Spokane7
67°
November 3, 2010 in Opinion
Editorial: Mega-load ruling gives chance to re-evaluate
The Idaho Supreme Court’s 3-2 decision to overturn a lower court ruling that would’ve blocked the four mega-loads of oil refinery equipment gives the Idaho Transportation Department a second chance to handle this issue the right way.
The court case turned on a technicality, with three justices deciding that it was beyond the court’s purview to adjudicate the permitting decision. That returns the controversy to ITD, where a spokesman said Tuesday that there had been no decisions on how the agency would proceed.
Litigants who opposed permits for the late-night rolling roadblocks on U.S. Highway 12 hope that the agency heeds the call from the many critics who have decried the informal and rather secretive process. We concur. Formal hearings that seek public input ought to be held before a precedent-setting decision is made.
This is not merely a matter of four wide loads being shipped by ConocoPhillips from the port of Lewiston to its refinery in Billings. Imperial Oil/ExxonMobil wants to transport as many as 207 mega-loads of equipment on the same highway, with the eventual destination being the mammoth Kearl Oil Sands Project in Alberta. A South Korean company reportedly is considering another 40 to 60 oversized loads.
Though the court declined to intervene, the majority opinion noted, “It is entirely possible that respondents have real grievances with ITD’s decision in this case.”
The best way to find out is to hold open hearings.
As we’ve said, the concerns of residents along the winding highway that is bounded by the Clearwater and Lochsa rivers should be taken seriously. The loads weigh more than 300 tons and would take up both lanes of the highway, pulling over every 15 minutes to allow other vehicles to pass. It would take four days to travel from Lewiston to Lolo Pass. We cannot fault the fretting about how a steady rumbling of shipments would impact tourism or emergency transportation. The process to date has not respected these concerns.
We understand the desire of ConocoPhillips to get permits rather quickly, because the onset of winter conditions could block any transports until spring. But the company still needs to get the required permits from Montana, so there is no guarantee that this excursion could take place this year.
We’re more concerned about the long-term prospects of using a nationally recognized scenic byway as the main overland route between Asian heavy equipment suppliers and a Canadian mining operation. State leaders in Idaho should feel the same way. This court ruling gives them another chance to take a more thoughtful, inclusive approach.
Trudy Rubin: Egyptians say no to Islamists 
Marksman on November 03 at 8:42 a.m.
It seems to me that letting a handful of Idaho residents hold up projects that are going to help America become independent of off shore(read that not friendly to our Nation)oil sources is typical of the provcincal attitude prevalent in the area. This attitude prevents business development and a growing economy here. How much more are Washington Residents on the East side willing to pay for petroleum? The Billings, Montana refineries provide most of the fuel used here. They are a major employer in Montana and here. Ask the railroad and trucking Co. employees who haul that fuel to you every day. The oil sands will be developed in spite of the Green lies. As I have said before, Canadians live on paychecks; Amerricans live on unemployment checks! Do you get it, yet?
bdr on November 03 at 11:51 a.m.
Lawsuits are a two bladed knife. Specially when your dealing with Exxon who hires NYC trial lawyers. If your found to have bogus lawsuits like this (you can be counter-sued for triple damages).
Now for anyone thinking these large totes will damage the road.
Your fools, These roads can support thousands of tons.
If your worried the road will be blocked……SNOW blocks the stupid road nearly every winter. (where you concern then)?
take your crabby-crybaby lawsuits and shove them.
#12 is a US highway…….you need to file suits accordingly at the federal level. Go find a bridge somewhere and become a grumpy troll.
Move the frigging loads already.
Dave_B on November 04 at 9:42 a.m.
Those who think Canada’s tar sands will provide energy security are sadly disillusioned. America gobbles up 20 million barrels per day of the oily stuff. Last year Canada’s tar sands produced only 1.4 million barrels per day, some of which stayed in Canada. And this after more than 40 years of production expansion.
Energy security from Canada is a ruse, it’s just not going to happen. The only way America will gain energy security is to break the addiction. This could happen with a shift to renewable energy and biofuels, a move that is creating hundreds of thousands of new, high paying, satisfying, technical jobs in places like Germany.
