Verbatim feedback: Railway consultation - Safety Management Systems Regulations

The feedback received through the railway consultation has been reviewed and posted according to Technical Safety BC’s Content Submission Guidelines.

Also see Verbatim feedback: Railway consultation for:

Requiring all 12 components of the SMS Regulations

Date Respondent Reasonableness
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Somewhat unreasonable
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Reasonable
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Unsure
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Unreasonable
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Reasonable
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Reasonable
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Somewhat reasonable


New requirements

Date Respondent Reasonableness Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions

Accountable Executive: Neutral

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Neutral

N/A
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY

Accountable Executive: Reasonable

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Neutral

These are not new. We already have identified an executive who is accountable and we are on the lookout for hazards on a daily basis. Fatigue management is not an issue as our Operators only do a 3 hr shift.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal

Accountable Executive: Neutral

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Reasonable

This section is somewhat confusing as some of the 12 components are part of the SMS today.
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd

Accountable Executive: Reasonable

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Somewhat reasonable

In 2015 the federal SMS regulations were put in place, with 3 specific parts to it. Part 1, Part 2 Div 1, Part 2 Div 2. They were set up in this fashion to recognize the various distinction between different types of train operations and took into account the size of the organization. Part 1 regulations are basically for the Main line, long haul, large railway companies. Part 2 Div 2 addressed those operations that may go on non-main track and the associated components of those regulations addressed the requirements of that kind of RR operation. BC Technical Safety should consider adopting the same type of regulations that Transport Canada has adopted. For a small industrial railway Part 1 is burdensome and unnecessary and would be better served falling under Part 2 Div 2.
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway)

Accountable Executive: Reasonable

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Reasonable

 
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway)

Accountable Executive: Reasonable

Reporting safety hazards: Neutral

Fatigue management: Reasonable

 
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway

Accountable Executive: Reasonable

Reporting safety hazards: Reasonable

Fatigue management: Neutral

The SMS system allows for review of factors that will contribute to operating a safe rail operation.

General Operating Instructions

Date Respondent Agreement Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Neither agree nor disagree  
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Disagree We already have an active SMS. Why do we need another level of bureaucracy.? A G,.O.I, is a waste of time and more paperwork to be done. We need less not more..
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Unsure Again, somewhat confusing. Not all industrial railways perform rail operations that fall within the definition of rail operating instructions. Industrial railways typically maintain operations training manuals.
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Agree All railways should have a GOI so it shouldn't be an issue incorporating it into an SMS. It is already part of our SMS.
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Agree -
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Agree -
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Neither agree nor disagree Depending on size and complexity of the rail line, there are existing rules and procedures, which if followed, should govern the operations.

Occurrence reporting guidelines

Date Respondent Helpfulness Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Somewhat helpful  
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Unhelpful We already conform to Reporting regulations with the use of Part A and Part B.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Neutral  
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Neutral While it may benefit some smaller RR's, others already have defined investigation protocols and would end up having to fill a number of documents out that essentially will mean the same thing. Burdensome.
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Helpful -
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Helpful It would be useful if TSBC provide all operations with updated and consistent reporting forms
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Neutral Will report as per existing rules and regulations.

Frequency of conducting safety concern analyses

Date Respondent Agreement Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Neither agree nor disagree  
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Agree What is it that Technical Safety wants? If they want a monthly report, a weekly report or a daily report - then just say so.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Neither agree nor disagree This can be part of the annual SMS audit.
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Somewhat disagree Putting a numerical requirement on the frequency of conducting analyses is not the proper way to look at this particular requirement. A more pro-active way to look at it as a regulator is to define circumstances where conducting analyses of safety concerns would be required
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Neither agree nor disagree -
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Agree TSBC needs to ensure that all operations have consistent procedures for conducting safety analysis for their operations.
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Somewhat agree Operating personnel proficiency tests done annually.

Annual proficiency testing (job observation)

Date Respondent Agreement Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Somewhat agree  
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Agree Where is the amendment. i t is already spelled out in our S.M.S. that this is done during each operating season. We operate only 5 months of the year and our proficiency testing is done at least 2 or 3 times on each operator.during each operation season.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Neither agree nor disagree  
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Somewhat agree While our organization already does this on a regular basis, it is important that proficiency testing be done well. If it is done to meet corporate or regulatory numerical requirements, it can very well lose the impact that it is being proposed for in the first place. Quality versus is the key point here. This is an opportunity for coaching and mentorship and should be treated in that fashion. If done well it will contribute to a better safety culture within the organization. If done poorly, it will negate an effective safety culture. 
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Somewhat agree -
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Agree TSBC needs to provide consistent basic format for proficiency reviews.
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Agree [See previous comment]

Annual audits

Date Respondent Agreement Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions Neither agree nor disagree  
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Unsure We already do an audit each year.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Unsure Does this audit refer to a review of the SMS document or overall adherence to the processes outlined in the SMS? I am surprised to read about an audit every 3 years. We have not been aware of this.
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd Somewhat agree While it is important to ensure your SMS is functioning as intended, to a degree the size of the operation and number of incidents should dictate frequency. Our organization does annual regulatory audits of our SMS, but what is of more value is to review how the SMS is actually functioning at a particular location. Effecting change locally and through the SMS will enhance safety performance. 
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Industrial Railway) Agree -
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) Somewhat agree -
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway Somewhat agree Depends on traffic volumes etc.

Specific components

Date Respondent Component Comments
10/10/2018 14:18 Nutrien Ag Solutions All components can be met

 

Safety policy

N/A
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY All components can be met N/A
11/5/2018 Cando Rail Services Ltd All components can be met N/A
11/22/2018 Anonymous (Heritage Railway) All components can be met N/A

Other comments on the SMS Regulations

Date Respondent Comments
10/10/2018 22:18 NELSON ELECTRIC TRAMWAY SOCIETY Lets try to make it simpler to follow and not be caught up in jumbo jumbo.
10/19/2018 Teck Coal Overall confusing about the frequency of audits and what the audits contain.
11/23/2018 Kamloops Heritage Railway We submit an annual SMS.