Transport Committee on March 21st, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Iacono, you have six minutes.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for joining us today, Ms. Diogo.

I would like to talk about railway companies' use of remote control technology.

Canadian railways have been using remote control technology in some switching yards since the 1990s to reduce operating costs and increase efficiency. The concerns raised by the use of such technology include inadequate training for users and support employees, as well as the reliability of the equipment.

Given that the three largest importers and exporters in the railway sector are China, the United States and Germany, what steps, if any, have been taken to look into the best practices those countries have adopted in regulating the use of remote control technology and the related training? What steps have been taken to improve the reliability of the equipment?

[Brigitte Diogo]

We are well aware that the equipment exists, but it is not certified by Transport Canada.

That technology has indeed been used since the 1990s. Transport Canada is mainly focused on providing training for users and ensuring that the operating conditions for the equipment are properly laid out in the regulations. Transport Canada is also responsible for management and risk analysis. That is one of the tools the department has to ensure that the equipment is used safely.

As for inspections, the Transport Canada inspectors look at the use of that equipment and other equipment in switching yards and take action when necessary in compliance with the law.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you.

A bit earlier, you said there was some disagreement over fatigue management. What exactly is the disagreement that has prevented the implementation of appropriate measures?

[Brigitte Diogo]

The task force did an analysis to determine how to improve fatigue management within industry. The task force has conducted comparative studies.

The task force could not agree on the recommendations to the then minister on what to consider in terms of regulatory amendments or industry requests to submit new regulatory proposals.

After speaking to a union and to industry, we concluded that the task force would not be able to make any further headway and that, given the context, it was not worth their while to continue working on the issue.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

You mentioned that there are complexities associated with voice and video recording regulations. Can you please describe those complexities?

[Laureen Kinney]

There are a significant number of issues that are being looked at in terms of the study that's going on right now. Some of those issues address the technical issues; what are the standards? If you're going to mandate a particular type of equipment, what kind of equipment? What kind of reliability? What kind of durability of recordings, etc.? What's the positioning? What's the placement? What is the data that you want to gather? There are a number of areas to be looked at there.

There are also areas to be looked at in terms of the objectives of the safety and fatigue information, and what other kinds of information might come out of this. In general, what is attempted to be achieved with the use of the recorders?

Then there is the issue of how that correlates with the employees who would be subject to the surveillance of those video recorders. There's a good body of work out in the public and from the various privacy commissioners and others as to some of those issues, and they do come under a variety of umbrella legislation in other areas as well that should be looked at.

Finally, there are the regulatory issues and the legislative issues that would be required to put in place an appropriate regulatory regime. There are many questions to be addressed at this stage.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Godin, you have five minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Kinney, Ms. Diogo and Ms. Girard, thank you for participating in this exercise with the committee members.

As parliamentarians, we have a duty to help our society advance. I will focus on more specific issues. There are regulations, studies and motions. But ordinary people, average Canadians, are a bit lost in all that.

I would like you to give me an idea of the situation as it was prior to July 2013 and the situation as it is today. You probably know that I am referring to the disaster in Lac-Mégantic. I think we can use that incident to move things forward.

What did the situation look like before July 2013 and what does it look like on March 21, 2016?

[Laureen Kinney]

Do we have one or two hours to properly explain all the changes?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You could come meet with us again.

[Laureen Kinney]

Transport Canada has done a lot of work related to the tragic events that were just mentioned. It is almost impossible to describe all the changes we have made. Some of the changes have to do with the rules, processes, inspection methods, as well as rail safety, dangerous goods

and new requirements or standards for cars.

There are many differences between DOT-111 and higher quality tank cars. We are currently waiting for a TC-117. A list of all the changes is posted on the Transport Canada website. If the committee so wishes, I can send the list to the chair.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Could you use percentages to give us a concrete idea of the rail safety situation in Canada before July 2013 and the current situation? We know that improvements have been made, but other things could surely be done in the area.

Could you quantify the change in terms of percentage?

[Laureen Kinney]

That's nearly impossible to do. After experiencing such an event, we wanted to focus on the most important issues, as well as the recommendations made by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. As I was saying earlier, the work will continue.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

In practical terms, all freight trains in Canada must be operated by two crew members. Could you confirm that this is currently the case?

[Laureen Kinney]

Yes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

The rule is being applied and you are sure of it.

How many DOT-111 tank cars are still currently being used in Canada? If you have a breakdown of the figures, where did we start and where are we now in terms of that? Will we manage to eliminate those cars and, if so, when?

[Nicole Girard, Director General, Transport Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport]

The first stage was completed last year, when we stopped using the most dangerous tank cars for transporting hazardous goods. We eliminated at least 5,000 of them. We did that thanks to one of our protection guidelines.

As for the DOT-111 tank cars, when we published our regulations in May 2015, we estimated the number of those cars to be about 150,000 across North America. We estimated the Canadian fleet to have contained about 7,500 of them when the regulations on the new requirements came into force.

We are currently looking at the transition of companies when it comes to the configuration of the TC-117 tank cars and the new configurations that will go into effect as of May 2017. We have made sure to be on the same page on both sides of the border with our U.S. counterparts.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You were saying—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Sorry, Mr. Godin, you were well over your time. I wanted to ensure the witness had sufficient time to answer your question.

Ms. Duncan, you have three minutes.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

I have so much to ask. I have two more questions on regulations, following on what my colleague just asked.

Are there amendments in process to expand the category of dangerous goods, including ammonia and chlorine? How about bunker C oil, and how about bitumen, which is now being called “crude”?

[Laureen Kinney]

Madam Chair, could I just ask for a clarification? Amendments to increase the definition of “dangerous goods”—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's correct.

[Laureen Kinney]

—as opposed to the requirements in the ERAPs or...?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's my understanding that the Emerson report made that recommendation.