It’s all human error ! So what’s the point?

Well, people say they don’t want a pipeline through BC. They better get prepared for the onslaught of crude oil tank cars right in downtown PG.

Leaving a running unattended loaded train on a declining main line, rather than on a spur line with a de-railer should be criminally irresponsible.

And they are pointing their fingers at the firemen who put out the initial fire on the locomotive. Apparently someone turned off some breakers that shouldn’t of been turned off.

Its a ‘self’regulated industry so the American company could do what ever it wanted, call it standard operating procedures, and gamble with other peoples safety. That is the problem here.

Strangely when the feds deregulated the railway industry, it was about the same time that BC sold BC Rail to a federal operator. BC Rail was regulated by the provincial government, but once sold was self regulated by CN under federal rules. Local politicians Pat Bell and John Rustad were the ones leading the charge of deregulation in the legislature and privatizing BC Rail as a means of deregulation fit right into their agenda.

Could this same kind of incident happen in PG? It already did and just as easily can again.

Could the risk be eliminated with proper regulation and oversight? You bet, make sure the trains are maned with qualified people, trains with dangerous cargo are always maned, equip trains with GPS, and ensure the infrastructure is designed for the type of cargo being transported. If it costs dollars the railways are not going to do this on their own IMO.

Myself I think the train conductor should be charged with manslaughter. The train was in his care and he should have been on site at minimum from the first fire. Its absurd the train would be left on a hill without first applying the manual brakes on enough cars to hold the load with a tug test.

The company should be liquidated for its policy of leaving dangerous cargo unattended. In this case the shareholders should be forfeiting their capital and their insurance should be taken for rebuilding the effected lives. The government should sell the infrastructure to the highest bidder.

My guess on the guilty party for releasing the brakes is either an American eco-terrorist from Maine, or a possibly drunk conductor (thus no where to be found). Since the engine made it clear of the explosion it should be easy to confirm with finger prints who’s hand released the brakes.

This will be an interesting case to see a company that clearly doesn’t have the means to financially pay for the cost of its risk gone bad… how much of the costs for this disaster will the tax payer pay as opposed to the shareholders of MM&A.

How would this case parallel with the Enbridge limited liability subsidiary Northern Gateway Pipelines? Both subsidiary corporations set up to take on great risk with limited capital available to cover the costs of liabilities should anything go wrong. Patsy corps of a sort through the abuse of corporate law.

“Train conductor charged with manslaugter”

From what i have read about this train, it had a crew of one. That crew member was at or beyond the number of hours he was supposed to work. He set the brakes and left for his rest period. I assume he did so in accordance with company policy. A fire broke out on one of the engines, the local fire department attended to it and put it out. It appears from the silence, that the company did not attend to the train to evaluate the damage the fire did. The engineer was off duty and we don’t know if he was asked to attend or even notified.

My assessment of this scenario is that the company asked its employee to do an impossible task.

Some information indicates that after the fire was put out in one of the engines, the engine that was running was shut down. It is not clear, whether or not it was the fire department who shut down the engine, however as the engine was running to keep the air up for the braking system, shutting it down, set things in motion for this accident.

We will have to wait for all the information to be released before we can make assumptions, as to what actually happened.

The train had 5 lomotives,shutting down one would not stop the other 4 from pumping air into the braking system. The other units may have been shut down aleady for fuel convseration, we dont know. Before anybody is “hanged” online or in the media the chain of event must be examined. It may not be one person that caused it but a chain of events strung together ending in the worst possible out come.

Anyone that has worked with trains, as I have, knows that rule number one with any train parked on a siding is to ensure the hand brakes are applied and tug tested to ensure the train can not roll regardless of the locomotive and its airbrake system.

Clearly, if the train rolled because the engine was shut down, then the hand brakes were not engaged. Either the engineer failed in his duties to secure the train or someone else went down the train and released all the hand brakes manually… a train that long maybe 6 cars at minimum should have had their hand brakes on to park it on an incline of 1.6%. That is the sole responsibility of the engineer to ensure his train is secure before going to the hotel for the night.

That and has already been reported that two MM&A track employees were at the site when the firefighters left the scene after the fire. Why didn’t they engage the hand brakes if they knew the engine would be shut down and the hand brakes had not been properly applied?

To not engage the hand brakes to ensure the train could not move regardless of air brake pressure is negligence when the train is left on an incline on a mainline with a 16km speed limit corner in the middle of a town at the bottom of the hill. That kind of negligence should be considered manslaughter regardless if the engineer was over his hours (which I have seen no indication he was). You secure the train before you walk away.

The company is guilty of negligent policy in only allowing one person to be responsible for the train and not have the proper safety procedures in place. Self regulating has to be a double edged sward otherwise its a free for all, and safety means nothing but an unnecessary expense to the company.

Let’s not forget the terrible cost some residents of Lac M. have paid.
metalman.