It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Norfolk Southern (NS) reported that its inaugural plan aimed at “reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with a focus on transitioning to a low-carbon economy” was released Jan. 4.
(Courtesy of NS)
The Climate Transition Plan (download below) is slated to help NS achieve its science-based target of reducing GHG emissions intensity 42% by 2034, the Class I reported. The Plan identifies three key ways for doing so: a 13% improvement in locomotive fuel efficiency by 2027, a commitment to increasing renewable energy usage to 30% by 2030, and 20% consumption of low-carbon fuels (biofuels) by 2034. Fuel is said to account for more than 90% of NS’s scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions.
The Plan covers governance, GHG accounting and verification, scenario analysis, risks and opportunities, financial planning, targets, strategy (example above), value chain engagement and low-carbon initiatives, and policy engagement. It will be reviewed and updated every two to five years. NS said that any material changes to its decarbonization targets would result in an updated Plan.
“I am pleased to introduce Norfolk Southern’s inaugural Climate Transition Plan (CTP), another milestone in our longstanding commitment to environmental stewardship and sustainability,” NS Chief Sustainability Officer Josh Raglin wrote in the Plan. “Rail is the most sustainable way to move freight over land. As one of the nation’s leading freight railroads, we understand the critical role we play in reducing supply chain emissions and fostering a transition to a low-carbon economy. We remain focused on building a better planet, a brighter future for our employees and our communities, and partnering with our customers to achieve their sustainability goals.”
The NTSB observed the inspection and disassembly of wheelset #4 from railcar 7200, which caused the 2021 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority derailment in Virginia. “In accordance with wheelset design, each wheel should have been flush against its bearing when mounted,” NTSB wrote in its January 2023 derailment investigation report. “Before disassembly, the inspection identified gaps between both wheels and their respective bearings: about 0.63 inches for the right-side wheel and about 1.10 inches for the left-side wheel [see above] … The back-to-back measurement was about 55.375 inches, or about 2 inches wider than the maximum design specification.” (NTSB Image)
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on Jan. 4 issued its final report on the October 2021 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) train derailment in Arlington, Va., attributing the cause to a wheelset irregularity. Chair Jennifer Homendy was critical of both the transit agency’s “safety culture” and the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) oversight.
Map showing the Rosslyn derailment on WMATA system. (NTSB Image)
WMATA’s train 407, comprising eight Kawasaki Rail Car-built 7000 series railcars and carrying 187 riders and the operator, derailed Oct. 12, 2021, while traveling from Rosslyn Station toward Arlington Cemetery Station on the Blue Line in Arlington, Va. (see map above). The derailment occurred in a tunnel south of the Rosslyn Station platform. All railcars remained upright and in-line. No injuries were reported; one passenger was transported to the hospital, treated and released.
The derailment occurred “because the wheels of one wheelset [on railcar No. 7200] had migrated outward on their axle, resulting in a width larger than the design specification,” according to the NTSB (download the agency’s report and watch the video recreation below). “The wheel migration happened over time, eventually causing the wheelset to exceed [by two inches] its maximum design width [of 53-3/8 inches]. When this wheelset traveled over a turnout … the out-of-specification wheelset width caused a wheel to leave the rail, derailing a railcar.”
NTSB also reported finding that “one department within WMATA was aware of wheel migration in its railcar fleet and attempted to mitigate the associated safety risks.”
According to the NTSB report, “WMATA observed cases of wheels migrating outward on their axles over time in the pre-7000-series fleet (the legacy fleet) in 2014 and responded by increasing the interference specification for the 7000-series, which was then in production. As a result, at the time of the derailments, the 7000-series fleet included wheelsets assembled under two different interference specifications: 0.0035-0.0060 inches (original) and 0.0045-0.0065 inches (after June 16, 2017, when WMATA approved revised design drawings from Kawasaki). These specifications resulted in wheelsets with mounting forces of 55-80 tons (original) and 65-95 tons (after revision).” The NTSB said that “[a]ccording to WMATA’s records, axle #4 on railcar 7200 was assembled under the original specification on April 8, 2016. The interference for both wheels was 0.0044 inches, resulting in a mounting force of 64 tons for the right wheel and 58 tons for the left wheel.”
NSTB reported that WMATA “did not conduct a trend analysis to monitor the incidence of wheel migration or how effective its mitigations were.” A trend analysis, NTSB said, “would have shown the increasing incidence of wheel migration and made an effective response more likely.”
WMATA has “since made improvements to its safety management systems and has plans to expand its use of trend analysis and related tools to identify and mitigate safety risks before accidents occur,” according to NTSB. “The oversight of the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission is vital to supporting and monitoring these ongoing improvements.”
NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy
“With any NTSB investigation, the key isn’t determining what happened, which we know pretty early on, but it’s how it happened,” Homendy said during a Jan. 4 press conference on the NTSB report release (scroll down to watch). “That’s how we prevent future accidents and tragedies. But once we issue safety recommendations, those recommendations need to be acted upon, otherwise safety isn’t assured. Since 1982, the NTSB has investigated 15 accidents on the WMATA rail system. In total we’ve issued 125 safety recommendations to WMATA, the oldest of those recommendations date back to 1970 when the system was still under construction. I want to read it to you. We recommended to WMATA to develop the capability within your organization for system safety engineering [SMS] … and apply system safety principles to all aspects of the proposed rail system. And here’s the key: to identify, assess and correct those deficiencies identified by the analysis. Since that recommendation was issued in 1970, we’ve consistently identified WMATA’s failure to adequately assess and mitigate safety risk; WMATA’s poor safety culture; and the failure of our federal government to oversee, regulate and enforce safety on our nation’s public rail transit systems, which are responsible for safely transporting millions of passengers daily. WMATA alone transports an average of 287,000 people every day.”
Homendy noted that “operators like WMATA are absolutely responsible for ensuring the safety of their systems, but when they can’t or they won’t or when there are repeated safety issues, it’s up to federal and state governments to take action to ensure safety of public citizens.” The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015 “gave DOT, in particular the FTA the authority to regulate and enforce safety standards for public transit systems,” she said. “To date they have not exercised this authority. I will note that the FAST Act also stated that in exercising that authority, USDOT should consider relevant NTSB recommendations asking DOT to act and to implement minimum safety standards and to enforce those safety standards. Those recommendations for the NTSB go back to 1978 … And yet, here we are today with unenforceable voluntary safety standards, in what we call a National Public Transportation Safety Plan. As a result, there are no enforceable federal standards for the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission to hold WMATA accountable. Let me put a finer point on this. If I wanted to haul a freight train full of coal through West Virginia today, there is a large book of federal standards I’d have to abide by. But if I want to operate a transit train loaded with passengers at rush hour in the nation’s capital capitol, there are no federal minimal standards required. None. FTA’s failure to take their authority seriously is evident in their party submission to the NTSB. Their party submission states: It would be our recommendation to NTSB to prevent similar events, to encourage all transit agencies operating heavy rail transit cars exceeding 20,000 pounds to increase the interference fit and press force on wheelsets to freight industry standards, which WMATA has done. But you don’t need to recommend it if you’re FTA. You don’t need to encourage it. You need to mandate it. You have the authority to do so, just like we do for every other mode of transportation: aviation, marine, pipeline, highways, freight and intercity passenger rail—they’re all regulated and those regulations are enforceable. So, I’m calling on FTA to take immediate action to regulate and enforce safety on our nation’s public transit rail systems.”
Post-Derailment Actions
On Oct. 17, 2021, the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission (WMSC) ordered WMATA to remove the 7000-series fleet from revenue service, develop a response to wheel gage anomalies in 7000-series railcars, and implement a plan for safely returning 7000-series railcars to revenue service, according to the NTSB. On Dec. 29, 2021, WMSC issued an additional order, setting criteria for WMATA to meet before returning the 7000-series fleet to revenue service. These criteria included internal oversight practices, data-driven revision of inspection frequency, and WMSC approval of WMATA’s return-to-service plan, NTSB reported. WMSC also required WMATA to develop and implement corrective action plans related to the 7000-series fleet and to emergency response, according to NTSB, which noted that “[t]hese plans are intended to improve accountability, risk management, and the efficacy of train operators and ROCC [Rail Operations Control Center] personnel in handling emergencies.”
On Nov. 1, 2021, the FTA issued a Safety Advisory, SA-21-1, requiring State Safety Oversight Agencies “to report information about out-of-tolerance wheel gages to the FTA within 30 days,” according to NTSB, which said the FTA did not receive any other reports. SA-21-1 also advised the State Safety Oversight Agencies “to require fleet-wide inspections of wheel gages on all rail transit vehicles in revenue service,” NTSB said.
After the Rosslyn derailment, WMATA inspected all 2,992 wheelsets in the 7000-series fleet, finishing in November 2022, according to NTSB. “These inspections identified about 50 Railroad Investigation Report RIR-23-15 30 wheelsets that had exhibited outward wheel migration reaching or exceeding the 53.375-inch maximum specification, bringing the total number of affected wheelsets in the 7000-series fleet to about 80,” NTSB reported. “None exhibited wheel migration as pronounced as the 2-inch exceedance measured on wheelset #4 of railcar 7200 after the Rosslyn derailment.”
