Transport Committee on April 10th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

We'll call our meeting to order.

I'd like to thank our witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Pryce, Mr. Stringham, Mr. Ahearn, can you hear me?

[A voice]

Yes, we can.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks for being with us.

We have representatives here in person from the Canadian Fuels Association, the Canadian Propane Association, and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. Also, joining us by video conference are representatives from the Canadian Fuels Association and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

I'm going to turn to Mr. Boag, from the Canadian Fuels Association, for 10 minutes or less.

[Peter Boag, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Fuels Association]

Thank you very much and good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

My name is Peter Boag, and I'm the president of the Canadian Fuels Association. With us via video conference from Calgary this morning is Brian Ahearn, vice-president of our western division and one of our leadership people on this particular file.

First I'd like to say thank you very much for the opportunity to participate in your examination of the safety regime for the transportation of dangerous goods. It is a very important subject, and we very much appreciate being here today.

For clarity, the Canadian Fuels Association represents Canada's petroleum refining sector, that is, the companies that refine, distribute, and market the petroleum products across the country. They're the manufacturing component of Canada's oil and gas value chain, converting crude oil into transportation fuels, which is about 75% of the sector's output, as well as into a broad range of other products including home heating oil, asphalt for roads, and petrochemical feedstocks that are essential components in hundreds of consumer goods that Canadians use and rely on every day, from plastics to textiles to pharmaceutical products.

The transportation fuels that our members produce are a vital component of Canada's energy system. Of the energy that Canadians consume, 30% is for transportation. That's close to 90 billion litres of fuels such as gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel every year. These are the fuels that keep our economy moving and enable our high standard of living.

With our vast geography and dispersed population, it should come as no surprise that Canadians are among the highest per capita users of transportation fuels in the world. Eighteen refineries in seven provinces produce the fuels that Canadians rely on for 95% of their transportation needs.

Getting fuel from the refinery to wholesale and retail customers is accomplished through a distribution system comprising a network of transportation assets, pipelines, trucks, trains, ships, 21 primary fuel distribution terminals, 50 regional terminals, and some 12,000 retail sites across the country.

Pipeline and truck are the primary modes of shipping fuels from the refinery to market. Rail service is generally used when long distances are involved and there is no pipeline. For some locations, rail may be the only mode of transportation available. For example, many of Canada's northern communities rely exclusively on the rail supply of fuels.

The majority of crude oil that is shipped into refineries is via pipeline and marine tanker, but rail supply of crude is increasing. It's a relatively recent development, a reflection of Canada's expanding oil production, which is outgrowing our oil transportation infrastructure, and of the desire of eastern Canadian refineries to gain access to western Canadian crude for which pipeline access does not exist. Rail is also an important transportation mode for the transport of biofuel inputs, principally ethanol and biodiesel, which are blended at the terminal to meet provincial and federal biofuel-blending requirements.

Canadian Fuels Association members place a very high priority on protecting the health and safety of employees, contractors, and their neighbours. They conduct their business with a dedication to safe and sustainable operation that goes well beyond companies' boundaries and extends into the communities in which they operate. They have developed an excellent safety record operating alongside Canadian communities for more than 100 years.

Indeed, the safety record of Canadian Fuels Association members' refineries is among the highest of all Canadian manufacturers, and their safety record continues to improve. Total recordable injuries for refinery, distribution, and retail employees are down nearly 80% across the sector since the year 2000. This record is the result of tight management across all facilities, systems, and processes to prevent incidents, as well as of constant attention to safety by all employees.

Five elements drive our safety management efforts: a safe work culture; integrated planning and operations; sharing resources in emergencies; continuous improvement in all our safety-related activities; and a commitment to leadership in all safety matters. Our members have a very active spill prevention and response system for the truck transport of petroleum products. We have a mature national program in place based on three critical principles: prevention, preparedness, and response.

For the rail transport of petroleum products, our members rely heavily on the rail carrier for the care and custody of our products. They expect rail carriers to conduct their operations with the same care and commitment to safety that they themselves have in their refinery operations. Thus the focus for improving the safety regime for the transportation of dangerous goods by rail must be on requirements for safer rail operations.

From that perspective, we support the recent Transportation Safety Board recommendations on enhancing the safety of rail operations.

