Clear Full Forecast

CN Derailment A Close Call

By 250 News

Wednesday, August 08, 2007 04:01 AM

Distance between  derailment and  residential areas,   just 313 yards (288 meters) apart. 

Did residents of the Prince George neighbourhood of “South Fort” dodge a bullet on the weekend when two CN trains collided on the tracks on the east side of the Fraser River?

The collision took place at 10:20 a.m., one train contained cars moving lumber products, and the other was hauling a host of tank cars.  It appears that while CN executives knew what the tankers contained, others on the scene trying to prevent a potential disaster did not.

When asked if there were dangerous or hazardous products contained in any of the tank cars, Assistant Deputy Fire Chief John Lane said CN reps were on hand with the manifest, but just as soon as the train was uncoupled and the cars moved away from the scene, he had no reason to ask.  ‘They were pulled from the scene so fast we didn’t know what was contained in those other tanker cars” said Lane.

The call to the fire department was received around 10:20 in the morning.  Lane did a briefing with members of the media at noon.   At that time, the tanker cars, with the unknown contents, were still coupled to the train.  They are visible in the background of a digital photo taken at the time (see photo at right, taken at 12:02 p.m.)

While CN is not commenting, it is known that if it hadn’t been for the heroics of a CN employee who rushed to the derailment and uncoupled the two trains from the burning or at risk cars, the scenario might have been very different.

According to Lane, the car that was immediately to the north of the gasoline tank car contained either diesel or gasoline, but that is as far he went. Police sources say they were never informed about what was contained in the other cars.

CN spokesperson Kelli Svendsen, says the railway will not release the manifest of what was in the other cars as “they weren’t part of the incident”.  Nor will CN release the name of the person who rushed in to uncouple the cars; it is not the company’s practice to release names of employees.  One insider tells Opinion250 the person who risked their life to uncouple those cars may very well face discipline for putting himself in harms way.

.According to the safety standards employed by emergency response teams in all of North America, when dealing with a derailment like the one that happened in Prince George Saturday, the perimeter around the scene should be, at minimum, 800 meters, or ½ a mile. 

The distance from Paddle Wheel Park to the derailment site was a mere 313 yards, or 288 meters.

(At left,  the mess after the  flames were out, photo submitted by Opinion250 reader "VOCER")

CN says while it has concluded it was human error that caused the collision, all other information on the crash will have to come from the Transportation Board which is conducting an investigation.

The Union (UTU) appears to have been vindicated in its claim that CN was moving too many cars.  A notice of orders delivered to CN calls for a maximum of 40 cars of which ten must be empty, or a total of 30 “loads”.  The Transportation Board also  ordered an end to the Point of Protection Zone, saying it  gave  a false sense of security that there were no other trains in the area,  and  there was an order  that  an employee must be on the lead equipment and visual contact be kept with the tracks at all time during switching.  Opinion250 had been told the trains were being switched by “remote control”.

CN has taken immediate action to comply with the 5 orders it has been given.

    


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

I going to rush downtown and fill up with propane at the Victoria Street Payless, just in case someone decides the Payless storage tank could level the downtown.

The hysteria generated by the CN smoke could have most gas stations and propane fill up stores moved out of the city. You can never be too safe if you are dodging a bullet.

I wonder how much TNT would have to be set off at the CN site to rattle the windows? I wonder if City Council will ask Crescent Spur not to ship their dynamite with CN? City Council will certainly think up something remotely important to "act on" and look impotant.


[quote]One insider tells Opinion250 the person who risked their life to uncouple those cars may very well face discipline for putting himself in harms way.[/quote]
In a word - WOW. In my humble opinion, the person who uncoupled the cars should be labelled a hero. This was obviously an accident, a terrible thing indeed BUT ... The person responsible for moving the other cars out of the way may well of saved the city a potential environmental catastrophe. If CN seriously wants to punish a person for taking the right course of action - Then we have a serious problem indeed. Will that be a case of finding a scapegoat to deflect attention away from the issues at hand? I personally pray that the comment is nothing but an opinion or an oversight and that no action be taken against the individual concerned.
I am suprised by the lack of leadership and comment by Kinsley and city council.
What with those people?
Afraid to rock the boat?
Do they work for the people of PG or CN?
A bullet was dodged here and they really need to stand up and be counted!
"The hysteria generated by the CN smoke could have most gas stations and propane fill up stores moved out of the city. You can never be too safe if you are dodging a bullet."