Following the derailment, NTSB investigation, and orders from the WMSC, NTSB reported that WMATA removed the 748 7000-series cars from service and developed a return-to-service plan that includes “replacement of all wheelsets in the 7000-series fleet with wheelsets assembled with an interference of 0.0065-0.0080 inches and a mounting force of 80–120 tons.”
NTSB reported that based on a “Hatch LTK report, and on related reports WMATA obtained from MxV and Kawasaki Rail Car, WMATA’s wheelset replacement program for the 7000-series fleet calls for increasing the interference specification to 0.0065-0.0080 inches (resulting in a mounting force of 80–120 tons) to correct insufficient interference fits, which WMATA assessed as the reason for the wheel migration.” According to NTSB, WMATA began replacing wheelsets July 31, 2023, and the replacement process for the entire fleet is scheduled to take three years. (For more on WMATA’s wheelset retrofit program, read: “WMATA Addressing ‘Pressing’ Problem.”)
“WMATA has been physically inspecting 7000-series wheelsets at 30-day intervals and plans to continue this practice for non-replaced wheelsets,” NTSB reported. “Replaced wheelsets will be physically inspected at 60-day intervals. WMATA is also deploying automated wayside inspection systems to monitor back-to-back measurements to supplement these physical inspections.”
Due to the two-year-old shortage of 7000-series equipment, which comprises roughly 60% of its fleet, WMATA said in December that it “continues to utilize its oldest, least-reliable railcars in the legacy fleet. As more 7000-series railcars are completed, tested and able to run longer between inspection intervals, we will gradually be able to increase the number in service, providing customers with more reliability and comfort. This will allow us to eventually remove the older, legacy railcar fleet from service.”
WMATA 7000-Series Rapid Transit Cars: Courtesy Wikipedia
According to the NTSB report, the current version of WMATA’s public transportation agency safety plan adopted after the Rosslyn derailment “includes additional criteria for when departments must perform trend analyses, along with clarified standards on reporting risks to the ESC [WMATA Executive Safety Committee] and internal oversight. These changes are intended to ensure that risk mitigations are being followed and are working as intended.” Additionally, WMATA has undertaken changes to its maintenance program, including “revising existing processes and implementing new processes to identify safety critical items for all assets, setting system-wide criteria for reporting and tracking risks, automating trend reports, and establishing triggers for informing executives of adverse safety trends,” NTSB said. WMATA plans to finalize organizational changes and begin recruiting staff to support the new processes and tools in early 2024, according to the federal safety agency.
NTSB Conclusions
Following are the NTSB investigative report findings:
None of the following issues contributed to the derailment: defects in the track or infrastructure; signals and train control systems; the train operator’s physical readiness for duty; and the train operator’s train handling.
“The derailment of train 407 south of Rosslyn Station was caused by the out-of-specification widened wheelset #4 on railcar 7200 and its interaction with special track work.”
“The out-of-specification back-to-back measurement on wheelset #4 was caused by incremental wheel migration over time.”
“Had the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) used trend analysis to assess the efficacy of its risk mitigation strategies for wheel migration, WMATA would have identified the increasing incidence of wheel migration in time to adopt more effective mitigation measures.”
“While the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) has a history of safety lapses related to risk identification and mitigation, its proposed additional processes and resources for expanding the role of trend analysis in identifying safety risks would, if implemented, increase the likelihood of WMATA successfully identifying and mitigating safety risks before accidents occur.”
“Washington Metrorail Safety Commission oversight of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s (WMATA) planned implementation of trend analysis is necessary to ensure that the WMATA’s operations remain compliant with the safety management system documented in its public transportation agency safety plan, and that the as-implemented changes to trend analysis support continuing improvements in identifying and mitigating risks.”
NTSB Recommendations
As a result of NTSB’s investigation, it recommended that WMATA “[i]mplement processes and resources to expand the role of trend analysis in identifying and mitigating safety risks. (R-23-28)” and that the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission “[d]evelop and implement a program to support and monitor” WMATA’s use of trend analysis within its safety management system. (R-23-29).
WMATA’s Response
“Metro [WMATA] fully supports the NTSB Derailment report and thanks all parties to the investigation for their leadership and thoughtful approach,” WMATA reported in a Jan. 4 post on social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. “The collaboration and professionalism between the NTSB and WMSC have been critical to our ability to move this process forward, and we appreciate that our proactive steps have been acknowledged. Metro has issued a fleet defect notice to Kawasaki related to our performance-based contract. Based on the contract, Kawasaki is responsible to pay all costs to fix this wheelset defect [at an estimated cost of $55 million]. We are confident that our current Wheelset Replacement program will address this wheelset defect as we work over the next several years to repress all 7000-series wheelsets at a higher press tonnage and increased interference fit.”
Kawasaki Speaks Out
“As expected, the NTSB’s conclusions align with our own findings and confirm that Kawasaki met the design and mounting specifications established by WMATA for the 7000 series wheelsets,” Kawasaki said in a statement released to Railway Age. “While we understand the budget crisis that WMATA is facing, any suggestion that Kawasaki should absorb the cost of WMATA’s own failures regarding the wheelsets of the 7000 series trains is not rooted in reality. As a reminder, WMATA supplied the wheelset design for the 7000 series railcars to match their older railcars and then failed to alert Kawasaki when they increased the mounting pressure for those older railcars after they identified 33 instances of back-to-back failures in 2014 –before the first 7000 series car was even delivered. The mismanagement by WMATA under prior leadership, cited in the NTSB’s final report, comes as no surprise to those who have followed the agency. We look forward to seeing the 7000 series railcars resume their legacy of safety and reliability as WMATA implements the recommendations outlined in the NTSB’s report.”
Fourth in a Series: There was something special about the Rail Diesel Cars (RDCs) built by the Budd Company in the middle of the past century. They were self-contained passenger cars (and some baggage cars, too) that ran on many railroads in Canada, the Northeastern United States and elsewhere. They had a unique “feel” as they rode, as well as an equally unique sound as the on-board diesel engines revved up, just before the train (sometimes as a single car, and sometimes coupled with other RDCs) started moving.
RDCs were used for commuter-length runs, corridor-length trips on lightly-patronized lines, and even for long trips where they replaced once-famous trains until those runs were discontinued. From the 1950s onward, they were seen and heard (yes, their engines were loud) on railroads from the Boston & Maine to Trinity Railway Express, and from the Northwestern Pacific to the Canadian Pacific. Today there are a few in service on certain tourist railroads, and there is one scheduled route where they run three times a week in each direction, year-round.
That route hosts VIA Rail Trains 185 and 186, formerly officially named the Lake Superior, but which the people along its route affectionately remember as the “Budd Train.” It is the only train on VIA Rail that runs on historic CP track (the signs have been changed to say “CPKC”), except for a few short stretches of the transcontinental Canadian. It runs between White River and Sudbury, Ontario, on a segment of the original Canadian route, from the days when CP Rail operated the train. It is isolated from any other passenger routes, and White River is a long way from other places.
Getting There from Winnipeg
My trip to ride the Lake Superior started in Winnipeg, at a dark and dingy bus station on Sherbrook Street, on the south side of the city. At one time, there were several bus routes that called at Manitoba’s capital, most of which were operated by Greyhound Canada, which suspended service west of Ontario in 2018 and went out of business completely in 2021. The few buses from Thompson do not stop at that location, so only eight buses per week do. One is a weekly bus to Regina, Saskatchewan operated by Rider Express. The other is a daily bus to Thunder Bay, Ontario, run by Ontario Northland, the bus company affiliated with the railroad of the same name.
My bus left on Monday, Aug.14 at 12:30 PM and ran on a highway loosely parallel to the CP main that once hosted such trains as the Canadian and the Dominion. The bus stopped near several places that once had CP stations and trains, like Kenora and Fort Francis on the 11-hour trip to Thunder Bay. Kenora was the most interesting place on the route. My bus wound its way through downtown after providing an opportunity to see a bit of the Lake in the Woods, where the Minnesota border juts north, making it the northernmost place in the United States south of Alaska. The rest of the stops were not that interesting, but they included a couple of convenience stores that had decent snacks (including an “assorted sandwich”; Manitoba’s name for a smaller version on a round roll of the sandwich we call a “sub”). After a one-hour layover near Thunder Bay, it was time to change to a bus bound for Sault Ste. Marie, (“the Soo”), which stopped at White River about 6:00 on Tuesday morning on its way there.
The Northwest End of the Line
The bus was due at White River at 6:00 AM, while the train was scheduled to leave at 7:00 AM from the station located about a 20-minute walk from the bus stop. The options were to spend an extra day in Winnipeg and take a chance on being stranded for two days in White River (and probably blowing the rest of my itinerary), or playing it safe by spending 25 hours in White River. I chose the latter option, which meant all day Tuesday there. I had booked a room at the Continental Motel, where the train crew also stayed. My first stop was a doughnut shop across the road, a lightly used stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway, so the day began with coffee and an opportunity to meet the local seniors, some of whom had worked on the railroad. After that, it was time to see the town, and there was not much to see. Many businesses and all the restaurants had moved away from the town’s residential area, and over to the highway.
