BNSF Railway and Asbestos Exposure on American Railroads

Company History

BNSF Railway — formally the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway — is one of the largest freight railroad networks in North America, operating tens of thousands of route miles across the western United States. The company as it exists today is the product of a long series of mergers and consolidations involving several historic rail lines, most significantly the 1995 merger of Burlington Northern Railroad and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. Burlington Northern itself had been formed in 1970 through the consolidation of the Great Northern Railway, the Northern Pacific Railway, the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad, and the Spokane, Portland and Seattle Railway.

Each of these predecessor railroads operated during the decades when asbestos use was standard practice in American industry, and each maintained locomotive fleets, maintenance facilities, and infrastructure that routinely incorporated asbestos-containing materials. Because BNSF is the legal successor to these earlier carriers, asbestos litigation has named the company in connection with exposures that occurred across multiple predecessor railroads spanning the better part of the twentieth century. According to asbestos litigation records, workers employed by predecessor lines dating back to the mid-twentieth century have alleged occupational asbestos exposure as a result of conditions and materials present on railroad worksites.

BNSF is currently a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, which acquired the company in 2010. The railroad continues to operate as a major freight carrier and does not maintain an asbestos bankruptcy trust fund, as the company has not sought Chapter 11 reorganization related to asbestos liability.

Asbestos-Containing Products and Materials

Railroads of the mid-twentieth century were among the most intensive industrial users of asbestos in the United States. The material’s heat resistance, durability, and relatively low cost made it appealing across virtually every operational and mechanical system that these lines depended upon. According to asbestos litigation records involving BNSF and its predecessor railroads, a wide range of asbestos-containing materials were alleged to have been present on locomotives, rolling stock, and in maintenance and repair facilities.

Locomotive Components

Court filings document allegations that diesel and steam locomotives operated by predecessor railroads contained asbestos in multiple components. Plaintiffs alleged that boiler insulation, firebox refractory materials, and exhaust system components on steam-era locomotives incorporated asbestos insulation that could release respirable fibers during routine inspection, repair, or replacement. As diesel locomotives displaced steam power through the 1950s and into the 1960s, asbestos remained present in gasket materials, brake shoes, engine compartment insulation, and electrical components. Turbocharged diesel engines generated significant heat, and according to asbestos litigation records, insulation wrapping and blankets used around engine compartments were frequently composed of asbestos-containing materials.

Brake Systems

Brake shoe linings on both locomotives and freight cars were among the most widely documented sources of asbestos exposure on American railroads. Plaintiffs alleged that carmen, machinists, and maintenance workers who inspected, replaced, or ground brake shoes were exposed to asbestos dust generated during those tasks. Court filings document that brake shoe replacement was a high-frequency maintenance activity performed at rail yards and in roundhouses, and that workers often performed this work without respiratory protection.

Thermal and Pipe Insulation

According to asbestos litigation records, insulation materials used in locomotive cab heating systems, steam lines, and pipe lagging throughout maintenance facilities and railroad structures were alleged to contain asbestos. Workers who cut, shaped, or removed this insulation — including pipefitters, insulators, and general maintenance laborers — were alleged to have disturbed asbestos-containing materials in the course of routine repair work.

Flooring and Interior Materials

Plaintiffs alleged that interior cab flooring, ceiling tiles, and fire-barrier materials in locomotive cabs and passenger cars contained asbestos. Floor tiles and mastic adhesives used in passenger car renovations and maintenance were also identified in court filings as potential sources of asbestos fiber release when disturbed during repair or renovation activity.

Repair Shop and Roundhouse Materials

Court filings document allegations that the shops, roundhouses, and maintenance buildings operated by predecessor railroads were environments where asbestos-containing building materials — including pipe insulation, boiler lagging, ceiling and wall insulation, and spray-applied fireproofing — were present in substantial quantities. Workers performing repairs in enclosed shop environments may have been exposed to accumulated asbestos dust from multiple simultaneous sources.

