Tag Archives: California Energy Commission

Region north of Sacramento sees 200-300 tank cars carrying crude oil on a given day

Repost from The Appeal-Democrat (Sutter & Yuba counties in California)

Tracking trouble: Recent accidents highlight the dangers of transporting flammables on trains – including crude oil through Marysville

June 29, 2014, by David Bitton

It might be scarier to know how much of anything is being hauled through the Yuba-Sutter region via railroad. But it might be for the best to know exactly how much crude oil is going through; and it might help to put it into perspective.

Crude oil has been on the minds of communities with rails running through them since the booming of oil exploration and drilling in North Dakota. There have been a few high-profile accidents involving trains pulling tankers full of the crude oil.

It is now public record that Burlington Northern Santa Fe tank cars carrying North Dakota Bakken crude oil pass through Marysville about once a week. The information was released this past week from the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.

Railroad companies sought to to restrict such information to just emergency responders, citing security concerns, but the state, after some time, went ahead and released the information.

The transporting of crude oil from the Bakken Fields in North Dakota has come under greater scrutiny in the past year, with fears over the potential problems with the crude oil that is more volatile and flammable than oil from other regions.

There have been fiery derailments in North Dakota, Virginia, Alabama and Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, Canada, all involving Bakken crude oil.

The likelihood of a train derailment in Yuba-Sutter isn’t any greater or different than much of the rest of the country, area emergency responders agreed. But that doesn’t mean accidents don’t happen — they do. And due to those accidents, state and federal agencies are scrambling to tighten regulations.

Much of the concern comes from the ever-increasing quantity of crude oil entering the state by rail.

Crude oil heading to California refineries via rail has spiked in recent years from 498,000 barrels in 2010 to 6.3 million barrels in 2013, according to the California Energy Commission (a barrel contains 42 gallons of crude oil).

And by 2016, as much as 150 million barrels of crude oil, or 25 percent of total imports, could be coming into the state on rail, according to the California Energy Commission.

Less than 1 percent

Despite the increases, Aaron Hunt, director of corporate relations and media for Union Pacific, said crude oil entering California currently accounts for less than 1 percent of its business.

“Though we ship more grain, cement and timber than crude oil, Union Pacific has safely moved crude oil on behalf of our customers for decades,” Hunt said. “Seeking energy independence, U.S. companies have enthusiastically developed crude oil resources and rail has played a role in getting those resources to the right markets.”

Both Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific move commodities through Yuba-Sutter ranging from fruits and vegetables to sulfuric acid, anhydrous ammonia, chlorine and crude oil.

U.P. does not currently move crude oil in California originating from the Bakken region, Hunt said. But the rail company does move crude from other areas through this region.

The quantity is hard to pin down as Union Pacific isn’t releasing figures, but Bill Fuller, chairman of the Region 3 local emergency planning commission, which includes 13 Northern California counties and falls under the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, was told by the Union Pacific that as many as 200-300 tank cars carrying crude oil could be moving through Yuba-Sutter on a given day.

Well-traveled lines

Lt. Aaron Easton, deputy chief of the Marysville Police Department, said the two Union Pacific rail lines that pass through Marysville are well traveled.

“Amtrak’s passenger lines come through twice each day in the pre-dawn hours,” Easton said. “The cargo lines pass numerous times at all hours of the day and night,” he said. “Cargo includes large volumes of fuels, chemicals, and a variety of other potentially hazardous types of cargo.”

Last month, the U.S. Department of Transportation ordered the railroad carriers to notify the State Emergency Response Commission when a single train is transporting more than 1 million gallons of Bakken crude oil into their state.

Railroad companies including Union Pacific support more stringent standards for tank cars, which are used to transport flammable liquids, including crude oil.

Tank cars are owned or leased by the companies shipping products, not by the railroad companies.

The Association of America of Railroads has standards for tank cars that currently exceed the federal requirements and have been pressing the Department of Transportation to upgrade.

Existing tank cars would need to be retrofitted or phased out, Hunt said.

“The new standard requires a thicker, more puncture-resistant shell, jacket, and thermal protection,” Hunt said. “It also requires extra-protective head shields at both ends of the tank car and additional protection for top fittings.”

Y-S ready in case of emergency

The stories are scary and run the gamut.

In April, a fire erupted after more than a dozen tanker cars carrying Bakken crude oil derailed in Lynchburg, Va. No one was injured.

But last July, 47 people in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, Canada, were killed when a train carrying Bakken crude oil derailed and erupted in flames that destroyed part of the downtown area.

Though a derailment and fire of that magnitude isn’t likely in Yuba-Sutter, emergency procedures are in place in case of a train derailment.

The Yuba-Sutter Hazmat Response Team, which was formed in 2012, is made up of six fire agencies — Marysville, Linda, Olivehurst, Wheatland, Yuba City and Sutter County.

Many of its members are hazardous materials technicians or specialists and have received training on rail car emergencies including leaks, spills and derailments.

“The concept was to pool the resources of local hazardous materials response teams for better protection of Yuba and Sutter Counties,” said Sutter County Fire Chief Dan Yager. “A large-scale incident involving any release of known or unknown substances would trigger the activation of this team.”

The six agencies agreed that their immediate course of action would be to determine the scope of the incident, call for mutual aid and help those in need.

“Our mission is to protect life, the environment and property, in that order,” Yager said.

If a large-scale evacuation is necessary, Yuba County Undersheriff Jerry Read said his department and the California Highway Patrol have worked together to create routes based on the scenario.

A unified command structure would be established with fire, law enforcement, county office of emergency services and railroad representatives working together, said Linda Fire Chief Richard Webb.

“Continued training and planning are the mechanisms we will continue to use in an effort to mitigate the risks associated with a derailment,” Webb said. “The projection is for Bakken crude oil shipments by rail to spike up dramatically over the next several years, which would increase the risk of a derailment possibilities.”

CAL Energy Commission workshop: ‘wake up call’ on crude by rail

Repost from The Contra Costa Times
[Editor: Significant quote for Benicia and others along the Union Pacific rail line: “Union Pacific Railroad Spokeswoman Liisa Lawson Stark said the company is not transporting any Bakken crude into the state, but it is bringing in other types of oil.”  – RS]

California trying to catch up to dangers of crude oil shipped on railroads

By Doug Oakley, Oakland Tribune, 06/25/2014

BERKELEY — California agencies have very little authority to regulate a massive increase in crude oil shipments by rail, and only now are they realizing the magnitude of the potentially explosive situation, according to state officials speaking Wednesday at a workshop sponsored by the California Energy Commission.

“It’s a wake up call when you look at the projections,” said commission Chair Robert Weisenmiller. “We have to plan for the worst case.”

Only in the last month, thanks to an order by the U.S. Department of Transportation, have railroads begun to disclose to the state Office of Emergency Services shipments of 1million gallons or more of highly flammable Bakken crude oil. Before that happened May 7, nobody knew anything about the shipments or where they were going, Weisenmiller said.

The Valero Refinery is seen in Benicia, Calif. on Monday, May 6, 2013. The Bay Area’s five refineries have moved toward acquiring controversial
The Valero Refinery is seen in Benicia, Calif. on Monday, May 6, 2013. The Bay Area’s five refineries have moved toward acquiring controversial Canadian tar sands crude through rail delivery. (Kristopher Skinner/Bay Area News Group)

Crude oil rail shipments have increased 506 percent in 2013 to 6.3 million barrels, according to a report by the state Interagency Rail Safety Working Group released June 10. That number could increase to 150 million barrels of oil in 2016, it said. Petroleum spills on railroads in California increased from 98 in 2010 to 182 in 2013, according to the Office of Emergency Services.

In California, crude goes by rail to the cities of Richmond, Sacramento, Bakersfield, Carson, Long Beach and Vernon, according to the energy commission.

The only thing state and local governments can do to try and prevent a catastrophic disaster is to enforce federal rules and prepare local first responders, officials said. The regulatory effort falls on the California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Peevey.

“I’m not enthusiastic about having tens of thousands of tank cars running around California because accidents are inevitable,” Peevey said at the workshop. “There’s been a huge increase in volume and we have to step up our awareness and activities, in cooperation with the federal government, but the feds have the ultimate responsibility.”

The commission recently added seven rail safety inspectors who look at rail cars, railroad lines, bridges and shipping requirements, bringing the total to 59 inspectors statewide, which Peevey said was adequate for this year.

Peevey dismissed criticism that the PUC has been too easy on industry it is supposed to regulate, and assured the public it is up to the task.

“We’ve been pretty darn tough,” he said.

Weisenmiller said the state first needs to identify the areas most at risk for crashes and make sure the tracks are maintained. He acknowledged there is no way to prevent shipments from coming into the state, but the state can “get its act together and reach out to communities near rail lines and provide first responders with information and technical expertise,” so they can respond to an accident.

As the state tries to catch up and wrap its collective mind around the increased shipments, oil companies are attempting to add projects that would bring in more oil by rail.

Valero Refining Co. is planning on 100 cars per day to its Benicia facility by the first quarter of 2015; West Pac Energy is planning 70 cars per day to a facility in Pittsburg; Phillips 66 is planning a crude-by-rail project in Santa Maria that could bring shipments through the Bay Area; Alon USA is planning 200 cars a day in Bakersfield and Plains All American is planning for 200 cars a day in Bakersfield, according to the Oil by Rail Safety in California report.

Union Pacific Railroad Spokeswoman Liisa Lawson Stark said the company is not transporting any Bakken crude into the state, but it is bringing in other types of oil.

But Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is bringing in nine full train loads of Bakken per month into California, said spokeswoman LaDonna DiCamillo. She did not know how many tank cars each train has or what the actual volume is.

Lawson Stark said that even though railroads are now required to report shipments of the highly flammable Bakken crude oil to the Office of Emergency Services, the information most likely will not be available to the public. A spokesman for the office did not immediately return phone calls.

California Energy Commission workshop on trends in sources of crude oil (Wed. 6/25/14)

Repost from California Energy Commission
[Editor: this 9am-5pm workshop will have a broad range of knowledgeable presenters.  Agenda here.  Sorry for short notice.  – RS]

Lead Commissioner Workshop on Trends in Sources of Crude Oil

Wednesday, June 25, 2014, 9:00 AM

The California Energy Commission Lead Commissioner on the Integrated Energy Policy Report will conduct a workshop to highlight changing trends in California’s sources of crude oil with emphasis on the potential growth of crude oil transport to California by rail, and the impacts of these trends on the transportation energy market and existing government policies. The discussions will focus on existing and possible new roles of federal, state, and local government to address market changes.

Commissioner Janea A. Scott, Chair Robert Weisenmiller, and Commissioner Karen Douglas will be in attendance. CPUC President Michael R. Peevey will also be in attendance. Commissioner Scott is the Lead Commissioner for the 2014 IEPR Update and the Lead Commissioner on Transportation. Other Commissioners of the California Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission may attend and participate in the workshop. The workshop will be held:

June 25, 2014 9:00 AM
Berkeley City College Auditorium
2050 Center Street
Berkeley, California 94704
(Wheelchair Accessible)

Remote Access Available by Computer or Phone via WebEx
Presentations and audio from the meeting will be broadcast via our WebEx web meeting service. For additional details on how to participate via WebEx, please see the notice at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2014_energypolicy/documents/#06252014

Computer Log on with a Direct Phone Number:
– Please go to https://energy.webex.com/ec/ and enter the unique meeting number 924 482 257
– When prompted, enter your information and the following meeting password meeting@9 . (Please note that password is case sensitive.)

For More Information:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2014_energypolicy/documents/index.html#06252014

Agenda  (Go here for the detailed timed agenda.)
This workshop will address current and anticipated trends in petroleum, crude oil distribution logistics, safety requirements and oversight of crude oil by rail transport, and California policies and activities designed to diversify the mix of future transportation fuels. Staff will facilitate discussions on these topics from industry, government agency, and academic perspectives. Participants will be asked to present information and insights on crude oil trends, the need for changes in government oversight responsibilities and regulatory requirements, and the potential options to reduce the need for petroleum as a transportation fuel.

Background

California obtains crude oil from foreign imports, Alaska, and in-state production. Since 2003, crude oil production from Alaska and California has declined while foreign imports have increased to over 50 percent of the state’s supply. Imports from Alaska and foreign sources are delivered to California by marine vessel. However, California’s crude oil sources appear to be shifting to new supplies, spurred by hydraulic fracturing and other extraction technology advances in North Dakota and other states and development of Canadian oil sands. Shipments of these new resources by rail or by barge from the state of Washington are increasing and could represent over 25 percent of California’s crude oil within a few years, depending on the economics of the extraction, transport, and development and approval of receiving/storage terminals in California. The development of the Monterey shale formation in California, while offering significant production potential, has not progressed primarily because the complex geology of the formation makes it expensive to develop.

California’s gasoline demand is expected to decline from 14.6 billion gallons in 2013 to 12.7 billion gallons in 2020 as the result of improvements in corporate average fuel economy standards (CAFE), requiring automakers to achieve 35.5 miles per gallon in 2016 and 54.5 mpg by 2025. Diesel and jet fuel are expected to grow at a rate of 1 – 2 percent per year, spurred by increased freight movement and other factors. California’s net crude oil demand to produce refined petroleum products is expected to decline in this period. California refineries also produce petroleum products for Arizona and Nevada and may be exporting the refined products to international markets.

Federal and California laws, regulations, and incentives designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reduce transportation demand, and increase the development and use of alternative fuels as a petroleum displacement have begun to show modest changes in the transportation energy market and could be poised for significant growth and displacement of petroleum fuels. The federal government provides the primary oversight of rail safety with additional roles by state agencies. California local governments review the environmental impacts of modifications and new construction of crude oil storage and delivery terminals under the California Environmental Quality Act regulations.

Public Comment

Oral Comments. The IEPR Lead Commissioner will accept oral comments during the

workshop. Comments may be limited to three minutes per speaker. Any comments will

become part of the public record in this proceeding.

Written Comments. Written comments should be submitted to the Dockets Unit by

July 10, 2014. Written comments will also be accepted at the workshop, however, the

Energy Commission may not have time to review them before the conclusion of the

workshop. All written comments will become part of the public record of this proceeding.

Additionally, written comments may be posted to the Energy Commission’s website for

this proceeding.

The Energy Commission encourages comments by e-mail. Please include your name

and any organization name. Comments should be in a downloadable, searchable format

such as Microsoft® Word (.doc) or Adobe® Acrobat® (.pdf). Please include the docket

number 14-IEP-1F and indicate Trends in Sources of Crude Oil in the subject line. Send

comments to docket@energy.ca.gov and copy the technical lead staff at

Gordon.Schremp@energy.ca.gov.

If you prefer, you may send a paper copy of your comments to:

California Energy Commission

Dockets Office, MS-4

Re: Docket No. 14-IEP-1F

1516 Ninth Street

Sacramento, CA 95814-5512

Public Adviser and Other Commission Contacts

The Energy Commission’s Public Adviser’s Office provides the public assistance in

participating in Energy Commission proceedings. If you want information on how to

participate in this forum, please contact Alana Mathews, Public Advisor, at

(916) 654-4489 or toll free at (800) 822-6228, or by e-mail at

PublicAdviser@energy.ca.gov.

If you have a disability and require assistance to participate, please contact Lou Quiroz

at LQuiroz@energy.ca.gov or (916) 654-5146 at least five days in advance.

Media inquiries should be sent to the Media and Public Communications Office at

(916) 654-4989, or by e-mail at mediaoffice@energy.ca.gov.

If you have questions on the technical subject matter of this meeting, please call Gordon

Schremp, Senior Fuels Specialist, at (916) 654-4887 or e-mail at

Gordon.Schremp@energy.ca.gov. For general questions regarding the IEPR

proceeding, please contact Lynette Green, IEPR project manager, at (916) 653-2728 or

by e-mail at Lynette.Green@energy.ca.gov.

The service list for the 2014 IEPR Update is handled electronically. Notices and

documents for this proceeding are posted to the Energy Commission website at

www.energy.ca.gov/2014_energypolicy/index.html. When new information is posted, an

e-mail will be sent to those on the energy policy e-mail list server. We encourage those

who are interested in receiving these notices to sign up for the list server through the

website at www.energy.ca.gov/listservers/index.html.

Remote Attendance

You may participate in this meeting through WebEx, the Energy Commission’s online

meeting service. Presentations will appear on your computer screen, and you may listen

to the audio via your computer or telephone. Please be aware that the meeting may be

recorded.

To join a meeting:

VIA COMPUTER: Go to

https://energy.webex.com/energy/onstage/g.php?d=924482257&t=a and enter the

unique meeting number: 924 482 257. When prompted, enter your information and the

following meeting password: meeting@9

The “Join Conference” menu will offer you a choice of audio connections:

1. To call into the meeting: Select “I will call in” and follow the on-screen directions.

2. International Attendees: Click on the “Global call-in number” link.

3. To have WebEx call you: Enter your phone number and click “Call Me.”

4. To listen over the computer: If you have a broadband connection, and a headset

or a computer microphone and speakers, you may use VolP (Internet audio) by

going to the Audio menu, clicking on “Use Computer Headset,” then “Call Using

Computer.”

