Don, you speak of the CTC as having some sort of authority over railways in
Canada. I presume you are referring to the Canadian Transport Commission, a
body which once had jurisdiction over railway safety in Canada. The CTC was
dissolved at the end of 1987 and replaced by the National Transportation Agency
of Canada, with different responsibilities over economic regulation of
transport. In the second phase of this change to transport regulation, at the
beginning of 1989 the Railway Safety Act came into force, removing all safety
regulation from the NTA and placing it with the Ministry of Transport, commonly
called Transport Canada or TC. Unlike the CTC and the NTA (since changed again
to the CTA for Canadian Transportation Agency) which are autonomous regulatory
agencies, TC is a formal branch of the government reporting directly to the
Minister of Transport. TC is responsible for regulating safety but does not
investigate accidents. The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) does that and
makes recommendations to the Minister for changes to regulations or practices,
based on the findings and conclusions of its investigations.
The fact that you are not aware of changes that occurred a generation ago
suggests you may not be fully aware of TC’s rules, regulations and practices.
You might find it enlightening to take a look at their website and investigate
some of the many topics listed there:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/menu.htm
Don Thomas
From: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: May-22-14 5:17 AM
To: cpsig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [cpsig] Fw: Central Maine & Quebec CEO: 'We'll have to prove
ourselves'
Thank you Roger! I was wondering how long this thread would go on before
Burkhardt would be mentioned.
The morning he made that remark I called his office in Chicago and told him
what I thought of his remarks as well as the nonsense he managed to get the CTC
to go along with in the form of one man crews. Burkhardt is one of the cheap
robber barons, so I am told by people much closer to him that I ever want to
be, whose only real purpose in life is lining his own pocket with as much as he
can and not giving a damn aboout anything else. His administrative assistant
seemed like a real sharp lady, however, whom I found in a subsequent
call was a friend of another friend in the Chicago area who confirmed my
assessment. It has also been indicated to me that Burkhardt's business holdings
may soon be, if they are not already, in bankruptcy from the Megantic accident.
Perhaps there is some satisfaction in that. One needs to check his previous
railroad experience as well which most will find "enlightening".
The former CPR night diesel manager in Megantic has provided me with some
choice comments on the way things were conducted on the MM&A as well,
especially the condition of some of the motive power. I have been told, for
exaample, that teh lead locomotive that caught fire was not even fit for a
museum and was in the worst condition of those on the train. So why was it in
the lead? Apparently it did not even have a cab that could be locked.
References to the train formerly being left in a sag, rather than at the top of
a hill, as well as questions about what the fire crew might or might not have
done in the cab also came up in our conversation a day or two after the
accident.
The big question in my mind, however, is how or why the CTC allows itself
to be browbeat into relaxing safety rules as it clearly had done for Burkhardt
in allowing one man crews, for example. I do not know the
full story of that sorry affair but would certainly like to hear more from
anyone in the know.
Cordially, Don Valentine, whose professional background was railroad casuatly &
property insurance.
