Derailment point located

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Derailment point located
http://www.jamestownsun.com/content/derailment-point-located

By Helmut Schmidt Today at 7:12am

CASSELTON, N.D. — Investigators of Monday’s train collision and fire have determined the point of the derailment and say a broken axle will be studied to determine if it played a role.

About 2:10 p.m. Monday, an eastbound Burlington Northern Santa Fe train hauling crude oil struck a westbound train’s derailed car filled with soybeans.
....

Among the National Transportation Safety Board findings released Wednesday:
....

* There may have been less than a minute between the derailment of the grain train’s cars and the collision of the oil tanker train with one of those cars. That crash led to at least 18 cars from the oil train derailing, setting several tanker cars ablaze and causing huge explosions.

Helmut Schmidt
[e-mail]

It was just kind of a bad break that the eastbound oil train was so close to the scene of the derailment. If he was going at any speed faster than a crawl, he could never have stopped in time.

The picture below shows, I believe, a locomotive that has been attached to the west end of the oil train. It is pulling tank cars that have not derailed away from the flames. This is not the front of the oil train. The picture was taken at the west end of the passing track.

If my reading of BNSF signals is correct, the angled sign is an "advance permanent speed indication sign." It indicates that freight trains will encounter a speed limit of 40 mph in two miles. Please don't hold me to that. Corrections are welcome.



A fire from a train derailment burns uncontrollably as seen from a mile away Monday, west of Casselton, N.D. Michael Vosburg / Forum News Service

I've heard it said that some of the tank cars affected were of the DOT-111 design. Please refer to an earlier thread at DU about that:

Railroads Seek Tighter Tank-Car Safety Rules
http://www.democraticunderground.com/111643788

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. Preliminary Guidance from OPERATION CLASSIFICATION

Last edited Wed Jan 8, 2014, 11:42 AM - Edit history (3)

Please see this thread in LBN:

After Train Fires, Feds Warn Bakken Oil May Be More Flammable Than Traditional Forms Of Oil
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014687058

I was surprised to see that the warning did not come from the Federal Railroad Administration, but the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Here it is:

Preliminary Guidance from OPERATION CLASSIFICATION
http://phmsa.dot.gov/portal/site/PHMSA/menuitem.ebdc7a8a7e39f2e55cf2031050248a0c/?vgnextoid=c6efec1c60f23410VgnVCM100000d2c97898RCRD&vgnextchannel=d248724dd7d6c010VgnVCM10000080e8a8c0RCRD&vgnextfmt=print

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is issuing this safety alert to notify the general public, emergency responders and shippers and carriers that recent derailments and resulting fires indicate that the type of crude oil being transported from the Bakken region may be more flammable than traditional heavy crude oil.

Based upon preliminary inspections conducted after recent rail derailments in North Dakota, Alabama and Lac-Megantic, Quebec involving Bakken crude oil, PHMSA is reinforcing the requirement to properly test, characterize, classify, and where appropriate sufficiently degasify hazardous materials prior to and during transportation. This advisory is a follow-up to the PHMSA and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) joint safety advisory published November 20, 2013 [78 FR 69745]. As stated in the November Safety Advisory, it is imperative that offerors properly classify and describe hazardous materials being offered for transportation. 49 CFR 173.22. As part of this process, offerors must ensure that all potential hazards of the materials are properly characterized.

Proper characterization will identify properties that could affect the integrity of the packaging or present additional hazards, such as corrosivity, sulfur content, and dissolved gas content. These characteristics may also affect classification. PHMSA stresses to offerors the importance of appropriate classification and packing group (PG) assignment of crude oil shipments, whether the shipment is in a cargo tank, rail tank car or other mode of transportation. Emergency responders should remember that light sweet crude oil, such as that coming from the Bakken region, is typically assigned a packing group I or II. The PGs mean that the material’s flashpoint is below 73 degrees Fahrenheit and, for packing group I materials, the boiling point is below 95 degrees Fahrenheit. This means the materials pose significant fire risk if released from the package in an accident.

As part of ongoing investigative efforts, PHMSA and FRA initiated “Operation Classification,” a compliance initiative involving unannounced inspections and testing of crude oil samples to verify that offerors of the materials have been properly classified and describe the hazardous materials. Preliminary testing has focused on the classification and packing group assignments that have been selected and certified by offerors of crude oil. These tests measure some of the inherent chemical properties of the crude oil collected. Nonetheless, the agencies have found it necessary to expand the scope of their testing to measure other factors that would affect the proper characterization and classification of the materials. PHMSA expects to have final test results in the near future for the gas content, corrosivity, toxicity, flammability and certain other characteristics of the Bakken crude oil, which should more clearly inform the proper characterization of the material.

“Operation Classification” will be an ongoing effort, and PHMSA will continue to collect samples and measure the characteristics of Bakken crude as well as oil from other locations. Based on initial field observations, PHMSA expanded the scope of lab testing to include other factors that affect proper characterization and classification such as Reid Vapor Pressure, corrosivity, hydrogen sulfide content and composition/concentration of the entrained gases in the material. The results of this expanded testing will further inform shippers and carriers about how to ensure that the materials are known and are properly described, classified, and characterized when being shipped. In addition, understanding any unique hazards of the materials will enable offerors, carriers, first responders, as well as PHMSA and FRA to identify any appropriate mitigating measures that need to be taken to ensure the continued safe transportation of these materials.

PHMSA will share the results of these additional tests with interested parties as they become available. PHMSA also reminds offerors that the hazardous materials regulations require offerors of hazardous materials to properly classify and describe the hazardous materials being offered for transportation. 49 CFR 173.22. Accordingly, offerors should not delay completing their own tests while PHMSA collects additional information.

For additional information regarding this safety alert, please contact Rick Raksnis, PHMSA Field Services Division, [phone] or E-mail: [e-mail]. For general information and assistance regarding the safe transport of hazardous materials, contact PHMSA’s Information Center at 1-800-467-4922 or [e-mail].

The same article by the same reporter ran in the local newspapers. Comments might be different.

Federal agency issues safety alert on Bakken crude
http://www.jamestownsun.com/content/federal-agency-issues-safety-alert-bakken-crude-5

Federal agency issues safety alert on Bakken crude
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/422533/

And, from the NYT:

Concern Over Safety Grows as More Oil Rides the Rails
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/03/us/concern-over-safety-grows-as-more-oil-rides-the-rails.html

By MATTHEW L. WALD JAN. 2, 2014

WASHINGTON — Safety officials have worried for years about hazardous materials carried on trains, but concern has intensified recently as a drilling surge in remote oil fields has generated heavy traffic on North America’s aging rail-freight networks.

That concern was heightened on Monday when a train of oil-tank cars near Casselton, N.D., plowed into a train carrying grain that had derailed on an adjacent track. The fire burned for more than a day. ... That accident was outside the town. But last July, in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, a similar train of tank cars that had been left unattended rolled down a grade and derailed, killing 47 people and burning down much of the downtown.

Even before the accident in Quebec, the United States Transportation Department had warned that shippers were failing to follow basic precautions, like determining the temperature at which oil will turn into a gas and burn or explode, and selecting appropriate tank cars to transport the material.

On Thursday, the department told oil shippers and railroads that it was “imperative” to test the oil being transported to determine its volatility. The department is also considering stricter requirements for the tank cars themselves, which are prone to puncture and burn in derailments. Sometimes the problem is as basic as the effect of a derailment, which can throw open valves and spill flammable contents.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

2. AUDIO/VIDEO: 911 calls from Casselton train derailment show crew member first reported his train car

I can't link to the video, but there's aerial footage of the burning cars.

Hat tip, Trainorders.com:

Western Railroad Discussion > Audio/Text Cassleton, ND Train wreck

AUDIO/VIDEO: 911 calls from Casselton train derailment show crew member first reported his train carried ethanol
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/423062/group/News/

Published January 08, 2014, 05:26 PM

AUDIO/VIDEO: 911 calls from Casselton train derailment show crew member first reported his train carried ethanol

FARGO – Emergency 911 calls indicate at least one member of the crew involved in the Dec. 30 train derailment and explosion west of Casselton thought the train was carrying ethanol instead of highly combustible Bakken crude oil.

