Train - hazardous cargo "accident"

[3930dave]

Sargeant Schultz couldn't have said it better....

Lac-M馮antic investigators seek urgent rail safety review - Montreal - CBC News

Not for the first time, I'm left wondering "So, what exactly (other than burn tax dollars) does this government department do ?" A partial quote is listed below.

The TSB investigation has determined the braking force applied wasn't enough to hold the train on the 1.2 per cent descending slope where it had been parked for the night.

Transport Canada late Friday confirmed it does not approve or give any specific guidance to Canada's rail companies on how many brakes must be applied for parked freight trains.

"Transport Canada does not validate the special instructions of a railway company," Transport Canada spokesperson Kelly James told CBC News in an emailed statement.

"It is the responsibility of a railway company to establish their special instructions and to ensure that they meet the requirements of the Canadian Rail Operating Rules (CROR). A company may voluntarily impose more restrictive procedures than the CROR require. During routine inspections TC monitors whether the special instructions by the company are being met."

This admission flies in the face of assertions made earlier this week by Transport Canada after repeated questioning by CBC News about the working of Rule 112 contained in the CROR's (Canadian Railway Operating Rules), which demands railways ensure sufficient numbers of brakes be applied to secure a train.

Earlier this week, James had stated that "the rules provide specific instructions for the use of hand brakes to prevent the train from moving when equipment is not in use. In addition, the rules specify that the hand brakes need to be fully tested before they can be used to secure equipment."

On Friday afternoon, the agency appeared to retreat from this position acknowledging that the regulator does not approve company policies and simply trusts companies to employ their own best practices to keep parked trains from running away.

Transport Canada Rail division either needs to get it's act together, or be scrapped altogether as it's clear that they are doing nothing.

Rgds, D.

 

[Scooby074]

Foxes guarding the henhouse.

Said it already, but companies in safety related industries should not be allowed to self regulate.

I heard that CP and CN have stepped up their procedures for securing a train, but didnt read up to find out exactly what they did to inprove.

 

[crazyal]

The TSB is starting to look like complete idiots. They state the obvious. Everyone knows that the braking force wasn't enough to keep the train from rolling, if it was then the train would have stayed put. They then go on to say they don't know if it was a mechanical failure or human (not enough or any hand brakes set, not set correctly, or tampered with after being set). Are they actually doing any testing to see if the number of brakes the engineer said he set would have been enough to hold that tonnage on a 1.2% slope would hold it?

They came up with two suggestions, revise the number of brakes used and not leave a train sitting on a mainline unattended. How about one for dealing with shutting down engines in the event of an emergency? Seams to me that there should be something in place that says if a locomotive needs to be shut down then an actual engineer that's familiar with that style of engine must be present to confirm there is no danger. If one can't be found then the train needs to be secured by using the manual brakes, not assume the manual brakes were set.

 

[crazyal]

The TSB is starting to look like complete idiots. They state the obvious. Everyone knows that the braking force wasn't enough to keep the train from rolling, if it was then the train would have stayed put. They then go on to say they don't know if it was a mechanical failure or human (not enough or any hand brakes set, not set correctly, or tampered with after being set). Are they actually doing any testing to see if the number of brakes the engineer said he set would have been enough to hold that tonnage on a 1.2% slope would hold it?

They came up with two suggestions, revise the number of brakes used and not leave a train sitting on a mainline unattended. How about one for dealing with shutting down engines in the event of an emergency? Seams to me that there should be something in place that says if a locomotive needs to be shut down then an actual engineer that's familiar with that style of engine must be present to confirm there is no danger. If one can't be found then the train needs to be secured by using the manual brakes, not assume the manual brakes were set.

 

[Cub 7274]

Looks like this disastrous derailment is going to cause big problems:
Pulling up the spikes on the MMA:
U.S. rail officials ready backup plans in case MM&A shuts down - The Globe and Mail

 

[Cub 7274]

Looks like this disastrous derailment is going to cause big problems:
Pulling up the spikes on the MMA:
U.S. rail officials ready backup plans in case MM&A shuts down - The Globe and Mail

 

[3930dave]

So, one obvious question is "Given the nature of the goods they haul, why was a railway allowed to operate with inadequate levels of insurance".

Back to that (non)oversight thing again....

Rgds, D.

 

[Scooby074]

MMA will go bankrupt.. Quebec and the rest of Canada will end up paying for this. Families will not be compensated for lost loved ones... Company could be back under a new name in no time. Something wrong with this system.

 

[Cub 7274]

Dont know if they will run through that town again

 

[kiotiken]

Dont know if they will run through that town again

They'd better keep their heads low if they tried

 

[3930dave]

If I drive my car on a public road w/o appropriate insurance, I will be handed major fines. Apparently the case of beer, 5 lbs of back bacon, and 10 litres of maple syrup I'm hauling present a major risk on a highway.

Always good to see our tax dollars enabling behaviour like MMA's and going into gas generating plants that are never built, at the same time as funding is being reduced/eliminated for the health care of seniors and military veterans.

CorporateGovernment takes care of their own, very well.

Sad Rgds, D.

 

[tcartwri]

So MMA filed for protection today.

 

[Scooby074]

So MMA filed for protection today.

Just saw that on Power and Politics. What a crock of ****. Like I said several posts ago.

The CEO should be locked up and loose his house like those in QC.

 

[tcartwri]

Not carrying sufficient insurance has got to be negligence and bring liability on the owners of the company. I wonder who the insurer is.

 

[3930dave]

Well, apparently you can transport millions of tons of hazardous cargo around the country, while paying for next to no insurance coverage.

