Government of Nova Scotia Submission. Railway Safety Act Review Panel

Transcription

1 Government of Nova Scotia Submission Railway Safety Act Review Panel June, 2007

2 Nova Scotia Government Submission Railway Safety Act Review 1.0 Introduction Railway service and safety are important to Nova Scotia. Our relatively small province has approximately 700 kilometers of rail track serving Halifax, Cape Breton, the Annapolis Valley, and central Nova Scotian communities. We have two federally regulated railways operating in Nova Scotia, Canadian National Railway (CN) and the Sydney Coal Railway (SCR). CN provides a vital rail connection to North American markets. CN offers a complete range of rail services for Nova Scotians to access national and international markets. Nova Scotia has daily double-stack container rail service between the Port of Halifax and its major inland markets in Montreal, Toronto and Chicago. The CN Halifax Intermodal Terminal handles local and domestic container traffic. CN plays a key role in our ability to compete in the North American and world markets. The SCR operates an industrial shortline railway in the Cape Breton Regional Municipality. Its primary purpose is shipping coal from Sydney to a power plant in Lingan. The railway is the former Cape Breton Development Corporation (DEVCO) railway. The province is served by two shortline railways under provincial jurisdiction. The Cape Breton & Central Nova Scotia Railway (CBNS) operates between Truro and Sydney. The Windsor & Hantsport Railway (WHRC) operates between Windsor Junction (Halifax Regional Municipality) and New Minas. The railways operate as an integrated transportation system whether federally or provincially regulated. All shortline traffic moves via CN to access Canadian markets. In addition, the Sydney Coal Railway off-line traffic moves over a provincial shortline (CBNS) to access CN. To further put this into perspective, shippers on either of the shortlines who move goods via CN to national markets must obtain rates from CN rather than the shortline. The federally regulated railway CN makes the arrangements for the movement of the goods. The shipper on the shortline is the direct customer of the federal railway and not the shortline. Shortlines provide a haul service for the federal railway to the interchange point at a predetermined rate on a per car basis. Rail safety in Nova Scotia is also integrated or harmonized. The federal Railway Safety Act (RSA) regulations apply to shortlines in Nova Scotia. How did the RSA regulations become implemented in Nova Scotia? Nova Scotia became a participant in the railway regulatory business in the 1990's due to changes in federal legislation. These changes saw the devolution of many federal branch lines to shortlines under provincial jurisdiction. 2

3 At that time Nova Scotia realized it was in the position of regulating new railways with a provincial Railways Act that had been unchanged and unused since The Railways Act was not up to date with current North American railway legislation and regulations. Nova Scotia adopted the federal Railway Safety Act (RSA) regulations by reference in order to fulfill its mandate to ensure safe rail operations. Nova Scotia continues to apply the federal railway safety regulations, rules and standards, supporting the harmonization of railway regulations in Canada. Further, Nova Scotia s Agreement with Transport Canada to provide inspection services to the Province ensures the consistent application of regulations. The rail industry in Nova Scotia continues to be in compliance with the federal (RSA) regulations. Nova Scotia s preamble indicates the importance of the federal RSA as it applies to federally regulated railways and as it applies to shortlines under provincial jurisdiction. The creation of railways under provincial jurisdiction is the result of the federal government s actions in the 1980's allowing federal railways to more easily dispose of less profitable railway lines. Nova Scotia offers its views on the current working and overall efficiency of the Railway Safety Act, with particular attention to impacts that cross jurisdictional boundaries. 2.0 Regulatory Process Nova Scotia s submission to the Railway Safety Act Review Committee in 1994 stated: Our primary concern has been the change from federal to provincial jurisdiction should not reduce the safety of railway operations. Implementing the RSA regulations with federal participation has been a beneficial partnership for the Province but not without some issues. Nova Scotia brings to the Advisory Panel s attention its observations on the federal rail safety regulatory consultative process for provincial governments. At times, Nova Scotia has viewed the regulatory decision making process in Canada as a process between Transport Canada and the Railway Association of Canada. There have been consultations on specific regulations. The Province has not always felt it has been an effective participant in the regulatory decision making process. Nova Scotia noted in its 1994 submission: the most important item to coordinate with the provinces and the federal government are the safety regulations. A 1994 Transport Canada report on Federal - Provincial Railway Regulation for the Council of Deputy Ministers of Transport recommended: 3

