One big stumbling block for the more than 100 police and fire personnel at the scene was not knowing the tanker's contents. Foote said the story from Philip Services kept changing.

"It was like going in with a blindfold," Foote said.

Initially, the company said there were two acids in the tanker, he reported. Later, two acids became four acids and even later ammonia was added to the list.

Foote said he wants to know why there was either a lack of communication or just false information being given to his crews.

A private company, the Center for Toxicology and Environmental Health or C-Tech, which was hired by officials, tested the tanker Monday and confirmed the presence of four acids but did not find traces of ammonia, Foote said.

After the tanker was drained, it was moved off the tracks into a large dirt area. The tracks and railroad ties on which the tanker rested and the 300-by-60-foot section of dirt under it were removed and neutralized. Foote said all of that will have to be rebuilt and new dirt brought into the area.

Fire crews were still investigating Monday what caused the tanker to leak.

"We're mainly concerned with what caused the failure, what caused it to get through the rubber liner," Foote said.

Cononelos said the liner that separated the acid from the steel tanker was actually a phenolic liner that was essentially painted on and then baked. It is designed to serve as insulation between the tanker and sulfuric acid only, he said.

"Those tanks are specifically designed, built and fabricated for sulfuric acid," he said. "If you put another acid in it, it could very well compromise the liner and the tanker."

Philip Services was required to file a standard manifest with the railroad of what was being hauled, Cononelos said. The items it listed on the manifest were not allowed to be in the tanker, he said.

"The contents in the leaking railroad car in question do not follow manufacturer's specifications for the phenolic coding in the tank car. The tank car is also visibly marked 'sulfuric acid,' " he said.

But Smith said Kennecott had a copy of the manifest since March 1 listing the type of waste PSC was shipping, giving Kennecott plenty of time to reject the load.

"We're not trying to point fingers at anybody, we are just trying to find out what happened," she said.

Cononelos acknowledged the tanker was mistakenly sent to Kennecott on March 1. At that time, the tanker was sent to Union Pacific's Garfield Yard.

"Kennecott did not handle or alter the contents of that rail car," he said.