Jump to content


Photo

U.S. oil train safety proposal due in May


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:49 PM

Reuters via InForum.com, 1/15:
 

U.S. oil train safety proposal due in May

 

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Transportation Department will offer a new design for oil trains by mid-May as officials try to make sure crude oil is moving safely on the tracks, officials said this week.

 

The next-generation tanker will have a thicker shell, more heat protection and other safety features meant to prevent future mishaps from becoming fiery derailments. Details have not been finalized.

 

"These new requirements are designed to lessen the consequences of derailments involving ethanol, crude oil, and certain trains transporting a large volume of flammable materials," the Transportation Department said in a memo this week outlining future regulatory actions.

 

The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is weighing costs and benefits of a draft proposal that has drawn more than 3,800 public comments.

 

Continue here.



#2 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 20 January 2015 - 11:53 PM

Vice News, 1/15:
 

US Department of Transportation Delays New Rules on 'Bomb Trains'

 

Following a series of derailments, spills, and deadly explosions, the US Department of Transportation (DOT) proposed new regulations this summer for the shipment of certain types of crude oil over the nation's railways.

 

DOT received nearly 150,000 public comments and late last year Congress set a Friday deadline for the department to issue its final rules.

Continue here.



#3 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 23 January 2015 - 10:07 AM

Transport Topics, 1/22:
 

DeFazio Blasts DOT Over Failure to Finalize Tank Car Rule, Calls for PHMSA Audit

 

Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.), ranking Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, blasted the Department of Transportation for what he called repeated failures to address “long-standing and undisputed” pipeline and hazardous materials safety issues including oil train safety.

 

A pending rule on standards for oil train tank cars is “a prime example” of the department’s failure, DeFazio said in a Jan 22 letter to Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx that also said an audit of PHMSA by the DOT’s Inspector General will be requested.

 

Continue here.



#4 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 23 January 2015 - 10:12 AM

Representative DeFazio (Oregon 4th District) news release:

 

DeFazio Blasts U.S. DOT for Failing to Address Rail Tank Car Safety
Jan 22, 2015
 
Will request an Inspector General audit of PHMSA safety programs
 

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

###



#5 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 29 January 2015 - 01:04 PM

Seattle (WA) Post-Intelligencer, 1/28:
 

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

 

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.”

 

SNIP

 

The oil trains have created a dilemma for Washington’s congressional delegation.

 

The refineries support more than 1,100 family wage union jobs. Yet, the trains roll through major population centers.

Read more here.



#6 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 29 January 2015 - 09:01 PM

USA Today via Argus Leader, 1/28:
 

Thune urges White House to delay tank car safety rules

 

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.

 

“Without question, we must improve the safety of our nation’s rail system, but I am concerned about the unattainable deadlines the rule proposes,” Thune said. “The DOT issued this proposed rule without analyzing the potential tank car shop capacity needed to retrofit or replace over 100,000 DOT-111 tank cars.”

Continue here.



#7 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 01 February 2015 - 07:59 PM

The Modesto (CA) Bee, 2/1:

 

Editorial
 

Our View: Delays on safer rail cars are unacceptable

 

Highly volatile crude oil has begun moving by rail through our Valley, rolling down through Sacramento into Stockton, Modesto and Merced on its way to two refineries in Bakersfield. Unfortunately, the trains carrying that oil are no safer today than they were 18 months ago when a train derailed in Lac-Megantic, Canada, killing 47 people and wiping out half the town.

 

The U.S. Department of Transportation has three times delayed adoption of rules to make tank cars that carry crude and other volatile liquids (such as Bakken crude and ethanol) safer. The DOT apparently is weighing the need for safer cars against a more comprehensive approach that includes train speeds, rail maintenance, etc. While those things are important, the one specific thing that will make our communities safer are substantially better designed and built tank cars.

 

The DOT should adopt rules for those cars then set deadlines to replace every single tank car in America. Our elected representatives should insist on it.

 

Continue here.



#8 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 13 February 2015 - 07:24 PM

DeSmogBlog, 2/13:
 

Singing Industry’s Tune: How Rep. Jeff Denham Plans to Delay Oil-by-Rail Safety Improvements
 

“I just want to make sure that we are all singing the same tune that we have a very safe industry and we want to work together on improving that industry.”

 

Those were the words of Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials on February 3rd at a hearing titled “How the Changing Energy Markets Will Affect U.S. Transportation.” He was directing this advice to Greg Saxton, chief engineer for rail tank car manufacturer Greenbrier.

 

Denham obviously had a bone to pick with Saxton because prior to the hearing the Modesto Bee, a newspaper in Denham’s home district, ran an editorial making a strong case that the existing tank cars used to transport crude oil are unsafe. The editorial, “Delays on safer rail cars are unacceptable,” didn’t mince words. It was clear on what should happen: “The DOT [Department of Transportation] should adopt rules for those cars then set deadlines to replace every single tank car in America. Our elected representatives should insist on it.”

 

Continue here.



#9 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 14 February 2015 - 12:23 PM

Bloomberg Business, 2/12:
 

Revised Oil-Train Safety Rule Said to Delay Upgrade Deadline

 

 (Bloomberg) -- The Obama administration revised its proposal to prevent oil trains from catching fire in derailments, giving companies more time to upgrade their fleets but sticking with a requirement that new tank cars have thicker walls and better brakes.

 

The changes, described by three people familiar with the proposal who asked not to be identified because the plan has not been made public, are in proposed regulations the U.S. Transportation Department sent to the White House last week for review prior to being released.

 

Continue here.



#10 CNJRoss

CNJRoss

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPip
  • 43390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted 14 February 2015 - 05:10 PM

Reuters, 2/12:
 

Transportation Department pushes tough oil train standards: sources

 

(Reuters) - The U.S. Transportation Department has recommended crude oil trains be reinforced and have advanced braking systems installed to prevent accidents from becoming fiery disasters, according to sources familiar with the plan.

 

The proposal, which now faces a White House review, envisions safety improvements that public advocates endorse but oil and rail leaders have said would mean high costs for modest safety gains.

 

SNIP

 

It would take at least $3 billion over the next 20 years to enact the plan, according to a government estimate, but oil and rail executives see much higher costs they say would needlessly hinder a sector that has helped push a national energy renaissance.

 

Complying with the DOT proposal would send roughly 90,000 existing tank cars into workshops for at least $30,000 in upgrades each or to the scrap heap because the improvements are too costly, according to industry and official estimates.

 

Read more here.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users