Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 156, Number 26: Regulations Amending the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (Registration Database)

June 25, 2022

Statutory authority
Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992

Sponsoring department
Department of Transport

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues

Audit recommendations still not addressed

Concerns were raised in an internal TC audit in 2006, as well as in audit reports from the CESD in 2011 and 2020, regarding TC’s lack of knowledge of Canada’s transportation of dangerous goods regulated community. The initial audit identified a need for TC to implement a national risk-based inspection program that would enable better prioritization of inspections to allow TC to focus on higher-risk Sites. The TDG Program uses a risk-based system for inspections. Risk scores for each Site are calculated using basic information about the Site (e.g. UN number, types of dangerous goods involved in DG activities, location, and compliance history) and these scores are used to help determine a Site’s priority for inspection (i.e. the higher the risk score, the higher the priority for inspection). While the CESD acknowledged in its 2020 audit that TC had developed an inspection program, the CESD concluded that TC still did not have a complete and accurate picture of its transportation of dangerous goods regulated community and that the information on many TDG Sites was incomplete, inaccurate and/or out-of-date. This lack of reliable data results in improper risk scores being assigned to TDG Sites, which undermines the effectiveness of the TDG Program.

Inaccurate and out-of-date information

The actual number of TDG Sites operating in Canada, and related information on their operations, is currently unknown. To date, TC has collected information on approximately 19,600 TDG Sites. However, it is likely that this number does not represent the actual number of TDG Sites operating in Canada, as there is currently no requirement for stakeholders involved in the transportation of dangerous goods to identify and register themselves or their Sites with TC. It is estimated that there are anywhere from 42,000 to 82,000 TDG Sites operating across Canada. As a result of having no regulated way to collect data on TDG Sites in a standardized manner, or to account for all TDG Sites in Canada, any information gathered to date has been obtained through a patchwork of data sources, public complaints, and inspection reports, leaving room for inaccuracies, duplications, and out-of-date information. This patchwork method for gathering information about TDG Sites is insufficient to provide inspectors with the information needed to determine whether a TDG Site should be prioritized for inspection. A registration database would assist in identifying previously unknown Sites, as well as in collecting basic information on previously known and new Sites so that TC can develop a risk score and appropriately prioritize the new Site for inspection. Depending on how many new Sites are identified through the registration database and the risk-level to public safety in the event of a release of dangerous goods on those Sites, TC may need to reassess inspection cycles (frequency of inspections) based on existing inspection resources.

Risk to public safety

According to the CESD, without a comprehensive understanding of its regulated community, TC does not have a consistent way to measure the effectiveness of inspections at preventing violations, non-compliance, or transportation of dangerous goods incidents.

Between 2009 and 2021, TC was notified of approximately 2,500 reportable on-site dangerous goods incidents and only 84 of them happened on a Site included in TC’s oversight system. In other words, 96.6% of these reported incidents occurred on Sites that were unknown to TC and, therefore, uninspected.

Although the types of incidents occurring at unknown Sites vary, they can still result in devastating impacts. Some examples of such devastating incidents include (i) in 1990, a chlorine (UN1017) release from a rail tank car in Hinton, Alberta, caused 20 injuries ranging from moderate to severe; (ii) in 2016, an explosion of a tank containing residue of petroleum crude oil (U1267) in Red Deer, Alberta, caused one fatality; and (iii) in 2018, a release of organic peroxide (UN3109) in Surrey, British Columbia, resulted in Site evacuation, five minor injuries and seven moderate injuries. Inspecting TDG Sites and enforcing TDG requirements are some ways that TC can mitigate the likelihood of such incidents occurring. Not having information on these Sites prevents TC from proactively addressing potential risks and undermines efforts to protect public safety.

Background

Minister of TC, pursuant to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 (TDG Act), is responsible for regulating the transportation of dangerous goods. The TDG Act and the TDGR prescribe the requirements for the transportation of dangerous goods, including proper classification and transportation in proper means of containment in accordance with applicable standards. The TDG Program promotes public safety in the transportation of dangerous goods by all modes of transport in Canada (rail, air, marine and road). The TDG Program maintains a regulatory and risk-based oversight regime that supports public safety, economic growth, and innovation.

TC’s risk-based approach to oversight is supported by a yearly oversight plan called the National Oversight Plan (NOP). The purpose of this plan is to ensure that TDG inspection resources are efficiently and effectively used to promote safety. The NOP considers a variety of factors when determining the frequency of inspections at a TDG Site. Site characteristics, including population density near the Site, number of transportation modes (e.g. truck, train), and the risk that the dangerous good itself poses should there be an incident, all form part of the TDG Program’s risk algorithm. This risk algorithm informs TC how frequently a TDG Site should be inspected.

To enhance the safe and secure transportation of dangerous goods, the TDG Program requires knowledge of its regulated entities, and their related dangerous goods activities (e.g. volume of dangerous goods involved in DG activities), to inform the development of its risk-based approach to oversight.

Objective

The objective of the proposed amendments is to reduce or eliminate information gaps that undermine TC’s ability to administer and enforce transportation of dangerous goods requirements effectively. The proposed amendments would help TC ensure that transportation of dangerous goods requirements are administered and enforced consistently and appropriately according to risk across the transportation sector, which in turn may reduce the likelihood and severity of incidents and accidents involving the transportation of dangerous goods. The proposed amendments would also serve to address the CESD’s recommendation in 2020 to strengthen the existing risk-based inspection program.

Description

The proposed amendments to the TDGR would introduce new requirements for persons to register themselves and their TDG Sites with a new online registration database administered by TC, and to provide data related to their transportation of dangerous goods activities at those Sites. This registration database would create a reliable and comprehensive inventory of Sites where the transportation of dangerous goods occurs, providing TC with a more comprehensive picture of activities involving dangerous goods taking place across the country, including at Sites that are currently unknown to TC. Further, the registration database would support TC’s risk-based analyses and risk scoring, which would help TC to prioritize Sites for inspection.

