The recent activity with 503 has once again cast the spotlight on this challenge of what to do with a steam locomotive that is owned by a government entity and which has fallen into disrepair. These artifacts are ravaged by weather and often contain asbestos, lead paint, and in some cases, old oil. If displayed in an unsupervised area, such as a local park, they can become a liability for several reasons. Even with the asbestos and (possibly) oil abated, there is still an appreciable amount of lead paint. So if anyone gets up on or in the locomotive, they can be exposed to lead. Rusted sharp edges in a steam locomotive that is not maintained and protected from the elements are also a hazard, as is the risk of a fall from the locomotive.

Several options, such as purchase or lease have been mentioned. How would a lease work within the constraints of the 1472 day/15 year inspection requirements in the event the locomotive is intended to be returned to operation? Would a lease have to be structured such that it ends at the end of a full inspection cycle? How would this be practical given the "it will be done when its done" nature of a restoration to operation? Given the typical initial restoration to operation expense, how many 1472 day/15 year cycles does the preservation group have to be able to retain possession of the locomotive so it does not lose its shirt if the government entity decides to not renew? In the case of non-renewal, who pays to get the locomotive back to the original location? If the lessee has to bear the cost of return, does a bond have to be posted to ensure that the funds are available at the end of the lease?

As far as dealing with government entities, what are the basic rules for the divestiture of government-owned locomotives? If Hazmats are present, does the purchasing/leasing organization have to provide a release from liability? For a locomotive that is to be returned to service, what about a Warranty of merchantability?

Mr. Glueck has provided some of his valuable reflections on his experience with 470 in the 503 thread. I'd really appreciate it if those who have been through the process could take a bit of time and discuss some best practices - what they did that worked and what they did that, in hindsight, they would do differently - for how to approach government owners of these locomotives, how to work with them towards a successful transaction, how to best structure the deal, and whatever other issues that arose.

Thank you.

What is the big deal about lead? Unless you're planning to eat the engine or grind down the existing paint and let it go into the breeze, it's totally innocuous. Asbestos is a potential hazard, and oil is a possible problem if it's in a large quantity. Minor leakage of lubricant is only a problem if you're in an over regulated state. Falls and associated liability is the bane of everyone. That's what insurance is for. The problem is cities that don't want to do any capital expenditures. That will only change if we can educate folks on why we should exist.

I just want to point out, New England Steam Corp. had to remediate residual asbestos, mostly around the cylinder jackets, by finding a company to do that work and paying them out f pocket. We also had to remove toxic paint from the tender frame by EPA approved methods. I know it was neither suggested nor implied, but I want to make it clear, we have dealt with two big issues by taking our lumps, along with our membership and donors. These are real issues which remain hidden until the moment critical, then you have to face them. Somebody will, eventually ask.

Not only does raw data disagree with your assessment, but so does an entire mega-multi-billion-dollar industry predicated around lead paint exposure hazards, litigation over presumed lead paint exposure, and even an entire "class warfare" argument circulating around the plights of urban poor children being repeatedly exposed to lead paint and plumbing in old, decrepit low-cost urban housing and other buildings.

Just last week I was made aware of two water fountains taken out of service, and replaced by water coolers with carboys, in a Baltimore building because of an accusation of lead exposure to a specific child, confirmed by a physician. The problem had supposedly been corrected months ago (and it was in old city-installed water connections outside the building, not inside the building's plumbing), but the building's occupants couldn't yet get the city to come in with a final test to certify the water as "lead-free," so the water coolers continue.

Now, this is ONE building.
I'm told there are cases like this ALL OVER this city.

And we're not even Flint, Michigan.

"Not only does raw data disagree with your assessment, but so does an entire mega-multi-billion-dollar industry predicated around lead paint exposure hazards, litigation over presumed lead paint exposure, and even an entire "class warfare" argument circulating around the plights of urban poor children being repeatedly exposed to lead paint and plumbing in old, decrepit low-cost urban housing and other buildings."

You make my point. There is a billion dollar industry that has brain washed the public to cry out whenever lead paint is found. The lead has to be in a form to be breathed or ingested. Just sitting on an engine does nothing and HAS NO HARMFUL EFFECT.

