Since I last wrote about oil trains in my April 12 blog, long-awaited federal regulations were released, a new state law has been adopted, and there has been another explosive derailment. My primary concern with oil trains is public safety – Spokane has several oil trains a day running through the heart of downtown. Most of the oil on these trains is from the Bakken fields in North Dakota, and is especially volatile.
The Spokane Fire Department has estimated that up to 20,000 people could be in danger in the event of an oil train derailment downtown. In early April, Spokane Mayor David Condon admitted that the city’s emergency responders were not prepared to react to an oil train crisis. The most recent derailment occurred near Heimdal, North Dakota, on May 6. This is the fifth explosive derailment in North America since February 14. That’s five major incidents in 82 days.
New federal regulations from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) were finally released on May 1, after a two-year process. The regulations establish requirements for tanker railcars, train speeds, and braking systems. Regulators said that the new rules will improve safety and curtail the possibilities of a catastrophic event.
But critics aren’t happy. Safety proponents, environmentalists, and legislators are claiming the new regulations fall short. The railroads and oil producers believe parts of the regulations are too expensive and unnecessary. In fact, the U.S. Oil industry has already filed suit to stop the new rules.
There are currently three generations of tanker cars used to transport oil: The DOT-111, the oldest model; a newer CPC-1232 model; and the newest model, the DOT-117. Most tanker railcars used today are the DOT-111 model, which have been getting replaced by the newer CPC-1232 model the past few years. The DOT-111 was not designed to carry explosive materials (shown in the picture above), and the newly released regulations mandate that these cars will have to be retired by March 2018.
The newer CPC-1232 cars have thicker steel hulls, 9/16 inch versus 7/16 inch on the older DOT-111 railcars. However, in the five recent derailments, 34 of the CPC-1232 railcars have split open and burned, leaving questions about the safety of these cars. The new regulations require that CPC-1232 tanker cars will have to be refitted to meet the new DOT-117 standards, or be removed from usage by April 2020.
The DOT-117 model tanker cars have the thicker 9/16 inch steel hulls, but also one-half-inch steel shields on both the front and backs of the cars, thermal protection, pressure-relief valves, and rollover protection for both top and bottom valves on railcars. While promising, the true effectiveness of this model won’t be known until some of these tanker cars are involved in a derailment.
The new regulations also limit oil train speed limits to 50 mph, reduced to 40 mph in densely populated areas. The urban speed limit will be lifted if all tanker cars in a train are the new DOT-117 model, or retrofitted CPC-1232 railcars.
The new federal rules will also require tanker cars to have electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) braking systems. These brakes send braking commands to all cars on a train simultaneously, which help stop each railcar individually. Conventional air-brake systems currently used work sequentially from railcar to railcar. According to DOT, ECP brakes will stop entire trains sooner, and prevent tanker cars from piling into one another – reducing the number of tanker cars punctured – in a derailment.
The ECP brake requirement only applies to oil trains with at least 70 tanker cars, but not until January 2021. The trains with at least 70 tanker cars not equipped with ECP brakes by this deadline will be required to slow its speed to 30 mph. Beginning 2024, all trains with at least 70 tanker cars will be required to have ECP braking systems.
In addition to the new federal rules, the Washington State legislature just passed a new law regarding oil trains. The new state law requires railroads to notify first responders in advance of all oil train shipments, and extends a 4-cent-per-barrel tax shipped by train. The new law also requires railroads to submit spill clean-up plans, including evidence that they have the ability to pay for a significant spill.
The bill also adds eight new rail inspectors for the state’s Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC); and gives the UTC the right to inspect rail crossings on private property. The UTC to will now be able to inspect approximately 350 private rail crossings, used by oil trains, on a routine inspection schedule. Up until now, these inspections had to be scheduled by appointment and were infrequent.
The new federal regulations and state law are both good steps to protect the public in the event of an oil train derailment, but in my view, they fall short. The new rules don’t go far enough to reduce the risk of a catastrophic explosion in a heavily populated area, and are too generous in the amount of time given to railroads and oil producers to meet the new standards – they are too little, too late.
In Friday’s Spokesman-Review, Governor Inslee was quoted when he signed the new state law, “Even with the passage of this bill I remain very concerned about the safety of Washingtonians.” Inslee also said the federal government must do more on the issue because, “we still have an unsafe situation in our state. These trains are a mile long with very volatile material, they’re rolling through our neighborhoods and they’re not safe today,” Inslee said. “More needs to be done.”
The oil from the Bakken fields will help the U.S. become energy independent, which is crucial to our national security and very beneficial to the economy. But public safety must trump all other considerations. While rail transport is considered the safest form of shipping, with more than 99.9% of hazardous trains arriving safely, even one catastrophic explosive derailment in a high-population area is unacceptable.
Although the government, railroads, and oil producers are starting to take action – it’s essential they keep moving forward expeditiously. The current situation continues to represent a significant lack of courage and leadership from our lawmakers and regulators, who should be demanding more be done sooner.
I’m also concerned about the potential of significant environmental damages, including the pollution of our drinking water, in the event of an oil train derailment into one of our rivers or lakes. In next week’s blog, I’ll offer some ideas for possible solutions.
Links to past blogs related to this subject
Oil Trains – A Real Concern:
http://www.commonsensecentrist.com/oil-trains-a-real-concern/
Oil Trains – A Picture Emerges:
http://www.commonsensecentrist.com/oil-trains-a-picture-emerges/
Link to video on Oil Trains:
http://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000003639391/a-danger-on-the-rails.html