| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Vol. 137, No. 18 — May 3, 2003 Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations (1344 — Difenoconazole)Statutory Authority Food and Drugs Act Sponsoring Department Department of Health REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Description Difenoconazole is registered under the Pest Control Products Act as a fungicide for the control of seed-borne Septoria, seedling blight (caused by seed- and soil-borne Fusarium), general seed rots (caused by Penicillium and Aspergillus), covered smut, false loose smut, and Pythium damping-off, and for suppression of common root rot (Cochliobolus spp.), Fusarium crown rot, Fusarium foot rot, and take-all on wheat as a seed treatment. A maximum residue limit (MRL) has been established under the Food and Drugs Act for residues of difenoconazole resulting from this use at 0.1 parts per million (p.p.m.) in wheat. MRLs have also been established at 0.05 p.p.m. in eggs and meat and meat by-products of cattle, goats, hogs, poultry and sheep, and at 0.01 p.p.m. in milk to cover residues in food derived from animals fed with crops treated with difenoconazole. By virtue of subsection B.15.002(1) of the Food and Drug Regulations, the MRL for other foods is 0.1 p.p.m.. The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) of Health Canada has recently approved an application to amend the registration of difenoconazole in order to allow its use for the control of seed-borne Septoria, seedling blight, general seed rots, covered smut, false loose smut, and Pythium damping-off, and for suppression of common root rot, Fusarium crown rot, Fusarium foot rot, and take-all on barley, rapeseed (canola) and mustard as a seed treatment. This proposed regulatory amendment would establish MRLs for residues of difenoconazole resulting from this use in barley, mustard seed and rapeseed (canola) in order to permit the sale of food containing these residues. Before making a registration decision regarding a new use of a pest control product, the PMRA conducts the appropriate assessment of the risks and value of the product specific to its proposed use. The registration of the pest control product will be amended if: the data requirements for assessing value and safety have been adequately addressed; the evaluation indicates that the product has merit and value; and the human health and environmental risks associated with its proposed use are acceptable. The human health risk assessment includes an assessment of dietary risks posed by expected residues of the pest control product, as determined through extensive toxicological studies. An acceptable daily intake (ADI) and/or acute reference dose (ARD) is calculated by applying a safety factor to a no observable adverse effect level or, in appropriate cases, by applying a risk factor which is calculated based on a linear low-dose extrapolation. The potential daily intake (PDI) is calculated from the amount of residue that remains on each food when the pest control product is used according to the proposed label and the intake of that food from both domestic and imported sources in the diet. PDIs are established for various Canadian subpopulations and age groups, including infants, toddlers, children, adolescents and adults. Provided the PDI does not exceed the ADI or ARD for any subpopulation or age group, and the lifetime risk is acceptable, the expected residue levels are established as MRLs under the Food and Drugs Act to prevent the sale of food with higher residue levels. Since, in most cases, the PDI is well below the ADI and lifetime risks are very low when MRLs are originally established, additional MRLs for the pest control product may be added in the future. After the review of all available data, the PMRA has determined that MRLs for difenoconazole of 0.05 p.p.m. in mustard seed, 0.03 p.p.m. in rapeseed (canola) and 0.01 p.p.m. in barley would not pose an unacceptable health risk to the public. This proposed regulatory amendment would also amend the chemical name of difenoconazole in order to comply with international nomenclature conventions. Alternatives Under the Food and Drugs Act, the sale of food containing residues of pest control products at a level less than or equal to 0.1 p.p.m. is permitted unless a lower MRL has been established in Table II, Division 15, of the Food and Drug Regulations. In the case of difenoconazole, establishment of MRLs for barley, mustard seed and rapeseed (canola) is necessary to support the additional use of a pest control product which has been shown to be both safe and effective, while at the same time preventing the sale of food with unacceptable residues. Benefits and Costs The use of difenoconazole on barley, mustard seed and rapeseed (canola) will provide joint benefits to consumers and the agricultural industry as a result of improved management of pests. In addition, this proposed regulatory amendment will contribute to a safe, abundant and affordable food supply by allowing the importation and sale of food commodities containing acceptable levels of pesticide residues. Some costs may be incurred related to the implementation of analytical methods for analysis of difenoconazole in the foods mentioned above. Resources required are not expected to result in significant costs