Category Archives: Federal Regulation (U.S.)

Another Oregon town calls for stricter rules on crude by rail

Repost from The Dalles Chronicle

The Dalles joins oil train debate

By RaeLynn Ricarte, January 29, 2015
A UNION Pacific freight train runs west along First Street, downtown The Dalles. The City of The Dalles has joined other Oregon and Washington cities in requesting greater federal oversight of oil train transports.
A UNION Pacific freight train runs west along First Street, downtown The Dalles. The City of The Dalles has joined other Oregon and Washington cities in requesting greater federal oversight of oil train transports. Photo by Mark Gibson.

The Dalles City Council has joined Hood River, Mosier and other Oregon towns in urging state officials to pursue greater federal regulation of crude oil transports.

The resolution approved by a unanimous vote Monday, Jan. 26, also recommends that rules be put in place to require that rail companies pay for damages caused by catastrophic fire and explosions following a derailment or accident.

Councilor Dan Spatz asked to have the issue put on the agenda, but was not at the Jan. 26 meeting.

The initial resolution, which is a formal expression of the council’s opinion, did not mention finances. However, local conservationist John Nelson, who has been pursuing action regarding oil trains at the city level, gained agreement from city officials to have the language included. “It’s a very complicated issue,” said Nelson, who provided the council with two news articles about the potential dangers of having oil shipped via railroad.

He said a 2013 derailment in Quebec, Canada, that killed 47 people ended up costing $2.7 billion in cleanup, damages and settlements.

The Washington side of the Columbia River Gorge has become the Pacific Northwest’s major railroad avenue for moving oil -— about 18 trains weekly — from North Dakota to shipping terminals.

Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railroad carries Bakken crude from North Dakota that is extracted from underground rock formations and is reportedly more flammable than traditional crude.

Environmental organizations, such as the Sierra Club, are seeking greater regulation of oil transports given the potential for an increase in shipments with North America on track to lead the world in oil production within five years.

Councilor Taner Elliott was unsure that the city’s resolution, which is non-binding, would be as solid an approach as sending a letter requesting details about safety measures to railroad companies, gorge legislators and state officials.

He said the city could ask for a briefing about what measures would be taken if an emergency occurred and to be kept abreast of new safety standards.

He said conversations with BNSF and Union Pacific, which operates on the Oregon side of the Columbia River, revealed “staggering numbers” tied to their respective prevention and emergency response plans.

“It appears they are very involved,” said Elliott, who did not provide specifics about what he had learned.

Representatives from both railroad companies said Wednesday that they had not been invited to Monday’s council meeting to answer questions or address safety issues.

Nelson told the council that the city’s resolution would let state officials know they was concerned about the welfare of citizens, as well as the environment in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. He said there was no local source for the foam that was necessary to extinguish flames if an explosion occurred.

He said travel to and from Portland for that product could delay response time, which would further threaten human life or resources.

In addition, he said local fire departments did not have the manpower or equipment to fight a catastrophic fire.

At Monday’s meeting Mayor Steve Lawrence said, once the resolution was approved, the Community Outreach Team could follow up by voicing concerns during a visit to Salem in the spring.

Tim Schechtel, a downtown property owner in The Dalles, said the oil boom in America had created an “unprecedented” risk for communities along railroad tracks.

According to information obtained last year by a Chronicle reporter, oil is traditionally delivered via pipelines, but the growth in U.S. and Canadian production has exceeded what they can carry.

That has caused oil transport by rail to increase from 9,500 carloads in 2008 to 400,000 in 2013.

Schechtel said oil unit trains were more than one-mile long with 100 cars and the potential to carry three million gallons of crude.

According to BNSF, 18 unit oil trains travel through the gorge each week. Schechtel said that put 54 million gallons of crude near residential communities.

“A lot of people are chiming in on this, nationally as well as locally,” he said.

Schechtel said the bigger picture was that fossil fuels contributed to global warming and acid rain around the world. So it was not too much to ask big oil companies, which were making huge profits, to better protect the public safety.

