One point that gets lost in most of these discussions is that even
if an employee did screw up (which is yet to be officially determined),
there should also be a backup safety measure for a location where
trains with hazardous cargo are routinely stopped unattended. (And,
while I am not a lawyer and have never even played one on TV, I would
assume that even if an employee messes up, the employer is not
blameless, if the employer did not provide a backup safety system for
potential human failure.)


That's the reason you have automatic train stop on some signaled lines.
Yes, the crew shouldn't screw up and miss a signal, but, if they do,
and fail to acknowledge a restrictive indication, a penalty brake
application is set. There are any number of other similar backup
safety measures, which backstop any potential human error or failure.


Similarly, this location should have derails or a switch to a runaway
track. Yes, a derail/runaway track would still derail equipment, but
at low speed, before it could build up enough momentum for a catastriphic
event. A runaway track wouldn't have to be very complicated -- just a
switch with a short track that runs slightly uphill and ends in a big
pile of sand or ballast.


For what it's worth, safety tracks are fairly common in Europe. For
example industrial spurs are seldom connected to a mainline with just a
simple switch. Instead, the connection is built with two switches in
the form of a crossover. The spur is normally lined straight to the
safety track.

Even station passing sidings in hilly or mountainous terrain typically
have a safety track on the downhill side.


I'm fairly sure that such measures will ultimately be installed. As is
often the case, such measures are only be implemented after it has been
made painfully obvious that they are needed.

-- Ernest