Tag Archives: California Energy Commission

Bakken Crude, California Regulation, Crude By Rail, Emergency Readiness & Response, Federal Regulation (U.S.), Massive increase in crude-by-rail, Rail inspection, Tank car design, Train speed

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

California Regulation, Crude By Rail, Federal Regulation (U.S.)

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.

California Regulation, Crude By Rail, Federal Regulation (U.S.)

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

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

Lawmakers voice concerns over oil trains in California

Jun 19, 2014

KCRAvideoFreightTrainFears_2014-06-19png

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KCRA) —State lawmakers learned at a hearing Thursday that there is very little they can do to regulate the growing number of oil trains entering California, and even tracking their movements is proving difficult.

“I almost feel like our hands in California are tied,” said Hannah-Beth Jackson, a Democratic state senator from Santa Barbara, during a joint hearing of several Assembly and Senate committees.

Watch report: State lawmakers voice concerns over oil trains

Paul King, deputy director of the Office of Rail Safety at the California Public Utilities Commission, testified that the recently passed state budget will allow his agency to hire seven additional rail inspectors.

However, he said public concerns about the shipments are justified.

“The risks are very high,” he said. “These things explode when they derail with any force at all.”

An official from the California Energy Commission told lawmakers the amount of crude oil imported into the state by rail has increased by more than 90 percent during the first four months of the year, compared to the same time last year.

He said oil trains are headed to facilities in McClellan Park in Sacramento County and the Bay Area city of Richmond.

He said five more terminal facilities are planned and a facility at the Port of Stockton that could receive 6,500 barrels per day was in the early stages.

“Were there to be a derailment in the Sacramento railyard, a scant distance from here, everyone in downtown Sacramento, including the State Capitol, would be threatened,” said Assembly Member Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento.

Lawmakers also expressed concern about the environmental impact and the potential effect on drinking water if a derailment were to happen near a major waterway or reservoir.

Jayni Hein, a U.C. Berkeley law professor testified that regulating railroads is normally the job of the federal government and that states can intervene in only limited circumstances.

Recently, the federal government ordered rail companies to begin sharing information about oil train shipments with state and local governments.

However, state officials testified the reports they have received so far are for shipments that have already arrived.

“That’s unacceptable. They need that information earlier than later.  I think the public has the right to know too,” said Sen. Fran Pavley, D-Aguora Hills, who chaired the hearing.

Juan Acosta of BNSF Railway said his company would consider sharing shipment details with state officials but wanted assurance the information will not become public.

If it does, he said, the trains might become targets.

“That’s the danger, a terrorist or somebody who’s misguided or who has some bad intention.  I think that’s the concern we have,” Acosta told KCRA 3.

Jan Rein of Midtown Sacramento testified at the hearing.

She later told KCRA 3 she lives a few blocks from the tracks and used to love to hear the trains rumble by, but not anymore.

“I don’t want to be incinerated in my own home,” she said.

California Regulation, Crude By Rail, Federal Regulation (U.S.)

Vallejo Times-Herald: Joint Legislative Oversight Hearing on Transport of California Crude Oil by Rail

Repost from The Vallejo Times-Herald
[Editor: Note near the end of this story, “Patterson, who joined Henke on a four-person panel addressing on-the-ground risks, did not address the merits of Valero’s proposed crude-by-rail project in Benicia.”  Patterson read a prepared statement by her personal attorney affirming her right to offer testimony, and was commended later in the hearing by Senator Wolk.  Mayor Patterson’s testimony can be viewed here – scroll ahead to minute 1:22:20 and 1:43:45.  – RS]

Benicia Mayor Patterson testifies at hearing about oil-by-rail risks

Lawmakers looking to address safety concern
By Tony Burchyns, 06/19/2014

As state lawmakers look to address the risks from a surge in oil train traffic, Benicia Mayor Elizabeth Patterson joined others Thursday in testifying at a legislative oversight hearing in Sacramento about the need for more actions to prevent and respond to accidents that could threaten public safety.

In her remarks, Patterson asked whether state and local agencies are prepared to deal with deadly tanker rail accidents like last year’s explosive derailment in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, which killed 47 people.

“If you are in an industrial area or a cultural center or a school the actual first-responders are those people who are affected,” Patterson said. “And that’s (the) ultimate primary concern that I have that we don’t put people at risk and that we don’t have the children or the people going to a concert or workers or residents exposed to that kind of threat.”

Driven by increased North American oil production, California and the nation are experiencing a surge in oil-by-rail traffic.

In California, imports grew from only 70 tanker carloads in 2009 to nearly 9,5000 carloads last year, and could increase up to 230,000 carloads – a quarter of all the crude oil refined in the state – in 2016, according to the California Energy Commission.

About 3.8 million Californians who live along train routes face increased safety risks posed by new unloading facilities planned or under construction, according to a study by the Natural Resource Defense Council.

Thursday’s hearing provided an opportunity for regulators, community members and first-responders to look at what the risks and needs are in terms of safety and response.

Issues raised included uncertainty over the timing and comprehensiveness of new federal rail tank car standards and operational rules, a need to more fully assess the risks from increased oil train traffic in California and a lack of timely and complete information about hazardous cargo before it passes through local communities.

The need for more training and resources for first-responders was also identified.

“Your immediate concern is the incident that takes place today, tomorrow and next week,” said Kurt Henke, chief of the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District.

Patterson, who joined Henke on a four-person panel addressing on-the-ground risks, did not address the merits of Valero’s proposed crude-by-rail project in Benicia. If approved, the project would allow Valero to bring in up to 100 tanker carloads of crude per day to its Benicia refinery.

The project’s draft environmental impact report was released Tuesday.

The proposed rail route would pass through rural and urban areas, including parts of Sacramento and Davis.