But a safe TDG regime extends beyond rail operations. To that end, Canadian Fuels Association and its members are actively involved with Transport Canada in an examination of additional measures in the areas of prevention, preparedness, and response. We have been working closely with our upstream colleagues at CAPP on a coordinated petroleum industry response and input to recent Transport Canada initiatives.

We are an active member on working groups established by Transport Canada. We support recent working group recommendations provided to Minister Raitt to implement tank car design enhancements for DOT-111 cars and to enhance emergency response through expansion of the ERAPs, emergency response assistance plans, and the establishment of a cooperative single-entity response organization.

With respect to new tank car standards we support a risk-based approach to the implementation of new means of containment standards that puts a priority on high-risk substances, provides realistic timelines for replacement and retrofitting of existing cars, and maintains alignment with regulatory requirements in the United States.

Recognizing that many of Canada's northern communities completely rely on the rail supply of fuels, we really recommend that the government and this committee in its recommendations pay appropriate attention to prioritizing the competing demand of new tank cars for products versus crude to ensure that we don't unnecessarily constrain the ability of northern communities to have access to the fuel they desperately need.

On emergency response enhancements, while supporting expansion of the ERAP, which was a recent recommendation from the working group examining this issue, we have highlighted the risks of a major expansion of ERAP requirements to all flammable hydrocarbons without substantive modifications to the current ERAP framework. We see the need for a more consistent and coordinated approach to response through the development and implementation of a single national entity for response to rail incidents and rail spills. We believe that rail carriers are best placed to lead that new entity.

To that end, the Canadian Fuels Association and our colleagues at CAPP have initiated discussion with the Railway Association of Canada to further advance the concept of a single entity emergency response organization. As well, we're in close discussions with the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs to examine how to better address the transport of dangerous goods product education and training needs of first responders.

An existing program, TransCAER, well established with our colleagues at the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada, is being actively considered as a potential platform for addressing first responders' TDG product education needs for petroleum products and crude oil.

To summarize, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, we recognize that public confidence in the safety of the transportation of dangerous goods has been shaken. We accept that improvements in the safety regime for the transportation of dangerous goods are necessary to restore confidence. Safe operations are a cornerstone of our industry, so we're committed to working with government and stakeholders to achieve the necessary improvements.

Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much, Mr. Boag.

I'll move to the Canadian Propane Association. We have Mr. Marchand and Mr. Bite, for 10 minutes or less please.

[Guy Marchand, President and Chief Executive Officer, Budget Propane 1998 Inc., Canadian Propane Association]

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

With me this morning are Andrea Labelle, General Manager, and Andy Bite, who also sits on the Board of Directors.

Thank you for giving us this opportunity to tell you about the transportation of propane by rail.

The Canadian Propane Association is the national voice of the Canadian propane industry, a multi-billion dollar industry that impacts the livelihood of tens of thousands of Canadians.

The CPA represents over 380 members, including producers, wholesalers, retailers, transporters, equipment manufacturers, service providers and industry associates.

Our mission is to facilitate the growth and best practices of the Canadian propane industry by acting as a unified champion for the entire industry, regardless of geography or place on the propane value chain.

Headquartered in Ottawa, the CPA maintains an office in Calgary that houses a subsidiary, the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Emergency Response Corporation, which is responsible for the propane industry's emergency response plan, and the Propane Training Institute, which trains over 24,000 students annually.

Now let me talk about the propane industry.

Canada produces approximately 11 billion litres of propane per year. Eighty-five per cent of the propane is produced by processing natural gas and 15% from refining crude oil. About half of the supply is used in Canada and the rest is exported to the United States. All the propane used in Canada is produced here.

Each year, the propane industry contributes $10 billion to the country's economy, including more than $900 million in taxes and royalties. It also employs more than 20,000 Canadians.

Propane is used in a wide range of applications, including residential heating, commercial activity, agriculture and transportation.

The propane industry is regulated by a range of statutes, standards, regulations and codes at federal, provincial and municipal levels.

The transportation of propane is governed by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, and its associated regulations. They specify a number of requirements about the transportation of propane, including containment, permits required, and emergency response plans.

At the federal level, Environment Canada requires propane companies and users with significant amounts of propane on their premises to have an environmental emergency response plan,

Storage and handling of propane are regulated by provincial agencies such as the Technical Standards Safety Authority in Ontario, the Régie du bâtiment du Québec and the BC Safety Authority in British Columbia. Those agencies administer the national standards and codes that establish the practices and training that are appropriate in the handling and use of propane and related material.

