Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 154, Number 51: Regulations Amending the Hazardous Products Regulations (GHS, Seventh Revised Edition)

December 19, 2020

Statutory authority
Hazardous Products Act

Sponsoring department
Department of Health

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations or the Order.)

Executive summary

Issues

On February 11, 2015, the Hazardous Products Regulations and the amendments to the Hazardous Products Act incorporating the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), fifth revised edition, for workplace hazardous products, came into force. This fulfilled the Canada – United States Regulatory Cooperation Council commitment to align and synchronize implementation of common classification and labelling requirements for workplace hazardous products.

The GHS is continually revised by the United Nations every two years. Since the publication of the Hazardous Products Regulations, updates and improvements have been made to the GHS. The seventh revised edition was published in 2017 and it includes the updates made to the GHS in its sixth and seventh revised editions. The updates made to the GHS between the fifth and seventh revised editions include revised criteria for the classification of Flammable Gases, amended definitions of terms used in some health hazard classes, new information elements required on safety data sheets, and additional or revised precautionary statements for certain hazard classes and categories or subcategories. The seventh revised edition provides increased worker health and safety benefits and protections compared to the fifth revised edition, as it allows for more precise classifications of some products (for example Flammable Gas products), and for workplace hazardous products in general. It also provides more comprehensive and more detailed information on labels and safety data sheets. Incorporating the seventh revised edition in Canada would allow workers to better protect themselves against the hazards posed by products that they use and handle in their workplaces.

Under the Canada – United States Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Forward Plan, one of the objectives of the Work Plan for workplace hazardous products is to coordinate the adoption of updates to the GHS. To achieve this international commitment, Canada and the United States (U.S.) have publicly committed to coordinate, to the extent possible, amendments to their respective regulations and align them with the seventh revised edition of the GHS. Coordinated amendments would avoid the economic costs of misalignment.

As announced in spring 2020 at the website of the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and the Office of Management and Budget, the United States are amending their Hazard Communication Standard to adopt the seventh revised edition of the GHS. Therefore, not amending the Hazardous Products Regulations would result in inconsistencies between the Canadian and United States regulations once the amended U.S. Hazard Communication Standard comes into force. These inconsistencies would require Canadian suppliers to evaluate and classify their products against two sets of standards and, for some products, maintain two sets of labels and safety data sheets to be able to market their products in both countries. This would result in increased costs for the chemical industry and other businesses who sell or import hazardous products intended for workplace use. In addition, if the Canadian regulations were not amended, Canadian customers purchasing hazardous products from U.S. suppliers might be charged higher prices since, for products classified in specific hazard classes where the information requirements would end up being different, U.S. suppliers would need to prepare specialized labels and safety data sheets for the Canadian market. Alternatively, some U.S. suppliers could decide to leave the Canadian market due to the misaligned requirements. Adopting the requirements of the seventh revised edition of the GHS in Canada would have significant, positive trade benefits as a result of the common labelling and safety data sheet requirements for workplace hazardous products. These trade benefits would be optimized if the timing of the coming into force of the amended Canadian regulations is aligned with that of the United States, so as to minimize disruption to industry.

Finally, there are several issues that have been identified by Health Canada and stakeholders since the Hazardous Products Regulations came into force. A number of other amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations are proposed to provide greater clarity or additional precision to specific provisions or to better reflect the original intent of specific provisions, as well as to address administrative updates.

Background

The Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) is Canada’s national hazard communication standard with regard to workplace hazardous products. The key elements of the system are hazard classification, cautionary labelling of containers, the provision of safety data sheets, and worker education and training programs. This national system, which has been in place since 1988, is implemented through interlocking federal, provincial and territorial legislation. At the federal level, the Hazardous Products Act and the Hazardous Products Regulations require suppliers of hazardous products intended for use, handling or storage in Canadian workplaces to classify and provide hazard information through labels and safety data sheets. At the workplace level, federal, provincial and territorial occupational safety and health Acts and regulations set out requirements for employers. These employer WHMIS requirements help ensure that hazardous products in the workplace are properly labelled, safety data sheets are made available to workers, and workers receive education and training on the safe storage, handling, disposal and use of hazardous products in the workplace.

As indicated in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement for the Hazardous Products Regulations (published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on February 11, 2015), numerous new or reformulated workplace hazardous products enter the Canadian market every year. This is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of hazardous products already offered for sale to, and in use in, Canadian workplaces. According to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s Trade Data Online, the Canadian chemical manufacturing sector imported more than $34 billion worth of chemicals from the United States in 2018 and exported more than $30 billion to the United States. These trade volumes represent only a small fraction of the total value of products used in Canada to which the WHMIS legislation applies. For instance, these figures do not include all imports and exports from the petroleum, natural gas, mining and metal sectors.

In response to the challenges faced by suppliers, employers and workers due to the lack of international alignment in the classification, labelling and provision of safety information for workplace hazardous products, Canada, the United States and other countries worked together under the auspices of the United Nations to develop the GHS. The GHS is a common, internationally consistent approach for the classification of chemicals according to their hazards and the communication of hazard information through labels and safety data sheets. The first edition of the GHS “Purple Book” was published by the United Nations in 2003. The United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the GHS is responsible for maintaining and updating the GHS, promoting its implementation and providing additional guidance as needs arise. Since the publication of the first edition in 2003, the United Nations Secretariat has been regularly updating and preparing consolidated revised editions of the GHS every two years.

In February 2011, Canada and the United States jointly announced the creation of the Regulatory Cooperation Council. Its key objective is the facilitation of trade between the two countries. In December 2011, one of 29 initiatives announced as part of the Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Action Plan was the coordinated implementation of the GHS for workplace hazardous products. Specifically, Canada and the United States agreed to align and synchronize the implementation of common classification and labelling requirements for workplace hazardous products within the mandate of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and Health Canada, without reducing the level of safety or protection for workers.

On February 11, 2015, the Government of Canada fulfilled this commitment through the publication of the Hazardous Products Regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part II, which, in addition to the amendments made to the Hazardous Products Act under the Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 1, modified WHMIS to incorporate the GHS for workplace hazardous products. The former Controlled Products Regulations were repealed and replaced by the Hazardous Products Regulations on the date of their publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II. The new system is referred to as “WHMIS 2015.”

Building on the achievements accomplished under the initial Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Action Plan, a second phase of regulatory cooperation was initiated in August 2014 with the launch of the Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Forward Plan. To increase the benefits to Canadian workers with respect to health and safety and meet Canada’s continued international commitments, Health Canada is proposing to amend the Hazardous Products Regulations to adopt the updates made to the GHS in its sixth and seventh revised editions by aligning with the seventh revised edition of the GHS. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration is also moving forward with similar proposed amendments to its Hazard Communication Standard.

Objective

The main objective of this proposal is to meet an international commitment under the Canada – United States Regulatory Cooperation Council to align with the United States in the adoption of the seventh revised edition of the GHS. These proposed amendments would help to ensure continued alignment with the United States, thereby facilitating trade through common hazard communication requirements, while increasing the benefits to Canadian workers with respect to health and safety. A secondary objective is to address issues identified by Health Canada and stakeholders since the coming into force of the Hazardous Products Regulations in February 2015. Specifically, this objective includes clarifying or adding precision to certain provisions (without changes to the scope or application of these provisions). In addition, the secondary objective includes making substantive changes that include corrections and amendments to other provisions, as well as revising the criteria or requirements to better reflect the original intent of these provisions. These proposed amendments would also provide increased benefits to Canadian workers with respect to health and safety in the form of greater clarity or more appropriate criteria and requirements.

Description

Under the authority of the Hazardous Products Act, Health Canada is proposing to amend the Hazardous Products Regulations to

• 1. align the Hazardous Products Regulations with the seventh revised edition of the GHS;
• 2. clarify, add precision to, or make changes to certain provisions;
• 3. correct and amend certain provisions to better reflect their original intent; and
• 4. make administrative updates to the Hazardous Products Regulations.

1. Align the Hazardous Products Regulations with the seventh revised edition of the GHS

The proposed amendments include the following (for provisions that the Department is proposing to repeal, a brief rationale is provided):

• Change the definition of the term GHS to refer to the seventh revised edition instead of the fifth revised edition;
• Subdivide Flammable Gases – Category 1 (extremely flammable gases) into subcategories 1A and 1B and repeal Subpart 19 of Part 7. Subcategory 1A would include pyrophoric gases (currently covered in a separate hazard class in Subpart 19 of Part 7 of the Hazardous Products Regulations) as well as chemically unstable gases. Subcategory 1B would include flammable gases that are not pyrophoric or chemically unstable, but have a lower flammability hazard than those of Subcategory 1A;
• Add new definitions for chemically unstable gas and pyrophoric gas;
• Repeal two provisions in Part 3 of the Hazardous Products Regulations (Labelling) that would no longer be required as a result of the proposed changes to the Flammable Gases hazard class (these provisions were originally included because the name of this hazard class was not aligned with that in the GHS, fifth revised edition);
• Change the name of the Flammable Aerosols hazard class to Aerosols and adopt a new Category 3, which addresses non-flammable aerosols;
• Remove the definition of flammable aerosol;
• Add a new provision to indicate that products classified in the Aerosols hazard class need not be classified in any category of the Gases Under Pressure hazard class;
• Repeal two provisions in Part 3 that were originally included to prevent duplicative hazard statements being required for hazardous products that meet the criteria to be classified as both Flammable Aerosols and Gases Under Pressure (with the addition of the new provision concerning these two hazard classes, these provisions would no longer be required);
• Expand the classification criteria for Oxidizing Solids to reflect the addition of a new test procedure;
• Amend the definitions of the following terms to align with updates made to these definitions in the GHS (seventh revised edition): acute toxicity, skin corrosion, skin irritation, serious eye damage, eye irritation, respiratory sensitization, skin sensitization and reproductive toxicity;
• Add new definitions for germ cell mutagenicity and carcinogenicity;
• Amend the classification criteria for Skin Corrosion to refer to corrosive effects “in at least one animal” instead of “in at least one of three animals”;
• Amend item 9 of Schedule 1 to the Hazardous Products Regulations to add new information elements concerning the physical and chemical properties of hazardous products; and
• Repeal paragraph 14(f) of Schedule 1 to the Hazardous Products Regulations. The wording of this item was updated in the GHS (seventh revised edition) to address solid, liquid and gaseous products that are transported as bulk cargoes. However, the updated wording does not clearly specify which International Maritime Organization instruments must be complied with, and information relating to transport in bulk is optional information. Therefore, it is proposed that paragraph 14(f) of Schedule 1 be repealed.