VIA TELEPHONE ONLY (no visual presentation): Call 1-866-469-3239 (toll-free in the

U.S. and Canada). When prompted, enter the unique meeting number: 924 482 257.

International callers may select their number from

https://energy.webex.com/energy/globalcallin.php.

VIA MOBILE ACCESS: Access to WebEx meetings is now available from your mobile

device. To download an app, go to www.webex.com/overview/mobile-meetings.html.

If you have difficulty joining the meeting, please call the WebEx Technical Support

number at 1-866-229-3239

Availability of Documents

Documents, agenda and presentations for this meeting will be available online at

www.energy.ca.gov/2014_energypolicy/documents/index.html by June 20.

Date: June 16, 2014

JANEA A. SCOTT

Lead Commissioner

2014 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update

Mail Lists: energy policy, transportation, altfuels

 

 

 

California lawmakers assail Feds for timid handling of rail oil shipments

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

State lawmakers assail Feds for timid handling of rail oil shipments

By Timm Herdt, Ventura County Star, June 20, 2014

SACRAMENTO — State lawmakers, concerned about the safety risks associated with a sixfold increase in crude oil shipments by rail into California, hoped on Thursday to get an update on what the federal government is doing.

But a regional official of the Federal Railroad Administration who had been scheduled to testify before a joint committee hearing regarding crude oil rail transport was a last-minute no-show.

Sen. Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills, said she received a call on the eve of the hearing from a high-level federal administrator in Washington, D.C., informing her that no one from the agency would testify.

It will take coordination between the state and federal governments to protect California from a spike in accidents that has led to fiery derailments and oil spills elsewhere, Pavley noted.

“We don’t have that cooperation yet,” she said. “There are a lot of things they can do. They need to step up to the plate.”

Other lawmakers — who are mostly powerless to act because they are pre-empted by federal law — shared her view.

A point of contention is the belief of many state and local officials that information about upcoming shipments of carloads of highly flammable crude oil should be publicly available. But railroads, citing national security concerns, have released that information only to emergency-response agencies, which must agree not to publicly disclose it.

“We’ve seen what happens when they explode,” said Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, chairwoman of the Joint Legislative Committee on Emergency Management. “It sure seems like in California our hands are tied. There’s so little we can do.”

Jackson asserted that security concerns should dictate public disclosure.

“National security means the security of people who live in the nation,” she said.

Under pressure from state officials in Montana, it appears federal officials may have decided to relent on that issue.

The Associated Press reported Wednesday that the U.S. Department of Transportation has ordered railroads to give state officials specifics on oil-train routes, and Montana officials intend to publicly release that information next week.

Rail-oil shipments have skyrocketed across the United States and Canada in recent months because there are no pipelines from which to ship oil extracted from the Bakken shale fields in North Dakota.

In the last year, derailments have resulted in fiery explosions in three Canadian provinces and in Virginia, and there have been more rail accidents involving oil spills than over the previous 30 years combined.

In Northern California, the issue has become front-page news in recent weeks, as city officials in the East San Francisco Bay city of Benicia are considering a permit application from a Valero oil refinery that would enable the refinery to accept two, 50-car trains every day.

If that refinery expansion is approved, the trains would wind through a narrow mountain pass in the Feather River Valley, and then pass through the populated corridor from Sacramento to Benicia, passing within a quarter mile of 27 schools.

Similar scenarios could unfold elsewhere around the state, testified Gordon Schremp of the state Energy Commission. He said six refinery projects have been proposed to accommodate rail shipments — two in Bakersfield, and one each in Benicia, Pittsburg, Santa Maria and the Port of Stockton.

As those projects come on line, Schremp said the commission expects the percentage of oil coming into California by rail to increase from 1 percent today to 23 percent by 2016. Most imported oil now arrives in the state either via marine tankers or by pipeline from Alaska.

A report issued last week by the state’s Interagency Rail Safety Task Force lists thousands of miles of track it identifies as “areas of concern.”

The new state budget that Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign Friday includes a 6.5 cent per-barrel fee on refineries to fund an expansion of the state Office of Oil Spills and Prevention and also hire new rail, bridge and railcar inspectors at the state Public Utilities Commission.

State lawmakers, who are pre-empted from taking such steps as requiring trains to take specific routes and imposing state-based safety standards on tanker cars, agreed their primary focus needs to be on preparing emergency agencies to respond to rail accidents involving toxic materials such as crude oil.

“This is an unusually fast-growing development,” said Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis. “It’s really important to have emergency procedures in place.”