Canada has a well-developed propane infrastructure that transports propane across Canada and into the United States by rail, by pipeline, by road and by water. About 4 billion litres of propane are transported by rail in Canada and more than 3 billion litres are sent by rail to the United States.

The propane industry takes all necessary steps to meet and surpass regulatory requirements designed to safely transport, deliver and use propane. We are pleased to be part of the discussion on maintaining and improving, to the extent possible, the level of safety needed for the transportation of dangerous goods by rail.

[Andy Bite, Chief Development Officer, SLEEGERS Engineered Products Inc., Canadian Propane Association]

As mentioned earlier, the propane industry takes every precaution to ensure the safety of all who transport, handle, and use the product.

One important element in the safe transportation of propane by rail is the design of the railcars. Propane railcars are designed to carry as much as 114,000 litres, or about 33,000 U.S. gallons, of propane. The railcars themselves are equipped with various devices and safety systems to protect the tank and fittings from damage during an accident or a severe impact.

These safety systems include pressure relief devices, which are fittings designed to relieve the internal pressure within a tank car above a specified value that may be resulting from abnormal pressure increases.

Tank cars transporting propane are also equipped with a tank head puncture-resistant system capable of sustaining, without the loss of lading, coupler-to-head impacts of 18 miles per hour. This is usually accomplished by the installation of separate head shields or full-head tank jackets made of half-inch thick steel on each end of the tank car.

The tank cars transporting propane must themselves be equipped with thermal protection or an insulation system that provides sufficient thermal resistance so that there will be no release of any lading, except through the pressure relief device, when subjected to a pool fire for 100 minutes or a torch fire for 30 minutes. The thermal protection systems are typically protected with an outer steel jacket. Additional safety features include loading and unloading valves and fittings that are located on top of the tank car and are enclosed in a protective dome. The tank cars are also equipped with positive shut-off valves and safety check valves.

Another important element of ensuring the safe transportation of propane is the training of personnel in the proper procedures for loading and unloading a tank car. This training is offered by the Propane Training Institute, which is a division of the Canadian Propane Association, and is specifically designed for the purpose of training propane plant operators responsible for unloading railcars and for use as a reference manual while on the job.

The unloading of propane railcars can be summarized in nine steps, which include several safety measures. First, the railcar is secured for unloading. The railcar is then inspected to make sure that it is free from damage or leaks that would create a hazard during unloading operations. The contents of the railcar at this point are tested to ensure among other things that the propane has been properly odorized. To avoid accidently overfilling a storage tank, the maximum amount of propane that can be added to it will be calculated.

Then, as most plants use an unloading riser to gain access to the top openings of the railcars, the liquid and vapour hoses between the railcar and the unloading riser will be connected using special connectors equipped with emergency shut-off valves. A compressor is then used to evacuate the liquid propane from the railcar into the storage container. The compressor is then reversed, and the propane vapours are evacuated from the tank car to a relatively low pressure. Once the transfer is complete and before letting the carrier remove the tank car, the hoses will be disconnected and the valves will be shut off.

During the entire transfer operation, a qualified person is present to monitor the transfer and to handle emergencies, should they arise. Regular inspections of the facility and its operations are performed by the railroads, as well as by the provincial gas authorities, to evaluate compliance and safety.

We also have an LPG Emergency Response Corporation, LPGERC. In the unfortunate event of an incident, the LPG Emergency Response Corporation, a subsidiary of the Canadian Propane Association, has a national network of experienced and trained remedial measures advisers and response teams offering 24-7 emergency response to transportation or stationary tank incidents.

The LPGERC plan provides emergency response to support all UN 1075, or liquefied petroleum gases, and UN 1010, butadiene stabilized products for more than 250 plan participants.

The LPG Emergency Response Corporation plan is approved by Transport Canada as per the regulatory requirements listed in part 7 of the transportation of dangerous goods regulations for emergency response assistance plans. As we have said in our presentation, the propane industry takes all necessary steps to ensure the product is delivered safely to consumers as well as end users.

We are leaving you with three CPA positions and related recommendations regarding the transportation of dangerous goods as it relates to propane.

First, the CPA supports the safe transfer of propane and believes that Transport Canada should review the regulatory requirements for transfers from rail to truck. In our view, the safety requirement should be consistently applied to different types of transfers, for example, for rail to storage and railcar to truck. This is currently not the case. We believe that there is a gap in the regulations.

Second, the CPA supports compliance with regulatory requirements and enforcement where compliance is not achieved. Accordingly, the CPA recommends that Transport Canada consider developing, maintaining, and executing a risk-based compliance inspection program.

Third, the CPA supports the harmonization of transportation of dangerous goods regulations between the United States and Canada, as significant amounts of propane move between the two countries. The equipment designed for propane applications is also very similar on both sides of the border. Where it is practical to do so, Transport Canada should seek to harmonize the transportation of dangerous goods regulations with international regulations and national standards.

Propane is an available and abundant energy source in Canada. It provides heat and power to homes and businesses. It has a multitude of uses that include fuel for home appliances, forklifts, and heat for mines in remote locations. Propane is also an essential energy source for those in rural areas, as it is highly portable and also a cleaner burning option over heating oil and wood. In urban areas it is also used to power forklifts and fleet vehicles.

As supply continues to grow with the increase in natural gas production, the propane industry is committed to working with government and the railways to ensure the safe and reliable transportation of our product.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

Now we will go to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Mr. Bleaney, for 10 minutes, please.

[Bob Bleaney, Vice-President, External Relations, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers]

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. Thanks for the opportunity to appear before you today.

My name is Bob Bleaney, and I'm the vice-president of Ottawa, and eastern and Atlantic Canada at CAPP, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. With me today via video conference in Calgary is David Pryce, CAPP's vice-president of western Canada, and Greg Stringham, our vice president of oil sands.

Before I start I'd like to establish that as shippers we are not experts in rail. Therefore, we're bringing our broader expertise to bear and our views as a user of rail services.

Our industry produces and transports three million barrels per day of oil serving Canadian consumers and export markets. This year the oil and gas industry will generate over $100 billion in revenues. These revenues serve as capital investment, labour, purchased goods and services, and government revenues of royalties and taxes.

Every molecule of energy that generates this revenue and jobs for Canadians must be transported from its source to the end market. Thus, sufficient, safe, reliable, and timely transportation capacity is critical to our industry and to the Canadian economy. For our industry, this includes pipeline, rail, marine, and truck transportation.

Approximately 200,000 barrels a day of crude is being shipped by rail in Canada today. It's expected to grow by about another 100,000 barrels a day in 2014, and could grow to as much as 700,000 barrels a day by 2016, providing further impetus for enhancements to the safety and integrity of transportation by rail.

As per this committee's 2008 rail safety report recommendations, Transport Canada and the rail industry were asked to develop action plans and assessment tools to monitor progress of safety management systems. CAPP views safety culture as key to overall safety management and important in safety performance improvement.

The oil and gas industry has long recognized the role played by a positive safety culture in improving personnel safety and in the prevention of major incidents.

With respect to safety management systems, these are commonly coupled with environmental compliance requirements, and have long been used to implement policy and standards consistently across organizations in our industry. These are subject to ongoing adjustment as new hazards and challenges confront industry, new personnel join the workforce, and new regulations are introduced.

It's worth highlighting that regulatory requirements as to proof of compliance can contribute to management systems that become over-documented bureaucratic mechanisms that do little to improve overall safety. We would caution that the linkage between management systems, control of risk, and personnel attitudes to safety can suffer as a result.

Regulators are in a unique position to provide leadership, clarify expectations, and support industry as it strives to improve safety performance, and we view there is significant opportunity to examine existing regulations to identify their effect on operator safety performance.

As shippers, we rely on the transporter's expertise, and expect that they have the mechanisms in place to ensure the safe transportation of our products.

CAPP supports recent Transportation Safety Board recommendations that would advance safety enhancements for rail operations. These recommendations include setting stringent criteria for the operation of trains carrying dangerous goods, as well as requiring railway companies to conduct route planning and analysis, and perform periodic risk assessments to ensure that risk control measures work.

It is critical that railroads are running a safe system. That is our expectation and their job, and view that Transport Canada should continue working with rail towards improving safety performance in these operations.

With regard to the transportation of dangerous goods, it's CAPP's view that a number of initiatives already in progress will play a key role in this committee’s review of the current TDG regime. These initiatives cut across the following three pillars: prevention, preparedness and response, and liability.