2. Clarify, add precision to, or make changes to certain provisions

The proposed amendments, which would not change the scope or application of the affected provisions, include the following:

• Clarify that, for each classification table of each hazard class, a product, mixture, material or substance must be classified in the most severe hazard category or subcategory for which it meets the criteria;
• Clarify that animal studies are not to be used for product classification if the mechanism or mode of action of the substance or mixture in the animal study is not applicable to humans;
• Amend the provisions concerning required supplemental hazard statements for substances and mixtures that, when in contact with water, emit a toxic gaseous substance (Water-Activated Toxicants), to clarify that the selection of the appropriate statement is based on the toxicity of the emitted gaseous substance;
• Clarify the label exemptions for laboratory samples that undergo a transfer of possession without transfer of ownership;
• Clarify the exemptions that may be applied in situations where hazardous products are sold to an employer who has filed a confidential business information claim;
• Specify and add precision to the procedure to be followed for Flammable Gases when classification is based on a scientifically validated calculation method;
• Make several amendments to add precision to the classification procedures for mixtures in the following hazard classes: Organic Peroxides, Acute Toxicity and Specific Target Organ Toxicity – Single Exposure – Category 3; and
• Specify that for health hazard classes that include both categories and subcategories, mixtures may be classified in a subcategory when there are sufficient data available to enable the determination of the appropriate subcategory for the mixture.

3. Correct and amend certain provisions to better reflect their original intent

The proposed amendments would change the scope of the affected provisions, thereby resulting in a change in hazard classification criteria or hazard communication requirements:

• Amend Part 4 of the Hazardous Products Regulations (Safety Data Sheets) to indicate that provisions in Part 3 that allow the combining of hazard statements and precautionary statements, as well as the omission of non-applicable precautionary statements, also apply to safety data sheets;
• Amend Part 4 of the Hazardous Products Regulations to indicate that exemptions in Part 3 that allow reduced information to be displayed on a label (specific rules concerning signal words, hazard statements, and symbols) also apply to safety data sheets;
• Allow for the use of narrower concentration ranges that fall within the concentration ranges prescribed for the disclosure of hazardous ingredients on safety data sheets;
• Amend the provisions concerning significant new data to specify that, when a supplier is required to provide, obtain or prepare a written document, the written document must provide the changes to the safety data sheet and/or label that result from the significant new data, rather than the new studies or data themselves;
• Amend the classification criteria for Self-Heating Substances and Mixtures to better align with the specified test method;
• Make a correction to the classification criteria for Organic Peroxides – Type G to change the criteria of self-accelerating decomposition temperature from “60^oC to 75^oC” to “60^oC or higher” when evaluated in a 50 kg package. This correction may result in some organic peroxide products being newly classified as Organic Peroxides — Type G;
• Make a correction to the classification criteria for Combustible Dusts – Category 1 to remove the phrase “or another oxidizing medium.” This correction is not anticipated to have any impact on the classification of products as Combustible Dusts – Category 1;
• Amend a provision concerning substances and mixtures that, as sold or imported, meet the criteria to be classified under Acute Toxicity – Inhalation and are also Water-Activated Toxicants to indicate that classification is based on the toxicity of the substance or mixture as sold or imported. As per the current Hazardous Products Regulations, a supplemental hazard statement based on the toxicity of the emitted gaseous substance is required and this would continue to be required for Water-Activated Toxicants, after the amendment;
• Amend a provision concerning substances and mixtures, which, as sold or imported, do not meet the criteria to be classified under Acute Toxicity – Inhalation, but are Water-Activated Toxicants, to indicate that the hazard statement “Fatal/toxic/harmful if inhaled” is not required. As per the current Hazardous Products Regulations, a supplemental hazard statement based on the toxicity of the emitted gaseous substance is required and would continue to be required for Water-Activated Toxicants, after the amendment;
• Make a correction to the classification criteria for Reproductive Toxicity – Category 2 to specify that, to support classification of a substance or mixture in this category, adverse effects observed in humans or animals must not be considered to be a secondary non-specific consequence of other toxic effects. This correction is expected to result in the re-evaluation of some products and it is possible that some products, previously classified in Reproductive Toxicity – Category 2, could end up no longer classified in this hazard class and category;
• Amend item 2 of Schedule 1 to the Hazardous Products Regulations to indicate that relevant provisions, set out in Part 3 (Labelling), also apply to safety data sheets. These provisions address the use of codes or instructions, as well as the hazard information elements required to be provided for hazardous products classified in certain hazard classes and categories or subcategories; and
• Amend item 3 of Schedule 1 to the Hazardous Products Regulations to specify that all hazardous ingredients which are present in a mixture at concentrations above the relevant cut-off levels must be disclosed, regardless of whether the hazardous ingredient contributes to the classification of the mixture as a hazardous product.

4. Make administrative updates to the Hazardous Products Regulations

There are several minor amendments that are being proposed to update the references in the Hazardous Products Regulations to the United Nations document entitled the “Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods: Manual of Tests and Criteria.” In addition, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard number 10156 was updated in 2017. ISO 10156:2010 is referenced in two provisions in the Hazardous Products Regulations and this needs to be updated to “ISO 10156:2017.” Furthermore, as a result of the Regulations Amending the Hazardous Products Regulations that were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II on April 18, 2018, two provisions need to be updated to refer to the new section 4.4.1 of the Hazardous Products Regulations that was introduced by the 2018 amendment.

In addition, the Department is also proposing an order to amend Schedule 2 to the Hazardous Products Act, which lists the hazard classes. The following amendments are proposed in order to align with the seventh revised edition of the GHS:

• Amend item 3 “Flammable aerosols” to “Aerosols” to reflect the name change of the hazard class; and
• Repeal item 19 “Pyrophoric gases,” as these gases are proposed for inclusion under subcategory 1A of the Flammable Gases hazard class.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Over the years, Health Canada has consulted on a regular basis with WHMIS partners and stakeholders on the GHS and its implementation for workplace hazardous products. Consultations have been conducted by engaging the Intergovernmental WHMIS Coordinating Committee, which is made up of representatives of federal, provincial and territorial occupational safety and health government agencies, as well as the WHMIS multi-stakeholder Current Issues Committee, which is made up of federal, provincial and territorial representatives and representatives from suppliers, employers, and worker organizations.

The current regulatory proposal has been discussed at four Current Issues Committee meetings held during 2018 – 2019. In May 2018, Health Canada presented an overview of the regulatory proposal to the Current Issues Committee and subsequently distributed a complete list of the proposed amendments.

Over the course of 2018, Health Canada also distributed two questionnaires to the supplier representatives on the Current Issues Committee to collect data on the anticipated costs associated with the proposed amendments. Their responses provided data to assist Health Canada in quantifying the expected costs, including costs related to product re-evaluation and reclassification, making revisions to labels and safety data sheets and, for suppliers who are also employers, making changes to WHMIS training programs.

In general, there was a large variability in the cost estimates provided by industry. Some representatives replied that the estimated costs would be in the range of approximately $100,000 to $650,000. However, other representatives of industry associations cited estimated costs, per company, in the millions of dollars. The estimated costs associated with the proposed amendments are summarized below in the “Benefits and Costs” section.

To collect additional quantitative data on the estimated costs associated with the proposed regulatory amendments, a third, more detailed questionnaire was distributed to the Current Issues Committee supplier representatives in April 2019, as part of the cost-benefit analysis. The Current Issues Committee supplier representatives distributed the questionnaire to their member companies. It included questions on the estimated costs of re-evaluating products, reclassifying products, revising labels, revising safety data sheets, training workers and managers, and other miscellaneous costs. A more targeted questionnaire was distributed to representatives of the animal feed industry in January 2020. This survey focused on questions concerning the estimated costs of revising labels and safety data sheets for animal feed products. Both surveys provided an opportunity for respondents to convey their comments to Health Canada with regard to the proposed regulatory amendments.

The data received in the completed questionnaires from April 2019 and January 2020 were extrapolated to the national level and a total national cost of $61.5 million to Canadian businesses was estimated. Further details are provided below in the “Benefits and Costs” section.

All respondents to the April 2019 questionnaire indicated that they were in favour of Health Canada’s regulatory proposal to continue to align the Hazardous Products Regulations with the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard. For the January 2020 questionnaire, four animal feed companies responded, but they did not provide any comments to Health Canada with regard to whether they supported the regulatory proposal. Both small and large companies who responded to the April 2019 questionnaire recognized that the one-time costs associated with making revisions to labels and safety data sheets to meet the requirements of the proposed amendments would be outweighed, over the longer term, by the ongoing savings resulting from having the same classification and hazard communication system as in the United States.

The support from businesses who responded to the April 2019 questionnaire is contingent upon aligning the timing of the Hazardous Products Regulations amendments with that of the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard 2012 amendments, to the extent possible, and businesses having sufficient time (i.e. at least two years) to make the necessary changes to product classifications, labels and safety data sheets.

Employers and worker organizations also support the regulatory proposal, as the proposed amendments would increase the benefits to Canadian workers with respect to health and safety. Employers and worker organizations want to ensure that worker health and safety protections are maintained or expanded (not reduced) through continued alignment with the United States.

The provinces and territories are also supportive of the proposal to amend the Hazardous Products Regulations to align with the GHS (seventh revised edition), as well as the other proposed amendments. Their primary concern is ensuring that current worker protections are not reduced through regulatory alignment. Some provincial representatives indicated that amendments to federal, provincial and territorial occupational safety and health legislation and regulations might be required as a result of the proposed amendments. The provinces and territories indicated that they would require time to transition to the proposed amendments to help ensure consistency across the country.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

As the Hazardous Products Regulations apply nationally, the proposed amendments would take effect in all areas of modern treaties. However, the proposed amendments would have no foreseeable impacts specifically on Indigenous peoples or laws as this proposal pertains to the requirements related to the classification of hazards found in hazardous products and the communication of health and safety information on labels and safety data sheets.

Instrument choice

In consideration that Health Canada has already incorporated and implemented the GHS (fifth revised edition) in the Hazardous Products Regulations, only regulatory options were considered. Non-regulatory options such as voluntary industry compliance through guidance would create confusion as this would not be consistent with current regulatory requirements. The following two regulatory options were considered:

Option 1. Status quo – Retain the fifth revised edition of the GHS in the Hazardous Products Regulations (no adoption of the seventh revised edition)

Having the Hazardous Products Regulations continue to be based on the fifth revised edition of the GHS would fail to benefit Canadian employers and workers from the health and safety advantages afforded by the improved global standard for classifying workplace hazardous products.

Furthermore, the United States, which is Canada’s largest trading partner, is in the process of moving forward with the adoption of the seventh revised edition. If Canada were not to proceed with the proposed amendments, in addition to not meeting Canada’s international commitment under the Regulatory Cooperation Council, it would create costs for industry due to eventual misalignment.

Option 2. Adopt the seventh revised edition of the GHS in alignment with the United States to the degree possible within Canada’s legal and health and safety frameworks

In consideration of the importance of implementing the seventh revised edition of the GHS while at the same time ensuring no loss of current worker protections in Canada, this option is recommended. This option would allow Health Canada to include additional necessary provisions but would also help to ensure that Canada remains in alignment with the United States, to the extent possible, in terms of the manner in which workplace hazardous products (or hazardous chemicals, as known in the United States) are classified and hazards are communicated. This would also provide additional assurances that more comprehensive and more detailed health and safety information will be provided to Canadian employers and workers.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

Taking into consideration the cost estimates provided by industry associations in response to two questionnaires distributed by Health Canada during 2018, this regulatory proposal was determined to have a significant cost and, therefore, a full cost-benefit analysis was conducted. This cost-benefit analysis characterized the quantitative costs and qualitative benefits of the implementation of the seventh revised edition of the GHS.

Cost of the regulatory proposal

If approved, the regulatory proposal would impose costs on suppliers who sell or import hazardous products intended for use, handling or storage in Canadian workplaces. For Canadian suppliers who sell products in both Canada and the United States, these costs would be incurred anyway, regardless of the proposed amendments to the Canadian regulations, given the adoption of the seventh revised edition by the United States. Therefore, the described costs should be considered as an estimate of the upper boundary of costs, rather than as the actual incremental costs that could be associated with the proposed Regulations. The incremental costs may be considerably less than the described costs (“incremental” refers to costs that suppliers would face due to the proposed regulatory amendments that are over and above the costs they would face in the absence of regulatory amendments).

To gather data on the anticipated costs, a questionnaire was distributed to industry stakeholders through correspondence with seven supplier associations that are members of the WHMIS Current Issues Committee. These supplier associations have well over 200 core members and additional affiliate members focused in the sectors responsible for supplying and using workplace hazardous products in Canada. A modified version of the questionnaire was distributed to representatives of the animal feed industry.

Assumptions made for the cost-benefit analysis include the following:

• the amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations would come into force at the beginning of 2021, with a two-year transition period;
• suppliers would have two years (spanning 2021 and 2022) to bring product classifications, safety data sheets and labels into compliance with the proposed amendments;
• apart from official language requirements and other variances between the Hazardous Products Regulations and the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard that have existed since 2015, suppliers who import hazardous products from the United States would not need to make changes to product classifications, labels, or safety data sheets;
• distributors would not need to make changes to product classifications, labels or safety data sheets because the changes would be made by manufacturers or importers of hazardous products;
• employers would begin to train production workers and managers in 2021 and this would continue until the end of 2022;
• there would be no incremental costs to government; and
• economic benefits and worker health and safety benefits would begin in 2023.

Twenty completed questionnaires were received from individual companies that are expected to be generally representative of companies that manufacture, sell or import a range of hazardous products. These completed questionnaires provided data on the expected costs of the proposed amendments, including monetized estimates of the costs associated with re-evaluating products, reclassifying products as necessary, revising labels, revising safety data sheets, and training workers and managers. Various other costs were also captured, including costs of updating computer systems, making updates to existing confidential business information claims, filing new confidential business information claims, relabelling existing stocks of products, and disposing of unused labels that would no longer be compliant.

The following business sectors are expected to be among the most impacted initially by this regulatory proposal:

• mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction;
• petroleum and coal product manufacturing;
• chemical manufacturing;
• plastics and rubber products manufacturing;
• non-metallic mineral product manufacturing;
• primary metal manufacturing; and
• animal feed manufacturing.

In addition, it is anticipated that initial costs will be faced by all workplaces where hazardous products are used, handled or stored, because workers and managers would need to be trained on the changes to the WHMIS system resulting from the proposed amendments. At the same time, employers would be likely to see accrued benefits as a result of workers receiving more comprehensive and more detailed hazard communication information and consequently, fewer workplace injuries and illnesses.

To develop the total national cost estimate for Canadian businesses, the questionnaire responses were used to estimate the cost associated with each type of incremental expense that would be incurred as a result of the proposed regulatory amendments. With regard to the cost of revising safety data sheets, based on the responses from companies who provided data, three cost estimates were applied, including a low-end estimate, a central (most likely) estimate, and a high-end estimate. These estimates were the following:

• a low-end estimate of $40 per safety data sheet;
• a central (most likely) estimate of $85 per safety data sheet; and
• a high-end estimate of $130 per safety data sheet.

It was noted that some safety data sheets would not cost much to revise while others would cost more, depending on the extent of revisions required and on whether computer systems, in-house resources or outsourced approaches are used to make the required changes. The central (most likely) cost estimate was used (i.e. the average cost of revising a safety data sheet was calculated to be $85), and it was estimated that approximately 205 000 safety data sheets would need to be revised in Canada in 2021.^{footnote 1} Using this information, a national one-time cost estimate associated with revising safety data sheets of $17.4 million was calculated.

A similar approach was used to develop the national cost estimate associated with revising labels. There were no data available to estimate the total number of labels in Canada that would need to be revised. Therefore, for this calculation, the cost-benefit analysis identified the questionnaires where respondents provided estimates of the cost of revising a safety data sheet and label, and the total number of safety data sheets and labels that their business would need to revise. Based on the responses to the April 2019 survey provided by individual companies, the total cost of safety data sheet revisions for these businesses was estimated to be $5.1 million and the total cost of label revisions was estimated to be $3.6 million. This suggests that label revision costs are approximately 28% less than safety data sheet revision costs. Therefore, it was assumed that label revision costs are approximately 28% less than safety data sheet revision costs. Using the central (most likely) cost estimate of $85 per safety data sheet and extrapolating to the national level, the national one-time cost estimate associated with revising labels was calculated to be $12.6 million (72% of $17.4 million, with rounding to three significant digits).

Similarly, there were no data available to estimate the total number of products in Canada that would need to be re-evaluated. Therefore, for this calculation, the cost-benefit analysis identified the questionnaires where respondents provided estimates of the cost of re-evaluating products and the total number of products that their business would need to re-evaluate and reclassify, as necessary. Based on the responses to the April 2019 survey provided by individual companies, the total cost of safety data sheet revisions for these businesses was estimated to be $5.1 million and the total cost of product re-evaluations and reclassifications was estimated to be $3.7 million. This suggests that product re-evaluation and reclassification costs are approximately 26% less than safety data sheet revision costs. Therefore, it was assumed that product re-evaluation and reclassification costs are approximately 26% less than safety data sheet revision costs. Using the central (most likely) cost estimate of $85 per safety data sheet and extrapolating to the national level, the national one-time cost estimate associated with product re-evaluations and reclassifications was calculated to be $12.9 million (74% of $17.4 million).

With regard to training employees, based on the questionnaire responses and on correspondence received from the federal, provincial and territorial occupational safety and health government agencies, it was assumed that on the average, 20 minutes of additional training would be provided to production workers. The number of production workers was estimated at 1.1 million and this resulted in a national one-time cost estimate of $10.1 million for training production workers. Based on the questionnaire responses, it was assumed that health and safety managers would require about 2 hours of training. The number of health and safety managers was estimated at 85 000 and this resulted in a national one-time cost estimate of $8.5 million for training managers. The other miscellaneous costs identified by businesses (including costs of updating computer systems, making updates to existing confidential business information claims, filing new confidential business information claims, and disposing of unused inventories of labels) were not extrapolated to the national level because the available data did not permit this extrapolation.

By adding up all of the above-mentioned itemized national cost estimates, the total national cost to Canadian businesses was $61.5 million. However, there is a large degree of uncertainty in this estimate owing to the small sample size and the variability in identified impacts by individual businesses. A discounted annual rate of 7% was applied. Based on this, the estimated total present value costs of the regulatory proposal would be $52.0 million over a 10-year period. This translates to an annualized average cost of $7.4 million.

The cost-benefit analysis was finalized in March 2020 and is available upon request to the departmental contact, found below in the “Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards” section.

Cost-benefit statement

Number of years: 10 (from 2021 to 2030)
Base year for costing: 2019
Present value base year: 2019
Discount rate: 7%

Monetized costs

Table 1: Cost statement (2019$)

Impacted Stakeholder	Description of Costs	Base Year: 2021	Other Relevant Years: 2022	Final Year: 2030	Total (Present Value)	Annualized Value
Industry	Safety data sheet revisions	$7,600,000	$7,100,000	$0	$14,700,000	$2,100,000
	Label revisions	$5,500,000	$5,100,000	$0	$10,600,000	$1,500,000
	Product re-evaluation	$5,600,000	$5,300,000	$0	$10,900,000	$1,600,000
	Worker training	$4,400,000	$4,100,000	$0	$8,500,000	$1,200,000
	Manager training	$3,700,000	$3,500,000	$0	$7,200,000	$1,000,000
	Total costs	$26,900,000	$25,100,000	$0	$52,000,000	$7,400,000

Notes:

• 1. The cost-benefit analysis did not include any risk assessment and all impacts that were quantified were also monetized.
• 2. The costs to industry summarized in this table include costs associated with re-evaluating products, reclassifying products as necessary, revising labels and safety data sheets, and training workers and managers. The values for each of these itemized costs were rounded to two significant figures.
• 3. It is expected that the Government of Canada will not experience incremental costs as a result of the regulatory proposal (i.e. costs associated with implementing the proposal, developing training materials, etc., would be factored into the Department’s regular operating budget).
• 4. The health and safety benefits of the regulatory proposal to Canadian workers could not be quantified or monetized (see description below).

The cost-benefit analysis also provided data on the cost breakdown by business size, as well as how impacts may be distributed across the regions in Canada (Tables 2.1 and 2.2). The regional analysis was undertaken by examining the distribution of North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 324 (Petroleum and Coal Product Manufacturing) and NAICS code 325 (Chemical Manufacturing) across Canada. Based on data reported in a previous economic analysis of proposed changes to the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard, prepared in September 2009,^{footnote 2} it is expected that these two sectors would face a large portion of product re-evaluation costs and costs of revising labels and safety data sheets. Based on data from Canadian Industry Statistics, with regard to NAICS codes 324 and 325, the distribution of establishments in these two sectors is relatively similar to the distribution of population across Canada. Therefore, no disproportionate regional impacts are anticipated.

Table 2.1: Quantified impacts (costs) —Breakdown by business size (2019$)

Impacts (Costs) on Businesses	Base Year: 2021	Other Relevant Years: 2022	Final Year: 2030	Total (Present Value)	Annualized Average
Small firms	$28,300,000	$28,300,000	$0	$47,800,000	$6,800,000
Medium-sized firms	$2,200,000	$2,200,000	$0	$3,600,000	$500,000
Large firms	$300,000	$300,000	$0	$500,000	$100,000
Total	$30,800,000	$30,800,000	$0	$52,000,000	$7,400,000

Note: The figures shown in the first two columns are non-discounted values. In the last two columns, these are discounted values and the discount rate was 7%.

Table 2.2: Quantified impacts (costs) — Breakdown across the regions in Canada (2019$)

Impacts by Region	Base Year: 2021	Other Relevant Years: 2022	Final Year: 2030	Total (Present Value)	Annualized Average
Atlantic	$900,000	$900,000	$0	$1,600,000	$200,000
Quebec	$8,200,000	$8,200,000	$0	$13,900,000	$2,000,000
Ontario	$12,300,000	$12,300,000	$0	$20,800,000	$3,000,000
Prairies	$5,400,000	$5,400,000	$0	$9,200,000	$1,300,000
British Columbia	$3,900,000	$3,900,000	$0	$6,500,000	$900,000
Territories	$0	$0	$0	$100,000	$0.0
Total	$30,800,000	$30,800,000	$0	$52,000,000	$7,400,000

Note: The figures shown in the first two columns are non-discounted values. In the last two columns, these are discounted values and the discount rate was 7%.

