Cities Tackle Chemical Transportation Security

When a freight train accident took eight lives in South Carolina earlier this year because of unsafe and uninspected train cars carrying toxic materials, it heightened concerns about chemical security in our trains and trucks. Cities across the nation have begun addressing serious deficiencies on this homeland security issue because the federal government has done little. Boston, Cleveland, Chicago, and Baltimore are all considering legislation to mitigate the risks of shipping hazardous materials through their heavily populated centers. In 2004, the District of Columbia became the first U.S. city to pass legislation banning hazardous shipments passing through its city limits destined for other locales. The DC Court of Appeals has since stayed the DC ordinance, following a challenge by the Bush administration and the rail industry that argued the legislation violated constitutional provisions dealing with interstate commerce. The Department of Justice asserted that rail security is the responsibility of the federal government and that local government has no authority in the matter. The DC government is appealing the court ruling. Despite the court decision, several cities are moving forward with their own chemical security legislation. In Baltimore, City Councilman Kenneth Harris (D-District 4) sponsored legislation very similar to the DC ban. The bill has been referred to the Land Use and Transportation Committee, where Harris is vice-chair, and a Sept. 14 public hearing has been scheduled on the issue. On May 9 in Cleveland, City Councilman Matthew Zone, introduced ordinance 928-05, which would prohibit rail shipments of hazardous materials through the city unless the fire chief issued a special permit. Several years ago Cleveland adopted restrictions on truck shipments of hazardous chemicals. The legislation is under administrative review by the city’s Directors of Public Safety, Finance, Law as well as the Committees on Public Safety, Legislation, Finance. Chicago Alderman Ed Smith (D-District 28) introduced legislation to reroute hazardous material shipments around the city. However, the measure was defeated in the Transportation and Health Committee due to opposition from rail corporations. After the recent London train bombings, the bill was re-introduced and is back in committee, with city officials optimistic about the legislation’s chances for passage. In Boston, City Councilmembers Stephen Murphy and Jerry McDermott recently cited federal inaction and the availability of alternative routes as key factors for submitting chemical transportation legislation. Their bill would prohibit hazardous material shipments within a 2.5 mile radius of Copley Square, a central urban location in Boston. The ordinance is now being considered by the city's Government Operations Committee, whose members include both Murphy and McDermott. Almost four years since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the federal government has taken no action to protect urban centers from threats posed by hazardous material shipments. This inaction continues despite terrorist attacks on European transit centers. Moreover, users of hazardous materials are not required by federal regulation to consider safer alternatives or to fully inform communities about hazardous cargo shipments. Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) has recently introduced national legislation that would require the Department of Homeland Security to work with cities and states to identify and address risks associated with chemical shipments. For more information on Biden's bill see our other Watcher article. Local safety officials have repeatedly expressed safety concerns resulting from hazardous materials passing through transit systems. These concerns garnered national attention this year when two freight trains carrying hazardous chemicals collided in Graniteville, South Carolina. The resulting spill, which killed nine and injured some 250 others, was the nation's worst from a train crash since 1978. In the South Carolina incident, a manual track switch was left in the wrong position causing a moving train that was supposed to stay on a main line to collide with a parked train on a sideline. The 11,500 pounds of chlorine released by the collision created a gaseous cloud that hovered over the city through nightfall. Residents used towels and blankets to seal off doors and windows and prevent the greenish-yellow gas from entering their homes. Official clean-up efforts focused on the chlorine release, due to its potentially deadly effects on respiratory and nervous system function; however, the hazardous chemicals cresol and sodium hydroxide were also released during the accident. Chemical accidents of this nature are more frequently than most realize. Two days after the South Carolina collision, a similar accident in Bieber, California, forced the evacuation of 5,400 local residents, injured two workers. In December 2004, a train carrying hazardous material derailed near St. Cloud, Minnesota, but luckily no hazardous materials were leaked. In a 2004 Rockland County, New York incident, a CSX freight train derailed, spilling nearly 200 tons of silicon metal. Yet, CSX won’t release information about the chemicals that pass through jurisdictions to local HAZMAT teams, first responders, and State Emergency Response Committees. Right to know advocates point out that, while these were accidents, key personnel were not informed about on-board chemicals and were thus stymied in their ability to respond. Community and environmental groups also maintain that the ability of terrorists to take advantage of track switches and other key areas of vulnerability in an attack necessitates added security and access to information on what is passing through communities.
back to Blog