Western Railroad Discussion > Indian tribe sues BNSF over oil trains

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/07/usa-washington-oiltrain-idUSL2N0X428I20150407?type=companyNews  

This could have pretty far reaching effects in a lot of the Western states.   Someone at BN messed up if they actually had an agreement to limit the number of trains per day.
RB

More in depth.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/swinomish-sue-to-get-bakken-oil-trains-off-tribal-lands/

Affects the Tesoro plant and Shell's plan in Anacortes.

Looks like  a failure to communicate. The PDF in the above article is informative.

the tribe agreed in 1990 to allow for train size increases as needed by customers. As long as they were compensated with additional rent.


 

"The crude-oil shipments across tribal lands began in late 2011, but tribal officials said they were never informed in advance, and have never authorized that train traffic."

I find it difficult to believe the tribe has not seen or even questioned the crude oil trains moving over their land since 2011.  Sounds fishy to me.  There is more to this.  Perhaps there is an environmental group that is using the tribe to stonewall Bakken oil transport to the refineries.  That would not surprise me.


Allen

bradleymckay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The crude-oil shipments across tribal lands began
> in late 2011, but tribal officials said they were
> never informed in advance, and have never
> authorized that train traffic."
>
> I find it difficult to believe the tribe has not
> seen or even questioned the crude oil trains
> moving over their land since 2011.  Sounds fishy
> to me.  There is more to this.  Perhaps there is
> an environmental group that is using the tribe to
> stonewall Bakken oil transport to the
> refineries.  That would not surprise me.
>
>
> Allen

Doesn't seem all that fishy to me. Who knows how long they "talked" without reaching an agreement before getting lawyers involved. Nothing involving lawyers moves fast-they are usually paid by the hour.

Posted from iPhone

Given that towns/cities cannot block or restrict Interstate Commerce, why do these "native" peoples have any standing to stop or inhibit any trains?

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Given that towns/cities cannot block or restrict
> Interstate Commerce, why do these "native" peoples
> have any standing to stop or inhibit any trains?

A lot depends on the specific facts, but most native American reservations aren't cities or towns in the legal sense. They're wards of the federal government, considered to be semi-sovereign,and are immune in many respects from local law.  Some western reservations are governed by treaties with the  US from the 1870s-1890s, with an abundance of case law.  The presence of the railroad may be covered in treaty terms, for example.

The Navaho situation with the Four Corners Power Plant and the coal mining / royalties payments has created a significant amount of new case law and regulatory policy.  As well as some Fort Berthold ND regulatory decisions.  Although the Washington state matter may indeed be the result of internal tribal politics, dismissing the matter could be a serious mistake.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------Four corneners is an example of how little the Indians care about the enviorment, the coal fired plants had for years emmisions that were well over any current standards.

> MEKoch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Given that towns/cities cannot block or
> restrict
> > Interstate Commerce, why do these "native"
> peoples
> > have any standing to stop or inhibit any
> trains?
>
> A lot depends on the specific facts, but most
> native American reservations aren't cities or
> towns in the legal sense. They're wards of the
> federal government, considered to be
> semi-sovereign,and are immune in many respects
> from local law.  Some western reservations are
> governed by treaties with the  US from the
> 1870s-1890s, with an abundance of case law.  The
> presence of the railroad may be covered in treaty
> terms, for example.
>
> The Navaho situation with the Four Corners Power
> Plant and the coal mining / royalties payments has
> created a significant amount of new case law and
> regulatory policy.  As well as some Fort Berthold
> ND regulatory decisions.  Although the Washington
> state matter may indeed be the result of internal
> tribal politics, dismissing the matter could be a
> serious mistake.

BAB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----Four corneners is an example of how little
> the Indians care about the enviorment, the coal
> fired plants had for years emmisions that were
> well over any current standards.
>
(SNIP)

Just to note that I didn't write the short snippet quoted to me.

That was somebody else, and the comment doesn't reflect anything I wrote

Does this involve a main line or
is it a branch line?

Thank you in advance.

Did you guys know that snakes come in barrels? And that somebody just opened one? One of the
three most used passing sidings on the BNSF Sioux City sub is right in the town of Winnebago, right
behind the tribal office! The tribe is very well run, council has had a few hiccups as of late but is
still the model for the nation. Should be interesting.

Out

As with most articles there isn't enought information provided to really know who is right or wrong here.  For instance, did the tribe notify BNSF, at any time between 2011 and now, that BNSF was in violation of the agreement and BNSF willfully ignored it?  Doubtful.  Were the tribe and BNSF negotiating to amend the agreement and talks broke down?  Maybe.  Was BNSF blindsided by the lawsuit and didn't see it coming?  The article makes it sound that way. 

As I said the tribe must have known about the oil trains back in 2011/2012.  The question is how many tank cars can the Tesoro refinery handle at one time?  Do they have a loop track?  Were they receiving 25 car "blocks" of oil at a time and now they are getting 110 unit oil trains and those unit trains are what is violating the agreement?  The article doesn't answer those questions.  There are big pieces of the puzzle missing here, including if the lawsuit is strictly the idea of the tribe or are they receiving backing from environmental groups knowing that tribal lands have different laws and regulations?  The million dollar question is: if this was grain, and not crude oil, would they still be suing BNSF for violating the agreement????


Allen






 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/15 11:14 by bradleymckay.

This shouldn't surprise anyone, as the Native Americans watch the news like anyone else.  They have a legal tool to use, so they decided to use it.  I applaud them for exercising their legal rights.  I don't know who is right and who is wrong, but that's why we have a legal system.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/15 10:44 by radar.

BAB Wrote:

> -----Four corneners is an example of how little
> the Indians care about the enviorment, the coal
> fired plants had for years emmisions that were
> well over any current standards.
>

The Navajo Nation does not own the Four Corners Generating Station, just the land it sits on.  The Navajo Nation has no control over how much pollution is generated by the station.  They also do not own the Navajo Generating Station near Page, AZ, just the land it sits on.

The Four Corners Generating Station is (or has been partially) owned by Arizona Public Service, Public Service of New Mexico, Salt River Project, Tuscon Electric Power, El Paso Electric and Southern California Edison.  Jointly, these utilities have done a good job at stalling for time when it came to installing necessary pollution control equipment.

Ready kilowatts for rich city folk.

d.