4 A mechanism should be established whereby the provincial governments can be consulted on changes to railway rules and standards and to ensure provincial concerns are fully taken into account. Nova Scotia feels that the consultation process has been at best sporadic and at times limited to a notification process rather than a consultative process. This can be exemplified by the fact the federal Railway Safety Consultative Committee (RSCC) did not meet for more than four years ( ). While the RSCC was not the most effective consultative vehicle, it was at least a source of information on current and future Transport Canada regulatory projects. Recommendations: 2.1. Nova Scotia recommends the establishment of a more effective provincial participation process in federal railway safety regulatory decision making The Railway Safety Consultative Committee should be open to a member from any Province or Territory that expresses an interest The RSCC should have at least one Provincial member on the Executive Committee with any RSCC provincial representative being able to act as an alternate. 3.0 Federal Rail Safety Funding Programs Currently, the Transport Canada, Grade Crossing Improvement Program is only available to federal railways. Nova Scotia would like consideration given to, current and future, federal railway safety funding programs being extended to include shortlines. Nova Scotia will briefly address the rationale for its position by discussing the harmonization of federal railway safety regulations and economic integration of the rail industry in Nova Scotia. In Nova Scotia, as well in other provinces, railways under provincial jurisdiction and corresponding road authorities are required to meet federal rail safety regulations and standards. Shortlines often expend additional resources to implement changes instituted at the federal level of government. Nova Scotia has agreed to meet the standards set by the regulations in the interest of harmonization. However, compliance can come at a price. For example, in 2002 the federal government proposed a new road/railway grade crossing regulation identified as RTD10. The regulation will require the railway and the road authority to undertake a detailed examination of crossings before construction, 4

5 together with periodic safety assessments at least every five years by qualified persons. Nova Scotia has not implemented detailed safety assessments. There are 325 public crossings in Nova Scotia which will require detailed safety assessments. The proposed technical standards also call for: - increase in grade crossing surface width; - approach angles to crossings more restric tive; - requirements for flashing lights and bells crossing protection increased. If RTD10 is adopted there will be numerous crossing upgrades required. Nova Scotia agrees with improving railway safety. However, provincial and municipal governments have resource limitations. The intent of RTD10 is for railways to meet new federal standards. Nova Scotia can support RTD10 if there is an expansion of the federal Grade Crossing Improvement Program to include projects on shortlines under provincial jurisdiction. The current Grade Crossing Improvement Program funded 103 projects at a cost of $10 million for Nova Scotia understands the selection process for projects is based on a national ranking taking into consideration the cross product of rail/highway vehicles, speed of trains and accident history. Shortlines in Nova Scotia operate at lower speeds and with less road/railway traffic at grade crossings than in the more urban parts of Canada. Therefore, Nova Scotia would like more weighting given to crossing accident history. Nova Scotia also recommends that Transport Canada Grade Crossing Program funds be allocated a regional basis. Implementing RTD10 will lead to the identification of a substantial number of crossing improvements projects. Addressing these projects will be delayed due to a lack of funding. Nova Scotia would expect the establishment of a national funding program accessible to all railways where there is a significant change in regulatory requirements. The economic integration of shortlines and the federal regulated carrier (CN) operating in Nova Scotia is important when considering access to federal funding. The federal carrier continues to have a significant influence on former federal branch line traffic in Nova Scotia through stringent contractual arrangements. The federal railway often establishes a per car rate for interchange traffic. The terms negotiated by the federal railway are more favourable to it than the shortline in the contract. Less favourable contract terms for shortlines can translate into less revenue to reinvest in their infrastructure. Nova Scotia recognizes shortline railways need to invest in their infrastructure for safety as well as for competitive reasons. In the short term, shortlines are meeting the standards set by the Railway Safety Act. Nova Scotia is concerned about the lack of investment in infrastructure and possible impact on safety in the longer term. Nova 5