to the Government. Consultation Registration decisions, including dietary risk assessments, made by the PMRA are based on internationally recognized risk management principles, which are largely harmonized among member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Individual safety evaluations conducted by the PMRA include a review of the assessments conducted at the international level as part of the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization Food Standards Programme in support of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as well as MRLs adopted by other national health/ regulatory agencies. Compliance and Enforcement Compliance will be monitored through ongoing domestic and/or import inspection programs conducted by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency when the proposed MRLs for difenoconazole are adopted. Contact Geraldine Graham, Alternative Strategies and Regulatory Affairs Division, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Health Canada, Address Locator 6607D1, 2720 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9, (613) 736-3692 (Telephone), (613) 736-3659 (Facsimile), geraldine_graham@hc-sc.gc.ca (Electronic mail). PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to subsection 30(1) (see footnote a) of the Food and Drugs Act, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations (1344 — Difenoconazole). Interested persons may make representations with respect to the proposed Regulations within 75 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 Geraldine Graham, Alternative Strategies and Regulatory Affairs Division, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health, Address Locator 6607D1, 2720 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9 (tel.: (613) 736-3692; fax: (613) 736-3659; e-mail: geraldine_graham@hc-sc.gc.ca). Persons making representations should identify any of those representations the disclosure of which should be refused under the Access to Information Act, in particular under sections 19 and 20 of that Act, and should indicate the reasons why and the period during which the representations should not be disclosed. They should also identify any representations for which there is consent to disclosure for the purposes of that Act. Ottawa, May 1, 2003 EILEEN BOYD Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council REGULATIONS AMENDING THE FOOD AND DRUG REGULATIONS (1344 — DIFENOCONAZOLE) AMENDMENT 1. The portion of item D.14 of Table II to Division 15 of Part B of the Food and Drug Regulations (see footnote 1) in columns II to IV is replaced by the following:
COMING INTO FORCE 2. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered. [18-1-o] Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations (1348 — Glyphosate)Statutory Authority Food and Drugs Act Sponsoring Department Department of Health REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Description Glyphosate is registered under the Pest Control Products Act as a herbicide for the control of annual and perennial grasses and broadleaf weeds on a wide variety of crops as pre-emergent and pre-harvest treatments. Maximum residue limits (MRLs) have been established under the Food and Drugs Act for residues of glyphosate, including the metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), resulting from these uses at 35 parts per million (p.p.m.) in oat milling fractions, excluding flour, 20 p.p.m. in soybeans, 15 p.p.m. in barley and wheat milling factions, excluding flour, and oats, 10 p.p.m. in barley and rapeseed (canola), 5 p.p.m. in peas and wheat, 4 p.p.m. in beans and lentils, 3 p.p.m. in corn and flax, and 0.5 p.p.m. in asparagus. MRLs have also been established at 2 p.p.m. in kidney of cattle, goats, hogs, poultry and sheep and 0.2 p.p.m. in liver of cattle, goats, hogs, poultry and sheep to cover residues in food derived from animals fed with crops treated with glyphosate. By virtue of subsection B.15.002(1) of the Food and Drug Regulations, the MRL for other foods is 0.1 p.p.m. This proposed regulatory amendment would increase the MRL for residues of glyphosate, including the metabolite AMPA, in sugar beets, in order to permit the import and sale of food containing these residues. In order to determine whether proposed MRLs are safe, the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), of Health Canada, conducts a dietary risk assessment. An acceptable daily intake (ADI) and/or acute reference dose (ARD) is calculated by applying a safety factor to a no observable adverse effect level or, in appropriate cases, by applying a risk factor which is calculated based on a linear low-dose extrapolation. The potential daily intake (PDI) is calculated from the amount of residue that remains on each imported food when the pest control product is used according to use instructions in the country of origin and the intake of that food from imported sources in the diet. PDIs are established for various Canadian subpopulations and age groups, including infants, toddlers, children, adolescents and adults. Provided the PDI does not exceed the ADI or ARD for any subpopulation or age group, and the lifetime risk is acceptable, the expected residue levels are established as MRLs under the Food and Drugs Act to prevent the sale of food with higher residue