Damage Prevention Newsletter

Transcription

1 Published by AAR/TTCI Damage Prevention & Loading Services September 2009 Over 200 Attend DP&FC Conference Over 200 attendees representing 70 companies participated in the 2009 Damage Prevention & Freight Claim (DP&FC) Conference focusing on Evolutionary Challenges in Rail Transportation. The conference continues to draw interest from new companies as over 25% of those attending were first time participants. The conference was held at the Westin Mission Hills in Rancho Mirage, CA on June 29 July 1. Frank Garcia, General Director Load & Ride Solutions, BNSF Railway and Chairman of the AAR s DP&FC Committee presided during the two-day business session. John Lanigan, Executive VP and Chief Marketing Officer, BNSF Railway highlighted the first day s program with a keynote address on the rail industry s efforts in overcoming the challenges of the first decade of the 21st century. Other presentations during the first day focused on Damage Prevention Success Stories; Intermodal Customer Perspectives; Motor Vehicle Handling at Distribution Centers; Freight Claims; and AAR/TTCI Prevention Programs and Activities DP&FC Conference Sponsors Special thanks and appreciation is extended to all sponsoring companies of the 2009 conference: Gold Sponsors Alliance Inspection Management Arrowhead Rail Damage Prevention Company Fitzsimmons Service Company Greif Load Securement and Allegheny Industrial Assoc. ITW Shippers Products MGM Business Partners MGM Marketing Partnershipping RCS Transportation Sunrise Manufacturing The Fabri-Form Company Vascor Walnut Industries Zeftek A Wabtec Company The second day s program led off with an address by Bill Heileman, General Director Homeland Security, BNSF which focused on key elements of rail transportation security. Rounding out the program were panel presentations on Rail Safety through Technology; New Prevention Products and Services; Open Top Open Innovations; and Successful Shipping of Roll Paper Products. On Tuesday evening the 2009 DP&FC sponsoring companies hosted a reception and supplier exhibit demonstrating the latest offerings in damage prevention related products and services. At the conclusion of the conference Frank Garcia passed the gavel to Rejean Pichette, Manager Freight Claim Settlement, CN who will serve as Chairman of the AAR s DP&FC Committee for the term. Cliff Creech, Manager Prevention and Field Services, NS was installed as Vice Chairman. Rejean has announced tentative plans to hold the 2010 conference in Chicago during the later portion of June. 1 Silver Sponsors Holland, LP Inter-Rail Management Bronze Sponsors Braid Logistics Caristrap International Complete Packaging Cordstrap USA E.J. Brooks Environmental Packaging Technologies Holden America Hulcher Services IONX, LLC ITW Signode Application Development & Research Lat-Lon, LLC Logistick National Rubber Technologies Pregis SOS Service Southern Bracing Systems Enterprises Southern Strapping Systems Tapex American/Cordex Tri-State Transfer & Rail Services

2 2009 Testing Activity Impact Tests (FI) Chairman Elect, Rejean Pichette and Chairman, Frank Garcia Loss and Damage Ratio to Revenue Continues to Improve For the third consecutive year the ratio of the total payout for loss and damage to freight revenue declined moving from 0.20% in 2007 to 0.19% in During 2008 U.S. and Canadian railroads reported a net amount paid for L&D totaling $128.5 million on total freight revenues of $68.0 billion. Continued improvement during 2009 will be challenging. For the 1st Quarter 2009 the ratio of L&D to freight revenue increased slightly from 0.20% in 2008 to 0.21% in FI 3-09, Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for Non-Hazardous Liquid in a 20 ISO Container - COFC Environmental Packaging Technologies. An impact test was conducted to evaluate a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of non-hazardous liquid in 20 ISO containers. The method successfully completed impact testing. FI 4-09, Wood Bins Containing Tomato Paste Braced by Disposable Inflatable Dunnage Bags and Reusable Polyethylene Void Fillers Fabri-Form. An impact test was conducted to evaluate a reusable style of polyethylene void filler as an alternative to the currently approved corrugated filler used with closed car shipments of tomato products detailed in current AAR General Information Series publication No The Fabri-Form void filler panels and lateral void fillers performed as intended. FI 5-09, Steel Coils on Platforms/Skids Secured by Floor Anchored Web Straps. An impact test was conducted evaluate a floor anchored web strap securement system for steel coils. The system successfully completed impact testing. Report in progress. 2 FI 6-09, Key/Anchor Application Using 1½ Wide Avistrap Woven Polyester Strapping for 84 Roll Paper in 60 Cushioned Rail Cars. An impact test was conducted to evaluate performance when using 1½ wide non-metallic straps in a Key/Anchor configuration

3 as doorway protection in loads of 84 diameter rolls of paper in 60 boxcars. The load successfully completed impact testing and was progressed to field testing. FI 7-09, Bi-Level Motor Vehicle Securement Systems with Bi-Level Products Only. A series of tests was conducted to evaluate the performance of new Bi-Level securement systems by Holden America, Holland Company, TrinityRail, and ZefTek. Each of the securement systems secured the vehicles until higher than normal acceptable coupling speeds were reached. FI 8-09, Bi-Level Motor Vehicle Securement Systems with Bi-Level and Tri-Level Products. A series of tests was conducted to evaluate the performance of new Bi- Level securement systems by Holden America, Holland Company, TrinityRail, and ZefTek. Each of the securement systems secured the vehicles until higher than normal acceptable coupling speeds were reached. FI 9-09, TrinityRail Tri-Level Motor Vehicle Securement System. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a motor vehicle Tri-Level securement system. All visible evidence indicated that the securement system performed as designed. FI 10-09, 80 Tight Head Steel, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 by Carolina Strapping and Buckles Company in 20 Containers. An impact test was conducted to evaluate using 1¼ wide CS-2044 nonmetallic polyester woven cord strapping as securement for eighty 55-gallon steel drums loaded in two layers in a 20 dry container. The method failed to successfully completed impact testing. Report in progress. FI 11-09, 80 Tight Head Plastic, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 by Carolina Strapping and Buckles Company in 20 Containers. An impact test was conducted to evaluate using 1¼ wide CS-2044 non-metallic polyester woven cord strapping as securement for eighty 55-gallon plastic drums loaded in two layers in a 20 dry container. The method failed to successfully completed impact testing. Report in progress. FI 12-09, 80 Tight Head Steel, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 by Carolina Strapping and Buckles Company in 20 Containers. An impact test was conducted to evaluate using 1¼ wide CS-2044 nonmetallic polyester woven cord strapping as securement for eighty 55-gallon steel drums loaded in two layers in a 20 dry container. The system was modified based on the results of FI and successfully completed impact testing. It was progressed to rail simulation testing. Report in progress. FI 13-09, 78 Tight Head Plastic, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 by Carolina Strapping and Buckles Company in 20 Containers. An impact test was conducted to evaluate using 1¼ wide CS-2044 non-metallic polyester woven cord strapping as securement for eighty 55-gallon plastic drums loaded in two layers in a 20 dry container. The method successfully completed impact testing and was progressed to rail simulation testing. Report in progress. Laboratory Tests (LB) LB 12-09, Tensile Testing of Southern Strapping Systems TY2 STRAP AW125 1½ Type 1A Grade 5 Woven Polyester Strap. All samples passed the elongation and joint strength minimum requirements. LB 13-09, Tensile Testing of Southern Strapping Systems TY2 STRAP AW 105 1¼ Type 1A Grade 4 Woven Polyester Strap. All samples passed the elongation and joint strength minimum requirements. LB 14-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 1 Testing of Paper D.I.D. Bags Stopak. Passed PPPPD testing and will be added to the Pneumatic Dunnage Product Verification List found at 3

