"Sarah Feinberg, the acting administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, told the committee that the agency intends to enforce the Dec. 31 deadline for all railroads to install positive train control. Railroad administration officials told a special advisory committee last week that enforcement could include fines and even a shutdown of operations for railroads that don't comply."
from: http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/ports-rail/bs-md-ntsb-amtrak-20150603-story.html
Shutdown? Really? Political bluster...
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Be fun to see her eat those words !
The fines won't be political bluster.
Euclid The fines won't be political bluster.
And at the end of the millenia when the legal actions cease - the only winners will be the lawyers.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Do you have any idea what the fallout would be if she shut down all rhe railroads?
She wouldn't be able to get a job flipping burgers.
Norm
There are three things they could do:
1) Extend the deadline.
2) Impose fines for failing to meet the deadline.
3) Shut down railroads that have not met the deadline.
Obviously, fines will be the preferred approach. Shutting down railroads is a throwaway negotiating item.
Extending the deadline will never happen. Why should they extend it? If they extend the deadline, they will lose out on the fines.
The government is in the driver's seat here, and the industry will dance to the government's tune.
Euclid There are three things they could do: 1) Extend the deadline. 2) Impose fines for failing to meet the deadline. 3) Shut down railroads that have not met the deadline. Obviously, fines will be the preferred approach. Shutting down railroads is a throwaway negotiating item. Extending the deadline will never happen. Why should they extend it? If they extend the deadline, they will lose out on the fines. The government is in the driver's seat here, and the industry will dance to the government's tune.
So you are saying the government could shut down a huge portion of the economy without any backlash?
That'll be the day. The rebellion would be from far more interests than just the railroads.
A few winters back, the railroad racked up a large amount of fines for having crews violate the hours of service. When it came time to pay the fines, the railroad was able to get the amount reduced by quite a bit.
Maybe they will be fined. It might be announced to be a huge amount. I bet the amount actually paid, if paid at all, will be a lot less.
Jeff
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmannMaybe the railroads will call their bluff and shut themselves down so they don't incur fines. Wouldn't that be interesting?
+1 I think that's a reasonable strategy. Technically, it would be against the law to operate non-compliant. I'll bet the RR's at least hint at it through the right channels. The RRs probably don't want to be seen as attempting to blackmail the gov't. I'll also bet the Admin lets the Republicans push through some sort of extension to give them cover and plausible deniability.
This is all about "showing you are tough enough to take on those big, mean, greedy corporations" and showing "you care". (for your own gain).
If they REALLY cared, they would have been helping remove all the obstacles in the way of getting PTC up and running! (money, regs, training, suppliers, etc.)
I saw a quote the other day attributed to Abraham Lincoln to the effect that the way to get a bad law changed was to obey it to the letter. I agree.
If I were the President of one of the railroads that would be my strategy, shut down any line segment not so equipped. There would be an extension in place in less than a week. The railroads are too important to the real economy. Let them demonstate by living up to the letter of a bad law.
Mac McCulloch
My thought: Fines (only) are the most likely outcome. Compare with the many recent bank settlements on penalties for those "funny money" mortgages, LIBOR rate manipulations, etc. Usually several $ Billion per bank - recall Sen. Everett Dirksen's aphorism:
"A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon you're talking real money !"
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/everettdir201172.html
Perhaps what we need is someone with the attitude of John Sexton, General Manager of the Eureka & Palisade RR in the 1930's era:
http://www.gbcnv.edu/hickson/ENRwy.html
http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/79182293/ (OCR text, clumsy and confusing formatting, but worth it to scroll down through).
Perhaps Rob Krebs could be persuaded to come out of retirement for this ?
- Paul North.
oltmannd "Sarah Feinberg, the acting administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, told the committee that the agency intends to enforce the Dec. 31 deadline for all railroads to install positive train control. Railroad administration officials told a special advisory committee last week that enforcement could include fines and even a shutdown of operations for railroads that don't comply." from: http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/ports-rail/bs-md-ntsb-amtrak-20150603-story.html Shutdown? Really? Political bluster...
On another thread, several people have claimed it doesn't matter who we vote for, for president and otherwise, the big corps call all the shots, etc.
What hooey! This is the latest shot from an anti-business administration whose little agency heads, such as Feinberg, are empowered to act their mischief as would never happen if we had elected McCain or Romney instead of Obama.
The notion that Big Biz and Citizens United gave us a self-aggrandizing twerp like Feinberg is laughable.
Amtrak has had to deal with similar issues since its inception. This includes a variety of ATS and cab signal installations, different fueling hardware, different HVAC systems in the rolling stock, etc.
My understanding is that the reason that the NTSB and FRA are sepparate is that it allows an invesigative agency (the NTSB) to be completely independant and conduct impartial investigations, so safety recommendations are made with safety and not cost in mind. The FRA is much closer to the railroads and listens to their arguments on whether or not the recommendations make sense, and creates reasonable and sensible regulations based on the feedback. She doesn't appear to understand that, and I forsee a lot of expensive safety regulations coming up.
NorthWest My understanding is that the reason that the NTSB and FRA are sepparate is that it allows an invesigative agency (the NTSB) to be completely independant and conduct impartial investigations, so safety recommendations are made with safety and not cost in mind. The FRA is much closer to the railroads and listens to their arguments on whether or not the recommendations make sense, and creates reasonable and sensible regulations based on the feedback. She doesn't appear to understand that, and I forsee a lot of expensive safety regulations coming up.
Remember that except in the event of emergency orders FRA regs are subject to a cost benefit analysis by OMB. And the benefits include those to the general public as well as the industry. That's one of the reasons FRA never proposed a PTC reg without a law requiring it. Another thing that gets lost is that Congress did not impose the planned PTC system on the industry, they required functionality and the industry picked this system ( after trying some others) to provide that functionality.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.