---

While Tesoro’s “Vancouver Energy” proposal is by far the biggest of the Northwest oil-by-rail projects, numerous smaller oil terminals have been proposed or are already operating. Even leaving the Tesoro proposal out of the equation, if all of these projects were to come online the Columbia River Gorge would see an additional 30 mile-long trains each week, the explosive cargo of Bakken crude posing a disastrous threat to the Columbia River and communities along the rail route.
   

Proposed Projects - Updates

Vancouver, WA

Rejected: The NuStar terminal in Vancouver, WA was granted a permit to handle ethanol in March 2017, with the condition that an application to handle crude oil was officially dropped.

Grays Harbor, WA

There were three terminals proposed for development or expansion near Hoquiam, WA.

• Defeated: The Westway terminal went through its DEIS process and hearing last fall, the same time as Imperium. The comment period closed on Nov. 30, 2015. In early 2017 the Washington Supreme Court ruled that the Ocean Resources Management Act (ORMA) applied to this project, and that its strict permitting requirements apply to crude oil shipping terminals. This ruling will effectively block a proposed oil terminal in Hoquiam.
• Withdrawn: The Grays Harbor Rail terminal never progressed beyond the scoping stage. U.S. Development Group, the backers of the proposal, terminated the lease with the Port of Grays Harbor on November 11, 2015. In August 2017, Port officials gave an annual report to the Ocean Shores City Council and the issue of shipping crude oil by rail and sea was “off the table” for the first time in four years.
• Withdrawn: The Imperium terminal was bought by Renewable Energy Group (REG) last summer. REG has announced it will no longer be pursuing permits to handle crude oil at the facility, instead to only continue handling biodiesel, petroleum diesel, vegetable oil and methanol, but there is nothing yet that legally binds this commitment. However, in August 2017, Port officials gave an annual report to the Ocean Shores City Council and the issue of shipping crude oil by rail and sea was “off the table” for the first time in four years.

Port Westward, OR

Withdrawn: In January, Global Partners laid off eight percent of its work force and aims to handle only ethanol, not crude, at its rail terminal in Oregon in response to the nearly 70 percent plunge in oil prices since mid-2014. Before January, the terminal had received all necessary regulatory approval and was exporting crude oil. Global Partners accomplished this by manipulating loopholes in the regulatory system to get adjustments for an existing biofuel facility instead of going through a more in-depth and full permit review with public input that a new facility would have required. They also acquired approval and funding to expand the dock near their facility to increase their export capabilities and receive larger ships. That project is slated to be finished in the third quarter this year. Global Partners could elect to again handle crude oil should market conditions improve.

Longview, WA

Rejected: Waterside Energy (also called Riverside Refining), which is led by the same people who were behind the failed TransMessis Columbia Plateau biofuels plant in Odessa, WA, is seeking permits for a new oil refinery and propane terminal in Longview, WA. After being abandoned in 2014, the Odessa plant required more than $400,000 worth of environmental cleanup. The EPA estimates final cleanup costs will be around $580,000. There has not been a public hearing or comment period scheduled yet for the Waterside refinery proposal.

Anacortes, WA: UPDATE Oct. 2016 - Proposal abandoned!

   

All Proposed Oil by Rail Projects - by the Numbers

Vancouver, WA

Project Name: Vancouver Energy (Read details of project)
Developer: Tesoro Savage
Operating capacity: 360,000 barrels per day – 36 trains per week

Project Name: NuStar terminal
Developer: NuStar Energy
Operating capacity: 22,000 barrels per day – 2.2 trains per week
 

Longview, WA

Project Name: Riverside terminal
Developer: Waterside, Inc.
Operating capacity: 30,000 barrels per day – 3 trains per week
 

Grays Harbor, WA

Project Name: Westway terminal
Developer: Westway Terminal Company
Operating capacity: 49,000 barrels per day – 5 trains per week

Project Name: Grays Harbor Rail terminal
Developer: U.S. Development Group
Operating capacity: 45,000 barrels per day – 4.5 trains per week
 

Anacortes, WA

Project Name: Shell Puget Sound Refinery (add-on to existing facility)
Developer: Shell
Operating capacity: Additional 60,000 barrels per day – 6 trains per week

Project Name: Tesoro Refinery
Developer: Tesoro
Operating capacity: 50,000 barrels per day – 5 trains per week
 

Ferndale, WA

Project Name: BP Refinery
Developer: British Petroleum
Operating capacity: 70,000 barrels per day – 7 trains per week

Project Name: Philips 66 Refinery
Developer: Philips 66
Operating capacity: 35,000 barrels per day – 3.5 trains per week
 

Tacoma, WA

Project Name: US Oil & Refining
Developer: US Oil
Operating capacity: 40,000 barrels per day – 4 trains per week

Project Name: Targa Terminals
Developer: Targa
Operating capacity: 40.000 barrels per day – 4 trains per week

Total capacity of all oil by rail projects: Over 800,000 barrels per day, over 74 trains per week.
 

Resources

Stand Up to Oil coalition, of which Friends is a member
Sightline Institute articles about crude oil transport
Sightline Institute’s Report “The Northwest’s Pipeline on Rails”
Oil Check – an interactive map of all Northwest opposition to oil trains.
Oil Train Blast Zone – an interactive map from Forest Ethics showing how close you live to an oil train blast or evacuation zone.