4 LB 15-09, Tensile Testing of Garibaldi (Chile) 5/8 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength requirements. LB 16-09, Tensile Testing of Southern Strapping Systems TY2 Strap AAR 12K 1⅝ Type 1A Grade 7 Woven Polyester Strap. All samples passed the elongation and joint strength minimum requirements. LB 17-09, Tensile Testing of Hankum CO., LTD. 1 1/4 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength requirements. LB 18-09, Tensile Testing of Hankum CO., LTD. 3/4 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength requirements. LB 19-09, Tensile Testing of Hankum CO., LTD. 5/8 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength test requirements. LB 20-09, Tensile Testing of Hankum CO., LTD. 5/8 x Type IV Polyester Plastic Strap (PET). All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength test requirements. LB 21-09, Tensile Testing of Hankum CO., LTD. 5/8 x Type IV Polyester Plastic Strap (PET). All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength test requirements. LB 22-09, Tensile Testing of Garibaldi (Chile) 3/4 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength test requirements. LB 23-09, Tensile Testing of Garibaldi (Chile) 1¼ x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the minimum break strength, elongation, and joint break strength test requirements. minimum joint break strength per AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section 1, Rule LB 25-09, Tensile Testing of Signode Packaging Systems 3/4 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the current ASTM 3953 and the minimum joint break strength per AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section 1, Rule LB 26-09, Tensile Testing of Signode Packaging Systems 1¼ x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the current ASTM 3953 and the minimum joint break strength per AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section 1, Rule LB 27-09, Tensile Testing of Signode Packaging Systems 2 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the current ASTM 3953 and the minimum joint break strength per AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section 1, Rule LB 28-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 1 Testing of Paper D.I.D. Bags ITW Shippers. Failed PPPPD testing. Proponent is expected to provide additional samples for testing. Report in progress. LB 29-09, Tensile Testing of Siemag 1¼ x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. Several samples failed to meet the minimum joint break strength and flex test requirements, per AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section 1, Appendix C, Attachment C1. LB 30-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 1 Testing of Polyethylene/Polypropylene D.I.D. Bags Stopak. Failed PPPPD testing. Proponent is expected to provide additional samples for testing. Report in progress. LB 31-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 4 Testing of Polyethylene/Polypropylene D.I.D. Bags Stopak. Passed Part A, awaiting Parts B & C testing. LB 24-09, Tensile Testing of Signode Packaging Systems 3/4 x Heavy Duty Steel Strap. All samples passed the current ASTM 3953 and the 4

5 LB 32-09, Tensile Testing of Teufelberger 3/4 x Type IV Polyester (PET) Strap. All samples met or exceeded the minimum break strength, elongation and joint break strength requirements. LB 33-09, Tensile Testing of Teufelberger 5/8 x Type IV Polyester (PET) Strap. All samples met or exceeded the minimum break strength, elongation and joint break strength requirements. LB 34-09, Tensile Testing of Teufelberger 5/8 x Type IV Polyester (PET) Strap. All samples met or exceeded the minimum break strength, elongation and joint break strength requirements. LB 35-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 1 Testing of Polyethylene/Polypropylene ITW Shippers. Passed PPPPD testing and will be added to the Pneumatic Dunnage Product Verification List found at Report in progress. LB 36-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 1 Testing of Paper D.I.D. Bags Stopak. Passed PPPPD testing and will be added to the Pneumatic Dunnage Product Verification List found at Report in progress. LB 37-09, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage Level 4 Testing of Polyethylene/Polypropylene D.I.D. Bags Stopak. Testing in progress. America, Holland, TrinityRail and ZefTek secured both the bi-level products and the tri-level products in position. There were no broken securement systems, no visible damage to the auto rack and no visible damage to the vehicles. VL 3-09, 78 Tight Head Plastic, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 and 80 Tight Head Steel, 55 Gallon Drums in Two Layers Secured With 1¼ Wide Non-metallic Polyester Cord Strap CS-2040 by Carolina Strapping and Buckles Company in 20 Containers. The respective securement systems successfully completed rail simulation testing and were progressed to field testing. Report in progress. Damage Prevention and Loading Services Publications General Information Series No. 713, Securement of Partial Second Layers of Roll Printing Paper in Cushion Equipped Boxcars Using 1½ Non-Metallic Strap Anchored to Sidewalls. General Information Series No. 714, Woven Polypropylene Bulk Bags (Super Sacks) in an Incomplete Second Layer Secured by Non-metallic Strapping in Cushioned Boxcars, cancels G.I.S. No Rail Simulation Tests (VL) VL 1-09, Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for Non-Hazardous Liquid in a 20 ISO Container - COFC Environmental Packaging Technologies. The system successfully completed rail simulation testing. VL 2-09, Bi-Level Motor Vehicle Securement Systems With Bi-Level and Tri-Level Products. A simulation test was conducted to evaluate the performance of four new securement systems for use on bi-level auto racks. The test included both bi-level and tri-level type vehicles. The securement systems supplied by Holden 5 Each publication is now available from TTCI. The single copy price for each G.I.S. is $6.00 for members and $12.00 for non-members. You can also use our online shopping cart to place an order with a credit card at: e%20prevention%20and%20loading%20services/gene ral%20information%20series.aspx