There were still a few businesses left in the older part of town, including a food store. The train station was there, too, but it was closed, and there was no waiting room or station agent. The White River Heritage Museum was open, though, and it provided an opportunity to learn about the town and its history. The museum also featured an exhibit about the town’s most-famous character, Winnie-the-Pooh. A veterinarian from an Army cavalry unit bought a bear cub from a trapper at the White River train station and took the bear with him when he went overseas to fight in 1914. He named the bear Winnie, for his home town, Winnipeg. Winnie ended up as a popular attraction at the London Zoo, and writer A.A. Milne bought a stuffed bear modeled after Winnie for his son Christopher Robin Milne. The rest is literary history. The town also has a Winnie-the-Pooh Park, a restaurant affiliated with the Continental Motel, and a lunch truck that sold decent fish and chips. All in all, there was not much to do in White River. The town takes pride in being the coldest place in Ontario, too, but not in August.
Riding the “Budd Train”
Several passengers who were riding the train stayed at the motel, and the owner provided a ride to the station for the crew, returned to the motel, and took us passengers to the station in time for the 7:00 AM departure. The train itself consisted of three cars: one each from the classes RDC-1, RDC-2, and RDC-4. The latter was a full baggage car. Tthe RDC-1 was a standard coach of its type with a 90-passenger capacity. The RDC-2 was a combine with a capacity of 70 passengers and a baggage compartment. It pulled up to the station, and about 20 riders got on. The interior sported a 1970s style, complete with an array of pastel colors. Curtis, who oversaw the train, had coffee available for us and a few snacks, although the lack of food was not as serious a problem on that train as it had been on those that took several days to complete their trips. There would be more to eat later, in Sudbury.
The route included two intermediate station stops where the old Canadian on CP Rail used to call: Chapleau and Cartier, in addition to the final stop at Sudbury. The entire trip took somewhat more than eight hours. As with other trains on VIA Rail, there were several stops at remote settlements. Even if there were no passengers getting on or off, the baggage man delivered and picked up items from or for the baggage car at few of those places. Within that car were several storage bins, stacked on top of each other and aligned in rows. They were marked, and it was clear who the recipients were. While the flag stops at remote places were also a feature of the other VIA Rail “Adventure” routes, the unique sound, smell and feel of the old Budd cars created a sense of nostalgia that pervaded the trip.
The scenery was similar to that on the current Canadian east of Winnipeg: lakes and woods, and more of the same. Yet the sound of the RDC cars and the feel of the way they speed up or slow down is unique, and it is not available anywhere else in North America on a scheduled train. Some of the riders were railfans who had also come a long distance to ride the train.
Shortly after 3:00, the train pulled into Sudbury, where it terminated. Riders got off and on along the way, but the number who alighted at Sudbury was approximately the number who had initially boarded at White River. The Sudbury station is one of the few truly historic buildings in town, but it has not been restored to its original glory. At one time, it was a major stop for the CP transcontinental trains, the place where the Toronto section joined or split from the Montreal section, depending on the direction. The Montreal section stopped at Ottawa, too. Those days are long gone, and today the Sudbury station stands as a rundown shadow of its former self. At least it still hosts a passenger train.
August 1970: CP Rail’s flagship train, the Canadian, departs Toronto Union Station for Sudbury, where it will meet with the section from Montreal. From thence, it will follow a southern route along the north shore of Lake Superior to Thunder Bay. From there it will proceed to Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary and Vancouver. Robert Taylor/Wikimedia Commons.
A Good Railroad Museum
Sudbury is a small city that once boasted a lot of railroad activity. There are CPKC through freights, and the VIA Rail “Budd Train” still goes to White River or arrives from there, the last vestige of the old CP Rail Canadian on its original route. The town itself started as a CP railroad town, and its growth was fueled by lumber, with copper and nickel mining. A “big nickel” stands on the grounds of the Science North Museum to commemorate that history. Not much more of the city’s history is visible in the downtown area. It appeared that much of it had been bulldozed or altered into oblivion. So, sadly, Sudbury’s downtown core did not have much to see, and its museums were not nearby.
Capreol is located northwest of downtown Sudbury, and was one of the towns that was absorbed into “Greater Sudbury” in 2001. Operationally, it was Sudbury’s counterpart on CN, where the Montreal and Toronto sections of the transcontinental trains like the Continental Limited and the Super Continental split or joined, depending on direction. Capreol still hosts VIA Rail’s Canadian twice a week in each direction, and it was the destination of the ticket agent who had welcomed Train 185 on Wednesday afternoon. He had to leave quickly to be on hand to open the Capreol station for Train 1.