levels. Since, in most cases, the PDI is well below the ADI and lifetime risks are very low when MRLs are originally established, additional MRLs for the pest control product may be added in the future. After the review of all available data, the PMRA has determined that an MRL for glyphosate, including the metabolite AMPA, of 10 p.p.m. in sugar beets would not pose an unacceptable health risk to the public. This new MRL harmonizes with the one established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Alternatives Under the Food and Drugs Act, it is prohibited to sell food containing residues of pest control products at a level greater than 0.1 p.p.m. unless a higher MRL has been established in Table II, Division 15, of the Food and Drug Regulations. In the case of glyphosate, establishment of an MRL for sugar beets is necessary to support the import of food containing residues that have been shown to be safe, while at the same time preventing the sale of food with unacceptable residue levels. Benefits and Costs This proposed regulatory amendment will contribute to a safe, abundant and affordable food supply by allowing the importation and sale of food commodities containing acceptable levels of pesticide residues. Some costs may be incurred related to the implementation of analytical methods for analysis of glyphosate, including the metabolite AMPA, in the food mentioned above. Resources required are not expected to result in significant costs to the Government. Consultation Dietary risk assessments conducted by the PMRA are based on internationally recognized risk management principles, which are largely harmonized among member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Individual safety evaluations conducted by the PMRA include a review of the assessments conducted at the international level as part of the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization Food Standards Programme in support of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, as well as MRLs adopted by other national health/regulatory agencies. Compliance and Enforcement Compliance will be monitored through ongoing domestic and/or import inspection programs conducted by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency when the proposed MRL for glyphosate is adopted. Contact Geraldine Graham, Alternative Strategies and Regulatory Affairs Division, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Health Canada, Address Locator 6607D1, 2720 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9, (613) 736-3692 (Telephone), (613) 736-3659 (Facsimile), geraldine_graham@hc-sc.gc.ca (Electronic mail). PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to subsection 30(1) (see footnote b) of the Food and Drugs Act, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations (1348 — Glyphosate). Interested persons may make representations with respect to the proposed Regulations within 75 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 Geraldine Graham, Alternative Strategies and Regulatory Affairs Division, Pest Management Regulatory Agency, Department of Health, Address Locator 6607D1, 2720 Riverside Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9 (tel.: (613) 736-3692; fax: (613) 736-3659; e-mail: geraldine_graham@hc-sc. gc.ca). Persons making representations should identify any of those representations the disclosure of which should be refused under the Access to Information Act, in particular under sections 19 and 20 of that Act, and should indicate the reasons why and the period during which the representations should not be disclosed. They should also identify any representations for which there is consent to disclosure for the purposes of that Act. Ottawa, May 1, 2003 EILEEN BOYD Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council REGULATIONS AMENDING THE FOOD AND DRUG REGULATIONS (1348 — GLYPHOSATE) AMENDMENT 1. The portion of item G.2 of Table II to Division 15 of Part B of the Food and Drug Regulations (see footnote 2) in columns III and IV is replaced by the following:
COMING INTO FORCE 2. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered. [18-1-o] Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate RegulationsStatutory Authority Motor Vehicle Transport Act Sponsoring Department Department of Transport REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT Description The Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate Regulations are new Regulations proposed under amendments to the Motor Vehicle Transport Act 1987 (MVTA). The amended MVTA, which received Royal Assent in June 2001, requires all motor carriers (both truck and bus undertakings), including foreign-based motor carriers, to have a "safety fitness certificate" in order to operate on Canadian roads. The purpose of these Regulations would be to define "safety fitness certificate" and provide a framework to enable provinces and territories to implement, consistently across Canada, a safety rating system for extra-provincial motor carriers. In part, this would be accomplished by incorporating by reference the National Safety Code Standard # 14, Safety Rating. These Regulations would seek to establish a common approach to safety ratings, the goal of which is to ensure that comparable motor carrier safety performance results in a comparable safety rating