Notwithstanding the initial costs expected to be incurred during the first two years after the proposed amendments come into force, the regulatory proposal has received support from industry. All respondents to the April 2019 questionnaire that was distributed to supplier representatives of the Current Issues Committee expressed their support for the proposed amendments. They noted that failing to update the Canadian regulations to maintain alignment with the United States would ultimately impose more significant costs on suppliers of hazardous products because they would be required to prepare two sets of labels and safety data sheets for certain products in order to be able to market them in both countries.

Benefits of the regulatory proposal

If approved, this regulatory proposal is expected to result in health and safety benefits to Canadian workers as well as economic benefits to Canadian businesses. There is not enough evidence to support quantification and subsequent monetization of the health and safety benefits of the regulatory proposal to Canadian workers. No data are available to quantify or monetize the expected reduction in injuries, acute and chronic illnesses, or fatalities in the workplace. Available data do not allow quantification of the extent to which injuries, illnesses, and fatalities that are associated with exposure to hazardous products occur in Canadian workplaces. Nor is reliable information available on the extent to which each of these would be reduced by adopting the proposed amendments. Therefore, a qualitative analysis of the health and safety benefits of the regulatory proposal was included in the cost-benefit analysis.

It is expected that, by providing increased health and safety benefits to Canadian workers, these regulatory amendments would translate into

• fewer workplace injuries;
• fewer acute illnesses from short-term exposure to hazardous products;
• fewer chronic illnesses from long-term exposure to hazardous products; and
• fewer fatalities from injuries and illnesses.

Health and safety benefits

The following elements of the regulatory proposal are expected to provide increased health and safety benefits and protections to Canadian workers:

• (i) Changes to the classification procedures for a few hazard classes will help to ensure that products are being classified more appropriately, to better reflect the hazards they pose (this applies to water-activated toxicants, flammable gases and pyrophoric gases);
• (ii) For selected hazard classes and categories or subcategories, there will be more comprehensive and more detailed precautionary statements provided on labels and safety data sheets that will help to better protect workers from the hazards associated with products classified in the affected hazard classes and categories or subcategories;
• (iii) While not currently covered under the Hazardous Products Regulations, aerosols that are non-flammable still pose a potential hazard because they may burst if heated. With the adoption of a new hazard category for non-flammable aerosols, hazard communication elements (signal word, hazard statement and precautionary statements) and other health and safety information will be required to be provided on labels and safety data sheets for these products;
• (iv) For flammable gases, new hazard subcategories will be adopted that make the distinction between extremely flammable gases, extremely flammable gases that are pyrophoric, extremely flammable gases that are chemically unstable, highly flammable gases and other flammable gases. With the adoption of these new subcategories, more comprehensive and more detailed hazard statements and precautionary statements will be required to be provided on labels and safety data sheets to help better protect workers from the hazards associated with these products;
• (v) With the adoption of the updates made to the GHS between the fifth and seventh revised editions, including those described in items (ii), (iii) and (iv) above, more comprehensive and more detailed health and safety information will be required to be provided on product labels and safety data sheets for the benefit of workers; and
• (vi) Several amendments intended to clarify certain provisions or amend certain provisions to better reflect their original intent are expected to result in clearer health and safety information that will be easier for workers to understand.

Economic benefits

Canadian businesses that import, export, and sell hazardous products intended for use in the workplace are expected to experience economic benefits as a result of the proposed regulatory amendments.^{footnote 3} Although businesses will initially incur costs to bring product labels and safety data sheets into compliance with the amended Hazardous Products Regulations, Canadian companies who sell hazardous products in both Canada and the United States would need to incur these costs anyway, regardless of the proposed regulations, when the United States adopts the GHS (seventh revised edition). The proposed amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations will continue to maintain alignment with the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard, thereby preventing inconsistencies that would require Canadian suppliers to prepare two sets of labels and safety data sheets for some products to be able to market their products in both countries. The regulatory amendments will therefore allow Canadian suppliers to avoid additional costs that they would face if there were different requirements for workplace hazardous products in Canada and the United States.

Over time, it is anticipated that the costs to businesses will be reduced as compared to what they would be if Canada did not update its Hazardous Products Regulations to align with the seventh revised edition of the GHS. Once the amended Hazardous Products Regulations and the amended U.S. Hazard Communication Standard are published and come into effect, suppliers will be able to continue to use one label and one safety data sheet per product to meet the hazard communication requirements of both countries, subject to Canada’s legal and health and safety frameworks, including official languages requirements. This will generate cost savings and economic benefits for Canadian businesses. Moreover, subject to Canada’s legal and health and safety frameworks, including official languages requirements, Canadian suppliers who import hazardous products from the U.S. will not need to make changes to product labels or safety data sheets, so importers will thereby experience cost savings as well.

It is important to consider the significance of continuing to harmonize Canadian requirements for hazardous products with those of our major trading partners. Based on data from Trade Data Online, approximately one half of all Canadian imports (i.e. imports of all goods, not just workplace hazardous products) arrive from the United States.

Small business lens

The proposed regulatory amendments will have impacts on small businesses; however, limited data are available to identify the anticipated costs. In response to the cost-benefit analysis questionnaire, four submissions were received from small businesses, all in favour of the regulatory proposal to continue aligning the Hazardous Products Regulations with the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard.

Based on the limited data available, the cost-benefit analysis estimated that the total compliance costs for small businesses would be approximately $47,800,000 (expressed in terms of present value). This translates to an annualized average cost of $6,800,000, as shown in tables 3.1 and 3.2. These values were calculated based on the total present value costs of the regulatory proposal ($52.0 million, which translates to an annualized average of $7.4 million), and by taking into consideration that small businesses (1 to 99 employees) comprise approximately 92% of all the businesses in NAICS codes 324 (Petroleum and Coal Product Manufacturing) and 325 (Chemical Manufacturing),^{footnote 4} two sectors that are expected to be among the most affected in terms of the number of safety data sheets that would require revision. There were insufficient data to estimate the total number of small businesses that would be impacted; therefore, it was not possible to use the Regulatory Cost Calculator to calculate the national compliance cost.

Small business lens summary

• Number of small businesses impacted: Insufficient data to estimate
• Number of years: 10 (from 2021 to 2030)
• Base year for costing: 2019
• Present value base year: 2019
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 3.1: Small business lens — Compliance costs

Activity	Annualized Value	Present Value
Costs associated with product re-evaluation, reclassification, revising labels and SDSs, and worker training	$6,800,000	$47,800,000
Total compliance cost	$6,800,000	$47,800,000

Table 3.2: Small business lens — Total compliance and administrative costs

Totals	Annualized Value	Present Value
Total cost (all impacted small businesses)	$6,800,000	$47,800,000
Cost per impacted small business	Insufficient data to calculate	Insufficient data to calculate

The average costs expected to be faced by small businesses as a result of having to re-evaluate products, reclassify products as necessary, revise labels, revise safety data sheets, and train employees are summarized in Table 4. These costs would fall under “compliance costs” rather than “administrative costs.” The regulatory proposal does not impose any new administrative burden or new administrative burden costs on suppliers. Based on the limited data available, small businesses are not expected to face significantly different costs than larger businesses.

Table 4: Average costs expected for small businesses as a result of the proposed amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations

	Small Businesses	All Businesses
Average cost per product re-evaluation and reclassification	$248 table b3 note a	$210
Average cost per label revision	$152	$146
Average cost per SDS revision	$63	$164
Average cost per employee trained	$54 table b3 note b	$29
Other costs	none identified	several identified table b3 note c
Table b3 note(s) Table b3 note a The cost per re-evaluation and reclassification among small businesses is skewed by one high-end outlier. If this outlier is removed, the cost per re-evaluation among small businesses falls well below the full sample average of $210. Return to table b3 note a referrer Table b3 note b The cost per employee trained among small businesses is skewed by one high-end outlier. If this outlier is removed, the cost per employee trained among small businesses falls to half the average for all businesses. Return to table b3 note b referrer Table b3 note c Other costs included costs of updating computer systems, making updates to existing confidential business information claims, filing new confidential business information claims, relabelling existing stocks of products, and disposing of unused labels that would no longer be compliant. Return to table b3 note c referrer

As is the case for larger businesses, the proposed regulatory amendments will benefit small businesses by continuing to align the Canadian requirements for workplace hazardous products with those of the United States. The proposed amendments will thereby support the growth of small businesses, given the relatively large market the United States provides. If Canada and the United States were to adopt different versions of the GHS, the requirements for workplace hazardous products would become misaligned. This would create an obstacle to the growth of small businesses, due to the costs involved in preparing two sets of labels and safety data sheets for some products.

No flexible mechanism was proposed to mitigate costs for small businesses, as delaying the timing of required compliance with the proposed amendments for small businesses (as a flexible option) would result in two sets of hazard identification and communication requirements in Canada. This would reduce the extent of economic benefits and worker protection, and possibly increase the costs to small and large businesses alike. An anticipated two-year transition period for all suppliers (small, medium, and large businesses) is expected to allow sufficient time for them to transition to the new requirements.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply since there is no incremental change in the administrative burden on business.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

Under the Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Forward Plan, Canada and the United States jointly developed a work plan for the workplace hazardous products initiative in which they publicly committed to coordinate amendments to their respective regulations to align with updates to the GHS. The Hazardous Products Regulations are based on the fifth revised edition of the GHS, which was published in 2013. The seventh revised edition was released in 2017. In order for Canada to meet its international commitment under the Regulatory Cooperation Council Joint Forward Plan, Health Canada is proposing to amend the Hazardous Products Regulations to adopt updates made to the GHS to align with the seventh revised edition. The United States is currently making similar amendments to their Hazard Communication Standard.

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, a preliminary scan concluded that a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

The proposed amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations would have no foreseeable impacts on sex, gender or diversity-related issues. No gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) impacts have been identified for this proposal. The proposed amendments are expected to increase the level of protection to Canadian workers above that which is afforded by the current Hazardous Products Regulations.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The intention is to move forward with these proposed regulatory changes in a timely manner. Attention would also be given to help ensure consistency across Canada through coordination and alignment between federal, provincial and territorial jurisdictions. In addition, Canada and the United States are working together to coordinate and synchronize, to the extent possible, the coming into force of the amended Hazardous Products Regulations with the coming into force of the updates to the U.S. Hazard Communication Standard.

