Officials Call for More Regulations to Prevent Crude Train Accidents

“There is growing concern that some oil shipments are improperly classified under federal hazardous material standards, leaving rail companies and emergency responders with incomplete information about what is being shipped through communities,” Wyden noted.

Wyden also called for the evaluation and update of safety requirements to adequately address crude transportation risks, and encouraged DOT to finalize rules for implementing the rail risk reduction program signed into law six years ago.

In November, PHMSA and the FRA issued a safety advisory to stress the importance of classifying and describing hazardous materials being transported. PHMSA advised the appropriate classification and packing group (PG) assignment of oil shipments, whether the shipment is in a cargo tank, rail tank car or other form of transportation. Proper characterization involves identifying properties that could affect the packing’s integrity or pose additional hazards, such as corrosivity, sulfur content and dissolved gas content.

PHMSA in the Jan. 2 notice also reminded emergency responders that light sweet crude such as Bakken crude is typically assigned a packing group of I or II. The PGs mean that the materials’ flashpoint is below 73 degrees Fahrenheit and, for PG I materials, the boiling point is below 75 degrees Fahrenheit, meaning they pose significant fire risk if accidentally released.

Issues with Rail Safety

Moving crude by rail actually predates pipelines, which only became commonplace in the second half of the 20th century, RBN Energy said in a Jan. 8 report. However, the surge in production of Bakken unconventional crude in North Dakota, where railway infrastructure is more readily available versus pipelines, means that Bakken crude is being shipped to refineries mostly by rail.  

The growing adoption of crude-by-rail transportation since 2012 means that more than 740,000 barrels of oil per day, or 11 percent of total U.S. output, was being moved by rail by the end of last year, RBN noted. Approximately 171 North American rail loading and offloading terminals have been built since 2011 or are under development. A number of refiners such as Valero and Phillips 66 have rail facilities at their plants.

DOT-111 tank cars, non-pressurized tank cars designed to carry a variety of commodities, including hazardous materials and non-hazardous materials such as corn syrup, make up the core of the North American rail tank car fleet. Approximately one third of the DOT-111 tank car fleet, which numbers 272,119, are dedicated to servicing flammable liquid commodities.


12345678

View Full Article

WHAT DO YOU THINK?


Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

Dr. Gary Reid  |  January 21, 2014
Railroad regulations are not the answer to safe rail crude transport. Pipelines are. The North America rail system is old, new sections and new cars dont mean there will not be any accidents. Approve new pipeline will equal less rail crude shipments which equals less potential for accidents. Of course 24 hour crews make a difference too. The O&G Industry takes safety seriously...like any industry there are accidents however, the amount of oil transported every day WITHOUT accidents points to a very safety record. Likewise, the amount of freight moved on a daily basis by rail without incident points to a very safe record. What is needed are pipelines. Pipelines move thousands of tons of crude per day without incident. Dwelling on the few accidents WRT pipeline spills is great to sell papers and get the environmentalist up in arms. However, what happens with the car and air accidents. Regulations are pasted, changes occur but there are still accidents. Lets get the pipelines in play and the number of rail crude shipments will decrease and thus accidents will also decrease.


Most Popular Articles