regardless of jurisdiction (including reciprocal recognition with the U.S.), so that safe motor carriers may compete on a level playing field across Canada, and eventually across North America. These Regulations would improve safety, reduce the risk of commercial vehicle collisions, and promote a fair competitive environment for safe carriers. Under the Regulations, provinces and territories would monitor the safety performance of all extra-provincial motor carriers licenced ("base-plated") in their jurisdiction by maintaining a complete safety compliance profile of each motor carrier, using input from all jurisdictions in which those carriers operate. All carriers would initially receive a Safety Fitness Certificate and be rated "Satisfactory - Unaudited", until such time as their safety performance and/or a facility audit resulted in a rating of "Satisfactory (Audited)", "Conditional", or "Unsatisfactory". A carrier rated "Unsatisfactory" would be prohibited from operating on Canadian roads. These Regulations would repeal the Extra-Provincial Truck Undertaking Licencing Regulations that set out insurance and safety fitness requirements. Background The MVTA Motor carriers whose trucks or buses cross a provincial or territorial border are extra-provincial carriers, and constitutionally come under the jurisdiction of the federal government. The original function of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act was to authorize provinces and territories to regulate extra-provincial truck and bus carriers on behalf of the federal government. In 1987, the MVTA was amended to eliminate the economic regulation of the extra-provincial trucking industry and to substitute a regime based on safety fitness. Subsequent to the 1987 amendments, the federal, provincial and territorial governments committed to ensuring an acceptable level of safety performance by the motor carrier industry, primarily through the mechanism of the National Safety Code for Motor Carriers (NSC). The National Safety Code (NSC) The NSC is comprised of 15 standards covering all aspects of commercial vehicle, driver and motor carrier safety, developed collaboratively by governments and stakeholders under the auspices of the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA). The CCMTA is the key national institution dealing with motor carrier safety regulation. Its committees include federal, provincial and territorial governments and industry, labour and road safety stakeholders. It reports to the Councils of Deputy Ministers and Ministers Responsible for Transportation and Highway Safety. Federal, provincial and territorial governments implement NSC standards by making regulations based on the standards and enforcing those regulations. Because this process allows a degree of flexibility to consider local requirements, it can result in less consistency than is desirable for a national regulatory scheme. National Consistency In concert with the 1987 amendments to the MVTA, the provincial, territorial and federal ministers of transportation and highway safety signed a Memorandum of Understanding Respecting a Federal-Provincial-Territorial Agreement on the Adoption of a National Safety Code for Motor Carriers (1987 MOU). The 1987 MOU recognized "the desirability of establishing uniform standards governing the safe operation of commercial vehicles nationally and internationally". The federal government has provided funding to assist the provinces and territories in implementing the NSC that will total $69 million by March 31, 2004. Since the 1987 MOU, both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Agreement on Internal Trade have come into force and added focus to the requirement for nationally consistent regulation of motor carriers. Commercial vehicle, carrier and driver safety monitoring and management encompasses both Canada and the U.S. and will eventually include Mexico. Efforts have been made to move towards greater harmonization and to reduce duplication of effort. Infractions, regardless of where they occur, would be transmitted to the home jurisdiction for incorporation into their safety rating system and for appropriate action. Throughout the 1990s, as NSC standards evolved and were implemented, it became clear that there were disparities in the adoption, application and/or enforcement of the standards across Canadian jurisdictions. Although some differences were minor and attributable to differences in regional needs, others were considered to have a greater impact on safety risk and on industry competitiveness. For this reason, Transport Canada was determined to improve the consistent adoption and application of the NSC standards, especially those pertaining to motor carrier safety fitness. In October 2000, the Council of Deputy Ministers directed the development of a new MOU aimed at re-energizing the commitment to the national harmonization of motor carrier safety standards. A federal-provincial task force developed a new MOU, based on the original 1987 document and consistent with the 2001 amendments to the MVTA. The new MOU, signed in 2002, formally recognized, inter alia, that harmonized motor carrier rules that were effective, practical and enforceable would provide important safety and economic benefits to Canada. It also acknowledged that such rules should not impede the efficient and economical movement of goods and people. The MOU identified four areas for priority action — hours of service, safety ratings, load securement and the NSC weight threshold — and created a process that formally engages the Councils of Deputies and Ministers in approving new or revised standards. Revision of Standard # 14 (Safety Rating) With these priorities set, CCMTA's Standing Committee on Compliance and Regulatory Affairs (CRA) set about revising Standard # 14, which had already been implemented in some jurisdictions through their own legislation and regulations. A project group, chaired by Transport Canada, revised the standard, which is the basis of the proposed federal regulations. Standard # 14 describes criteria for rating each motor carrier according to its record of safety performance (collisions, convictions, inspections and audits). Each motor carrier is rated by its home or "base" jurisdiction from safety records generated in any jurisdiction in North America in which its vehicles may operate. The regime relies on a system of inter-provincial and international records exchange developed and administered by the CCMTA. Standard # 14 provides that every carrier is assigned a rating, which is publicly available, based on its safety performance. Depending on that performance, a carrier may receive one of four ratings: Satisfactory Unaudited, Satisfactory, Conditional and Unsatisfactory. A carrier that is identified as Conditional would be subject to interventions by the governing jurisdiction (such as letters of warning, facility audits, etc.) A refusal or inability to improve safety performance could result in a carrier receiving an Unsatisfactory Rating and being prohibited from operating. International Agreements Beginning in 1988, a safety rating system was implemented in the U.S. by the Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration, now the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). The Canadian government has undertaken preliminary discussions with the U.S. FMCSA towards the eventual reciprocal recognition of each other's safety rating systems in order to prevent duplication of efforts, to facilitate the flow of goods and people, and to ensure fair competition for safe operators. The discussions have focused on achieving similar principles, not necessarily identical systems. The principles include consistent application of the safety rating system across all participating jurisdictions. Talks have also been ongoing at the North American Free Trade Agreement Land Transportation Subcommittee to harmonize certain basic elements of the safety rating system that would help achieve the national and international objectives set out above (e.g. load securement). 2001 Amendments to the MVTA Following extensive consultations with the provincial and territorial governments and stakeholder groups, Transport Canada amended the MVTA in 2001 to encompass the renewed commitment to develop and harmonize motor carrier safety fitness systems, symbolized by the new MOU, and to reflect the continuing evolution of the NSC. The NSC, in particular Standard # 14, forms the basis of the revised Act. The amendments, which received Royal Assent on June 14, 2001, craft a legislative framework for a regulatory regime focused on the monitoring and assessment of motor carrier safety performance. The amendments create a requirement for a national "safety fitness certificate" for extra-provincial motor carriers, embodying a safety rating issued by the provinces and territories under the authority of the Act, and provide for Ministerial arrangements with foreign governments for the mutual recognition of standards, ratings, and performance assessments. These proposed Regulations and the 2001 amendments to the MVTA are intended to respond to the needs of the federal government, and also the needs expressed by road safety groups, the motor carrier industry and the provincial and territorial jurisdictions. Road safety groups seek confidence in motor carrier safety and a reduction in collisions involving large vehicles. The industry wants a level competitive arena — that all carriers be managed according to a nationally consistent set of requirements. The industry also wants uninterrupted access to foreign markets, which necessitates a system recognized as equivalent to U.S. and, eventually, Mexican systems. The provinces and territories want to optimize the use of their enforcement and administrative resources while maintaining a high level of safety performance in all motor carriers operating in their jurisdictions, and they want to be able to rely on other jurisdictions to implement and enforce safety performance to the same level so there is no disadvantage to its base-plated carriers or increased risk from non-base plated carriers operating in their jurisdictions. Coming Into Force The proposed Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate Regulations are made under section 16.1 of the 2001 amendments to the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987. While the 2001 amendments to the MVTA have received Royal Assent, they are not yet in force. The proposed Regulations would come into force on the date of their registration by the Clerk of the Privy Council once the 2001 amendments to the MVTA have come into force by order of the Governor in Council made pursuant to section 13 of that Act. Alternatives Transport Canada considered a number of alternative approaches in concert with the provincial and territorial jurisdictions and stakeholders through discussions at the CCMTA Compliance and Regulatory Affairs Standing Committee. Option 1 — Status Quo The status quo had become unacceptable to all stakeholders. There was general agreement that national consistency in motor carrier safety ratings systems was desirable from the point of view of the economic competitiveness of the industry, safety performance and international trade. If regulations are not put in place providing for the incorporation by reference of Standard # 14 , the following would likely occur. Federal, provincial and territorial jurisdictions, which had begun to implement the standard in anticipation of the changes to the MVTA and consequent regulations, would likely continue to develop Standard # 14 and implement it across most jurisdictions. However, this would take longer to implement, and result in inconsistencies, possibly resulting in delays in reciprocal recognition agreements of safety ratings with the U.S. and Mexico, and continued costs to safe motor carriers competing with unsafe motor carriers. Potentially, the number and severity of collisions involving commercial vehicles would continue to decline marginally, on average, following the trend over the last decade. Option 2 — Encouraging voluntary application of the standard by jurisdictions Reaching consistency through the voluntary application of the standard by the provinces and territories was considered, but in view of past difficulties in achieving consistency, the Department and several key stakeholders believe that federal regulations are necessary to provide national leadership to jurisdictions. Consistency is a hallmark of the revisions to the MVTA, and a regulatory approach was determined to provide the most effective means of achieving the objectives of the Act. Option 3 — Adopting the U.S. safety ratings model Although the U.S. safety ratings system is fundamentally similar to that described in Standard # 14, it is administered federally. Because the responsibility for motor carrier safety in Canada is shared between the federal and provincial/territorial governments, adopting the U.S. model would not have been appropriate. However, in developing the standard, the jurisdictions have taken into consideration, and have often mirrored, many elements of the U.S. approach with a view to facilitating and harmonizing motor carrier movements throughout North America, and to facilitate future reciprocal recognition. Option 4 — Re-establishing federal authority over extra-provincial motor carrier safety The MVTA continues to delegate the authority to regulate extra-provincial motor carriers to the provincial and territorial governments. Reclaiming federal authority over extra-provincial carriers would be onerous to many parties for several reasons. Provincial and territorial governments would perceive repatriating this federal authority as an intrusion into longstanding provincial and territorial powers. Authority over extra-provincial carriers was delegated to the provincial and territorial level by virtue of the 1954 MVTA mainly because all other (intra-provincial) carriers are regulated at that level. Centralizing this authority would require considerable duplication of effort at the federal level of resources for administration, regulation, monitoring and enforcement, and would create a two-tier system for extra-provincial and intra-provincial motor carriers. Provincial and territorial governments have the infrastructure, resources and legal structure in place to undertake this responsibility — the federal government would have to create it. Benefits and Costs The adoption of the proposed Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate Regulations would have considerable beneficial effects on road safety and motor carrier competitiveness. An analysis of the proposed regulations, undertaken by a consultant on behalf of Transport Canada, indicates that the benefit-cost ratio, given various possible assumptions, would be no less than 3.8:1, and could reach 37.6:1. Benefits were based on reductions in road collisions. Costs were defined as those incurred by provinces and territories to implement the proposed Regulations, and those incurred by motor carriers as a result of facility audits. The proposed changes are not expected to affect market technological change, inflation, employment or the environment. It is expected that the proposed Regulations would enhance the potential for reciprocal recognition with other North American motor carrier safety regimes. The proposed regulations were motivated in part by the desire of motor carriers for fairer competition, and it is expected that the regulations would enable a more level playing field, where all motor carriers would be expected to maintain a minimum level of safety performance to operate. The proposed Regulations could create a larger market for third party auditor services in those jurisdictions that allow accredited outside parties to perform facility audits. In effect, the impact of these proposed Regulations would be difficult to distinguish from the impact of implementing