Western Railroad Discussion > Consolidater Now

The following editorial appeared in today's Fresno Bee. It references a lengthy article published on Sunday about the dangers involving a major derailment in the middle of Fresno and the city's preparation for it.

Please note before responding to this post about the editorial and/or the Sunday article that nowhere in either piece is either railroad; 1) blamed for the problem 2)accused of being unsafe 3)asked to pay for any of the consolidation project.

Sunday's thread with article
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?f=1&i=160249&t=160249


actual link to editorial
http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/3780014p-4805438c.html

Consolidate now
The danger posed by trains rolling through Fresno will only grow.

(Published Tuesday, July, 30, 2002, 5:13 AM)



The danger of derailed trains in the city of Fresno has long been recognized. But Bee staff writer Jennifer Fitzenberger's report Sunday brought a sharp focus to the potential problems, and should serve as another call to arms in the long struggle to achieve rail consolidation in Fresno.

That struggle is an old one; city plans as far back as the World War I era spotlighted the need to shift what are now the Burlington Northern Santa Fe lines farther to the west, adjacent to or near the current alignment of the Union Pacific tracks. The need has not changed.

What has changed is the urgency of the task. There are now nearly a half-million vehicles per day crossing the BNSF tracks alone. With 30 or so trains running on those tracks each day, that's a lot of cars idling behind crossing bars, wasting gasoline and pumping even more pollution into our filthy skies.

And the cargo on those trains is increasingly worrisome. All manner of explosives, toxins and corrosive chemicals are transported on the nation's railways each day, and the tracks that cut though the heart of Fresno are no exception. The safety record of the nation's railroads is very good, especially considering the volume of traffic and the tonnage of cargo, but the chilling reality is that it only takes one derailment and spill to create a catastrophe.

The specter of dangerous chemicals spilled near a school, a hospital, a major employment center or just in the middle of a residential neighborhood is frightening. Yet examples of all of those venues lie along the BNSF tracks through Fresno.

And now, with the Yucca Mountain nuclear storage facility set to open in Nevada in the near future, there is also the prospect of nuclear waste moving through town on a regular basis.

The cost of building new lines near the existing Union Pacific tracks, roughly alongside Freeway 99, is now estimated to be some $325 million. That's up from the figure of $200 million we were using for the project just a few years ago. The November ballot initiative that would extend Fresno county's Measure C sales tax for transportation uses would provide $150 million to kick off the consolidation project. With that kind of seed money, it's likely that state and federal funds could be found to make up the difference.

This isn't something we can wait around for any longer. The statistics may tell us that a deadly derailment is unlikely, but that's a far cry from saying one is impossible. And the danger of such a derailment is only one among many reasons for consolidation. Fewer urban crossings means smoother traffic -- and less pollution -- as well as fewer occasions when impatient or inattentive drivers and pedestrians try to beat a train through a crossing, often with consequences that plunge their families and friends into grief.

Two things are certain: The longer we wait to consolidate the rail lines, the greater will be the danger and the higher the cost. Let's not wait any longer. Everyone in Fresno should get on board this project.

>The specter of dangerous chemicals spilled near a school, a hospital, a major employment center or just in the middle of a residential neighborhood is frightening. Yet examples of all of those venues lie along the BNSF tracks through Fresno.<

Move the tracks to the West (poor) side of town, trippling their train traffic. They probablly won't be as vocal as the people who got that great deal on their five bedroom house in Figarden, right next to the tracks.

Brian

Objectively, the newspaper article is accurate. It is a fact that railroad trains haul extremely dangerous chemical and products that can cause severe medical problems or death to a large number of people if a derailment occurred in the right (or rather wrong) place. The same is true for any part of a city where an interstate highway passes through residential areas bringing trucks hauling chemical and flammable products into proximity of populated areas.

I suppose the difference is that potential for a disaster from a derailment is greater than the potential for a diesel rig accident. Usually a truck hauling chemicals, propane, etc. involve only one load of product. A train derailment can involve the potential of several different types of products being exposed into the atmosphere alone or in combination with other chemicals or flammable liquids. A train derailment does have a greater potential than a truck accident to human beings.

I think the point of the article is not to stop railroads from traveling through communities or to quit hauling dangerous shipments. My reading of the article is that a very serious potential for environmental damage and human damage exists and that emergency response needs to be planned in advance and coordinated so as to mitigate the damage as much as possible in the event of an unfortunate accident.

The problem with railfans is that anything negative printed about railroads results is hysterical reactions. The Fresno Bee article is absolutely accurate about the potential and also accurate about the need to better plan and coordinate, in advance, for the emergency response to such disasters. Certainly it is not unreasonable for emergency response personnel to expect to have data available quickly as to what types of products are on a train and in what quantities, and where they are located in the train, especially in relationship to other hazardous and potential flammable or explosive loads (in other words, a manifest). With today's electronic and FAX technology I do not see any reason why such information could not be made available by the railroads to emergency response personnel with the first hour after the derailment and probably available in much less time than that.

>Certainly it is not unreasonable for emergency response personnel to expect to have data available quickly as to what types of products are on a train and in what quantities, and where they are located in the train, especially in relationship to other hazardous and potential flammable or explosive loads (in other words, a manifest). With today's electronic and FAX technology I do not see any reason why such information could not be made available by the railroads to emergency response personnel with the first hour after the derailment and probably available in much less time than that.<

The data is most ceartinly avaiable. The train conductor carries two copies of the paperwork that describes in detail train placement, weight/volume, and type of hazardous material. In addition there is also detailed hazardous response information relating to evacuation distances, personal protective gear, and other pertinent information. One copy is to be furnished to the first responders, the other is to be retained for the railroad company officals. In addition, all crew members carry that little orange hazmat guidebook that all first responders carry.

Brian

There have been some instances where train crews have been killed or badly injured and the lead units totally destroyed in a collision or derailment. What are the backup resources for the provision of such data if cannot be provided at the scene by a crew member?

>There have been some instances where train crews have been killed or badly injured and the lead units totally destroyed in a collision or derailment. What are the backup resources for the provision of such data if cannot be provided at the scene by a crew member?<

In that case, god forbid, the nessasary paperwork would be provided by the railroad company officals. The information is readily avaiable to any railroad employee with access to the companys computer system. By imputing the trains symbol, the data can be obtained. Of course there would probablly be some delay in this instance. This is where the first responders orange guidebook comes into play. By looking up the UN number on the cars placard, the hazard can easily be determined. For instance say a ceartin car had a UN # of 1075. The first responder would use his book to look up the code and find out that 1075 is Liquified Petroleum Gas, and the required precautions.

I'm sure there could be a faster way, such as letting fire departments have acess to the info through a computer in realtime, but don't forget that the railroads are very sensitive about leaking out this information.

Brian

brian wrote:


> Move the tracks to the West (poor) side of town, trippling their train traffic. They probablly won't be as vocal as the people who got that great deal on their five bedroom house in Figarden, right next to the tracks.

You might do a little homework before making snide comments about folks in Figarden and their five bedroom houses. The poor folks within close proximety (say 1/2 mile)of the UP tracks in Fresno doesn't even come close to those within the same distance of the BNSF main. When it comes to schools and hospitals, their ain't even a race.