the provision to delay or remove the requirement for ECP brakes on oil and ethanol trains is the correct position, in my opinion. Not one case where either oil or ethanol trains have experienced a catastrophic derailment would ECP brakes have made any material difference in the outcome.
ECP brakes represent yet another layer of safety equipment that must be maintained and is subject to failure. The causes of the derailments so far have been rooted in either failure to identify defects or a lack of maintenance, either of the physical plant (the rails, roadbed, drainage structures, etc.) or components of the cars and engines themselves.
The Lac Megantic derailment was the result of several things going wrong and contributing to the disaster, from the insufficient number of handbrakes used to the handbrakes that didn't work (due to lack of maintenance) to the engine failure and subsequent fire (also due to lack of maintenance). ECP brakes would have had zero impact on this derailment.
The derailment in North Dakota outside Fargo was the result of a broken wheel on a train on an adjacent track. Nothing wrong with the oil train until the other train collided with it. The train went into emergency braking almost immediately. ECP brakes could not have applied the brakes faster than two seconds sooner, which would have had no positive effect.
If I remember correctly, the recent derailment in Illinois was the result of a track defect. When the train derailed, the emergency brake was automatically applied. I fail to see how ECP brakes applying in emergency as a reaction to the derailment would have any effect.
I don't particularly care for operating these trains, especially in my area where we recently had so much rain that portions of the track were washed out without warning. But changing the braking system won't do any good. Mandating a hi-rail vehicle immediately precede all of these trains is a good start. Limiting speed to 35 or 40 is also a good idea. Making these trains get extended haul air tests and inspections by qualified personnel at mechanical facilities (in other words, not relying on the contractor at the oil loading facility to perform the inspection and air test on a train they have a vested financial interest in being 100% perfect every time) would also be a great start. Setting a maximum speed these trains can pass another train on adjacent track might also be something to look into. Like in the North Dakota derailment, the problem isn't always with the oil train. A shifted load on a train on the next track could spell doom.
The Republicans fuck up everything they touch. They are so reliable in this regard that it's easy to say, "if they're for it, I'm against it!" But in this one case on this one bill, they got it right.
= new reply since forum marked as read
