By Anna Del Savio, Columbia County Spotlight
(View original article)

The Oregon legislature passed a bill earlier this month raising emergency preparedness standards for railroads that carry oil near major bodies of water.

The bill requires that railroads that own or operate high hazard train routes have oil spill contingency plans approved by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. It also establishes various fees for railroads, a portion of which will go toward an oil spill preparedness fund also established by the bill.

Along with the contingency plan, the bill requires that railroads submit a financial responsibility statement demonstrating that the railroad has the financial ability to clean up a "worst case" spill, through insurance or other sources.

The bill, HB 2209, passed the House and Senate and now awaits Gov. Kate Brown's signature.

Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie and Sen. Betsy Johnson, D-Scappoose, both voted in favor of the bill.

"This is a first step, and I think as people both gear up and train up, that they will, at that point, be able to advise us in the legislature" on the next steps to improve rail safety, Witt said.

Ryan Rittenhouse, an organizer with Friends of the Columbia Gorge, which lobbied for higher rail safety standards, said the bill is a good start. But, Rittenhouse said, the definition of "worst case" is one flaw. 

"Our opinion is that if you really mean worst case, you should have to cover the entire train," Rittenhouse said at a public forum hosted last week by Columbia Riverkeeper.

The legislation defined a worst case spill as 300,000 gallons of oil or 15% of the total amount of oil held in the largest train that would transport oil on the route.

Rittenhouse acknowledged that 15% is a typical derailment size, but said it isn't the worst possible case.

The change is still welcome and a step in the right direction.

"The situation now is way better than it used to be," Rittenhouse said. "We are going to work to try to increase that worse case scenario definition in the future."

"It (HB 2209) wasn't perfect. It didn't have everything we thought it should have, but it had most of it," he added. "(The bill) took us mostly up to par with the emergency response plan that Washington state has."