Evidence of meeting #6 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transport.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
The definition of a key route is any track that carries 10,000 or more loaded tank cars of dangerous goods. The department is currently working with the National Research Council to look at that definition and see whether that threshold remains the correct threshold or not.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Do these companies include companies that transport goods from the United States into Canada?
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I have one last question. What research are you doing or conducting on track conditions to discourage rail companies from operating trains at lower speeds, rather than upgrading their track, for example? Will new regulations follow, or is this a voluntary adoption approach?
4:35 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
If I may just briefly outline the way that the railway regime is structured, there are various classes of track. Depending on the speed that is desired to travel, a certain level of maintenance and quality of investment in that track is required to travel at that speed. There is a range across Canada, across various railways and railway tracks, as to what speed is planned and proposed, and therefore what level of maintenance and investment is done on that track. This becomes, to some degree, a business decision of the railway. However, if a railway is operating at any particular class level, there are a very significant set of requirements for what must be done to be able to travel at that speed.
You will see situations where, for example, a temporary repair needs to be made. At that point, it might be that the train could operate at a lower speed, so a lower track speed is applied while the repair is made, because it doesn't meet the requirements for a higher level. Then, once it's repaired, it could go back to the higher level.
In general, it's a business decision.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you.
I'd like to follow up on the question that Ms. Block just asked. In looking at the report from March 2015, on page 10 it reads:
To ensure that railway companies do not use speed reductions as a replacement for track maintenance, the federal government is currently conducting research on track conditions which it hopes to use to encourage industry to be more proactive in upgrading railway infrastructure.
It then refers to amendments that were going to come into force on April 1, 2015, to help support that. I know there's been some discussion about track speed, but I was wondering if you could let me know what research has been done on that specifically.
4:40 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
In terms of research, it is ongoing. We all participate in research with our U.S. counterparts on rail integrity, rail wear, and what standards need to be established in this area. We also continue to take a look at what we can learn from accidents that have occurred, since Lac-Mégantic, that were due to the track. That work is ongoing.
The reference that you have here is about the transportation information regulations that came into force on April 1, 2015, whereby companies were required to submit certain sets of data to Transport Canada starting January 1, 2016.
We have received that information and it will be what we call “leading indicators”, so what is the information we need to review in advance to prevent accidents rather than taking into account...? Before that, we had information post-event, or indicators post-event. So that information is part of what we would analyze and take into account regarding how we set our inspection priorities starting in April and on an ongoing basis. It's a source of information to study and to determine where we need to act.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Just talking about inspectors, the number one recommendation in this report—and it was addressed in your initial comments, Ms. Kinney—was about increasing the number of inspectors. You said a number of considerations were being looked at to determine the appropriate number of inspectors.
Could you outline for me what those considerations are that are being taken into account?
4:40 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
The way that Transport Canada manages the national oversight plan each year, which is a key part of the work that is done to maintain the oversight of the railway safety regime and other safety regimes, is to do a national oversight plan. That plan looks at what the risk factors are; what is happening with companies; what's been the history, the records, etc; and as we get these new leading indicator data we will be able to incorporate elements like that.
As you look at that you develop a plan for what the risk-based inspection plan is: what our highest risks are, what the intensity is, where the locations are, and where that inspection activity should take place. It includes a variety of types of oversight, including planned inspections and reactive inspections, where you see an incident of some kind occurring or an event that requires more investigation, or simply a company that has had a compliance problem or a safety issue that you're following up on.
There's a wide variety of work. That work is put together each year into a national oversight plan, and then it is applied. That national oversight plan largely gives us the number of inspectors that you need to do that. As that changes over time, you have to review and look at what your requirement is, but generally it stays on a relatively stable basis from a year-to-year requirement.
There are some other requirements that are included in our analysis as well, but those are the main ones.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Is that oversight plan for the past year available publicly?
4:40 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
I think we may have mentioned, and I certainly did mention in the beginning of the comments that I made, that our annual plan for this year had in the vicinity of 33,400 inspection types of activities planned.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I was talking about...because you said in regard to the risk assessments that there were certain locations and certain high risks that had been identified. I was wondering if that was available.
4:40 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
No.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
It's a bit of an iterative process where regional offices develop their information and then feed it into a national system. Then a national assessment is done, and you go back to see what the timing is. It's quite an iterative process.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
When the assessment was made you knew the goal would be 33,400. There was some type of oversight assessment that had been made to track that and where it would be done. Can I please have that information?
4:45 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
I would suggest the committee might want to look, Madam Chair, at what type of information you'd like us to provide in terms of.... I'm just not quite sure I understand.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
That was just one. I was looking at the considerations. There were specific considerations you listed that went into the assessment you would be targeting. You said a number of 33,400, I believe, and a number of inspectors. I think you mentioned high-risk areas. Off the top of my head, I didn't have all of them, but there were certain things that you had taken into account as an oversight plan that would lead to that number, so I think it would be helpful to have that information.
4:45 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport
I think we can provide a summary of that, if you like.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I notice in the information provided, and in the legislation, that industry, at least by policy, consults with the municipalities as they're doing the risk management studies. But are they also required to disclose those and get feedback from the municipality—for example, from the first responders—to see if they're satisfied with the risk assessment and the response?
4:45 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
The key route and key train rules require them to consult and to take into account the concerns expressed by municipalities in their risk assessment. There is a requirement for railway companies to respond to municipalities on how those concerns are being mitigated.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Do they then reveal that to the people who raised the concerns?
