Proponents of two proposed oil
terminal projects in Grays Harbor County must address multiple railroad safety
concerns before the project moves forward, the state rail safety regulator said
on Tuesday.
In comments submitted on the Draft
Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS) for the proposed Westway and Imperium
oil terminal projects, the Utilities and Transportation Commission listed among
its concerns the integrity of the track bringing crude oil to the facilities,
the impact on rail crossings, and financial ability of the project owners to
address spills or accidents.
Westway Terminal Company LLC owns an
existing methanol distribution facility at the Port of Grays Harbor. If
approved, the proposed projects would expand the storage capacity for crude oil
facilities, adding up to five storage tanks capable of holding up to 8.4
million gallons of crude oil each, and add rail and pipeline infrastructure at
the site.
Imperium Terminal Services owns an
existing biodiesel production and transport facility adjacent to the Westway
facility. It proposes to build up to nine storage tanks to hold up to 3.4
million gallons of liquids each, including crude oil, and add rail and pipeline
facilities.
The companies expect to receive
Bakken crude oil shipped by rail from the Midwestern United States. They would
also load and unload crude oil and other liquids by barge and ship.
The UTC is concerned about the
capacity of railroad bridges located between Centralia and the project site to
carry heavy trains loaded with volatile Bakken crude oil; the accuracy of
identified private railroad crossings along the oil route; failure to address
safety at 17 public crossings identified by the UTC as “at-risk crossings”; and
the integrity of the track and subgrade along a section which experienced three
derailments in 2014.
“The DEIS raises a number of
significant safety issues that need to be addressed before this project is
considered further,” said UTC Chairman David Danner. “Those issues bear
directly on the state’s ability to deal with spills and accidents along the oil
train routes.”
State law requires state and local
agencies in Washington to consider the environmental impacts that could result
from government actions such as permit approval. The City of Hoquiam and the
Department of Ecology are the co-lead agencies in evaluating the DEIS. The
commission participated throughout the DEIS process, providing input and
guidance on rail safety issues.
The UTC regulates railroad safety,
including approving new grade crossings and closing or altering existing rail
crossings, investigating train accidents, inspecting public-railroad crossings,
approving safety projects and managing safety education through Operation
Lifesaver.
It was a record year for oil train mishaps—and the year crude-by-rail hit the brakes.
by Matthew Philips Dec 2, 2015
Bloomberg Business
It’s
been several months since an oil train accident grabbed big
headlines—but not because there haven’t been any. A single weekend
in November saw
two trains derail in Wisconsin.
The first spilled about 20,000 gallons of ethanol into the Mississippi
River, followed a day later by a spill of about 1,000 gallons of North
Dakota Bakken crude.
This year has already been the costliest by
far for crude train explosions. Derailments in 2015 have caused $29.7
million in damage, according to data from the U.S. Department of
Transportation, a huge increase from $7.5 million in 2014. Most of this
year’s price tag can be attributed to two crashes within a three-week
span. The Feb. 16 derailment of a CSX train in West Virginia triggered a
massive explosion near a cluster of homes along the Kanawha River and
led to more than $23 million in damage. A BNSF train that
derailed and exploded
in Illinois on March 5 caused an additional $5.5 million in damage.
Both trains were carrying highly explosive crude from North Dakota.
The lesser-noticed recent accidents haven’t come with explosions or
towering fireballs.
At least some of the ruptured tank cars were the newer-model CPC-1232,
which are supposed to be less likely to split open. The U.S. and Canada
earlier this year announced
stricter tank car standards,
mandating further improvements in the future. Those rules will cost
companies—mostly those that ship crude—an estimated $2.5 billion
from 2015 to 2034; government estimates suggest the benefits will range
from $912 million to $2.9 billion, presumably from fewer accidents.
But
even without changing safety standards, there’s reason to suspect that
costly train accidents will decline. While 2015 will go down as the
worst year for crude train disasters, it’s also shaping up to be the
year crude-by-rail hit the brakes.
The crash in prices has slowed
activity in the oilpatch and reduced the amount of petroleum riding the
rails. The number of train carloads carrying petroleum has fallen
30 percent through Nov. 20 since peaking in December 2014, according to
the American Association of Railroads. The monthly data on crude-by-rail
shipments kept by the U.S. government lags a few months behind, but as
of September those shipments had dropped 21 percent from their peak in
January 2015.....
more here
Rail safety concerns are mentioned
The
Port of Camas-Washougal Commission is expected to vote today on a
resolution, that includes
concerns about rail safety and mobility
issues, regarding the proposed oil terminal project at the Port of
Vancouver.
An increase in oil train traffic is expected, if the terminal is built.
The resolution that will be under consideration during today’s
meeting includes a request from the port to the Washington Department of
Transportation and the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board to
analyze and study the potential economic effect of the oil train traffic
on the displacement of existing economic activity.
The potential
loss of access to rail transport by local and regional
shippers and commuter services are also mentioned among the port
commission’s concerns.....
more here
Note: can't find any web info yet about the meeting results ....
