By Roger Straw, Editor [Editor: UPDATE ON 8/26/15: CONFIRMED: the first Planning Commission hearing will be on Tuesday, September 29, 6:30pm at City Hall Council Chambers. If additional speakers wish to offer public comments, subsequent hearings will be held on Wednesday, September 30, Thursday, October 1 and Thursday, October 8 (presumably at the same time and location?). The 45-day public comment period will close on October 15. – RS]
Benicia Planning Commission hearings will likely begin on Tuesday, September 29, 2015
The City of Benicia posted a notice on August 13 that the next Planning Commission hearing on Valero’s proposed Crude by Rail project will be held on Tuesday, September 29, 2015. If the hearing is held on that date, the Commissioners and public will begin their review of the RECIRCULATED Draft Environmental Impact Report, time and location yet to be announced.
The Planning Division’s 8/13/15 listing of Current Planning Projects shows a Planning Commission meeting on 9/29, designated for review of Valero’s Use Permit, and notes, “Railway extension inside refinery. Recirculated Draft EIR anticipated to be released for public review period on August 31, 2015.”
As of today according to the City’s Planning Department, the R-DEIR will be released as scheduled, on August 31, 2015. (Note correction: previously published information that the release would be on 8/29 was in error.)
We will let you know when dates and locations of future hearings are confirmed.
Maryland judge orders release of oil train reports
HIGHLIGHTS
• Case marks first time railroads have lost on the issue in court
• Judge not persuaded that release would harm security, business
• Companies that filed 2014 lawsuit have until Sept. 4 to appeal
By Curtis Tate, August 17, 2015
Tank cars loaded with crude oil head east at Hurricane, W. Va., in May 2014. A Maryland judge has ordered the release of oil train reports to McClatchy and other news organizations. West Virginia and a handful of other states agreed to keep the reports confidential. Curtis Tate – McClatchy
WASHINGTON – A Maryland judge rejected two rail carriers’ arguments that oil train reports should be withheld from the public, ordering them released to McClatchy and other news organizations that sought them.
The ruling isn’t the first time railroads have lost their bid to keep the oil train reports secret, but it is the first court decision recognizing the public’s right to see them.
The U.S. Department of Transportation began requiring in May 2014 that railroads inform states of large shipments of crude oil after a series of derailments with spills, fires, explosions and evacuations. Since February, six more major oil train derailments have occurred in North America.
Nonetheless, some railroads have continued to press their case that the reports should be exempt from disclosure under state open records laws. Most states shared the documents anyway, and Pennsylvania and Texas did so after McClatchy appealed. Maryland is the only state that was taken to court after it said it would release the reports.
Norfolk Southern and CSX sued the Maryland Department of the Environment in July 2014 to stop the state agency from releasing the records to McClatchy and the Associated Press. They have until Sept. 4 to appeal the decision, issued Friday by Judge Lawrence Fletcher-Hill of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.
Both companies, which transport crude oil to East Coast refineries concentrated in Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, said they would review the decision.
Dave Pidgeon, a spokesman for Norfolk Southern, said the company would “respond at the appropriate time and venue.”
Melanie Cost, a spokeswoman for CSX, said the railroad “remains committed to safely moving these and all other shipments on its network.”
The ruling isn’t the first time railroads have lost their bid to keep the oil train reports secret, but it is the first court decision recognizing the public’s right to access them.
In his 20-page opinion, Fletcher-Hill was not persuaded by arguments that releasing the oil train reports would harm the railroads’ security and business interests. He also dismissed the relevance of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s May final rule addressing the safety of oil trains. The companies had argued that the final rule supported their claims.
He also ordered the companies to pay any open court costs.
In a statement, Maryland Secretary of the Environment Ben Grumbles said the agency was pleased with the ruling and that it is “committed to transparency in government.”
Rail transportation of Bakken crude oil, produced through hydraulic fracturing of shale formations in North Dakota, has grown exponentially in the past five years. However, a series of fiery derailments, including one in Quebec in 2013 that killed 47 people, have raised numerous concerns about public safety, environmental protection and emergency planning and response.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx issued an emergency order on May 7, 2014, that required any railroad shipping 1 million gallons or more of Bakken crude oil through a state to inform that state’s emergency response commission what routes the trains would take and which counties they would cross, as well as provide a reasonable estimate of how many trains to expect in a week.
Beginning in June 2014, McClatchy submitted open records requests in 30 states for the oil train reports, including Maryland.
McClatchy was able to glean some of the details in the Maryland report through a Freedom of Information Act request to Amtrak, which owns part of Norfolk Southern’s oil train route in the state. The subsequent release of oil train reports in Pennsylvania revealed more about such operations in Maryland.
On Monday, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf released an 84-page assessment of oil train safety in the state, which examined derailment risk, tank car failures and regulatory oversight. Some Maryland lawmakers have called for the state to perform a similar assessment.
Repost from the Benicia Herald [Editor: No link is provided for this letter because the Benicia Herald does not publish letters in its online edition. A version of this letter also appeared in the Contra Costa Times. – RS]
Allowing crude by rail is asking for trouble
By Kathy Kerridge, August 16, 2015, Benicia Herald
It’s time for Benicia and California to say no to bringing in crude oil by rail (CBR). This is the highly explosive and flammable Bakken crude from North Dakota, which exploded in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, killing 47. This is what Valero wants to bring into Benicia and other refineries want to bring into the Bay Area. There have been 30 major crude by rail accidents since 2012, including the latest on July 17 in Montana that spilled 35,000 gallons from a train that was going the legal speed limit.
The refineries also want to bring in tar sands crude from Alberta, Canada. A spill of tar sands crude in water cannot be cleaned up. The substances that dilute the tar sands (like benzene) so it can be transported evaporate and the tar sands sink to the bottom of the water. $1 billion, yes that’s right billion, has been spent on the Kalamazoo River spill of tar sands and the river is still not clean. Do we want a spill on the Benicia Rail Bridge into the Carquinez Strait or one in the Suisun Marsh? How about the Feather River Canyon where a train carrying corn recently derailed sending its cargo into the river?
Say no to CRB going over high hazard areas. Every rail line into the state goes through one. Say no to CBR by earthquake faults. Say no to trains carrying crude in cars designed to carry corn syrup. Say no to the new cars which have also split and spilled in recent derailments. Say no to bomb trains going through densely populated areas like Sacramento, Davis, and the East Bay. Just say no to putting people, our water sources and our environment at risk
Heather J. Carlson, Aug 15, 2015 10:13 am
The Olmsted County Sheriff’s Deparment owns this retired U.S. Military MRAP Armored Vehicle. Scott Jacobson
Local law enforcement agencies applying for armored vehicles from the Pentagon cited high-profile visitors to Mayo Clinic, Rochester’s expected population growth and the Prairie Island nuclear plant in their requests.
Mother Jones recently made public more than 450 law enforcement agencies’ applications for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs. Those documents show that in 2013 the Austin Police Department, Olmsted County Sheriff’s Office and Goodhue County Sheriff’s Office all applied for an armored vehicle.
In its application, the Olmsted County Sheriff’s Office noted that “Rochester/Olmsted County is home to the Mayo Clinic which routinely hosts Foreign Heads of State and VIPs.” It also mentioned the potential population growth expected to accompany Destination Medical Center — a $6 billion initiative to transform Rochester into a global destination for health care.
The county’s application proved to be successful, with the sheriff’s office receiving an armored vehicle in 2013. Capt. Scott Behrns, of the Olmsted County Sheriff’s Office, filled out the Pentagon application and said having so many VIPs and foreign heads of state visiting the city every year is a security concern.
“We get more VIPs here than people realize, I think. And a lot of it is very low key and handled well, but when they are here it does pose a security threat and we certainly don’t want anything to happen to a visiting VIP, a foreign head of state while they are here visiting the clinic,” he said.
Behrns said the MRAP isn’t routinely used for these visits but is available in case something goes wrong and individuals need to be rescued quickly from a dangerous situation.
Rochester Police Chief Roger Peterson said it’s difficult to estimate just how many foreign dignitaries local authorities help protect because it can vary dramatically from year to year. Generally, the police department teams up with the Secret Service or the State Department to provide security.
“It’s not used as a standard measure, but if things do go horribly awry, there are resources you can rely on. Fortunately, we haven’t had to make that decision. All of the visits we’ve had have gone well,” Peterson said.
The use of armored vehicles and other military equipment has come under increased scrutiny since last year’s police shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown and the violence that followed in Ferguson, Mo.
Billions of dollars worth of military equipment from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been given to local law enforcement agencies across the country.
A seven-member police oversight commission was recently established in Rochester to review police policies and practices, and that commission could address the issue of military equipment. Commission Chairman Allan Witz could not be reached for comment for this article.
A way to prevent violence?
Local law enforcement agencies that have received armored vehicles say they have helped prevent possible violence. Behrns said Olmsted County’s MRAP was sent to Fillmore County last year after a potentially armed suspect with explosives barricaded himself in a bus on a remote farmyard. After the armored vehicle arrived, authorities were able to arrest the man peacefully.
“(The suspect) did make a statement to the effect that because we had the big vehicle, he knew were weren’t leaving and he decided to give up,” Behrns said.
Fears about the safety of officers prompted the Austin Police Department to apply for an MRAP, according to Austin Police Detective Todd Clennon. The idea to try to get the military vehicle came after a woman was shot in rural Mower County. Police were faced with the tough task of trying to apprehend armed men on the property, which had a long driveway surrounded by an open field.
“Ultimately, my guys used great skill and decision making and jumped in the back of a 4-wheel drive pickup truck and bounced their way through a mile of a corn field with their weapons and gear,” Clennon said.
The police managed to get behind a farm building and arrest the men safely. But the incident got Clennon thinking and he decided to look into getting an armed vehicle for these types of high-risk arrest situations. They applied in 2013, citing that the police department and Mower County Sheriff’s Office have a joint Special Incident Response Team. They received an armored vehicle in 2013.
Goodhue County rejects armed vehicle grant
Goodhue County Sheriff’s Office applied for a grant in 2013 for an armored vehicle, noting that the department is responsible for responding to threats against Prairie Island nuclear plant. The department’s initial request was unsuccessful. They applied again last year and late last month, the department learned it had received a grant for a $325,000 armored vehicle.
But before the department can get the vehicle, the county board has to sign off on an $81,000 local match. Goodhue County Sheriff Scott McNurlin said last year that the board voted unanimously in favor of the department applying for the grant and planned to set the money aside for the local match. But on Thursday, the Goodhue County Board of Commissioners voted 3 to 2 against accepting the grant. Opponents cited concerns about the local cost. It is possible that the board may reconsider the issue at its Tuesday meeting.
The county has a 32-year-old armored vehicle, but McNurlin said its “woefully outdated.” The new vehicle would have a pressurized interior, making it an ideal rescue vehicle in the case of a potential nuclear disaster or oil train derailment.
“If there ever was an unfortunate incident at the power plant and a release was imminent or could occur, we can use the vehicle to actually evacuate people because it has the self-contained unit,” he said.
Goodhue County Commissioner Brad Anderson voted in favor of getting the armored vehicle and said he hopes fellow commissioners will change their minds and back the proposal.
Anderson added, “They should have said no last year if they seriously didn’t want to do it. Times haven’t changed.”