Occupational Exposure Risks and Affected Trades

Asbestos exposure on railroad worksites was not limited to a single trade or job classification. According to asbestos litigation records, claims have been filed on behalf of a broad range of occupational groups who worked for BNSF predecessor railroads during the period of heaviest asbestos use, generally understood to extend from the 1940s through the early 1980s.

Locomotive Engineers and Firemen spent long hours in locomotive cabs where, plaintiffs alleged, asbestos-containing insulation, gaskets, and flooring materials were present throughout their working lives. Repeated daily exposure in an enclosed cab environment is a recurring theme in court filings involving these worker classifications.

Machinists and Carmen performed hands-on disassembly and reassembly of locomotive and car components. According to asbestos litigation records, these workers are among those most frequently identified in claims because their work routinely involved direct contact with brake components, gaskets, and insulation materials alleged to contain asbestos.

Boilermakers who serviced steam locomotives were alleged in court filings to have worked extensively with asbestos insulation applied to boiler surfaces and steam lines. Even as steam power was phased out, boilermakers continued to work on heating systems and pressure vessels in maintenance facilities where legacy asbestos materials remained.

Pipefitters and Insulators who maintained steam and heating systems throughout railroad facilities were alleged to have encountered asbestos pipe lagging and insulation regularly, including during repair and replacement activities that involved cutting or removing deteriorated asbestos-containing materials.

Laborers and Shop Workers who swept, cleaned, and performed general maintenance in roundhouses and repair shops were alleged to have been exposed to asbestos dust that had settled on surfaces and become airborne during cleaning operations, even when those workers were not themselves performing asbestos-related tasks.

Signal Maintainers and Electrical Workers may also have encountered asbestos in electrical panel insulation and heat-shielding materials, according to claims documented in asbestos litigation records.

The Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) provides a specific legal framework for railroad workers injured on the job, and asbestos-related FELA claims have been a significant category of railroad litigation for decades. FELA applies exclusively to workers employed by the railroad itself and operates differently from standard workers’ compensation systems, requiring a showing of employer negligence but allowing full tort damages including compensation for pain and suffering.

BNSF Railway has not established an asbestos bankruptcy trust fund and has not undergone Chapter 11 reorganization related to asbestos claims. This means that individuals alleging asbestos-related injuries from exposure during employment with BNSF or its predecessor railroads must pursue their claims through active civil litigation rather than through a trust fund claims process.

According to asbestos litigation records, BNSF and its predecessors have been named as defendants in asbestos personal injury lawsuits filed across the United States. Plaintiffs have alleged that the railroad knew or should have known of the hazards posed by asbestos-containing materials and failed to adequately warn workers or provide appropriate protective equipment. Court filings document these allegations spanning multiple predecessor railroad entities and multiple decades of alleged exposure.

Because BNSF is a successor to multiple historic railroads, individuals who worked for any predecessor carrier — including Burlington Northern, Santa Fe, Great Northern, Northern Pacific, or the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy — may have potential claims that name BNSF as the current successor entity, in addition to claims against product manufacturers whose asbestos-containing materials were used on those railroads.

If you or a family member worked for BNSF Railway or any of its predecessor railroads — including Burlington Northern, Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe, Great Northern, Northern Pacific, or Chicago Burlington and Quincy — and has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, asbestosis, lung cancer, or another asbestos-related disease, the following options may be available:

  • Civil litigation against BNSF under the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) or general tort law, depending on employment status and the nature of the claim
  • Product liability claims against manufacturers of specific asbestos-containing products used on railroad worksites, many of which maintain active bankruptcy trust funds that accept claims independently of any BNSF lawsuit
  • Trust fund claims against other defendants in the supply chain — gasket manufacturers, insulation suppliers, brake lining producers — whose products were alleged to have been used on railroad equipment and in maintenance facilities

Because BNSF does not operate a trust fund, legal action requires filing in civil court. FELA claims have specific procedural requirements and statutes of limitations that differ from standard personal injury claims. An attorney experienced in railroad asbestos litigation can evaluate the specific facts of an employment and exposure history to identify the most appropriate legal avenues.

This article is provided for informational and historical reference purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Individuals seeking guidance about specific legal claims should consult a qualified attorney.