ARCHIVED — Vol. 148, No. 27 — July 5, 2014

Warning This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Railway Safety Management System Regulations

Statutory authority

Railway Safety Act

Sponsoring department

Department of Transport

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Issues: The Railway Safety Management System Regulations (SMS Regulations), made under the Railway Safety Act (the Act), came into force in 2001 as a complement to Transport Canada’s rail safety legislative framework. The SMS Regulations require railway companies to develop and maintain a safety management system for integrating safety into their day-to-day operations. In 2008, the reports of the Railway Safety Act Review and of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities (SCOTIC) study on rail safety made several recommendations with regard to improving the implementation of safety management systems in the rail industry. Those recommendations resulted in amendments to the Act, which came into force on May 1, 2013. These amendments, as well as the Rail Safety Program’s more than 10 years’ worth of lessons learned from regulatory oversight of safety management systems, resulted in the need to revise and modernize the SMS Regulations. Specifically, three key areas required attention: additional detail and clarity to facilitate more effective implementation and enforceability; expansion of the scope of application to local railway companies that operate on federal track; and the inclusion of new provisions stemming from amendments to the Act that authorize the Governor in Council to establish regulations for an accountable executive, continuous monitoring and regular assessment of safety, non-punitive internal reporting by employees, as well as increased involvement of employees and their unions to enhance rail safety management systems.

Description: Due to the volume of amendments and the significant restructuring of the Regulations, the proposed Railway Safety Management System Regulations (proposed Regulations) would repeal and replace the SMS Regulations and would include the following revisions and restructuring:

  • Application of the proposed Regulations to include local railway companies operating on federally regulated track;
  • Inclusion of new requirements pursuant to revised authorities in the Act;
  • Revision and expansion of existing requirements by providing more detail on regulatory objectives in order to enhance compliance and enforceability of the proposed Regulations;
  • Revision of existing requirements to provide a clearer explanation of the expectations for industry; and
  • Addition of new definitions.

Cost-benefit statement: The overall cost of the proposed Regulations is estimated to have a present value of $26.8 million over a 10-year period, which corresponds to an annualized value of $3.8 million. In the long term, the proposed Regulations would be expected to increase railway safety by enhancing requirements that compel companies to take responsibility for managing the safety of their operations, including improving their abilities to identify hazards, as well as assess and mitigate risks. These benefits are qualitative in nature and are difficult to monetize given that both the risk and impact (baseline and proposal) are uncertain. It is expected that a safety management system would help reduce the number of accidents, fatalities and injuries, as well as property damage. Therefore, even if the benefits cannot be monetized, it is expected that the proposed Regulations would result in a net benefit to Canadians.

“One-for-One” Rule and small business lens: Transport Canada has considered the potential impacts of all provisions of the proposed Regulations on administrative burden, and has determined that the “One-for-One” Rule would apply with the annualized cost to be offset estimated at $255 (total annualized average administrative costs) among 35 local railway companies.

The proposed Regulations were designed to align compliance costs with underlying risks, so that costs disproportionate to risk were not imposed on the six companies that would be considered small businesses. The flexible approach taken would result in an annual average cost per small business of $33,710 rather than $56,747.

Domestic and international coordination and cooperation: Transport Canada has consulted with provincial counterparts as the proposed Regulations would expand their application to include local railway companies. Local railway companies are provincial railways and commuter trains that, when operating on federal track, fall under the requirements of the Act. The addition of local railway companies to federal rail safety jurisdiction occurred when the amendments to the Act came into force on May 1, 2013. In addition, many provinces have harmonized their rail safety legislative framework with that of the federal government. As a result, the provinces were consulted to ensure they were aware of proposed changes to the federal approach to safety management systems.

Background

The Railway Safety Management System Regulations (SMS Regulations), created under the Railway Safety Act (the Act), came into force on March 31, 2001, with the objective of establishing, within the rail industry, a more comprehensive way of managing safety. The SMS Regulations were designed to supplement the existing legislative framework, and require railway companies to take responsibility for managing the safety of their operations, identifying hazards, assessing and mitigating risks, while building a safety consciousness into their day-to-day operations. Basic components of a safety management system include a safety policy, safety targets, a risk assessment process, and internal audit and evaluation procedures. The introduction of the SMS Regulations in 2001 resulted in all federal railway companies implementing and maintaining a safety management system, based on regulatory requirements.

In 2008, the reports of the Railway Safety Act Review and of the SCOTIC review on rail safety made a series of recommendations to further enhance the safety of the rail transportation system in Canada. While the reports expressed support and commendation for safety management systems, several recommendations focused on how to improve their implementation and effectiveness.

The bulk of the recommendations made in the 2008 reports resulted in amendments to the Railway Safety Act that came into force on May 1, 2013. The amendments comprise the addition of many new specific authorities to make regulations requiring the establishment by companies of a safety management system that includes the following:

  • Identification of an executive responsible for the company’s operations and accountable for the extent to which the requirements of the company’s safety management system are met;
  • Implementation of remedial actions as a result of a risk assessment required to maintain the highest level of safety;
  • Continuous monitoring and regular assessment of the level of safety achieved;
  • Implementation of non-punitive internal reporting by the railway company’s employees of contraventions of the Act or of any regulations, rules, certificates, orders or emergency directives under the Act relating to safety;
  • Involvement of employees and their bargaining agents in the ongoing operation of the railway company’s safety management system; and
  • The establishment of the criteria to which the safety management system must conform as well as the components, including the principle of fatigue science applicable to scheduling, that must be included in a safety management system.

Among other changes, the amendments to the Act also expanded the scope of the application to include local railway companies.

Issues

Legislative amendments, including the addition of local railway companies to the federal regime, as well as more than 10 years’ worth of lessons learned from providing regulatory oversight of safety management systems, have resulted in the need to revise and modernize the SMS Regulations.

Specifically, three key areas require attention: additional detail and increased clarity to allow for more effective implementation and enforceability; expansion of the scope of application to local railway companies that operate on federal track; and inclusion of requirements stemming from amendments to the Act that clarified the Governor in Council’s regulatory authority in order to enhance rail safety management systems.

Objectives

The key objectives of the proposed Regulations are to

  • Expand the scope of application of safety management system requirements to ensure all companies under federal jurisdiction have such a system.
  • Expand the regulatory regime related to safety management systems by including new provisions under the revised authorities of the Act.
  • Clarify the overall objectives of the safety management system regulations, and the regulatory provisions in relation to safety management systems, in order to facilitate more effective compliance and enforcement.

By addressing these objectives, the proposed Regulations are expected to improve the quality of safety management systems, in general, by improving the implementation by the rail industry and enhancing Transport Canada’s oversight consequently, leading to the improved safety of Canada’s rail transportation system.

Description

The proposed Regulations would repeal the SMS Regulations and replace them, including the following changes:

  • Inclusion of new requirements pursuant to revised authorities in the Act;
  • Expansion of the scope of application to include local railway companies operating on federally regulated track;
  • Revision of existing requirements by providing more detail to regulatory objectives in order to enhance compliance and enforceability; and
  • Amendments to definitions for increased clarity.
Application of amendments to the Act

In response to the amendments to the Act, the proposed Regulations would include new requirements for a company’s safety management system, such as the following:

  • The appointment of an accountable executive who is responsible for the operations and activities of the railway company and accountable for compliance with the proposed safety management system requirements.
  • The inclusion, by railway companies, of a procedure that would enable employees to report safety contraventions to the railway company without the fear of reprisal, and the establishment of a policy for protecting its employees from reprisals for reporting contraventions.
  • The inclusion of a process for establishing the schedules of locomotive engineers, conductors, persons involved in switching operations, and operators of remote control locomotives, taking into consideration the applicable principles of fatigue science.
Proposed revisions and expansions of the Regulations

The full suite of safety management systems components in the proposed Regulations would include the following requirements:

  • The identification of an accountable executive responsible for the company’s operations and accountable for the extent to which the requirements of company’s safety management system have been met;
  • A railway safety policy showing the company’s commitment to safety;
  • A process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments;
  • A process for managing railway occurrences which includes procedures for the reporting of occurrences by employees to the company’s management;
  • A process for identifying safety concerns from collected data for the purpose of risk assessments;
  • A process for risk management which includes an evaluation of the level of risk of safety concerns identified;
  • The implementation and evaluation of remedial actions for the purpose of mitigating risks;
  • A process for employees to report contraventions and safety concerns to the company without the fear of reprisal;
  • A process for managing knowledge to ensure that employees of the company as well as any other persons carrying out activities that may affect railway safety property have the knowledge they need to perform their duties safely;
  • A process for establishing the schedules of certain employees, taking into account applicable principles of fatigue science;
  • A process for continual improvement of the company’s safety management system; and
  • A process for establishing annual targets and developing initiatives to achieve the targets.

