Uinta Basin Rail: Difference between revisions

|start_year = 2023

The '''Uinta Basin Rail''' project is a proposed {{convert|100|mi|km|adj=on}} rail line<ref name="trains"/> to connect the [[shale oil]] rich [[Uinta Basin]] region of eastern [[Utah]] to the [[national rail network]]. Numerous proposals have been made, some as far back as 1902, that are still under consideration. The current effort is a [[Public–private partnership|public-private partnership]] between a coalition of 7 counties in Utah, the [[Rio Grande Pacific Corporation]] and [[Drexel Hamilton]] Infrastructure Partners. The railroad is also backed by the [[Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation|Ute Tribe]] who hold a 5% stake in the project.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://railfan.com/tribe-backs-uinta-basin-railroad-construction/ |title=Tribe Backs Uinta Basin Railroad Construction |author=Railfan & Railroad staff|date=September 30, 2021 |website=railfan.com |publisher=White River Productions |access-date=May 13, 2022}}</ref> If the rail line is built it will be the first major [[greenfield project|greenfield]] rail line built in the United States since the [[Chicago and North Western Transportation Company|Chicago and North Western]]’s line to the [[Powder River Basin]] was built in the 1970searly 1980s.<ref>{{Cite nameweb |last=enrFranz |first=Justin |date=August 29, 2023 |title=After Court Rejects Approval, What's Next For Uinta Basin Railway? |url=https://railfan.com/after-court-rejects-approval-whats-next-for-uinta-basin-railway/ |access-date=April 2, 2024 |website=railfan.com |language=en-US}}</ref> The [[Surface Transportation Board]] approved construction of the line in December 2021, however, the approval is being challenged in court by various environmentalist groups. In 2024, the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] agreed to hear the case ''[[Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County]]'', involving the approval to build the rail line.<ref name=SCOTUStrains/>

The Uinta basin's oil and mineral resources have long attracted the attention of railroad builders. The [[Denver and Salt Lake Railway|Denver, Northwestern and Pacific]] (DDNW&SLP), later renamed to the Denver and Salt Lake Railway, was a company started in 1902<ref name="Griswold">{{cite book | author=P.R. Griswold|title=David Moffat's Denver, Northwestern and Pacific: The Moffat Road|publisher=Rocky Mountain Railroad Club|year=1995|isbn=978-0962070723}}</ref> with a goal of connecting its namesake cities via the Uinta basin, to take advantage of these resources.<ref name=SLTRIB>{{cite news |work=Salt Lake Tribune (republished by Utahrails.net) |date=August 17, 1919 |title= Railroad is Soon to Open Vast Treasure Storehouse in Uintah Basin |url=https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Miscellaneous/i-4gXD5hc/A| url-status=live | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211114/https://donstrack.smugmug.com/UtahRails/Miscellaneous/i-4gXD5hc/A| archive-date=2021-11-14 |access-date=December 18, 2019}}{{cbignore}}</ref> While a significant portion of the line in Colorado was built, and still exists today, the company struggled financially and never progressed any closer than [[Craig, Colorado]] to the Uinta basin. After this effort failed, almost immediately other efforts began.<ref name=sld>{{cite web |url=http://utahrails.net/utahrails/salt-lake-denver.php| url-status=live | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211114/http://utahrails.net/utahrails/salt-lake-denver.php| archive-date=2021-11-14 |last=Strack |first=Don |date=May 30, 2019 |title=Salt Lake & Denver Railroad |publisher=Utah Rails.net |access-date=November 22, 2019}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

The only rail line connecting the basin to the rail network that was actually built was the [[Uintah Railway]]. However, while the line served the basin for a few years, this line was problematic from day one. The Uintah Railway had a [[break of gauge]], as this branch line was [[narrow gauge]] but connected to a [[standard gauge]] main at [[Mack, Colorado]]. The line featured a 7.5% grade with 65-degree curves, and was so steep that only articulated [[Shay locomotive]]s, specifically designed for this route, were capable of navigating a portion of the line. This resulted in a single cargo train having to be both re-gauged, and multiple locomotive changeovers to reach its destination. All but the last few miles of the line were in Colorado, and the line was more useful to ship goods to Colorado rather than other cities in Utah. The book ''Utah Ghost Rails'' documents that through a bureaucratic loophole, the [[USPS]] charged in-state rates for shipping between the basin and [[Salt Lake City]], assuming a straight line distance to calculate the rate, despite them using the Uintah Railway, and having to route the mail to Colorado first and then back into Utah. This meant it was significantly cheaper to ship by mail than pay the railroad directly. A number of businesses soon discovered this loophole, and when the builders of a bank in the town of [[Vernal, Utah|Vernal]] learned this, they shipped 30 tons of bricks, one at a time, by mail. This nearly bankrupted the Utah division of the postal service, forcing them to adjust the shipping zone boundaries and regulations to match the geographical isolation of the Uinta Basin from the rest of Utah.<ref name=ghostrails>{{cite book |isbn=0914740342 |last=Carr |first=stephen L |title=Utah Ghost Rails |year=1989 |publisher=Western Epics |pages=196–199 |chapter=Uintah Railway}}</ref> Once modern highways were built into the basin, the line was unable to compete with truck traffic and was abandoned in 1939.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://museumofwesternco.com/blog/cross-orchards-historic-site/the-railroad-exhibits-of-cross-orchards-historic-site/| url-status=live | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211114/https://museumofwesternco.com/blog/cross-orchards-historic-site/the-railroad-exhibits-of-cross-orchards-historic-site/| archive-date=2021-11-14 |title=Uintah Railway Exhibit | date=November 30, 2018 |publisher= Museums of Western Colorado |access-date=December 19, 2019}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

In 1984, the [[Deseret Power Railway]] was built to connect a coal mine in Colorado with a power plant in Utah. The route is similar to a small portion of the unfinished D&SL route; however it is completely isolated from the [[national rail network]].<ref name=":1">{{cite web|title=Deseret Western Railway – Deseret Power Railroad |url=http://utahrails.net/utahrails/deseret-western.php| url-status=live | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211114/http://utahrails.net/utahrails/deseret-western.php| archive-date=2021-11-14 |work=utahrails.net |first=Don |last=Strack |publisher=Utahrails.net |access-date=December 12, 2020}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

In 2012, the [[Utah Department of Transportation]] (UDOT), working with the regional Six-County Infrastructure Coalition, began studying transportation in the basin, which is a major oil-producing region.<ref name="trains"/> The study determined that the existing infrastructure was unlikely to be able to move the expected volume of oil. In 2013, HDR Engineering, working with the state, began surveying the area for a rail line.<ref name="trains"/> After examining 26 potential routings, the state recommended a route east through the Indian Canyon from the [[Union Pacific Railroad]]'s [[Central Corridor (Union Pacific Railroad)|Central Corridor]] line near [[Soldier Summit, Utah|Soldier Summit]] to [[Duchesne, Utah|Duchesne]] and [[Roosevelt, Utah|Roosevelt]] in the basin.<ref name=UDOT>{{cite report|chapter-url=http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=22029103377080492|title=Utah State Rail Plan|website=udot.utah.gov|publisher=[[Utah Department of Transportation]]|chapter=1,4,6,7 |pages=20–21,113–114,138–146, 158–159|chapter-format=PDF|date=Apr 2015|access-date=March 18, 2018|archive-date=January 26, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200126145020/https://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=22029103377080492|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="trains"/><ref name="kuer"/> The right of way would largely follow existing roadways, [[U.S. Route 191 in Utah|US Route 191]] from the rail main through Indian Canyon to the basin and [[U.S. Route 40 in Utah|US Route 40]] once inside the basin.<ref name="trains"/> There would be two terminals for oil trains at the mid and endpoints of the railroad.<ref name="trains"/> The key feature of this route would be a {{convert|10|mi|km|adj=on}} tunnel underneath the [[Roan Cliffs]] of the West Tavaputs Plateau, to bypass the {{convert|9144|ft|m}} mountain pass used by US&nbsp;191 in this area,<ref name=udotmap>{{cite map |url=https://www.udot.utah.gov/main_old/uconowner.gf?n=89563328019277451 |publisher=Utah Department of Transportation |year=2020 |title=Official Highway Map |section=F6}}</ref> that if built would be the longest railroad tunnel in Utah.<ref name="dec2014">{{cite web | url=http://www.sltrib.com/news/1922880-155/leaders-drop-wells-to-rails-plan-for-uinta | title=Leaders drop wells-to-rails plan for Uinta Basin oil | publisher=Salt Lake City Tribune | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150324050229/http://www.sltrib.com/news/1922880-155/leaders-drop-wells-to-rails-plan-for-uinta | date=9 December 2014 | access-date=25 April 2015 | url-status=live | archive-date=24 March 2015}}</ref>

In late 2014, after selecting the routing, the state began studying the cost, estimated to be up to $4 billion.<ref name="kuer">{{cite web | url=http://kuer.org/post/rail-line-would-deliver-uinta-basin-energy-markets | title=Rail Line Would Deliver Uinta Basin Energy to Markets | publisher=KUER.org | date=14 July 2014 | access-date=20 October 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141020062157/http://kuer.org/post/rail-line-would-deliver-uinta-basin-energy-markets | url-status=live | archive-date=20 October 2014}}</ref> With a total of $8.2 million in funding from the state, the Department of Transportation also began work on the [[Environmental Impact Statement]] (EIS) for the railroad, with planned to complete the document by the end of 2016.<ref name="trains">{{cite web | url=http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2014/10/utah-looks-to-build-new-railroad-to-tap-oil-boom| url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141011192032/http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2014/10/utah-looks-to-build-new-railroad-to-tap-oil-boom| archive-date=2014-10-11 | title=Utah looks to build new railroad to tap oil boom | publisher=Trains Magazine | date=9 October 2014 | access-date=20 October 2014}}</ref> Several months after beginning work on the EIS, however, the state decided to end study of the route, citing rising costs identified by closer study.<ref name="dec2014"/> Kevin Van Tassell, a member of the state legislature's transportation committee, said the state would "look at other systems to move product out of the basin other than the railroad at this time."<ref name="dec2014"/>

Though the EIS was cancelled, UDOT's report was published in 2015 recommending the line as a top priority for Utah's rail infrastructure, noting the strain the lack of rail access is placing on highways that serve the basin, and the price disadvantage caused by lack of rail access compared to other oil-producing regions with rail. Most of the oil is trucked to refineries in Salt Lake City.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Marsh |first=Amy Hadden |date=December 14, 2022 |title=Uinta Basin Railway opposition unites Colorado towns, Utah backcountry residents |url=https://www.postindependent.com/news/uinta-basin-railway-opposition-unites-colorado-towns-utah-backcountry-residents/ |access-date=2022-12-15 |website=Post Independent |language=en-US}}</ref> The study identified multiple possible rail corridors, stating before selecting the Indian Canyon alternative, they originally considered a route via [[Rifle, Colorado]], but noted this route is mostly in Colorado, not Utah. The state of Colorado was not assisting in the studies or providing funding.<ref name=UDOT/>

===Public private partnership===

The coalition initially submitted four routes to the [[Surface Transportation Board]] (STB) for detailed study and an Environmental Impact Statement. Three of these would connect to the [[Central Corridor (Union Pacific Railroad)|Central Corridor]] near [[Soldier Summit]] and proceed north east towards the basin. The fourth option would extend the former D&SL line from its terminus in Craig. It would use the existing Deseret Power Railway for a portion of the journey, and in so doing connect that line to the national rail network as well. The study noted that the Craig alternative traversed the easiest terrain, was the only option to not require constructing tunnels, and overall was one of the lower-cost options. However, theThe Craig option required the most new track to be built. The STB announced they had removed this option from consideration while reviewing and preparing the Environmental Impact statement on December 13, 2019. Both agencies cited a concern that while the Central Corridor is subject to a [[trackage rights]] agreement that allows a number of rail companies access to the line, there is no such agreement in place for the branch to Craig. Making matters worse, theThe Craig alternative required negotiating access agreements with 3 separate track owners, and after months of negotiation, no agreement with any owner had been reached. Two of the track owners used the line exclusively for transporting coal, whose business has dramatically decreased. Even if access rights could be secured, the STB and the coalition decided there was a risk the Unita Basin Rail operators could be forced to assume ownership and/or maintenance costs for these sections, should coal volumes continue to decrease.<ref>{{cite report |url=https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/12/13/2019-26878/seven-county-infrastructure-coalition-rail-construction-and-operation-in-utah-carbon-duchesne-and| url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191217230738/https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/12/13/2019-26878/seven-county-infrastructure-coalition-rail-construction-and-operation-in-utah-carbon-duchesne-and| archive-date=2019-12-17 |publisher=[[Surface Transportation Board]] |date=December 13, 2019 |access-date=December 17, 2019 |title = Notice of Availability of the Final Scope of Study for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Seven County Infrastructure Coalition-Rail Construction & Operation-in Utah, Carbon, Duchesne, and Uintah Counties, Utah}}</ref><ref>{{cite report |publisher= Surface Transportation Board |title=Re Finance Docket No 36284 – Seven County Infrastructure coalition – Uinta Basin Railway Project Proposal – Feasibility of the Craig Route Alternative |date=September 4, 2019 |access-date = December 29, 2019 |url=http://uintabasinrailwayeis.com/documents/2019_09_04_Ltr_to_STB_Re_Craig_Route_Alt.pdf }}</ref>

Of the 3 routes remaining under study, the Surface Transportation Board recommended one called the Whitmore Park alternative as having the least environmental impact, and approved its construction.<ref name=stbapproval>{{cite report |url= https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1639603742088/51032.pdf |publisher=Surface Transportation Board |date=December 15, 2021 |title=DECISION Docket No. FD 36284 SEVEN COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE COALITION—RAIL CONSTRUCTION & OPERATION EXEMPTION—IN UTAH, CARBON, DUCHESNE, AND UINTAH COUNTIES, UTAH}}</ref> This alternative is based on the Indian Canyon alternative surveyed by UDOT. The route was modified to include [[horseshoe curve]]s and [[Spiral (railway)|spirals]] to scale higher up the [[Roan Cliffs]] and West Tavaputs Plateau, which would allow the length of the tunnel into Indian Canyon to be shortened to {{convert|3.1|mi|km}}. Other modifications included using a longer route and side canyons to scale the Roan Cliffs, avoiding a landslide area identified as a risk by UDOT, and adjusted routing in parts of the basin for easier land access rights.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://uintabasinrailwayeis.com/ |title=Uinta Basin Railway Environmental Impact Statement| publisher= Surface Transportation Board |year=2019 |access-date=December 17, 2019}}</ref><ref name=routeoptions/> In September 2020, it was announced that Drexel Hamilton Infrastructure Partners, LP (DHIP) would fund construction for the line and have the exclusive right to develop the line, thus giving the rail project the green light to start construction.<ref>{{cite journal |url=https://www.railwayage.com/freight/short-lines-regionals/uinta-basin-railway-green-lighted/?RAchannel=news |last=Vantuono |first=William |title=Uinta Basin Railway Green-Lighted |date=September 8, 2020 |access-date=September 12, 2020 |journal=[[Railway Age]]}}</ref> In December 2020, environmentalist groups filed a lawsuit attempting to block construction, claiming the project is primarily to benefit fossil fuel extraction. Yet, someSome of the funding allocated to the project was instead intended to help diversify the economy of rural Utah away from fossil fuels.<ref name=hcn>{{cite news| work=High Country News |last=Kaiser-Schatzlein |first=Robin |title=Lawsuit over proposed fossil fuel railway in Utah moves forward |date=December 15, 2020 |access-date=January 21, 2020 |url=https://www.hcn.org/articles/energy-industry-lawsuit-over-proposed-fossil-fuel-railway-in-utah-moves-forward| url-status=live | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211114/https://www.hcn.org/articles/energy-industry-lawsuit-over-proposed-fossil-fuel-railway-in-utah-moves-forward| archive-date=2021-11-14}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

