Oil train disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Québec 07-06-2013

Just checking in after hearing from the mod. This is going to be a LONG thread, folks, so let's keep it free and clear of personal attacks. I realize there may be arguments you hold in disdain; counter them, ignore them, etc. by all means, but let's keep it clean. A different point of view is not necessarily trolling, but if you feel a member or the discussion is getting argumentative or hijacking a thread, just give us a head's up with the report function, and the mod can handle it.

Thanks,

Jeff

charlie6017 wrote:I would have to think a lot of the clean-up and rebuilding may have been held up by investigations by the NTSB, FRA and maybe insurance companies.

The domestic Canadian agencies, like Transport Canada and the Canadian Transportation Board, might like a say in the matter, if foreign American boards and administrations try to get involved. Reading between the lines, I wonder if the railroad has any money available for rebuilding?

JimBoylan wrote:

charlie6017 wrote:I would have to think a lot of the clean-up and rebuilding may have been held up by investigations by the NTSB, FRA and maybe insurance companies.

The domestic Canadian agencies, like Transport Canada and the Canadian Transportation Board, might like a say in the matter, if foreign American boards and administrations try to get involved. Reading between the lines, I wonder if the railroad has any money available for rebuilding?

That's right, Mr. Boylan. I couldn't think off the top of my head the Canadian agencies you mentioned , but I have
to think they will have a LOT of say in the matter.

I can't see how the MMA would have any money to do anything after this is all said and done.

Charlie

Again, save for material submitted here by one member, this discussion has moved forth with a high degree of maturity and respect.

We really are at a point where there is little else to discuss until the Canadian TSB releases their report of the incident; that could be well into 2014.

Allow me to make one observation; unlike the US NTSB, which reports directly to the President without any chain of command through the USDOT, the Canadian agency appears to report to Canada's DOT equivalent, Transport Canada. I would be derelict if I stated this chain has resulted in conflicts of interest, but I would think less thoughts of such could be raised if the agency had a more direct reporting chain to whoever is the 'CEO' in a parliamentary system (I guess that is the Prime Minister).

So far as the Report, I would hope that it addresses institutional issues, such as the culture within MMA/C. It simply appears to me, as I noted in an earlier posting, that a Class II Regional accustomed to handling commodities such as lumber (potatoes anymore?) and other State Of Maine product, now found themselves playing in the Class I's sandbox, when they found themselves handling the volume of HAZMAT an oil train received in interchange from a Class I represents.

The above is simply analogous to if my solo practitioner accounting firm, whose clientele comprised several not-for-profit agencies, independent retailers, sales representatives, and small trucking companies, suddenly were to accept an engagement to be auditor for General Motors.

i accept the criticism. my rationale in raising the crude oil discussion was to offer a larger perspective on the mm&a debacle. i believe this event has created an unnecessary call for 'regulations'. i think all agree that 'regulations' are difficult for all parties. it is tragic that mma's loose approach to transporting this valuable commodity will have, in my opinion, a large impact on oil transportation macros. as for my various statements re: crude. these came from the 5/14 iea statement that the 'boom in shale will displace OPEC in 5 years' and benteks statements that 'usa & canada are at 12.1 million barrels/day, 'us imports will fall 41% by 2016, and 'downward pressure on prices'. i thought this to be an appropriate discussion item. ken patrick-

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Allow me to make one observation; unlike the US NTSB, which reports directly to the President without any chain of command through the USDOT, the Canadian agency appears to report to Canada's DOT equivalent, Transport Canada. I would be derelict if I stated this chain has resulted in conflicts of interest, but I would think less thoughts of such could be raised if the agency had a more direct reporting chain to whoever is the 'CEO' in a parliamentary system (I guess that is the Prime Minister).

So far as the Report, I would hope that it addresses institutional issues, such as the culture within MMA/C. It simply appears to me, as I noted in an earlier posting, that a Class II Regional accustomed to handling commodities such as lumber (potatoes anymore?) and other State Of Maine product, now found themselves playing in the Class I's sandbox, when they found themselves handling the volume of HAZMAT an oil train received in interchange from a Class I represents.

The above is simply analogous to if my solo practitioner accounting firm, whose clientele comprised several not-for-profit agencies, independent retailers, sales representatives, and small trucking companies, suddenly were to accept an engagement to be auditor for General Motors.

Mr. Norman- to be pedantic, the Chief Executive of Canada is none other than Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, as represented by His Excellency the Right Honourable David Lloyd Johnston, CC, CMM, Governor General of Canada.

Anyway- in all seriousness I completely agree with your argument. The MM&A was likely in over its head handling unit oil consists in the first place.

KEN PATRICK wrote:i accept the criticism. my rationale in raising the crude oil discussion was to offer a larger perspective on the mm&a debacle. i believe this event has created an unnecessary call for 'regulations'. i think all agree that 'regulations' are difficult for all parties. it is tragic that mma's loose approach to transporting this valuable commodity will have, in my opinion, a large impact on oil transportation macros. as for my various statements re: crude. these came from the 5/14 iea statement that the 'boom in shale will displace OPEC in 5 years' and benteks statements that 'usa & canada are at 12.1 million barrels/day, 'us imports will fall 41% by 2016, and 'downward pressure on prices'. i thought this to be an appropriate discussion item. ken patrick-

Ken, This is one of the best posts I have seen you submit.

