Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Following revelations of serious safety missteps by the cheapskating railroad industry (Conrail in this event) before and after the derailment of a chemical train in Paulsboro, NJ three years ago, legislation is in the works to better respond if a similar situation ever arises again.







April 28, 2015

The derailment of the Conrail train sent four aging tank cars into Mantua Creek.  One car ruptured, spilling 20,000 gallons of vinyl chloride into the creek and its fumes into the air.

A National Transportation Safety Board report on the Paulsboro train derailment and spill pointed to some major mistakes, including train speed, track safety and lack of a coordinated response by Conrail. The NTSB also cited a failure to use proper response protocols.

In response to the federal report, legislation is in the works in Washington and Trenton.

New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez and Congressman Donald Norcross are rolling out  the “Toxics by Rail Accountability and Community Knowledge” — or TRACK — act to hopefully improve rail safety as it pertains to the transportation of hazardous materials.

The bill would heavily penalize railroads that violate safety standards and require up to date and accurate information on what is being transported by rail to assist first responders in the event of an accident. Part of the bill would improve safety procedures and qualifications for moveable bridge crossings.

Meanwhile in Trenton, several members of the Assembly have rolled out a state bill they believe will tighten safety standards in New Jersey for the rail transportation of hazardous materials. The measure is co-sponsored by New Jersey Assembly members Gordon Johnson, Tim Eustace, Marlene Caride, Elizabeth Muoio, Valerie Vainieri Huttle and Joseph Lagana.

The bill, (A-4283) requires operators of trains carrying a hazardous cargo to submit a discharge response, cleanup and contingency plan to the state Department of Environmental Protection.

“We want a clear plan in place, and this information put out to all law enforcement agencies throughout the state, so that we all know how to respond to an incident like this,” Assemblyman Gordon Johnson said. “We want coming out of this bill, a plan where the railroad and the Attorney General and the OEM, the Officer of Emergency Management, to get together and have a plan in place in case there is a derailment or an accident on the rail cars, to include educating first responders about how to respond to this  and also having the resources in place to have a proper first response to it.”

One provision of the legislation requires operators of high hazard trains to submit a discharge response, cleanup and contingency plan to the state Department of Environmental Protection.

Another co-sponsor, Assemblyman Tim Eustace, said lawmakers are trying to put safety measures in place to prevent another incident like the Paulsboro derailment.

“There were missteps, and we are hoping that we are addressing them. We are just trying to make sure that things like this don’t happen in the future,” he said.

Eustace said just as each municipality is required to have a emergency response on file, the companies that operate trains in New Jersey neighborhoods should have the same sort of emergency response and contingency plans on file with the state.

The bill has been referred to the Assembly Transportation and Independent Authorities Committee.

Source: nj1015.com

//-----------------------//


TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — The National Transportation Safety Board has released its final report on systemic flaws leading up to a 2012 train derailment that leaked a dangerous gas in southern New Jersey.

The report issued Tuesday was approved by the NTSB last month, and its key findings were made public at that time.

The release gives full details of the Nov. 30, 2012 accident in Paulsboro — in which seven cars derailed, with some falling from a bridge into a creek — and its aftermath. Vinyl chloride, a gas used in industrial processes that has been linked to respiratory problems, dizziness and death — was released into the air.

The safety board faults Conrail for continuing to open and close a swinging bridge where the accident occurred, despite a consultant’s recommendation to keep it closed. The report said a conductor decided to go over the bridge anyway despite not having adequate training to make such a call. It also found problems with the way Conrail and local officials handled the emergency response.

Even before the final report was made public, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez began calling for tougher penalties for railroads found to violate safety standards. 
Menendez said his proposal was a reaction to the NTSB’s findings.
Last month, Conrail said it was concerned with safety and was taking the recommendations seriously.

Local officials said they are already working on emergency response protocols.
Several people are suing over the spill. A judge this month declined to grant them class-action status.

////////////////////////---------------------------------//



CAMDEN – Paulsboro residents, including several business owners, do not meet requirements to file a class-action lawsuit against Conrail over a 2012 train derailment in their town, according to a federal judge.

The judge Wednesday denied residents’ request for “class certification.”
The plaintiffs claim the train wreck aftermath caused businesses to lose income and resulted in economic losses for 680 residents of the Gloucester County town.

A breached rail car released a cloud of toxic vinyl chloride that rolled through the borough. The chemical spill forced the evacuation of hundreds of Paulsboro residents, who were displaced for weeks.

While the plaintiffs indicated about 680 Paulsboro residents were impacted by derailment-related evacuations, 486 residents settled with Conrail by accepting hundreds — and in some cases thousands — of dollars in exchange for a promise not to sue the railroad company. Another 45 residents have separate individual lawsuits related to the derailment.

Those who settled with Conrail and those with separate lawsuits — more than 531 residents in total — could not be part of the requested class, U.S. District Court Judge Robert B. Kugler ruled.

“Plaintiffs have not demonstrated how many, if any, of the remaining evacuees have unreimbursed, nonmedical expenses,” he said.

In addition, the judge said the plaintiffs could not show how business losses would be measured.