Within the context of these three pillars, Transport Canada has initiated a review of regulatory and policy requirements that will examine adequacy of railcar design, emergency response, and third party liability and compensation.

CAPP and our colleagues from the Canadian Fuels Association have been working collaboratively on these files, as was referenced by Peter in his presentation, and we offer a shared perspective across these three pillars.

The first pillar is prevention. With respect to the means of containment, proposed tank car regulations will replace existing standards, and will require that new DOT-111 cars be built with thicker steel requirements as well as adding top fitting and head shield protection to tank cars.

Industry supports an open, transparent, and risk-based review of the appropriate means of containment for the transportation of crude by rail.

Some crude products are less volatile than others. Therefore, a risk-based approach will ensure that during the transition phase, the higher risk crude types will be shipped in the higher standard cars as the older legacy cars are transitioned out. This will enable an appropriate timeframe for the replacement and/or retrofitting of the legacy tank cars, and support logistical requirements during the transition period.

In terms of preparedness and response, industry strongly supports enhancements to emergency response for higher risk dangerous goods but cautions, as Peter observed, that to date, undue focus has been applied to the existing emergency response assistance program, or ERAP, as being the appropriate delivery mechanism.

CAPP is of the view that the current local and single shipper-importer type ERAP system must be modified to enable a more comprehensive national system that can be run by the rail carriers.

CAPP is currently advancing discussions with the Railway Association of Canada and the Canadian Fuels Association with a view to seeking alignment and presenting a common solution to the government that would see development of a single preparedness and response entity for rail incidents involving flammable hydrocarbons.

As an immediate and interim step, a mutual emergency assistance agreement, which specifies and streamlines access to available member companies' resources, will be established among CAPP, the Railway Association, and Canadian Fuels Association members.

For the third pillar, liability, industry supports the polluter pay principle. This is already embedded in many existing liability frameworks. However, gaps within these liability frameworks have recently emerged.

While industry is of the view that the current rail liability framework is fundamentally sound, there is a need for more rigorous oversight and better alignment of liabilities to insurance so that all rail companies have the financial and management capability to manage an incident.

As design considerations for the rail liability and compensation regime are contemplated, Transport Canada will need to be mindful of implications to carriers and ensure that a risk-based approach is applied to liability requirements. Industry encourages Transport Canada to explore the possibility of creating a hybrid liability model that would leverage attributes from both marine and pipeline models.

A hybrid approach would enable smaller, short-line railways to be represented collectively, or by a pooled approach, an attribute associated with the marine model, whereas the larger class I railways can choose a self-insurance approach, an attribute more in line with the pipeline model.

In closing, we suggest the committee focus on opportunities for enhancement in the following areas:

With regard to safety management systems and safety culture, we suggest leveraging of existing best practices and bodies of research.

Over the last 10 years, a number of oil and gas industry organizations, particularly the American Petroleum Institute, the Society of Petroleum Engineers, and the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, have published a wealth of information, recommended practices, and guidance on safety management systems, safety culture, and leadership.

Regarding additional measures to strengthen the TDG regime, consideration should be given to the harmonization of the TDG regulations with those of the United States Department of Transportation, where possible. This would include timelines for phase-outs of legacy tank cars and standardization of sampling and testing procedures for crude classification.

Let me conclude with a just a few key points.

CAPP recognizes that the stakeholders and the public are demanding improvements to the safety of transportation of dangerous goods. We want to ensure safe transportation of our products by all means, by pipe, rail, and marine. The safe and responsible production and transport of crude oil is the foundation of our economic well-being, and its importance cannot be overstated.

We look forward to the committee's report to facilitate the drive toward performance improvement, so as to ensure that oil and gas can be safely moved to markets where it's needed.

Thank you. We look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, gentlemen. You were all within the time, and that's great. That leaves more time for questioning.

I'll turn it over to Mr. Mai, for seven minutes.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, witnesses, for being here today.

My question is regarding the DOT-111 legacy cars. We have heard that there are about 80,000 tank cars still in Canada.

I heard from witnesses that we need to have a realistic timeline. Can anyone give me a realistic timeline, knowing, for instance, that Irving has said they'll phase them out within one year? CN said they would phase them out within four years.

We had a working group that looked at the DOT-111, and there is still no timeline. I understand that we are waiting for what's happening in the U.S., but can we know here in Canada? Especially after what happened in Lac-Mégantic, Canadians want to know the timeline. Can any one of you give me a realistic timeline?