I agree that regulations aren't always optimal, nor are regulations always in the best interests of a particular
industry. Look how regulations had a strangle-hold on the entire railroad industry in the US from the end of WWII
until the Staggers Act was passed. Many of the people that implement these regulations have no clue of the ramifications
that they will cause.

That's the thing, there is always a reaction to action and obviously this "action" created such unfortunate attention to
the MMA and the industry in general......not to mention unimaginable sorrow for the victims and their families.

Charlie

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Allow me to make one observation; unlike the US NTSB, which reports directly to the President without any chain of command through the USDOT, the Canadian agency appears to report to Canada's DOT equivalent, Transport Canada. I would be derelict if I stated this chain has resulted in conflicts of interest, but I would think less thoughts of such could be raised if the agency had a more direct reporting chain to whoever is the 'CEO' in a parliamentary system (I guess that is the Prime Minister).

To clarify. the TSBC reports to the Government House Leader while Transport Canada reports to the Minister of Transport. Both the House Leader and Minister are responsible to the Prime Minister and Parliament as a whole. This means there is a certain level of independence to the TSBC.

CTV News wrote:Work begins on new train tracks after Lac-Megantic derailment disaster

More than three months after a deadly train derailment devastated Lac-Megantic, Que., work has begun to rebuild the train tracks vital to the local economy.
Workers have started laying the tracks that will reconnect the town’s industrial park to the railway. Some residents are welcoming the rebuilding efforts, but others say they fear another derailment in the future.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/work-begin ... -1.1507353" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mr.T.J wrote:Question , haven't we already exhausted this topic ?

Mr.T.J

No, we're still talking about it.

Charlie

Ken V wrote:

CTV News wrote:Work begins on new train tracks after Lac-Megantic derailment disaster

More than three months after a deadly train derailment devastated Lac-Megantic, Que., work has begun to rebuild the train tracks vital to the local economy.
Workers have started laying the tracks that will reconnect the town’s industrial park to the railway.

Will this construction only connect the main line from the west to the industrial park or will it also reconnect the main line to together?

charlie6017 wrote: Will this construction only connect the main line from the west to the industrial park or will it also reconnect the main line to together?

In everything I've read on the rail reconstruction in the past week, it only states the industrial park is to be reconnected. I take the media with a grain of salt so who knows if it actually is the mainline, but I doubt it. Some articles say a reconnect to the industrial park will be on a new alignment and others just dont say. All the reconstruction designs and maps available online about the rebuilding of Lac Megantic do not include any such new alignment proposals for either the mainline or a new connection of the industrial track.

fogg1703 wrote:All the reconstruction designs and maps available online about the rebuilding of Lac Megantic do not include any such new alignment proposals for either the mainline or a new connection of the industrial track.

Could you provide a link or links to the proposed maps please. Thank you.

The plans available in various news articles are nearly 2 months old. A quick search reveals the following articles with the same map with a new bridge, new downtown buildings and an "X" marks the spot of the epicenter of the disaster.

From Sept 6 Montreal Gazette
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/M" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;égantic+gets+funds+rebuild+downtown+core/8836083/story.html

Again the Montreal Gazette Oct 5
http://www.montrealgazette.com/Plan+rebuild+M" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;égantic+downtown+sows+anger+resentment/8999379/story.html

If there is anything reported in general circulation media to support my earlier statement that the MMA/C was a Class II regional that thought they could play in a Class I's sandbox, this article appearing during August in the Toronto Globe and Mail has got to be it:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le13602737" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brief passage:

Edward Burkhardt thought his money-losing Montreal Maine and Atlantic Railway Inc. (MM&A) was saved when he received a call in the spring of 2012.

A U.S. oil broker was on the line requesting a quote from the Bangor-based railway for shipping North Dakota crude from Montreal to the New Brunswick border, where it would be transported by another carrier to its final destination: a refinery owned by Irving Oil. After a 'rocky' decade of watching MM&A’s losses grow with the failures or struggles of its core forest product customers, the veteran railway executive said he jumped at the offer to transport a new commodity. Within a year, the Maine-based railway was so profitable that it was able to restore wages and operating budgets slashed in 2003 after Mr. Burkardt’s holding company Rail World Inc. and a syndicate of investors acquired the Bangor-based company out of bankruptcy proceedings

Simply because the phone rings and on the other end is a prospective shipper looking at a railroad map makes an inquiry does not mean you have the institutional 'infrastructure' to handle what is being proposed.

Quite simply, the deficiency in institutional expertise was on display from the moment the incident occurred. Wasn't a PR firm skilled in 'damage control' in the Rolodex (whoops, I guess that's Speed Dial nowadays) and on retainer. How could someone get up in front of the 'mike and cams' and blame the 'Department de Pompiers' for 'tampering' with the locomotive when the only man in the area qualified on train handling was permitted to snooze away in a nearby hotel? Earlier I noted the inadequate level of insurance apparently carried, and to which Mr. Boylan, a manager with a US Short Line, noted that was probably all that the MM&AC could obtain. If so, someone should have had the fortitude to get out of the sandbox before you step on the castle.