This is a purely hypothetical question. What problems and issues may arise when trying to relocate a locomotive that still has a healthy dose of vitamin A on it? Does it merely have to be contained? Does it affect railroad interchangeability, like say friction journal bearings might?

And, I guess this applies to other equipment too. Like some passenger cars have insulation on their underside plumbing (steam pipes?).

Railway Preservation News
hkading@rypn.org

This is a good question, but in my experience, asbestos that is contained securely inside and inpenetrable wrapper such as boiler jacketing is considered to be safer than that which is exposed to the atmosphere. Often, securely wrapped plumbing and boilers are left undisturbed. I have seen several cases where park locomotives are stripped of asbestos lagging in situ prior to moving. If you go to railway museums where many locomotives are stored (St. Louis Trans. comes to mind), securing the lagging inside a well wrapped boiler jacket makes better economic sense for the time being. Rusted out areas are filled will Bondo or a similar plastic sealer. It's putting off the inevitable, but it is a money management problem. Kind of like a mortgage.


glueck@saturn.caps.maine.edu

I have a completely different take on this issue.

If you are willing to take on a locomotive, it comes with asbestos. That asbestos will need to be removed someday - either before restoration, or, worst case, before being cut up. Either way, it has to go.

I have just recently contacted a local asbestos company in San Diego and they are finishing up removing all the asbestos on all of our steam locomotives and passenger cars as a donation! This is not a large compnay - just one who feels the need to participate in our community.

Therefore, I would recommend that the person accepting the locomotive plan into the acquistion the removal of asbestos - either by themselves, or, having the current owner be responsible for it. It's not going away, and, it will not stay put on a locomotive. The jacket will rust away and asbestos will drop out.

Be a responsible caretaker of that piece of American history you are interested in.

JimLundquist55@yahoo.com

When we moved SP1215, I had to get an answer to this question. The main reason that Portola was able to purchase this engine was the "vita A" removal problem. The county park had been given a very expensive estimate for it's removal. We wanted to be able to postpone the removal until after we had it at the museum, where there is a concrete floor, roof, and wall, all of which help reduce the costs of containment (plus a very controled access enviroment--far better than what you find in a public park!
The short story is that, since we were not taking the loco for scrap, but for re-use, we were allowed to move it on public highways with the A word encapsulated. Encapuslation consisted of securing all loose jacketing, adding temporary jacketing, and basically duck-taping everything so nothing "white" could fall out. If the loco had been headed for scrap, the issue would have been much different (no, I still don't understand the logic of that).
We did cross state lines (Nevada) during the move, so I believe this answer is true at least in these two states (hmm, and at that time too!).
S'
David Dewey

djdewey@cncnet.com

why not have the park dept remove the asbestos, or take on the responsibility - they have too if the scape or give it away!

JimLundquist55@yahoo.com

> why not have the park dept remove the
> asbestos, or take on the responsibility -
> they have too if the scape or give it away!

Because the cost of asbestos removal is sometimes prohibitive. The outlay of money is seen as pouring good money after bad on a locomotive that may have become an eyesore. The last thing we want is to induce a scrapping on site. I would much rather use the fiberous rock to our (preservationist) strategy rather than let some board of selectmen or city council make that decision. Generally a Parks Dep't. doesn't have the skilled personell or equipment required to perform asbestos abatement. Better to leave it sealed up or contract the job to experts.


glueck@saturn.caps.maine.edu

BTW, save some VitA to spread around near park locomotives you want to aquire. It motivates cities pretty well.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

Jim,

BECAUSE the Park commission saw a great expense facing them (the "non-conforming insulating material"--doesn't that sound a lot less like the A word?), WE were able to PURCHASE the locomotive and move it to the museum for (hopefully)restoration to operation. (We did a lot of inspecting and analyzing before undertaking the purchase) We did have to wait out a local person who made claim that he could restore it "on-site", but after the predictable non-activity, the commission proceeded with our sale.
I might add; once we started working on the engine to prepare it for removal, we didn't let any grass grow under our feet--many bad things can happen between the first time someone (and not necessarily vandals) becomes aware of activity around "their" engine. It took two weeks, the first week was mostly unseen (from outside the fence)prep work (bearing cleaning, lubrication, etc.), we then had to take a break (mostly all volunteer help, some had to return to their regular lives!). The second trip was about a week, we removed the fence, attached rails, more lubricating and cleaning, then the two trucks arrived and we loaded her. Then there was the five-day journey 'round robin's barn to get to Portola via Tehacapi, 395 through Nevada! I will write about the adventure sometime! Our first stop was looking for some weigh scales that could handle the load, so we could check axle loadings. The first place we stopped, the guy wanted to know if we were headed for a scrapper!! AAAAUGH!!!!
S'
David Dewey


djdewey@cncnet.com

no - I didn't miss the point. Let me try again.

The PArk, City, County, state, person, whomever, which ownes the engine is respjnsible for it and the vit. A. Let them remove it or pay to have it removed - it's their cost even if they do want to scrap it!

JimLundquist55@yahoo.com

If the Park paid to remove the non-conforming insulating material, which, at the time, would cost about $60K in situ; then they would never let it go and it would sit and rot away. We took advantage of the situation, and spent around $16K to purchase and move it to the museum. Removal at the museum should be under $20K based on estimates we've had.
Because of the material on board, no scrapper would pay to remove it, but would also charge major bucks to scrap it. Neither the "rot in the park" nor the "scrap n the park" option is popular with me! BTW, for some reason, the park removed the window frames and stored them in a dry shed, we even have glass in some of them! (not that it's safety glass or anything, but WOW, non-rotted window frames!)
Steamcerely,
DAvid Dewey



djdewey@cncnet.com

CN 5288 is still carrying insulation that may contain Vitamin A. While it was stored at Toby, Steamtown had encapsulation performed on the boiler jacketing. The pipe wrapping was removed. However, prior to the 22 mile move from Toby to Taylor Yard, TVRM installed a "diaper" under the locomotive. We placed tarps that were secured by bungee cords on the lower half of the boiler. These tarps were there to catch any loose material that might fall off during the move.

With regards to the abatement of Vitamin A, let me refer everyone to CFR Title 40, Chapter 1, Subpart M, National Emission Standard for Asbestos. Read paragraph 61.145, Standard for Demolition and Renovation. I know of one railroad where the 160 square feet threshold was successfully used to reduce the amount of work needed to abate a locomotive. This subpart also contains info on wetting Vitamin A during abatement. Interesting reading...

aw90h@cs.com