Canadian National FP9 6507 with Train 2, the Super Continental coming into Pembroke, Ontario, Sept. 6, 1965. Marty Bernard/Wikimedia Commons.
The next morning, it took about 45 minutes to get to Capreol from downtown Sudbury on a Greater Sudbury Transit (GOVA) local bus. I had added Capreol as my Thursday stop only the prior evening, when I learned that the Northern Ontario Railway Museum would be open. The museum is located in a railroad Superintendent’s house built in 1916, also one of the few buildings that has retained its historic appearance. The house contains exhibits about local railroading, the CN main that goes through there, mining, lumbering and other aspects of Capreol’s history and culture. The railroad collection, located behind the house, includes a CN Mountain class steam locomotive, a boxcar that had been converted into a small house for a railroad worker and his wife during the 1930s, and other equipment and tools. Probably the most interesting car in the collection is a “school car” that served remote towns along the line. It contained a classroom, a small library and living quarters for the teacher and his wife. He taught all grades, from first grade to a few basic college-level courses to the children in the towns on his circuit, as well as adult education in the evening.
Capreol’s other museum, the Heritage Centre, is located one block away, in a now-retired firehouse. It contains a fire engine and other firefighting memorabilia, more artifacts that tell the history of the town, and a large model railroad layout downstairs. It took about three hours to see both museums, and slightly more than another hour to take a quick walk around town and have lunch at the eatery where the locals go. From there, the director of the museum, with whom I also had lunch, gave me a ride to the Sudbury station for Ontario Northland buses. It is not located near downtown Sudbury, but it hosted one departure a day toward Ottawa, my next destination. The ride was not as scenic or interesting as the one from Winnipeg to White River, but it was not as long, either. The bus left about 2:45 and arrived at the VIA Rail station in Ottawa on schedule, at 10:30 PM.
Canada’s Capital
I have already reported on the transit I rode in Canada, so I will concentrate on my destination cities in this article. Ottawa’s new Confederation Line light rail took me to within walking distance of my accommodation for the night. The next day I rode the entire line by daylight, ending up back at the train station for my trip to Montreal.
In the meantime, I took a look at the city, focusing on downtown Ottawa. Like many cities, it has historic buildings interspersed with newer, less-interesting structures. There are some famous places to see: the Byward Market, the Chateau Laurier Hotel, and the bridge over the Rideau Canal (which is a popular spot for ice skating in the winter). It was not possible to see the Parliament buildings because of construction. They were not even fully in use, since the Senate was temporarily using the historic Union Station building (the current station is several miles away but is served by the Confederation Line). Because there were no tours of the Parliament buildings available, I saw the Supreme Court Building instead. Ottawa does not have a particularly strong food scene, although shwarama, the Arab counterpart to the Greek gyro, is a popular favorite.
There is more to see in Ottawa, including museums, but they will have to wait for another visit to the city. Service on VIA Rail is not one of the city’s great attractions. There is relatively frequent service to and from Toronto and fewer trains to and from Montreal, but there are no other lines that serve the capital city. There were trains directly from New York City on the New York Central at one time, but that was before most of us were born.
The last train left for Montreal at 5:50 PM, and I was on it. It was one of the first trips from Ottawa that ran with the new Siemens Venture cars instead of VIA Rail’s old corridor fleet. I did not find the comfortable. They were fixed and did not recline at all, there were no footrests, they were narrow (or at least they felt that way), there was not much leg room, and half of the seats faced backwards. In short, they were similar to the equipment that Brightline runs in Florida and Amtrak has introduced on its Midwest routes centered on Chicago. The train was packed, and I boarded early enough to get a forward-facing window seat, but the trip had the comfort level of a “commuter” train. It took slightly more than two hours to get to Montreal; about the length of the Long Island Rail Road’s East End trips, NJ Transit’s longest journeys, and many of the longer trips in the Los Angeles area on Metrolink.
I spent the next day (Friday) in Montreal, riding local transit and sampling local foods, as I reported previously. I had to be home in New Jersey for a while to attend to civic matters and catch up on writing for Railway Age. Amtrak’s Adirondack had been suspended for the summer, so I had no choice but to take a bus. New York Trailways ran an overnight bus, so I got home on Saturday morning, Aug. 19. It could have been worse. One of the few routes that Greyhound still operates to Canada is the route between Montreal and New York, so there is still a choice of buses between those endpoints.
I still had more places to go in Canada, including plans to ride the two remaining VIA Rail lines in Quebec, and the Ocean to and from Halifax, Nova Scotia. That trip would take place at the end of August and the beginning of September. I will report on the trains that serve the remote areas of northern Quebec in the next article in this series. In the meantime, I will have a feature on the “Budd cars” and their influence on passenger railroading during their heyday more than a half-century ago.
David Peter Alan is one of America’s most experienced transit users and advocates, having ridden every rail transit line in the U.S., and most Canadian systems. He has also ridden the entire Amtrak and VIA Rail network. His advocacy on the national scene focuses on the Rail Users’ Network (RUN), where he has been a Board member since 2005. Locally in New Jersey, he served as Chair of the Lackawanna Coalition for 21 years, and remains a member. He is also Chair of NJ Transit’s Senior Citizens and Disabled Residents Transportation Advisory Committee (SCDRTAC). When not writing or traveling, he practices law in the fields of Intellectual Property (Patents, Trademarks and Copyright) and business law. Opinions expressed here are his own.
Indian PM dedicates demonstration reprocessing plant
04 January 2024
The Demonstration Fast Reactor Fuel Reprocessing Plant (DFRP) is a precursor to large-scale plants for the reprocessing of fast reactor fuel.
The project was one of several dedicated to the nation by Modi during his visit to Tamil Nadu (Image: X/@DAEIndia)
Prime Minister Narendra Modi ceremonially dedicated the DFRP, at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR) in Kalpakkam, to the nation on 2 January.
The facility - which has cost INR400 crore (about USD48 million - 1 crore is 10 million) to develop - is the first industrial-scale plant in the world that is capable of handling both carbide and oxide spent fuels from fast reactors, according to India's Department of Atomic Energy. The Indian-designed facility will serve as a precursor to large-scale commercial fast reactor fuel reprocessing plants.
Fast reactors are part of India's vision for a closed nuclear fuel cycle and making use of its abundant reserves of thorium. IGCAR is home to the MWt Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR), in operation since 1985. Work on a 500 MWe prototype fast breeder reactor - the PFBR - began at Kalpakkam in 2004; in August last year, Minister of State Jitendra Singh told the Lok Sabha that the unit was undergoing "integrated commissioining".
In 2017, IGCAR awarded Hindustan Construction Company a contract worth INR 7.64 billion to construct the Fast Reactor Fuel Cycle Facility (FRFCF) to reprocess used fuel from the PFBR.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
China approves construction of four new reactors
03 January 2024
The construction of two Hualong One reactors at each of the Taipingling and Jinqimen sites was approved by China's State Council at a 29 December meeting. Meanwhile, various milestones have been reached in the construction of other Chinese units.
The construction site of units 1 and 2 at the Taipingling site (Image: CGN)
At the meeting of the Standing Committee of the State Council, chaired by Chinese Premier Li Qiang, approval was granted for units 3 and 4 at China General Nuclear's (CGN's) existing Taipingling nuclear power plant in Guangdong province, as well as units 1 and 2 at China National Nuclear Corporation's (CNNC's) new Jinqimen nuclear power plant in Zhejiang province.
The Taipingling plant will eventually have six Hualong One reactors. The construction of the first and second units began in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Unit 1 is scheduled to start up in 2025, with unit 2 following in 2026.
Cold functional tests began at Taipingling 1 on 22 December, CGN announced. The tests mark the first time the reactor systems are operated together with the auxiliary systems. Cold functional tests are carried out to confirm whether components and systems important to safety are properly installed and ready to operate in a cold condition. The main purpose of these tests is to verify the leak-tightness of the primary circuit and components - such as pressure vessels, pipelines and valves of both the nuclear and conventional islands - and to clean the main circulation pipes.
Units 1 and 2 of the Jinqimen plant - which CNNC notes have been included in the national plan and have undergone a comprehensive safety assessment review - have also been approved. CNNC subsidiary CNNC Zhejiang Energy Co Ltd will be responsible for project investment, construction and operations management of the new plant.
On 31 July last year, China's State Council approved the construction of six nuclear power units: units 5 and 6 of the Ningde plant in Fujian Province; units 1 and 2 of the Shidaowan plant in Shandong Province; and units 1 and 2 of the Xudabao plant in Liaoning Province. The latest approvals bring the total number of nuclear power projects approved in 2023 to ten, the same number approved in 2022.
Construction milestones
The Hualong One design features a double-layered containment structure. The main function of the containment building is to ensure the integrity and leak tightness of the reactor building, and it plays a key role in the containment of radioactive substances.
Installation of the inner dome at Changjiang 4 (Image: CNNC)
CNNC announced that the inner dome of the containment building of unit 4 at the Changjiang plant in Hainan province and the outer dome of unit 2 at the Zhangzhou plant in Fujian province were hoisted into place on 27 and 28 December, respectively.
