I 95 bridge rebuild costs

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

Just an observation about how differently the disasters at East Palestine and the I-95 bridge were handled by the government.

I-95 bridge to be rebuilt at a cost of $30 million. This will be paid by the federal government. That’s on top of what’s already been spent.

East Palestine: NS will be paying for everything… and then some.

I’m not sure of all of the legal requirements but it just does not seem like a level playing field between the trucking and RR industries. Hoping to hear what others might have to say.

2

One difference is that tens of thousands of taxpayers aren’t inconvenienced by the East Palestine wreck every day.

3

At one time gas taxes paid for the highways, but Congress stopped raising the gas tax to keep up with expenses. Last time I checked the Highway Fund had to be supplimented with $40 billion per year general funds.

4

I-95 is a public facility - Federal - State - Local

NS tracks through East Palestine are not a public facility.

5

I’m pretty sure the railroads don’t want the government involved financially. That money usually comes with more strings than a grand piano.

6

I-95 is a Government highway, open to qualified use by the American public. The NS main through East Palestine is private property, not even open to foot traffic except for defined grade crossings.

Were some form of Government ‘iron ocean’ scheme set up, then Federal assistance with wrecks would be more appropriate.

7

Could the truck operator even begin to pay for the I-95 repairs?

8

Would expect max insurance be $10 M. Has PA filed claim yet? Bankruptcy appears only option for tank company operator.

9

Would expect max insurance be $10 M. Has PA filed claim yet? Bankruptcy appears only option for tank company operator. Please have all emloyees cash their pay checks as quickly as possible. If company really cares for all employees it will pay up all due employees before bankruptcy. As well pay driver’s widow.

10

Under PA WC law, its very hard to sue the employer. If there is evidence the accident was due or partially due to a 3rd party, then the family can sue it.

11

What on earth does workmen’s-compensation law have to do with this situation?

Whether or not the driver acted improperly (which I don’t think has been indicated, let alone demonstrated or proven) he was no less an ‘agent’ of the trucking company or owner than, say, a driver of a Coca-Cola or Walmart truck involved in an accident. Which puts the trucking-company owners squarely in ‘deep pockets’ liability for anything in excess of insurance payout.

I’d be a little surprised if the Buttegieg DOT had not already taken action to arrange insurance payout or freeze the trucking-company assets. They would certainly subrogate any amount paid for the remediation that insurance did not choose to cover.