From: ahk@chinet.com

conklin  wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:
>>conklin  wrote:

>>>The New York Times has a front page article on hazardous material
>>>transport by railroads.

>>I got past the pay wall with two extra steps.

>>http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/business/despite-spills-haza
ds-ride-the-rails-in-secret.html

>>>It seems that when local officials tried to look into a
>>>derailment in Westford, MA, they were threatened with arrest.

>>So what? The town manager and fire chief would have told the police
>>that they were there to investigate the incident and determine
>>what local emergency response was necessary, and wouldn't have been
>>arrested. Any company official can make a police report for trespass,
>>but that doesn't mean someone would have been arrested. If you don't
>>want to be intimidated, don't let yourself be intimidated.

>>It's not like these two people wouldn't have been known to their own
>>police department.

>>>Federal laws shield railroads from almost any supervision.  Yet, if
>>>an accident takes place, railroads must rely on local hazardous waste
>>>personnel.  It seems that they supply some local officals secret lists
>>>of hazardous materials.  How that works seems unclear, but the public
>>>does not know.  Also, routes are kept secret too.  And those tin can
>>>rail cars will be in use basically forever.  Arresting local mayors who
>>>look in on accidents seems to be legal.  They could also arrest local
>>>hazrdous material teams too.

>>Now you're just making shit up. Thanks, George, for making an effort to
>>start a decent discussion.

>The list of hazard materials is NOT public and shared only with certain
>officials, and that apparently does not include elected officials.

I asked you a what you think local officials are to do. It's quoted below.
You chose not to answer.

I don't know of any legitimate reason why local officials would be required
to know the manifest of a particular train that hasn't derailed. Can you
explain to us what the reason is, other than, "We're fearful of railroad
transportation and we want to know everything"?

No one's informed in advance of those same chemicals being moved through
town in a tanker truck.

>You should read the article, which you obviously scanned.

I read the article. This is how I no that no local mayors were arrested
at accident scenes. That was shit you made up.

>I get the hard copy myself.  And the article does state that Federal
>laws shield the railroads from local supervision and this includes,
>importantly, decisions on routing of hazadous materials.

The article used a scary word that got you all in a tissy. It's not a shield.
There's a body of law going back centuries called "negative commmerce clause"
which prevents states and their subdivisions from interfering in interstate
commerce.

>And the officials were threatened with arrest.

The threat was a joke, George. The two officials were not going to be
arrested for going to an accident location on legitimate business by their
own police department.

>And if the RR decides that the best tracks are through a city and not
>around it, hazardout materials go through the city, not around it.

If this bothered me, George, I wouldn't live in Chicago.

>>I would like to know exactly what you think local officials should
>>have done once it became apparent that the train could be re-railed
>>and there was no leak or spill.

George failed to answer.

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)