Matters of turf after Danvers blast

State and federal officials still clash a year after last November's explosion at a paint and ink plant in Danvers. (David L. Ryan/Globe Staff/File 2006)

YOUR NOV. 29 editorial, "Bad chemistry in Danvers," makes excellent points, but one statement needs correction. The president of the Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts evidently said that the Chemical Safety Board ran roughshod over local responders and refused to join a unified command - claims that are inaccurate.

The CSB investigative team arrived in Danvers on Nov. 24, 2006, two days after the explosion. The fires were out, and the immediate emergency was over. We asked state and local authorities for access to observe and photograph - but not alter - the accident site in its pristine condition. And we asked those authorities to stop altering the accident site themselves until all investigators could examine it. Neither request was followed.

There was no opportunity for the CSB to join a unified command, as state and local authorities denied our investigative jurisdiction and asked us to leave.

By the time we got access after a five-day impasse, the accident site had been extensively disturbed using heavy equipment. We documented this using before-and-after aerial photographs. No one knows what evidence was lost or what it might have told us.

Our agency remains committed to positive relationships with firefighters, who widely use our independent investigation reports and outreach products. We all share a compelling interest in protecting our communities and our responders from devastating chemical accidents. The American public deserves no less.

WILLIAM E. WRIGHT
Board member
US Chemical Safety Board
Washington

IT WAS disturbing to see the Globe brought into the US Chemical Safety Board's public relations machine. I find absurd your lack of confidence in the Massachusetts Department of Fire Services, and object to insinuations that Danvers Fire Chief James Tutko and state Fire Marshal Stephen Coan had no regard for evidence.

The state's fire chiefs have a legal responsibility over all fires and explosions in their communities, and that cannot be delegated to other agencies. All public safety agencies, including the Chemical Safety Board, are required to comply with the National Incident Command System.

When the CSB showed up at the Danvers explosion, no one from the Massachusetts fire services had ever heard of them. There was no protocol, as with other federal agencies we work with, such as FEMA and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Instead, members from this seemingly unknown federal agency showed up with a "step aside, we'll take it from here" attitude.

If the CSB would make a sincere effort to explain their expertise to the Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts and work within the system we are mandated to follow, there would be no problem. Instead, the CSB prods the Globe to criticize one of the finest state fire service systems in the country.

MALCOLM LARSON
Fire chief
Milton