Archives
11:17:00 AM EDT
Railroad Hazmat Route Selection Rule
Railroad Hazmat Route Selection Rule : Be sure not to miss the real intent and impact. See stories in USA Today 3 14 08; Oakland Tribune 4 16 08 and CNN 4 17 08.
Friends of the Earth Blasts New Bush Administration Railroad Routing Regulations
WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Bush administration published new regulations today that allow U.S. railroads to unilaterally select dangerous routes through or around major cities for chemical railcars that the federal agencies call “Weapons of Mass Destruction.”
Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder had the following response:
“These regulations are part of President Bush’s failed homeland security legacy. This rerouting policy leaves our cities vulnerable to attacks on trains carrying hazardous rail cargoes. It is an abdication of government responsibility in the face of corporate power that endangers millions of Americans.”
Fred Millar, rail security consultant for Friends of the Earth, said:
"Cities and states need to protest these new regulations vigorously, and once again Congress must re-address the rail routing issue. This Bush administration pretense of regulation must be replaced with real protections for target cities."
OVERVIEW OF THE NEW RULE: SAME AS THE BUSH ADMINSTRATION’S LAST FAILED ATTEMPT
The new rule is nearly identical to the one Bush administration proposed December 21, 2006, and which Congress subsequently found inadequate. The previous rule and the new one allow railroads to pick hazardous materials routes using assumptions and calculations that are kept secret from the public. They also allow virtually no role for state and local officials in these selections and preempt state and local rerouting legislation. Eleven major <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />U.S. target cities, beginning in 2005 with Washington D.C., and including St. Louis, Buffalo and Chicago, and two states (New York and Tennessee) have introduced new rerouting legislation, and many major media reports have shown the easy accessibility to dangerous railcars in cities and rail yards.
The new rule utilizes the same flawed regulatory techniques as the last one, ensuring that virtually no protective rerouting will occur:
It puts individual railroads (including the 300 or so relatively new shortline railroads which often link major rail lines and the chemical company shippers or final customers for the dangerous rail cargoes) in charge of analyzing their own current routes and alternatives to these “over which they have authority to operate.” The Department of Transportation appeals in the regulation to the “good faith” of the railroads—a flawed approach.....
As FRA's Joseph Boardman told reporters Wednesday : This is a routing rule [i.e., business as usual], not a re-routing rule." Exactly.
Fred Millar fmillar@erols.com
Written by fmillar1 Blog about this entry |
Add to del.icio.us | 
digg this
-
Since Fred’s initial entry on this new Journal was ‘inspired’ by a posting on my blog I thought that I ought to join in on the discussion here. As I mentioned in my reply to his comments there, I think that this rule will have very little effect on the route selection process employed by the rail carriers. The rail carriers have to know that the FRA and TSA inspectors that are tasked with “aggressively” reviewing the required 27-point route analysis will not have anywhere near enough time during a site visit to review one route analysis. They will certainly not be able to review the hundreds that the major rail carriers will likely have to complete.
On the other hand, I have to agree with PHMSA that allowing state or local governments to mandate route restrictions will not work. Quoting from the interim final rule (pages 20767-8):
“We note that virtually every urban and suburban jurisdiction in the United States has a population density that is a matter of concern in planning for and regulating hazardous materials transportation; if all of the jurisdictions located on or near rail routes were to enact routing restrictions applicable to the rail transportation of hazardous materials, such transportation would come to a virtual standstill.“
The problem still remains that the chemicals covered under this new rule do present a significant terrorist target when traversing urban areas. Route selection is only a small part of any potential solution to the problem. Hardening of railcars is an important factor in increasing the safety and security of these rail shipments. Keeping high risk railcars moving will also make it harder for terrorists to target them; and this rule also addresses (briefly) that action. Additional work will also need to be done on other security aspects of rail movement, hopefully these will be addressed in DHS rule making later this year.
4/19/08 5:10 PM
DHS recognized this problem when they were setting up their chemical facility security rules. They knew that they would not have enough manpower to the data from thousands of chemical facilities to determine which facilities should make the list of ‘high-risk’ facilities. Instead, they set up the Top Screen Tool as part of an on-line computer analysis system called Chemical Security Analysis Tool (CSAT). This tool allows DHS to objectively analyze a large amount of data to determine which facilities really require Federal supervision of their facility security.
DOT needs to set up a similar system for rail route hazard assessments. An objective tool such as the Top Screen would allow the railroad to enter in the various proposed routes to allow an objective assessment of their relative safety and security. Such a program should allow for the identification of high-risk sections of each route that would require additional mitigation efforts to minimize the risks to the shipment and/or local populace.
Anything less than an impartial, objective analysis of the relative risk of the various possible routes for the shipment of dangerous materials leaves the American public, chemical companies, and the railroads at risk.