Hoisting of the outer dome at Zhangzhou 2 (Image: CNNC)
Meanwhile, the reactor pressure vessel of unit 3 of the Sanmen plant in Zhejiang province was hoisted into place on 25 December. The "open-top method" was used, which involved using a 2600-tonne crane to install the vessel - weighing more than 271 tonnes - prior to the dome of the containment building being hoisted into place.
The reactor pressure vessel is move into place at Sanmen 3 (Image: SNERDI)
The first safety-related concrete was poured for the nuclear island of Sanmen 3 on 28 June, marking the official start of its construction. Phase II (units 3 and 4) of the Sanmen plant - which already houses two operating Westinghouse AP1000 units - will comprise two CAP1000 reactors, the Chinese version of the AP1000. The units are scheduled to start up in 2027 and 2028, respectively.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
IAEA welcomes action on back-up power at Zaporizhzhia
04 January 2024
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says a new system to ensure an immediate supply of back-up electricity if the main external line fails is a significant safety development - but has also outlined a list of areas of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant its experts want to inspect.
IAEA teams have been on site since September 2022 (Image: IAEA)
IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said that frequent external power cuts - there have been eight since August 2022 - remained a "source of serious concern for safety and security" because electricity is required to cool its reactors and other essential functions.
The plant, on the frontline of Russian and Ukrainian forces, has just the one remaining 750 kV line, with one 330 kV back-up power line. But since mid-2023, the IAEA says, the back-up line has needed manual intervention to become operational. The IAEA says that work has now been carried out at the plant on back-up electrical transformers which, Grossi said: "Means that if the main power supply through the 750 kV switchyard is lost, the back-up line will automatically be able to provide electricity to the plant without manual, and hence delayed, intervention, provided it remains operational."
He added: "This is a significant development, as it enables independence and redundancy in the site’s power supply scheme, even though the overall off-site power situation ... remains extremely fragile. This solution will only be effective if the 330 kV power line remains available, which, as we know from experience, is far from guaranteed."
In the first update of the new year, the IAEA also detailed its requests for more access at the site, which has been under Russian military control since early March 2022. It said its experts stationed at the plant were still awaiting access to the rooftops of reactors which had been planned for 19 December, and it said "access to some parts of the ZNPP’s turbine halls continues to be restricted, including those areas of reactor units 3, 4 and 6 over the past week".
For the past two weeks, the agency says, its team has not been allowed to access the reactor halls of units 1, 2 and 6 - "the first time that IAEA experts have not been granted access to a reactor hall of a unit that was in cold shutdown".
They are also awaiting the maintainance schedule for 2024 and are "closely following developments" regarding boric acid deposits they observed during a walkdown in the containment building of unit 6, which the plant operators said was the result of a leak in one of the boric acid storage tanks. The IAEA said: "This type of leak can occur during the operation of a plant. However, this kind of event requires proper and timely attention, investigation and response from the operator, to prevent further and potentially more severe safety implications."
Progress continues on the installation of four more mobile diesel boilers at the site, to help generate additional steam for various nuclear safety functions. The plant currently has nine mobile boilers, of which at least eight have been operating, providing additional heating during the winter. Five of the six reactors at the nuclear power plant are in cold shut down, with one remaining in hot shutdown, where it produces heat for the plant and the nearby town of Energodar where most of the staff live.
IAEA teams stationed at Ukraine's other nuclear sites of Rivne, Khmelnitsky, South Ukraine power plants and Chernobyl "continue to report that nuclear safety and security is being maintained, despite wide-ranging missile attacks on Ukraine in the past week, which forced the IAEA experts at the Khmelnitsky NPP to take shelter three times". Those stationed at the Rivne plant were informed that a cruise missile flew close to the plant on 29 December.
![The NTSB observed the inspection and disassembly of wheelset #4 from railcar 7200, which caused the 2021 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority derailment in Virginia. “In accordance with wheelset design, each wheel should have been flush against its bearing when mounted,” NTSB wrote in its January 2023 derailment investigation report. “Before disassembly, the inspection identified gaps between both wheels and their respective bearings: about 0.63 inches for the right-side wheel and about 1.10 inches for the left-side wheel [see above] … The back-to-back measurement was about 55.375 inches, or about 2 inches wider than the maximum design specification.” (NTSB Image)](https://www.railwayage.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/lead.png)
.jpg?ext=.jpg)
The project was one of several dedicated to the nation by Modi during his visit to Tamil Nadu (Image: X/@DAEIndia).jpg?ext=.jpg)
The construction site of units 1 and 2 at the Taipingling site (Image: CGN).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
IAEA teams have been on site since September 2022 (Image: IAEA)