6 Loading Steel Drums Open Top Loading Rules Two Technical Advisory Groups (TAG) on Pipe formed by Open Top Loading Rules Committee No, this is not a new method to load tight head steel drums in a 20 intermodal container. See the AAR Intermodal Loading Guide for Products in Closed Trailers and Containers for securement methods that have been tested and approved for such. In any case, trailer/container doors may not be used to secure loads containing hazardous materials. Under certain conditions, as outlined in Rule 5A, Section II (Circular 43-D) trailer/container doors can be relied upon to secure non-hazardous lading. The doors of a vehicle, meeting AAR M931 and AAR M930 specifications, can be relied on to secure lading under the following conditions: 1. The load consists of multi-unit lading such as boxes of food-stuff, tissue or soft paper products, furniture, etc., not exceeding 40,000 lbs., covering a minimum of 60% of the door area and evenly distributed throughout the vehicle. 2. Lading must be loaded tightly lengthwise and crosswise and flush to the rear doors of the vehicle allowing no room for movement. If any void exists, fill with recommended dunnage. 3. The doors must fit squarely, the hinges must be tight and locking bars must be in good condition and function properly. Example of a load that could conform to Rule 5A 6 A TAG was formed with members of the OTLR Committee and the pipe industry to investigate and develop methods to secure the top layer of pipe shipped in gondola cars. In March 2007, Committee members brought up problems with pipe in gondolas. This item was addressed at our joint meeting with the American Iron and Steel Institute. We had requested that they work with us to resolve the high incidence of pipe setouts in this equipment (up to 16% on some lines). Many of the pipe loading figures date prior to 1960 and had allowed for 1-foot clearance from the end of the gondola including pipe loaded above the gondola ends. The problem stems from the top layer of pipe moving past the end of the gondola car as much as 5 ft. in some instances. Efforts by the TAG are underway to develop methods to secure the pipe. Several impact tests have been conducted to date with further testing scheduled. A second TAG was formed with members of the OTLR Committee and the pipe industry to help define an interpretation of the FRA requirements relative to the open top loading rules. The AAR OTLR requires that loads of coated pipe on 89-foot flatcars to have 4-foot of end clearance at each end of car. Recently, a review of pipe figures and distressed loads in the field have brought to light that when pipe is loaded outside the car side sill on pipe flats that the floating loads of pipe were making contact with side ladders at the B end of the car. Further investigation, revealed that this same shifting pipe could also hamper the efficient and most expeditious application of the side mounted hand brake in that it would not allow for the full arc to be made of the brake handle. The TAG, with the cooperation of several pipe shippers, is conducting a data gathering survey of pipe shipments to determine load movement with coated pipe. The survey is ongoing at the writing and upon completion; results will be analyzed and presented to the OTLR Committee for review.