Councilor Linda Miller asked Schectel to expand upon his statements about the problems caused by the use of petroleum products.

“So, do you want to stop all oil trains coming through or just to make things safer?” she asked.

“I think just make safer at this time,” said Schectel, who felt the issue of pollution should be addressed at some point in the future.

“The bottom line is, if we had a catastrophe, it would be overwhelming,” said Lawrence.

U.S. Senators on new safety rules: Hurry up! or maybe… Slow Down!

[Editor: The news on Wednesday, January 28 carried two stories about U.S. Senators, one urging speed and the other urging delay in the Obama administration’s effort to – finally after over 20 years of delays – pass new rules governing rail transport of crude oil and other hazmat materials.  Washington Senator Maria Cantwell: the Department of Transportation should “move its behind.”  South Dakota Senator John Thune: the government is “moving too quickly.”    Read both stories below.  – RS]

Get moving on oil train safety rules, Cantwell tells Obama administration

Seattle PI, By Joel Connelly, January 28, 2015
In this image made available by the City of Lynchburg, several CSX tanker cars carrying crude oil in flames after derailing in downtown Lynchburg, Va., Wednesday, April 30, 2014. (AP Photo/City of Lynchburg, LuAnn Hunt)
Several CSX tanker cars carrying crude oil in flames after derailing in downtown Lynchburg, Va., Wednesday, April 30, 2014. (AP Photo/City of Lynchburg, LuAnn Hunt)

With 19 oil trains passing through Washington towns and cities each week, the U.S. Department of Transportation should move its behind, finalize and enforce safety rules for tanker cars, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said Wednesday.

“We should go faster: The administration should get those recommendations implemented,” Cantwell said at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing.

“My constituents are now seeing trains through every major city in our state: They’re literally hitting Spokane through the Tri-Cities, through Vancouver, up through Tacoma, Seattle, Everett and then up to the refineries.”  (…continued)


Thune urges White House to delay tank car safety rules

Argus Leader, By Christopher Doering, USA TODAY, January 28, 2015
poet ethanol Chancellor
Jeff Hansen tightens the bolts on top of an ethanol rail car after filling it Thursday at the POET ethanol plant in Chancellor, Jan. 27, 2011. (Elisha Page/Argus Leader)

WASHINGTON – An Obama administration effort to boost the safety of tank cars used to transport crude and other materials by train could disrupt the country’s already congested rail network if an unrealistic proposal is allowed to go forward, the head of the powerful Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee said Wednesday.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., who chairs the Senate panel that oversees the country’s railroads, said the government was moving too quickly with a proposal for phasing out or retrofitting older freight-rail tank cars known as DOT-111 that carry crude oil and ethanol. The Transportation Department is to finalize the regulations on May 12, before giving the rail industry two years to comply.  (…continued)

 

DeFazio Blasts U.S. DOT for Failing to Address Rail Tank Car Safety

Press Release from Congressman Peter DeFazio

DeFazio Blasts U.S. DOT for Failing to Address Rail Tank Car Safety

Will request an Inspector General audit of PHMSA safety programs

From Press Release, 22 Jan 2015

Washington, D.C. – Today, Ranking Member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Peter DeFazio (D-OR) sent a letter to U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Anthony Foxx, urging him to take immediate action to address rail tank car safety and other significant pipeline and hazardous materials safety hazards.

“Despite numerous incidents involving the transportation of crude oil and other flammable materials by rail, subsequent NTSB safety recommendations, and an industry petition for new tank car design standards, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) failed to take action until a train transporting crude oil in DOT-111 tank cars in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, killed 47 people and completely destroyed the town center,” said DeFazio. “Here we are almost 15 months later, and we still do not have a final rule.”

DeFazio also takes issue with PHMSA’s failure to address longstanding, significant safety issues that extend to pipelines.

In multiple pipeline accident investigations over the last 15 years, the NTSB has identified the same persistent issues–most of which DOT has failed to address. Each time, Congress has been forced to require PHMSA to take action, most recently in the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011. Yet three years later, almost none of the important safety measures in the Act have been finalized, including requirements for pipeline operators to install automatic shutoff valves and to inspect pipelines beyond high-consequence areas.

“For these reasons, I will soon be sending a letter to the DOT Inspector General (IG), requesting a thorough audit of PHMSA’s pipeline and hazardous materials safety program, including an evaluation of the agency’s effectiveness in addressing significant safety issues, congressional mandates, and NTSB and IG recommendations in a timely manner; the process PHMSA utilizes for implementing such mandates and recommendations; the sufficiency of PHMSA’s efforts to coordinate with the modal administrations and address safety concerns raised by those administrations; and any impediments to agency action, such as resource constraints.”

DeFazio urges DOT to take immediate action to address these serious safety issues. He writes that the tens of millions of Americans who rely on the Federal Government to protect their safety and health and our nation’s natural resources rightly deserve more than proposed rules that languish in the Federal bureaucracy.

The full letter to Secretary Foxx is below:

January 22, 2015

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

Dear Secretary Foxx:

I write to express my serious concerns with the repeated failure of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to address longstanding and undisputed pipeline and hazardous materials safety issues.

The rule regarding Enhanced Tank Car Standards and Operational Controls for High-Hazard Flammable Trains is a prime example. The DOT maintains finalizing this rule remains one of its highest priorities, yet the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) now reports that publication of a final rule is not anticipated until May 12, 2015. In fact, the DOT has not even transmitted a draft final rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has raised concerns about the “high incidence of failure” of DOT-111 tank cars since 1991. In fact, over the last 10 years, the NTSB has investigated or is currently investigating seven accidents involving the transportation of crude oil and other flammable materials in DOT-111 tank cars, including an October 2006 train derailment in New Brighton, Pennsylvania, which caused the release of 485,278 gallons of ethanol that ignited and burned for almost 48 hours; an October 2007 ethanol train derailment in Painesville, Ohio; a June 2009 ethanol train derailment and fire in Cherry Valley, Illinois, which killed one person, injured nine others, and resulted in a mandatory evacuation of about 600 residences within a half-mile radius of the accident site; an October 2011 ethanol train derailment in Tiskilwa, Illinois; a July 2012 mixed freight train derailment in Columbus, Ohio, which released 53,000 gallons of ethanol; a December 2013 train derailment and fire in Casselton, North Dakota, which resulted in the release of 476,000 gallons of crude oil and the evacuation of 1,400 residents; and, an April 2014 train derailment in Lynchburg, Virginia, which spilled 30,000 gallons of crude oil in and around the James River.

The NTSB has been made aware of (but is not investigating) five additional train accidents that occurred between August 2008 and February 2014 in the U.S., which involved the release of crude oil, causing significant environmental damage and fires.

In March 2011, the Association of American Railroads petitioned PHMSA to conduct a rulemaking on new tank car design standards, which seemingly languished in the bowels of the agency until 2013, when a train transporting crude oil in DOT-111 tank cars in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, killed 47 people and completely destroyed the town center. Coincidentally, two months later, PHMSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on new tank car design standards.

Here we are almost 15 months later, and we still do not have a final rule. Frankly, I am concerned that opposition to the more contentious portions of the rule will only lead to further delays, possibly even litigation. That will end up postponing implementation of a final rule while the concerns of States and local communities are growing.

Moreover, these delays have significant implications for rail car manufacturers. It will take time for them to adjust to the standards proposed in the rule, which in turn will have a rippling effect on shippers who are putting off purchases of new tank cars until the new design standards are finalized. As I have said before, I believe that you should seriously consider severing this rule and propose one rule on stronger tank car design standards and another rule to address the operational changes proposed in the NPRM. That is sure to move this issue forward and address the more immediate dangers posed by the current DOT-111 tank cars.

Additionally, my concerns regarding PHMSA’s failure to address longstanding, significant safety issues extend to pipelines, as well. In multiple pipeline accident investigations over the last 15 years, the NTSB has identified the same persistent issues, most of which DOT has failed to address on its own accord. Each and every time, Congress has been forced to require PHMSA to take action, most recently in the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-90). Yet, three years later, almost none of the important safety measures in the Act have been finalized, including requirements for pipeline operators to install automatic shutoff valves and to inspect pipelines beyond high-consequence areas.