Clearly, there has been a great deal of negligence at play. While MMA obviously has a primary role, they aren't the only ones who should be held accountable.

As I've opined earlier, the various govt "regulatory" bodies should either get their act together, or be dismantled entirely. There is no point in pouring further tax dollars into ineffective black holes. I understand their role as window dressing for industry, but this charade has gone beyond tiresome.

Sad Rgds, D.

 

[Cub 7274]

Decay of infrastructure, lack of maintenance, lay people off.1 man crews etc is the only way they can make a profit sadly the railroad needs to be maintained like any other transportation network.
Lack of it leads to horrific results this one being the worst.

 

[crazyal]

The fact of the matter is that most people here do not have enough insurance to cover a catastrophic accident. Take a look at your auto insurance and see what the limit is. Chances are if you hit a multimillion dollar car your insurance wouldn't cover all of it and you would most likely be forced to file for bankruptcy. If you fell asleep behind the wheel and ran into a gas pump the damage could be well into the millions. I'm not saying the rail company had the correct amount of insurance but who sets the level of risk and who adjusts it as values go up?

I read how some of the families have hired lawyers to go after the railway. They are trying to do it in Chicago because they can get a lot more money in the US even though they are Canadian, the accident happened in Canada, the laws that may have been violated are Canadian laws, and the rail cars were filled in Canada and never entered the US. Chances are the railway's lawyers simply said that if you can't move the suits out of a US court there's no way you have the hundreds of millions a jury could award. they probably gave the rail company the odds on moving it into Canada.

 

[Soundguy]

Not carrying sufficient insurance has got to be negligence and bring liability on the owners of the company. I wonder who the insurer is.

look at auto drivers that carry statuatory minimums. a medium+ accident can drain that in a hot second...

 

[3930dave]

The fact of the matter is that most people here do not have enough insurance to cover a catastrophic accident. Take a look at your auto insurance and see what the limit is. Chances are if you hit a multimillion dollar car your insurance wouldn't cover all of it and you would most likely be forced to file for bankruptcy. If you fell asleep behind the wheel and ran into a gas pump the damage could be well into the millions. I'm not saying the rail company had the correct amount of insurance but who sets the level of risk and who adjusts it as values go up?

I read how some of the families have hired lawyers to go after the railway. They are trying to do it in Chicago because they can get a lot more money in the US even though they are Canadian, the accident happened in Canada, the laws that may have been violated are Canadian laws, and the rail cars were filled in Canada and never entered the US. Chances are the railway's lawyers simply said that if you can't move the suits out of a US court there's no way you have the hundreds of millions a jury could award. they probably gave the rail company the odds on moving it into Canada.

This isn't 1850, or even 1950. The science, data, and supercomputers are available to assess risk. Any quant on Wall Street is more than capable of running the numbers. I suspect that MMA was not even adequately covered to deal with the clean up of a mid-sized oil spill, let alone causing fatalities. The dreamer in me would like to see these modern day data resources used for something other than helping a .1%'er move more billions off-shore.

Agreed, insurance is about odds. Supercat(astrophe) coverage is out there, that's where Berkshire used to (maybe still does) play quite a bit. To answer your first question - apparently nobody. I don't know the acual #'s, but I'm willing to bet a good chunk of money that an actuary would tell me that the odds of having a major accident by ramping up a huge amount of oil shipments, on rickety tracks, with old equipment are way higher than me picking off a Veyron, or a gas station.

I hadn't read where the rail cars where filled, but could be, as Bakken extends north of the 49'th. I'm sure you remember the last round of US bank bailouts. I see some similarities..... an industry that has convinced the govt "Keep your hands off us, we'll self regulate, we know what we are doing"..... then when the brown stuff hits the fan, that position falls apart pretty quickly. Part of the charade I refer to.

Unfortunately, in this game of optimizing profit while minimiziing expenses, many people died.

I believe people and corporations (apparently the same thing, legally, at least when it's convenient) should be responsible for their actions, or lack thereof.

Companies either need to carry adequate insurance, or post bonds to the equivalent amount. Ante up, or don't play.

The trial needs to take place wherever the plaintiffs will receive the maximum settlement. The direct immediate reason is they deserve at least that, for the lives lost. The broader reason is that corporations won't really pay any attention to these issues until the cost of ignoring safety/maintenance/adequate staffing is exceeded by the court awards.

Rgds, D.

 

[Scooby074]

look at auto drivers that carry statuatory minimums. a medium+ accident can drain that in a hot second...

Right, but most cars arent hauling thousands of gallons of flammable crude! There is an order of magnitude difference in what can happen in a car accident vs a train accident.

Whats the worst case scenario for a car accident? Hitting a truck carrying a trailer of propane? Even if it burst into flames and exploded the toll would be much less than the QC disaster.

If anything trains need higher coverage than regular commercial carriers due to the volume of materials that can be involved in a single incident. Im thinking "oil tanker" levels, although IIRC they arent even that high, although I think new legislation has addressed some of that.

Now there is talk that much of the area is so contaminated with hydrocarbons that it may be uninhabitable, talk about insult to injury, its the centre of town!

These companies are driving right though these insurance and regulation loopholes. Being able to declare bankruptcy and walk away from this sticking Canadians and the local community with the bill is criminal. Plus nothing is stopping them from starting up a new subsidiary to run this very same route in the future free from all the liabilities of this disaster.

The system is broken. Where is all this supposed director's liability that these new enviromental/workers comp rules were supposed to create to make management responsible when stuff like this happens?