It is anticipated that a transition period of two years would begin on the date when the proposed amendments to the Hazardous Products Regulations come into force. It is possible that the transition approach and timing may not end up completely aligned between Canada and the United States. It may turn out that chemical manufacturers, importers and distributors in the United States would need to be in compliance with the amended Hazard Communication Standard starting from an earlier date than the date upon which Canadian suppliers would need to be in compliance with the amended Hazardous Products Regulations. If so, then Canadian suppliers who export hazardous products to the United States would need to be aware of the earlier transition end date in the United States, to avoid having product safety data sheets and labels that would be non-compliant in the context of the amended Hazard Communication Standard. An earlier transition end date in the United States would not be a concern for Canadian suppliers who import hazardous products from the United States into Canada. It is expected that such imported hazardous products would already be in compliance with the amended Hazardous Products Regulations, except where changes may need to be made to safety data sheets and labels to reflect Canada’s official language requirements and any other requirements that are specific to Canada’s legal and health and safety frameworks.

Compliance and enforcement

Health Canada would continue to undertake inspection activities as provided for under the Hazardous Products Act. Working with the Intergovernmental WHMIS Coordinating Committee and the Canadian Association of Administrators of Labour Legislation — Occupational Safety and Health Committee, Health Canada would develop training materials and undertake training sessions for inspectors designated under the Hazardous Products Act to promote a common understanding and interpretation of the new regulations. Costs associated with developing training materials, training inspectors, and other related activities would be factored into the Department’s regular operating budget.

Contact

Lynn Berndt-Weis
Workplace Hazardous Materials Bureau
Department of Health
Postal Locator 4908B
269 Laurier Avenue West, 8th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K9
Telephone: 1‑855‑407‑2665
Fax: 613‑952‑2551
Email: hc.whmis-simdut.sc@canada.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to subsection 15(1)^{footnote a} of the Hazardous Products Act^{footnote b}, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Hazardous Products Regulations (GHS, Seventh Revised Edition).

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 70 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 Lynn Berndt-Weis, Director, Workplace Hazardous Materials Bureau, Consumer and Hazardous Products Safety Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, 269 Laurier Avenue West, Address Locator: 4908B, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9 (email: hc.whmis-simdut.sc@canada.ca).

Ottawa, December 10, 2020

Julie Adair
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Hazardous Products Regulations (GHS, Seventh Revised Edition)

Amendments

1 The definitions GHS and Manual of Tests and Criteria in subsection 1(1) of the Hazardous Products Regulations^{footnote 5} are replaced by the following:

GHS

means the United Nations document entitled Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), Seventh Revised Edition. (SGH)

Manual of Tests and Criteria

means the United Nations document entitled Manual of Tests and Criteria, as amended from time to time. (Manuel d’épreuves et de critères)

2 (1) Subsection 2(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Evaluation — order in classification table

(2) When a product, mixture, material or substance is evaluated in accordance with the criteria and requirements of a category or subcategory of a hazard class, the evaluation must proceed in accordance with the order of the hazard’s decreasing severity as presented in each classification table. The product, mixture, material or substance must be classified in the category or subcategory for which it meets the criteria. The product, mixture, material or substance that meets the criteria of more than one category or subcategory of the same classification table must be classified, among those categories or subcategories, in the one that represents the most severe hazard.

Evaluation not necessary for less severe hazard

(2.1) If the product, mixture, material or substance is classified in a category or subcategory of a hazard class that represents a more severe hazard in comparison with another category or subcategory of that hazard class in the same classification table, the product, mixture, material or substance need not be evaluated in respect of the category or subcategory that represents a less severe hazard.

(2) Subsection 2(9) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Animal data — not relevant to humans

(9) Animal data from a particular species of animal must not be used for the purpose of classifying a mixture or substance in any of the health hazard classes referred to in Subparts 1 to 10 and 12 of Part 8 when it has been demonstrated conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mechanism or mode of action of the mixture or substance in that particular species of animal is not relevant to humans.

3 (1) Subsection 3(1) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (e) and by replacing paragraph (f) with the following:

• (f) in the case of a hazardous product that is classified as an acute toxicant and that, upon contact with water, releases a gaseous substance that has an LC₅₀ that falls into one of the ranges indicated in Table 3 to subsection 8.1.1(3), the supplemental label elements that consist of the following hazard statements:
  • (i) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 1 or 2, “In contact with water, releases gases which are fatal if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz mortels en cas d’inhalation”,
  • (ii) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 3, “In contact with water, releases gases which are toxic if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz toxiques en cas d’inhalation”, or
  • (iii) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 4, “In contact with water, releases gases which are harmful if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz nocifs en cas d’inhalation”; and
• (g) in the case of a hazardous product that is classified in the category “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 1”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 2”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 3” or “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 4” further to subsection 8.1.1(2), the supplemental label elements that consist of the following hazard statements:
  • (i) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 1 or 2, “In contact with water, releases gases which are fatal if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz mortels en cas d’inhalation”,
  • (ii) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 3, “In contact with water, releases gases which are toxic if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz toxiques en cas d’inhalation”, or
  • (iii) in the case of a released gaseous substance that is classified in Category 4, “In contact with water, releases gases which are harmful if inhaled/Au contact de l’eau, libère des gaz nocifs en cas d’inhalation”.

(2) Section 3 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following after subsection (4):

Precautionary statement — Pyrophoric Liquids and Pyrophoric Solids

(4.1) In the case of a hazardous product that is classified in the category “Pyrophoric Liquids – Category 1” or in the category “Pyrophoric Solids – Category 1”, in addition to the information elements that are specified for those categories in section 3 of Annex 3 of the GHS, the following precautionary statement must be used:

• (a) if the contents of the hazardous product are handled and stored under inert gas, “Handle and store contents under inert gas/Manutentionner et stocker le contenu sous gaz inerte”; or
• (b) if the contents of the hazardous product are handled and stored under a liquid or gas other than inert gas, “Handle and store contents under [insert the name of the liquid or gas]/Manutentionner et stocker le contenu sous [insérez le nom du liquide ou du gaz]”.

Hazard statement — Acute Toxicity (Inhalation)

(4.2) In the case of a hazardous product that is classified in the category “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 1”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 2”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 3” or “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 4 ” further to subsection 8.1.1(2), the hazard statement specified for that category in section 3 of Annex 3 of the GHS need not be used on the label.

(3) Paragraphs 3(5)(a) to (d) of the Regulations are repealed.

4 Subsection 3.2(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Non-applicable precautionary statements

(2) If a precautionary statement that is required to be provided on a label does not apply in a particular case with regard to the normal conditions of use, handling and storage of the hazardous product, it may be omitted.

5 Section 3.6 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Specific rule — signal word

3.6 (1) If there is a requirement to provide the signal word “Danger” on a label, any requirement to provide the signal word “Warning” does not apply.

Specific rule — hazard statement

(2) If there is a requirement to provide the hazard statement “Causes severe skin burns and eye damage” on a label, any requirement to provide the hazard statement “Causes serious eye damage” does not apply.

Specific rule — symbol

(3) In the case of the symbols specified below, the following apply:

• (a) if there is a requirement to provide the “skull and crossbones” symbol on a label, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate acute toxicity does not apply;
• (b) if there is a requirement to provide the “corrosion” symbol on a label, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate skin or eye irritation does not apply; and
• (c) if there is a requirement to provide the “health hazard” symbol on a label to indicate respiratory sensitization, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate skin sensitization or skin or eye irritation does not apply.

6 The portion of paragraph 4(1)(b) of the Regulations before subparagraph (i) is replaced by the following:

• (b) subject to sections 4.4.1 and 4.5, the content of the specific information elements set out in paragraphs 3(1)(a) and (2)(a) and (d) of Schedule 1 for the heading for item 3 and, for each heading of that Schedule, if the information is available and applicable, the content of the other specific information elements of that Schedule, including the unit of measure, if applicable, taking into account the following:

7 Section 4.2 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Identical identifiers

4.2 The product identifier, the initial supplier identifier and, if applicable, any replacement information required under subsection 5.7(9) or (10) that are provided on the safety data sheet of a hazardous product must be identical to those provided on the label.

8 (1) Subsection 4.4.1(1) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (a), by adding “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b):

• (c) a concentration range of the material or substance in the hazardous product that falls entirely within one of the concentration ranges set out in subsection (3).

(2) Subsection 4.4.1(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Actual concentration within more than one concentration range

(2) For the purposes of paragraphs (1)(b) and (c), if the actual concentration of a material or substance in a hazardous product falls within more than one of the concentration ranges set out in subsection (3), then any one of those ranges or a range that falls entirely within any one of those ranges may be provided on the safety data sheet.

(3) The portion of subsection 4.4.1(3) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Concentration ranges

(3) For the purposes of paragraphs (1)(b) and (c) and subsection (2), the concentration ranges are the following:

(4) Subsection 4.4.1(4) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Statement — trade secret

(4) If the safety data sheet provides a concentration range further to paragraph (1)(b) or (c), it must also provide, immediately following the concentration range, a statement to the effect that the actual concentration is withheld as a trade secret.

9 (1) Subsection 4.5(1) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b):

• (b.1) a concentration range of the material or substance in the hazardous product that falls entirely within one of the concentration ranges set out in subsection (3); or

(2) Subsection 4.5(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Actual concentration range within more than one concentration range

(2) For the purposes of paragraphs (1)(b) and (b.1), if the actual concentration range of a material or substance in a hazardous product falls entirely within more than one of the concentration ranges set out in subsection (3), then any one of those ranges or a range that falls entirely within any one of those ranges may be provided on the safety data sheet.

(3) The portion of subsection 4.5(3) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Concentration ranges

(3) For the purposes of paragraphs (1)(b) to (c) and subsection (2), the concentration ranges are the following:

(4) Subsection 4.5(4) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Statement — trade secret

(4) If the safety data sheet provides a concentration range further to paragraph (1)(b), (b.1) or (c), it must also provide, immediately following that concentration range, a statement to the effect that the actual concentration range is withheld as a trade secret.

10 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 4.5:

Combined precautionary statements

4.6 (1) The precautionary statements that are required to be provided on a safety data sheet may be combined if the combination contains the same information as would have been conveyed by each of the individual precautionary statements.

Non-applicable precautionary statements

(2) If a precautionary statement that is required to be provided on a safety data sheet does not apply in a particular case with regard to the normal conditions of use, handling and storage of the hazardous product, it may be omitted.

Combined hazard statements

(3) The hazard statements that are required to be provided on a safety data sheet may be combined if the combination contains the same information as would have been conveyed by each of the individual hazard statements.

Specific rule — signal word

4.7 (1) If there is a requirement to provide the signal word “Danger” on a safety data sheet, any requirement to provide the signal word “Warning” does not apply.

Specific rule — hazard statement

(2) If there is a requirement to provide the hazard statement “Causes severe skin burns and eye damage” on a safety data sheet, any requirement to provide the hazard statement “Causes serious eye damage” does not apply.

Hazard statement — Acute Toxicity (Inhalation)

(3) In the case of a hazardous product that is classified in the category “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 1”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 2”, “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 3” or “Acute Toxicity (Inhalation) — Category 4” further to subsection 8.1.1(2), the hazard statement specified for that category in section 3 of Annex 3 of the GHS need not be used on the safety data sheet.

