As a follow up to my prior post of March 6, 2014, here is the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) agenda for the April 22-23, 2014 Rail Safety Forum on Transportation of Crude Oil and Ethanol by rail.
The public meeting will be held at NTSB's Washington HQ and will also be available via webcast. Speaking at the meeting will be researchers, crude oil and ethanol shippers, tank car builders, rail carriers, emergency responders, and federal regulators. The presentations will cover current and proposed safety initiatives, including attempts to reduce the consequences of accidents involving crude and ethanol via tank car design, operating practices, and emergency preparedness.
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Supreme Court Rules Abandoned Rail Line Owned by Landowner not Government
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme court in Marvin Brandt Revocable Trust et al. v. United States (slip opinion attached here), ruled that a Wyoming landowner was the owner of a former railroad right of way which had been formally abandoned.
This case, and the somewhat colorful opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts, could potentially complicate Rails-to-Trails systems, and the burgeoning cottage industry of land owners seeking compensation from rail trail owners/operators for taking of their land.
The Court's decision yesterday is fairly straightforward: holding that a Wyoming landowner, whom "patented" (i.e. acquired) land from the federal government, subject to certain easements, including a rail road right of way easement, owned the land under the former rail line after it had been abandoned (via a formal process before the Surface Transportation Board).
Citing a 1942 case, Great Northern R. Co. v. United States, 315 U.S. 262 (1942), the Court stated "the government loses ... today, in large part because it won when it argued the opposite before this Court more than 70 years ago." The Government had argued in the Great Northern case, that under a 1875 law, railroads granted land by the government (after 1875) acquired only an easement in the land for railroad purposes. The conclusion then is fairly elementary property law, once the use for which the easement was granted ceased, the easement itself ceased to exist. Justice Roberts, joined by all other justices save Justice Sotomayor whom dissented, rejected the argument that the government retained any implied interest in the land (other than an easement) after the 1875 land.
This decision is also notable because it is an interesting opinion to read, and that is saying a lot when the subject matter is abandoned railroad rights of way and property easements. For example, in recounting the history of the former rail line, Justice Roberts cites to the original rail operator, the Laramie, Hahn's Peak and Pacific Railroad (LHP&P), once touted as the "one of the most important railroad systems in this country," as termed by locals the "Lord Help Push and Pull" or "Late, Hard Pressed, and Panicky." Needless to say, the LHP&P did not have an illustrious history as a railroad.
The key distinction pointed out in this case is how the federal government conveyed land for railroad purposes prior to and after 1875. Much of the land granted before 1875 contained more land ownership interest in the railroads than mere easements, whereas after 1875, most land granted by the government was the use of the land for a railroad, i.e. an easement only, rather than an ownership interest.
This distinction may be significant as more and more cases are brought against rail trail entities by owners of adjacent lands claiming ownership of the rail bed and right of way after the rail use was abandoned.
This case, and the somewhat colorful opinion authored by Chief Justice Roberts, could potentially complicate Rails-to-Trails systems, and the burgeoning cottage industry of land owners seeking compensation from rail trail owners/operators for taking of their land.
The Court's decision yesterday is fairly straightforward: holding that a Wyoming landowner, whom "patented" (i.e. acquired) land from the federal government, subject to certain easements, including a rail road right of way easement, owned the land under the former rail line after it had been abandoned (via a formal process before the Surface Transportation Board).
Citing a 1942 case, Great Northern R. Co. v. United States, 315 U.S. 262 (1942), the Court stated "the government loses ... today, in large part because it won when it argued the opposite before this Court more than 70 years ago." The Government had argued in the Great Northern case, that under a 1875 law, railroads granted land by the government (after 1875) acquired only an easement in the land for railroad purposes. The conclusion then is fairly elementary property law, once the use for which the easement was granted ceased, the easement itself ceased to exist. Justice Roberts, joined by all other justices save Justice Sotomayor whom dissented, rejected the argument that the government retained any implied interest in the land (other than an easement) after the 1875 land.
This decision is also notable because it is an interesting opinion to read, and that is saying a lot when the subject matter is abandoned railroad rights of way and property easements. For example, in recounting the history of the former rail line, Justice Roberts cites to the original rail operator, the Laramie, Hahn's Peak and Pacific Railroad (LHP&P), once touted as the "one of the most important railroad systems in this country," as termed by locals the "Lord Help Push and Pull" or "Late, Hard Pressed, and Panicky." Needless to say, the LHP&P did not have an illustrious history as a railroad.
The key distinction pointed out in this case is how the federal government conveyed land for railroad purposes prior to and after 1875. Much of the land granted before 1875 contained more land ownership interest in the railroads than mere easements, whereas after 1875, most land granted by the government was the use of the land for a railroad, i.e. an easement only, rather than an ownership interest.
This distinction may be significant as more and more cases are brought against rail trail entities by owners of adjacent lands claiming ownership of the rail bed and right of way after the rail use was abandoned.
Thursday, March 6, 2014
NTSB Schedules Crude/Ethanol by Rail Safety Forum for April
It seems as though I may need to rename this blog "Crude by Rail Today," but the news continues to pour in for this hot topic in transportation safety.
Today, the NTSB announced it will hold a two-day public forum at its Washington, DC headquarters on April 22-23, 2014. The forum "Rail Safety: Transportation of Crude Oil and Ethanol" will cover DOT-111 tank car design, construction and crashworthiness, rail operations and risk management strategies, emergency response challenges, and the ever-popular federal oversight.
The Board states a detailed agenda is forthcoming and will be available on the NSTB web site, www.ntsb.gov.
Today, the NTSB announced it will hold a two-day public forum at its Washington, DC headquarters on April 22-23, 2014. The forum "Rail Safety: Transportation of Crude Oil and Ethanol" will cover DOT-111 tank car design, construction and crashworthiness, rail operations and risk management strategies, emergency response challenges, and the ever-popular federal oversight.
The Board states a detailed agenda is forthcoming and will be available on the NSTB web site, www.ntsb.gov.
Monday, February 24, 2014
Railroads to Adopt Voluntary Crude By Rail Safety Initiative
A voluntary safety initiative addressing shipment of crude oil by rail has been announced by the USDOT and the Association of American Railroads (AAR). Under the voluntary initiative, major U.S. Railroads will agree to the following steps, outlined in the attached letter from USDOT Secretary, Anthony Foxx:
1. Effective March 25, 2014, one additional internal rail test (i.e. ultrasonic testing) will be conducted each year, and at least two track geometry inspections per year, on track over which crude traffic runs.
2. Route analysis requirements under 49 CFR 171.820(c) will apply to trains transporting 20 or more loaded tank cars carrying petroleum crude oil, which are to be termed "Key Crude Oil Trains."
3. Key Crude Oil Trains with at least one USDOT 111 type tank car, not meeting AAR Circular CPC-1232 requirements, will be restricted to 40 mph, effective July 1, 2014 or before.
4. By July 1, 2014 the participating railroads will have installed wayside defect detectors to detect overheated bearings at intervals of 40 miles, over which Key Crude Oil trains operate.
5. AAR and the railroads will develop an inventory of emergency response resources along the routes over which Key Crude Oil Trains operate.
6. Railroads are to agree to jointly fund $5 million for training emergency responders to rail accidents involving crude oil shipments.
1. Effective March 25, 2014, one additional internal rail test (i.e. ultrasonic testing) will be conducted each year, and at least two track geometry inspections per year, on track over which crude traffic runs.
2. Route analysis requirements under 49 CFR 171.820(c) will apply to trains transporting 20 or more loaded tank cars carrying petroleum crude oil, which are to be termed "Key Crude Oil Trains."
3. Key Crude Oil Trains with at least one USDOT 111 type tank car, not meeting AAR Circular CPC-1232 requirements, will be restricted to 40 mph, effective July 1, 2014 or before.
4. By July 1, 2014 the participating railroads will have installed wayside defect detectors to detect overheated bearings at intervals of 40 miles, over which Key Crude Oil trains operate.
5. AAR and the railroads will develop an inventory of emergency response resources along the routes over which Key Crude Oil Trains operate.
6. Railroads are to agree to jointly fund $5 million for training emergency responders to rail accidents involving crude oil shipments.
Monday, February 17, 2014
PHMSA Cites 3 Shippers for Misclassified Crude Oil
As part of the on-going "Operation Classification" effort of the USDOT's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), the agency recently announced it had cited three crude oil shippers for allegedly misclassifying crude oil shipped. According to PHMSA's announcement of the Notices of Probable Violation, the agency charges that 11 of 18 samples of crude being loaded onto rail cars were not assigned the proper packing group under the Hazardous Materials Regulations.
The Agency also notes the expansion of the scope of "Operation Classification" to gauge compliance with vapor pressure characterization, corrosiveness, and concentration of entrained gases in materials.
My prior post earlier this year, explains the creation of "Operation Classification" following several accidents involving crude oil shipped by rail.
The Agency also notes the expansion of the scope of "Operation Classification" to gauge compliance with vapor pressure characterization, corrosiveness, and concentration of entrained gases in materials.
My prior post earlier this year, explains the creation of "Operation Classification" following several accidents involving crude oil shipped by rail.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
National Freight Advisory Committee to Meet February 6, 2014
The National Freight Advisory Committee will hold its latest meeting on February 6, 2014, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.(EST). A link to the agenda, including the ability to pre-register for Webinar access, is attached here. Web registrants are to complete their registrations by February 5.
The main topic of this meeting is for the NFAC members to prepare a joint comment on the USDOT's designation of the Primary Freight Network. The Primary Freight Network Designation draft has been prepared by the Federal Highway Administration, and the comment period is currently open until February 15, 2014 under docket FHWA-2013-0050,.
Created under MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act), the NFAC advises the USDOT Secretary on implementing MAP-21's call for a national freight network, developing a national freight strategic plan, and other things including legislative recommendations.
The main topic of this meeting is for the NFAC members to prepare a joint comment on the USDOT's designation of the Primary Freight Network. The Primary Freight Network Designation draft has been prepared by the Federal Highway Administration, and the comment period is currently open until February 15, 2014 under docket FHWA-2013-0050,.
Created under MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act), the NFAC advises the USDOT Secretary on implementing MAP-21's call for a national freight network, developing a national freight strategic plan, and other things including legislative recommendations.
Friday, January 3, 2014
PHMSA Issues Safety Alert for Crude Oil Shipment Classification
The USDOT's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued a Safety Alert on January 2, 2014 following recent crude oil fires from train accidents where Bakken crude oil was involved. The Safety Alert is attached here. The Agency states that initial tests from the recent North Dakota accident involving two BSNF trains, and Lac Megantic Quebec in June 2013, indicate Bakken crude "may be more flammable than traditional heavy crude oil."
Yesterday's Safety Alert also encompasses the ongoing "Operation Classification" effort of PHMSA and the FRA, where the agencies have been conducting unannounced field tests to verify proper classification of crude oil shipments. In particular, the Agencies are concentrating on "Packing Group" classifications of shipments; i.e. does the chemical composition of the oil actually in a tank car reflect the packing group classification (and placard) on the car. Packing Groups are the defined classes of hazardous materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), which classify a material's flashpoint and boiling point, among other things.
PHMSA states that as "Operation Classification" is an on-going effort, it will share its sampling results of Bakken crude and oil from other locations. However, PHMSA reminds the offerors of crude oil that they should not delay their own testing (and classification under 49 CFR 173.22) of oil shipped while PHMSA's effort is underway.
Yesterday's Safety Alert also encompasses the ongoing "Operation Classification" effort of PHMSA and the FRA, where the agencies have been conducting unannounced field tests to verify proper classification of crude oil shipments. In particular, the Agencies are concentrating on "Packing Group" classifications of shipments; i.e. does the chemical composition of the oil actually in a tank car reflect the packing group classification (and placard) on the car. Packing Groups are the defined classes of hazardous materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), which classify a material's flashpoint and boiling point, among other things.
PHMSA states that as "Operation Classification" is an on-going effort, it will share its sampling results of Bakken crude and oil from other locations. However, PHMSA reminds the offerors of crude oil that they should not delay their own testing (and classification under 49 CFR 173.22) of oil shipped while PHMSA's effort is underway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)