Skip to main content
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
Canada’s most-awarded newsroom for a reason
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Crews work in the area of the derailed tanker cars in Lac-Mégantic, Que., on July 14, 2013.

PETER POWER/The Globe and Mail

Canada's fire chiefs and municipalities are pressing Ottawa to require detailed emergency response plans for flammable liquids, a move they say would better prepare local first responders to deal with dangerous accidents in their communities.

Transport Minister Lisa Raitt tasked an advisory group last year with developing new emergency planning recommendations after a deadly accident in Lac-Mégantic, Que., raised questions about the volatility of some types of crude oil. The group was given until the end of this month to produce its recommendations, and Ms. Raitt has said she expects a new system to be in place for dealing with crude oil accidents by the middle of this year.

But municipalities and first responders say they want the federal government to go beyond crude oil and require emergency response assistance plans (ERAPs) for other flammable liquids as well. ERAPs can place special obligations on shippers and importers, such as providing foam trucks or other equipment along a route and ensuring specialized response teams are available for accidents.

Story continues below advertisement

Paul Boissonneault, first vice-president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, said there should be no reason to ignore other flammable liquids if ERAPs will be required for crude oil. "Besides crude oil, we're saying all flammable liquids throughout the transportation process" should be subject to the plans, he said.

The specialized safety protocols have long been required for dozens of other hazardous materials, but crude oil was not included because it was not previously believed to be explosive. After the accident in Lac-Mégantic, a Globe and Mail investigation documented how crude from the Bakken region, which covers North Dakota, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, can be significantly more volatile than traditional crude.

Claude Dauphin, president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, said he thinks ERAPs should be required for any product that could burn or explode.

"FCM is calling for Emergency Response Assistance Plans to be required for all flammable liquids including crude and ethanol," Mr. Dauphin wrote in an e-mail. "Canada needs a comprehensive approach to dealing with emergency planning and response, and that means closing this gap in the ERAP system."

A spokesman for Ms. Raitt said on Monday that the advisory group is considering whether ERAPs are needed for crude and other flammable liquids, including ethanol, gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel. "As we have said, we are examining whether we need further measures to strengthen rail safety and the transportation of dangerous goods," Rémi Moreau wrote in an e-mail.

Requests for comment on extending ERAPs to cover other flammable liquids were not answered by Canada's two largest railways, Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Pacific, on Monday afternoon.

Chris Powers represents the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs on the Transport Canada advisory group that is considering the new ERAPs. He said flammable liquids are highly demanding for local first responders to deal with and require significant resources that some municipalities may not have.

Story continues below advertisement

"It [the Lac-Mégantic derailment] kind of caught everybody off guard. But let's not get caught off-guard again. Let's do the whole thing. Let's make the people who are producing it, shipping this stuff, accountable and responsible," Mr. Powers said.

Representatives of the FCM, the fire chiefs' association and the rail industry met in Ottawa on Monday to discuss rail safety issues, including how to help municipalities respond to emergencies. Several railway presenters argued for an aggressive phasing-out of DOT-111 rail cars, which are commonly used to haul crude oil. Newer models of the cars are considered to be less prone to puncture in an accident, but retrofitting or replacing the older fleet would be costly.

The federal government announced on the weekend that it would formally adopt new standards for the construction of DOT-111 cars. However, it is unlikely that the new rules will have a practical impact on rail safety because the industry has been using these standards since 2011.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies