The country’s transportation safety body alleges in a 34-page information to obtain a search warrant, filed by safety inspector Robert W. Blair at Calgary provincial court last month, that conductor Stefaney Pacey had sent an email to a CP union representative Jamie Lind on Feb. 16 concerning the order to not apply hand brakes, used to clap down wheels, to Train 401 on Feb. 14 and 15.
Her email was forwarded to Transportation Canada Rail safety inspector Todd Horie, then Horie and another inspector, Geoff Campbell, launched an investigation into the alleged incident.
The probe led to investigators seizing all radio voice recordings, telephone recordings, electronic and written records for rail traffic control, train information sheets, management notes and employee notes from CP’s head office on Ogden Dale Road S.E. last month.
In an interview with Pacey on April 29, according to the court document, the conductor said she was directed by her manager to set off all railway cars at Greely storage track of CP’s Mountain Subdivision as they were approaching the southeastern B.C. town near the end of her shift late on Feb. 14.
At midnight, CP workers were scheduled to walk off the job on a strike.
Pacey said she knew that all unattended equipment in high-risk locations would require hand brakes to be applied to the cars, in accordance with an Oct. 29, 2014, directive from Transport Minister Lisa Raitt as a result of the deadly Lac Magentic, Que., derailment the previous year.
Pacey noted that via a radio communication to the rail traffic controller in Calgary there was insufficient time to complete the assigned movement as directed, and that was she directed not to apply the brakes to the standing cut of cars. She also informed that the direction came from Mark Jackson, then employed as superintendent for CP’s B.C. Interior Division.
The conductor also advised investigators that she left the standing cut without hand brakes, as directed, and that she knew the railway tank cars — believed to be more than a dozen — were carrying dangerous goods. The cars relied on secondary brakes to keep from rolling and did not move until picked up later.
As of the filing of the information to obtain the search warrant, no interview had been conducted with Train 401 engineer Curtis Ayotte.
According to the minister’s directive under the Railway Safety Act less than four months earlier, there was new information released as a result of the deadly Lac Megantic derailment in July 2013, that warranted such action.
In the Lac Megantic incident, in which an explosion and fire involving cars carrying crude oil killed 47 people, some hand brakes had been applied, to complement the air brakes, but failed to hold after the engine was shut off.
“I am of the opinion that more robust defences are required to prevent the risk of any future uncontrolled motion of railway equipment,” said the directive, signed by the assistant deputy minister of safety and security.
“Notwithstanding the fact that new rules pertaining to the securement of railway equipment have since been adopted by the industry and that practices related to the securement of railway equipment have improved, there remains sufficient residual risk that without additional layers of defence, uncontrolled motion of railway equipment could still occur, with possibly catastrophic consequences.”
In this case, none of the engines or cars moved from where they were parked and they were later removed.
Transportation Canada has not laid any charges, but alleges there is reasonable grounds to believe that two offences have been committed: that CP and Jackson contravened a section of the Railway Safety Act by leaving the equipment unattended without using hand brakes.
CP spokesman Marty Cej said by phone Monday that he could comment very little as the incident still is under investigation. He also could not confirm media reports by Jackson that he had been cleared of any wrongdoing.
“Canadian Pacific is co-operating fully with Transport Canada and we will continue to co-operate,” Cej said. “This is ongoing and, at this point, that’s all I can say.”
If a corporation is convicted of the charge by indictment, it faces a fine not exceeding $1 million. An individual, by indictment, faces a fine not exceeding $50,000 and one year in jail, or both.
On the lesser summary conviction, a corporation is subject to a fine not exceeding $500,000, and an individual faces a fine of no more than $25,000 or six months in jail, or both.
Source: