NS serious derailment late feb 3 ( ~2100 )

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Unless I'm mistaken, one facet of "PSR" was a cutback in the number of first-level supervisors (trainmasters and road foremen).

[Shadow the Cats owner]

I wouldn't trust the EPA to mange the cleanup of a restroom let alone something like this mess.  Here's why read up on the Radium Girls and Ottawa Illinois.  The EPA declared their old factory a Superfund cleanup site in the freaking 80s and it took them almost 40 years to get it done.  They literally had the maps of were stuff was buried and they still didn't get some of it removed for decades.  Including the area that was a high school's football field and track.  The highest radioactive earth wasn't removed for 15 years from the old factory site.  

[Euclid]

Here is very interesting news from 2/21 about how the controlled burn was approved.  They are looking for the legal authority that was needed in order to conduct the controlled burn procedure to deal with the 5 cars of vinyl chloride.  It seems to have been the local Fire Chief Keith Drabick.  But as of 2/21, he had no comment to the questions.  The EPA did not order the controlled burn.

 

General information from the article:

 

East Palestine fire chief silent when Environmental Protection Agency claims he ordered the controlled burn

 

It sounds like the EPA comes in and delegates authority to other organizations such as, in this case, the Ohio EPA.  It says that it was the local Fire Chief who made the decision to do the controlled burn in consultation with the NS Railroad, local law enforcement, and the Ohio EPA.

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief was asked the following questions:

 

1      Did he recommend the controlled burn?

 

2      Did he have the legal authority to order the controlled burn?

 

3      Could he provide more details of the analysis that led to the decision to do the controlled burn?

 

4      Were they any other options considered besides waiting for the tank cars to explode?

 

The Fire Chief declined to comment on the 4 questions. 

 

The following people/organizations have asserted that they did not make the decision to do the controlled burn:

 

The Governor of Ohio

 

The Governor of Pennsylvania

 

The Norfolk Southern Railroad

 

The Federal EPA

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief

 

 

Most people associated with dealing with the derailment seem absolutely certain that had they not done the controlled burn, a massive explosion would have soon occurred and caused widespread destruction.  There are others who question that predicted outcome if there had been no burn-off, but they have no way to challenge it because there is no way to prove what would have happened if no controlled burn had been done.  So the unanswerable question is whether a tragedy was averted or not.  Another unanswered question is weather the burn-off created a new tragedy that would play out in the long term. 

 

 

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/east-palestine-fire-chief-silent-when-environmental-protection-agency-claims-he-ordered-the-controlled-burn/article_9303cca0-b232-11ed-8bef-9f01ecabcc04.html

 

More about Governor Dewine's role in the authority that ordered the controlled burn:

 

https://tennesseestar.com/the-midwest/ohio-governor-dewine-refuses-to-answer-reporters-questions-on-east-palestine-burn/hpoling/2023/03/03/

[BaltACD]

Euclid

Here is very interesting news from 2/21 about how the controlled burn was approved.  They are looking for the legal authority that was needed in order to conduct the controlled burn procedure to deal with the 5 cars of vinyl chloride.  It seems to have been the local Fire Chief Keith Drabick.  But as of 2/21, he had no comment to the questions.  The EPA did not order the controlled burn. 

General information from the article:

 

East Palestine fire chief silent when Environmental Protection Agency claims he ordered the controlled burn

 

It sounds like the EPA comes in and delegates authority to other organizations such as, in this case, the Ohio EPA.  It says that it was the local Fire Chief who made the decision to do the controlled burn in consultation with the NS Railroad, local law enforcement, and the Ohio EPA.

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief was asked the following questions:

 

1      Did he recommend the controlled burn?

 

2      Did he have the legal authority to order the controlled burn?

 

3      Could he provide more details of the analysis that led to the decision to do the controlled burn?

 

4      Were they any other options considered besides waiting for the tank cars to explode?

 

The Fire Chief declined to comment on the 4 questions. 

 

The following people/organizations have asserted that they did not make the decision to do the controlled burn:

 

The Governor of Ohio

 

The Governor of Pennsylvania

 

The Norfolk Southern Railroad

 

The Federal EPA

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief 

 

Most people associated with dealing with the derailment seem absolutely certain that had they not done the controlled burn, a massive explosion would have soon occurred and caused widespread destruction.  There are others who question that predicted outcome if there had been no burn-off, but they have no way to challenge it because there is no way to prove what would have happened if no controlled burn had been done.  So the unanswerable question is whether a tragedy was averted or not.  Another unanswered question is weather the burn-off created a new tragedy that would play out in the long term.  

 

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/east-palestine-fire-chief-silent-when-environmental-protection-agency-claims-he-ordered-the-controlled-burn/article_9303cca0-b232-11ed-8bef-9f01ecabcc04.html

 

More about Governor Dewine's role in the authority that ordered the controlled burn:

 

https://tennesseestar.com/the-midwest/ohio-governor-dewine-refuses-to-answer-reporters-questions-on-east-palestine-burn/hpoling/2023/03/03/

Genuine 21st Century politics - whenever something happens - Disavow any responsibility, point fingers at everyone else involved.

[azrail]

More like Hobson's choice.

[Euclid]

BaltACD

 

 

Euclid

Here is very interesting news from 2/21 about how the controlled burn was approved.  They are looking for the legal authority that was needed in order to conduct the controlled burn procedure to deal with the 5 cars of vinyl chloride.  It seems to have been the local Fire Chief Keith Drabick.  But as of 2/21, he had no comment to the questions.  The EPA did not order the controlled burn. 

General information from the article:

 

East Palestine fire chief silent when Environmental Protection Agency claims he ordered the controlled burn

 

It sounds like the EPA comes in and delegates authority to other organizations such as, in this case, the Ohio EPA.  It says that it was the local Fire Chief who made the decision to do the controlled burn in consultation with the NS Railroad, local law enforcement, and the Ohio EPA.

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief was asked the following questions:

 

1      Did he recommend the controlled burn?

 

2      Did he have the legal authority to order the controlled burn?

 

3      Could he provide more details of the analysis that led to the decision to do the controlled burn?

 

4      Were they any other options considered besides waiting for the tank cars to explode?

 

The Fire Chief declined to comment on the 4 questions. 

 

The following people/organizations have asserted that they did not make the decision to do the controlled burn:

 

The Governor of Ohio

 

The Governor of Pennsylvania

 

The Norfolk Southern Railroad

 

The Federal EPA

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief 

 

Most people associated with dealing with the derailment seem absolutely certain that had they not done the controlled burn, a massive explosion would have soon occurred and caused widespread destruction.  There are others who question that predicted outcome if there had been no burn-off, but they have no way to challenge it because there is no way to prove what would have happened if no controlled burn had been done.  So the unanswerable question is whether a tragedy was averted or not.  Another unanswered question is weather the burn-off created a new tragedy that would play out in the long term.  

 

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/east-palestine-fire-chief-silent-when-environmental-protection-agency-claims-he-ordered-the-controlled-burn/article_9303cca0-b232-11ed-8bef-9f01ecabcc04.html

 

More about Governor Dewine's role in the authority that ordered the controlled burn:

 

https://tennesseestar.com/the-midwest/ohio-governor-dewine-refuses-to-answer-reporters-questions-on-east-palestine-burn/hpoling/2023/03/03/

 

 

Genuine 21st Century politics - whenever something happens - Disavow any responsibility, point fingers at everyone else involved.

 

But why would they be doing that if they thought it was such a good idea?  After they saved lives by preventing that terrible explosion that they had warned was certain to happen, you would think they would be wallowing in our praise for their successful mission.   And yet they refuse to even come forward.  What does that tell you?  It tells me they never really thought it was a good idea, but did not have the guts to say so.

[tree68]

Euclid

It tells me they never really thought it was a good idea, but did not have the guts to say so.

It sounded like a good idea at the time...

[BaltACD]

Euclid

 

BaltACD 

Euclid

Here is very interesting news from 2/21 about how the controlled burn was approved.  They are looking for the legal authority that was needed in order to conduct the controlled burn procedure to deal with the 5 cars of vinyl chloride.  It seems to have been the local Fire Chief Keith Drabick.  But as of 2/21, he had no comment to the questions.  The EPA did not order the controlled burn. 

General information from the article:

 

East Palestine fire chief silent when Environmental Protection Agency claims he ordered the controlled burn

 

It sounds like the EPA comes in and delegates authority to other organizations such as, in this case, the Ohio EPA.  It says that it was the local Fire Chief who made the decision to do the controlled burn in consultation with the NS Railroad, local law enforcement, and the Ohio EPA.

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief was asked the following questions:

 

1      Did he recommend the controlled burn?

 

2      Did he have the legal authority to order the controlled burn?

 

3      Could he provide more details of the analysis that led to the decision to do the controlled burn?

 

4      Were they any other options considered besides waiting for the tank cars to explode?

 

The Fire Chief declined to comment on the 4 questions. 

 

The following people/organizations have asserted that they did not make the decision to do the controlled burn:

 

The Governor of Ohio

 

The Governor of Pennsylvania

 

The Norfolk Southern Railroad

 

The Federal EPA

 

The East Palestine Fire Chief 

 

Most people associated with dealing with the derailment seem absolutely certain that had they not done the controlled burn, a massive explosion would have soon occurred and caused widespread destruction.  There are others who question that predicted outcome if there had been no burn-off, but they have no way to challenge it because there is no way to prove what would have happened if no controlled burn had been done.  So the unanswerable question is whether a tragedy was averted or not.  Another unanswered question is weather the burn-off created a new tragedy that would play out in the long term.  

 

https://www.theohiopressnetwork.com/news/ohio/east-palestine-fire-chief-silent-when-environmental-protection-agency-claims-he-ordered-the-controlled-burn/article_9303cca0-b232-11ed-8bef-9f01ecabcc04.html

 

More about Governor Dewine's role in the authority that ordered the controlled burn:

 

https://tennesseestar.com/the-midwest/ohio-governor-dewine-refuses-to-answer-reporters-questions-on-east-palestine-burn/hpoling/2023/03/03/ 

Genuine 21st Century politics - whenever something happens - Disavow any responsibility, point fingers at everyone else involved. 

But why would they be doing that if they thought it was such a good idea?  After they saved lives by preventing that terrible explosion that they had warned was certain to happen, you would think they would be wallowing in our praise for their successful mission.   And yet they refuse to even come forward.  What does that tell you?  It tells me they never really thought it was a good idea, but did not have the guts to say so.

In the 21st Century - Accountability has become a dirty word.  Without accountability you have anarchy.  One segment of the world's population - in each and every country - are more politically anarchist than any that have existed since the early 20th Century.

What it says - NOBODY HAS ANY GUTS!  Cowards all!

[CSX Robert]

Euclid

According to the news...

You really have to be careful trusting what the news said.  Just look at the reporting on the Springfield derailment.  I saw it stated by over and over again that Norfolk Soouthern said there were no hazardous materials on board the train, but I've found no actual quote that says that.  The few times I've been able to find an actual quote they said no hazardous materials were involved, as in they were not involved in the derailment, not that they weren't on the train.

This is just one small example of how so often now news outlets will repat what others have said or report their interprataion without any real verification of the facts, and this is true whether you're talknig "main stream media" or "alternative media."  It's often hard to sift through the reporting and get to the actual facts.

[BaltACD]

CSX Robert

 

Euclid

According to the news... 

You really have to be careful trusting what the news said.  Just look at the reporting on the Springfield derailment.  I saw it stated by over and over again that Norfolk Soouthern said there were no hazardous materials on board the train, but I've found no actual quote that says that.  The few times I've been able to find an actual quote they said no hazardous materials were involved, as in they were not involved in the derailment, not that they weren't on the train.

This is just one small example of how so often now news outlets will repat what others have said or report their interprataion without any real verification of the facts, and this is true whether you're talknig "main stream media" or "alternative media."  It's often hard to sift through the reporting and get to the actual facts.

When it comes to the operation of general merchandise freight trains - most all carry some products that are considered HAZMAT.  There are many commodities, that if they were handled in smaller quantities would not be considered HAZMAT, however, the quantities involved in rail trainsportation make them HAZMAT.

Go through your own household and take a look at all the HAZMAT you use in your daily life - and don't give it any thought.

[tree68]

BaltACD

Go through your own household and take a look at all the HAZMAT you use in your daily life - and don't give it any thought.

Ya know those brown trucks....  Yep.

As Balt points out - it depends on the quantity...

[Euclid]

Shadow the Cats owner

I wouldn't trust the EPA to mange the cleanup of a restroom let alone something like this mess.

When I said the EPA should have authorized the controlled burn, that does not mean I trust the EPA.  I think they are the heart of the problem.  They delegate all the decisions to key players, and those players act in their own self-interest of CYA.  I believe that nobody approved the controlled burn. So it is like an “Act of God.” If the players cannot produce the person who authorized the burn, and if nobody comes forward what else can I conclude?  The players were told about the plan and they just did it because they each thought someone else would answer for it if anything went wrong.  And you could say that nothing went wrong in the most literal sense.  The threat of the massive explosion was extinguished (if it ever existed).

 

The problem is that the giant fireball raising the giant black cloud rattled everyone’s cage enough to think, “My God, what were we thinking?”  I suspect the only party with no regrets is NS.  But even they may have gotten more than what they bargained for.   Clearly, the Federal EPA says they did not authorize or approve the burn-off.  I am absolutely positive that if NS had asked the EPA for permission to do the burn-off, the EPA would not have allowed it. 

 

So I see no reason to conclude that the EPA will not go after the NS for damages.  After all, it was NS that had control of the tank cars.  Nobody is going to blow them up and let them burn without the permission of NS.  And all the other players will point to NS and say it was NS’s idea. 

[tree68]

If they had not conducted the controlled release and things went "boom," we'd be here criticizing the players for not doing the controlled release.

Without actual boots on the ground at the scene, we can do little more than speculate.

I would speculate that a controlled unloading of the product (into other containers) in a timely manner was deemed impractical.  That left controlled release or letting it sit and hoping it didn't explode.  And an explosion probably would have spread product over a much wider radius, not to mention mechanical damage to the area.

Thus, there are your choices.

[Euclid]

tree68

If they had not conducted the controlled release and things went "boom," we'd be here criticizing the players for not doing the controlled release.

Without actual boots on the ground at the scene, we can do little more than speculate.

I would speculate that a controlled unloading of the product (into other containers) in a timely manner was deemed impractical.  That left controlled release or letting it sit and hoping it didn't explode.  And an explosion probably would have spread product over a much wider radius, not to mention mechanical damage to the area.

Thus, there are your choices.

 

Well we have been talking about the decay of honesty throughout society and how nobody can be trusted.  So who would you trust if they said the tank car might explode unless a controlled release is performed?  Who had the scientific expertise to make that claim?  Why wouldn’t those receiving that warning want to know the actual probabilities of the explosion, and what other remedies might be available?  Why would they just accept “might explode” as the justification for the controlled burn-off?  They said the Fire Chief authorized the burn-off.  Why is he refusing to explain the science behind his decision?

 

What was the risk of exposing the town to the fallout of the explosion?  Obviously everyone is afraid to speak because they don’t have the answers, and they don’t want to admit that. 

 

I would not be surprised of people who are afraid to speak might also be afraid to tell us everything they know about the chemical detection data they are finding since the burn-off.

 

I suggest you read the articles I linked, and particularly the comments made by Pennsylvania Governor Shapiro in a letter to the NS Railway.

 

You say we can do little more than speculate.  I am more inclined to ask questions rather than speculate.  The material I have posted raises many questions.  I think that if somebody points out those questions, it may lead to getting answers by those who are close enough to know things without the need to speculate. 

 

You are free to speculate if you want to, but I see no reason to accept your speculation of what my choices would have been in this case, as you say.  I would not have acted on speculation.   

[tree68]

Euclid

I would not have acted on speculation.

You have a limited amount of time to decide whether to relieve pressure or take a chance on an explosion.  Those are your choices.  It's that simple.

You're the expert.  Make a choice.  

[BaltACD]

tree68

 

Euclid

I would not have acted on speculation. 

You have a limited amount of time to decide whether to relieve pressure or take a chance on an explosion.  Those are your choices.  It's that simple.

You're the expert.  Make a choice.  

And if you don't make a choice - you have made a choice!

[adkrr64]

I can understand why the various people involved in the decision making on this incident are hesitant or unwilling to make statements to the media, especially the fire chief, assuming he was the incident commander that ultimately made the call. With all the potential civil liability, he should lawyer up and handle communications through or with them. Not because he did anything wrong, but to make sure he does not end up with a self inflicted errror resulting from an unfortunately worded statement or phrase.

This has me wondering, and perhaps tree68 can comment: In situations such as these, where there are difficult decisions with downsides no matter what, are the individuals acting as incident commanders afforded some level of legal protection from civil or criminal liability assuming they make decisions with good faith and with appropriate input from relevant authorities?

[CSX Robert]

Euclid

I am more inclined to ask questions rather than speculate.

Sure sound like speculation to me:

Euclid

Obviously everyone is afraid to speak because they don’t have the answers, and they don’t want to admit that.

[ns145]

Where's Superman when you need him?

[Overmod]

Tree:  We can "speculate" that the Orange Book would be the likeliest reference for first responders in East Palestine.  Can you quote or paraphrase what the Orange Book says about vinyl chloride?  Does it specifically mention polymerization?

Can someone track down the reports that contained references to runaway polymerization?  Has the NTSB mentioned this in the preliminary material so far?

We need to know the advice that the incident commander would have had available at the time a decision had to be made.

[Euclid]

tree68

 

 

Euclid

I would not have acted on speculation.

 

 

You have a limited amount of time to decide whether to relieve pressure or take a chance on an explosion.  Those are your choices.  It's that simple.

You're the expert.  Make a choice.  

 

Based on that exact choice alone, I would have chosen NOT to do the controlled burn.  Then I would have done other things. I do not believe the choice was confined as you say it was.  The Governor of Pennsylvania has said there were other options that would have been safer than the controlled burn, but (he said) they would have slowed the reopening of the track. 

 

You also have no idea whether the choice you are giving me was the same as the choice that was presented to the town.  Whatever the choice actually was, there are a lot of people doubting whether the controlled burn was the correct choice, including many who had a role in executing the plan.   

[tree68]

The Orange Book (ERG, or Emergency Response Guide) is good for about the first thirty minutes of a hazmat incident.  That's straight from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration website.

Vinyl Chloride (UN 1086), Guide 116P.

Potential Hazards:

 EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE.

• Will be easily ignited by heat, sparks or flames.

• Will form explosive mixtures with air. Acetylene (UN1001, UN3374) may react explosively even in the absence of air.

• Silane (UN2203) will ignite spontaneously in air.

• Those substances designated with a (P) may polymerize explosively when heated or involved in a fire. (My emphasis)

• Vapors from liquefied gas are initially heavier than air and spread along ground.

• Vapors may travel to source of ignition and flash back.

• Cylinders exposed to fire may vent and release flammable gas through pressure relief devices.

• Containers may explode when heated.

• Ruptured cylinders may rocket.

And this:

EVACUATION

Immediate precautionary measure

• Isolate spill or leak area for at least 100 meters (330 feet) in all directions.

Large Spill • Consider initial downwind evacuation for at least 800 meters (1/2 mile).

Fire

• If tank, rail car or tank truck is involved in a fire, ISOLATE for 1600 meters (1 mile) in all directions; also, consider initial evacuation for 1600 meters (1 mile) in all directions.

The ERG is available on-line at https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2021-01/ERG2020-WEB.pdf

If you go to the ERG and look up vinyl chloride, you'll note that in the fire section, it recommends not putting the fire out.   

In addition to the book itself, there are mobile apps available.  I have it installed on my phone, along with the hard copy I carry in my truck.

By the end of that 30 minutes, the command staff should have been in contact with CHEMTREC (or it's Canadian equivalent, as appropriate), which has detailed information on pretty much everything, as well as contact information for most shippers.

The MSDS/SDS will have more detailed information on the product, however the train crew does not usually have that available to them.  It could be faxed or otherwise transmitted to command staff, I'm sure.

