Supreme Court to consider reinstating critical approval for eastern Utah rail project

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to consider reinstating a crucial approval for a rail project that would transport crude oil and boost fossil fuel production in eastern Utah.

The justices will review an appeals court decision that overturned the Surface Transportation Board’s approval of the Uinta Basin Railroad, an 88-mile (142-kilometer) rail line. The arguments will take place in the fall.

The rail line would connect oil and gas producers in rural Utah to the broader rail network, allowing them to access larger markets and ultimately sell to refineries near the Gulf of Mexico. Producers currently limited to tanker trucks could ship an additional 350,000 barrels of crude daily on trains stretching up to 2 miles.

The railway is being built through a public-private partnership between infrastructure development and investment firm DHIP Group in Winter Park, Fla., and the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, an organization formed by officials from eastern Utah.

Other supporters include oil companies and the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation. They argued that the railway would be a boon to struggling local economies and boost domestic energy production.

The type of oil to be exported from Utah – waxy crude, semi-solid at room temperature – makes it more difficult to transport. Currently it is heated and shipped in insulated trucks.

The consistency of oil, on the other hand, makes it less damaging and easier to clean up after a spill, project proponents say.

The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case was a source of optimism for proponents of the stalled railroad.

“This project is vital to the economic growth and connectivity of the Uinta Basin region and we are committed to making it happen,” Keith Heaton, director of the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, said in a statement.

Environmental groups and Eagle County, Colorado, which has filed a lawsuit challenging the project, are nonetheless concerned about safety and potential train derailments. From the Utah Railroad, the oil trains would enter Colorado, following the Colorado River upstream and through the Rocky Mountains to Denver and beyond.

Colorado U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse, both Democrats, oppose the project, saying an oil spill in the upper Colorado River would be catastrophic.

Environmental groups also say the rail line will allow more oil to be extracted and burned, contributing to climate change.

The federal appeals court in Washington ruled last year that the Surface Transportation Board’s environmental approval was rushed and violated federal law.

The question before the Supreme Court is whether the agency should have assessed the potential environmental damage caused by the railroad’s main cargo, both where oil is drilled in Utah and refined on the Gulf Coast, despite having no regulatory authority over oil production.

“It is disappointing that the Supreme Court has taken up this case, but the appeals court’s decision on this destructive project is legally sound and should ultimately stand,” said Wendy Park, senior attorney at the Center for Diversity biological, in a press release.

The railway would still need additional review and government approvals to continue, even if its proponents were successful at the Supreme Court, the group noted.

Gruver reported from Cheyenne, Wyoming.