Derailment in Westford Ma 2-20-14

do railroad people take dumb pills before going to work? call police because the town manager was at the wreck? my. nice public relations. paid firefighters at the wreck? why not. they are paid 24/7 so what's the difference between sitting in a stationhouse and standing by a derailment? ken patrick

KEN PATRICK wrote:do railroad people take dumb pills before going to work? call police because the town manager was at the wreck? my. nice public relations. paid firefighters at the wreck? why not. they are paid 24/7 so what's the difference between sitting in a stationhouse and standing by a derailment? ken patrick

as stated above, it doesn't matter who she is, she is trespassing on railroad property, and can be removed however seen fit by the railroad. as for firefighters, they are NOT paid 24/7, but in the shifts they work, and tell me how an idling firetruck(s) sitting next to a wreck is cheaper than spending a shift at a firehouse doing nothing. as a taxpayer, i would be inclined to go for whatever doesn't add up in the town budget.

i would simply fault the railroad for not telling anyone as soon as this happened but it seems as though the whole town felt the need to make a big deal out of it

These days it's pretty much standard practice for any large corporation to have a " public statement " type form pre made up for any type of expected incident or disaster that may occur. You would expect a railroad to have a "fill in the blanks" statement such as-" There has been a derailment in (location) there are (number of cars) derailed. We have notified local authorities and working with them to evaluate the situation, etc."
In today's world of instant information via the internet it's best to make as much factual information available to everyone early to cut down on the hysteria.

Several posts from posters on this site and on other railfan groups at the
minimum, leave much to be desired. One post inferred that the "small
town fire chief" in Westford was at fault. Does this mean that if this
situation occurred in Manchester VT (population 4,391) that the Fire
Chief there should keep his nose out of the situation, but that if the
incident occurred in Manchester NH (population 109,565), it's okay
for the Fire Chief to become involved, including stationing apparatus
and crews in the incident area.

These Fire officials are governed by State and local laws and regulations
and are directed to protect life and property in all types of incidents. In
this case, the Fire Chief or the Officer in Charge chose to keep a piece
of fire apparatus at the scene during the cleanup. While the cleanup
turned out to be a "routine" event for PAR, some posters here and else-
where would be the first to be pointing the finger, should something have
gone wrong with serious consequences and the fire truck and crew were
sittin in the fire station.

The disaster at Megantic has put the danger of transporting fuel products
by rail front and center for the fire service across the county, anywhere
through which fuel trains pass. With that in mind, any derailment involving
such railcars will get a higher level of scrutiny, than in the past.

Remember, you did not have to take off your shoes before boarding
commercial airliners in the US, until a bomber attempted to blow up
a plan using explosives in his shoe. The Megantic incident and several
other high profile crude oil derailments, luckily without fatalities, fit
the same scenario. Few, if any, fire departments will consider such
incidents "routine".

The moral of the story is Pan Am still has a way to go when it comes to Public Relations. Legally obligated to notify or not, issues can be avoided by a little talk.

The other issue is local municipalities are beginning to get too big for their britches. Look to Billerica, Winchester and Grafton for the latest examples.

Having worked as a fire chief in a "small town" as well as conductor for a Class I railroad, I can offer my perspective on this incident. Obviously, there are two very differing views depending by those involved.

Wearing my fire chief "helmet", public safety is the #1 concern of the residents and visitors of the community. There is generally a lack of good knowledge and understand by public safety officials of rail operations. I personally feel that railroads do a less-than-ideal job in public safety outreach and the Massachusetts fire training academy currently offers no training in this subject. Because of this, I can very easily see how a fire chief would react when he observes the trucks of a few LP-Gas tank cars on the ground. I don't think any reasonable person can fault the chief, given the lack of information regarding rail operations, for being very cautious, especially given the litigious society in which we live. As was mentioned earlier, several ethanol incidents as well as the Lac Megantic disaster have raised tremendous awareness and fear of potential dangers of haz-mat transport over the rails.

Now, placing my conductor "hat" on, it is not uncommon for a truck or two from a rail car to derail. I don't want to say that it is a "common" occurrence, but it does happen more than anyone would like to see. To railroaders, this was pretty much a routine minor event with no spill, leak or hazard - call in the heavy equipment, re-rail the cars, and go on with normal business.

Massachusetts FIre Prevention regulations do have mandatory reporting requirements for a spill or leak: "Flammable and combustible liquid spills and leaks shall be promptly reported to the head of the fire department and to the Office of Incident Response of the Department of Environmental Protection." However, the regulation "shall apply to the storage and handling of flammable liquids, combustible liquids, flammable solids and flammable gases." There was NO spill or leak in Westford. Railroads are federally regulated, and most have their own rules that require the dispatcher be notified of haz-mat releases, who in turn will notify local public safety officials.

There was a derailment on a rail line which ran through my community, however the derailment was just over the town line in the next community. A section of rail head broke off resulting two trucks on the train going on the ground. There was no haz-mat release. The Class I railroad (not the one involved in the Westford Incident), called and notified my department of the incident as a courtesy.

The long and short of it is that there needs to be better training, outreach and communications between rail and public safety to ensure that this type of event does not happen again. Hopefully, everyone learned from this incident and things will change...…..

Two words: Lac Megantic

Pan Am doesn't exactly have a stellar reputation when it comes to safety. You're damn right I'd want someone out there with a watchful eye. These are the people who refuse to admit when they spill who-knows-what anywhere they seem to go. they're repeat environmental offenders with a history of coverups.

For all PAR/Big G's silent indiscretions the Westford derailment (the cleanup of which I witnessed) was minor. It wasn't worthy of the hysteria pitched by local solons and the local press. The town provided plenty of police and emergency personnel, all of whom spent a few idle hours sipping coffee and watching a PAR crew get the derailed cars back on track.

NHV 669 wrote:as stated above, it doesn't matter who she is, she is trespassing on railroad property, and can be removed however seen fit by the railroad. as for firefighters, they are NOT paid 24/7, but in the shifts they work, and tell me how an idling firetruck(s) sitting next to a wreck is cheaper than spending a shift at a firehouse doing nothing. as a taxpayer, i would be inclined to go for whatever doesn't add up in the town budget.

i would simply fault the railroad for not telling anyone as soon as this happened but it seems as though the whole town felt the need to make a big deal out of it

Removed however seen fit by the railroad? Depending upon how one interprets the law, she is technically the head of the local town government to include its public safety agencies. The first railroad employee to put their hands on her would have been subject to arrest themselves, let alone the civil lawsuit to follow. The fire chief clearly had statutory authority here, whether there was a leak or not, and as for the ridiculous comment that the cars are heavily constructed? Please, it takes surprisingly little lateral force to overturn a derailed and destabilized tank car, and certainly one that rolled off of a trestle would have been subject to a breach of some sort. Westford made a lot of noise, but they could have busted Pan Am's nuts a lot more than they did, to include calling in the state fire marshal's office and demanding that the cars be off-loaded before they were re-railed, an order the railroad would have balked at but would have stood up all day long in superior court (derailed hazmat cars on a raised trestle? What were the trucks resting on? 50 year old rotted ties? Fire chief's call period). I am also confused by your comment that firemen are not paid 24/7..... Westford has a full-time fire department, they get paid for their shift whether they are at a call or at the station. The 50 dollars in diesel fuel is not even worth a response. People seem to have a hard time differentiating between the preclusion of local and state governments from interfering with the day to day operations of interstate commerce and reasonable actions by public safety officials.

TPR37777 wrote:

NHV 669 wrote:as stated above, it doesn't matter who she is, she is trespassing on railroad property, and can be removed however seen fit by the railroad. as for firefighters, they are NOT paid 24/7, but in the shifts they work, and tell me how an idling firetruck(s) sitting next to a wreck is cheaper than spending a shift at a firehouse doing nothing. as a taxpayer, i would be inclined to go for whatever doesn't add up in the town budget.

i would simply fault the railroad for not telling anyone as soon as this happened but it seems as though the whole town felt the need to make a big deal out of it

Removed however seen fit by the railroad? Depending upon how one interprets the law, she is technically the head of the local town government to include its public safety agencies. The first railroad employee to put their hands on her would have been subject to arrest themselves, let alone the civil lawsuit to follow. The fire chief clearly had statutory authority here, whether there was a leak or not, and as for the ridiculous comment that the cars are heavily constructed? Please, it takes surprisingly little lateral force to overturn a derailed and destabilized tank car, and certainly one that rolled off of a trestle would have been subject to a breach of some sort. Westford made a lot of noise, but they could have busted Pan Am's nuts a lot more than they did, to include calling in the state fire marshal's office and demanding that the cars be off-loaded before they were re-railed, an order the railroad would have balked at but would have stood up all day long in superior court (derailed hazmat cars on a raised trestle? What were the trucks resting on? 50 year old rotted ties? Fire chief's call period). I am also confused by your comment that firemen are not paid 24/7..... Westford has a full-time fire department, they get paid for their shift whether they are at a call or at the station. The 50 dollars in diesel fuel is not even worth a response. People seem to have a hard time differentiating between the preclusion of local and state governments from interfering with the day to day operations of interstate commerce and reasonable actions by public safety officials.

If you are someone's property, they can remove you. If she was on railroad property, the B&M police can remove her. Do you think when Menino get's mad he barges into the Federal building? It's as simple as that.

The local fire chief and/or state fire marshal and even the DEP have no, read ZERO jurisdiction on making a call to offload laden in a situation like this. The call comes down to either the railroad, or the FRA in conjunction with the EPA.

I agree, reasonable actions by the RR ie communication go a long way.

newpylong wrote:If you are someone's property, they can remove you. If she was on railroad property, the B&M police can remove her. Do you think when Menino get's mad he barges into the Federal building? It's as simple as that.

The local fire chief and/or state fire marshal and even the DEP have no, read ZERO jurisdiction on making a call to offload laden in a situation like this. The call comes down to either the railroad, or the FRA in conjunction with the EPA.

We have had this conversation before. I can not make you understand the things which are beyond your comprehension. Neither the FRA nor the EPA are in the business of determining how active scenes are handled, they come in to play after the fact. Do you think the Canadian version of the FRA directed fire suppression at Lac Megantic? Does the NTSB decide where to deploy foam to extinguish plane crashes? The fire chief had authority here whether little Pan Am liked it or not. I think it is the railroad portion of this that makes it so confusing for you, and results in such poor metaphors as you employ. Transition the situation to a tractor trailer hauling LNG down 495 in Westford, having originated in Nashua, NH (interstate commerce). Someone cuts off the TT unit, and the driver loses control resulting in the entire rig leaving the road and ending up in the woods through the fencing. Since the state only owns about 10 meters on either side of the highway, the scene is clearly on someone's private property (this happens all of the time, by the way). Do you think you could just wander out into the woods from your nearby house with a shotgun under your arm and order everyone off of your land? Private property, right? Try it and let me know how it works out for you. Leak or no leak, at such a scene any and all decisions on how to safely remove the trailer from the woods would fall on the fire chief (or more likely his designee) and Coady's Towing in this case. The trucking company would be compelled to follow the directives of the fire chief, whether they liked it or not.

There are quite a few sharp posters here with engineering backgrounds, maybe they could be of more assistance in explaining the risks involved in this derailment. Each of the derailed cars was resting on eight points, each point being on the road bed in a configuration that the track structure was not designed for. In the case of the LNG cars on the trestle, several of the wheels can be seen sitting on the ties. Are you familiar with the track conditions in this area? Do you think the ties on that trestle were well suited for supporting the weight of a fully loaded tank car? Whether you realize it or not, all it would take would be one half of one truck to sink into or snap a single rotted tie and that load would have catastrophically shifted. There is no such thing as a minor derailment involving hazmat, especially for those of us whose asses are directed toward the glow when things go awry.

Question.

Has there been any official word that the tank cars were even loaded? I can only find what has been posted here. For all I know, the reporter could be looking at the placards and matching them up to the newest ERG (Emergency Response Guide) they have, or reading the name on the side of the tank car. There is no obvious gauge for them (or the rest of us) to see if they are full or empty.

Pressure tanks are never considered totally empty after unloading,there will be some
fumes/vapor remaining after unloading,unless the tank(inside) was cleaned/vented after unloading.
Tanks handling Crude Oil,or "finished" petro products,there might be some "Heel"(left over product)
in the tank,along with fumes/vapors untill the inside is cleaned out.

TPR37777 wrote:

NHV 669 wrote:as stated above, it doesn't matter who she is, she is trespassing on railroad property, and can be removed however seen fit by the railroad. as for firefighters, they are NOT paid 24/7, but in the shifts they work, and tell me how an idling firetruck(s) sitting next to a wreck is cheaper than spending a shift at a firehouse doing nothing. as a taxpayer, i would be inclined to go for whatever doesn't add up in the town budget.

i would simply fault the railroad for not telling anyone as soon as this happened but it seems as though the whole town felt the need to make a big deal out of it

Removed however seen fit by the railroad? Depending upon how one interprets the law, she is technically the head of the local town government to include its public safety agencies. The first railroad employee to put their hands on her would have been subject to arrest themselves, let alone the civil lawsuit to follow. The fire chief clearly had statutory authority here, whether there was a leak or not, and as for the ridiculous comment that the cars are heavily constructed? Please, it takes surprisingly little lateral force to overturn a derailed and destabilized tank car, and certainly one that rolled off of a trestle would have been subject to a breach of some sort. Westford made a lot of noise, but they could have busted Pan Am's nuts a lot more than they did, to include calling in the state fire marshal's office and demanding that the cars be off-loaded before they were re-railed, an order the railroad would have balked at but would have stood up all day long in superior court (derailed hazmat cars on a raised trestle? What were the trucks resting on? 50 year old rotted ties? Fire chief's call period). I am also confused by your comment that firemen are not paid 24/7..... Westford has a full-time fire department, they get paid for their shift whether they are at a call or at the station. The 50 dollars in diesel fuel is not even worth a response. People seem to have a hard time differentiating between the preclusion of local and state governments from interfering with the day to day operations of interstate commerce and reasonable actions by public safety officials.

you insinuate that i meant violent force in her removal, totally unnecessary. it doesn't matter one bit who she knows or who she is, she is on PRIVATE railroad property. as for the firemen being paid 24/7, i believe we misinterpreted each other. i meant the idea of being paid for shift time, however long it is, regardless of where they are or what they are doing, not 24/7-365. I'd be inclined to believe that most firefighters have a residence BESIDES the station house

TPR37777 wrote:

newpylong wrote:If you are someone's property, they can remove you. If she was on railroad property, the B&M police can remove her. Do you think when Menino get's mad he barges into the Federal building? It's as simple as that.

The local fire chief and/or state fire marshal and even the DEP have no, read ZERO jurisdiction on making a call to offload laden in a situation like this. The call comes down to either the railroad, or the FRA in conjunction with the EPA.

We have had this conversation before. I can not make you understand the things which are beyond your comprehension. Neither the FRA nor the EPA are in the business of determining how active scenes are handled, they come in to play after the fact. Do you think the Canadian version of the FRA directed fire suppression at Lac Megantic? Does the NTSB decide where to deploy foam to extinguish plane crashes? The fire chief had authority here whether little Pan Am liked it or not. I think it is the railroad portion of this that makes it so confusing for you, and results in such poor metaphors as you employ. Transition the situation to a tractor trailer hauling LNG down 495 in Westford, having originated in Nashua, NH (interstate commerce). Someone cuts off the TT unit, and the driver loses control resulting in the entire rig leaving the road and ending up in the woods through the fencing. Since the state only owns about 10 meters on either side of the highway, the scene is clearly on someone's private property (this happens all of the time, by the way). Do you think you could just wander out into the woods from your nearby house with a shotgun under your arm and order everyone off of your land? Private property, right? Try it and let me know how it works out for you. Leak or no leak, at such a scene any and all decisions on how to safely remove the trailer from the woods would fall on the fire chief (or more likely his designee) and Coady's Towing in this case. The trucking company would be compelled to follow the directives of the fire chief, whether they liked it or not.

There are quite a few sharp posters here with engineering backgrounds, maybe they could be of more assistance in explaining the risks involved in this derailment. Each of the derailed cars was resting on eight points, each point being on the road bed in a configuration that the track structure was not designed for. In the case of the LNG cars on the trestle, several of the wheels can be seen sitting on the ties. Are you familiar with the track conditions in this area? Do you think the ties on that trestle were well suited for supporting the weight of a fully loaded tank car? Whether you realize it or not, all it would take would be one half of one truck to sink into or snap a single rotted tie and that load would have catastrophically shifted. There is no such thing as a minor derailment involving hazmat, especially for those of us whose asses are directed toward the glow when things go awry.

No, I have not had this conversation before. Why do you feel it is beyond my comprehension? Because your wear a fire helmet and I used to wear a RR vest? I think it's possible to see the other side without insulting one's competence in understanding.

Can you please quote me where I said the FRA or EPA would manage how the derailment scene is handled? What I did say was a local Fire Marshall has no authority to order the railroad to offline laden. The railroad didn't think there was a threat. If the local FD had deemed a threat there would be a jurisdiction problem. Though I feel had there been a threat the railroad would have also recognized that or complied had the FD requested it.

I'm not sure what your point is regarding the tractor trailer story. We were discussing the Town Manager being removed from the property, not any first responders. Surely the Town Manager of Westford can't be of assistance when it comes to re-railing?

Yes, I am familiar with track conditions, I used to run trains over them several times per week - they haven't gotten any better. I also have seen pictures of the derailment site that the public has not. Some of the trucks were already off the ties into the ballast, so I am not sure what your point is regarding a shifting load?

I think the real issue is at hand is for some reason you think the railroad (or I?) am slighting the fire department. I don't think there is a more important thing than the safe shipment of hazardous material. I had to work with local fire departments on issues like this more times than I can count. Been through big derailments, small derailments, hazmat, loss of property, etc and so on. If something would have happened caused by negligence and there was a spill or even worse, death, Pan Am might not be big enough to sustain the back lash. They do not need nor want something like Megantic to happen. But they know their business and how rail cars are built better than you. Like I said, I think there should have been better communication.

BTW - Pan Am does not transport LNG, I don't know many railroads that do.