Last week the DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety
Administration (PHMSA) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register (81 FR
50067-50129) concerning oil spill response plans and information sharing
for high-hazard flammable trains. The advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM)
for this rulemaking was
published in August of 2014.
This rulemaking addresses three general areas:
• Information
Sharing; and
Oil Spill Response Plans
The current hazardous materials regulations (49
CFR 130) currently requires two types of oil spill response plans (OSRP).
The basic OSRP {§130.31(a)}
covers any oil shipment in containers of 3,500 gallons or greater. The
comprehensive OSRP {§130.31(b)}
covers any oil shipment in containers of 42,000 gallons or greater. Since
railcars used for transporting crude oil are generally 30,000 gallons,
railroads are currently only required to prepare basic OSRPs.
This NPRM proposes to generally re-write Part 130; moving (and
expanding) the comprehensive OSRP requirements to a new Subpart C. The changes
to the comprehensive OSRP requirements would include:
• Expanding the applicability for
comprehensive oil spill response plans to include “Any railroad which
transports a single train transporting 20 or more loaded tank cars of liquid
petroleum oil in a continuous block or a single train carrying 35 or more
loaded tank cars of liquid petroleum oil throughout the train consist” {new §130.101(b)};
• Establishing a general
requirement for the overall development of the comprehensive response plan and
requires the plan uses the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and
Incident Command System (ICS) {new §130.102(a)};
• Establishing a general
requirement for the plan format including the development a core plan and the
establishment of geographic response zones and accompanying response zone
appendixes {new §130.102(b)};
• Establishing requirements for the
notification procedures and contact information that a railroad must include in
a comprehensive oil spill response plan {new §130.105};
• Establishing requirements for
equipment testing and drill procedures consistent with PREP requirements for
comprehensive oil spill response plans {new §130.108}; and
• Establishing requirements and
procedures to submit comprehensive oil spill response plans for approval to FRA
{new §130.111};
Nothing in this rule changes the basic OSRP requirement that
the plan is targeted at oil spill containment and recovery. In fact, a new
definition is added in §130.5
for ‘Response
Activities’ that specifically limits that definition to the “the
containment and removal of oil from navigable waters and adjoining shorelines”.
Information Sharing
While information sharing was not included in the ANPRM for
this rulemaking, Congress did recently specifically direct DOT to “require each
Class I railroad to provide advanced
notification and information on high-hazard flammable trains
to each State emergency response commission, consistent with the notification
content requirements in Emergency Order Docket No. DOT–OST–2014–0067
[.PDF Download link added]” {§7302(a)(3)
of the FAST Act (PL HR
114-94)}.
This NPRM establishes information sharing requirements that
expands the notification requirements of the Emergency Order to include all
Highly Hazardous Flammable Trains (HHFT) as defined in §171.8.
The NPRM would require monthly reports to State and Tribal Emergency Response
Commissions (SERC and TERC) that would include:
• A reasonable estimate of the
number of HHFTs that the railroad expects to operate each week, through each
county within the state or through each tribal jurisdiction;
• The routes over which the HHFTs
will operate;
• A description of the hazardous
material being transported and all applicable emergency response information
required by subparts C [Shipping
Papers] and G [Emergency
Response Information] of part 172; at least one point of contact at the
railroad (including name, title, phone number and address) with knowledge of
the railroad's transportation of affected trains (referred to as the “HHFT
point of contact”); and
• If a route is subject to the
comprehensive spill plan requirements, the notification must include a
description of the response zones (including counties and states) and contact
information for the qualified individual and alternate, as specified under
§ 130.104(a).
SERCs and TERCs would be required to share the supplied
information with “appropriate local authorities, upon request” {new §174.312(a)}.
Further dissemination of the information may be restricted upon request by the
submitting railroad if the railroad determines that the information may be “security
sensitive or proprietary and exempt from public disclosure” {new §174.312(a)(2)(iii)}.
The language does not make the information Sensitive Security Information under
§1520.5
so the SERC and TERC would be able to make their own decisions as to what State
or local regulations applied to the protection of the information.
Initial Boiling Point Test
One of the concerns about shipping crude oil from the Bakken
region is that the current standard for classifying the crude oil for shipment may
not appropriately address the volatility of the crude oil. Suggestions have
been made to include a vapor pressure measurement for use in the classification
of crude oil and I have discussed
the problems with that sort of measurement.
The current testing process outlined in §173.120
and §173.121
almost certainly allow significant amounts of the light-ends (low molecular
weight hydrocarbons). Depending on the concentration of these light-ends, these
current test methods could significantly under-state the flammability of the
material.
Recognizing
this problem, PHMSA and the American Petroleum Institute (API) came up with a
best practice (ANSI/API
RP 3000) for measuring the flammability of crude oil that includes using ASTM D7900 for determining
initial boiling point. This test method, however, is not one of the approved
methods for classifying flammable liquids in §173.121. This NPRM would add ASTM
D7900 as an acceptable alternative for determining initial boiling point to be
used in determining packing groups for Class 3 (flammable liquids) hazardous
material.
Public Comments
PHMSA is soliciting public comments on this rule making. Written
comments may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.Regulations.gov; Docket # PHMSA-2014-0105).
Comments should be submitted by 9-27-16.
Commentary
My major concern with the OSRP section of the NPRM is that
it fails to address what is the most publicly acknowledged problem with crude
oil transportation by unit trains; the potential for catastrophic fires and
explosions resulting from a rail accident and the inability of most local first
response agencies to properly deal with this type of catastrophic emergency.
Unfortunately, the current OSRP rules are based upon the Clean Water Act
provisions that are intended to protect waterways (and drinking water sources)
from contamination with crude oil. Until Congress specifically addresses the
flammability problems associated with a variety of energy chemicals shipped by
unit trains, neither PHMSA, FRA, nor the Coast Guard will be able to address
these very real probable consequences of oil spills.
PHMSA took a pass on addressing the issue of confidentiality
of HHFT train schedule information by allowing the railroads to claim that the
information was either sensitive from a security perspective or confidential
business information and then allowing each SERC or TERC to evaluate those
claims based upon State and local laws. Again, PHMSA has not really been
authorized to make a determination that the information falls within the
Sensitive Security Information rules; only TSA is authorized to make that
determination. Again this is going to take Congressional action to resolve this
problem.
The issue of crude oil testing is a more complex problem.
The addition of ASTM D7900 to the list of allowable test methods provides crude
oil shippers with a more accurate method of classifying crude oil based upon
the initial boiling point. PHMSA has long maintained that shippers are
responsible for determining which of the allowed test methods is the most
appropriate for classifying the material which they ship. The use of this test
should result in upgrading some shipments from Packing Groups II and III and
that will result in some increase in safety of those shipments.
What is missing, however, is a more complete discussion of
the role of volatility in the fires and explosions seen in a relatively small
number of crude oil derailments. Measurement of volatility, alone will not
increase safety unless some additional safety measures are required for
flammable liquids with higher vapor pressures. For crude oil, that could
include a requirement to remove light-ends from the material to reduce vapor
pressure before it is offered for shipment.
To be an effective safety tool, any vapor pressure testing
is going to have to specifically address protection of samples from vapor loss
(sealed sampling devices and sample containers) as well as measuring vapor
pressure at multiple temperatures if there is any hope of using the test as an
effective tool for predicting the safety consequences of the fluid vapor
pressure.
The current NPRM provides a good first step at addressing
the transportation safety classification of crude oil. Hopefully PHMSA will
continue to look at possible additional changes to test methodology to more
completely identify the safety issues associated with crude oil transportation.
No comments:
Post a Comment