Registration requirement

The information collected would be limited and specific to what would directly contribute to achieving the objective for this regulatory amendment, which is to amass a reliable and comprehensive inventory of TDG stakeholders and Sites where the transportation of dangerous goods is taking place, in order to strengthen risk-based oversight. Subject to certain exemptions, all persons that import, offer for transport, handle or transport dangerous goods at a TDG Site in Canada would be required to register in the registration database. Pursuant to the TDGR, exemptions to registration in the database would be permitted as per the following examples:

• Exemption 1: A person^{footnote 1} who imports, offers for transport, handles, or transports dangerous goods under any of the Special Cases listed under Part 1 of the TDGR other than:
  • Section 1.16 – 500 kg Gross Mass Exemption; and
  • Section 1.22 – 3,000 kg Gross Mass Farm Retail Exemption.
• Exemption 2: A person who imports, offers for transport, handles, or transports dangerous goods exempted under a special provision in Schedule 2 of the TDGR;
• Exemption 3: A person who imports, offers for transport, handles, or transports selected lower risk dangerous goods (for example, retail stores, mail services and courier companies);
• Exemption 4: A person conducting cross border movements that does not have a headquarters or operate a TDG Site in Canada;
• Exemption 5: Foreign carriers operating cross-border movements that do not have headquarters or own a Site in Canada where transport activities take place;
• Exemption 6: A person operating one or multiple oil wells; and
• Exemption 7: A self-employed commercial truck owner operator who imports, offers for transport, handles, or transports dangerous goods within Canada.

The proposed Regulations take a risk-based approach that considers the specific commodities involved in DG activities and their quantities, the size and scope of an operation, practical realities (such as whether or not a person transports goods to/from a Site or for personal use or commercial), and administrative burden.

Introduction of new definition

The proposed amendments would introduce a definition of “Site” into the new Part 17 of the TDGR to indicate that a Site is a place where dangerous goods are imported, offered for transport, handled or transported, but does not include a means of transport^{footnote 2}. In cases where a building or premises are contained within a larger facility, such as a port or airport, the Site would be the building or premises itself and not the larger facility, unless the Site and the facility are the same.

Marine

For marine transport, the definition of Site includes locations where dangerous goods are being loaded and unloaded but would not include a warehouse or a vessel, even if docked at the port. A common-use terminal would be registered as a Site. For ports where there is no terminal, the port would be registered as the Site.

Air

In the context of air transportation, since dangerous goods are loaded onto and unloaded from aircraft at a company’s respective common-use cargo terminal, the location that would be registered would be associated with the cargo terminal. For smaller airports with no distinct cargo terminal, the airport would be registered as a Site. In these cases, any road vehicle (such as aircraft refuellers) or aircraft sitting at the airport would not be considered as Sites. In addition, warehouses storing dangerous goods to be used by the airport would not have to be registered as Sites as this type of storage would not be considered as in transport^{footnote 3} as per the TDGR.

Rail

For rail transport, Sites would include any rail terminal that receives dangerous goods to be loaded on a train as well as any Site where dangerous goods are offloaded from a train and transferred to another means of transport. Sites would also include rail yards where rail cars are coupled into a train. Warehouses where dangerous goods are stored (not in transport) and sidetracks^{footnote 4} do not fall under the scope of Site.

Consignor

A consignor of dangerous goods would have to register locations where DG activities are conducted for transportation. For example, a chemical company would need to register any Site where dangerous goods are prepared for and offered for transport.

Petroleum producers

For the oil and gas industry, Sites would be the terminals, refineries, and distribution centres where DG activities are conducted with the intent of being transported. Extraction premises, such as wells and well pads, and retail premises, such as gas stations, are exempted from the regulations.

Information to provide

When registering in the database, a person would need to provide administrative information, including

• the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) business number;
• the business name;
• the address and contact information;
• the name of a point of contact;
• the address(es) of the Site(s) where DG activities are conducted;
• the type of activity taking place at the Site (import, offer for transport, handle for purposes of transport, or transport);
• the classes and divisions of all dangerous goods; and
• the mode(s) of transport (road, rail, marine or air) involved for each Site.

For persons involved with higher risk^{footnote 5} dangerous goods the following information would also be required to be reported for each of the higher-risk dangerous goods involved in DG activities at the Site:

• the UN number;
• the Emergency Response Assistance Plan (ERAP)^{footnote 6} number of the approved ERAP;
• the quantity range in the previous year; and
• the number of consignments in the previous year.

Requirement for yearly renewal of registration

A person would have to renew their registration in the database annually and, in so doing, would be required to review and update all the information in the database, as needed, for each Site.

Information that would need to be confirmed or updated annually for each Site includes the following:

• administrative information;
• mode of transport;
• classes and divisions of dangerous goods; and,
• specific activities (importing, offering for transport, handling or transporting) that were undertaken in the previous year.

Information that would need to be confirmed or updated annually for each Site where DG activities are conducted on higher-risk dangerous goods, for each higher-risk dangerous good, includes the following:

• UN number;
• ERAP number;
• quantity range; and,
• annual number of consignments.

How to register

The registration database application would be made available to persons online through TC’s website on tc.canada.ca on the day these regulations are published in Canada Gazette, Part II.

A registration would be deemed complete when all required fields, based on the type of dangerous goods involved in DG activities, have been filled out, the profile saved and sent in the application database, and a confirmation message from TC has been received.

Requirement to update the information

Persons would be required to maintain up-to-date information in the registration database by providing updates within 30 calendar days of a change related to their administrative information (e.g. CRA business number or name), addresses (headquarters or Sites), contact information, classes of dangerous goods or mode of transportation.

Transitional period

Persons already involved in DG activities at the time of the coming into force of the proposed amendments, which would be on the day of their publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II, would have one year after the coming into force date to complete their registration in the database.

Persons who start their operations after the coming into force of the proposed amendments would have 90 days after starting their DG activities to provide their administrative information, and would be required to make a renewal 365 days after their initial registration is completed.

Privacy

Personal information^{footnote 7} collected under the registration database would be protected under the authority of the Privacy Act. The Privacy Act allows a government institution, such as TC, to refuse to disclose personal information to a third party, as per section 26 of the Privacy Act. Any personal information that would be provided to TC would only be used and disclosed by TC in accordance with the Privacy Act.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Extensive consultations were carried out on the proposed amendments.

TC first held consultations with stakeholders between February and April 2018. The findings from these consultations were summarized in a “What We Heard” report and released to the General Policy Advisory Council (GPAC) in November 2018. Following a review of the “What We Heard” report, GPAC members expressed additional concerns. In response to the feedback received from GPAC members, a second round of consultations was held in January 2019 to better understand the concerns raised. The results of the second round of consultations were presented to GPAC in January 2020.

Following the January 2020 presentation to GPAC, 15 one-on-one consultations were held in spring 2020, to provide stakeholders an opportunity to explain how the proposed amendments may impact their businesses and/or business sector. Based on these consultations, TC amended its policy approach to address concerns raised where feasible. TC’s final policy approach was supported by GPAC in June 2020.

Consultations highlighted three main concerns from stakeholders, as outlined below.

1. How would the information collected by the registration database serve to minimize the risks to public safety associated with the transportation of dangerous goods?

The capacity for TC to mitigate dangerous goods incidents and better maintain public safety in the transportation of dangerous goods depends on its knowledge of who is involved in DG activities in Canada, which dangerous goods are involved, how much dangerous goods are involved and the conditions under which these DG activities are taking place. The available information TC has on TDG Sites has mainly been gathered by using a patchwork of data sources such as public complaints, and inspection reports.

TC would use the information on the new TDG Sites collected through the registration database to assess their risk to public safety and prioritize them for inspection based on risk against other TDG Sites. Having more complete information on the true population of TDG Sites for this prioritization process would allow TC to allocate inspector resources in the most effective and efficient way possible. It is expected that prioritizing inspections would help to identify and mitigate risks and thereby reduce the likelihood and damage of potential incidents.

2. What administrative burden would registration place on persons who do not presently collect the data required to register with the registration database?

Some stakeholders, across various industries, expressed concerns about the imposition of administrative burden on clients, particularly small businesses. Many stakeholders perceived these data collection and reporting requirements to have intensive resource implications. A few stakeholders noted that some of the required information for registration may not be readily available in the process of regular business operations, or that they do not have the necessary resources to provide the amount, type, or level of detail required. It was suggested that some businesses may need to hire additional staff to report on specific dangerous goods activities, which could affect their profit margins. Stakeholders also pointed out that, should the administrative burden associated with registration be too great, some may choose to stop their dangerous goods activities entirely, which would have wider implications for Canada’s economy.

Registration would inevitably place some burden on stakeholders, who would be required to provide information on several items related to their business and transportation of dangerous goods activities. As a result of industry feedback, TC reduced the reporting requirements in the proposed amendments by limiting the required information to only what would be absolutely necessary to identify a TDG Site and evaluate the level of risk it might pose to public safety.

3. Would the registration database cause registration duplication for stakeholders who have already provided similar information to other federal and provincial government departments? Why is the information contained in these platforms not being utilized instead of developing a new database?

Stakeholders were concerned that information demands of the TDG registration database would be excessive given that some businesses are already required to provide similar information to other federal departments, provinces and territories, and in some cases, to foreign entities. The duplication of some requirements for the TDG registration database could also be problematic for businesses should discrepancies exist between what different entities requiring this information consider to be a dangerous goods site or activity. Stakeholders recommended that, to avoid duplication, TC should look to leverage information already collected by other government departments.

Multiple platforms were assessed by TC, such as those of Natural Resources Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the Canada Border Services Agency, Statistics Canada, as well as other TC platforms. Some information, such as the CRA business number, head office location, and contact phone numbers were available, but these inventories would not provide the information necessary for TC inspectors to identify TDG Sites and prioritize inspections according to the specific needs of the TDG Program. Furthermore, TC cannot use the relevant information found in these platforms as the information collected by other federal and provincial governments is governed by different policies surrounding collection, privacy, and security. The information that would be collected under the registration database would be specific to the DG activities, namely, Site address, classification of the dangerous goods, the mode of transport, the type of activities (importing, offering for transport, handling or transporting), the ERAP number as well as the number of consignments and quantities of dangerous goods.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an analysis was undertaken to determine whether the proposal is likely to give rise to modern treaty obligations. The assessment examined the geographic scope and subject matter of the proposal in relation to modern treaties in effect and, after examination, no implications or impacts on modern treaties were identified.

Instrument choice

TC’s ability to mitigate dangerous goods incidents and to protect public safety in the transportation sector depends on its knowledge of who is involved in DG activities in Canada, which dangerous goods are involved, how much dangerous goods are involved and the conditions under which these DG activities are taking place. The lack of a registration requirement for the transportation of dangerous goods has repeatedly been identified as a critical program and public safety risk. TC has limited, inaccurate and/or out-of-date information about persons involved in the transportation of dangerous goods in Canada. TC has attempted to address the issue through non-regulatory means.

TC has gathered relevant information using a patchwork of data sources; however, the information available through these sources is incomplete and not sufficient to support consistent and effective risk assessment, inspection, and/or enforcement. A registration requirement established in the regulations would ensure that TC has complete, accurate and up-to-date information, which would allow TC to identify and evaluate risks and prioritize inspection and enforcement activities. A registration database would also address fundamental concerns raised in the 2011 and 2020 CESD reports on TC’s lack of information on the regulated transportation of dangerous goods community.

If the status quo were maintained, TC would not be able to adequately deliver a risk-based oversight regime that ensures compliance with the TDGR to maintain public safety. Given that non-regulatory options have been tried and have not worked, regulatory intervention is needed to ensure the ongoing integrity and success of TC’s TDG Program.

Regulatory analysis

The proposed amendments would introduce a registration requirement for persons involved in DG activities when applicable. Amending the regulations would ensure that TC has the information required to effectively identify TDG Sites. The proposed amendments would result in an incremental cost of $12.39 million in present value (2021 Canadian dollars, discounted to the year 2022 at 7% discount rate) to persons involved in DG activities between 2022 and 2031. In addition, the proposed amendments would result in an incremental cost of $2.67 million to the Government of Canada between 2022 and 2031. The total cost of the proposed amendments is an estimated $15.07 million.

The proposed amendments would enable TC to have comprehensive knowledge of active TDG Sites across Canada. By closing the data gap, TC would enhance the capacity of the existing oversight framework and strengthen the effectiveness of the risk-based inspection program. These improvements would allow TC to better protect employees conducting DG activities on Site and Canadians at large.

Analytical framework

The costs and benefits for the proposed amendments have been assessed in accordance with the Treasury Board Secretariat’s (TBS) Policy on Cost-Benefit Analysis. Where possible, impacts are quantified and monetized, with only the direct costs and benefits for stakeholders being considered in the cost-benefit analysis.

Benefits and costs associated with the proposed amendments are assessed based on comparing the baseline scenario against the regulatory scenario. The baseline scenario depicts what is likely to happen in the future if the Government of Canada does not implement the proposed amendments. The regulatory scenario provides information on the expected outcomes of the proposed amendments.

The analysis estimated the impact of the proposed amendments over a 10-year period from 2022 to 2031, with the year 2022 being when the final regulations are expected to be registered. Unless otherwise stated, all costs are expressed in present value 2021 Canadian dollars, discounted to 2022 at a 7% discount rate.

Affected stakeholders

The proposed amendments would introduce requirements to persons that import, offer for transport, handle or transport dangerous goods to register themselves and the TDG Sites they own in an online database. Based on consultations with subject matter experts at TC, it is expected that the majority of those impacted would be businesses (referred to in the TDG Act as organizations). For the purpose of this analysis, all affected stakeholders are assumed to be businesses involved in DG activities.

TC’s internal analysis estimated that about 57,020 businesses would be impacted,^{footnote 8} of which, approximately 80% of affected businesses are assumed to be small businesses and 20% are medium/large businesses.^{footnote 9} The number of Sites is higher than the number of businesses, as larger businesses likely own more than one Site. Subject matter experts at TC assume that the transportation of dangerous goods industry is stable; therefore, the analysis does not include a business growth rate.

In addition, the proposed amendments would impact the Government of Canada. It is expected that TC would incur costs associated with maintaining and updating the registration database.

Baseline and regulatory scenario

Under the baseline scenario, businesses involved in DG activities would not be required to register their Sites in the registration database. Therefore, TC’s dangerous goods enforcement would continue to be based on the existing narrow scope of information on businesses and TDG Sites involved in DG activities.

Under the regulatory scenario, the proposed amendments would require businesses involved in DG activities to register their business and Sites which they operate in the registration database. This would result in an incremental administrative cost for affected stakeholders as well as implementation and maintenance costs for TC. The proposed amendments would be added under Part 17 of the TDGR and would set out the requirements for the information needed to register and the frequency with which the information needs to be updated. The information collected from the database would result in a comprehensive view of the regulated community, which would help better inform decision-making at TC that could enhance program efficiency, regulatory compliance, and the protection of employees conducting DG activities and Canadians at large.

Benefits and costs

Benefits

TC’s Dangerous Goods Accidents Information System (DGAIS) collects annual data on incidents related to the transportation of dangerous goods. The data collected shows that, between 2014 and 2018, a total of 1,879 accidents were reported. 42 of these accidents resulted in 49 fatalities; 312 accidents resulted in 507 injuries.^{footnote 10}

The information collected through the proposed amendments would provide TC with a comprehensive view of active TDG Sites across Canada, which would better inform TC’s decision-making; enhance the efficiency of TC’s existing oversight framework; and support TC in raising awareness and promoting compliance. This collection of information is ultimately expected to reduce the likelihood or the severity of incidents on TDG Sites and better protect employees conducting DG activities and the Canadian public.

Currently, TC categorizes known TDG Sites based on risk levels (i.e. low, medium, high, and very high); however, TC still does not have sufficient risk-related information to accurately determine risk levels on approximately 12% of these known TDG Sites.^{footnote 11} This information gap on known Sites highlights present risks in the TDG industry. More comprehensive data collected from TDG Sites would help TC more accurately identify and assess risks and, thereby, better inform decisions on compliance and enforcement strategies.

Between 2009 and 2021, TC was notified of approximately 2,500 reportable on-Site dangerous goods incidents and only 84 of them happened on a Site included in TC’s oversight system. In other words, 96.6% of these reported incidents occurred in Sites that were unknown to TC.^{footnote 12} Such a data gap hinders TC’s ability to effectively regulate the TDG sector and protect employees handing dangerous goods and the Canadian public.

