Port of C-W to consider oil-by-rail resolution

o Who: Port of Camas-Washougal commission’s regular public meeting.

o What: Discuss a resolution to make a statement of concern about oil by train in Clark County.

o When: 5 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 16.

o Where: 24 S. A St., Washougal.

Port of Camas-Washougal commissioners on Tuesday, Sept. 16, will discuss whether to make a statement of concern about the movement of oil by rail in Clark County and Washington. Commissioners Mark Lampton, Bill Macrae-Smith and Bill Ward also will receive a presentation by a representative of the joint venture that wants to build the Northwest’s largest oil-by-rail transfer terminal at the Port of Vancouver.

The statement is a draft resolution, proposed by Ward, that spells out multiple public safety concerns and that says the port will take several steps to address them. Those steps include supporting “any actions taken by Camas, Washougal, Vancouver and other cities threatened by oil trains to restrict train movement until such time as a full fleet of U.S. (Department of Transportation) certified tank cars are used and effective disaster response measures can be implemented throughout the entire Columbia Gorge, or Bakken crude oil is stabilized prior to shipment to render it non-hazardous during transport,” according to the draft document.

The resolution is listed as discussion and action items on the port’s agenda. Its fate is unclear. Both Lampton and Macrae-Smith questioned the resolution’s usefulness. “You can issue resolutions about any number of things, but does it really have any impact on anything?” Lampton said. “The answer to that, I believe, is no.”

Ward said he modeled his proposed resolution, which focuses on rail safety, on a similar one that was recently adopted by Port of Olympia commissioners on a 2-1 vote. It’s intended to help build “an alliance of communities that are going to be impacted by the trains,” Ward said, so that their voices are better heard at the state and federal levels.

The Port of Camas-Washougal commission’s regular public meeting begins at 5 p.m. Tuesday at the port’s office, 24 S. A St. in Washougal. The port takes up the resolution as Washington state and local governments grapple with safety concerns prompted by increased oil-train traffic, proposals to build or expand oil-by-rail facilities and a string of explosive derailments in the U.S. and Canada.

Safety and mobility

In east Clark County, the Washougal City Council also is mulling a resolution concerning oil-train safety and traffic impacts. “We’re looking at a number of versions of it,” said Washougal Mayor Sean Guard. He noted the city has five at-grade crossings. Guard said it’s possible the resolution also will take a position on the proposal by Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies to receive an average of 360,000 barrels of crude per day at the Port of Vancouver.

In Camas, City Administrator Pete Capell said that “as of now, there’s nothing on the horizon that would bring any sort of resolution forward.” In June, the Vancouver City Council voted 5-2 to oppose the Tesoro-Savage plan, as well as any proposals that would result in an increase of North Dakota Bakken crude being hauled through Clark County.

Tuesday, Port of Camas-Washougal commissioners will receive a presentation by Jared Larrabee, general manager for Vancouver Energy, the Tesoro-Savage joint venture. Larrabee will give an overview of the companies’ proposed oil terminal, “including the jobs and economic benefits it will bring to the region,” said Jennifer Minx, a Tesoro spokeswoman. He’ll discuss the status of the proposal’s permit review by the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, she said, and answer questions from port commissioners.

Afterward, commissioners are expected to take up the rail safety resolution. Its concerns include: the volatility of Bakken crude; expansion plans that would increase oil trains moving through Clark County; “catastrophic explosion, spills and death due to derailments of tankers carrying” Bakken crude; and the National Transportation Safety Board’s assessment that “because there is no mandate for railroads to develop comprehensive plans or ensure the availability of necessary response resources, carriers have effectively placed the burden of remediating the environmental consequences of an accident on local communities along the route.”

For those and other reasons, the resolution says, the port urges state transportation officials to analyze the impacts of oil-train traffic, including “the economic damages to the public resulting from accidents on the rails.” It says the port will work “in lockstep” with Camas and Washougal to secure funding for grade separations and other improvements to alleviate “growing safety and mobility” concerns. And it calls on Gov. Jay Inslee to “carefully consider” whether moving “explosive” Bakken crude by rail through the state “is in the public interest of our state, its economy, its citizens, domestic livestock and wildlife.”

Macrae-Smith said his ultimate position on the resolution depends on Tuesday’s discussion of it. Resolutions seeking to stop projects, he said, are “troubling.” Recent remarks by Democratic U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, he said, struck a positive tone by focusing on fixing rail safety problems.