Case Study
Experts Distinguish Corrosive Property Damage from Normal Deterioration
Several years ago, a catastrophic event occurred in which a
train carrying chlorine gas derailed and one of the tank cars
loaded with chlorine ruptured, releasing about 60 tons of the gas.
Within four days, RJ Lee Group was on the scene of the accident to
provide technical support in evaluating air quality and to assist
federal, state and local authorities to ensure that the evacuated
properties were safe for reoccupation. After completing the
environmental impact study, we were asked to remain by the gas
carrier and were retained to determine any property damage caused
by the chlorine gas. These evaluations involved physical inspection
and examination of more than 360 unique property locations and
damage assessment of approximately 500 vehicles, on-site readings
and laboratory analyses.
Recently, some individuals living near the accident location
claimed property damage as a result of the event. Our experts were
once again retained to inspect the residences of the claimants, and
also to provide a critical review of data generated by their
expert, as well as to evaluate samples collected and analyzed by
that expert.
To the trained eye, the nature of chlorine damage to property is
distinct and visually, as well as microscopically, recognizable
when compared to general weathering over time. In an effort to
separate instances of chlorine damage from those caused by standard
weathering at the claimants’ properties, our metals corrosion
experts followed the same proven protocol we established during our
initial examination of hundreds of properties immediately after the
gas release to identify the damage. Once we completed these
observations, we were able to move on to collecting samples.
We collected lift samples from surfaces at the claimants’
properties and analyzed them using scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) to obtain microscopic evidence of corrosion products. Taking
into account this entire body of evidence, including our analyses
of physical samples provided by the claimants’ expert, we
determined that the residence was not affected by the release of
the chlorine gas.
After a critical review of the claimants’ expert's report and
based upon our on-site inspections, the analysis of samples from
the claimants’ property, our corrosion expert's findings, and our
analytical results, our expert testified at trial concluding that
there was no corrosion property damage at the claimants’ residence
as a result of the chlorine gas release.
Follow Us