September, 30 2014, 01:00pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jared Margolis, Center for Biological Diversity, (971) 717-6404
Michael Lang, Friends of the Columbia Gorge, (503) 490-3979
Immediate Ban Called for on Puncture-prone Rail Cars Carrying Volatile Crude Oil Across United States
New Rules Fail to Protect Public Safety, Nation's Waterways, Wildlife
PORTLAND, OREGON
In response to inadequate federal proposals for regulating transport of volatile crude oil by rail, the Center for Biological Diversity ("Center"), Adirondack Mountain Club ("ADK") and Friends of the Columbia Gorge ("Friends") filed comments today calling for an immediate ban on puncture-prone tank cars involved in several explosive accidents.
The legacy DOT-111 tank cars remain in widespread use despite the National Transportation Safety Board's acknowledgment that they're likely to breach in derailments. The new rules proposed by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration allow for the dangerous tank cars to continue in service over a five-year phase-out period. The groups also filed a petition for an emergency order, asking the Department of Transportation to immediately require comprehensive oil-spill response plans for oil trains.
"Allowing these dangerously deficient tank cars to remain in service is playing Russian roulette with public safety," said Jared Margolis, an attorney at the Center who focuses on the impacts of energy development on endangered species. "These tank cars put our health and the environment at risk, so allowing their continued use is unacceptable."
The proposed regulations are intended to address the risks associated with the recent rapid increase in oil train traffic, which has grown from virtually nothing in 2008 to more than 400,000 rail cars of oil in 2013, moving billions of gallons of oil through towns and cities ill-equipped to respond to the kind of fiery explosions and spills that have occurred across the country in recent years.
"The proposed rules just don't go far enough to protect people from these bomb trains," says Margolis. "These regulations simply sanction business-as-usual, ensuring the ongoing transport of billions of gallons of crude oil through our cities and sensitive wildlife habitats at unsafe speeds, in unsafe tanks."
The groups' call for updated oil-spill response plans was spurred by grossly inadequate existing regulations that do not require oil shippers to ensure that sufficient equipment and personnel will be available to respond to a worst-case spill event. This puts the burden on state and local responders, rather than those profiting from shipping the toxic, flammable liquids.
"Increased traffic of dangerous oil trains puts our communities and the Columbia River Gorge at risks of accidents and oil spills," said Michael Lang, Friends' conservation director. "The new federal rules must ensure that our communities and the iconic resources of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area are protected from oil train accidents. Ultimately, oil trains don't belong in the Gorge, and we are calling for an analysis of the threats and specific means for avoiding impacts to public safety and fish and wildlife habitat."
Along with the comments, more than 18,000 members of the Center have submitted letters to the Department of Transportation calling for a ban on the DOT-111 bomb cars.
A U.S. Government Accountability Office report released last week echoes the groups' concerns. It states that "without timely action to address safety risks posed by increased transport of oil and gas by pipeline and rail, additional accidents that could have been prevented or mitigated may endanger the public and call into question the readiness of transportation networks in the new oil and gas environment."
Background
Oil transport, especially by rail, has dramatically increased in recent years. A series of fiery oil-train derailments has occurred in the United States and Canada, resulting in hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil being spilled into waterways. The worst was a derailment in Quebec that killed 47 people, forced the evacuation of 2,000 people, and incinerated portions of a popular tourist town. The most recent explosive derailment, occurred in April in downtown Lynchburg, Va., resulting in crude oil leaking out of punctured tank cars and setting the James River on fire.
Most of this oil is being transported in older DOT-111 tank cars, which have been known for decades to be puncture-prone.
"Given the unprecedented recent increase in rail transport of oil throughout North America, and new knowledge concerning the risks of transporting oil by rail, there is a far greater risk for impacts to people and the environment from a derailment and oil spill than was the case just a few years ago," the groups' comments state. "This new information serves to heighten the immediate need for a ban on the use of DOT-111 tank cars, and the promulgation of rules that ensure sufficient protections for people and the environment. More must be done to prevent fiery derailments and spills that will continue to endanger Americans in their homes and wild animals and ecosystem along busy rail corridors."
The unprecedented boom in oil-train traffic has caught responders unaware, and there is a lack of sufficient personnel and equipment to respond to a spill event. Since many oil trains travel through densely populated areas and along waterways where there are protected species and critical habitat, the lack of comprehensive plans for responding to oil spills puts people and species at risk. Requiring comprehensive plans would ensure that sufficient resources will be available for a worst-case spill event.
The groups contend the proposed rules must be accompanied by an analysis of the potential impacts to the environment and endangered species pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act. The government has failed to provide a thorough analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed rules, and has not even considered reasonable alternatives, such as an immediate ban on the use of the legacy DOT-111 tank cars. It has also failed to initiate consultation pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, ignoring the continuing harm that oil trains pose to our most imperiled species.
"These spills continue to pose completely unacceptable threats to people and drinking water supplies as well as to wildlife, including endangered species," said Margolis. "Regulators have known for decades that these outdated tank cars are prone to puncture in derailments. Waiting another five years to get them off the tracks is nothing short of reckless."
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
Trump Asylum Crackdown Dealt Major Blow in 'Hugely Important' Court Ruling
"Nothing in the Constitution grants the president the sweeping authority asserted," wrote a U.S. district judge.