For these reasons, I will soon be sending a letter to the DOT Inspector General (IG), requesting a thorough audit of PHMSA’s pipeline and hazardous materials safety program, including an evaluation of the agency’s effectiveness in addressing significant safety issues, congressional mandates, and NTSB and IG recommendations in a timely manner; the process PHMSA utilizes for implementing such mandates and recommendations; the sufficiency of PHMSA’s efforts to coordinate with the modal administrations and address safety concerns raised by those administrations; and any impediments to agency action, such as resource constraints.

In the interim, I urge you to take immediate action to address these serious safety issues. The tens of millions of Americans who rely on the Federal Government to protect their safety and health and our nation’s natural resources rightly deserve more than proposed rules that languish in the Federal bureaucracy. If you need additional information or have questions regarding this letter, please have your staff contact Jennifer Homendy of my staff at 202-225-3274.

Sincerely,

PETER DeFAZIO
Ranking Democratic Member

 

Federal Court Order: Explosive DOT-111 “Bomb Train” Oil Tank Cars Can Continue to Roll

Repost from DeSmogBlog
[Editor: see also related story at SputnikNews.  – RS]

Federal Court Order: Explosive DOT-111 “Bomb Train” Oil Tank Cars Can Continue to Roll

By Steve Horn, 1/23/15

A U.S. federal court has ordered a halt in proceedings until May in a case centering around oil-by-rail tankers pitting the Sierra Club and ForestEthics against the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). As a result, potentially explosive DOT-111 oil tank cars, dubbed “bomb trains” by activists, can continue to roll through towns and cities across the U.S. indefinitely.  

“The briefing schedule previously established by the court is vacated,” wrote Chris Goelz, a mediator for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. “This appeal is stayed until May 12, 2015, or pending publication in the Federal Register of the final tank car standards and phase out of DOT-111 tank cars, whichever occurs first.”

Order to Delay DOT-111 Bomb Trains Case
Image Credit: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filing its initial petition for review on December 2, the Sierra Club/ForestEthics lawsuit had barely gotten off the ground before being delayed.

That initial petition called for a judicial review of the DOT‘s denial of a July 15, 2014 Petition to Issue an Emergency Order Prohibiting the Shipment of Bakken Crude Oil in Unsafe Tank Cars written by EarthJustice on behalf of the two groups. On November 7, DOT denied Earthjustice’s petition, leading the groups to file the lawsuit.

Initially, DOT told the public it would release its draft updated oil-by-rail regulations by March 31, but now will wait until May 12 to do so. As reported by The Journal News, the delay came in the aftermath of pressure from Big Oil and Big Rail.

“In a joint filing, the Association of American Railroads (AAR) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) contend the tank car industry doesn’t have the capacity to retrofit the estimated 143,000 tank cars that would need to be modernized to meet the new specifications,” wrote The Journal News. “Nor can manufacturers build new tank cars fast enough, they say.”

The “bomb trains” carrying volatile crude oil obtained via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) from the Bakken Shale, then, will continue to roll unimpeded for the foreseeable future. They will do so in the same DOT-111 rail cars that put the fracked oil-by-rail safety issue on the map to begin with — the July 2013 deadly explosion in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec.

And as DeSmogBlog has reported, industry promises to phase-out DOT-111s on a voluntary basis have rung hollow.

“The courts and the administration are dragging their feet on common sense safety steps that will take the most dangerous oil tanker cars off the tracks, slow down these trains, and help emergency responders prepare for accidents,” Eddie Scher, communications director for ForestEthics, told DeSmogBlog.

“We filed our lawsuit because the DOT is not moving fast enough on safety. This court’s decision ignored the imminent threat to the 25 million Americans who live in the blast zone and the communities around the nation that don’t have the luxury of waiting for DOT and the rail and oil industry lobbyists to finish their rule.”