SukiKat on November 05 at 8:48 p.m.
As a life-long Idahoan who respects and loves the outdoors, I cannot fathom how anyone can look at Highway 12 and see it as a way to transfer mega loads that occupy both lanes of a highway.
When I drive from south Idaho to my parent’s home in north Idaho, I cross the Montana line, go over Lolo Pass, and the first sign I see is “winding road next 77 miles.” And that’s just the road between Lolo and Lowell. After Lowell comes the highway past Kooskia, through Kamiah, and past Orofino—a route that already has far too much truck traffic and way too many fatal accidents. With little to nothing except a few concrete barriers between the roadway and the river, it is insane to think of 300 ton loads traveling through the area. Bicyclists travel the road in summer months, kyakers and boaters use the route to put in during the spring, campers and travel trailers frequent the area through all seasons, etc. So they say the loads will only travel at night. If something goes wrong and 300 tons slips one way or another, it could be a long time before the blockage is removed.
This is an historic and beautiful area, not a mega load transfer route.
jkirk on November 05 at 10:06 p.m.
Flinging labels like “cry-babies” here at those who oppose turning Rt 12 into a freeway for gigantic truck loads is not being civil, as requested by the paper!
Huge trailer-truck loads have already ruined most of the routes in Idaho and elsewhere in western states that allow them on the roads, tax them lightly, while not repairing the roadways. Now taxpayers are being asked to subsidize gigantic truck loads taking up the whole of Rt.12 in the most dangerous parts of this route, meanwhile risking the beauty of this federal scenic byway as well as the natural resources nearby—like rivers, for a start.
An accident with one of these megaloads might never be repaired. The companies involved will just write it off as a loss and the citizens and travelers will inherit the destruction.
Check out what such a load looks like and compare it to commercial trucks. You will easily see the difference and what Rt. 12 is up against. There’s a photo at FightingGoliath.org.
It is not just a “handful of residents” in opposition, as claimed by another comment here. According to the Lewiston Tribune’s article by Elaine Williams on 8/8/10, several hundred people have written to IDT stating their reasons for opposing the use of Rt. 12 for such loads.
This plan is not good for anyone in Idaho. Very little added employment will result from permitting these particular megaloads, while the generation of incomes all over the relevant area from tourism will seriously decline as the scenic route turns into another ugly industrial highway.
JFLO on November 05 at 10:31 p.m.
I am sorry “Marksman”, but you are inaccurate stating there are only a handful of people opposing the shipments! There are literally hundreds just in this area of the Clearwater River alone! Not to mention folks in Montana and elsewhere. I am not sure where you get your info from, but if you dig a bit deeper, you will find a lot more not in favor of these loads.
There are many people in this area who are very concerned about their ability to make a living here if there is a precedent set w/ the loads. Tourism is our one economy that is growing in this area and these loads pose a very real threat to jobs here.
I hope the ITD is willing to hear our concerns and act accordingly!
WitsEnd on November 06 at 12:30 a.m.
One 646,000 pound load equals how many normal passenger vehicles? How many normal semi-loads? The semis alone create significant and continuing damage, and the passenger vehicle-driving tax-paying public pays for the damages—not the trucking companies. Anyone familiar with this treasured highway knows of its fragility under even “normal” traffic.
Emergency medical traffic destined for the nearest hospital in Orofino (over 100 miles down the line from Lolo Pass) is overwhelmingly effected in private vehicles, not ambulances with radios. (Radios don’t even work throughout much or even most of the canyons through which US Hwy. 12 passes.) “Sorry, folks. You’ll just have to pull over and wait 15 minutes.” Riiight. That’s looking out for the safety and well-being of local residents!
The Port of Lewiston projected that if this mega-load project becomes a reality they may be able to add up to 4 full-time job positions. I’ve no doubt that even with this massive influx of cash to the area, Nez Perce taxpayers will still be paying to keep the Port alive, just like they’ve been doing for the past 50 years or so.
Why are Foreign manufacturers, Foreign shippers and Foreign oil companies being encouraged by ITD to usurp Idaho’s and our nation’s fragile, narrow, National Scenic Byway, US Hwy. 12, for Foreign profit?