Standard # 14, which, although incorporated into the Regulations by reference, is not in and of itself a federal document. It is developed under the auspices of the CCMTA and, as such, belongs to that organization and collectively to its members. Environmental Impact These Regulations will have no impact on the environment. Consultation These proposed Regulations have been developed in concert with the CCMTA's Safety Fitness Project Group and the Compliance and Regulatory Affairs Standing Committee (CRA). As such, these consultations have included all provincial and territorial governments, as well as motor carrier industry groups such as the Canadian Trucking Alliance, labour organizations such as Teamsters Canada, the U.S. Department of Transportation, and public safety advocates such as Canadians for Responsible and Safe Highways. The Project Group and the CRA met, on average, twice a year from 1998 to 2002 to develop the safety fitness standard and to discuss the proposed regulations that were to be based on the standard. All parties consulted expressed support for the safety fitness standard and regulations based on that standard. Comments on the proposed Regulations will be accepted during the 75-day consultation period that will follow the publication of this proposal in the Canada Gazette, Part I. All responses will be taken into consideration in the development of the final Regulations. Compliance and Enforcement Provincial and territorial governments are responsible for ensuring that their safety ratings systems comply with the requirements of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act. Transport Canada will monitor the implementation and enforcement of Standard # 14 and the Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate Regulations through the meetings and discussions of the appropriate CCMTA standing committees, through annual reports provided by the provinces as required by NSC funding agreements, and through occasional studies on implementation and consistency as may be undertaken by the department. Provisions have been made in the MVTA to sanction jurisdictions that do not adhere to the Regulations by revoking their authority to issue safety fitness certificates, without which motor carriers cannot operate. Contact Brian Orrbine, Chief, Motor Carrier Group, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate, Transport Canada, 330 Sparks Street, Tower C, 8th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5, (613) 990-8855 (Telephone), (613) 990-2912 (Facsimile), orrbinb@tc.gc.ca (Electronic mail). For copies of National Safety Code Standard # 14, Safety Rating, please contact the Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate, Transport Canada, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5, (613) 998-8616 or 1-800-333-0371 (Telephone), (613) 990-2913 (Facsimile), regsclerkcommis@tc.gc.ca (Internet address). [18-1-o] PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to section 16.1 (see footnote c) of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act (see footnote d) , proposes to make the annexed Motor Carrier Safety Fitness Certificate Regulations. Interested persons may make representations with respect to the proposed Regulations to the Minister of Transport within 75 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 sent to Brian Orrbine, Chief, Motor Carriers, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate, Department of Transport, Place de Ville, Tower C, 8th Floor, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5. (Tel.: (613) 990-8855; fax: (613) 990-2912) Persons making representations should identify any of those representations the disclosure of which should be refused under the Access to Information Act, in particular under sections 19 and 20 of that Act, and should indicate the reasons why and the period during which the representations should not be disclosed. They should also identify any representations for which there is consent to disclosure for the purposes of that Act. Ottawa, May 1, 2003 EILEEN BOYD Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY FITNESS CERTIFICATE REGULATIONS INTERPRETATION 1. The definitions in this section apply in these Regulations. "Act" means the Motor Vehicle Transport Act. (Loi) "safety fitness certificate" means a safety fitness certificate issued under section 7 of the Act. (certificat d'aptitude à la sécurité) "NSC Standard #14" means the National Safety Code for Motor Carriers, Standard #14— Safety Rating, as amended from time to time. (norme no 14 du CCS) APPLICATION 2. These Regulations apply to (a) provincial authorities that issue safety fitness certificates to extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings; and (b) extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings. ISSUANCE OF SAFETY FITNESS CERTIFICATES 3. A provincial authority may issue a safety fitness certificate to a person or body to operate an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that operates one or more of the following vehicles: (a) a truck, tractor or trailer, or any combination of these vehicles, that has a registered gross vehicle weight exceeding, or that weighs more than, 4,500 kg; or (b) a bus that is designed, constructed and used for the transportation of passengers and that has a designated seating