Bulk terminal operator sues City of Oakland, Calif. over coal ban

Oakland Bulk & Oversized Terminal (OBOT) has sued the City of Oakland in federal court after facing strong opposition from environmentalists and others that oppose coal exports through a bulk handling terminal OBOT wants to build.    Oakland Bulk & Oversized Terminal (OBOT) has sued the City of Oakland in federal court after facing strong opposition from environmentalists and others who oppose coal exports through the new bulk handling terminal OBOT wants to build.
   OBOT accused the Oakland City Council of an “unconstitutional abuse of its power.”
   OBOT is seeking an injunction against a city ordinance and resolution that prohibits the transportation and export of coal and petroleum coke (petcoke) to and through its planned rail and marine terminal currently in development on city land at the Port of Oakland.
   The land is adjacent to, but not part of the Port of Oakland.
   The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California (16-CV-7014), claims the ordinance and resolution are unconstitutional under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution and preempted by United States statutes, including the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, and the Shipping Act of 1984.
   OBOT said the justifications for the ban and purported benefits of the ordinance and resolution are “illusory” and “impose a burden on interstate and foreign commerce, are clearly excessive in relation to the purported local benefits, are not based on evidence of a substantial danger to residents of Oakland and neighbors or users of the terminal, and there are less restrictive measures that can and do control the purported health effects that are the purported basis of the ordinance and resolution.”
   The company claims the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act vests the exclusive power to regulate rail transportation in the Surface Transportation Board of the United States – not the City of Oakland. The company also said that the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act vests the United States Secretary of Transportation – and not the city – the authority to determine what materials warrant “hazardous” designations and restrictions or prohibitions in interstate and intrastate transportation.
   Further, it says the Shipping Act of 1984 prohibits discrimination in shipping of the kind required by the ordinance.