Transport Committee on Nov. 27th, 2013

[Gerard McDonald]

Obviously with any regulation you have to consult—and we have an obligation to consult—with all those who may be affected with regard to that particular regulation, to assess what the potential benefits and costs of bringing in a regulation are, and to give Canadians an adequate time to consult on whatever regulatory changes we might be proposing. There is a time element to that. We're trying to reduce that as much as possible, but we do have certain requirements in order to bring something forth as a regulation.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

When did you start examining whether or not crude oil should be included? Have you been examining it just in the last six months or have you been looking at it for the last few years?

[Gerard McDonald]

No. It's primarily post-Lac-Mégantic that we have been looking at whether crude should be an ERAPable good.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

The previous response about DOT-111, that they last at least 40 years and they're made in the U.S.—there is absolutely no plan to phase out the existing DOT-111s. Do you have a plan on when you want to phase them out?

[Gerard McDonald]

That's part of our consultation with our colleagues in the U.S. As you can appreciate, these cars move all across North America, so it would become very difficult for us to regulate a phase-out unilaterally, but this is one of the aspects, in addition to designing the new standard. As Madame Dagenais pointed out, one of the other aspects is what would be a reasonable phase-out period for the existing cars, and also whether or not there should be any restriction on the types of goods they might carry, if some older existing cars remain in use.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

The Transportation Safety Board has made recommendations, has flagged this issue for many years. This is not new. DOT-111 punctures very easily because of its lack of thickness.

You have been talking to your American counterparts for many years. How much longer are you going to take to come to a decision so there might be a plan to phase this out? The last recommendations from the Transportation Safety Board are at least five or six years old. They have been flagging it.

[Gerard McDonald]

Yes, and that new standard has been developed. As Madame Dagenais said, it will be given the force of law. Even though tank cars already are being built to that standard, it will be given the force of law, hopefully within the next couple of weeks.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

No, I'm talking about the old ones, the ones that don't meet the requirements. Seventy per cent of the shipments right now are using DOT-111.

[Gerard McDonald]

I can't recall the Transportation Safety Board recommendations verbatim, but I believe their recommendation was to develop a new standard for the 111. As I said, that has been done, and we're on the next generation after that particular standard.

We're constantly trying to improve them with each iteration. But that being said, one of the things we will be looking at and discussing with our American counterparts is whether or not we should consider the accelerated phase-out of older DOT-111 tank cars.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I'm sorry. The Transportation Safety Board is not talking about the new ones or the standards. They are talking about the existing ones, the ones that are in use now, and that conversation has continued for a while.

I'll move on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. McGuinty, you have five minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Mr. McDonald, can I go back to some testimony you gave on Monday; you were asked about capacity in the department.

In response to capacity you said:

...while indeed some of the budgets at Transport Canada have reduced over recent years, when we undertook the deficit reduction plans at Transport Canada, we made a specific effort not to touch any of the inspection resources that were available within the department.

I think you will find that our level of inspection within the department has not decreased. In fact in some areas, rail safety in particular, the number of inspections has actually increased.

Do you still stand by that testimony in the wake of yesterday's report?

[Gerard McDonald]

Yes, I do.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Our research says you have a three-year cycle for auditing. Is that correct?

[Gerard McDonald]

That was the original plan, yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

For example, in the three years ending March 31, 2012, how many audits were completed?

[Gerard McDonald]

Perhaps Monsieur Bourdon can....

[Luc Bourdon]

About eight.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

And what percentage would you say that accounts for in terms of what your own policy requires?

[Luc Bourdon]

When we set that target, we thought at the time we could probably meet that three-year cycle. We also tried not to decrease the amount of inspection we were doing. For instance, this year we're planning 10 audits for 10 different railways, which is about one-third of the industry.

However, it became obvious to us that to try to have full-blown audits would take a lot more resources than we thought. If I look at our colleagues from civil aviation, their cycle is five years.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Let me ask the question again. What percentage of audits did you complete based on your own targets for the three fiscal years?

[Luc Bourdon]

According to the OAG, we completed 26%.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

That's one quarter.

[Luc Bourdon]

It's one quarter, yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

One quarter of the audits that you had set out—