By: Helmut Schmidt, INFORUM

[mahatmakanejeeves]

3. Train fire adds fuel to safety debate

Last edited Wed Jan 15, 2014, 05:24 PM - Edit history (3)

Train fire adds fuel to safety debate
http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jan/01/train-fire-adds-fuel-to-safety-debate/

Keystone Pipeline backers say a block to the project will put more oil on trains
By Jim Snyder, Lynn Doan and Bradley Olson, Bloomberg News

Published: January 1, 2014, 6:00 AM

Vancouver, Washington, is on the route for additional oil trains. Tesoro and Savage have proposed building a big facility just west of downtown Vancouver.

Tesoro, Savage explain oil-by-rail plans
http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/sep/30/tesoro-savage-explain-oil-by-rail-plans/

'Slick' meeting had little substance, says a neighborhood leader

By Aaron Corvin, Columbian port & economy reporter

Published: September 30, 2013, 11:36 PM

....
Savage, a supply-chain management company, and Tesoro Corp., the West Coast's largest refiner, want to build an oil-by-rail terminal that would handle as much as 380,000 barrels of crude per day.

The project is mentioned in this article in The Wall Street Journal. If you link to it from Google News, you should be able to read it without a subscription.

Cities Grapple With Oil-Train Safety
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303819704579320971969135440

Recent Derailments Raise Concerns Over North Dakota Crude Traveling by Rail Through Cities

By Russell Gold and Lynn Cook Jan. 14, 2014 11:02 p.m. ET

....
In Vancouver, Wash., refiner Tesoro Corp. TSO -3.25% and logistics firm Savage Cos. have proposed building a railroad terminal that could handle 360,000 barrels a day, twice the size of the oil terminal in Albany.

Barry Cain, lead developer of Columbia Waterfront LLC, a $1.3 billion real-estate revitalization project in Vancouver with space 100 feet from the tracks, said he supports robust U.S. oil production but fears the trains would endanger residents. "What if one derails?" he asked. "There is no margin of error with these things."

The general manager of the proposed new rail terminal, Jared Larrabee, said it and waterfront development can co-exist. "We believe the region can and should have both," he said.

Vancouver Fire Dept. Battalion Chief Steve Eldred said hazardous-materials response plans are in place for existing train traffic, but would need to be studied and probably require additional resources to handle more oil trains.
....

—Chester Dawson, Ben Kesling and Betsy Morris contributed to this article.

Write to Russell Gold at [e-mail] and Lynn Cook at [e-mail]

[mahatmakanejeeves]

4. National Transportation Safety Board Releases Preliminary Report on Railroad Train Derailment

National Transportation Safety Board Releases Preliminary Report on Railroad Train Derailment, Casselton, North Dakota, December 30, 2013

PRELIMINARY REPORT
RAILROAD
DCA14MR004

The information in this report is preliminary and will be supplemented or corrected during the course of the investigation.

On December 30, 2013, about 1411 central standard time, a westbound BNSF Railway (BNSF) grain train, G-RYLRGT9-26A, derailed 13 cars at milepost 28.5 near Casselton, North Dakota. The grain train, operating on main track 1, consisted of two head-end locomotives, one rear distributed power locomotive, and 112 cars. One of the derailed cars, the 45th car from the head end, fouled main track 2. An eastbound BNSF petroleum crude oil unit train, U-FYNHAY4-05, operating on main track 2 collided with the derailed car that was fouling main track 2 and derailed the head-end locomotives and the first 21 cars of the train. The petroleum crude oil unit train consisted of two head-end locomotives, one rear distributed power locomotive, and 106 cars.
....

The accident occurred on the BNSF KO Subdivision where train movements were governed by the signal indications of a traffic control system. The maximum authorized speed for freight trains in the accident area was 60 mph. Event recorder data from the rear locomotives of both trains, as well as recorded data from the signal system, were examined to determine train speeds and signal aspects prior to the collision. The grain train was traveling about 28 mph when it went into an emergency brake application. The petroleum crude oil unit train was traveling about 43 mph when the train crew initiated an emergency brake application. The train was traveling about 42 mph when the collision occurred.