VANCOUVER, B.C. - The federal Transportation Safety Board is blaming a 2006 derailment that killed two workers and seriously injured a third on a decision by Canadian National to replace a braking system without a formal risk assessment, the Toronto Globe and Mail reports.
The two killed were UTU members.
Peeling back the layers of the onion, the fact that this business decision was taken to remove locomotives equipped with a supplementary braking system from this territory becomes particularly important, Dan Holbrook, Western Canada manager of the board's rail-pipeline investigations branch, said in an interview.
The board's report notes that although employees spoke among themselves of their concerns about the use of locomotives without so-called dynamic brakes, the issue was not raised with management before the crash, meaning an opportunity was lost to resolve this safety issue.
As a result, a CN freight train travelling south on June 29, 2006, toward the southern Interior community of Lillooet ran into trouble.
Struggling to control the train on steep Fraser Canyon terrain, the locomotive engineer tried the brakes several times, but the effort failed to bring things under control and the locomotive and flat car came off the tracks, plunging almost 300 metres.
Crew members Don Faulkner, 59, and Tommy Dodd, 55, were killed. Engineer Gordon Rhodes suffered serious injuries.
(Conductor Faulkner and brakeman Dodd were members of UTU Local 1778 in N. Vancouver, B.C.)
The derailment occurred after the runaway train reached a speed at which it could not negotiate the sharp curves while descending the long, steep, mountain grade. The train set-up, without a locomotive equipped with [a] dynamic brake and with a single loaded car, resulted in a high gross weight for the braking capacity available from a small number of operative brakes, the report says.
With dynamic brakes, the risk of a loss of control would have been reduced.
When the system was operated by BC Rail, locomotives were equipped with dynamic braking systems, but CN removed such locomotives after they acquired the operation in 2004, replacing them with older locomotives.
We know the decision was a financially motivated decision but what's important to the safety board and from a safety-accident investigation perspective is that they didn't perform the required risk assessment, required by their safety management system before making this significant operational change, Mr. Holbrook said.
Asked whether he thought CN made a mistake, Mr. Holbrook said I think that's an accurate way to look at it.
He added: Of course, looking back at an accident, our vision is always 20-20, but we know that in railway operations there are potential risks and we know that those risks have to be identified and compensated for and that's why the board has made its recommendation concerning the proper performance of risk assessment.
He noted that he was not linking the purchase of BC Rail to this accident and others in the region.
Kelli Svendsen, a CN spokeswoman, declined detailed comment on the board's report due to legal action by the families of the victims, but said the company has been working to improve safety.
She noted a 31-percent reduction in main-track accidents between 2007 and 2009 to date, and a 29-percent reduction in non-main-track accidents.
Anne Fairfield, the sister of Mr. Faulkner, issued a statement in which she thanked the board for their care, discipline, and dedication to getting the facts out.
In a subsequent interview, the Hamilton-area resident said she thought the accident was preventable.
This was a runaway. It could have been prevented. I don't think the company took the reasonable steps to make sure this didn't happen. The big question is why?
Jeff Dolan, a spokesman for the Office of the Chief Coroner of B.C., said the office has been pursuing an ongoing investigation into the derailment since it occurred and will review the board report as part of the effort that, at this point, will lead to a coroner's report.
Mr. Dolan said the chief coroner could call a full-fledged inquest into the case, but that a decision on this possibility has not yet been made. Lillooet train derailment animation
(This item appeared May 29, 2009, in the Globe and Mail. Additional information added by UTU editors.)
The board's report notes that although employees spoke among themselves of their concerns about the use of locomotives without so-called dynamic brakes, the issue was not raised with management before the crash, meaning an opportunity was lost to resolve this safety issue.
Not to make light of this because it isn't funny, but I've sure been on a lot of power over time that had that kind of dynamic brakes on it. Phrase just caught my eye, that's all.
And I'll bet someone did raise the issue with management, too, but like the rest of the big ones, what do we know? What can we do?
Fuck you CN, you murdering motherfuckers!!!!! Just another example of you super-rails riding in like a knight in shining armor on your stallion to show us backward-assed hayseed country fucks how to railroad!!! Keep thinking outside the box, you fucking bastards, you know what's best...NOT!!!!!
You don't listen to alternatives offered by those of us who were there before you, you don't seek input from those in the know, instead you let your gawd-damed fucking egos and your "yes men" drones write the checks that we have to cash.
FUCK YOU!!!!!!!
__________________
Some people say I have a bad attitude. Those people are stupid.
" Asked whether he thought CN made a mistake, Mr. Holbrook said I think that's an accurate way to look at it.
He added: Of course, looking back at an accident, our vision is always 20-20, but we know that in railway operations there are potential risks and we know that those risks have to be identified and compensated for and that's why the board has made its recommendation concerning the proper performance of risk assessment."
The CN has taken many steps to reduce future accidents on this stretch of track by reducing it to one train a day each way instead of the half dozen back in the BCOL days. The bare minimum traffic to keep the line active.
__________________
If you are in a horror movie, you make bad decisions, its what you do.
The "old" CN was a sugar coated route with no grades more than 1% and that went from coast to coast in Canada. While the CP had very stout grades with their routes the CN had little need for dynamic brakes on their loco's. Add Grand Trunk and the Illinois Central, both flatland railroads, and you can see that dealing with dynamic braking and grades is something that the railroad would be quick to eliminate. This tragedy in BC is CN stupidity. They made no effort to understand because they weren't capable, they had no experience to draw from. I'm very familiar with the terrain and location of this accident. This is some serious railroad trackage. Hope all the affected families in this tragedy get a handsome settlement.
__________________
If you are in a horror movie, you make bad decisions, its what you do.
On that particular run the old BCR always ensured there was proper braking power!! Ever since the CN took over the BCR they've been destroying things left and right. This tradgedy and the Destruction of the Chekamus river could have all been prevented if they followed the tried and true policy's of the BCR.
__________________
Gentlemen, we all must realize that neither side has any monopoly on sons of bitches. C.D. Howe (in Washington to resolve a shipping dispute)
But you forget, Steamer, that the CN is the most efficient railroad that ever was. That means that the other railroads don't/dodn't know what they were doing. Fortunately CN came in to save the day.
I can't believe my head didnt explode just now...
__________________
Some people say I have a bad attitude. Those people are stupid.
On that particular run the old BCR always ensured there was proper braking power!! Ever since the CN took over the BCR they've been destroying things left and right. This tradgedy and the Destruction of the Chekamus river could have all been prevented if they followed the tried and true policy's of the BCR.
This tragegy aside...I loved the old PGE/BCR. A railfans delight with all the old ALCO/MLW power. The railroad was friendly as I had no troubles. Recall a visit to Squamish BC back in the early 80's where my buddy and I had free reign of the facilities and were invited up into the cab of a waiting freight on the siding. Will have to post the pictures I took of the "meet". It seems everytime you turn around these days, something good is now gone.
__________________
If you are in a horror movie, you make bad decisions, its what you do.
It's only appropriate that after your report of a cab visit, that someone make a "rare treat" comment, Krink. And ask, did PGE use those MU fuel cables?