I would imagine that by the time it became necessary to make the decision on how to handle the situation that the chemical supplier had also been contacted, although they are never mentioned.  I have my doubts that the fire chief, OEPA, or federal EPA made the decision on their own.

We'll just have to wait for the final report.

 

 

[charlie hebdo]

Euclid and Tree:  You both raise many good points, imo.  But Tree and Balt especially seem to implicitly defend ALL the actions taken.  The whole point of debriefing and investigation is to determine what went wrong or right, what could have been done better to mitigate damage post derailment and prevention of such catastrophic accidents in the future. 

[Euclid]

I understand it was just one of the five tank cars of VC that was experiencing temperature rise.  What was causing that rise?

[tree68]

charlie hebdo

But Tree and Balt especially seem to implicitly defend ALL the actions taken.

I tend to believe that actions taken are based on the best information available at the time.

Should further information become available in the future, then that does get filed under lessons learned.

To say, without the benefit of more in-depth information, that "I would have done it differently" is irresponsible at best.  Especially with the implications that personnel on the scene acted improperly.  

I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I do have documented training in hazmat, including hazmat incident command.   I refresh that on an annual basis.

This is why I issued the challenge.  It's easy to sit here and Monday morning quarterback, but when you are facing a real-life deadline that may measure in hours, you need to make decisions.

 

 

[Reading467]

Euclid

I understand it was just one of the five tank cars of VC that was experiencing temperature rise.  What was causing that rise?

 

Accoridng to the manifest data on train 32N, there were two covered hoppers of polyethylene pellets burning just in front of the 4 tank cars with VC. There was an empty tank car between those CH's and the first tank (TILX 402025) with VC. The 5th car (OCPX 80370) was farther back in the train, but was next to a box car (TBOX 640019) filled with Cotton Balls which was burnt in the fire. 

 

[charlie hebdo]

Reviewing past actions is necessary to make progress. Refusal to do so with tell tale phrases like "Monday morning quarterbacking" is simply not admitting errors. As to that phrase, if you played football you would know that critiqueing is exactly what coaches and players do to improve.

And here is the CEO of NS waffling and weaseling:

https://apnews.com/article/ohio-train-derailment-ceo-norfolk-southern-railroad-e709db3c9945a35c8b92b99e2ba82b2e

 

 

[ns145]

Overmod

Tree:  We can "speculate" that the Orange Book would be the likeliest reference for first responders in East Palestine.  Can you quote or paraphrase what the Orange Book says about vinyl chloride?  Does it specifically mention polymerization?

Can someone track down the reports that contained references to runaway polymerization?  Has the NTSB mentioned this in the preliminary material so far?

We need to know the advice that the incident commander would have had available at the time a decision had to be made.

 

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/RRD23MR005.aspx

See paragraph 6.  It mentions concern over polymerization due to the fact that the fire had been put out on Feb 5th, but the temperature in one of the vinyl chloride tank cars was still rising. 

Euclid will love the "suggested polymerization" language.  I guess some unlucky stiff should have been forced to go out into no man's land and cut a hole in the side of the tank car to conclusively (and concussively) ascertain that polymerization was in fact occurring.   

[tree68]

Charlie hebdo

Refusal to do so with tell tale phrases like "Monday morning quarterbacking" is simply not admitting errors.

We aren't part of the official discussion.  We're simply discussing it.  Anything offered here is Monday morning quarterbacking.  "Coulda, woulda, shoulda."

The CEO simply said "we're trying." I didn't see any waffling or weaseling.  In fact, more that 3/4 of that video was the senator's monologue. 

It's not like they're purposely causing the incidents - they cost money.  Of course, it goes back to the Pinto Principle - do the incidents cost less than the fixes?

Again, I'm not saying there is no blame to be laid.  But we need more information first.

How many derailments occurred on other railroads in the past few weeks?  

[ns145]

Euclid

I understand it was just one of the five tank cars of VC that was experiencing temperature rise.  What was causing that rise?

 

Polymerization is an exothermic reaction.  Once it starts it creates its own self-sustaining heat source.  According to Wikipedia, when vinyl chloride monomer is polymerized to create PVC in a controlled environment adequate cooling must be provided.