Trains.com

Dirty old dirt

3681 views
48 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Dirty old dirt
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:10 AM

             Locally, there is something in the news about possible health issues concerning a brownfield area downtown along the railroad tracks. The old Milwaukee Road yard was built on top of a filled in swamp. It had been converted to a junkyard when the Milwaukee went away. Some transients had burned down the roundhouse that was full of car parts. Then, after 100+ years of yucky stuff soaking into the ground next to the river, the city bought the land for redevelopment.

     As the city spent millions of tax dollars to clean up the mess, they shipped hundreds of truckloads of contaminated soil to a site in Utah, Nevada, or somewhere out there.  All while an active rail line- with a siding- ran through the middle of the property.  It seems like long hauls of heavy, low-value (worthless dirt in this case) freight long distances would be right up the railroad’s alley. Are railroads ever used for hauling contaminated dirt?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:25 AM

All the time!

The fact that they felt that trucks gave them better value is amazing.

There was one site in Oak Park/Forest Park that was specifically set up for removal of contaminated dirt from an area; it was loaded into containers, which went on to CSX trains for some site in Michigan, as I recall.  Usually gons are the preferred mode; more often than not tarps cover the loads.

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:25 AM

I may not be right on target here but the contaminated dirt would still be considered a hazardous material and require special handling.  I would assume that covered hoppers would be needed to handle the material and would have to be cleaned pretty thoroughly before being returned to service.  All of this drives up costs, which would have to be built into what might be a one-time-only rate.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:39 AM

Would a carload of dirty dirt have to have a plackard?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Monday, October 17, 2016 9:33 AM

Murphy Siding
Then, after 100+ years of yucky stuff soaking into the ground next to the river, the city bought the land for redevelopment.      As the city spent millions of tax dollars to clean up the mess, they shipped hundreds of truckloads of contaminated soil to a site in Utah, Nevada, or somewhere out there. 

Why weren't the original owners (or their corporate succesors) billed for clean up?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, October 17, 2016 9:54 AM

CSSHEGEWISCH

I may not be right on target here but the contaminated dirt would still be considered a hazardous material and require special handling.  I would assume that covered hoppers would be needed to handle the material and would have to be cleaned pretty thoroughly before being returned to service.  All of this drives up costs, which would have to be built into what might be a one-time-only rate.

 

We used to have a "dirty dirt" unit train.  I remember gondolas, low side and high side, with clamped plastic covers.  

Some, maybe most now, goes in containers.  The link has a picture of some, derailed, that the story says were hauling contaminated soil.  http://www.northjersey.com/news/business/nutley-commissioners-question-contaminant-transport-and-track-maintenance-after-derailment-1.1461910?page=all

Jeff

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:10 AM

Jeff: Wine-Door gons (high bottom /hinged bottom cars, hardly made or seen anymore) still move dirt the old fashioned way. Plenty of burrito cars (gons with dirt surrounded by plastic sheeting or fabric liners) out there as well as the containers.

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: SE Minnesota
  • 6,847 posts
Posted by jrbernier on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:27 AM

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight?  

Modeling BNSF  and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:46 AM

All the results of the dredging of the Hudson River (GE/PCBs) travelled somewhere by rail - I don't know where it ended up.

I've seen "burrito cars" before, and in the recent past.

I know of a site in a former NYC rail yard where they went down some 12 feet and were still digging up "dirty dirt."  And that's mostly fill there, too.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:48 AM

jrbernier

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight?  

 

Ding ding!  We have the winner. The city also lacked patience. The previous owners probably did not have the money to fix the problems that they inherited from the railroad. They probably got the property at a fire sale price.  In the end, I doubt anybody up the chain had any money to fix this.  Consequently, fools rush in where angels fear to tread, especially if they are spending someone else’s money.

 

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:04 AM

CShaveRR

All the time!

The fact that they felt that trucks gave them better value is amazing.

There was one site in Oak Park/Forest Park that was specifically set up for removal of contaminated dirt from an area; it was loaded into containers, which went on to CSX trains for some site in Michigan, as I recall.  Usually gons are the preferred mode; more often than not tarps cover the loads.

 

Carl,

We have enough dirty dirt of our own. Thanks, but no thanks. Confused

Norm


  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:13 AM

There's never money to pay for the clean up, but there's money to pay for the lawyers to avoid paying for the clean up.  The legal bill is probably a bargain compared to the cleaning bill.

Jeff

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:25 AM

Murphy Siding
jrbernier

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight? 

Ding ding!  We have the winner. The city also lacked patience. The previous owners probably did not have the money to fix the problems that they inherited from the railroad. They probably got the property at a fire sale price.  In the end, I doubt anybody up the chain had any money to fix this.  Consequently, fools rush in where angels fear to tread, especially if they are spending someone else’s money.

And then the file to be a EPA Super Fund clean up site.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:26 AM

jrbernier

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight?  

 

try Milwaukee's CMC-Heartland industries case = Greedy/OPM pushy developer + greedy/tax hungry/dumb local politicians = City paying to remediate brownfields...

(Convenient to always blame railroads for dirty dirt. Doesn't always pass the smell test. Railroads frequently blamed for things out of their control or accepted practice changes over the years) 

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:31 AM

jrbernier

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight?  

 

The original owner and polluter was the Milwaukee Road, now owned by CP?  Why not go after them?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 11:49 AM

schlimm
 
jrbernier

Why is city paying for this?...because the city wanted to redevelop the land and did not have the foresight?  

 

 

 

The original owner and polluter was the Milwaukee Road, now owned by CP?  Why not go after them?

 

Short answer is that a junkyard also added to the mix of whatever is in the dirt.  Reality is you could pay lawyers until the cows come home and probably not get a penny from whoever should rightfully be paying.  The city just jumped right in and said "Hey- this would be a neat place envision something real cool".

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Monday, October 17, 2016 4:09 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH
I would assume that covered hoppers would be needed to handle the material

Most dirty dirt is shipped in gons, typically ex coal gons or open top containers that look like dump truck beds.  IN both cases they were covered with tarps.  I can't think of a single shipment that used covered hoppers.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Monday, October 17, 2016 4:10 PM

Yup...NOS class 9....we have a PTRA customer that handles dirty dirt all the time, they burn it up!

The dirt arrives in what looks like smallish dumpsters that fit on a spine car, one designed just for these containers/dumpsters, they stack like intermodal boxes, and have tarps on top to keep the dirt in.

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, October 17, 2016 4:32 PM

Since dirty dirt and such contaminants need to be encapsulated, I wonder if the fine folks of (insert city name here) thought about encapsulating-in-place.  You know, like shelter-in-place.  

It's a two-fer.

You encapsulate the yucky stuff, and you get a 12" thick concrete slab foundation for, I don't know, an Ikea and a Starbucks and a parking garage.  You know, something really useful.

Might be cheaper.

Ed

 

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Monday, October 17, 2016 4:49 PM

Probably because a good part of the pollution happened before there was a law? It's an old principle of American justice that you don't go after people who "broke the law" before there was one.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 5:01 PM

7j43k

Since dirty dirt and such contaminants need to be encapsulated, I wonder if the fine folks of (insert city name here) thought about encapsulating-in-place.  You know, like shelter-in-place.  

It's a two-fer.

You encapsulate the yucky stuff, and you get a 12" thick concrete slab foundation for, I don't know, an Ikea and a Starbucks and a parking garage.  You know, something really useful.

Might be cheaper.

Ed

 

 

Frost line in our area is 42" down. Pouring a 12" slab foundation on top is not an option.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Monday, October 17, 2016 7:18 PM

Murphy Siding
Frost line in our area is 42" down. Pouring a 12" slab foundation on top is not an option.

Why?

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Monday, October 17, 2016 7:40 PM

Mookie
Murphy Siding

Why?

For one thing, because freeze-thaw cycling would break down the encapsulation and possibly heave the concrete.  You'd need a cap structure that would ensure stability reasonably below that frost line ... a relatively thin concrete layer, even if tendon-reinforced, won't assure you that.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, October 17, 2016 7:43 PM

edblysard

Yup...NOS class 9....we have a PTRA customer that handles dirty dirt all the time, they burn it up!

The dirt arrives in what looks like smallish dumpsters that fit on a spine car, one designed just for these containers/dumpsters, they stack like intermodal boxes, and have tarps on top to keep the dirt in.

 

Houston Ed's mention of NOS Class 9 remined me of the time about fifteen years ago that I had some lithium batteries to ship--and found no other class than 9. Now, we have the lithium batteries that could be flammable.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:12 PM

Mookie

 

 
Murphy Siding
Frost line in our area is 42" down. Pouring a 12" slab foundation on top is not an option.

 

Why?

 

Unlike the tropics of central Nebraska, it gets darn cold in these parts. The frost line- the depth to which the ground can freeze during the coldest months is 42" below green grass. In Lincoln, that figure may be closer to 36". Because of this frost line, the concrte footings under the foundation have to be more than 42"
 in the ground.  If not, ugly things can happen.

     If the footings aren't deep enough, the ground can freeze underneath the footings. If there is water present, it freezes and expands. That can cause your footings and foundation walls to heave up.  In the extreme they can heave up 2".  Trouble is, it doesn't do that all over the house, generally it's just in some place and causes all your concrete to crack and deteriorate.

     Concrete that is poured on top of the ground, like sidewalks and driveways can move up and down 1-2 inches through the year.  The interstate highways in our part of the country are agood example.  Each year, the highway department has to make a decision which parts of broken up, heaved concrete to replace in order to make the ride rougher. Thump-thump! Thump-thump! Thump-thump!.

     Pouring a 12" slab foundation on top of the ground for a big building wouldn't work up here. The freeze/thaw cycle would break it up pretty quickly. I have a friend in construction in Florida. There, they pretty much scrape off the green grass and pour the concrete floor for the house on the ground.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Iowa
  • 3,293 posts
Posted by Semper Vaporo on Monday, October 17, 2016 8:12 PM

You may also need to mitigate any further leakage BELOW the contaminated soil, which might be hundreds of feet down... i.e.: dig it all out, line the pit with clay or some other (considered) inpermeable layer, then put it all back, tamp it down, cover it and then build on top of it.  Granted, the water table might already be contaminated due to leakage up to the date when it is decided that it is not supposed to happen, but present ideology is to arrest any further contamination.

Semper Vaporo

Pkgs.

  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: US
  • 13,488 posts
Posted by Mookie on Monday, October 17, 2016 9:54 PM

Information appreciated.  

Murphy - I tried to find out Lincoln's frost line and kept coming up with 42", same as your area.  Since all our winter cold comes from your area, that might be right.  We have pretty much clay soil - are you the same?  And they tell me that our water table is fairly deep.  Sam - in KS - however always seems to be warmer than us.  Kind of like we are the end of the line for seriously stupid weather in winter.

Anyway - I always learn something on the forum.

She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:07 PM

dakotafred

Probably because a good part of the pollution happened before there was a law? It's an old principle of American justice that you don't go after people who "broke the law" before there was one.

 

It is specifically written in the main part of the US Constitution that "ex post facto" laws are prohibited. That's something that came to mind with regards to this thread. IANAL, so I don't know if the ex post facto provisions apply to civil cases as opposed to criminal cases.

On the other hand, I do remember reading with disgust about the redevelopment agency involved with the downtown baseball stadium saying that landowners facing eminent domain taking of the land would be financially responsible for underground gasolene plumes even if they were unaware of the plumes AND had no part in the plume being there in the first place.

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,021 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:11 PM

I'm sure our frost line is at least 42" down - although at my house, it's a moot point as the bedrock isn't all that deep.  In fact, I suspect my foundation is on bedrock.  They had to blast to install a new 1000 gallon septic tank a few years ago.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, October 17, 2016 10:18 PM

tree68

I'm sure our frost line is at least 42" down - although at my house, it's a moot point as the bedrock isn't all that deep.  In fact, I suspect my foundation is on bedrock.  They had to blast to install a new 1000 gallon septic tank a few years ago.

 

Septic tank? You are out away from civilization. Though, I do not know if my hometown has a sewer system now--all sorts of changes have been made since I graduated from high school (it is now tied to a county water system instead of having its own waer tank). My grandfather's house had two septic tanks (capacity ?)--one for upstairs and one for downstairs.

Johnny

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy