Category Archives: Emergency Readiness & Response

Bakken Crude, Emergency Readiness & Response, Explosion, Hazmat notification, Massive increase in crude-by-rail, Oil spill, Positive Train Control, Rail tank cars, Volatile gases

US Rep. Thompson & colleagues urge action on oil train safety

Repost from Representative Mike Thompson’s website
[Editor: see also the full text of the Reps’ letter below this press release.  – RS]

Reps. Thompson, Matsui, Miller & Garamendi Send Letter To Secretary Of Transportation Foxx Requesting Immediate Action To Improve Safety Of Crude Oil Shipped By Rail

Jul 1, 2014  |  Press Release
Letter calls on DOT to expedite rules and issue regulations to improve safety of crude shipments and prevent future accidents

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Representatives Mike Thompson (CA-05), Doris Matsui (CA-06), George Miller (CA-11) and John Garamendi (CA-03) sent a letter to Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx expressing strong concern over the increased shipments of crude oil by rail in their districts, and calling for action to increase safety.

“We are especially concerned with the high risks involved with transporting lighter, more flammable crude in densely populated areas. Should spills or explosions occur, as we have seen over the last year, the consequences could be disastrous, costing lives, damaging property, and harming the environment,” the members wrote. “While we are pleased with the many actions that DOT has taken thus far and we believe that your agency is making steady progress, we must still emphasize the utmost importance of demonstrated compliance with federal regulations by the railroad and petroleum industries.  We believe there must be accountability and comprehensive oversight, as well as adherence to the most stringent of standards.”

Specifically, the letter calls on the Department of Transportation (DOT) to:

  • Provide a report on the level of compliance by the railroad and petroleum industry to the May 7th Emergency Order that requires information be shared in a timely manner with local entities.
  • Issue a rulemaking that requires stripping out the most volatile elements from Bakken crude before it is loaded onto rail cars.
  • Expedite the issuance of a final rulemaking to require the full implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) technology for all railroads transporting lighter crude and provide a status report on the progress of PTC implementation to date.
  • Expedite the issuance of a rulemaking that requires phasing out old rail cars for newer, retrofitted cars.

The full text of the letter is below:

July 1, 2014

The Honorable Anthony Foxx
Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20590

Dear Secretary Foxx:

As members of the California Congressional Delegation, we are writing to voice our strong concerns over the increased shipment of crude oil by rail in our districts and the safety risks associated with this upsurge. Northern California is already seeing a significant increase in the movement of oil through our local communities, and the number of shipments is only expected to rise in the coming years. We commend the Department of Transportation (DOT) for its focus thus far on more information sharing, slower speeds, and reinforced railcars. As you know, the solutions for this important safety issue must be multi-pronged and implemented as quickly as possible, which requires a strong and coordinated effort by the federal government to achieve an effective solution.

We are especially concerned with the high risks involved with transporting lighter, more flammable crude in densely populated areas. Should spills or explosions occur, as we have seen over the last year, the consequences could be disastrous, costing lives, damaging property, and harming the environment. While we are pleased with the many actions that DOT has taken thus far and we believe that your agency is making steady progress, we must still emphasize the utmost importance of demonstrated compliance with federal regulations by the railroad and petroleum industries.  We believe there must be accountability and comprehensive oversight, as well as adherence to the most stringent of standards.

We appreciate your agency’s May 7th Emergency Order that requires carriers to provide State Emergency Response Commissions with advance notice because it is imperative that local emergency managers and first responders are given up-to-date information on what materials are being transported through their regions, when these transports are occurring, and where this crude oil will be stored. But, because improved coordination and communication between the oil companies, railroads, and emergency managers is so fundamental to the safe transport of highly flammable lighter crude, we request a full report on the level of compliance by the oil companies and railroads to date.

Additionally, we urge your agency to prioritize implementing solutions in an expeditious manner that we believe will better protect our communities. One such solution would remove a significant amount of the volatile elements, flammable natural gas liquids (NGLs), from the crude before it is loaded onto rail cars and we understand that regulators are already considering this course of action. In order for industry to comply, they would need to build small processing towers known as stabilizers that shave off NGLs from crude before it is ultimately loaded for transport. Stabilizers are common in other parts of the country and we understand that this could also be feasible through equipment leasing.  Because your agency has explicitly stated that all options are on table, we believe that requiring the petroleum industry to make lighter crude shipments by rail less volatile must be a part of the solution. And, although building infrastructure will require time and investment, industry experts have also publicly stated that stripping NGLs from lighter crude is a part of the equation for addressing railcar safety.

Furthermore, we believe that positive train control (PTC) advanced technology should be fully implemented as it is designed to automatically stop or slow a train before accidents can occur.  Derailments must be avoided at all costs and PTC should be prioritized due to its accurate prevention of train-to-train collisions and derailments caused by excessive speed and unauthorized movement of trains.  We believe that an expedited final rulemaking requiring full implementation of PTC is needed for those railroads that will be transporting lighter crude by rail through our communities.

Yet another solution that has been considered and in some cases the oil industry has initiated, is switching out older rail cars for new, retrofitted ones.  We urge your agency to issue a rulemaking to require phasing out and retrofitting older tank cars that do not have the latest safety technologies installed in order to further minimize the impact of an explosion, if a derailment with lighter crude were to occur.

As all of these federal emergency orders and standards are being considered and final regulations are set to come out next year, we request that your agency provide us ongoing information regarding industry compliance and develop ambitious standards that will both prevent derailments and ensure that industry workers and communities are protected in cases where derailments do occur.  We cannot allow communities to be in danger when viable solutions are available.

To sum up our requests, we would like your agency to:

  • Provide a report on the level of compliance by the railroad and petroleum industry to the May 7th Emergency Order.
  • Issue rulemaking that requires stripping out the most volatile elements from Bakken crude before it is loaded onto rail cars.
  • Expedite the issuance of a final rulemaking to require the full implementation of PTC technology for all railroads transporting lighter crude and provide a status report on the progress of PTC implementation to date.
  • Expedite the issuance of a rulemaking that requires phasing out old rail cars for newer, retrofitted cars.

We believe that we must be vigilant and put in place strict safety regulations that can adapt and meet the rapidly changing transportation and energy needs of our country. Thank you for your continued elevation of these important safety issues, and we look forward to working with you on this matter.

Crude By Rail, DOT-111, Emergency Readiness & Response, Federal Regulation (U.S.), Hazmat notification, Local Regulation, Massive increase in crude-by-rail, Positive Train Control, Rail inspection, Rail routing, Risk Assessment, State regulation, Train speed

Law professor: 9 ways that STATES can help regulate railroad safety and transportation

Repost from LegalPlanet.org
[Editor:  Federal preemption under the Commerce Clause is NOT the last and only word on regulating crude oil trains.  Here are some suggestions for State regulation by Professor Jayni Foley Hein, executive director of UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment.  – RS]

Oil By Rail: Nine Things California Can Do to Increase Safety

While FRA Considers New Federal Regulations, States Can Ramp Up Prevention and Emergency Response
By Jayni Hein, June 24, 2014

At a joint Senate and Assembly hearing last week on oil by rail safety in California, some lawmakers expressed frustration at slow federal action, and asked what California can do to increase public safety. My testimony focused on federal preemption issues, defining areas where the state can regulate, and those where it is preempted by the Commerce Clause, Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA), or ICC Termination Act, or all three.

While the Department of Transportation (DOT) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) have primary authority over railroad safety and transportation, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) shares authority with the federal government to enforce federal rail safety requirements and conduct inspections. And even with strong federal preemption provisions, there are actions that California and other states can take right now to increase public safety in light of the enormous growth of oil by rail.

Here are nine things the state can do:

1. Prioritize track and rail car inspection.

California has more than 5,000 miles of mainline railroad track. Inspection of track and rail cars is vital, as derailments are the most common type of train accident in the United States. A national analysis of freight train derailments from 2001 to 2010 on the Class I freight railroads’ mainline track found that broken track rails or track welds were the leading cause of derailments. Broken rail car wheels and track obstructions are also common causes of derailments. (Liu, et. al. 2012).

Governor Brown’s new budget includes funding to hire seven additional rail safety inspectors for the CPUC, paid for by rail industry assessments. The state should ensure that it has enough CPUC inspectors to accommodate the projected rise in oil by rail traffic each year. If seven new inspectors are needed right now; we will likely need many more by 2016, when oil by rail shipments are projected to increase as much as 25-fold, to 150 million barrels per year.

2. Obtain robust data on rail routing, rail car contents, and accident causes.

California agencies need more information from FRA and the railroads on routes, frequency, and rail car contents, as well as data on train derailments, their causes, and risk factors specific to crude by rail transit. The state should obtain this data from FRA – a recommendation echoed in the June 10, 2014 California Inter-Agency Working Group Report. The CPUC needs both national data and California-specific data in order to do its job.

3. Conduct an analysis of the risks that crude by rail poses to the state, including identification of high-risk areas of track, and propose specific measures to increase safety.

The legislature should consider requiring an annual report from the CPUC on the specific risks that crude by rail poses to the state, and measures that it can take to increase safety. Voluntary agreements with the railroads may also be an important outgrowth of this state-specific analysis that can inform where and how to direct limited state resources. As previewed above, this state analysis should be guided by the most recent data available from FRA and the railroads.

The legislature could also consider requiring information sharing among the relevant state agencies, including CPUC, Office of Emergency Services (OES), Office of Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR), California Environmental Protection Agency, and more.

4. Require state oil spill contingency plans for trains transporting oil into the state.

SB 1319 (Pavley) would require state oil spill contingency plans for trains transporting oil into the state. Such a state-mandated plan would provide an opportunity to secure better emergency response protection for the environment and public safety.

5. Get access to daily information on oil shipments into California, and ensure that state and local emergency personnel can access this information immediately in the event of an accident.

A recent DOT Emergency Order requires that each railroad operating trains containing more than 1 million gallons of Bakken crude oil, or approximately 35 tank cars, to provide states with weekly notice that includes estimated volumes of Bakken oil  transported per week and routing information.

The state should also have immediate access to real-time shipment information, assuming the technology exists to enable this. The state should also ensure that local emergency response personnel are well trained to deal with any crude by rail accident, and can readily identify the contents of any shipment. Training and information sharing with local emergency response personnel can be paid for by the industry, using a fee or assessment like the 6.5 cent/barrel fee on all oil imports recently approved by the state.

6. Advocate for more stringent federal safety regulations.

Legislative pronouncements, as well as the CPUC’s robust participation in the Rail Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) are needed to secure better federal standards.

California joins others states such as New York in advocating for more stringent rail car design standards (phasing out DOT-111 cars, for example), mandatory placards on rail cars identifying Bakken crude oil,  expediting Positive Train Control, and requiring electronically-controlled pneumatic brakes on all crude oil trains. The state can also advocate for further federal analysis of possible routing changes, to avoid sensitive population and habitat areas.

7. Monitor compliance with new voluntary measures that the railroads agreed to implement this year.

As part of a February 2014 agreement with DOT, the Class I railroads will perform one additional internal-rail inspection each year than required by the FRA on routes over which trains carry 20 or more tank cars of crude oil, and will conduct at least two track geometry inspections over these routes. The  railroads also agreed to use end-of-train braking systems on all oil trains, and lower train speed in federally-designated “high-threat-urban-areas.”

The CPUC should monitor the railroads’ compliance with these voluntary measures. At the same time, CPUC and the state should advocate for making these voluntary measures mandatory, by issuing new or revised FRA regulations.

8. Consider issuing guidance to local permitting agencies on requirements for offloading facilities and oil refinery expansion.

There are currently at least five crude-by-rail refinery projects being pursued in California: one in Pittsburg, one in Benicia, two in Bakersfield, and one in Wilmington. There is a patchwork of local permitting agencies responsible for land use, air, water, and other local safety and environmental issues that may be relevant to offloading sites and refineries.

Local government and permitting agencies can deny land use and other permits for refineries and offloading facilities if they find safety risks or improper environmental mitigation under statutes like the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). But, local agency personnel may have varying levels of expertise in oil and rail issues and may apply permitting criteria inconsistently. As such, the state, through the Office or Planning and Research (OPR), should consider issuing guidance to local permitting agencies on necessary permits and requirements for offloading facility or refinery expansion.

9. Provide guidance on CEQA review and the public comment and participation process, especially relevant to environmental justice communities that may be located near offloading sites or refineries.

While rail accidents can happen anywhere, communities near offloading sites and refineries are especially vulnerable to oil by rail transport risks. The state can provide information and guidance to these communities on opportunities for engagement, comment and participation.

In addition, the state can encourage railroads, industry and refineries to work directly with potentially affected communities to disclose as much information as possible about shipments, safety measures, and how community members can participate in the process to make their communities safer.

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, Emergency Readiness & Response, Federal Regulation (U.S.), Rail accidents, Valero Benicia Refinery

Sacramento Bee editorial: First steps on oil train safety, but more to do

Repost from The Sacramento Bee
[Editor: The Bee’s editorial board hit the nail on the head, but not hard enough.  Which is to say, the editors have joined with the chorus of legislators who want a good patch job for train wrecks that they presume are unstoppable.  Oil train safety would be best guaranteed by pressing the federal government to ban oil trains.  Allowing these “bomb trains” to rumble through our communities approaches criminal recklessness, and should be stopped.  Big business does not – or at least should not – dictate the direction we take as a nation.  – RS]

Editorial: First steps on oil train safety, but more to do

By the Editorial Board   |  Jun. 19, 2014
G092G6L04.3Staff Photographer
Assemblyman Roger Dickinson of Sacramento announced legislation in April to require more disclosure to emergency officials of oil shipments by rail. Randall Benton

These are not all the steps that are needed, but it’s good to see the Legislature trying to get ahead of a potential (oil) train wreck.  As part of the budget they approved Sunday, legislators added seven rail safety inspectors. They also included a 6.5-cent fee proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown on each barrel of crude oil that comes to California by rail. The $11 million or so raised annually will be used to prevent and clean up oil spills, especially in inland waterways.

On Monday, the state Senate passed a resolution urging the federal government to pass laws and rules to protect communities from oil train accidents, including tougher standards on tank cars, and to put “safety over cost effectiveness.” That sends an important message because so far, federal officials have not required enough of railroads and oil companies – either in safety measures or public disclosure – to keep pace with a rapid increase in rail shipments of oil extracted through hydraulic fracturing, especially in Canada and North Dakota.

But there’s more that California officials can do.

Sens. Jerry Hill of San Mateo and Lois Wolk of Davis have a bill for a second as-yet unspecified shipping fee on oil companies to fund training and equipment for firefighters and other first responders. A recent state report found that 40 percent of local firefighters are volunteers who generally don’t have the resources to handle major hazardous material spills.

First responders often don’t have all the information they need, either, as reporting by The Sacramento Bee has made clear. Assemblyman Roger Dickinson of Sacramento is pushing a bill to require companies to tell emergency officials about crude oil shipments. The latest version does away with an exemption from the state public records law; instead it says reports would be deemed “proprietary information” that could only be shared with “government personnel with emergency response, planning or security-related responsibilities on a need-to-know basis.”

Time is of the essence since oil trains could be running through the Sacramento region later this year. Valero Refining Co. is seeking approval to route two 50-car oil trains a day through Roseville, Sacramento, West Sacramento and Davis to its refinery in Benicia.

An environmental impact report released Tuesday offers some reassurances but no guarantees. The draft report concludes that while a crash or spill could be catastrophic, the likelihood of an incident is “very low.” The probability of a spill of 100 gallons or more along the 69 miles between Roseville and Benicia is calculated at once every 111 years.

Yet, it has happened elsewhere – six major oil train crashes in North America just in the last year, including the horrific fireball in Quebec that killed 47 residents.

More than 135,000 people in Sacramento and 25,000 in Davis live within a half-mile of rail tracks, the Natural Resources Defense Council reported Wednesday. They’re counting on legislators to do all they can to make sure oil trains pass safely through our cities.