capacity of more than 10 persons, including the driver, if it is operated for purposes other than personal use. 4. For the purpose of subsection 7(1) of the Act, a permit issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation to a motor carrier undertaking based in the U.S. or in another foreign state to operate in interstate commerce is an analogous document. RESPONSIBILITY OF PROVINCIAL AUTHORITIES WITH RESPECT TO EXTRA-PROVINCIAL MOTOR CARRIER UNDERTAKINGS 5. Each provincial authority must (a) issue a unique National Safety Code number to each extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking; and (b) develop and maintain, for every extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that is based in the province and that holds a safety fitness certificate, a motor carrier profile that contains the information set out in section 2 of Part C of NSC Standard # 14. 6. Before issuing a safety fitness certificate to an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking, a provincial authority must, for the purpose of determining its fitness, assign a safety rating to that extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking in accordance with the process set out in section 3 of Part C of NSC Standard # 14. APPLYING FOR A SAFETY FITNESS CERTIFICATE 7. (1) A provincial authority may not issue a safety fitness certificate to an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking unless the provincial authority has obtained the information and documents set out in section 4 of Part C of NSC Standard # 14. A provincial authority may require the extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking to provide the information and documents. (2) An extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that applies for a safety fitness certificate must provide to the provincial authority, subject to subsection (3), written proof that it holds the minimum liability insurance coverage and endorsement referred to in section 8. (3) The extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking may provide to the provincial authority written proof of an undertaking to purchase the minimum liability insurance coverage, instead of the proof of minimum liability insurance coverage. (4) An extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that has provided proof of an undertaking to purchase the liability insurance must provide to the provincial authority written proof of coverage before it will be issued a safety fitness certificate. INSURANCE FOR EXTRA-PROVINCIAL TRUCK UNDERTAKINGS 8. (1) A provincial authority may not issue a safety fitness certificate to an extra-provincial truck undertaking unless it has written proof that the undertaking holds the minimum liability insurance coverage and endorsement referred to in subsections (2) to (4). (2) In order to cover bodily injury to or death of any person or loss of or damage to property of other persons, other than cargo, an extra-provincial truck undertaking must hold the following minimum liability insurance coverage: (a) $1,000,000 for each motor vehicle; and (b) $2,000,000 for each motor vehicle used to transport dangerous goods (i) that are set out in column 2 of Schedule 1 to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations, in the quantities referred to in column 7 of that Schedule to those Regulations, and (ii) in respect of which an emergency response assistance plan is required to be filed with the Minister or a designated person, pursuant to Part 7 of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations. (3) An extra-provincial truck undertaking must ensure that the insurance policy contains an endorsement stating that, at least 15 days before the policy is cancelled or changed or lapses, the insurer agrees to notify the provincial authority with which the written proof of the insurance policy was filed of (a) the cancellation or non-renewal of the policy; or (b) any change in the policy that results in the policy no longer providing the minimum liability insurance coverage. (4) An extra-provincial truck undertaking must immediately notify the provincial authority with which the written proof of the insurance policy was filed of any change in the policy, or of any notification by the insurer that the policy will be changed, so that it no longer provides or will no longer provide the minimum liability insurance coverage. SAFETY RATING CATEGORIES 9. A provincial authority may not issue a safety fitness certificate to an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking unless the provincial authority has determined that the undertaking has a "satisfactory", "satisfactory unaudited" or "conditional" safety rating, as set out in section 5 of Part C of NSC Standard # 14. REPEAL 10. The Extra-Provincial Truck Undertaking Licencing Regulations (see footnote 3) are repealed. COMING INTO FORCE 11. These Regulations come into force on the day on which An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, chapter 13 of the Statutes of Canada, 2001, comes into force. [18-1-o] S.C. 1999, c. 33, s. 347 C.R.C., c. 870 S.C. 1999, c. 33, s. 347 C.R.C., c. 870 S.C. 2001, c. 13, s. 6 R.S., c. 29 (3rd Supp.); S.C. 2001, c. 13, s. 1 SOR/88-46 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NOTICE:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
