Suburban Chicago mayors criticize crude oil tanker policy making

Repost from ABC7 Chicago Eyewitness News
[Editor: Be sure to read the mayors’ letter to the Obama Administration.  – RS]

Suburban mayors criticize crude oil tanker policy making

By Chuck Goudie, Friday, June 20, 2014

Benicia DEIR downplays risks in marked contrast to NRDC assessment

Repost from AllGov California

This Is Where Deadly Crude Oil Trains May Be Rolling Through California

By Ken Broder, June 20, 2014
(graphic: Natural Resources Defense Council)

Although this country’s oil boom has been accompanied by an explosion of dangerous crude-carrying trains―literally and figuratively―a much-anticipated environmental impact report (Summary pdf) says the spill threat from Valero Refining Company’s proposal to run 100 tanker cars a day through Roseville and Sacramento to its Benicia refinery is negligible.

The draft EIR, written by Environmental Science Associates of San Francisco for the city of Benicia and released on Tuesday, singled out air pollution, “significant and unavoidable,” as the sole danger among 11 “environmental resource or issue areas.”

The next day, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) released seven maps detailing the rail routes through the “Crude Oil Train Derailment Risk Zones in California,” which stretches from the Bay Area to the Central/San Joaquin Valley and encompasses 4 million people.

The NRDC’s assessment of risk was markedly different than in the EIR. Noting that “California has seen a dramatic increase of crude by rail, from 45,000 barrels in 2009 to six million barrels in 2013” without any new safety measures or emergency response put in place, the NRDC report said the aging “soda cans on wheels” are not built to handle the particularly volatile crude being fracked out of the ground in America’s rejuvenated oil fields like those in North Dakota, and shipped to refiners.

Tracks would run within half a mile of 135,000 people in Sacramento and 25,000 people in Davis.

The NRDC wants old tanker cars removed from service, lower speeds for trains, rerouting through less-sensitive areas, disclosure of what kind of crude is being carried, more visible emergency preparedness, fees on shippers to pay for emergency response, high-risk designations for oil-trains and more comprehensive risk assessments.

The EIR was a bit more upbeat.

It concluded that oil spills between Roseville and Benicia would occur about once every 111 years. The project would have no impact on agriculture and forestry resources or mineral resources. It would also have less-than-significant impacts on aesthetics, population and housing, public services, recreation and utilities and service systems.

In other words, the assumption is there won’t be anything like the tragic accident in July 2013 in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, where 72 tank cars of crude oil exploded, killing 47 people and destroying much of the town’s core. As Russell Gold and Betsy Morris explained in the Wall Street Journal, “Each tank car of crude holds the energy equivalent of 2 million sticks of dynamite or the fuel in a wide body jetliner.”

The Sacramento Bee said the risk assessment’s author, Christopher Barken, previously worked for the Association of American Railroads, the industry’s leading advocacy group in Washington, and does research supported by the railroad association.

Barken’s website at the University of Illinois, where he is a professor and executive director of the Railroad Engineering Program, says, “Our strong relationship with the rail industry means our research has an impact.”

In describing the twice-a-day snaking of 50-car trains through heavily populated areas, the report offered far more information than has generally been made available by rail companies to state and local governments, as well as disaster first-responders. But the EIR did acknowledge Benicia would not reveal seven Valero “trade secrets” (pdf) at the oil company’s request.

That “confidential business information” included the specific crude Valero would be shipping in by rail and the properties of crude it refined now or in the past. That lack of information would be complicating factors in accurately assessing pollution and risk.

California, like states and localities across the nation, are scrambling just to get a handle on how much crude-by-rail is coursing through their jurisdictions, much less assessing what regulations and safety measures need to be put in place. They are working blind.

A study by Politico analyzed 400 oil-train incidents nationally since 1971 and found a dramatic escalation the past five years. Property damage from 70 accidents through mid-May this year is already $10 million, triple the year before.

“It has become abundantly clear that there are a whole slew of freight rail safety measures that, while for many years have been moving through the gears of bureaucracy, must now be approved and implemented in haste,” Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) said.

They must. Because the trains are already rolling and Valero would like to get its California project finished by the end of the year. America is waiting.

Public Radio: Lawmakers Seek Ways to Address Oil Train Risks

Repost from Capital Public Radio News
[Editor: About halfway through this 2-minute Public Radio report, UC Berkeley Law professor Jayni Hein offers several ways in which state regulators CAN make effective contributions to public health and safety.  The 3-hour California Joint Legislative Oversight Hearing on Transport of California Crude Oil by Rail  can be viewed here – RS]

Lawmakers Seek Ways to Address Oil Train Risks

California Update
By Mark Prell & Capital Public Radio News , June 20, 2014

California lawmakers are taking a closer look at the risks posed by importing crude oil by rail. At issue is what the state can do to prevent and respond to oil rail accidents when so much regulation happens at the federal level.

Audio Report – LISTEN

LA Times: Joint Legislative Oversight Hearing on Transport of California Crude Oil by Rail

Repost from The Los Angeles Times
[Editor:  The 3-hour California Joint Legislative Oversight Hearing on Transport of California Crude Oil by Rail  can be viewed here.  – RS]

California safety officials ill-prepared for increasing oil imports

By Patrick McGreevy  |  June 19, 2014
Oil by rail
A view of Union Pacific West Colton Yard Bloomington. California lawmakers considered a report that officials are not prepared to deal with increased oil imports by train. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

California safety agencies are currently ill-prepared for a significant increase in transporting oil by rail through the state, but steps are being taken to catch up, experts told state lawmakers Thursday.

Oil imports by rail to California have grown from 70 tank cars in 2009 to nearly 9,500 tank cars in 2013, and they could increase to up to 230,000 carloads by 2016, according to the California Energy Commission.

The state needs to step in to address safety issues inadequately handled by the federal government, a California Interagency Rail Safety Group reported during a joint hearing of the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee and the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

“In sum, while the federal actions taken to date are significant, they do not go far enough to address the risks of increased oil by rail transport,” the group’s report concluded. “The state should press both the federal government and the railroad industry to take additional safety measures.”

The study group said trains transporting crude oil travel via the Feather River or Donner Pass to the San Francisco Bay Area, and via the Tehachapi Pass to Bakersfield and into Los Angeles.

The working group recommended the state strengthen its inspection and enforcement staff. There are only 52 positions to handle railroad operations and safety inspections, which the group’s study said is “seriously inadequate given current and projected numbers of oil shipments.”

The state budget approved Sunday by the Legislature allows for the hiring of seven additional rail inspectors for the California Public Utilities Commission, which should meet the need, said commission spokesman Paul King. He added that better tank cars and clear markings are needed to increase safety.

The working group also recommended more funding for local emergency responders, and better planning.

“Emergency responders currently lack basic, critical information needed to help plan for and respond to oil by rail incidents, including what resources railroads can provide in the event of an accident, and how they would respond to potential worst case scenarios,” the group found.

Lawmakers including Sen. Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) and Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata) said they have introduced bills to improve the ability to prevent and respond to rail accidents involving oil.

“It’s not acceptable for us to wait until something bad happens,” Pavley, chairwoman of the senate committee, said during the three-hour hearing at the Capitol. “Unless the locals have adequate resources to be prepared” and the state and federal officials cooperate, “we’re not going to be able to deal with it if a catastrophe strikes.”

She noted that a Federal Railroad Administration official declined to attend the hearing.

“We don’t have that cooperation yet,” she said.

For safe and healthy communities…