Federal court rejects rail board's approval for crude oil trains through Utah, Colorado
A plan to build an 85-mile stretch of new rail line in central Utah was derailed -- at least temporarily -- by federal judges' ruling Friday.
The court's rejection of the previously approved proposal means trains carrying crude oil will not be rolling through the Interstate 70 corridor in Colorado. That is, not until the proposal is reconsidered and re-approved by the Surface Transportation Board (STB) and withstands any more litigation from the Colorado communities through which the trains would travel.
With Friday's decision, it didn't survive the first round in court.
"It is not our job to decide whether the Board ultimately arrived at the right outcome in light of its findings," two judges wrote in the ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. "However, it is clear that the Board failed to adequately consider the Rail Policies and 'articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action including a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made,'" citing previous case law.
The judges called STB's consideration of the environmental impacts of potential crude oil spills a "paltry discussion" and its approval of the project "arbitrary and capricious."
RELATED: Colorado coal town grapples with future as power plant shuts down
"If this is going to move forward, it needs to start over," Bryan Treu, Eagle County's attorney, told CBS News Colorado. "Any new application will now have to fully consider the impacts to Colorado. Many more eyes will be watching this time around."
Conceptually, the Uinta Basin Railway would connect energy production facilities in Utah's Uinta and White River basins with the national railroad network. Crude oil transportation is the focus of the project. Trains working their way toward Gulf Coast refineries would travel on existing track laid next to the Colorado River once they're in Colorado's Western Slope. The proposed route would continue through Glenwood Canyon and turn north to connect with freight and passenger line tracks in Granby and Winter Park, eventually coming through the Moffat Tunnel to the Front Range and the Denver metro area before heading east.
An alternate proposed route has the trains turning south, rather than north, after Glenwood Canyon and following the Arkansas River through Leadville, Salida, the Royal Gorge and Pueblo, then exiting through the southeastern part of the state.
U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse released a joint statement following the court's ruling:
"This ruling is excellent news. The approval process for the Uinta Basin Railway Project has been gravely insufficient, and did not properly account for the project's full risks to Colorado's communities, water, and environment. A new review must account for all harmful effects of this project on our state, including potential oil spills along the Colorado River and increased wildfire risk. An oil train derailment in the headwaters of the Colorado River would be catastrophic -- not only to Colorado, but the 40 million Americans who rely on it."
Neguse's district includes communities that could be impacted by the railway.
Eagle County was the first to legally object to the proposal. Attorneys there filed a complaint in October 2022, five months after the public/private coalition in Utah submitted its proposal to the STB.
Soon, other municipalities along the train route joined the lawsuit: the city of Glenwood Springs; the towns of Minturn, Avon, Red Cliff, Vail; and Pitkin, Routt, Lake, Chaffee, and Boulder counties. They joined, not as co-litigants, but "friends of the court," a position of support taken by entities who are not party to a court filing but contend they are affected by its outcome.
View the municipalities' amicus brief below. If you're having trouble viewing the document, click here.
The municipalities argued that the STB's approval of the project gave improper weight to the economic benefits and ignored environmental impacts beyond the section of new track being built. Those potential impacts were referenced in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) as "downline impacts" to the Uinta project and were not expected to be "significant."
In their brief, the municipalities pointed to studies which showed higher risks of accidents to trains pulling more than 65 cars. The FEIS, the municipalities noted, suggested the crude oil trains will average 110 cars.
The municipalities also complained the FEIS failed to account for the challenges of the terrain. In particular, Glenwood Canyon. The struggles endured during and after the Grizzly Creek Fire were cited.
RELATED I-70 back open after mudslide closes interstate from Glenwood Springs to Dotsero
The coalition behind the railway project claims rail is the preferred method of crude oil transport. Pipelines are too costly, as stated on its website. Present truck traffic contributes to increased air pollution and highway repair costs on already congested highways.
RELATED Interstate 70 mostly back open in Glenwood Canyon after second dramatic snowy semi crash this year
On the project's website, Utah Senate President J. Stuart Adams is quoted in support of the new rail line:
"The Uinta Basin Railway is important to Utah's economy and rural Utah's ability to diversify their economic streams. Mineral lease dollars generated from the extraction industry and exporting Utah's crude to domestic and global markets means more revenue for the Permanent Impact Board, which benefits other infrastructure."
Rio Grande Pacific, a Texas-based owner of freight railroads in the region, is the primary source of private funding behind the Uinta Basin Railway.
CBS News Colorado has asked both Rio Grande Pacific and the Surface Transportation Board for reaction to last week's ruling and details of future action. STB declined to comment. This story will be updated with any response from Rio Grande Pacific.