Specific rule — symbol

(4) In the case of the symbols specified below, the following apply:

• (a) if there is a requirement to provide the “skull and crossbones” symbol on a safety data sheet, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate acute toxicity does not apply;
• (b) if there is a requirement to provide the “corrosion” symbol on a safety data sheet, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate skin or eye irritation does not apply; and
• (c) if there is a requirement to provide the “health hazard” symbol on a safety data sheet to indicate respiratory sensitization, any requirement to provide the “exclamation mark” symbol to indicate skin sensitization or skin or eye irritation does not apply.

11 Subsection 5(6) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Transfer of possession — label

(6) The transfer of possession of a laboratory sample for a specific purpose, without transferring ownership, is exempt from the application of paragraphs 3(1)(c) and (d) if

• (a) the laboratory sample is one of the following types:
  • (i) a laboratory sample that is a substance for which the chemical name is not known,
  • (ii) a laboratory sample that is a mixture for which the chemical name of one or more of its ingredients is not known or for which the concentration of one or more of its ingredients is not known, or
  • (iii) a laboratory sample in respect of which the supplier has not offered or exposed the hazardous product for transfer of ownership; and
• (b) the label of the laboratory sample provides the following information:
  • (i) the statement “Hazardous Laboratory Sample. For hazard information or in an emergency, call/Échantillon pour laboratoire de produit dangereux. Pour obtenir des renseignements sur les dangers ou en cas d’urgence, composez”, followed by an emergency telephone number for the purpose of obtaining the information that must be provided on the safety data sheet of the hazardous product,
  • (ii) if the laboratory sample is a substance, the chemical name or generic chemical name of the substance, if known by the supplier, and
  • (iii) if the laboratory sample is a mixture, the chemical name or generic chemical name of any ingredient that is in the laboratory sample and that is referred to in subsection 3(2) of Schedule 1, if known by the supplier.

12 (1) Subparagraph 5.7(8)(c)(ii) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (ii) subject to sections 4.4.1 and 4.5, the concentration of the first supplier’s hazardous product that is in the subsequent supplier’s hazardous product.

(2) Subsection 5.7(9) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Safety data sheet and label — confidential product identifier — paragraphs 3(1)(a) and 4(1)(b)

(9) Paragraph 3(1)(a) and the requirement in paragraph 4(1)(b) in relation to paragraph 1(a) of Schedule 1, if the information is available and applicable, do not apply in respect of the sale of a hazardous product to an employer who is exempt under the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act or under the laws of a province from the requirement to disclose the product identifier of a hazardous product if that information is replaced on the label and safety data sheet by:

• (a) the code name or code number specified by the supplier; and
• (b) the information referred to in subsection (3) or (4) in respect of the employer’s claim for exemption under the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act or, if that information is not available, the information required to be provided under the laws of the province.

(3) The portion of subsection 5.7(10) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Safety data sheet and label — confidential supplier identifier — paragraphs 3(1)(b) and 4(1)(b)

(10) Paragraph 3(1)(b) and the requirement in paragraph 4(1)(b) in relation to paragraph 1(d) of Schedule 1, if the information is available and applicable, do not apply in respect of the sale of a hazardous product to an employer who is exempt under the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act or under the laws of a province from the requirement to disclose any information that could be used to identify the supplier of the hazardous product if that information is replaced on the label and the safety data sheet by

(4) The portion of subsection 5.7(11) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Safety data sheet — sale to employer

(11) The sale of a hazardous product to an employer is exempt from the requirement to disclose information – other than the product identifier and initial supplier identifier – on the safety data sheet that could be the subject of a claim for exemption under subsection 11(2) of the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act if

13 (1) Paragraph 5.12(2)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (b) a document that provides the changes to the safety data sheet that are required as a result of the significant new data and the date on which the significant new data became available.

(2) Paragraph 5.12(3)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (b) obtains or prepares a document that provides the changes to the safety data sheet that are required as a result of the significant new data and the date on which the significant new data became available and appends that document to the safety data sheet referred to in paragraph (a).

(3) Paragraph 5.12(4)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (b) the person or government that acquires possession or ownership is provided with a document that provides the changes to the label that are required as a result of the significant new data and the date on which the significant new data became available.

(4) Paragraph 5.12(5)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (b) the supplier obtains or prepares a document that provides the changes to the label that are required as a result of the significant new data and the date on which the significant new data became available.

14 The heading “Definition” before section 7.2 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Definitions

15 Section 7.2 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Definitions

7.2 The following definitions apply in this Subpart.

chemically unstable gas

means a flammable gas that is liable to react explosively even in the absence of air or oxygen. (gaz chimiquement instable)

flammable gas

means a gas that has a flammable range when mixed with air at 20°C and at the standard pressure of 101.3 kPa. (gaz inflammable)

pyrophoric gas

means a flammable gas that is liable to ignite spontaneously in air at a temperature of 54°C or less. (gaz pyrophorique)

16 Section 7.2.1 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exclusions

7.2.1 (1) Any product that is classified in a category of the hazard class “Aerosols” need not be classified in any category or subcategory of this hazard class.

Categories — Flammable Gas

• (2) A flammable gas is classified in a category or subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Category	Column 2 Subcategory	Column 3 Criteria
1		Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Flammable Gas	A flammable gas that (a) is ignitable when mixed with air at a concentration ≤ 13.0% by volume; or (b) has a flammable range when mixed with air ≥ 12 percentage points, regardless of the lower flammability limit, unless data demonstrate it meets the criteria for the subcategory "Flammable Gases — Category 1B, Flammable Gas"
2		Flammable Gases — Category 1B, Flammable Gas	A flammable gas that meets the criteria for the subcategory "Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Flammable Gas", but does not meet the criteria for the subcategory "Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Pyrophoric Gas", "Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Chemically Unstable Gas A" or "Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Chemically Unstable Gas B", and that has (a) a lower flammability limit of > 6% by volume in air; or (b) a fundamental burning velocity < 10 cm/s
3	Flammable Gases — Category 2, Flammable Gas		A flammable gas that does not meet the criteria for the subcategory "Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Flammable Gas" or "Flammable Gases — Category 1B, Flammable Gas"

Subcategories — Chemically Unstable Gas

(2.1) A chemically unstable gas is classified in a subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Subcategory	Column 2 Criteria
1	Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Chemically Unstable Gas A	A flammable gas that, at 20°C and at the standard pressure of 101.3 kPa, is a chemically unstable gas
2	Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Chemically Unstable Gas B	A flammable gas that, at > 20°C or at a pressure > 101.3 kPa, is a chemically unstable gas

Subcategory — Pyrophoric Gas

(2.2) A pyrophoric gas is classified in the subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Subcategory	Column 2 Criteria
1	Flammable Gases — Category 1A, Pyrophoric Gas	A flammable gas that is a pyrophoric gas

Calculation method

(3) Test data have priority over data obtained using a calculation method. If a calculation method is used to establish whether a gas is classified in this hazard class, the calculation method set out in the International Organization for Standardization standard ISO 10156:2017 entitled Gas cylinders — Gases and gas mixtures — Determination of fire potential and oxidizing ability for the selection of cylinder valve outlets, as amended from time to time, or any other calculation method that is a scientifically validated method, must be used.

Data permits classification in category or subcategory

(4) If the data obtained using a calculation method referred to in subsection (3) support the conclusion that the gas must be classified in a category or subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with the tables following subsection 7.2.1(2), (2.1) or (2.2), the gas must be classified in the appropriate category or subcategory.

Data does not permit classification in category or subcategory

(5) If the data obtained using a calculation method referred to in subsection (3) support the conclusion that the gas is a flammable gas, but do not permit for the determination of classification in the appropriate category or subcategory of this hazard class, the gas must be classified in the subcategory “Flammable Gases – Category 1A, Flammable Gas”.

17 The heading “Flammable Aerosols” before section 7.3 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Aerosols

18 The definition flammable aerosol in section 7.3 of the Regulations is repealed.

19 Section 7.3.1 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Categories

7.3.1 (1) An aerosol is classified in a category of this hazard class in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Category	Column 2 Criteria
1	Aerosols — Category 1	An aerosol dispenser that (a) contains ≥ 85.0% flammable components and that generates an aerosol that has a heat of combustion ≥ 30 kJ/g; (b) generates a spray aerosol that has an ignition distance ≥ 75 cm, based on test results from the ignition distance test for spray aerosols performed in accordance with sub-section 31.4 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria; or (c) generates a foam aerosol that has, based on test results from the aerosol foam flammability test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.6 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, either (i) a flame height ≥ 20 cm and a flame duration ≥ 2 s, or (ii) a flame height ≥ 4 cm and a flame duration ≥ 7 s
2	Aerosols — Category 2	An aerosol dispenser that generates (a) a spray aerosol that does not meet the criteria for the category "Aerosols — Category 1" and that has (i) a heat of combustion ≥ 20 kJ/g, (ii) an ignition distance ≥ 15 cm, based on test results from the ignition distance test for spray aerosols performed in accordance with sub-section 31.4 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, (iii) a time equivalent ≤ 300 s/m³, based on test results from the enclosed space ignition test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.5 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, or (iv) a deflagration density ≤ 300 g/m³, based on test results from the enclosed space ignition test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.5 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria; or (b) a foam aerosol that does not meet the criteria for the category "Aerosols — Category 1" and that has a flame height ≥ 4 cm and a flame duration ≥ 2 s, based on test results from the aerosol foam flammability test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.6 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria
3	Aerosols — Category 3	An aerosol dispenser that (a) contains ≤1% flammable components and that generates an aerosol that has a heat of combustion <20 kJ/g; (b) generates a spray aerosol that does not meet the criteria for the category "Aerosols — Category 1" or "Aerosols – Category 2" and that has (i) a time equivalent > 300 s/m³, based on test results from the enclosed space ignition test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.5 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, or (ii) a deflagration density > 300 g/m³, based on test results from the enclosed space ignition test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.5 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria; or (c) generates a foam aerosol that does not meet the criteria for the category "Aerosols – Category 1" or "Aerosols – Category 2" and that has, based on test results from the aerosol foam flammability test performed in accordance with sub-section 31.6 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, a flame height < 4 cm or a flame duration < 2 s

Default category

(2) A product that contains flammable components in an aerosol dispenser for which there are no test results in accordance with subparagraph 2.1(a)(i) and referred to in subsection (1) must be classified in the category “Aerosols – Category 1”, unless the product contains flammable components at a concentration less than or equal to 1.0% and has a heat of combustion less than 20 kJ/g.

20 The portion of item 1 of the table to section 7.4.1 of the Regulations in column 2 is replaced by the following:

Item	Column 2 Criteria
1	A gas that has an oxidizing power > 23.5% based on one of the methods set out in the International Organization for Standardization standard ISO 10156:2017 entitled Gas cylinders — Gases and gas mixtures — Determination of fire potential and oxidizing ability for the selection of cylinder valve outlets, as amended from time to time

21 Section 7.5.1 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exclusions

7.5.1 (1) Any product that is classified in a category of the hazard class “Aerosols” need not be classified in any category of this hazard class.