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) has identified improperly classified and documented information of highly volatile petroleum crude oil to be a potential risk causing serious accidents when it is transported by train in large volumes.^{footnote 13} The railway investigation report cited that if information on classification and documentation were properly reported to TC, it would have helped draw the attention of officials to assess risks in a timely manner and take more proactive actions, such as targeted inspections, which could reduce the likelihood or the severity of potential accidents. The proposed amendments would require this information to be reported which would enhance the focus of TC’s oversight.

The proposed amendments would also enhance the effectiveness of the existing risk-based inspection program at TC. The reported data would enable TC to make more reliable risk score estimates, and therefore allow TC to more effectively identify and inspect higher-risk TDG Sites, which could help prevent the occurrence or severity of incidents from happening.

Overall, the Government of Canada is adopting data-driven decisions in its daily operations, not only to react to stakeholder demands and concerns, but also to proactively identify and even prevent issues before they develop into crises.^{footnote 14}

Benefits of the proposed amendments associated with enhancing safety and security for employees and the Canadian public are not quantified nor monetized, as the data required to do so would only be available as a result of the proposed amendments. However, TC strongly believes that these safety benefits would significantly outweigh the costs to stakeholders of providing the data.

Costs

Compliance with the proposed amendments would result in incremental costs of approximately $12.39 million to 57,020 businesses involved in DG activities over the 10-year analytical time frame. Furthermore, the proposed amendments would result in a cost of $2.67 million to the Government of Canada for maintaining and updating the registration database. Together, the proposed amendments would result in an estimated cost of $15.07 million between 2022 and 2031.

Cost to industry

Initial registration requirement

Businesses involved in DG activities in Canada would be required to provide information on their dangerous goods activities. The information that would be required includes: the CRA business number, name, address and contact information, point of contact, Site address where DG activities are conducted, the type of activities (handle for purposes of transport, offer for transport, transport, or import), the type of dangerous goods and modes of transportation. Some impacted businesses involving high-risk^{footnote 15} dangerous goods in their DG activities would be required to provide more detailed information. For businesses involved with higher-risk dangerous goods, information such as the list of dangerous goods and the quantities involved in the previous year would also be required.

Businesses would be required to register through the online registration database application developed by TC. It is estimated that 37% of TDG businesses are involved in DG activities of higher-risk dangerous goods and would require an average of four hours to complete registration. Furthermore, 63% of businesses are involved in lower risk dangerous goods and would require an average of 1.5 hours to complete registration.^{footnote 16} Businesses operating an existing TDG Site would have a one-year transitional period after the coming into force date of the proposed amendments. This requirement would result in an initial registration cost to business of $4.85 million in 2023.

Requirement for yearly renewal of registration

The proposed amendments would also require businesses to renew their registration on an annual basis by reviewing and updating all business information in the database as needed. The time required to update registration would depend on the risk-level of the dangerous goods involved in DG activities for each business. It is estimated that businesses conducting DG activities for higher risk and lower risk dangerous goods would require an average of one hour and 25 minutes, respectively, to review and update information.^{footnote 16} This requirement would result in a total cost of $7.55 million on businesses between 2024 and 2031.

Requirement to update the information

Businesses would be required to maintain up-to-date administrative information in the registration database by providing updates within 30 calendar days of a change related to activities or dangerous goods in their profile. This requirement ensures business information, such as the CRA business number, business addresses and contact information, is updated in a timely manner in the database if it is changed. Subject matter experts at TC expect that very few businesses would change such information during the analytical period because the cost of the initial infrastructure setup for businesses conducting DG activities is normally considerable, and therefore business owners would be unlikely to change such administrative information. As such, this requirement is not quantified for the central analysis. However, in the unlikely case a business does need to update administrative information, it is expected to take 10 minutes and would be done by an administrative level employee.^{footnote 16} This would result in an estimated $6.25 cost per update required to businesses.

Cost to the government

The development of the registration database would occur prior to the coming into force of the proposed amendments; however, TC is expected to incur the initial implementation and ongoing maintenance costs. It is assumed that in 2022, TC would require six employees, two at the AS-02 level, three at the CR-02 level and one at the EC-04 level^{footnote 17}, who would be responsible for the implementation of the database. Beginning in 2023, it is expected that TC would require one full-time employee^{footnote 17} at the EC-04 level and five part-time employees at the AS-03^{footnote 18} level who would be responsible for ongoing maintenance of the database. This requirement would result in a total government cost of $2.67 million between 2022 and 2031 for implementation and maintenance.

The proposed amendments would not change the way inspections are done on Sites. The information collected from the database would allow TC to make evidence-based decisions to prioritize existing oversight measures (awareness campaigns, inspections, etc.) based on risk. The proposed amendments are expected to make the existing oversight framework more efficient. The changes are not related to how oversight is performed, but rather where oversight should be focused. As such, TC does not intend to hire additional resources. Any training updates would be integrated into already scheduled training and would, therefore, only result in negligible costs.

Cost-benefit statement

• Number of years: 10 (2022-2031)
• Base year for costing: 2022
• Price year: 2021
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 1: Monetized costs (in millions)

Impacted stakeholder	Description of cost	Base year (2022)	Other relevant years (2023)	Other relevant years (2024–2030)	Final year (2031)	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Industries involved in DG activities	Initial registration requirement	0.00	4.85	0.00	00	4.85	0.69
	Yearly requirement of registration	0.00	0.00	6.81	0.74	7.55	1.07
Government of Canada	Implementation cost	0.45	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.45	0.06
	Ongoing maintenance	0.00	0.32	1.72	0.19	2.22	0.32
All stakeholders	Total costs	0.45	5.16	8.53	0.92	15.07	2.15

Sensitivity analysis

As previously described, a number of assumptions have been made to estimate the costs of the proposed amendments. To address the effect of uncertainty and variability on these assumptions, a sensitivity analysis was conducted, where variables are assigned different values, and outcomes are re-evaluated. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the following variables: analytical time frame and discount rates.

