Rail safety better since Lac-MÃ©gantic train derailment - Toronto Star

MONTREAL—No one who witnessed the devastation of July 6, 2013, in the Quebec town of Lac-Mégantic can today look without at least a hint of suspicion at a train. A country built around the railway has learned to doubt the safety of the loads rumbling across Canada's tracks.

This, despite a heap of new regulations in the 14 months since the derailment that are intended to increase rail safety; the scrapping of tanker cars built to standards unsuitable for dangerous cargo like the crude oil that spilled and exploded that night; and a rail industry desperate to shore up confidence.

The federal government and the rail companies tell us they are moving with lightning speed to make a safe mode of transport even more secure. Activists and labour unions tell us there is a huge gap between what is being done and what needs to be done to keep populations, workers and the environment safe.

Nestled between London and Chatham-Kent is Southwest Middlesex, and its mayor, Doug Reycraft, has been consumed with these very issues as co-chair of a rail-safety group set up by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities after the Lac-Mégantic crash.

The same 72 cars of crude oil that derailed and exploded in eastern Quebec had, earlier in the voyage from the oilfields of North Dakota, chugged along the CP Rail tracks through Reycraft's municipality. He says any number of problems could have resulted in the disaster striking his own or other cities along the way.

"It's kind of sad to say this but it took 47 deaths in Lac-Mégantic to make it happen: yes, we are safer," Reycraft said in an interview. "And I think we're on a different track now to increase the level of safety around rail transportation in this country."

On track, but not yet there.

Rex Beatty, president of the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, says the changes to rail operations brought in by the federal government have only formalized good safety practices that existed within most companies. They include measures like locking unattended locomotives; having two crew members double check the application of the brakes when a train is parked; and removing a train's reverser handle, without which a locomotive cannot be moved in any direction.

"It's the optics of change that are out there," he says. "Quite frankly we used to do (these things) even before Lac-Mégantic."

The Railway Association of Canada says some rail companies have also installed videorecorders in their locomotives and are considering the use of audio-recording systems to ensure best practices, a measure that unions fear may intrude on the rights of workers.

Last November, the federal government brought in rules requiring companies to file annual reports outlining the types and amounts of dangerous goods they are carrying so that local emergency crews can equip themselves and prepare for derailments, crashes and spills.

"We don't need to know what's on every single train or in every single car that's going through, but if we have a sense of what materials are in those cars and going through on a frequent basis, that allows fire departments and paramedics to get prepared for them," Reycraft says.

Rail companies and shippers must also prepare an emergency response plan for the dangerous goods they transport such as chemicals or crude oil. Those plans indicate how hazardous materials should be contained by water or foams, safe evacuation distances and other dangers to watch out for.

"That wasn't the case in the past. Now even if there's only one car that is containing crude oil there has to be an emergency response assistance plan for that train," Reycraft says. "That puts the responsibility on the railway or the shipper or both to make sure that what's needed to deal with an emergency is going to be available."

It also allows local fire crews to train and equip themselves for accidents.

"Six-million litres of crude being dumped into a specific area — that takes a very quick calculation to figure out how much foam-suppression capabilities you require as well as the amount of water needed," says Brant Fire Chief Paul Boissonneault, vice-president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs.

But there are still gaping holes in these plans that have been mandated by Transport Canada, says Beatty.

There has been great emphasis on having rail companies draw up federally mandated safety management plans — and having them policed by Transport Canada rail inspectors (something the department was criticized for in the Lac-Mégantic accident report). But Beatty says most crew members "have little to no idea" what dangerous goods they are carrying along the tracks.

The union is worried that its members are hauling cargo without information about their company's specific safety plans, and believes the public should be worried as well.

"From a crewman's point of view in the middle of nowhere or in the middle of a city, contrary to what people think, we are the first responders so we should have that type of information," he says.

"Who best to raise a (safety) violation than the crews because not only are they protecting themselves, but the general public at large. They should be able to say, 'Wait a second, you're not following your own rules.' "

The Transportation Safety Board's final report this week into the Lac-Mégantic derailment commended the federal government for ordering the emergency response plans for trains carrying dangerous goods and acknowledged new rules that have banned some 5,000 older and vulnerable DOT-111 tanker cars from Canadian tracks.

By 2017, all tanker cars carrying dangerous material will have to conform to the highest standard, a move that is expected to be matched by the United States government for American rail companies which frequently send or receive loads going to or coming from Canada.

But the TSB report says that "until all (older) tank cars are no longer used to transport flammable liquids and a more robust tank car standard with enhanced protection is set for North America, the risk will remain."

The board, which investigates all Canadian rail, air or marine accidents, has also urged "additional physical defences" to prevent runaway trains, and called on Transport Canada to do a better job policing errant railways.

That could prove a challenge for the 110 federal inspectors watching over the country's 46,000 kilometres of track. Still, Transport Minister Lisa Raitt's says her department has acted on every recommendation made by the TSB since the July 2013 derailment and will continue taking measures to increase rail safety.

A spokesperson in Raitt's office said this week that Transport Canada is also continuing to hire railway inspectors across the country.

"Had it not been for (Lac-Mégantic) unfortunately I don't think there would have been much change in the department," says Beatty. "I think they're being dragged into doing something about this."

Chief Boissonneault, whose organization has advised Transport Canada on some of its rail safety improvements, senses a more determined effort.

"We know that sometimes changes are not immediate, but there certainly seems a very important message that this has to be improved. It's not a question of if it has to be improved, it's how it's going to be improved and what timeline," he says.

Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang

Dengan url

https://goartikelasik.blogspot.com/2014/08/rail-safety-better-since-lac-magantic.html

Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya

namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link

sebagai sumbernya

Artikel Asik