Evidence of meeting #144 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was plans.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
It's worth noting that we get the information from directive 36, which comes twice a year, and from our perspective, we use that for our training. However, do we know what's coming through on a day-to-day basis? No.
It's worth noting that, whilst we assume that we can provide this adequate response, the municipality will set the level of service for that fire department based upon their own needs and circumstances, and, more importantly, their own tax base. There is this vision that we can have firefighters who can arrive immediately at the scene of a derailment or a release of a chemical and immediately get to work, but that might not always be the case. Most—
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
If I may just interject, has it improved, since Lac-Mégantic, for the cities to be aware? Has it improved in some way, or is there still a lot of room for improvement? That's my first question.
My second question is, are the cities that are affected by this crossing of rail lines equipped to have the proper emergency plans if an incident would ever arise?
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
To answer your first question, as we said in our opening statement, it's certainly improved. Are the cities equipped? That very much depends on the city. In some cities, there may be a very highly functioning hazardous materials response team. In other cities, there may be a very basic firefighting component. Those levels of service will dictate what that city can do.
We heard from Transport Canada at the last meeting. I was advised that we're talking about doing mass evacuations in a very short space of time. That's a very difficult thing to do, to try to evacuate a large area. I can tell you, since I'm somebody who's done it a number of times.
My message would be that, while there have been improvements, as we've pointed out today, there's certainly a lot of room for improvement and a lot of room to improve the safety of our communities.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
What role does the railway's police force play when there is a rail incident involving a potential release of dangerous goods? Is its role the same in all the cities, or does it vary depending on what type of police force exists?
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
I can comment from my own circumstances and what I've heard from members. The rail police is our first point of contact, normally through our own police dispatch. Again, that very much depends on where the police are based and how long it will take them to respond to the scene, which I imagine would be part of these emergency action plans.
What we're talking about here is very much a continental issue. It's very difficult to apply a standard response across the breadth of Canada and North America and to say that we have a standard response to all of the issues, with the differences in communities, language, landscape and all of the other factors that may change.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you, Mr. Iacono.
Mr. Barsalou Duval, you have the floor for six minutes.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.
Mr. Mayor, we've heard that railway companies disclose to cities the dangerous goods that pass through their territory on an annual or semi-annual basis. Cities also have the opportunity to tell the public about the top 10 goods that pass through their boundaries. Is that enough for you?
Mayor, Ville de Saint-Basile-le-Grand
No. That way of doing things provides comfort to those who argue that it's enough. However, it can't be enough because, operationally speaking, it leads to nothing.
Even if we know the entire list of dangerous goods that can be transported by rail, it's only when an incident or accident occurs, such as a derailment, that we can learn what materials are in a particular train. Providing a list in advance is useless, because we don’t know what material is being transported that day. There are dozens of hazardous materials, but it's only when a spill occurs that we know how to respond. However, municipalities can't prepare for contingencies with respect to all toxic materials, either in the event of fumes or a fire. For example, how to extinguish a fire depends on the type of material.
So it doesn’t eliminate the danger at the source. This is something that gives comfort to those who maintain that there's no danger from the moment we learn about the list. Even if the entire list were made public, we'd be no further ahead because people would just be more concerned.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
I think Mr. Chris Case said earlier that the availability of specialized equipment to respond to an incident varies from one municipality to the next, depending on its fiscal capacity and budget. So even though there are some very dangerous goods going through, cities don't necessarily have what they need to adequately respond to situations that may arise.
In a way, this is a transfer of risk since cities are now responsible for protecting themselves against such situations. Do you think it's normal for cities to assume all the risk?
Mayor, Ville de Saint-Basile-le-Grand
No, it's not normal. It's an economic activity carried out by producers and rail carriers, but cities inherit the damage and must respond when there's an incident or accident.
To answer the first part of your question, like Mr. Case, we can say that the availability of specialized equipment varies greatly from one city to the next, depending on its resources. Even if a city has a lot of money, it somewhat plays Russian roulette because it never knows what disaster to prepare for. Those disasters can take many forms.
For example, in the past we had the polychlorinated biphenyls disaster. When that happened, we knew what the product was, but we didn’t know how to respond. We intervened with foam, but that wasn't the right way. So even though you have a lot of money, there are dozens of dangerous goods going through your territory and you’re somewhat playing Russian roulette, because you can’t protect yourself against everything.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
We talked today about the emergency response assistance plans that railway companies are required to establish under Transport Canada regulations. Since this department has a certain oversight role, to your knowledge, has your municipality had any discussions with Transport Canada about its ability to deal with incidents or the emergency response plan? Has Transport Canada had any discussions with your municipality or the fire department about those things?
Mayor, Ville de Saint-Basile-le-Grand
Yes, but we're going around in circles because the measures that can be put in place are designed to deal with disasters. Most economic sectors plan ways to eliminate hazards at the source based on their activities. However, we can't do that in the rail sector unless we circumvent municipalities that have high population densities.
In conclusion, I'd say that it's like giving a rattle to the municipalities, as was the case at Lac-Mégantic. That town paid a heavy price, however, and it was only after the disaster that measures were put in place to prevent it from happening again. Why isn't that done in municipalities where it can happen?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor.
Next we'll go to Mr. Bachrach.
Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours for six minutes, please.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm struck by those last comments and also by the fact that so many of the improvements we've seen, such as directive 36, are written in the blood of people who have lost their lives in disasters. I think what we're trying to do here at this committee, through this study, is look down the road and try to strengthen the protective system without it costing the lives of our neighbours.
Thinking about what we've heard around these plans and preparedness, I'm struck by Chief Case's words about Canada's geography and the difficulty of applying a standard response across Canada. That hits home, because the part of Canada I represent is a region of rural and remote communities, yet the same volume of goods goes through our communities as through downtown Edmonton. It seems that the risk is dictated by the products and the capacity for response is dictated by the tax base.
Could you talk a bit about the unique challenges that small rural fire departments face when dealing with the volumes of hazardous goods that we're talking about moving through our towns?
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
Between you and Mayor Lessard, you've hit most of the issues that we would talk about.
If you're talking about your own area, it's a volunteer area.
As you've seen from our census, which we referred to, 56% of our reported fire departments are struggling to maintain basic equipment for firefighting. Because of the increase in the cost of fire trucks, which has gone up massively over the past two years, the cost of training and the cost of PPE, some of our fire chiefs are struggling to maintain a basic firefighting provision.
What we're talking about now is a highly technical hazardous materials response to a really complex incident that would challenge any fire chief.
When it comes to the risks, you're quite correct. We've talked a lot about preparation and about the strengthening of railcars and trying to prevent the incident from happening, but we're also now talking about when the unknown happens.
Our business is the unforeseeable. We're the people who get called when there's an unforeseeable incident, and it's really difficult to maintain that level of response across such a wide area. It would also be very difficult for your local municipality to fund the level of response that might be needed to deal with such a catastrophic incident.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I want to ask about the cost of providing capacity. As a former mayor, I know that small municipalities are stretched when it comes to their resources. Small fire departments are stretched, as you've just mentioned, yet many of the companies shipping goods through our communities have millions if not billions of dollars in revenue.
The costs don't seem equitably distributed. Should the costs of responding to major industrial spills and fires along the rail line be borne by municipal property taxpayers? Is it fair?
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
Through you, Mr. Chair, if we had a chemical factory built in your area, the E2 regulations and the rest of the federal regulations would demand that the plant not only be safe to operate but have mitigation plans, should there be a leak within that plant. It's not fair, because you now have that risk that travels at speed through different areas, and I will also concede to Mr. Masterson that it's incredibly difficult to have a response that can follow that risk.
However, you are quite correct. In a lot of the areas these trucks are going through, the first responders will not be equipped. They won't be trained, and it's very difficult. We're seeing recruitment of volunteer firefighters become harder and harder because of the changes in people's lives and the way they work. We're also seeing that, in some provinces, you have to be licensed as a firefighter the same way that a full-time firefighter is, so the costs are not going down, and the level of technical response needed for an incident like this would be extreme.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Given all of that, how do we protect residents in small communities? I'm thinking about my community of Smithers. It's named after the chairman of the railroad. It's a railroad town. There are hundreds of people who live right along the rail line. They live and work in close proximity to those trains that are coming through. Given the challenges around capacity, how do we protect their lives?
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
Overall, there has to be prevention rather than response. The work that is taking place to improve safety has to be the way to deal with this, but there has to be an acknowledgement that it's not only a risk to life but also a risk to the community and to the environment. There has to be an investment that is at least an effective stopgap that's put in place until the industry experts show up.
I realize I'm not answering your question; it's a very difficult one to answer.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Some of the most difficult scenarios to talk about are these worst-case scenarios that are of extremely high consequence. If we're talking about multiple rail cars on fire in the heart of a community at risk of BLEVE, these boiling liquid evaporating vapour explosions that we've seen, is it reasonable to expect there to be a response that prevents the loss of human life?
As a resident, I would sure hope that there is, but when you look at the hard facts: the time required to evacuate, the number of people who would need to be evacuated and the capacity of the community, it really stretches the imagination to understand how a small fire department would get people out of the way.
December 12th, 2024 / 5:15 p.m.
Fire Chief, Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With a hazardous materials incident, the incident commander has two very definite options: Move the people away from the bad stuff, or move the bad stuff away from the people. At the very least, there has to be a response whereby you can do a meaningful evacuation. That is training, awareness and community education, so that people are aware that this stuff is coming through the municipality and the evacuation plan. You're basically—again, I'm speaking from a professional perspective—seeking an element of self-evacuation to effectively get people away from this.
Getting a crew that can arrive and immediately mitigate a BLEVE or something like that is nearly impossible at times. You really do have to put as much water on it as you can and get everybody away for up to 24 hours.