Jul 02, 2025
President Donald Trump's crackdown on asylum-seekers was dealt a major blow on Wednesday when U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled that the administration had vastly overstepped its legal authority with an executive order issued on the first day of his second term.
Politico reports that Moss found that Trump's January 20 executive order slapping new restrictions on asylum-seekers even if they arrive at proper points of entry exceeded his powers as outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which the judge described as containing the "sole and exclusive" procedure for properly deporting undocumented immigrants. In fact, Moss went so far as to say that Trump had established "an alternative immigration system" with his asylum order.
Moss—appointed to the district court in Washington, D.C. by former President Barack Obama—also didn't buy the administration's rationale that such drastic measures were necessary due to the emergency of an "invasion" at the southern border.
"Nothing in the INA or the Constitution grants the president... the sweeping authority asserted in the proclamation and implementing guidance," the judge wrote. "An appeal to necessity cannot fill that void."
Lee Gelernt, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who argued the case in court, praised the ruling as "a hugely important decision" that will "save the lives of families fleeing grave danger" and "reaffirms that the president cannot ignore the laws Congress has passed and the most basic premise of our country's separation of powers."
The original Trump order not only barred asylum-seekers who showed up at the border outside the proper points of entry, but also mandated that asylum-seekers at the points of entry provide additional documentation beyond what is required by law, including medical histories and information about potential past criminal records.
Moss' order is not going into effect immediately as he is giving the administration two weeks to prepare an appeal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Form Procedural 'Conga Line' to Block Medicaid and SNAP Cuts
"We're here to help people, not screw people over!" said Rep. Jim McGovern.
Jul 02, 2025
Democrats in the House of Representatives on Wednesday banded together in an attempt to gum up the works to block House Republicans from passing their massive budget bill that includes historic and devastating cuts to both Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program known as SNAP.
One by one, House Democrats moved in what Punchbowl News reporter Jake Sherman described as a "conga line" to make the exact same request for unanimous consent "to amend the rule to make an order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid and SNAP." Each time a Democrat would make the request, Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), holding the gavel in the chamber, informed them that "the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained."
At one point, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) grew frustrated with his Republican colleagues for their insistence on passing the budget bill, which he noted would significantly cut taxes for the richest Americans while decimating safety net programs designed to help poor and working class Americans.
"We're here to help people, not screw people over!" McGovern fumed.
As of this writing, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R.La.) remained in his office, according to Punchbowlreporting, an apparent signal that a floor vote for Wednesday remained up in the air.
The United States Senate on Tuesday passed a budget package by the slimmest of margins that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period and would slash SNAP spending by more than $250 billion over the same period.
Previous polling has shown that the budget package is broadly unpopular and a new poll from Data for Progress released Wednesday found that the Republican plan grows more unpopular the more voters learn about its provisions. In particular, voters expressed significant concern about the plan's impact on the national debt, cuts to CHIP and Medicaid, and attacks on clean energy programs.
Over 100 @HouseDemocrats lined up to ask for "unanimous consent to amend the rule and make in order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid & SNAP" pic.twitter.com/r5ktS9Uj0K
— Jahana Hayes (@RepJahanaHayes) July 2, 2025
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Cruel Betrayal': Educators Furious Over Trump Funding Freeze for School Programs
One Democratic senator called the move a "clear as day violation of federal law."
Jul 02, 2025
The Trump administration informed state education agencies on Monday that it would not release over $6 billion in previously approved federal funding for schools—sparking outcry from teachers unions, Democratic lawmakers, and education-focused groups who called the move harmful to students.
In an unsigned email, Education Department staff told states that they would not be dispersing any money from five programs that focus on issues including migrant education, before- and after-school programs, English learner services, and more.
"Given the change in administrations, the department is reviewing the FY 2025 funding for the [Title I-C, II-A, III-A, IV-A, IV-B] grant program(s), and decisions have not yet been made concerning submissions and awards for this upcoming year," according to the email, which was obtained by NPR.
Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, a group that promotes access to after-school programs for kids, called the funding loss "catastrophic," according to The New York Times.
Grant's organization is sounding the alarm that loss of funding for 21st Century Community Learning Centers, one of the programs targeted, could mean that 10,000 after-school and summer programs could close their doors for the 2025-26 school year. Over a million children are at risk of losing their programs as soon as this summer, according to the Afterschool Alliance.
The email came one day before the federal government was scheduled to disperse the money, on July 1. The funding had been previously approved by Congress in a continuing budget resolution that passed in March.
On Wednesday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called the move a "clear as day violation of federal law. The appropriations law passed by Congress requires this money to be spent."
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, a teachers union, also called it unlawful. "This is another illegal usurpation of the authority of the Congress. Plus it directly harms the children in our nation," she said in a statement on Tuesday.
According to Education Week, a 2026 federal budget proposal from the White House unveiled last month seeks to eliminate all five of the education programs targeted in this week's funding freeze, meaning this move from the Trump administration is essentially the White House advancing its priorities early, without Congress' consideration.
"Withholding billions in promised federal education funding that students need—and states had planned to use to support children in their states—is a cruel betrayal of students, especially those who rely on critical support services," said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, in a statement on Tuesday.
"Sadly, this is part of a broader pattern by this administration of undermining public education—starving it of resources, sowing distrust, and pushing privatization at the expense of the nation's most vulnerable students," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular