Emergency Response Task Force - Thursday, February 19, 2015
Record of Decision - Draft
Meeting of Thursday, February 19, 2015
Attendees: For a complete list of attendees, please refer to RDIMS 10414175.
|Agenda Item||Decisions / Action Items||Sponsor|
|1. Opening Remarks by Chair||The Chair opened the meeting, welcomed the participants and took attendance.||
Chair, ER Task Force
|2. Approval of the Agenda||The Agenda was approved as presented.||All|
|3. Approval of the January 15, 2015 Meeting Record of Decision||The January 15, 2015 Decision Record was approved without comments.||All|
|Update from TC-TDG regarding Action Plan to implement First Quarter Report||
Nicole Girard, Director General of TDG presented: Transport Canada’s Action Plan: To Implement the Emergency Response task Force recommendations: First Quarterly Report
In reference to ERG2016 Guidebook “to add Canadian Maple Leaf Flag to the 47 Orange Guide pages”, Members suggested that Transport Canada consider adding a reference to add ‘see shipping documents’ that way one can tell if a particular product has an ERAP.
|National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)||The Chair provided an update regarding the NFPA Submission indicating that the submission had been provided within the deadline to the NFPA Council. He also provided an update regarding upcoming March 18 NFPA meeting.||Chris Powers Chair, ER Task Force Transport Canada|
|ER Task Force Subgroup 1 – PD 33 Final Report for Discussion||
Vice-Chair provided a verbal update regarding Subgroup 1.
Members originally commented/suggested that clarification was needed on offer for transport and shipper to determine who had to meet the ERAP requirements. The Vice Chair responded that the definition of ERAP-holder was what Subgroup 1 members agreed upon.
The Vice-Chair explained that the methodology used by Subgroup 1 was an approach called Transportation Risk Management, which takes into consideration Risk Assessment and Incident Hazard Analysis. One challenge was that the transport movement data was not readily available to Subgroup 1. A request was actioned to TC by the ERTF Secretariat. The data is currently being collected.
The 2nd challenge was the lack of consensus on how to define a populated area, urban/rural/remote, therefore that issue was put aside.
The Vice Chair explained that Subgroup 1 members analysed two scenarios; 1) a spill with no fire - members felt that no further recommendations were necessary and agreed that their findings provided further corroboration and validation of similar scenarios used by TDG during ERAP submission assessments.
2) a spill with fire – member discussions on what the purpose of an ERAP would be in such a scenario, and members suggested a Tiered Response would be appropriate once an ERAP is activated.
The Vice-Chair pointed out that the Tier One in the Response Tier and Timelines document - which offers best practices and guidelines - indicate emergency response advice over the phone within 10 minutes of the request and NOT 20 minutes.
The Vice-Chair then spoke about the Technical Advisor (referred to in the Response Tier and Timelines), explaining that communities and first responders would be unfamiliar with that term/meaning. Members felt it was important to clarify the expectations and competencies required for a Technical Advisor – specifically a Flammable Liquids Technical Advisor (FLTA). The FLTA would provide advice in the Tier One of the Response Tier and Timelines document.
The intention of the profile is not to create a legal instrument, but to flesh out a clear understanding of what the appropriate role, training and competencies would be required for a FLTA for the purpose of assisting First Responders. These are offered as best practices, and the intent of the FLTA is to clarify the role and describe the profile.
It was suggested that recommendation 17 be reworded from “…TC TDG Directorate uses the FLTA descriptor document as an approval… tool during the review and approval process of ERAP..” to replace uses with further develop.
The Technical Advisor profile would be further developed and pursued during the NFPA workshop scheduled for March 18.
ERTF member inquired about the current criteria TDG uses to assess a Technical Advisor.
Vice-Chair responded that TDG does currently have guidelines to assess a technical advisor and will share with members.
|ERTF Secretariat ERTF Secretariat Louis Laferriere|
|Presentation: Experience in Emergency Procedures Involving Flammable Liquids||Ernie Wong, SME, (Imperial Oil), presented on his experience in emergency procedures in the field. The importance of strong respectful communications was emphasized.||Ernie Wong SME Imperial Oil|
|Presentation: Flammable Liquids Field Response Experience||Jean Claude Morin presented on Lessons Learned from the Lac Mégantic Train Derailment. The theme of common language (English/French), building relationships through training, exercises and maintaining those relationships resonated throughout the presentation.||Jean Claude Morin Emergency Response Contractors|
|Presentation:||RMS Roles and Responsibilities Ève Poirier, RMS for the Montréal region, presented RMS Roles and Responsibilities. She emphasized the importance for RMS to participate in exercises as it allows relationships to be built/trust put in place and RMS role is better understood.||Ève Poirier RMS Transport Canada|
|10. Next Steps||
||Shayne Mintz, NFPA ERTF Secretariat All|
|11. Roundtable – Questions and Answers||
Participants’ concerns, questions or suggestions are included in a consultation record which will be updated on a regular basis (RDIMS 9712281).
When: Thursday, March 19, 2015
- Date modified: