Distinguished Forum Members; Let me begin by saying that everyone in West lost something, and in no small measure. The owners of the plant lost their business, yes. But they also knew the employees and fire fighters that were lost. They knew the people who lost their homes, several of which, no doubt, worked for the plant. Absent the notion of arson by someone deranged or agrieved, I can imagine no one associated with that plant waking up that morning thinking, "Wouldn't it be neat to see what happens if the warehouse caught fire and decimated a third of the town in an explosion!" I would temper the implication of something "sinister" towards the owners until all of the facts are gathered. Afterall, from a standpoint of strictly business, trying to save money is not sinister in and of itself, although the results from it can lead to tragedies that were unforeseen.
This facility had existed in that location since about World War II. It's no secret that West is a farming community and has been since its inception. Over the years, development began to encroach on the facility, placing homes, apartments and schools within close proximity to the plant. McClennan County has an emergency preparedness committee. It has been reported locally that no one who was listed as a member knew that they had been placed on it. The chairman himself claims to have been clueless to the fact that he was head of this committee. These committees are required by the federal government for the purpose of coordinating with federal officials and FEMA in the event of any conceivable disaster. At this time, it appears that McClennan County created theirs on paper and never followed up with action. The facility was not sprinklered. At this time, there appears to have been no mandate requiring it. Texas is a home rule state. Like it or not, a city can mandate, or not, whether a facility is protected by either adopting, or not adopting, a particular fire code. Chances are, if there was a fire code adopted, this facililty was grandfathered. The amounts of ammonium nitrate are not out of line for a production facility. Afterall, it moves out almost as soon as it is produced based on demand, especially in a farming community such as this where hundreds upon thousands of acres are cultivated. While reporting amounts that exceed certain limits to a federal agency seems reasonable, it stands to chance that by the time the report was processed, the actual "batch" that was reported would be long shipped and used. Several officials from other rural counties have weighed in to this affect, realizing that they have similar facilities with higher amounts and larger footprints. Given the nature of the plant, the local fire departments should have trained collaboratively on how to respond to an incident there. Most of us who lead a double life as a firefighter on the side know how it feels to want to run up to the fire and put "the wet stuff on the red stuff". That's what makes us what we are. But there are some incidences where a defensive posture is required to ensure the safety of the responders. In this case, had the McClennan County emergency preparedness committee done its research, much less its job, then it would have been established that immediate evacuation would have been the proper response. These are only a few factors that should be considered in a discussion such as this. Certainly, we all look back on what should or could have been done. We operate within an esoteric realm of knowledge not generally understood by the average retail or industrial manager. It's easy for us to hypothesize and postulate, prophesy and prognosticate. Lawyers are gathering like fleas to assign blame and a community is struggling with not only the loss of life and property, but of friendships and neighborhoods as the investigation inevitably gives way to litigation. Lines will be drawn, and a business that once provided jobs and economic vitality to a rural community will be demonized. Gentlemen, accept the tragedy for the tragedy that it is. But please do try to be gentle with the people and the community. Respectfully... -----Original Message----- From: George Church [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 2:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: West, TX explosion Wouldn't that be like robbing Ft Knox? That's a lotta truckloads of fertilizer Sent from my iPhoner On Apr 26, 2013, at 2:25 PM, "Maurice Marvi" <[email protected]> wrote: > As I put on my tin foil hat, > > Isn't a fire a great way to cover up the theft of a large amount of > Ammonium Nitrate? > > Taking hat off, joining regular society > > Maurice Marvi > > ---------------------------------------- > > From: "Steve Leyton" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 2:16 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: West, TX explosion > > I'm not suggesting that they had sinister intentions, but I'll betcha a > dollar to a dime that we're gonna find out there were all manner of > violations and corners cut in their safety program. They were fined > $10,000 last summer for safety violations by the U.S. Pipeline and > Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, but that fine was reduced to > $5,250 after the company claimed to have made corrections. Are you > bleeping kidding me? 5 thousand bucks ain't a pimple on a bear's ass > to a good sized company. Here's one thing I'm sure of: make the fine > $5,250 for every word in the notice of violation and you'll have an > actual deterrent effect. > > Steve Leyton > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 10:23 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: West, TX explosion > > Just to take some of the sinister connotation out of a facility storing > 270 tons or ammonium nitrate (fertilizer), that is only enough to do a > single springtime application to about 900 acres of hay fields. Based on > the amount of farming in the midsection of the U S, I'm betting there > are many, many, and much bigger facilities scattered across rural > America. > Mark at Aero > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Steve Leyton > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 10:00 AM > To: [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: RE: West, TX explosion > > Todd - your numbers aren't exactly right, but there are definitely going > to be some very compelling questions asked over the next few days and > weeks. The plant had 270 tons of ammonium nitrate; Federal law states > that you must make a declaration to Homeland Security if you keep over a > ton. The company apparently did file a disaster plan with the EPA, but > various reports hint that it was for an airborne release of anhydrous > ammonia only, and hadn't been updated since 2011. It has also been > reported that the company may have made declarations to state and local > agencies, but this begs the question of why there wasn't a HSA > declaration and whether or not the good-old-boys network was working to > facilitate this local business keeping their ammonium nitrate storage > under wraps, so to speak. Timothy McVeigh used approximately 2 tons of > this stuff in OKC; 270 tons is a wee bit more than that. The family > that owns this business is obviously in deep voodoo, as are the > regulatory agencies that missed this - or worse, covered it up. > > Steve Leyton > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Steve Mackinnon > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 9:39 AM > To: [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: RE: West, TX explosion > > OMG! > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Todd - Work > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: West, TX explosion > > From reading the latest reports, the fertilizer facility in West, TX > that exploded had 270 tons of ammonium nitrate on site. They had > previously told authorities that they had nothing hazardous. They were > required to file with DHS if they have more than 400 pounds on site and > only exceeded that by 1350 times. (Don't forget, Timothy McVeigh used a > lot of that at the OK City bombing). Obviously there is a problem at the > management level. > > So when we evaluate facilities for sprinkler protection, how are people > handling hazardous materials? As a PE, I will address it one way. If a > contractor is looking at it in a design/build project, how is that being > addressed? > > Todd G Williams, PE > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > Stonington, CT > www.fpdc.com > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler > .org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler > .org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler > .org > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler > .org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