Analytical time frame

A 10-year analytical time frame was used for the central analysis, whereas the sensitivity analysis presents the results should a 15-year or 20-year time frame have been used.

Discount rate

The central analysis used a 7% discount rate as recommended by TBS. The sensitivity analysis presents the results should a 3% discount rate have been used, as well as if there was no discounting.

Table 2: Sensitivity analysis results (in millions)

Parameter	Total Cost
Analytical Time frame
10 years table b2 note *	$15.07
15 years	$18.84
20 years	$21.54
Discount Rates
Undiscounted	$19.53
3%	$17.36
7% table b2 note *	$15.07
Table b2 note(s) Table b2 note * Central scenario used in main analysis Return to table b2 note * referrer

Distributional analysis

The proposed amendments would impact all four transportation sectors (air, rail, marine and road), however, businesses in the road sector would be impacted more greatly than the other transportation sectors as the majority of businesses involved in DG activities are in the road sector. It is estimated that approximately 70% of the costs would be carried by businesses in the road sector, for a total of $8.68 million. The three other transportation sectors (air, marine and rail) would carry the remaining 30%, for a total of $3.72 million.^{footnote 19}

Table 3: Costs by transportation sector (in millions)

Transportation Sector	%	Total Cost
Road Sector	70	$8.68
Other transportation sectors (air, rail and marine)	30	$3.72
Total	100	$12.39

Small business lens

The small business lens applies as there are impacts on small businesses associated with the proposal. It is estimated that industries involved in DG activities are made up of approximately 80% small businesses,^{footnote 20} where a small business is defined by having 1–99 employees, or less than five million dollars in annual gross revenues. The proposed amendments would result in an incremental cost of $9.91 million over the 10-year analytical period to small businesses, with an incremental cost of $196 per business, annualized to $27.85 per business (Tables 4 and 5).

TC has not considered more flexible approaches to minimize the cost impact on small businesses as the proposed amendments aim to mitigate the risk of incidents on Sites conducting DG activities. Since a small business does not necessarily equate to conducting DG activities for lower risk dangerous goods, it is important to require consistent information from all businesses impacted.

Small business lens summary

• Number of small businesses impacted: 45,616
• Number of years: 10 years (2022-2031)
• Base year for costing: 2021
• Present value base year: 2022
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 4: Administrative costs (in millions)

Activity	Annualized value	Present value
Initial registration requirement	$0.55	$3.88
Yearly requirement of registration	$0.86	$6.04
Total administrative costs	$1.41	$9.91

Total 5: Compliance and administrative costs

Totals	Annualized value	Present value
Total cost (all impacted small businesses)	$1.41 million	$9.91 million
Cost per impacted small business	$27.85	$196

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies since there would be an incremental increase in administrative burden on businesses. As such, the proposal is considered burden “IN” under the rule. The proposed amendments would impose additional administrative requirements on businesses to register and renew registration. Using the methodology developed in the Red Tape Reduction Regulations, it is estimated that the annualized additional administrative costs imposed would be $698,406 or $12.25 annualized per business to the affected stakeholders (present value in 2021 Canadian dollars, discounted to the year 2012 with a 7% discount rate for a 10-year period between 2022 and 2031).

No regulatory titles would be repealed or introduced.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

In the United States (U.S.), the transportation of dangerous goods is governed by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). To fulfill its mandate, the PHMSA establishes national policy, sets and enforces standards, educates, and conducts research to prevent incidents and prepares the public and first responders to reduce consequences if an incident does occur.

Since 1992, PHMSA has required those who offer for transport or transport in commerce certain quantities and types of dangerous goods, including hazardous waste, to file an annual registration statement with the U.S. Department of Transportation. U.S. departments and agencies, however, are exempted from registration. In addition, all registrants are required to pay a fee on an annual basis.^{footnote 21}

The proposed amendments to require registration in Canada would therefore align to some extent with what is currently being done in the U.S. However, the programs would differ as TC’s registration requirement would: (i) apply to all persons who import, offer for transport, handle or transport dangerous goods within Canada; (ii) not apply fees for those who register with TC; and (iii) apply these requirements to federal departments and agencies. Despite the differences between these programs, the intent of both initiatives remains the same: to gather information to manage program activities based on risk.

The proposed amendments would not apply to U.S. persons involved in DG activities in Canada unless they are operating a Site or have their headquarters in Canada.

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, and the Transport Canada Policy Statement on Strategic Environmental Assessment (2013), the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) process was followed for this proposal and a Sustainable Transportation Assessment was completed. Although no important environmental effects are anticipated, the proposed amendments may have an environmental benefit because they are expected to reduce the likelihood, frequency, and potential damage — including environmental damage — that can result from dangerous goods incidents and accidents. The assessment considered potential effects to the environmental goals and targets of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS).

Gender-based analysis plus

A GBA+ review was completed, and the results of the analysis determined that the proposed amendments would not benefit or disadvantage any groups based on biological, social, economic, or cultural factors. The regulatory proposal would affect businesses involved in DG activities, which are legal entities, rather than individuals; therefore, no differential impacts are expected based on identity factors, such as gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, religion, etc. TC further consulted stakeholders, including the Assembly of First Nations, regarding potential differential impacts on diverse groups of people, but no specific concerns were raised.

While TC does not have comprehensive data on the gender composition of the transportation of dangerous goods industry, it should be noted that, in general, women are underrepresented in the transportation industry. The proposed amendments are not expected to create, perpetuate, or reinforce any barriers to access for women within the transportation industry.

Implementation, and compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

TC aims for the proposed amendments to come into force upon their publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II. However, existing businesses at the time of the coming into force would have one year after that date to complete their registration.