6 Scotia sees a need for a federal infrastructure funding program designated for shortlines, regardless of federal or provincial jurisdiction. Recommendations: 3.1 Expand the Grade Crossing Improvement Program to include shortlines under provincial jurisdiction. 3.2 Allocate Grade Crossing Improvement Program funds on a regional basis. 3.3 Establish a federal infrastructure funding program designated for shortlines, accessible to all shortlines regardless of jurisdiction (federal or provincial). 4.0 Occurrence Data (Incidents and Accidents) Currently, all railways in Nova Scotia report occurrences (incidents and accidents) to the Transportation Safety Board (TSB). Nova Scotia appreciates the efforts undertaken by the TSB to collect initial incident and accident reports from railways under provincial jurisdiction. This is a prudent approach to reporting especially in the event a province requests the TSB to undertake an investigation. The TSB does not include provincial occurrence (incidents/accidents) data in their statistical reports. Nova Scotia recommend the TSB include provincial occurrence data. The addition of provincial data should improve the identification of safety issues for the rail industry in Canada and more specifically for the shortline railway industry. We understand the TSB shares portions of the occurrence data with Transport Canada. Occasionally, Transport Canada may request additional information from the Province or a railway for data previously submitted to the TSB. Nova Scotia recommends the TSB and Transport Canada jointly review their data needs and data sharing policies to improve the sharing of information. Recommendations: 4.1 The TSB should include provincial occurrence data in their annual statistical reports. 4.2 Transport Canada and the TSB should undertake a joint review of their occurrence data needs and data policies to improve the sharing of information. 6

7 5.0 Safety Management Systems Nova Scotia is encouraged by the efforts of Transport Canada to implement Safety Management Systems (SMS) with Nova Scotia s shortline railways. The responsibility of SMS is on the railway company to design, implement and monitor its own safety program with the appropriate oversight by Transport Canada. The implementation of SMS is consistent with the Nova Scotia, Occupational Health and Safety Act internal responsibility system where everyone in a company shares in the responsibility for health and safety in the workplace. SMS was initially proposed by Transport Canada to change the railway safety regulatory process from a prescriptive inspection program to a risk assessment and auditing process. Nova Scotia believes the program has been implemented with some success and offers the following comments: $ Transport Canada s implementation of SMS in Nova Scotia has been sensitive to the differing requirements for a shortline as opposed to a national carrier. For example, the SMS Guide has an extensive lists of risks identified to be addressed in an SMS. Transport Canada has not required the shortlines to address every risk on the list. Similarly, the Guide references the use of test cars, impact detectors and crossing systems as a reasonable cost for collecting data. While a reasonable cost for CN or CP Rail, these tools may not be a reasonable cost for a shortline. Transport Canada has not required shortlines in Nova Scotia to use all of these tools. Nova Scotia encourages Transport Canada to continue to recognize the size and scope difference in the implementation of a shortline SMS versus a mainline railway SMS. $ Moving the administration of railway safety from an inspection program to an audit program is taking time. In discussions with Transport Canada and other Provinces it was noted that SMS has not been established consistently and that various stages of development of SMS for railways exist across Canada. Some railways have expended significant resources in the design and implementation of SMS, perhaps more than they initially expected. The establishment and implementation of SMS should continue across Canada, especially the risk assessment and audit components which specifically place the responsibility for safety on the railway. TSB incident and accident statistics in Canada have not shown a need for an overhaul of rail safety in Canada. Preliminary TSB statistics for 2006 show that incidents and accidents have gone down from Nova Scotia feels the emphasis should be on ensuring railways across Canada implement an effective SMS in the very near future rather then any reemphasis of prescriptive regulations. 7

8 Recommendation 5.1 Transport Canada continue to implement SMS, recognizing the SMS requirements for a shortline are different from the requirements of a national carrier. S ummary of Recommendations 2.1. Nova Scotia recommends the establishment of a more effective provincial participation process in federal railway safety regulatory decision making The Railway Safety Consultative Committee should be open to a member from any Province or Territory that expresses an interest The RSCC should have at least one Provincial member on the Executive Committee with any RSCC provincial representative being able to act as an alternate. 3.1 Expand the Grade Crossing Improvement Program to include shortlines under provincial jurisdiction. 3.2 Allocate Grade Crossing Improvement Program funds on a regional basis. 3.3 Establish a federal infrastructure funding program designated for shortlines, accessible to all shortlines regardless of jurisdiction (federal or provincial). 4.1 The TSB should include provincial occurrence data in their annual statistical reports. 4.2 Transport Canada and the TSB undertake a joint review of their occurrence data needs and data policies to improve the sharing of information. 5.1 Transport Canada continue to implement SMS, recognizing the SMS requirements for a shortline are different from the requirements of a national carrier. 8