Document text
Oil train legislation sent back to committee A Union Pacific oil train burns June 3, 2016, near Mosier after derailing. [Alan Berner/The Seattle Times via AP, File] Friday Jun 30, 2017 at 5:16 PM Jun 30, 2017 at 5:16 PM By Gillian Flaccus Associated Press PORTLAND — State lawmakers sent a proposed oil train safety bill back for more work Friday after growing concerns that an amendment favoring the railroad industry had watered down key provisions on public oversight and financial accountability. The Oregon House was prepared to vote on House Bill 2131, but Rep. Barbara Smith Warner, a Democrat from Portland, made a surprise motion to send the proposed legislation back to the Joint Ways and Means committee for changes. The move came after environmental groups and residents of the Columbia River Gorge raised concerns about an amendment they felt neutered the state's ability to police the railroads that run oil trains through communities. The bill was crafted at the start of the legislative session to address safety concerns after an oil train derailment near the small Columbia River Gorge town of Mosier sparked a fire near an elementary school that took hours to put out. Oil trains run continuously along tracks that parallel the Columbia River and pass through Mosier and other small communities. The bill was amended in May. Critics said the changes compromised transparency and public safety for the benefit of the rail industry. "Our intention was not to hide oil train safety plans from the public," Smith Warner said before the vote on the motion. "This has been a complicated path, a long negotiation, and despite that there are times when the need for good policy overrides the need for consensus." The railroad industry says making information about oil train routes and plans for a potential spill public would endanger national security by identifying where the easily identifiable, mile-long trains move. Smith Warner said Friday that the proposed bill had been crafted in a way that would help it survive legal challenges. Justin Jacobs, a regional spokesman for Union Pacific Railroad, said in a statement that the railroad had worked closely with legislators on the bill in question and also had safety as a priority. Railroads are only required to provide a detailed accident contingency plan in California, Washington and Minnesota, he said, and Minnesota allows those plans to be kept from the public. Environmentalists had been vocal in their criticism of the amendments, which made the railroads' safety plans secret from the public. The original bill would have allowed the public to read the plans; required railroads to pay a fee for oil response planning and required financial disclosures to prove railroads could pay for any accident cleanup, said Michael Lang, conservation director for Friends of the Columbia Gorge.