Today, a federal judge in Kentucky confirmed the arbitration award against Wasatch Railroad Contractors of Cheyenne, Wyoming in favor of the McCreary County Heritage Foundation and the Big South Fork Scenic Railway. The Court ordered Wasatch to pay the foundation/railroad $730,284.60, and ordered either John Rimmash or Wasatch to pay the foundation/railroad $3,825.00.

The order is attached.

So they had a contract with an arbitration clause. Who controlled and chose the arbitrator? My sense is arbitration tends to work in favor of whoever chooses the arbitrator.

If I remember correctly, both parties got to pick the arbitrator together from a list provided by AAA (the arbitration people not the auto club).

If you get your hands on the arbitrators decision paper it's actually pretty bipartisan with the arbitrator admitting that steam locomotive repair is a bit out of his wheel house and that their decision was based mainly on the information of witness testimony of other steam locomotive restoration folks that were brought in as experts.

Kind of hard to favor Wasatch when they're own hired expert basically agreed with the heritage foundations expert that they had screwed up royal.

I ain't no lawyer but it would appear it's pay up time for John and his company. The arbitrators were understandably heavily influenced by the testimony of the steam " experts"

Hope they have the money. Ross Rowland

If someone with the needed computer skills would kindly post a link to the AAA case file so those who wish to can read the details of how they came to this decision that would be appreciated and instructive.

Thanks, Ross Rowland

There was a thread a couple months back regarding the arbator ruling on this. It contained the file which was removed by moderators a couple times before it was obtained (Through publically available court records) and posted a final time on page four of the thread here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=44909

It has not been removed as of the time of this post.

Thanks Boilermaker but that doesn't get us to the Arbitrators award and how he got there. If somebody can provide a link to that it would be most helpful.

Obviously an award of near 3/4 rds. of a million dollars must cover some substantial finding of wrong on the part of Wasatch Railroad Contractors and I'm sure there are many on here who would like to learn the details.

Thanks, Ross Rowland

Ross, read my message carefully. Go to page four of the linked thread, in the last post on that page there are three files you can click to download. The second file contains the arbitration document explaining the whole thing.

From what I have read all the stay bolts and rivets were bought in China by Wasatch. This violated the "buy America" stipulation in the Federal funding contract that stated if accepted you must buy materials made in America. Also the FRA stated that the stay bolts must have mill test reports before installing which they also did not have. The award was for the cost of the new materials and in labor costs to remove and replace all stay bolts. This blunder is really one of the worst case scenarios as all that hard work was done for nothing, new materials wasted, and now someone will have to rework that entire boiler.

Thanks Boilermaker. I did read the award carefully and feel sorry for both parties. Lord knows it's not easy for the very few boiler contractors that exist to find enough paying jobs to stay alive and a mistake of this magnitude could be fatal. It's certainly a mystery why Wasatch ignored the Buy American stipulations and the FRA requirement that certain materials carry test certifications before being installed in a locomotive boiler. Costly mistakes for sure.

And for the owner they're left with trying to collect on a judgement so they can afford to get the subject engine back under steam.

Sad all around. Ross Rowland

Wow, thanks for this. It is too bad the OP didn't point this out long ago in that earlier thread, it would have saved a lot of speculation.

In the UK there have been problems with steel from far eastern sources and rivet heads flaking off. That led to some expensive repeat repairs, one rivet supplier pulled out of the market and some boilersmiths insist on further independent QA testing after import.

In general, UK boiler repairs must be carried out to an approved standard by qualified persons using materials of the proper quality - and you have to be able to prove it, because the boiler insurance inspector will insist on it. Also that is what your railway's Safety Management System will say you must do.

Sooner or later your railway will get a visit from an inspector from the Office of the Rail Regulator who will check your SMS against everything your railway does and especially your boiler repair records and QA certificates. Woe betide you if the SMS ( a compulsory requirement) is not up to scratch and the records do not tally. I was personally present at an ORR inspection when the operator of one locomotive was told to either produce QA paperwork for a particular component, or replace it.

Using boiler repair material with no QA paperwork at all would be unthinkable these days.

Was it binding arbitration?
If not, it'll keep going and isn't done yet.

Binding and the result has the force of law as a legal judgment.