On Oct. 18, 2019, the U.S. Department of Transportation released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that will loosen the Hazardous Materials Regulations for the bulk transport of refrigerated liquid methane, commonly known as liquefied natural gas, by rail tank car. Comments on the proposed rules, developed by the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Federal Railroad Administration, were closed on Jan. 13, 2020. The proposed rule argued that regulatory changes are needed to accommodate the increase in the extraction of methane and the need to move it to markets for export.
Apparently, in response to industry demands, a federal Executive Order was issued in April 2019 that directed DOT to change existing regulations to allow liquefied natural gas to be shipped in railcars. DOT is required to ensure public safety in any changes to its policies, but the proposed change does not include any safety testing for moving this highly flammable cargo. Instead, the proposal would allow the railroad industry to transport liquified natural gas in rail cars that are currently allowed to move only small quantities of other flammable liquefied gases. These tanker cars, known as DOT-113, have a 50-year-old design with a double-hulled tank separated by a vacuum layer, and they have experienced numerous failures while transporting other, less dangerous cargoes. Again, it is important to note that this federal rule proposes no restrictions on the number or distribution of liquefied natural gas tanker cars in a particular train, nor on the routes, these trains may travel. Under the rule, these trains would be subject to only a voluntary speed limit of up to 50 mph through densely-populated cities.
The supercooled rail tank cars (designated DOT-113) used to carry gas below -260 degrees Fahrenheit have no special protections against rupture if a train derails. Independent rail experts warn that liquified natural gas is extremely hazardous if a tank car ruptures and the gas is exposed to air, causing it to explode in an unquenchable fire. When the new regulations go into effect, many of the natural gas trains will be going through urban and suburban areas. PHMSA’s draft Environmental Assessment would subject virtually all major U.S. cities to the risk of a liquified natural gas by rail disaster, ignoring the long-standing industry practice of maintaining “protective distance” from concentrated populations.
Among the 444 comments submitted on the Federal Register in response to this rule,
- Officials at the Federal Railroad Administration have noted that tank cars are unlikely to survive impacts at even 30 mph.
- The National Transportation Safety Board said allowing liquefied natural gas to be moved in railroad tank cars “would be detrimental to public safety,” and notes that the rule would allow the explosive substance to move across the U.S. in “invalidated tank cars and lacking operational controls that are afforded other hazardous materials such as flammable liquids.”
- The National Association of State Fire Marshals commented that, in the new rule, the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration “is not proposing any additional safety requirements on these railcars, or the trains which transport them, despite the potential hazards of the liquified natural gas product.”
- The Federal Accounting Office stated that an accident involving only five rail tank cars loaded with liquid propane gas exploded over an area half a mile by three-quarters of a mile and was felt 45 miles away. Debris from the fire and explosions covered 20 blocks of Decatur, Ill. They noted, “If large amounts of LPG or its vapor get into the sewer system, subways or other subterranean ducts, it could lead to a major catastrophic event.”
In prior years, PHMSA concluded that more robust research was needed to assess the high risk of accidents at fixed natural gas facilities, which have historically been located away from human population centers. The latest PHMSA assessment, however, declined to require a similar risk research effort in approving gas by rail, even though these trains would potentially carry liquified natural gas on 100-car trains directly through densely populated, major U.S. cities. The Department of Transportation’s own Emergency Response Guidebook, which is used universally by North American fire and emergency services, advises that in the event of a breached refrigerated liquids transportation container, first responders should immediately isolate the scene for one mile in all directions. This would be virtually impossible in any timely manner within a densely populated area.
After reviewing the comments on its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the DOT is able to adopt its proposal. The new rules could be challenged in federal court, but during the legal challenge, unless the rules are suspended by court order, the nation’s cities, towns, and villages would be exposed to increased risks of derailments and explosions. Independent experts on railway safety, such as Fred Millar, who was quoted in a Fortune article, warned that such changes would “pose an unprecedented new level of risk for American cities,” and are being pursued hastily “because of enormous pressure to sell our fracked gas.”
One only has to revisit history to recall the potentially catastrophic danger this rule poses for our community and all of Long Island. Have there been disasters involving liquefied natural gas? YES. In one of the worst examples, 131 people were killed, countless injured and a square mile of Cleveland, Ohio, was destroyed when liquefied natural gas escaped from a tank farm, flowed into the city’s sewer system and ignited in 1944. In the numerous explosions that followed, temperatures soared to 3000 degrees, streets blew up — in fact, one explosion opened a crater 25 feet deep, and 60 feet long.
Thus, as a citizen, homeowner and voting taxpayer who is impacted by the LIRR Expansion Project (“Third Track Project”), this new rule is of significant concern to me, my family, friends and community members all of whom reside in the Village of New Hyde Park – especially considering we still await the long-delayed installation of ‘positive train control’ safety technology on the LIRR (which can automatically slow down or stop a train to prevent an accident).
Personally I have reached out to all federal, state, county, town and local government officials for answers. NHP Village Mayor Larry Montreuil was the only one who responded by sharing his serious concern regarding the aforementioned. Why haven’t those government officials – especially those at the federal and state levels who supported the LIRR Expansion Project, answered me? We, the people of the Village of New Hyde Park and every railroad community across Long Island, want to know what is being specifically done to protect the public’s safety and security by guaranteeing that no liquified natural gas will be transported on the Long Island Rail Road. As a member of a growing number of residents, business owners and voting taxpayers who have mobilized because of a myriad of issues that affect our families and our largest personal investment – our homes, we have more than earned a cogent response to these concerns. After all, if we are truly living the tenets of a democratic republic, isn’t this still government for the people?
Diane Bentivegna
New Hyde Park
