An earlier state study said that without the rail route or alternatives such as new pipelines or freeways, $30 billion worth of oil and gas may remain undeveloped in the basin during the next 30 years because of transportation constraints. It said that could cost Utah's economy $10 billion and prevent creation of nearly 27,000 jobs.
The Utah Transportation Commission received the new rail assessment Friday at a meeting in Roosevelt. UDOT told the commission it plans now to begin a formal EIS to further evaluate that route and potentially avoid derailing an expanded Uinta oil boom.
UDOT hopes to have a draft EIS in 2016 and a final version in 2017.
Thomas said UDOT just completed an initial feasibility study funded by the Legislature of 26 alternatives that included following U.S. 40 directly west to the Wasatch Front, going north through Wyoming or even east through Colorado.
"After evaluating 4,100 miles of alignments with engineering feasibility and environmental impacts, there is one corridor that appears to be feasible," Thomas said. "This would essentially go down Indian Canyon along U.S. 191 south from Duchesne to U.S. 6" near Price.
By connecting to national rails there, he said, oil could go not only go to the Wasatch Front but also to the West Coast or east to different markets.
"It is about a 100-mile long corridor, with a 10-mile tunnel to go under Indian Pass" just north of U.S. 6, Thomas explained. National averages predict a construction cost of $10 million per mile for the main line, plus $100 million a mile for the tunnel for a rough estimate of $2 billion overall.
Thomas said as UDOT now begins the formal EIS, the department will "conduct community outreach and outreach to stakeholders" to discuss the route. He said the federal Surface Transportation Board would need to issue permits for the rail project to be built.
The EIS will help show, among other things, how the rail line could affect traffic on U.S. 40, which now has a steady stream of tanker trucks 24 hours a day to Wasatch Front refineries.
Thomas said a rail line may mean trucks would "be more internally focused to the basin," merely transporting oil from wells to rails.