In addition, the Regulations would require, at the Minister’s request, the filing of specific information with the Minister upon request for the purpose of assessing the effectiveness and improvement of the company’s safety management system.

Scope of application

The SMS Regulations apply only to railway companies that hold a certificate of fitness. As the amendments to the Act include the addition of local railway companies to the federal regime, the proposed Regulations would also apply to those companies.

The scope of application of the proposed Regulations is divided into three parts:

  1. Federal railway companies, to which the SMS Regulations apply, would have to comply with the requirements under Part 1 of the proposed Regulations.
  2. Local railway companies that operate on federal main track would have to comply with the requirements under Part 2, Division 1, of the proposed Regulations.
  3. Local railway companies that operate solely on federal non-main tracks would have to comply with the requirements under Part 2, Division 2, of the proposed Regulations, which would focus on the following provisions:
    • a safety policy;
    • a process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments;
    • a process for identifying safety concerns;
    • a risk assessment process;
    • a process for implementing and evaluating remedial actions; and
    • filing those remedial actions with the Minister upon request.
More detailed objectives to enhance safety management systems

The proposed Regulations would build on the framework established in the SMS Regulations by regulating specific matters for companies to address in their safety management systems and setting regulatory requirements for companies to act in a manner that demonstrates implementation of the safety management system that they develop.

Under the SMS Regulations, the components are listed, with details and expectations outlined in guidance material. The proposed Regulations would list the components required in a safety management system, and the procedures to be documented, implemented and maintained. The proposed Regulations contain much of the detail previously found in the guidance material to better establish the intent of the requirements in order to improve compliance and contribute to more effective enforcement by Transport Canada. For example, while the SMS Regulations require a process for evaluating and classifying risks by means of a risk assessment, the proposed Regulations would set out the components of the risk assessment, such as the circumstances that trigger a risk assessment; a description of the circumstances that triggered the risk assessment; a description of the risks associated with the circumstances; the factors included in the assessment, including whether the public or the company’s employees are impacted and whether property or the environment are impacted; an indication of the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of the consequences of any risk; and an identification of required remedial action, as well as remaining risk after the remedial actions have been taken into account. Articulating the components of a risk assessment would facilitate effective compliance and enforcement.

Amendments to definitions

The proposed Regulations would update the definitions by moving some of the detail previously contained in the definition section of the SMS Regulations into the provisions containing obligations in the proposed Regulations, and would add to the definitions in the SMS Regulations to increase clarity and respond to amendments to the Act. Definitions that would be added are

  • accountable executive;
  • main track; and
  • railway occurrence.

Regulatory and non-regulatory options considered

The proposed approach aims to continue and improve upon the regulated approach first introduced in 2001. Given the lessons learned and the changes to the Act since the introduction of the SMS Regulations, a regulatory approach is needed to address legislative amendments and provide greater clarity to regulated entities to facilitate more effective and efficient compliance.

The approach would also facilitate enforcement by avoiding undue reliance on unenforceable guidance material in applying and interpreting requirements. Therefore, a voluntary approach was not considered. Regulated requirements for railway companies to identify their risks and document, coordinate, and oversee the safety of operations, including risk mitigation efforts, were considered the most appropriate and effective approach. Voluntary safety assessments, internal audits and remedial actions could not have been considered as options, as there would be no assurance that safety systems and processes would be optimally managed to mitigate risks and improve safety.

Benefits and costs

Costs

The proposed Regulations would apply to 28 federal railway companies and to 35 local railway companies. A distinction is made between local railway companies that operate on federal main track (18 companies) and local railway companies that operate on federal non-main track (17 companies). The regulatory provisions applicable to local railway companies that operate on federal main track would include the minimum requirements of a safety management system but not those requirements that affect labour relations, as these are under the jurisdiction of the province. The focus of the proposed Regulations for local railway companies that do not operate on federal main track would be on five safety management system components.

The level of compliance with the proposed Regulations has been estimated in consultation with the stakeholders and varies according to the requirements for federal railway companies, local railway companies operating on federal main track and local railway companies operating on federal non-main track. Costs are associated with new roles and responsibilities for company employees and the possible creation of new positions. Assuming an average wage rate of $35.70 (this includes 25% overhead), the present value of the cost to federal railway companies is estimated to be $13.8 million over a 10-year period, which corresponds to an annualized value of $2 million. The present value of the cost to local railway companies that operate on federal main track is estimated to be $9.9 million with an annualized value of $1.4 million, and the present value of the cost to local railway companies that operate on federal non-main track is estimated to be $3.1 million with an annualized value of $438,000. Therefore, the present value of the total cost to industry is estimated to be $26.8 million over a 10-year period, which corresponds to an annualized value of $3.8 million.

Table of estimated costs by provision

Total incremental costs
Proposed Regulatory Provision Federal (PV) Local Main Track (PV) Local Non-Main Track (PV) Total (PV)
Attestation of accountable executive $10,158 $6,530 N/A $16,687
Railway safety policy $0 $28,186 $26,620 $54,805
Process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments $443,101 $331,677 $313,250 $1,088,027
Process for managing railway occurrences $1,622,822 $1,066,281 N/A $2,689,103
Process for identifying safety concerns $1,235,713 $1,850,841 $1,748,016 $4,834,570
Risk assessment process $2,124,282 $825,093 $779,255 $3,728,629
Process for the implementation and evaluation of remedial actions $102,703 $65,380 $61,747 $229,830
Annual safety targets and associated initiatives $0 $141,951 N/A $141,951
Process for reporting contraventions and safety concerns $76,981 N/A N/A $76,981
Process for managing knowledge $1,337,315 N/A N/A $1,337,315
Process for establishing schedules $228,100 N/A N/A $228,100
Process for continual improvement (internal audits) $4,665,134 $4,654,127 N/A $9,319,262
Continual evaluation $1,722,638 $775,187 N/A $2,497,825
Recording instances of consultation, communication or collaboration with employees* $249,266 $160,242 $151,340 $560,848
Total costs to industry $13,818,211 $9,905,494 $3,080,228 $26,803,934

* The cost estimate reflects the compliance burden of documenting instances of consultation, communication or collaboration with employees to demonstrate compliance; it is not an estimated cost of keeping records.

There would be a cost to Transport Canada to update the existing Rail Safety Integrated Gateway (RSIG) system, which is the Rail Safety Program’s national database used to inform risk-based business planning, with the new safety management system (SMS) requirements. This would require the costs for two to three consultants over a two-week period. The present value of the cost to Government is estimated to be $42,000 over a 10-year period, which is equivalent to an annualized value of $6,000.

The overall cost of the proposed Regulations is estimated to have a present value of $26.8 million over a 10-year period, which corresponds to an annualized value of $3.8 million.

Benefits

The main benefits of the proposed Regulations would be to provide greater safety to the Canadian rail transportation system by establishing the minimum requirements with respect to the safety management system that a company must develop and implement for the purpose of achieving the highest level of safety and by expanding the scope of its application to local railway companies. The proposed Regulations would also provide more details regarding the various safety management system components that companies must implement and facilitate enforcement.

Safety management is based on the premise that there will always be safety hazards and human errors. A safety management system establishes processes to improve information and communication about these risks and take action to minimize them. It therefore facilitates more informed decision making. Furthermore, risk assessments can allow an organization to evaluate and plan for the mitigation of risk of accidents and could enable better resource allocation, which would result in increased efficiencies and reduced costs. Safety management systems also strengthen corporate safety culture and demonstrate corporate due diligence, thus improving an organization’s overall level of safety in the long term.

The proposed Regulations would be expected to increase railway safety in the long term by requiring railway companies to take additional responsibility for managing the safety of their operations, including refining their ability to identify hazards, assess and mitigate risks, and build a safety consciousness into their day-to-day operations, which would lead to a reduced number of accidents. Additionally, the benefits include fewer resources being spent by anticipating issues and solving problems earlier to avoid costly derailments and accidents.

These benefits are qualitative in nature and are difficult to monetize given that both the risk and impact (baseline and proposal) are subjective and uncertain. However, not only have qualitative benefits been identified, but statistics reflect a correlation between the introduction of the safety management system approach in 2001 and improved safety statistics. Statistical analysis using linear regression indicates a downward trend in accident rates (statistically significant at the p < .05 level) over the past 10 years. (see footnote 1) Moreover, since 2007, train accidents have decreased by 23% and passenger train accidents have decreased by 19%. This decrease can be linked to increased levels of consultation and communication between the three largest railway companies and Transport Canada, enhanced focus on safety management systems, and a variety of new safety initiatives related to operations and infrastructure. It is therefore expected that updates to safety management systems would help further reduce the number of accidents, fatalities and injuries, and property damage. As a result, even if the benefits cannot be monetized, those benefits could be significant.

The 2007 Railway Safety Act Review Panel Final Report asserts that “[a] strong SMS can lead to economic benefits because safety and economic performance are linked . . . [with] direct and indirect cost savings when accidents are prevented . . .” The Final Report also listed a number of benefits including the following:

  • improved decision making;
  • improved safety performance;
  • customized mitigation strategies;
  • possibly exceeding safety standards set by regulation;
  • improved public and customer confidence;
  • increased competitive advantage;
  • demonstrated due diligence;
  • enhanced relationships and collaboration; and
  • improved economic performance. (see footnote 2)

Overall, it is expected that the proposed Regulations would have a positive impact on Canadians.

Cost-benefit statement

Cost-benefit statement Base Year (2015) 2019 Final Year (2024) Total (PV) Annualized Cost
A. Quantified impacts ($)
Costs Federal railway companies $2,373,390 $1,903,881 $1,906,880 $13,818,211 $1,967,402
Local railway companies on federal main track $1,250,178 $1,434,123 $1,436,050 $9,905,494 $1,410,320
Local railway companies on federal non-main track $700,970 $398,278 $398,278 $3,080,228 $438,555
Industry total $4,324,537 $3,736,282 $3,741,208 $26,803,934 $3,816,277
Government $45,000     $42,056 $5,988
Total $4,369,537 $3,736,282 $3,741,208 $26,845,990 $3,822,265
B. Qualitative benefits
  • Regulatory requirements are more easily understood and implemented by industry;
  • Increased safety information and communication improves risk-based decision making by industry; and
  • Safety of the rail transportation system in Canada is further enhanced.

The approach taken to the proposed Regulations focuses on efficiency, capacity, and proportionality with requirements for either processes or outcomes rather than prescriptive requirements for “how” the objectives of safety management systems should be achieved. This would promote accountability and timely remedial actions in the management of safety, without Transport Canada prescribing one-size-fits-all requirements. An exclusively prescriptive regulatory approach would only ensure compliance with regulations rather than providing for proactive risk assessments and remedial action. Therefore, industry-developed and -monitored safety management systems are intended to more efficiently and effectively supplement the existing regulatory framework by formally requiring companies to be proactive and responsible for safety.

In an effort to minimize the burden on stakeholders, while continuing improvement of safety management system implementation to further increase safety, local railway companies that operate solely on federal non-main track would be required to have fewer requirements, including a safety policy and a process for each of the following: ensuring compliance, identifying safety concerns, assessing risk, and implementing and evaluating remedial actions.

“One-for-One” Rule

Transport Canada has considered the potential impacts of all provisions of the proposed Regulations on administrative burden, and has determined that the “One-for-One” Rule would apply with the annualized cost to be offset estimated at $255 (total annualized average administrative costs) among 35 local railway companies (18 on federal track and 17 on federal non-main track). When consulted, federal railway companies agreed that despite updates, there would be no incremental effort needed to comply with the requirement to submit information annually to the Minister. This determination was based on the following assumptions: an applicable wage rate of $23.84/hour (2012 dollars), and a time estimate of 0.3 hours per regulated company annually (once a year, ongoing) to submit the required safety management system information to Transport Canada.

Small business lens

The proposed Regulations were designed to align compliance costs with underlying risks, so that costs disproportionate to risk were not imposed on small businesses. For the application of these Regulations to local railway companies, a distinction between main track and non-main track was used to represent the area of highest risk to address. Non-main track includes sidings and rail yards, and main track represents tracks that run across the country through cities and towns. For the proposed Regulations, a distinction would be made between local railway companies that operate on federal main track and local railway companies that operate solely on federal non-main track. Regulatory provisions applicable to local railway companies that operate on federal main track would include all the same obligations as those that apply to railway companies with the exception of those that affect labour relations, as they are under the jurisdiction of the province. The proposed Regulations would encompass 18 local railway companies that operate on federal main track. Requirements for local railway companies that do not operate on main track would focus on the minimum safety management system provisions.

The total scope of application includes at least six small businesses as defined by the Treasury Board Secretariat guidance (having fewer than 100 employees and between $30,000 and $5 million in annual gross revenues). Due to the nature of safety management systems, the proposed Regulations would be proportional to the size and risk of the operations.

With the expanded scope in the Act, Transport Canada could have taken a broader approach to the scope of application for local railway companies. However, this would have imposed a burden disproportionate to the risk associated with local non-main track railway company operations. During consultations, both industry and Transport Canada’s Rail Safety inspectors and officials recommended and/or supported this approach. Industry pointed out that requiring local railway companies who operate on non-main track to comply with the full suite of regulatory requirements would be overly burdensome and costly for what would usually be a smaller or limited railway operation. Rail Safety inspectors and officials acknowledged that the risk represented by such companies on non-main track did not warrant the development and implementation of a full safety management system, but that certain core aspects be applied as a means of instilling a safety culture in those companies.

  Initial Option Flexible Option
Short description Small businesses (6 out of 17 local railways that do not operate on main track) face the same requirements as federal railways and local railways that operate on main track. Small businesses (6 out of 17 local railways that do not operate on main track) do not face the same requirements as federal railways and local railways that operate on main track.
Maximum number of small businesses impacted

6

6

  Annualized Average
($ 2012)
Present Value
($ 2012)
Annualized Average
($ 2012)
Present Value
($ 2012)
Compliance costs $48,433 $340,173 $28,754 $201,953
Administrative costs $44 $308 $44 $308
Total costs $48,477 $340,480 $28,797 $202,260
Average cost per small business $8,079 $56,747 $4,800 $33,710

Consultation

The Railway Safety Act Review Panel and SCOTIC, during their study of rail safety in 2007–08, consulted a wide range of stakeholders across Canada including railway companies, railway employees, unions, municipalities, provincial governments, as well as a host of others. As a result, stakeholders have been aware of the initiative, and corresponding details, to revise and modernize the SMS Regulations for a number of years.

In developing the proposed Regulations, Transport Canada’s Rail Safety Program followed an established and formalized stakeholder consultation process. Consultative activities have included the following:

  • Dissemination of consultation documents by email to industry stakeholders and to employees of Transport Canada’s Rail Safety Program;
  • A face-to-face meeting with the Advisory Council on Railway Safety (ACRS) Working Group on Regulatory Development (with representatives from Canadian National Railway, Canadian Pacific Railway, VIA Rail, the province of British Columbia, Railway Association of Canada, GO Transit and Agence métropolitaine de transport);
  • A face-to face meeting with unions (including UNIFOR, Teamsters, United Steelworkers Local 2004);
  • A teleconference with the Federal-Provincial Working Group; and
  • Two additional teleconferences with the Regulatory Development Working Group comprising representatives from railway companies, local railway companies, provinces and unions to explain the proposed Regulations.

The comments submitted by industry in these initial consultations were considered and addressed during policy development and regulatory drafting processes. No outstanding issues remain. Examples of the issues raised include the following:

  • Preventing overlap with the Canada Labour Code with regard to requirements for employee involvement in safety management systems development and implementation.
  • How railway companies are to inform employees regarding corrective actions resulting from the non-punitive reporting process.
  • Ensuring that when companies create employee schedules, principles of fatigue science are taken into account as part of their overall safety management system.

Transport Canada also worked closely with industry to develop the cost assumptions for the cost-benefit analysis. Specifically, Transport Canada consulted the Regulatory Development Working Group of the Advisory Council on Rail Safety in its cost assumptions, both secretarially and through conference calls. The comments received from industry were considered and addressed and played a large role in Transport Canada’s development of the cost-benefit analysis.

Regulatory cooperation

The recent amendments to the Act change its application to now include local railway companies operating on federal track. Before the changes to the Act, those local railway companies operating on federally regulated track were only indirectly subject to federal rules and standards through contract agreements with their host railway companies; however, the requirement for a safety management system did not apply to them. Different provinces took different approaches with respect to adoption of the federal SMS Regulations. The proposed Regulations would support the change in scope of the Act by applying the regulatory provisions to these local railway companies. This would also increase national consistency, and reduce complexity in implementation and oversight.

During regulatory development, Transport Canada has been consulting with the provinces through the Federal-Provincial Working Group and through the Regulatory Development Working Group. Transport Canada would continue to work with the provinces to facilitate implementation of the proposed Regulations.

Rationale

The proposed Regulations would replace the SMS Regulations to respond to the analysis and recommendations of the Railway Safety Act Review in 2008 and the SCOTIC review of 2008. The proposed Regulations would further address oversight issues in order to

  • Improve the implementation and oversight of regulated safety management systems with clearer, more detailed requirements that enhance enforcement by clarifying what can be enforced.
  • Enable consistent and predictable implementation and compliance by providing sufficient detail to ensure regulatory objectives are understood and met.

The proposed Regulations would also improve the overall consistency and quality of companies’ safety management systems by providing

  • Certainty as to the regulatory requirement related to each safety management system component;
  • Clarified expectations, adding clear rules of conduct;
  • Added provisions requiring demonstration of implementation; and
  • A structure to the requirements that is more logically organized, facilitating compliance.

Furthermore, the proposed Regulations also apply the new regulatory authorities in the Act that regulate requirements for the identification of an accountable executive and for a process for non-punitive reporting for employees.

While Transport Canada continues to conduct inspections, the intention of safety management systems is not to replace the existing regulatory and oversight framework, but rather to increase safety by having companies put formal systems in place to identify and address safety concerns before Transport Canada inspections, and before major safety issues arise. In addition, companies implementing safety management systems should not only be looking to comply with the Act and its related instruments, but, moreover, should be working to build a safety culture throughout their organization to achieve the highest level of safety.

As an early adopter of the safety management systems approach, Transport Canada, with the help of the third-party reports, has learned lessons about how to improve safety through further progressing safety management system implementation. The proposed Regulations would address those opportunities for improvement by expanding the scope of application to local railway companies operating on federally regulated track, as well as by strengthening and clarifying the regulatory provisions, and by adding new provisions to improve employee involvement in, and awareness of, safety management systems. The proposed Regulations are intended to increase railway safety by providing more details related to the requirements for implementation of safety management systems by companies and by facilitating Transport Canada oversight and enforcement.

Implementation, enforcement and service standards

The proposed Regulations would come into force for all companies on April 1, 2015.

The proposed Regulations would provide more detail and clarity than the 2001 SMS Regulations. As Transport Canada continues to enhance its approach to oversight of safety management systems, it would continue to develop and refine its methodology for identifying safety risks, performance indicators and safety performance information needed from companies so that oversight activities can be targeted to areas of greatest risk. Transport Canada would also work to update and enhance inspector/auditor training and tools to ensure oversight is undertaken by properly trained staff with the appropriate tools.

Transport Canada would develop non-regulatory elements such as guidance material, templates, tools and best practices in consultation with industry to support the proposed Regulations. Transport Canada would be committed to developing materials in collaboration with industry, including guidance material to facilitate implementation and compliance.

Performance measurement and evaluation

In keeping with the life-cycle approach to regulating under the Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Management, the effectiveness of the proposed Regulations would be measured through the oversight activities of the Rail Safety Program. Rail Safety Program officials will monitor whether the proposed Regulations continue to meet policy objectives via results stemming from inspections and audits. The oversight activities consist of a combination of inspections to verify compliance and audits to verify the effectiveness of a company’s safety management system. Once the proposed Regulations are in force, Transport Canada would continue to conduct a minimum baseline audit every five years for both railway and local railway companies. This audit cycle would be complemented by an emergent audit program where audits are conducted at any time during a year. Analyses would be based on the results of inspections and audits to both continually inform the oversight activities of the Rail Safety Program to achieve regulatory compliance, as expressed in Transport Canada’s Report on Plans and Priorities, and to identify whether the intended results of the proposed Regulations are being achieved. For example, industry trends in non-compliance or SMS deficiencies would be analyzed to determine if increased oversight would be necessary, or if the regulatory requirement should be amended to clarify objectives or whether the requirement no longer enhanced safety and would warrant repeal.

Contact

Any questions related to the proposed Regulations should be directed to

Susan Archer
Director
Regulatory Affairs
Rail Safety
Transport Canada
427 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario
K1R 7Y2
Telephone: 613-990-8690
Email: susan.archer@tc.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given, pursuant to subsection 50(1) (see footnote a) of the Railway Safety Act (see footnote b), that the Governor in Council, pursuant to sections 37 (see footnote c), 47 and 47.1 (see footnote d) of that Act, proposes to make the annexed Railway Safety Management System Regulations.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 90 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be addressed to Susan Archer, Director, Regulatory Affairs, Rail Safety Directorate, Department of Transport, 427 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 7Y2 (tel.: 613-990-8690; fax: 613-990-7767; email: susan.archer@tc.gc.ca).

Ottawa, June 12, 2014

JURICA ČAPKUN
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

RAILWAY SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM REGULATIONS

INTERPRETATION

Definitions

1. The following definitions apply in these Regulations.

“accountable executive”
« gestionnaire supérieur responsable »

“accountable executive” means the executive referred to in subsection 8(1) or 39(1), as the case may be.

“Act”
« Loi »

“Act” means the Railway Safety Act.

“dangerous goods”
« marchandises dangereuses »

“dangerous goods” has the meaning assigned in section 2 of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992.

“main track”
« voie ferrée principale »

“main track” means a line of railway on which the movement of railway equipment is authorized by a railway company.

“non-main track”
« voie ferrée non principale »

“non-main track” means a line of railway other than a main track.

“railway occurrence”
« accident ferroviaire »

“railway occurrence” means a railway occurrence that is reportable under section 5 of the Transportation Safety Board Regulations.

OVERVIEW

Purpose

2. These Regulations establish the minimum requirements with respect to the safety management system that a company must develop and implement for the purpose of achieving the highest level of safety in its railway operations.

Organization

3. These Regulations are divided into three parts:

  • (a) Part 1 sets out the requirements applicable to a railway company with respect to its safety management system and with respect to recordkeeping and the filing of information;
  • (b) Part 2 sets out
    • (i) in Division 1, the requirements applicable to a local railway company that operates railway equipment on main track with respect to its safety management system and with respect to record-keeping and the filing of information, and
    • (ii) in Division 2, the requirements applicable to a local railway company that operates railway equipment exclusively on non-main track with respect to its safety management system and with respect to record-keeping and the filing of information; and
  • (c) Part 3 provides for the repeal of the Railway Safety Management System Regulations and sets out the date on which these Regulations come into force.

PART 1

RAILWAY COMPANIES

APPLICATION

Railway company

4. (1) This Part applies to a railway company.

Delayed application

(2) In the case of a railway company that begins railway operations after the day on which these Regulations come into force, sections 21 to 23 do not apply until the day that is six months after the day on which the railway company begins railway operations.

SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Components

Policy and processes

5. A railway company must develop and implement a safety management system that includes

  • (a) a process for accountability;
  • (b) a railway safety policy;
  • (c) a process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments;
  • (d) a process for managing railway occurrences;
  • (e) a process for identifying safety concerns;
  • (f) a risk assessment process;
  • (g) a process for implementing and evaluating remedial action;
  • (h) a process for establishing targets and developing initiatives;
  • (i) a process for reporting contraventions and safety concerns;
  • (j) a process for managing knowledge;
  • (k) a process for establishing schedules; and
  • (l) a process for continual improvement of the safety management system.

Index

6. (1) A railway company must keep an up-to-date index of all the processes included in its safety management system that it has implemented.

Content of index

(2) The index must indicate, for each process,

  • (a) the position in the railway company that has the responsibility for the development and implementation of the process; and
  • (b) the procedures required by this Part that are associated with the process, and the date of their last revision.

Procedures

7. (1) For each procedure developed by a railway company under this Part, the railway company must

  • (a) identify the position in the railway company that has the responsibility for development and implementation of the procedure; and
  • (b) specify how the railway company is ensuring that the persons involved in the procedure are carrying out their responsibilities in accordance with the procedure.

Written procedures

(2) Every procedure required by this Part must be in writing and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Process for Accountability — Accountable Executive

Designation

8. (1) A railway company must designate an executive who is responsible for the operations and activities of the railway company to be accountable for the extent to which the requirements of the safety management system are met.

Notice to Minister

(2) The railway company must provide the Minister with the name of the accountable executive as soon as possible after he or she has been designated.

Declaration to the Minister

(3) Within 30 days after the day on which the railway company designates an accountable executive, the railway company must ensure that the accountable executive provides the Minister with a signed declaration accepting accountability for the extent to which the requirements of the safety management system have been met.

Designation of managers

(4) The railway company may, in its safety management system, permit the accountable executive to designate persons to develop and implement one or more of the processes required by this Part. The designated persons must occupy management positions within the railway company that are at an appropriate level and that include responsibilities relevant to the process or processes.

Railway Safety Policy

Safety policy

9. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a railway safety policy that reflects the railway company’s commitment to promoting railway safety. The policy must be approved by the accountable executive.

Annual review

(2) The railway company must ensure that its railway safety policy is reviewed annually and that the date of the review is indicated in the policy document.

Communication

(3) The railway company must communicate its railway safety policy, and any changes to the policy, to its employees.

Process for Ensuring Compliance with Regulations, Rules and Other Instruments

List of instruments

10. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a list of the following instruments relating to railway safety:

  • (a) any regulations made under the Act that apply to the railway company and that are in force;
  • (b) any rules approved or established by the Minister under section 19 of the Act that apply to the railway company and that are in force;
  • (c) any notices sent to the railway company under section 31 of the Act and that contain an order that is in effect;
  • (d) any documents in effect by which the Minister has ordered the railway company to do or to not do something, including a ministerial order issued under section 32 of the Act and an emergency directive sent under section 33 of the Act;
  • (e) any exemptions granted under section 22 or 22.1 of the Act that apply to the railway company and that are in effect; and
  • (f) any standards approved by the Minister under section 7 of the Act or established by the Minister under subsection 19(7) of the Act.

Date and subject-matter

(2) The list of instruments must include

  • (a) in the case of a rule, the date on which it was approved, established or revised; and
  • (b) in the case of a notice, a document referred to in paragraph (1)(d), or an exemption, the date and subject-matter.

Update

(3) The list of instruments must be kept up to date and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Availability of list

(4) The railway company must make an upto-date version of the list of instruments available to its employees.

Procedures

11. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for

  • (a) reviewing and updating the list of instruments referred to in subsection 10(1); and
  • (b) verifying compliance with
    • (i) the requirements of the regulations, rules, notices and documents that contain an order, and standards, referred to in the list of instruments, and
    • (ii) the terms of the exemptions referred to in the list of instruments.

Communication

(2) The railway company must specify, in its safety management system, the manner in which any change to the list of instruments, or to the instruments set out in the list, will be communicated to its employees.

Process for Managing Railway Occurrences

Procedures

12. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for

  • (a) reporting a railway occurrence to the railway company’s management;
  • (b) reviewing a railway occurrence; and
  • (c) verifying that the employees of the railway company are reporting railway occurrences and that the reporting is in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph (a).

Communication

(2) The railway company must communicate to its employees the procedure for reporting railway occurrences.

Process for Identifying Safety Concerns

Analyses

13. A railway company must, on a continual basis, conduct analyses of its railway operations to identify safety concerns, including any trends or emerging trends, or any repetitive situations. The analyses must, at a minimum, be based on

  • (a) any reports of railway occurrences;
  • (b) any internal documentation relating to railway occurrences;
  • (c) any reports of injuries;
  • (d) the results of any inspections conducted by the railway company or by a railway safety inspector;
  • (e) any reports of contraventions or safety concerns that are received by the railway company from its employees;
  • (f) any complaints relating to safety that are received by the railway company;
  • (g) any data from safety monitoring technologies;
  • (h) the findings of any audit reports; and
  • (i) the results of any evaluation of the procedures included in the railway company’s safety management system.

Procedure

14. A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for conducting the analyses referred to in section 13.

Risk Assessment Process

Risk assessment

15. (1) A railway company must conduct a risk assessment in the following circumstances:

  • (a) when it identifies a safety concern in its railway operations;
  • (b) when it proposes to begin transporting dangerous goods, or to begin transporting dangerous goods different from those it already transports; and
  • (c) when it proposes to make a significant change to its railway operations that may affect the safety of the public or personnel or the protection of property or the environment, for example
    • (i) the introduction or elimination of a technology, or a change to a technology,
    • (ii) the addition or elimination of a railway work, or a change to a railway work,
    • (iii) an increase in the volume of dangerous goods it transports,
    • (iv) a change to the route on which dangerous goods are transported, or
    • (v) a change affecting personnel, including an increase or decrease in the number of employees or a change in their responsibilities or duties.

Components

(2) The risk assessment must

  • (a) describe the circumstances that triggered the requirement to conduct the risk assessment;
  • (b) identify and describe the risks associated with those circumstances;
  • (c) identify the factors taken into account in the risk assessment, including
    • (i) whether the railway company’s employees or the public are affected, and
    • (ii) whether property or the environment are affected;
  • (d) indicate, for each risk, the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences;
  • (e) identify the risks that require remedial action;
  • (f) identify the remedial action for the risks that require remedial action; and
  • (g) evaluate the likelihood that residual risks will occur and the severity of their consequences.

Consultation

16. (1) A railway company must, when identifying the risks that require remedial action and the remedial action to be implemented, consult with the bargaining agents or, if there is no bargaining agent, with its employees or a representative selected by its employees.

Communication

(2) The railway company must communicate the risks identified as requiring remedial action, and the remedial action to be implemented, to employees of the railway company who are affected by any of the circumstances referred to in subsection 15(1).

Procedures, method and plan

17. A railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for determining the circumstances, other than those referred to in subsection 15(1), that require a risk assessment;
  • (b) a method for evaluating the level of risk, taking into account the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences;
  • (c) a procedure for identifying the risks that require remedial action, taking into account the likelihood that the risks will occur and the severity of their consequences; and
  • (d) a plan for the consultation referred to in subsection 16(1).
Process for Implementing and Evaluating Remedial Action

Remedial action — implementation

18. (1) A railway company must implement remedial action to reduce or eliminate the risks that it has identified in its risk assessment as requiring remedial action.

Remedial action — evaluation

(2) The railway company must evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial action in reducing or eliminating the risks.

Consultation

19. The railway company must, when evaluating the effectiveness of the remedial action, consult with the bargaining agents or, if there is no bargaining agent, with its employees or a representative selected by its employees.

Procedures and plan

20. A railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for selecting the remedial action to be implemented;
  • (b) a procedure for implementing the remedial action and evaluating its effectiveness; and
  • (c) a plan for the consultation referred to in section 19.
Process for Establishing Targets and Developing Initiatives

Targets and initiatives

21. (1) A railway company must, for each calendar year,

  • (a) establish targets designed to improve the railway company’s safety performance; and
  • (b) develop initiatives to achieve each target.

Basis for establishing targets

(2) The targets must be based on the analyses conducted under section 13 and must take into account the results of any previous analyses.

Details of initiatives

22. A railway company must include, in its safety management system, the details of each initiative to be implemented in order to achieve each target and the manner in which the initiative will make it possible to achieve that target.

Communication

23. (1) A railway company must communicate to its employees the targets and the initiatives to be implemented.

Manner

(2) The railway company must specify, in its safety management system, the manner in which the targets and initiatives will be communicated to its employees.

Process for Reporting Contraventions and Safety Concerns

Internal reporting

24. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for enabling its employees to report to the railway company, without fear of reprisal, a contravention of the Act or of any regulations, rules, certificates, orders or emergency directives made under the Act in relation to safety, or any other safety concern.

Policy

(2) The railway company must include, in its safety management system, a policy for protecting its employees from reprisals for reporting a contravention or safety concern.

Collaboration

(3) The railway company must develop the procedure and the policy in collaboration with the bargaining agents or, if there is no bargaining agent, with its employees or a representative selected by its employees.

Communication

(4) The railway company must communicate the procedure and the policy to its employees.

Process for Managing Knowledge

Employees

25. (1) A railway company must ensure that an employee of the railway company whose duties may affect the safety of railway operations has a knowledge of

  • (a) any procedure referred to in this Part that the employee is required to implement;
  • (b) the instruments referred to in subsection 10(1) that relate to the employee’s duties;
  • (c) any federal legislation that may affect railway safety and that the employee needs to know to carry out his or her duties safely; and
  • (d) any of the railway company’s procedures, standards, instructions, bulletins or other internal documents that may affect railway safety and that the employee needs to know to carry out his or her duties safely.

Persons other than employees

(2) The railway company must ensure that a person, other than an employee, whose activities may affect railway safety has a knowledge of

  • (a) the instruments referred to in subsection 10(1) that relate to the person’s activities;
  • (b) any federal legislation that may affect railway safety and that the person needs to know to carry out his or her activities safely; and
  • (c) any of the railway company’s procedures, standards, instructions, bulletins or other internal documents that may affect railway safety and that the person needs to know to carry out his or her activities safely.

Competencies — positions

(3) The railway company must establish a list of the knowledge, skills and qualifications specific to positions in the railway company that are related to safe railway operations and must ensure that a person occupying one of those positions has that knowledge or those skills or qualifications.

Competencies — duties

(4) The railway company must establish a list of the knowledge, skills and qualifications specific to duties that are related to safe railway operations and must ensure that a person who carries out any of those duties has the knowledge, skills and qualifications.

Plans and methods

26. A railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a plan for ensuring that employees of the railway company whose duties may affect the safety of railway operations have the knowledge referred to in subsection 25(1);
  • (b) a method for verifying that a person, other than an employee of the railway company, whose activities may affect railway safety has the knowledge referred to in subsection 25(2);
  • (c) a method for verifying that a person who occupies a position requiring the knowledge, skills and qualifications referred to in subsection 25(3), has the knowledge, skills and qualifications; and
  • (d) a method for supervising employees of the railway company who carry out duties that may affect railway safety.
Process for Establishing Schedules

Establishing schedules

27. (1) A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for establishing schedules for the following employees:

  • (a) locomotive engineers;
  • (b) conductors;
  • (c) persons involved in switching operations; and
  • (d) operators of remote control locomotives.

Principles of fatigue science

(2) The railway company must include, in its safety management system, the principles of fatigue science applicable to the establishment of schedules, including the principles

  • (a) that human fatigue is governed by physiology;
  • (b) that human alertness is affected by circadian rhythms;
  • (c) that human performance degrades in relation to hours of wakefulness and accumulated sleep debt; and
  • (d) that humans have baseline minimum physiological sleep needs.

Communication

(3) The railway company must communicate to its employees the principles of fatigue science that it has taken into account in establishing their schedules.

Process for Continual Improvement of the Safety Management System
Annual Audit

Audit

28. (1) A railway company must audit its safety management system to assess the overall effectiveness of the safety management system in achieving the highest level of safety. The audit must, in particular,

  • (a) evaluate the extent to which the procedures required by this Part have been followed;
  • (b) verify whether the bargaining agents, the employees or a representative selected by the employees have been involved in the processes as required by this Part; and
  • (c) verify whether the targets established by the railway company have been achieved and, if they have not, determine the reasons.

Timing

(2) The audit must be conducted once every calendar year, with not more than 18 months between consecutive audits. However, if the railway company begins its railway operations during the period beginning on July 1 and ending on December 31 of a calendar year, it is not required to conduct the annual audit for that calendar year.

Audit report

(3) An audit report must be prepared and must include the findings of the audit.

Action plan

(4) The railway company must prepare an action plan indicating the action to be taken to address each finding in the audit report that it identifies as indicating a deficiency in its safety management system.

Review of audit report

29. (1) A railway company must ensure that the accountable executive reviews the audit report referred to in subsection 28(3) and signs it to acknowledge that he or she has reviewed its content.

Approval of action plan

(2) The railway company must ensure that the accountable executive signs the action plan referred to in subsection 28(4) to acknowledge that he or she has approved its content.

Procedure — audit

30. A railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for planning and conducting the audit referred to in section 28.

Continual Evaluation

Evaluation

31. (1) A railway company must continually evaluate the procedures included in its safety management system to ensure that they remain effective.

Evaluation plan

(2) The railway company must include, in its safety management system, an evaluation plan that

  • (a) defines the scope of each evaluation;
  • (b) identifies the evaluation criteria to be applied;
  • (c) specifies the method to be used in conducting each evaluation; and
  • (d) identifies the frequency at which each evaluation is to be conducted.

RECORDS

Records

32. (1) A railway company must keep records of the following:

  • (a) for each instance in which the railway company, in accordance with this Part, consults, or communicates or collaborates with, the bargaining agents, its employees or a representative selected by its employees,
    • (i) the date of the consultation, communication or collaboration,
    • (ii) the subject of the consultation, communication or collaboration, and
    • (iii) the manner in which the consultation, communication or collaboration was carried out;
  • (b) the results of each analysis conducted under section 13;
  • (c) each risk assessment conducted under section 15;
  • (d) the results of each evaluation conducted under subsection 18(2); and
  • (e) the results of each evaluation conducted under subsection 31(1).

Plan and methods

(2) A railway company must keep records showing that the plan and methods referred to in section 26 are being carried out.

Duration

(3) The records referred to in subsections (1) and (2) must be kept for five years after the day on which they are created.

FILING AND NOTIFICATION

Filing with the Minister

33. A railway company must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister

  • (a) the audit report referred to in subsection 28(3) for the preceding calendar year;
  • (b) the targets and initiatives referred to in subsection 21(1) for the current calendar year; and
  • (c) an up-to-date copy of the index referred to in subsection 6(1).

Notification and filing — significant change

34. A railway company that proposes to make a change referred to in paragraph 15(1)(c) must, before making the change, notify the Minister of the change and must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister the risk assessment that it conducted with respect to the change.

PART 2

LOCAL RAILWAY COMPANIES

DIVISION 1

MAIN TRACK OPERATIONS

Application

Local railway company — main track

35. (1) This Division applies to a local railway company that operates railway equipment on main track.

Delayed application

(2) In the case of a local railway company that began operating railway equipment on a railway after the day on which these Regulations came into force, sections 50 to 52 do not apply until the day that is six months after the day on which the local railway company began operating railway equipment on a railway.

Safety Management System
Components

Policy and processes

36. A local railway company must develop and implement a safety management system that includes

  • (a) a process for accountability;
  • (b) a railway safety policy;
  • (c) a process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments;
  • (d) a process for managing accidents;
  • (e) a process for identifying safety concerns;
  • (f) a risk assessment process;
  • (g) a process for implementing and evaluating remedial action;
  • (h) a process for establishing targets and developing initiatives; and
  • (i) a process for continual improvement of the safety management system.

Index

37. (1) A local railway company must keep an up-to-date index of all the processes included in its safety management system that it has implemented.

Content of index

(2) The index must indicate, for each process,

  • (a) the position in the local railway company that has the responsibility for the development and implementation of the process; and
  • (b) the procedures required by this Division that are associated with the process, and the date of their last revision.

Procedures

38. (1) For each procedure developed by a local railway company under this Division, the local railway company must

  • (a) identify the position in the local railway company that has the responsibility for the development and implementation of the procedure; and
  • (b) specify how the local railway company is ensuring that the persons involved in the procedure are carrying out their responsibilities in accordance with the procedure.

Written procedures

(2) Every procedure required by this Division must be in writing and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Process for Accountability — Accountable Executive

Designation

39. (1) A local railway company must designate an executive who is responsible for the operations and activities of the local railway company to be accountable for the extent to which the requirements of the safety management system are met.

Notice to Minister

(2) The local railway company must provide the Minister with the name of the accountable executive as soon as possible after he or she has been designated.

Declaration to the Minister

(3) Within 30 days after the day on which the local railway company designates an accountable executive, the local railway company must ensure that the accountable executive provides the Minister with a signed declaration accepting accountability for the extent to which the requirements of the safety management system have been met.

Designation of managers

(4) The local railway company may, in its safety management system, permit the accountable executive to designate persons to develop and implement one or more of the processes required by this Division. The designated persons must occupy management positions within the local railway company that are at an appropriate level and that include responsibilities relevant to the process or processes.

Railway Safety Policy

Safety policy

40. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a railway safety policy that reflects the local railway company’s commitment to promoting railway safety. The policy must be approved by the accountable executive.

Annual review

(2) The local railway company must ensure that its railway safety policy is reviewed annually and that the date of the review is indicated in the policy document.

Communication

(3) The local railway company must communicate its railway safety policy, and any changes to the policy, to its employees.

Process for Ensuring Compliance with Regulations, Rules and Other Instruments

List of instruments

41. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a list of the following instruments relating to railway safety:

  • (a) any regulations made under the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in force;
  • (b) any rules approved or established by the Minister under section 19 of the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in force;
  • (c) any notices sent to the local railway company under section 31 of the Act and that contain an order that is in effect;
  • (d) any documents in effect by which the Minister has ordered the local railway company to do or to not do something, including a ministerial order issued under section 32 of the Act and an emergency directive sent under section 33 of the Act; and
  • (e) any exemptions granted under section 22 or 22.1 of the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in effect.

Date and subject-matter

(2) The list of instruments must include

  • (a) in the case of a rule, the date on which it was approved, established or revised; and
  • (b) in the case of a notice, a document referred to in paragraph (1)(d), or an exemption, the date and subject-matter.

Update

(3) The list of instruments must be kept up to date and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Availability of list

(4) The local railway company must make an up-to-date version of the list of instruments available to its employees.

Procedures

42. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for

  • (a) reviewing and updating the list of instruments referred to in subsection 41(1); and
  • (b) verifying compliance with
    • (i) the requirements of the regulations, rules, and notices and documents that contain an order, that are referred to in the list of instruments, and
    • (ii) the terms of the exemptions referred to in the list of instruments.

Communication

(2) The local railway company must specify, in its safety management system, the manner in which any change to the list of instruments, or to the instruments set out in the list, will be communicated to its employees.

Process for Identifying Safety Concerns

Analyses

43. A local railway company must, on a continual basis, conduct analyses of its railway operations to identify safety concerns, including any trends or emerging trends, or any repetitive situations. The analyses must, at a minimum, be based on

  • (a) any reports of accidents;
  • (b) any internal documentation relating to accidents;
  • (c) any reports of injuries;
  • (d) the results of any inspections conducted by the local railway company or by a railway safety inspector;
  • (e) any reports of contraventions or safety concerns that are received by the local railway company from its employees;
  • (f) any complaints relating to safety that are received by the local railway company;
  • (g) any data from safety monitoring technologies;
  • (h) the findings of any audit reports; and
  • (i) the results of any evaluation of the procedures included in the local railway company’s safety management system.

Procedure

44. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for conducting the analyses referred to in section 43.

Risk Assessment Process

Risk assessment

45. (1) A local railway company must conduct a risk assessment in the following circumstances:

  • (a) when it identifies a safety concern in its railway operations;
  • (b) when it proposes to begin transporting dangerous goods, or to begin transporting dangerous goods different from those it already transports; and
  • (c) when it proposes to make a significant change to its railway operations that may affect the safety of the public or personnel or the protection of property or the environment, for example
    • (i) the introduction or elimination of a technology, or a change to a technology,
    • (ii) an increase in the volume of dangerous goods it transports,
    • (iii) a change to the route on which dangerous goods are transported, or
    • (iv) a change affecting personnel, including an increase or decrease in the number of employees or a change in their responsibilities or duties.

Components

(2) The risk assessment must

  • (a) describe the circumstances that triggered the requirement to conduct the risk assessment;
  • (b) identify and describe the risks associated with those circumstances;
  • (c) identify the factors taken into account in the risk assessment, including
    • (i) whether the local railway company’s employees or the public are affected, and
    • (ii) whether property or the environment are affected;
  • (d) indicate, for each risk, the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences;
  • (e) identify the risks that require remedial action;
  • (f) identify the remedial action for the risks that require remedial action; and
  • (g) evaluate the likelihood that residual risks will occur and the severity of their consequences.

Communication

46. A local railway company must communicate the risks identified as requiring remedial action, and the remedial action to be implemented, to employees of the local railway company who are affected by any of the circumstances referred to in subsection 45(1).

Procedures and method

47. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for determining the circumstances, other than those referred to in subsection 45(1), that require a risk assessment;
  • (b) a method for evaluating the level of risk, taking into account the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences; and
  • (c) a procedure for identifying the risks that require remedial action, taking into account the likelihood that the risks will occur and the severity of their consequences.
Process for Implementing and Evaluating Remedial Action

Remedial action — implementation

48. (1) A local railway company must implement remedial action to reduce or eliminate the risks that it has identified in its risk assessment as requiring remedial action.

Remedial action — evaluation

(2) The local railway company must evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial action in reducing or eliminating the risks.

Procedures

49. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for selecting the remedial action to be implemented; and
  • (b) a procedure for implementing the remedial action and evaluating its effectiveness.
Process for Establishing Targets and Developing Initiatives

Targets and initiatives

50. (1) A local railway company must, for each calendar year,

  • (a) establish targets designed to improve the local railway company’s safety performance; and
  • (b) develop initiatives to achieve each target.

Basis for establishing targets

(2) The targets must be based on the analyses conducted under section 43 and must take into account the results of any previous analyses.

Details of initiative

51. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, the details of each initiative to be implemented in order to achieve each target and the manner in which the initiative will make it possible to achieve that target.

Communication

52. (1) A local railway company must communicate to its employees the targets and the initiatives to be implemented.

Manner

(2) The local railway company must specify, in its safety management system, the manner in which the targets and initiatives will be communicated to its employees.

Process for Continual Improvement of the Safety Management System

Annual Audit

Audit

53. (1) A local railway company must audit its safety management system to assess the overall effectiveness of the safety management system in achieving the highest level of safety. The audit must, in particular,

  • (a) evaluate the extent to which the procedures required by this Division have been followed; and
  • (b) verify whether the targets established by the local railway company have been achieved and, if they have not, determine the reasons.

Timing

(2) The audit must be conducted once every calendar year, with not more than 18 months between consecutive audits. However, if the local railway company began operating railway equipment on a railway during the period beginning on July 1 and ending on December 31 of a calendar year, it is not required to conduct the annual audit for that calendar year.

Audit report

(3) An audit report must be prepared and must include the findings of the audit.

Action plan

(4) The local railway company must prepare an action plan indicating the action to be taken to address each finding in the audit report that it identifies as indicating a deficiency in its safety management system.

Review of audit report

54. (1) A local railway company must ensure that the accountable executive reviews the audit report referred to in subsection 53(3) and signs it to acknowledge that he or she has reviewed its content.

Approval of action plan

(2) The local railway company must ensure that the accountable executive signs the action plan referred to in subsection 53(4) to acknowledge that he or she has approved its content.

Procedure — audit

55. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for planning and conducting the audit referred to in section 53.

Continual Evaluation

Evaluation

56. (1) A local railway company must continually evaluate the procedures included in its safety management system to ensure that they remain effective.

Evaluation plan

(2) The local railway company must include, in its safety management system, an evaluation plan that

  • (a) defines the scope of each evaluation;
  • (b) identifies the evaluation criteria to be applied;
  • (c) specifies the method to be used in conducting each evaluation; and
  • (d) identifies the frequency at which each evaluation is to be conducted.
Records

Records

57. (1) A local railway company must keep records of the following:

  • (a) the results of each analysis conducted under section 43;
  • (b) each risk assessment conducted under section 45;
  • (c) the results of each evaluation conducted under subsection 48(2); and
  • (d) the results of each evaluation conducted under subsection 56(1).

Duration

(2) The records must be kept for five years after the day on which they are created.

Filing and Notification

Filing with the Minister

58. A local railway company must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister

  • (a) the audit report referred to in subsection 53(3) for the preceding calendar year;
  • (b) the targets and initiatives referred to in subsection 50(1) for the current calendar year; and
  • (c) an up-to-date copy of the index referred to in subsection 37(1).

Notification and filing — significant change

59. A local railway company that proposes to make a change referred to in paragraph 45(1)(c) must, before making the change, notify the Minister of the change and must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister the risk assessment that it conducted with respect to the change.

DIVISION 2

NON-MAIN TRACK OPERATIONS

Application

Local railway company — non-main track

60. This Division applies to a local railway company that operates railway equipment exclusively on non-main track.

Safety Management System
Components

Policy and processes

61. A local railway company must develop and implement a safety management system that includes

  • (a) a railway safety policy;
  • (b) a process for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules and other instruments;
  • (c) a process for identifying safety concerns;
  • (d) a risk assessment process; and
  • (e) a process for implementing and evaluating remedial action.

Index

62. (1) A local railway company must keep an up-to-date index of all the processes included in its safety management system that it has implemented.

Content of index

(2) The index must indicate, for each process,

  • (a) the position in the local railway company that has the responsibility for the development and implementation of the process; and
  • (b) the procedures required by this Division that are associated with the process, and the date of their last revision.

Procedures

63. (1) For each procedure developed by a local railway company under this Division, the local railway company must

  • (a) identify the position in the local railway company that has the responsibility for the development and implementation of the procedure; and
  • (b) specify how the local railway company is ensuring that the persons involved in the procedure are carrying out their responsibilities in accordance with the procedure.

Written procedures

(2) Every procedure required by this Division must be in writing and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Railway Safety Policy

Safety policy

64. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a railway safety policy that reflects the local railway company’s commitment to promoting railway safety. The policy must be approved by the accountable executive.

Annual review

(2) The local railway company must ensure that its railway safety policy is reviewed annually and that the date of the review is indicated in the policy document.

Communication

(3) The local railway company must communicate its railway safety policy, and any changes to the policy, to its employees.

Process for Ensuring Compliance with Regulations, Rules and Other Instruments

List of instruments

65. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a list of the following instruments relating to railway safety:

  • (a) any regulations made under the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in force;
  • (b) any rules approved or established by the Minister under section 19 of the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in force;
  • (c) any notices sent to the local railway company under section 31 of the Act and that contain an order that is in effect;
  • (d) any documents in effect by which the Minister has ordered the local railway company to do or to not do something, including a ministerial order issued under section 32 of the Act and an emergency directive sent under section 33 of the Act; and
  • (e) any exemptions granted under section 22 or 22.1 of the Act that apply to the local railway company and that are in effect.

Date and subject-matter

(2) The list of instruments must include

  • (a) in the case of a rule, the date on which it was approved, established or revised; and
  • (b) in the case of a notice, a document referred to in paragraph (1)(d), or an exemption, the date and subject-matter.

Update

(3) The list of instruments must be kept up to date and must indicate the date of its last revision.

Availability of list

(4) The local railway company must make an up-to-date version of the list of instruments available to its employees.

Procedures

66. (1) A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for

  • (a) reviewing and updating the list of instruments referred to in subsection 65(1); and
  • (b) verifying compliance with
    • (i) the requirements of the regulations, rules, and notices and documents that contain an order, that are referred to in the list of instruments, and
    • (ii) the terms of the exemptions referred to in the list of instruments.

Communication

(2) The local railway company must specify, in its safety management system, the manner in which any change to the list of instruments, or to the instruments set out in the list, will be communicated to its employees.

Process for Identifying Safety Concerns

Analyses

67. A local railway company must, on a continual basis, conduct analyses of its railway operations to identify safety concerns, including any trends or emerging trends, or any repetitive situations. The analyses must, at a minimum, be based on

  • (a) any reports of accidents;
  • (b) any internal documentation relating to accidents;
  • (c) any reports of injuries;
  • (d) the results of any inspections conducted by the local railway company or by a railway safety inspector;
  • (e) any reports of contraventions or safety concerns that are received by the local railway company from its employees;
  • (f) any complaints relating to safety that are received by the local railway company; and
  • (g) any data from safety monitoring technologies.

Procedure

68. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system, a procedure for conducting the analyses referred to in section 67.

Risk Assessment Process

Risk assessment

69. (1) A local railway company must conduct a risk assessment in the following circumstances:

  • (a) when it identifies a safety concern in its railway operations;
  • (b) when it proposes to begin transporting dangerous goods, or to begin transporting dangerous goods different from those it already transports; and
  • (c) when it proposes to make a significant change to its railway operations that may affect the safety of the public or personnel or the protection of property or the environment, for example
    • (i) the introduction or elimination of a technology, or a change to a technology,
    • (ii) an increase in the volume of dangerous goods it transports,
    • (iii) a change to the route on which dangerous goods are transported, or
    • (iv) a change affecting personnel, including an increase or decrease in the number of employees or a change in their responsibilities or duties.

Components

(2) The risk assessment must

  • (a) describe the circumstances that triggered the requirement to conduct the risk assessment;
  • (b) identify and describe the risks associated with those circumstances;
  • (c) identify the factors taken into account in the risk assessment, including
    • (i) whether the local railway company’s employees or the public are affected, and
    • (ii) whether property or the environment are affected;
  • (d) indicate, for each risk, the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences;
  • (e) identify the risks that require remedial action;
  • (f) identify the remedial action for the risks that require remedial action; and
  • (g) evaluate the likelihood that residual risks will occur and the severity of their consequences.

Communication

70. A local railway company must communicate the risks identified as requiring remedial action, and the remedial action to be implemented, to employees of the local railway company who are affected by any of the circumstances referred to in subsection 69(1).

Procedures and method

71. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for determining the circumstances, other than those referred to in subsection 69(1), that require a risk assessment;
  • (b) a method for evaluating the level of risk, taking into account the likelihood that the risk will occur and the severity of its consequences; and
  • (c) a procedure for identifying the risks that require remedial action, taking into account the likelihood that the risks will occur and the severity of their consequences.
Process for Implementing and Evaluating Remedial Action

Remedial action — implementation

72. (1) A local railway company must implement remedial action to reduce or eliminate the risks that it has identified in its risk assessment as requiring remedial action.

Remedial action — evaluation

(2) The local railway company must evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial action in reducing or eliminating the risks.

Procedures

73. A local railway company must include, in its safety management system,

  • (a) a procedure for selecting the remedial action to be implemented; and
  • (b) a procedure for implementing the remedial action and evaluating its effectiveness.
Records

Records

74. (1) A local railway company must keep records of the following:

  • (a) the results of each analysis conducted under section 67;
  • (b) each risk assessment conducted under section 69; and
  • (c) the results of each evaluation conducted under subsection 72(2).

Duration

(2) The records must be kept for five years after the day on which they are created.

Filing and Notification

Filing with the Minister

75. A local railway company must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister an up-to-date copy of the index referred to in subsection 62(1).

Notification and filing — significant change

76. A local railway company that proposes to make a change referred to in paragraph 69(1)(c) must, before making the change, notify the Minister of the change and must, at the request of the Minister, file with the Minister the risk assessment that it conducted with respect to the change.

PART 3

REPEAL AND COMING INTO FORCE

REPEAL

77. The Railway Safety Management System Regulations (see footnote 3) are repealed.

COMING INTO FORCE

April 1, 2015

78. These Regulations come into force on April 1, 2015.

[27-1-o]

  • Footnote 1
    Transportation Safety Board of Canada — Statistical Summary, Railway Occurrences 2013: www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/stats/rail/2013/ssro-2013.asp.
  • Footnote 2
    Stronger Ties, Review of the Railway Safety Act, November 2007, p. 65.
  • Footnote 3
    SOR/2001-37
  • Footnote a
    S.C. 2012, c. 19, s. 485
  • Footnote b
    R.S., c. 32 (4th Supp.)
  • Footnote c
    S.C. 2012, c. 7, s. 30
  • Footnote d
    S.C. 2012, c. 7, s. 37