YDPC .... do some research for a change.

Tell us how many incidents there have been involving dangerous goods by highway transport versus rail transport? If you can show that rail poser a lesser risk than highway transport, then I will be a convert.

Wow, now there is a challenge, eh?

;-)
Other than the fact that the tracks do run a bit close to a residential area,I would rather that potentially dangerous cargo be moved by rail than on the highways!
But then,it is a moot point because that will not change anytime soon.
CN is not about to change where the tracks run and that's a fact of life!
The best we can hope for is that there are enough controls in place to minimize the risks.
How well they are monitored is the part that involves the political crap!
No challenge at all Owl. Its like comparing car accidents to airline accidents. When you get 300 people killed in an airline crash it seems like a big number, however it pales in comparison to the number of people killed in car accidents. So once you do the numbers statistically it is safer to fly than to drive a car.

The same thing applies to Railway accidents versus Highway truck accidents. Railway accidents such as the one at Chekumus, or the one years ago in Missasauga Ontario which involved Chlorine Gas get a lot of media coverage, however there are very few people acutally killed in Rail Accidents in Canada. Truck accidents on the other hand, might very well kill other people (collateral damage) but not through spillage of toxic product. Usually the driver survives these accidents.

The bottom line is that the Railways handle significantly more dangerous commodities than trucks, and usually in the case of Methane Gas, they handle over 100 cars per train on a daily basis. Other dangerous commoditys such as Diesel, Gasoline, Caustic Soda, Sulphuric Acid, Hydrogen Peroxide, etc; while handled in smaller numbers of cars per trains, are also handled on a daily basis year in and year out. So in effect it is much safer to handle dangerous commoditys by train versus truck, if you just look at the tons handled per year by the different carriers and the number of accidents that actually take place.

The potential for a serious conflageration of course lies with the Railways mainly because of the fact that you could have a huge derailment that could (in theory) ignite numerous cars with dangerous and deadly gases, and poisons.

It seems that we are surrounded by dangerous goods of all types, being handled by rail and truck, and there are safety features built into the handling of these commoditys. It is when these rules and regulations, and safty guidelines are circumvented, or ignored that we have accidents. The CN derailment across the river is a prime example.

(1) Manpower problems
(2) Track problems
(3) Visibility problems
(4) Hours of work problems

The list goes on. One would think that under no circumstances would we let safety take a back seat to normal operations, however it does happen.
Wonder if the new Fraser Bench subdivision is a half mile from dangerous goods being transported in the BCR Industrial site?

Just a thought.

Cheers
Uh yes Steve that person is a hero for sure....my mom and stepdad live in that neighborhood. Glad nobody was hurt :)
"A total of 1246 rail accidents were reported to the TSB in 2005, a 9% increase from the 2004 total of 1138 and an 18% increase from the 2000-2004 average of 1055. Rail activity is estimated to have increased by 3% over 2004 and by 6% over the five-year average. The accident rate increased to 13.0 accidents per million train-miles in 2005, from 12.3 in 2004 and from the five-year rate of 11.7. Rail-related fatalities totalled 103 in 2005, compared to 101 in 2004 and the five-year average of 93. In 2005, rail incidents reported in accordance with TSB mandatory reporting requirements reached a 23-year low of 244, down from 252 in 2004 and the five-year average of 300."

Rail is a commercial carrier.

Air is both a commercial a private carrier.

Here is the air situation:

"Canadian-registered aircraft, other than ultralights, were involved in 258 reported accidents in 2005, a 2% increase from the 2004 total of 252 but a 10% decrease from the 2000-2004 average of 287. The 2005 estimate of flying activity is 3 832 000 hours, yielding an accident rate of 6.7 accidents per 100 000 flying hours, up from the 2004 rate of 6.5 but down from the five-year rate of 7.3. Canadian-registered aircraft, other than ultralights, were involved in 34 fatal accidents with 51 fatalities in 2005, comparable to the five-year average of 32 fatal accidents with 54 fatalities. Twenty of the fatal occurrences involved privately operated aircraft (13 aeroplanes, 6 helicopters and 1 glider), and 12 of the remaining 14 fatal occurrences involved commercial operators (9 aeroplanes and 3 helicopters). The number of accidents involving ultralights decreased to 30 in 2005 from 36 in 2004, and the number of fatal accidents decreased slightly to 5 in 2005 from 6 in 2004. In 2005, a total of 823 incidents were reported in accordance with TSB mandatory reporting requirements. This represents a 9% decrease from the 2004 total of 909 and a 2% decrease from the 2000-2004 average of 837."

So, 12 fatalities when dealing with commercial aspect of air travel and a rate which is going down as opposed to up.

I cannot find a similar stat for the highways with respect to commercial - buses + freight.

I also cannot find a stat that deals with passenger-kilometres or tonne-kilometres

Maybe someone can help.

So, for me ti is not an "of course" situation. I need to see the figurea and make sure we are not comparing apples (commercial) to oranges(private) the latter of which is the greatest generator of fatalities - private vehicles on public highways, just as are private planes in public skies.

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/media/communiques/other/multimodal2006.asp

"Wonder if the new Fraser Bench subdivision is a half mile from dangerous goods being transported in the BCR Industrial site?"

Yes, and likely the highest probability of incidents.
Interesting how the heroic deeds of an employee that saved CN's butt finds himself possibly facing disiplinary action.

Typical of CN management to try to distract from the real issues by directing the focus to a scapegoat. Sad day. Time to step up to being accountable for the situation in the first place rather than trying to attach some kind of blame on everyone trying to sort out the mess they caused. Chester
Too much tonnage for the grade is roughly equivalent to too many cars.
Management was running the job but "it's the employee's fault.- CN policy IMHO

"Safety is the first order of business" in the Canadian Rail Operating Rules

CN policy is asset utilization first, with safety right around number four.

Under the law a corporation is a kind of person, but some of them are not good citizens.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/08/08/bc-cn.html

"The Transportation Safety Board is launching a full-fledged investigation into last weekend's fiery derailment of a CN train after a collision with another train in Prince George, B.C.

A board spokesman said Wednesday that investigators on the scene have found material that's prompted the move to gather and analyze data for an all-out investigation."

So there we have it. "something smells fishy in the state of CN"
I don't know, but I suspect, that all the cars being pulled were pulled without their air brakes hooked up. The only brakes available for the operator to use would have been on the remote-controlled engine. That unit will be inspected to see if its brakes were in fact working properly.
The regular operating crews were saying that they never pull more than 35 loaded cars and this time there were many more than that.
So my earlier post was slightly wrong; it should be too many tons per brake for the grade.
Speed may or may not have been a factor, stopping distance is proportional to the speed and employees are pressured to operate the remote-controlled engines at their maximum speed of 15 mph whenever possible. This makes them much harder to stop than at, say, 10 mph. Much harder- your eyes get really big when you try it.
Dangit, I'm wrong again. Stopping distance is proportional to the SQUARE of the speed making stopping distance at 15 mph something like 2.25 the stopping distance at 10 mph. It's really hard to fling a train out and make it stop at the exact place you want it to.
Going on five days and still no comments from our M.L.A.'s or Mayor regarding the endangerment of Prince George. If ever there was any doubt about who these guys represent, I think it is safe to say they yet again they obviously don't care about us. Please let's do something about these guys in the next election. Maybe it will be one of your family next who falls victim to moral rejects. LET'S NOT FORGET AT ELECTION TIME!!!!!!