Some of the tools that TC would use to facilitate the implementation of the proposed amendments are described below.

• TC website: The TC Web pages are updated on a regular basis with various communication products, as well as specific sections for awareness material (e.g. Frequently Asked Questions, Alerts, Advisory Notices and Bulletins). Notices with respect to the proposed amendments would be placed on the relevant pages of the TC website after final publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II.
• TDG website: In relation to the new requirements, the TDG website would be updated to include a notice of the proposed amendments after prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I. Safety awareness materials would be developed for stakeholders as required. TC would prepare a video on “how to register” and publish that video on the TDG website as part of the awareness campaign after final publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II.
• The TDG GPAC: During GPAC meetings, TC consults and provides information and updates on research and regulatory amendments that are proposed and their coming-into-force dates. TC would use these meetings to promote awareness of and compliance with the proposed amendments by educating the industry on the new database tool. TC would also share the video on “how to register” at these meetings.
• The TDG Newsletter: The TDG Newsletter, published semi-annually since 1980, is distributed to over 15,000 readers in Canada and abroad. It is free of charge and available in hard copy and electronically on the TDG website. Proposed regulatory amendments and updates are published in the TDG Newsletter regularly. An article highlighting the addition of the Part 17 requirements to the TDGR would be prepared for the TDG Newsletter and published in the issue following the coming into force of the proposed amendments.

Implementation of the database

The database is currently being developed. TC expects the database to be completed and fully accessible in spring 2023. The database would be cloud-based and easily accessible through TC’s website.

Transport Canada operates a risk-based oversight program and takes into consideration important factors before taking any enforcement action. In the unlikely event of a system failure, a registration or update could be completed as soon as the issue is resolved. As such, renewal registration requirements could be delayed by a few days only under these circumstances.

In the event that a business is located in a place where Internet access is limited or impossible, the business could request a paper form from TC in writing, which they would complete and return by fax or by mail. Corrections or administrative changes^{footnote 22} would be required to be made by providing updates within 30 calendar days of a change and would be made directly in the database.

A registration would be deemed complete when all required fields, based on the type of dangerous goods involved in DG activities, have been filled out, the profile saved and sent in the application database, and a confirmation message from TC has been received by the registrant.

Costs associated with the ongoing operation and maintenance of the database would be managed by TC within existing resources.

Data protection

TC will secure and protect the information collected in the database and stored in the Microsoft Cloud by:

• relying on Microsoft’s network security services to control network traffic accessing the database in the Microsoft Cloud, provided as part of the contract for Cloud services between TC and Microsoft;
• using TC network appliances to control network traffic entering and exiting the TC network;
• only allowing TC employees to access the database in the Microsoft Cloud from a TC-owned computer using a registered TC user account;
• requiring internal users to provide two pieces of identification to gain access to the system;
• requiring external users to use a government-issued identification key to gain access to the system;
• for those users allowed access to the database, limit the permission they have to change the data based on predefined roles; and
• encrypting data sent to and from the database and encrypting data in the database.

Compliance and enforcement

Training on the new requirements would be provided to TC TDG inspectors and provincial and territorial inspectors prior to the coming into force of the proposed amendments. This training may include a combination of classroom instruction, Web-based learning, advisory notes, bulletins, Frequently Asked Questions and enforcement instructions. Costs for such training would be managed within TC’s existing resources and training curriculum.

Following the transition period and after the first registrations come in, the system would be able to identify the types of businesses who are registering. TC would put in place targeted awareness campaigns to ensure that all businesses that could potentially be conducting DG activities, provided they are not under any exemptions, are prompted to register in the registration database within a specific time frame.

Compliance with the registration database requirements would be addressed using existing enforcement measures and personnel. Should an inspector identify non-compliance through an opportunity inspection,^{footnote 23} a letter would be sent to the company requiring that the company register within a specified time frame. TDG inspectors who identify non-compliance with the TDGR may apply a graduated approach to enforcement including, but not limited to, education, warnings and/or fines^{footnote 24} of between $500 and $1000.

Contact

Farrah Fleurimond
Executive Director
Regulatory Frameworks and International Engagement Branch
Transportation of Dangerous Goods Directorate
Department of Transport
L’Esplanade Laurier (ASDD)
300 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa (Ontario)
K1A 0N5
Email: TC.TDGRegulatoryProposal-TMDPropositionReglementaire.TC@tc.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to section 27^{footnote a} of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992^{footnote b}, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (Registration Database).

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 70 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must be submitted online on the Canada Gazette, Part I, or, if submitted by email, post or other format, must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be addressed to Farrah Fleurimond, Executive Director, Regulatory Frameworks and International Engagement Branch, Department of Transport, Esplanade Laurier, 300 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5 (email: TDGRegulatoryProposal-TMDPropositionReglementaire@tc.gc.ca).

Ottawa, June 17, 2022

Wendy Nixon
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (Registration Database)

Amendments

1 The portion of subsection 1.15(1) of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations ^{footnote 25} before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(1) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a vessel on a domestic voyage if

2 Subsection 1.17(2) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of limited quantities of dangerous goods on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a vessel on a domestic voyage if each means of containment is legibly and durably marked on one side, other than a side on which it is intended to rest or to be stacked during transport, with the mark illustrated in subsection (5).

3 The portion of subsection 1.17.1(3) of the Regulations before the “Excepted Quantities Mark” is replaced by the following:

(3) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods in excepted quantities if each means of containment is marked on one side, other than a side on which it is intended to rest or to be stacked during transport, with the excepted quantities mark illustrated below.