[Peter Boag]

I think we don't have a clear answer to that yet. We're looking at a large number of companies that own, operate, and lease cars, so I think some of that research has been done to help Transport Canada identify what actually is a practical timeline.

I would certainly defer to our witnesses on the teleconference, who are more deeply involved in this, in terms of whether they have more specific information that they could provide.

[Bob Bleaney]

Maybe it would be useful to pass it over to our witnesses in Calgary for more specifics. They are most closely associated with the working group that's been working on this issue.

[David Pryce, Vice-President, Operations, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers]

There are a couple of points that we would make. There is some work going on to try to understand what would be an appropriate timeline. I think we're looking at something in the one-year to five-year range, probably closer to three or four. We don't have the data fully in place yet to understand that.

As we contemplate this, though, one of the things we think would be important is to understand the nature of the product that is being shipped and to look at a transitional strategy that would target the newer cars that are already in place to the higher risk products that move today.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

We've known for 20 years now, and the TSB has been pretty clear on that. We've seen what happened in Lac-Mégantic. The old DOT-111s are problematic. They are considered to be ticking time bombs, and still today we do not have a timeline. I can't understand that.

This question is for CAPP. I see that the industry is making $100 billion in revenue per year. Is that correct?

[Bob Bleaney]

Yes, that's the revenue stream from all of our member companies combined.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Can you tell me a ballpark figure what the profit is of those companies?

[Bob Bleaney]

I can't speak to the specific profit arrangements for all of our companies. Our members are a wide range of different sized companies and they all have different business models that they're working through. I don't have an answer on that.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

You would not know how much the companies that you represent are making in terms of profit.

I think they are all basically public companies. Right?

All I'm saying is.... If the revenues are about $100 billion, let's just make a calculation. According to a witness we had here, we have 80,000 DOT-111 cars that have to be phased out in Canada. Do you agree that the cost is about $100,000 per car, more or less, for the new ones?

[Bob Bleaney]

Again, I'm not that close to the specifics on the car cost estimates.

Greg, would you want to comment on that?

[Greg Stringham, Vice-President, Oil Sands and Markets, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers]

Yes, I can comment on that.

As we were looking at the new cars that are on order, I think 80,000 is a number that is much higher than we've seen out there. As we look at the older legacy DOT-111s, there could be a lower number in Canada. But as you well know, sir, they are moving across the border back and forth all the time. That's why we're looking at that side of things.

The cost estimate for the new cars that we understand are on order is in the range of between $100,000 and $150,000.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Let's say it's $150,000 and fewer than 80,000 cars; we're talking about more or less $80 million in total cost. How many people have to die before we put forward the money to make sure Canadians are safe? I know you won't answer that, but it is very frustrating for us.

I understand there's a link with the U.S., but with what happened here in Canada, especially in Lac-Mégantic, I think we have to take some leadership as regulators, as Canadians. We need to work with industry, and I get that, but if having companies like Irving tell us they can do it within one year, and you can't tell us, after having a working group, how long it will take.... You're talking about one to five years. Obviously, we lack leadership from the government in terms of telling us how many years it will take, so we'll make sure that the demand is there, production will be there.

We heard from the manufacturers, who said maybe four years, if we make them all in Canada. But if we open the market, whatever, hopefully they would be done in Canada, but if we're talking about moving forward, I still don't understand why all of you working together, having a working group, cannot come up with a timeline.

[Bob Bleaney]

One of the things I'd like to make clear is that the work that's going on is very focused on ensuring we have a safe protocol for handling the crude oil. It was noted that there is a variety of different kinds of crude oil, and the ones that are the most volatile are the ones that need to have the first access to modern transport capabilities. The plans of this working group are very much focused on ensuring a safe transition away from the old legacy cars that are safe in service for certain kinds of product, toward the transition to the new cars over the shorter period of three to five years, or one to five years, or whatever. The work of that committee has been very much focused on trying to ensure there will be a safe transition to that product handling.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Mr. McGuinty, you have seven minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Bleaney, I'm not going to let you off the hook that easily. I'm going to go back to the question my colleague asked a second ago. I'm going to ask the three groups here today, starting with Mr. Boag.

Mr. Boag, what are the gross revenues and approximate net profits of your industry, your group?