The Surface Transportation Board issued their approval in December 2021. However, environmentalistEnvironmentalist activists are organizing efforts to block construction, citing the pristine nature of the mountains where construction will take place and concerns cost overruns are likely given the difficult terrain.<ref name=motherjones>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/05/an-oil-train-is-set-to-destroy-pristine-utah-mountains-why-wont-biden-stop-it/ |magazine=Mother Jones |issue=May 2022 |title=An Oil Train Is Set to Destroy Pristine Utah Mountains. Why Won’tWon't Biden Stop It?}}</ref> In 2022 construction contracts for the railroad's construction particularly for the tunnels along the route were announced with [[AECOM]], a joint venture with [[Skanska]] & [[W.W. Clyde Company]], and [[Obayashi Corporation]] as principal partners.<ref>{{cite webnews |url=https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220513005554/en/Rio-Grande-Pacific-Corporation-Announces-Engineering-and-Construction-Teams-for-Uinta-Basin-Railway-Project |title=Rio Grande Pacific Corporation Announces Engineering and Construction Teams for Uinta Basin Railway Project |author=<!--Not stated--> |date=May 13, 2022 |work=Business Wire |access-date=May 13, 2022}}</ref> The [[US Forest Service]] granted right-of-way through {{convert|12 |miles}} of [[Ashley National Forest]] and upheld the decision when challenged by several environmental groups.<ref>{{Cite news |date=July 8, 2022 |title=Forest Service upholds decision on Uinta Basin Railway |url=https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/forest-service-upholds-decision-on-uinta-basin-railway/ |access-date=2022-07-10 |work=Trains |language=en-US}}</ref> A $28 million grant by the Utah Community Impact Fund Board was also upheld in July 2022 after being challenged.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Maffly |first=Brian |date=July 16, 2022 |title=Uinta Basin Railway on track after Utah judge approves state grants for railroad funding |url=https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/07/16/uinta-basin-railway-track-after/ |access-date=2022-07-17 |website=buisnesswireThe Salt Lake Tribune |language=en-US}}</ref> This line could create spillover pressure to reopen the [[Tennessee Pass Line]] to avoid a surge in oil trains through the [[Moffat Tunnel]] and down into [[Denver]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Williams |first=David O. |date=2023-05-05 |title=Billionaire Colorado landowner no longer pursuing Tennessee Pass rail line |url=https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/05/04/colorado-tennessee-pass-rail-line/ |publisheraccess-date=2023-05-06 |work=Colorado Newsline |language=en-US}}</ref> On August 18, 2023, a Federal Appeals Court halted the project pending "''a more fulsome explanation'' for the Board’s conclusion that the Railway’s transportation benefits outweighed the project’s environmental impacts".<ref name="TDP 2023-08-28">{{cite news|last=Schmelzer |first=Elise |date=August 18, 2023 |title=Proposed railway that would bring millions of gallons of crude oil through Colorado halted by federal judge |url=https://www.denverpost.com/2023/08/18/uinta-basin-railway-utah-colorado-project-halted/ |work=[[The Denver Post]] |location=[[Denver, Colorado]] |accessdate=August 19, 2023 }}</ref> since the Forest Service decision relied on the Surface Transportation Board’s environmental review, the Service withdrew its record of decision and amendment in February 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gutierrez |first=Emily |date=2024-02-20 |title=Forest Service pulls Uinta Basin Railway's special use permit, halting approval of project trying to ship waxy crude oil along Colorado River |url=https://www.skyhinews.com/news/forest-service-pulls-uinta-basin-railways-special-use-permit-halting-approval-of-project-trying-to-ship-waxy-crude-oil-along-colorado-river/ |access-date=May2024-02-21 13|website=Sky-Hi News |language=en-US}}</ref> In August 2023, 2022a Federal Appeals Court halted the project pending "''a more fulsome explanation'' for the Board’s conclusion that the Railway’s transportation benefits outweighed the project’s environmental impacts".{{r|TDP 2023-08-28}}<ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2023-12-05 | first1=Marybeth |last1=Luczak |title=Report: Court Will Not Rehear Uinta Basin Railway Case |url=https://www.railwayage.com/regulatory/report-court-will-not-rehear-uinta-basin-railway-case/ |access-date=2023-12-06 |magazine=Railway Age |language=en-US}}</ref> In March 2024 the project backers petitioned the [[Supreme Court of the United States|US Supreme Court]] to decide if "...National Environmental Policy Act requires an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority". On June 24 the Court agreed to review the Appeals court ruling.<ref name=SCOTUStrains>{{cite news |title=Supreme Court to review decision blocking Uinta Basin project |url=https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/supreme-court-to-review-decision-blocking-uinta-basin-project/ |access-date=25 June 2024 |work=Trains.com |publisher=Kalmbach Media |date=25 June 2024 |location=Waukesha, Wisconsin}}</ref>