Categories

(2) A gas under pressure is classified in a category of this hazard class in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Category	Column 2 Criteria
1	Gases Under Pressure — Compressed Gas	A gas that when packaged under pressure is entirely gaseous at -50°C, including all gases with a critical temperature ≤ -50°C
2	Gases Under Pressure — Liquefied Gas	A gas that when packaged under pressure is partially liquid at temperatures > -50°C
3	Gases Under Pressure — Refrigerated Liquefied Gas	A gas that when packaged is partially liquid because of its low temperature
4	Gases Under Pressure — Dissolved Gas	A gas that when packaged under pressure is dissolved in a liquid phase solvent

22 Subsection 7.6.1(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exclusions

7.6.1 (1) Any product that is classified in a category of the hazard class “Aerosols” need not be classified in any category of this hazard class.

23 (1) Subsection 7.7.1(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exclusions

7.7.1 (1) Any product that is classified in a category of the hazard class “Aerosols” need not be classified in any category of this hazard class.

(2) The portion of subsection 7.7.1(2) of the Regulations before the table is replaced by the following:

Categories

(2) A flammable solid that is a readily combustible solid is classified in a category of this hazard class, based on results from testing performed in accordance with the burning rate test in sub-section 33.2 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, in accordance with the following table:

24 The portion of section 7.9.1 of the Regulations before the table is replaced by the following:

Category

7.9.1 A pyrophoric liquid is classified in the category of this hazard class, based on results from testing performed in accordance with test N.3 of sub-section 33.4.5 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, in accordance with the following table:

25 The portion of section 7.10.1 of the Regulations before the table is replaced by the following:

Category

7.10.1 A pyrophoric solid is classified in the category of this hazard class, based on results from testing performed in accordance with test N.2 of sub-section 33.4.4 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, in accordance with the following table:

26 Subsection 7.11.1(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Categories

(2) Subject to subsection (3), a self-heating substance or mixture is classified in a category of this hazard class, based on results from testing performed in accordance with test N.4 of sub-section 33.4.6 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, in accordance with the following table:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Category	Column 2 Criteria
1	Self-heating Substances and Mixtures — Category 1	A solid or liquid in respect of which a positive result is obtained in a test using a 25 mm sample cube at 140°C
2	Self-heating Substances and Mixtures — Category 2	A solid or liquid in respect of which a positive result is obtained in a test using a 100 mm sample cube at 140°C, a negative result is obtained in a test using a 25 mm sample cube at 140°C and (a) the solid or liquid is packed in packages with a volume > 3 m³; (b) a positive result is obtained in a test using a 100 mm sample cube at 120°C and the solid or liquid is packed in packages with a volume > 450 l; or (c) a positive result is obtained in a test using a 100 mm sample cube at 100°C

27 Section 7.12 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Interpretation

7.12 In this Subpart, substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases are liquids and solids that, by interaction with water, are liable to become spontaneously flammable or give off flammable gases in dangerous quantities, that is, in quantities that are greater than one litre of gas per kilogram of the mixture or substance per hour.

28 (1) The portion of subsection 7.12.1(2) of the Regulations before the table is replaced by the following:

Categories

(2) A liquid or solid which, in contact with water, emits flammable gases is classified in a category of this hazard class, based on results from testing performed in accordance with test N.5 of sub-section 33.5.4 of Part III of the Manual of Tests and Criteria, in accordance with the following table:

(2) The portion of item 3 of the table to subsection 7.12.1(2) of the Regulations in column 2 is replaced by the following:

Item	Column 2 Criteria
3	A liquid or solid that reacts with water at ambient temperature such that the maximum rate of evolution of flammable gas is > 1 l/kg of liquid or solid per hour

29 The table to subsection 7.14.1(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Category	Column 2 Criteria Using Test O.1	Column 3 Criteria Using Test O.3
1	Oxidizing Solids — Category 1	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning time < the mean burning time of a 3:2 mixture, by mass, of potassium bromate and cellulose	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning rate > the mean burning rate of a 3:1 mixture, by mass, of calcium peroxide and cellulose
2	Oxidizing Solids — Category 2	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning time ≤ the mean burning time of a 2:3 mixture, by mass, of potassium bromate and cellulose	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning rate ≥ the mean burning rate of a 1:1 mixture, by mass, of calcium peroxide and cellulose
3	Oxidizing Solids — Category 3	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning time ≤ the mean burning time of a 3:7 mixture, by mass, of potassium bromate and cellulose	A solid that, when tested in a 4:1 or 1:1 mixture, by mass, with cellulose, exhibits a mean burning rate ≥ the mean burning rate of a 1:2 mixture, by mass, of calcium peroxide and cellulose

30 (1) Paragraph 7(a) of the table to subsection 7.15.1(3) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Item	Column 2 Criteria
7	(a) has a SADT ≥ 60°C when evaluated in a 50 kg package, or

(2) Subsection 7.15.1(4) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Mixtures — organic peroxides

(4) Subject to subsection (5), a mixture of organic peroxides must be classified in the same category as the most hazardous organic peroxide in the mixture, unless data of the types referred to in subparagraph 2.1(a)(i) or (ii) or (b)(i) or (ii) are available for the mixture as a whole and the data support the conclusion that the mixture must be classified in a category that represents a less severe hazard.

Mixtures — Type G organic peroxides

(5) A mixture of two or more Type G organic peroxides must be classified in the category “Organic Peroxides — Type G”, unless the self-accelerating decomposition temperature of the mixture results in the mixture being classified in a category that represents a more severe hazard.

31 Paragraph 1(a) of the table to section 7.17.1 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Item	Column 2 Criteria
1	(a) has been shown to, upon ignition, catch fire or explode when dispersed in air; or

32 Subpart 19 of Part 7 of the Regulations is repealed.

33 The portion of the definition acute toxicity in section 8.1 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

acute toxicity

refers to serious adverse health effects, including death, occurring following

34 Subsection 8.1.1(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Contact with water — gaseous substance

(2) If an acute toxicant that is a substance is not classified in accordance with subsection (1) with respect to the inhalation route of exposure in a category of this hazard class in accordance with Table 3 to subsection (3) and, upon contact with water, the acute toxicant releases a gaseous substance that has an LC₅₀ that falls into one of the ranges indicated in that table, it is classified in accordance with that table with regard to that range.

35 Section 8.1.7 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Conversion from range to point estimate

8.1.7 (1) If a formula in section 8.1.5 or 8.1.6 is used, an acute toxicity point estimate must be determined, in accordance with the table to this section, for each ingredient for which only that ingredient’s classification category or experimentally obtained acute toxicity range is available.

More than one range

(2) If the experimentally obtained acute toxicity range for an ingredient does not fall entirely within any of the ranges set out in column 2 of the table to this section, the converted acute toxicity point estimate for that ingredient for the purposes of column 3 is the lowest value of the experimentally obtained acute toxicity range.

TABLE

Item	Column 1 Exposure Routes	Column 2 Classification Category and Associated Experimentally Obtained Acute Toxicity Range Minimum and Maximum Values	Column 3 Converted Acute Toxicity Point Estimate
1	Oral (mg/kg body weight)	0 < Category 1 ≤ 5	0.5
		5 < Category 2 ≤ 50	5
		50 < Category 3 ≤ 300	100
		300 < Category 4 ≤ 2000	500
2	Dermal (mg/kg body weight)	0 < Category 1 ≤ 50	5
		50 < Category 2 ≤ 200	50
		200 < Category 3 ≤ 1000	300
		1000 < Category 4 ≤ 2000	1100
3	Inhalation (gases) (ppmV)	0 < Category 1 ≤ 100	10
		100 < Category 2 ≤ 500	100
		500 < Category 3 ≤ 2500	700
		2500 < Category 4 ≤ 20 000	4500
4	Inhalation (vapours) (mg/l)	0 < Category 1 ≤ 0.5	0.05
		0.5 < Category 2 ≤ 2.0	0.5
		2.0 < Category 3 ≤ 10.0	3
		10.0 < Category 4 ≤ 20.0	11
5	Inhalation (dust/mist) (mg/l)	0 < Category 1 ≤ 0.05	0.005
		0.05 < Category 2 ≤ 0.5	0.05
		0.5 < Category 3 ≤ 1.0	0.5
		1.0 < Category 4 ≤ 5.0	1.5

36 The definitions skin corrosion and skin irritation in section 8.2 of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

skin corrosion

means the production of irreversible damage to the skin, namely, visible necrosis through the epidermis and into the dermis, occurring after exposure to a mixture or substance, and includes ulcers, bleeding, bloody scabs and, within a 14-day observation period, discoloration due to blanching of the skin, complete areas of alopecia, and scars. (corrosion cutanée)

skin irritation

means the production of reversible damage to the skin occurring after exposure to a mixture or substance. (irritation cutanée)

37 The portions of items 1 to 3 of the table to subsection 8.2.2(2) of the Regulations in column 2 is replaced by the following:

Item	Column 2 Criteria
1	A substance that, according to animal data acquired from a scientifically validated method, produces irreversible damage to the skin after an exposure of three minutes or less, and within one hour of observation, in at least one animal
2	A substance that, according to animal data acquired from a scientifically validated method, produces irreversible damage to the skin after an exposure of more than three minutes and up to and including one hour, and within 14 days of observation, in at least one animal
3	A substance that, according to animal data acquired from a scientifically validated method, produces irreversible damage to the skin after an exposure of more than one hour and up to and including four hours, and within 14 days of observation, in at least one animal

38 (1) Subsection 8.2.11(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Data available for ingredients

8.2.11 (1) Subject to subsection (3), a mixture that contains one or more ingredients that are classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C” or the category “Skin Irritation — Category 2” is classified in a category or subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with subsection (2), subject to the following:

• (a) ingredients that are classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C” or the category “Skin Irritation — Category 2” and are present in the mixture at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 1.0% must be included in the calculation of the sum of concentrations of ingredients; and
• (b) ingredients that are classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C” or the category “Skin Irritation — Category 2” and are present in the mixture at a concentration of less than the concentration limit of 1.0% must be included in the calculation of the sum of concentrations of ingredients only if there is evidence that, at the concentration at which they are present, the ingredients are skin-corrosive substances or skin-irritant substances.

(2) Paragraph 8.2.11(2)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (a.1) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A” is equal to or greater than 5.0%, and the mixture does not contain any ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C”, the mixture is classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1” or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”;
• (a.2) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B” is equal to or greater than 5.0%, and the mixture does not contain any ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C”, the mixture is classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1” or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”;
• (a.3) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C” is equal to or greater than 5.0%, and the mixture does not contain any ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, the mixture is classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1” or the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C”;
• (a.4) if the sum of the concentrations of ingredients set out in two or more of the following subparagraphs is equal to or greater than 5.0%, the mixture is classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”:
  • (i) ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”,
  • (ii) ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”,
  • (iii) ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B”, and
  • (iv) ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C”;
• (b) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B” and ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C” is equal to or greater than 1.0% but less than 5.0%, the mixture is classified in the category “Skin Irritation — Category 2”;

(3) Subparagraph 8.2.11(2)(d)(i) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (i) 10 times the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the category “Skin Corrosion — Category 1”, ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1A”, ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1B” and ingredients classified in the subcategory “Skin Corrosion — Category 1C”, and

39 The definitions eye irritation and serious eye damage in section 8.3 of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

eye irritation

means the production of changes in the eye after exposure of the eye to a mixture or substance that are fully reversible within an observation period of 21 days after that exposure. (irritation oculaire)

serious eye damage

means the production of tissue damage in the eye or serious physical decay of vision, occurring after exposure of the eye to a mixture or substance,

• (a) for which data demonstrate that it is irreversible; or
• (b) that is not fully reversible within an observation period of 21 days after that exposure. (lésion oculaire grave)

40 (1) Subsection 8.3.11(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Data available for ingredients

8.3.11 (1) Subject to subsection (3), a mixture that contains one or more ingredients that are classified in the category “Serious Eye Damage — Category 1”, the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”, the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B” is classified in a category or subcategory of this hazard class in accordance with subsection (2), subject to the following:

• (a) ingredients that are classified in the category “Serious Eye Damage — Category 1”, the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”, the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B” and are present in the mixture at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 1.0% must be included in the calculation of the sum of concentrations of ingredients; and
• (b) ingredients that are classified in the category “Serious Eye Damage — Category 1”, the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”, the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B” and are present in the mixture at a concentration of less than the concentration limit of 1.0% must be included in the calculation of the sum of concentrations of ingredients only if there is evidence that, at the concentration at which they are present, the ingredients are substances that cause serious eye damage or eye irritation.

(2) Subsection 8.3.11(2) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (c) and by adding the following after paragraph (c):

• (c.1) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A” is equal to or greater than 10.0%, and the mixture does not contain any ingredients classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B”, the mixture is classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A”;
• (c.2) if the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B” is equal to or greater than 10.0% and the mixture does not contain any ingredients classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A”, the mixture is classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2” or the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B”;
• (c.3) if the sum of the concentrations of ingredients set out in two or more of the following subparagraphs is equal to or greater than 10.0%, the mixture is classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”:
  • (i) ingredients classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”,
  • (ii) ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A”, and
  • (iii) ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B”; or

(3) Subparagraph 8.3.11(2)(d)(ii) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (ii) the sum of concentrations of ingredients classified in the category “Eye Irritation — Category 2”, ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2A” and ingredients classified in the subcategory “Eye Irritation — Category 2B”.

41 The definitions respiratory sensitization and skin sensitization in section 8.4 of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

respiratory sensitization

means the production of hypersensitivity of the airways occurring after inhalation of a mixture or substance. (sensibilisation respiratoire)

skin sensitization

means the production of an allergic response occurring after skin contact with a mixture or substance. (sensibilisation cutanée)

42 Section 8.5 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

germ cell mutagenicity

means an increased occurrence of heritable gene mutations, including heritable structural and numerical chromosome aberrations in germ cells, occurring after exposure to a mixture or substance. (mutagénicité sur les cellules germinales)

43 Section 8.5.3 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1A

8.5.3 (1) A mixture is classified in the category “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1A” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture is a germ cell mutagen, in which case the mixture is classified as a germ cell mutagen in accordance with section 8.5.1; or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to an in vivo heritable germ cell mutagenicity test that determines that the mixture is not a germ cell mutagen, and a scientifically validated method was used and the test was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1B

(2) A mixture is classified in the category “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1B” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1B”, and does not contain any ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Germ Cell Mutagenicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture is a germ cell mutagen, in which case the mixture is classified as a germ cell mutagen in accordance with section 8.5.1; or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to an in vivo heritable germ cell mutagenicity test that determines that the mixture is not a germ cell mutagen, and a scientifically validated method was used and the test was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

44 The heading “Definition” before section 8.6 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Definitions

45 Section 8.6 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Definitions

8.6 The following definitions apply in this Subpart.

carcinogenic

means, in relation to a mixture or substance, liable to lead to cancer or to increase the incidence of cancer. (cancérogène)

carcinogenicity

means the production of cancer or an increase in the incidence of cancer occurring after exposure to a mixture or substance. (cancérogénicité)

46 Section 8.6.3 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1A

8.6.3 (1) A mixture is classified in the category “Carcinogenicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Carcinogenicity — Category 1A” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Carcinogenicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture is carcinogenic, in which case the mixture is classified as a carcinogenic mixture in accordance with section 8.6.1; or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to a carcinogenicity study that determines that the mixture is not carcinogenic, and a scientifically validated method was used and the study was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1B

(2) A mixture is classified in the category “Carcinogenicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Carcinogenicity — Category 1B” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Carcinogenicity — Category 1B”, and does not contain any ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Carcinogenicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture is carcinogenic, in which case the mixture is classified as a carcinogenic mixture in accordance with section 8.6.1; or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to a carcinogenicity study that determines that the mixture is not carcinogenic, and a scientifically validated method was used and the study was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

47 The definition reproductive toxicity in section 8.7 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

reproductive toxicity

refers to any of the following effects occurring after exposure to a mixture or substance:

• (a) adverse effects on sexual function and fertility;
• (b) adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring; or
• (c) effects on or via lactation. (toxicité pour la reproduction)

48 The portion of item 3 of the table to subsection 8.7.1(1) of the Regulations in column 3 is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 3 Criteria

3

A substance in respect of which human or animal data support a positive association between exposure to the substance and adverse effects on sexual function and fertility or adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring, but do not support a conclusion, based on established scientific principles, that exposure to the substance leads to such effects, provided that such effects are not considered to be a secondary non-specific consequence of other toxic effects

49 Section 8.7.3 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1A

8.7.3 (1) A mixture is classified in the category “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1A” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture has adverse effects on sexual function and fertility or adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring, in which case the mixture is classified as a mixture that is toxic to reproduction in accordance with subsection 8.7.1(1); or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to a reproductive toxicity study that determines that the mixture does not have adverse effects on sexual function and fertility or adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring, and a scientifically validated method was used and the study was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

Ingredient classified in Category 1 or 1B

(2) A mixture is classified in the category “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1” or the subcategory “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1B” if it contains at least one ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1B”, and does not contain any ingredient at a concentration equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 0.1% that is classified in the subcategory “Reproductive Toxicity — Category 1A”, unless

• (a) there are data for the mixture as a whole that demonstrate conclusively, based on established scientific principles, that the mixture has adverse effects on sexual function and fertility or adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring, in which case the mixture is classified as a mixture that is toxic to reproduction in accordance with subsection 8.7.1(1); or
• (b) the mixture as a whole has been subjected to a reproductive toxicity study that determines that the mixture does not have adverse effects on sexual function and fertility or adverse effects on the development of the embryo, fetus or offspring, and a scientifically validated method was used and the study was performed in accordance with generally accepted standards of good scientific practice at the time it was carried out.

50 (1) Paragraph 8.8.5(1)(c) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “or” at the end of subparagraph (ii), by adding “or” at the end of subparagraph (i) and by repealing subparagraph (iii).

(2) Subsection 8.8.5(1) of the Regulations is amended by striking out “or” at the end of paragraph (b), by adding “or” at the end of paragraph (c) and by adding the following after paragraph (c):

• (d) in the category “Specific Target Organ Toxicity — Single Exposure — Category 3”, if it contains at least two ingredients that are classified in that category which are present individually at a concentration of 1.0% or more and
  • (i) such ingredients individually cause a transient narcotic effect, and the sum of their concentrations is equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 20.0%, or
  • (ii) such ingredients individually cause transient respiratory tract irritation, and the sum of their concentrations is equal to or greater than the concentration limit of 20.0%.

51 Paragraph 2(b) of Schedule 1 to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2 Specific Information Elements

2

(b) subject to subsections 3(2) and (4) to (5) of these Regulations, for each category or subcategory in which the hazardous product is classified, with the exception of the categories referred to in paragraph (b.1), the information elements, namely, the symbol, signal word, hazard statement and precautionary statement, that are specified in section 3 of Annex 3 of the GHS. If the required information element is a symbol, either the name of the symbol or the symbol itself may be used; (b.1) subject to subsection 3(2) of these Regulations, for each category set out in Subparts 17 to 20 of Part 7 and in Subparts 11 and 12 of Part 8 in which the hazardous product is classified, (i) the information elements that are specified for that category in Schedule 5. If the required information element is a symbol, either the name of the symbol or the symbol itself may be used, and (ii) any precautionary statements that are applicable to the hazardous product in terms of (A) general precautionary statements, (B) prevention precautionary statements, (C) response precautionary statements, (D) storage precautionary statements, and (E) disposal precautionary statements; (b.2) the information elements referred to in paragraphs 3(1)(e) to (g) of these Regulations;

52 Subsection 3(2) of Schedule 1 to the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2 Specific Information Elements

3

(2) In the case of a hazardous product that is a mixture, for each material or substance in the mixture that, individually, is classified in any category or subcategory of a health hazard class and is present above the concentration limit that is designated for the category or subcategory in which it is classified — regardless of whether the material or substance contributes to the classification of the mixture as a hazardous product — or is present in the mixture at a concentration that results in the mixture being classified in a category or subcategory of any health hazard class,

53 Paragraphs 9(a) to (r) of Schedule 1 to the Regulations are replaced by the following:

Item

Column 2 Specific Information Elements

9

(a) physical state; (b) colour; (c) odour; (d) melting point and freezing point; (e) boiling point or initial boiling point and boiling range; (f) flammability; (g) lower and upper explosion limit or lower and upper flammability limit; (h) flash point; (i) auto-ignition temperature; (j) decomposition temperature; (k) pH; (l) kinematic viscosity; (m) solubility; (n) partition coefficient — n-octanol/water (logarithmic value); (o) vapour pressure; (p) density and relative density; (q) relative vapour density; and (r) particle characteristics

54 Section 14 of Schedule 1 to the Regulations is amended by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (e) and by repealing paragraph (f).

55 Part 3 of Schedule 5 to the Regulations is repealed.

Transitional Provision

56 (1) In this section, former Regulations means the Hazardous Products Regulations as they read immediately before the day on which these Regulations come into force.

(2) Despite these Regulations, a supplier may

• (a) sell or import a hazardous product in accordance with the former Regulations; and
• (b) classify a product, mixture, material or substance in accordance with the former Regulations if they do so using a category or subcategory of a hazard class listed in Schedule 2 to the Hazardous Products Act as it read immediately before that day on which these Regulations come into force.

(3) This section ceases to have effect on the day that is two years after the day on which these Regulations come into force.

Coming into Force

57 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.