7 Motor Vehicle Update combined team effort of railroad, manufacturer, and their contractors. Automotive Quality Excellence Award Winners Announced The 2009 winners of the Association of American Railroad's first annual Automotive Quality Excellence Awards were recently announced at the 117th Annual Damage Prevention and Freight Claim Conference in Rancho Mirage, CA. The awards were based on the highest scores achieved during AAR Quality Reviews which are conducted at major loading and unloading facilities throughout North America. The 2009 winning score of 99.10% for origin locations was achieved by the team at Vance, Alabama. The winning team consists of Mercedes-Benz USA; Norfolk Southern Corporation; A.P.L.S., LLC; and Road & Rail Services, Inc. Team Jacksonville Mike Kelley, Brooke Ricketts, and Robert Rio, (Inter-Rail Transport); Bob Lovelace and David Butts (Norfolk Southern). Hard work, team effort, and true dedication to doing a great job are the foundations for reaching this great accomplishment. Congratulations to each and every team member! New Questions Add to Quality Reviews Team Vance Allen Uffinger (APLS); Brian Koontz (Road & Rail); Bob Lovelace and David Butts (Norfolk Southern). The destination award went to the Jacksonville, Florida team of Norfolk Southern Corporation and Inter-Rail Transport with a score of 99.97%. The AAR conducts Quality Reviews of all finished motor vehicle loading and unloading facilities throughout North America. All auto manufacturing plants, ports, mixing centers and other loading and unloading facilities have been subject to these Quality Reviews. The Quality Reviews are detailed audits of the total vehicle handling processes from the plant door through to the destination railhead. The overall audit score is a There will be new questions concerning the use of Green Seals added to both the Origin and Destination Quality Reviews in the near future. The Multi-Level Pooling Executive Committee (MPEC) has directed that two questions be added to the Origin Quality Review program and one new question added for the Destination program. The Green Seal program is used to identify the headlight orientation of vehicles on the autorack. The newer autoracks with fewer holes in the side panels, gap seal being used between panels and end doors that close off more openings makes it difficult to see inside to determine which direction the vehicles are facing. The use of a green seal on the end of the autorack that the vehicles are facing will aid switch crews in determining which direction to spot the autoracks. A neutral colored seal is to be used on the opposite end of the autorack. 7

8 The Origin questions will address - Are green seals being used at the facility? and the second question Are green seals used properly?. One question will be added for the Destination Are autoracks spotted properly for unloading according to the green seals?. The Vehicle and Equipment Quality Task Force (VEQ) will be addressing the final versions of the wording at their September meeting. It is anticipated that implementation will become effective on January 1, Perfection at Titusville The perfect 100% score for an unannounced Destination Quality Review has evaded the best of the unloading locations since I personally thought it would never happen. You cannot have cracks in the pavement, a vehicle off line, a coupler spread too far or any other exception in the 37 questions that we score. You have to be flat out perfect. Well, the perfection barrier has been broken. On June 29, 2009, the Team at Titusville, FL achieved the impossible, a perfect 100% score on an unannounced Destination Quality Review. The team members are the Norfolk Southern Railroad and Inter-Rail Transport. Sound familiar? It should, this is the team that had the Highest Score for a Destination Quality Review in 2008 at their nearby Jacksonville operation. There are several key ingredients in this success story. Norfolk Southern and Inter-Rail Transport management and supervision have a total dedication and commitment to the quality handling of automobiles. They have focused their attention on the smallest details regarding safety and quality. They stress quality and safety every hour of every day. Their workers are proud and have a can do attitude. Mike Gundersen of Inter-Rail Transport and Ray Fries of the Transportation Technology Center/AAR show off the perfect 100% score at the Titusville, FL operation. Other Team Members include: Ryan Conyers, Joshua Lopez, Ben Jenkins and Tracy Scott. Safety Notice Everyone working around autoracks should be reminded to be sure to thoroughly inspect all steps, grab irons and convenience handles before climbing on autoracks. There have been recent reports of convenience handles that have been cut or have had a fastener removed. The cut handles have been the vertical handles on the side of end doors. The cuts are a very fine line and smooth cut that are difficult to see without close inspection. My congratulations go out to the Team at Titusville, FL for achieving what was thought to be impossible. Dream big and set your goals high! -- Ray Fries View showing cut convenience handle. 8

9 The handles with the fasteners removed are convenience handles located on the underside of the roof panel that are used when entering or exiting the top deck from the side ladder. Either of these types of defects is very serious and could easily contribute to personnel injuries. AAR Early Warning letters have been issued advising the industry of these problems. View showing missing fastener. Defective Refurbished Chocks It seems as long as I can recall, there has been problems with quality control when it comes to refurbished chocks and harnesses. A problem will crop-up which will be investigated and tracked to the source and fixed. Then the cycle will start all over again, normally with a different vendor being identified. These recurring cycles have a negative impact on reducing and eliminating vehicle damages and ultimately end up costing the entire industry. Finally it falls to the loading personnel not to use chocks that may cause damage to vehicles. The bottom line is that we need your help in identifying refurbished chocks that come from vendors with defects. The following photos are a few examples of refurbished chock defects. The replacement chocks coming from the vendors should be properly repaired with no defects. But at the same time pretrip personnel and loading personnel need to be vigilant as to defective chocks which increase the potential for vehicle damage. When an order from a vendor comes in, pretrip personnel need to take the time to check over the chocks for defects. In addition, when replacement chocks are put onto multi-levels, pretrip personnel need to verify straps and harnesses are not backwards and there are no defects on the chock body. Pat Breslin 9

10 Bridge Plates The current industry average for the question concerning the condition of bridge plates is 74.13% for Origin Quality Reviews and 85.29% for Destination Quality Reviews. The top three bridge plate exceptions are: 1. Bridge Plate side gouges 2. Missing Anti-Skid 3. Bridge Plates with 2 or more loose bolts Although there are numerous other deficiencies a bridge plate may have the three listed above are by far the most common. 25% or more missing anti-skid paint from the driving surface of the bridge plate is an exception. Pat Breslin When scoring side gouges on a bridge plate. The exception is the sharp burrs which have the ability to cause injury to personnel handling the bridge plates. Two or more missing bolts on the hinge assembly of a bridge plate are an exception. Although there are no bolts missing in this photo the bridge plate has a frozen locking pin. When the spring pin of a bridge plate becomes bent to the point that it is not able to cycle through its full range of motion it is an exception called a frozen locking pin. 10

11 QUALITY REVIEW SUMMARY The following is a summary of the section scores for Quality Reviews conducted in the first half of Origin Quality Reviews 1st Qtr 2 nd Qtr Overall Score 88.84% 87.50% Mechanical 78.12% 81.46% Transportation 92.55% 87.04% Mfr./Cont 95.90% 91.33% Facility Proc % 83.38% Destination Quality Review 1st Qtr 2 nd Qtr Overall Score 94.75% 93.28% M-L Placement 92.64% 91.22% U/L Procedures 93.72% 92.84% Facility Proc 94.68% 94.21% Door/Plates 96.37% 91.91% Baying Proc % 95.03% DAMAGE PREVENTION AND LOADING SERVICES CONTACTS 7001 Weston Parkway, #200, Cary, NC Gary Held Director Damage Prevention & Loading Services (919) gary.held@railinc.com Dwayne Florence Senior Manager Damage Prevention & Training (919) dwayne.florence@railinc.com Bernie Bonk Senior Mgr. Damage Prevention Engineering (919) bernard.bonk@railinc.com Mike Sandoval Senior Engineer Damage Prevention (719) mike_sandoval@aar.com John Blackman Manager Open Top Loading Rules and Damage Prevention (719) john_blackman@aar.com Ray Fries Manager Field Operations (919) ray.fries@railinc.com Pat Breslin Manager Data and Field Services (240) pat.breslin@railinc.com 11