[Vision2020] Items to be Considered at the Megaload Meeting at HIRC

[Tom Hansen]

Courtesy of Mr. Linwood Laughy (co-intervener in case against Conoco and
others) who provided this information and suggested grounds for discussion
at the May 11th Mooscow Megaload Meeting at the Hamilton Indoor Recreation
Center.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The following information may be helpful in discussions between members of
the community of Moscow and Exxon/Mobil. Much of this information was
confirmed under oath during the contested case hearing held in Boise over
the past two weeks.

1. ITD is required to give “primary consideration” to public convenience
and public safety. However, the agency defines public convenience only
with respect to whether or not the public is “delayed” in traffic during
actual shipments. The term “delay” is defined as being completely stopped
for more than 15 minutes at any one location. Thus if a shipment travels
through Moscow in under 15 minutes, or if all traffic anywhere in Latah
County is stopped for less than 15 minutes, the residents of Moscow/Latah
County have not been inconvenienced at all according to ITD. This would be
the case with 1 load or 100 loads, for 1 night per week or 7 nights per
week, for one month of transport or 24 months.

2. Using the ITD standard for traffic delay, if a driver followed a
megaload from the top of the Lewiston hill all the way to Moscow at 15 mph
without any opportunity to pass the load, that driver would not have been
“delayed.”  Likewise, in the case of oncoming traffic, if a driver is
stopped at an “advanced” flagger station for 10 minutes, then sent on to
another flagger station (which might be a mile down the road, or two
miles, or only 100 yards), then held for another 13 minutes, then allowed
to proceed past the module, the driver has not been delayed and hence has
suffered no inconvenience.

3. From the perspective of the traveling public, a driver is “delayed”
from the time he or she cannot continue traveling at a normal speed until
s/he is able to return to normal speed. The Federal Highway Administration
defines traffic delay as what could be called “citizen perceived delay”
minus the amount of time the driver would spend traveling that same
stretch of highway at normal speeds. Three ITD employees have admitted
under oath that a driver who follows a megaload at low speeds has been
delayed even if that driver was never required to actually stop. Thus the
traveling public, the Federal Highway Administration, and 3 key ITD
employees all agree that the definition of traffic delay used in the
megaload decision is in error, but ITD uses this false definition anyway
as a means of supposedly eliminating public inconvenience.

4. No other interruptions in the public’s life constitutes inconvenience.
A thousand traffic stops for tree-trimming, interruptions of electric
power as new poles are installed and overhead lines raised, taking
alternate travel routes to avoid the megaloads, spending time trying to
determine whether they will or will not be on the highway on any given
night —none of these are considered by ITD as inconvenience.

5. The transportation plan that forms the basis of the actual permit is “a
living document” and can thus be altered by ITD after the permit is issued
even though the decision to issue the permit was based on the initial
plan. Thus Conoco’s plan to be on Highway 12 for 4 nights per shipment
was, after the permit was issued, changed to 6 nights on the road, which
actually became 7 nights. None of these changes posed any issue for public
convenience, since public inconvenience only exists when the public is
“delayed” for more than 15 minutes during shipment. Thus a hearing officer
could decide that a given transportation plan did not violate ITD
regulations or state statutes, ITD could approve the plan, and
subsequently make significant changes to that plan with no public
recourse. Thus when Exxon or some other corporation tells the public,
prior to receiving a permit, how shipments will be conducted, they can be
guessing or lying. Their goal is to get the permit. Reality and Murphy can
be dealt with later.

6. The absolutely hard-and-fast rule of traffic delays of no more than 15
minutes is, well, not so hard-and-fast. ITD testified that 16 minutes was
probably okay, maybe 17 or 18, but if this occurred a lot ITD would
discuss the matter with the contractor to see what could be done. In the
case of Conoco, monitors of the shipments consistently noted traffic
delays at various locations of 20, 30, 40 minutes, including dead stops of
these lengths, which proved not to be of any concern to ITD as they
allowed the Conoco shipments to continue. ITD press releases only
mentioned complete blockage of the highway for an hour or more.

7. A given night’s schedule, like the plan itself, is also adjustable in
real time. While a specific route and destination is usually announced for
each night’s shipment, the transporter does not stick with the announced
schedule. Thus someone planning to avoid a transport cannot be certain
about where the megaload will actually be at a given time on a given
night.

8. The decision to allow a megaload to travel can come as late as 4:00
p.m. on the day of travel. ITD, and particularly the shipper, have
consistently done a poor job of notifying the public of when a megaload
will or will not be on the road.

9. The Idaho State Police allow any driver/vehicle to pass a megaload once
each way on any given night. They take license numbers, and anyone not
abiding by their “rule” is pulled over and told they cannot proceed, must
stay between a police car and the trailing pilot car, and if they do not
do so they can be arrested. At least two Moscow residents have been
“detained” in this fashion for up to 3 hours. At least these residents
were not “inconvenienced” according to ITD calculations.

10. In the case of Highway 12, Exxon’s permit is for 200+ loads. ITD
testified they were unable to determine how many loads over 200 were
included. Thus the public has no idea how many loads Exxon will ship up
Highway 12 other than likely more than 200. A permit for 60 megaloads to
travel on Highway 95 does not mean shipments would be limited to 60. Exxon
has stated that if they don’t get permits for Highway 12 soon, they will
need to disassemble all of the 33 modules now at the Port of Lewiston,
resulting in 66 shipments of the same length and width. If 60 shorter
modules are shipped on I-5 out of Vancouver, Washington, (13 have been
shipped on this route so far), then 113 or so modules of the original 207
Exxon has often mentioned are out there somewhere. If these modules are
transported to Lewiston and disassembled, this could add 226 loads to
Highway 95 traffic. Again, the modus operandi appears to be to get an
initial permit, then worry about the details later.

11. No modules connected with the Kearl Project (the 207 megaloads
referred to above) can move through Montana at the present time due to a
temporary restraining order issued by the district court. The one
exception to this was the test module, which must now remain parked at
Lolo Hot Springs. The Missoula County Commission and three environmental
groups will be seeking a preliminary injunction to continue this TRO on
May 16th. Two tribes, including the Nez Perce, have been granted amicus
status in this case. A preliminary injunction would halt the construction
of the 53 new highway turnouts, along with the modification of 22 existing
turnouts, Exxon needs to meet Montana’s 10 minute traffic delay rule. If a
preliminary injunction is granted, any modules shipped on 95 would have to
be parked somewhere in north Idaho for at least the amount of time
required to resolve the court case, and potentially for whatever
additional time might be required to do a thorough environmental impact
study under Montana’s environmental protection laws.

The transport of megaloads to the Port of Lewiston based in part on a wink
and a promise has become a costly venture and not the cheap route to
Alberta Exxon anticipated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

It is absolutely imperative that these concerns be thoroughly examined and
discussed publicly.  It's only right.

Thank you,

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"This is the 'Mouse that Roared,' 'David and Goliath' and 'Avatar' all
rolled into one.  We must remember that the thousands of citizens involved
in this effort to protect their personal and family safety, their
businesses and their lifestyles are confronting some of the largest
international corporations in the world."

- Linwood Laughy