“They have not proposed how to determine whether each of these businesses actually had physical operations in the evacuations or shelter-in-place zones, or of these, which ones actually suffered income losses,” Kugler wrote.
While the judge acknowledged Don’s Barbershop, owned by Donald Wilson, relies on a “physical presence to generate revenue, it’s not so clear that all 381 businesses with mailing addresses in the shelter-in-place zones have a similar business model.”

Finally, Kugler pointed out Wilson and another plaintiff, Tracy Lee, already received reimbursements from Conrail at the railroad company’s post-derailment assistance center in Paulsboro, where impacted residents could obtain reimbursements and gift cards.

Wilson acknowledges receiving $4,000. Lee received more than $2,000, according to court papers.

“We believe Judge Kugler’s opinion speaks for itself,” Conrail said in a statement.


//------------------------//




This week’s MMWR includes a report on the experience of volunteer firefighters, police and other personnel who responded to a November 2012 train derailment in Paulsboro, NJ. The Contrail train twisted off a movable bridge and three tank cars containing vinyl chloride landed in Mantua Creek. About 20,000 gallons of vinyl chloride were released, resulting in a noxious vapor cloud.

Among those responding to the early morning incident were individuals with the Paulsboro Fire Department, and HAZMAT teams from the PBF Energy’s Paulsboro Refinery, Gloucester County, and Conrail. It wasn’t long before residents and responders complained of respiratory problems, headaches and other problems. Ultimately, more than 250 individuals visited local emergency rooms because of symptoms following the incident.

The MMWR article provides the results of a survey, conducted by the New Jersey Department of Health, the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, of 93 emergency responders to the Paulsboro incident. One topic of particular interest was identifying symptoms of acute exposure to vinyl chloride, which is already known as a human carcinogen. Their survey findings include:

48% of respondents reported spending >12 hours at the site, and only 22% reported using respiratory protection during their response activities
26% reported experiencing headaches, 26% reported experiencing upper respiratory symptoms, and 22% reported experiencing lower respiratory symptoms
Among the 72 respondents who reported they did not wear respiratory protection on initial arrival at the scene:
49% said they didn’t’ think it was required for their work
24% said none was available
17% said they were not advised to wear respiratory protection
17% said they did not think they needed it
What the MMWR piece doesn’t describe are the circumstances that might illuminate why better safety precautions were not taken. As Debra Coyle McFadden, assistant director of the New Jersey Work Environment Council told me:

“It is imperative that every step is taken to protect and train emergency responders. When the exposure levels are unknown, the leadership onsite should proceed to instruct emergency responders to protect themselves as if the level is above established occupational exposure limits until it is proven otherwise.”

In the Paulsboro incident, that didn’t happen. The National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) investigation describes the troubling nature of the emergency response. For example:

There was confusion about the contents of some of the railcars. About 25 minutes after the derailment, the fire chief radioed: “We are getting some information that a couple of these tanks have bad stuff, we just can’t get the placards.”

The trainmaster reviewed the shipping manifest [a.k.a., train consist] with the deputy fire chief, but then the trainmaster departed with the document. It was the only available copy. “The trainmaster retained possession of the consist for almost 3.5 hours, leaving emergency responders with no means of referencing the document for response planning.”

“The incident commander and other first responders remained within about 50 yards of an active vinyl chloride release. …About 6 hours into the incident, the fire chief had yet to relocate the ICP [incident command post] to a safe location and failed to establish PPE requirements for the accident scene.”
NTS Board Member Robert Sumwalt noted:

“This new location was only about 1/4 mile from the ruptured tank car—a distance that still posed unacceptable risk because the responders were not wearing protective clothing and equipment.”

The NTSB’s report goes on and on like this. (It makes me wonder what the situation would be like for emergency responders in my town should one of the dozens of trains motoring through it derailed.)

The NTS Board Members raise critical issues concerning our country’s hefty reliance on volunteer fire fighters. They are an integral part of local emergency response, but the NTSB asks some serious questions about the ability of volunteers to respond safely to event such as the Paulsboro incident. NTSB acting chairman Christopher Hart asked:

“How can volunteer firefighters obtain the training they need to do their jobs adequately without being required to have so much training that people who have full-time jobs will choose not to be a volunteer firefighter because the training requirements are more than they can reasonably handle?”

There was harsh criticism directed at individuals in charge of the emergency response. NTS Board Member Sumwalt said:

“…when disasters occur, the very men and women putting their lives on the line as first responders count on prudent, informed decision-making by their incident commanders. While the decision to not evacuate nearby Paulsboro residents can be somewhat explained by logistical concerns and uncertainty, what is indefensible are the decisions, actions, and inactions that placed first responders directly in harm’s way.”

Erring on the side of caution, as Debra Coyle McFadden suggests, would be a good first step toward protecting the health of our community’s emergency responders. The MMWR article’s authors recommend ongoing health monitoring of the emergency responders involved in the Paulsboro, NJ incident. The trouble is they note, there’s not a complete roster of individuals who participated in the emergency response.
Source: http://scienceblogs.com