Asbestos that is friable and shedding is a problem and should have been corrected before the item was accepted or the donor contacted to assist in the removal. If they took a tax write off, knowing there was asbestos and not including a discount for the remediation in their donation valuation, they may have a problem with the IRS.

Petroleum contamination is almost universally present from street run off. Fuel stored when not needed is a no brainer that it should be removed. preventing ALL possible petroleum contamination is simply granny government at its worst.

Museums and rides need to exercise common sense. Would you want to have to live with your debris? If not, then take the proper steps to control and be a good neighbor.

.

This whole silly thing just brings up how easy it is to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

I'm familiar wit the case of a park display engine (which will remain unidentified) that had it's asbestos removed as a DIY effort while it was still legal to do so. Years later, the park board came back to the guy who headed up the project and wanted to know what precautions were taken to keep asbestos off the ground... well, none were taken, because at the time none were required. The asbestos had been removed not because it was a hazard, but to preserve the boiler. The guy they were asking asked me what I thought. I advised to tell them that asbestos that is encapsulated and not friable is not a hazard. So, if they are really concerned about it, to hire a driveway sealing contractor to spray the track and gravel in the enclosure with blacktop sealer, which would encapsulate any possible fibers, and then spread a layer of new gravel to protect the sealant. Instead, they went out and consulted a remediation contractor. When they got the price, the item was quietly tabled, and nothing has been done to this day.

An exercise in edification.

What is the final disposition of remediated evil asbestos removed from our fragile environment?
What is the final disposition of remediated evil lead based paint removed from our fragile environment?

Opinions? Answers?

I'd have to say educate the people of that city. Teach them the value of what they have and why it is valuable. Make the pollutants the least of thier worries.

I suppose with situations like the 503, dealing with any park engine will involve the city 9 times out of 10. Looking at it from the viewpoint of a city with a (most likely out of mind and/or sight) park locomotive, it really is an added expense, if maintained by the city. On the other hand, it'll be forgotten until someone notices a rusted lump with questionable material leaking from it. A local government would have to satisfy thier citizens to a degree, enough to keep them voting for those in it. It could be handed off to responsible hands. Maybe it'll be wanted as a little tourism trinket. At worst, it'll be turned to razors. Most likely the city government would want the cheapest route, scrapping it is. Unless your voting citizens want the engine worked with or placed in proper hands, it'll sit or scrap. If the citizens of that city keep being serious I'd say asbestos is not an issue. Provided that greased palms and dirty money are watched out for, of course. That will, may I say, derail the best laid plans. Reaching the people of any city does seem difficult, but anything can be done these days.

Just my thoughts on this.

Asbestos gets buried in double plastic bags and is always the responsibility of the owner of whatever it came out off.......in years to come it could be dug up and moved again at the original owners expense.

4004 in Cheyenne is well loved and having several hundred thousands spent including abatement.

Two entirely different hazards.

Asbestos is a naturally-occurring form of silicate mineral. Its hazard is of inhalation, with the silica doing damage to the lungs. In any inert form, sealed, it is safe for exposure to, for example, ground water.

Lead is a naturally-occurring element that does long-term toxic neurological damage to those exposed to it through various forms--inhalation of fumes (like when it was used in gasoline), water leaching, eating off of pewter utensils, etc. You want to put it somewhere where it won't be exposed to ground water, be emitted in fumes, etc. Hanging a pewter plate on the wall or wearing a pewter belt buckle is fine; grinding off lead paint, letting kids put lead soldiers in their mouths, etc.--not good.

What & When & why was that part cut off the boiler leaving a big square hole?

Hole was cut in 1978 for two staybolts for 3985

Now, I’m starting wonder about other park ornaments, such as military aircraft, artillery pieces, tanks, boats, and other vehicles. I wonder if other preservation communities are having similar discussions and launching efforts to save some of these park artifacts. I know there was an effort to restore the B-17 “Memphis Belle” several years ago. This historic aircraft sat neglected out on display for years. Interesting. Gonna have to do some research.