4 The portion of section 1.19.1 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.19.1 Part 2 (Classification), Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to samples of goods that the consignor reasonably believes to be dangerous goods whose classification or exact chemical composition is unknown and cannot be readily determined if

5 The portion of section 1.19.2 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.19.2 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to samples of dangerous goods if

6 The portion of subsection 1.21(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(1) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods on a road vehicle licensed as a farm vehicle if

7 The portion of subsection 1.23(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(1) Part 3 (Documentation), the requirements for the display of a UN number in section 4.15 of Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 6 (Training) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to a solution of pesticides in transport on a road vehicle if

8 The portion of section 1.24 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.24 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to UN1005, ANHYDROUS AMMONIA, if it is

9 Section 1.30 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

1.30 Paragraph 3.6(3)(a) of Part 3 (Documentation), subsection 4.16(3) and paragraph 4.16.1(2)(d) of Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to dangerous goods in transport on a road vehicle or railway vehicle that is being transported on board a vessel that is operating over the most direct water route between two points that are not more than 5 km apart.

10 The portion of section 1.30.1 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.30.1 Subsection 1.6(1) of Part 1 (Coming into Force, Repeal, Interpretation, General Provisions and Special Cases), paragraph 3.6(3)(a) of Part 3 (Documentation) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to dangerous goods that are UN1203, GASOLINE, or UN1978, PROPANE, that are in a highway tank that is being transported by a tank truck on board a passenger carrying vessel that is operating over the most direct water route between two points that are not more than 5 km apart if

11 The portion of section 1.31 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.31 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 6 (Training), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods included in Class 1, Explosives, on a road vehicle or a railway vehicle if

12 Section 1.32 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

1.32 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to UN2857, REFRIGERATING MACHINES, refrigerating machine components that contain gases included in Class 2.2, Non-flammable, Non-toxic Gases or UN2672, AMMONIA SOLUTIONS, if the quantity of gas has a mass that is less than or equal to 12 kg and the quantity of ammonia solutions is less than or equal to 12 L.

13 The portion of section 1.32.3 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.32.3 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 6 (Training) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to dangerous goods that are transported in one or more small means of containment on a road vehicle solely on land if

14 The portion of section 1.33 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.33 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods included in Class 3, Flammable Liquids, on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a vessel on a domestic voyage if the dangerous goods

15 The portion of section 1.35 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.35 Part 3 (Documentation), the UN number requirements in sections 4.12 and 4.15.2 of Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 6 (Training) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods that are UN1202, DIESEL FUEL, or UN1203, GASOLINE, on a road vehicle if

16 The portion of section 1.36 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.36 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a vessel on a domestic voyage of

17 The portion of section 1.38 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.38 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of a polyester resin kit that consists of a substance included in Class 3, Packing Group II or III and a substance included in Class 5.2, Type D, E or F that does not require temperature control if

18 The portion of section 1.39 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.39 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), except section 4.22.1, and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of infectious substances that are included in Category B if

19 The portion of section 1.41 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.41 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of biological products if they

20 Subsection 1.42(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(1) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of human or animal specimens and are reasonably believed not to contain infectious substances.

21 Subsection 1.42.2(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(1) Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of blood or blood components that are intended for transfusion or for the preparation of blood products and are reasonably believed not to contain infectious substances.

22 The portion of section 1.42.3 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.42.3 Part 3 (Documentation), sections 4.10 to 4.12 of Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 8 (Reporting Requirements) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods that are medical waste or clinical waste if

23 The portion of section 1.43 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.43 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 5 (Means of Containment), Part 6 (Training), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan), Part 9 (Road), Part 10 (Rail), Part 11 (Marine), Part 12 (Air) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods included in Class 7, Radioactive Materials, if the dangerous goods

24 The portion of section 1.44 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.44 Part 2 (Classification), Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks), Part 7 (Emergency Response Assistance Plan) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to a residue of dangerous goods contained in a drum that is in transport on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a vessel on a domestic voyage, except for dangerous goods included in Packing Group I or contained in a drum otherwise requiring a label for Class 1, 4.3, 6.2 or 7, if

25 Section 1.45.1 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

1.45.1 Part 3 (Documentation), Part 4 (Dangerous Goods Safety Marks) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to substances that are classified as marine pollutants in accordance with section 2.43 of Part 2 (Classification) if they are in transport solely on land by road vehicle or railway vehicle. However, substances may be identified as marine pollutants on a shipping document and the required dangerous goods safety marks may be displayed when they are in transport by road or railway vehicle.

26 The portion of section 1.47 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

1.47 Subsections 5.10(1) and (2) of Part 5 (Means of Containment) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of UN1044, FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, if the fire extinguishers

27 The portion of subsection 1.49(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(1) Section 5.10 of Part 5 (Means of Containment) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods in a cylinder on a road vehicle or an aircraft if

28 The portion of subsection 1.50(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(1) Sections 5.2 and 5.5 and subsections 5.10(1) and (2) of Part 5 (Means of Containment) and Part 17 (Registration Database) do not apply to the offering for transport, handling or transporting of UN1978, PROPANE, in a cylinder on a road vehicle, a railway vehicle or a ship on a domestic voyage if

29 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after Part 16:

PART 17
Registration Database

Definition

17.1 In this Part, site means a place where dangerous goods are imported, offered for transport, handled or transported, but does not include a means of transport.

Application

17.2 (1) Subject to subsection (2), this Part applies to a person who imports, offers for transport, handles or transports dangerous goods at a site located in Canada.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to

• (a) a person who imports, offers for transport, handles or transports dangerous goods originating from outside Canada and passing through Canada to a destination outside of Canada without any handling being done in Canada;
• (b) a person conducting cross border movements who does not have headquarters in Canada or who does not operate a site in Canada where importing, offering for transport, handling or transporting activities take place;
• (c) a person operating one or more oil wells; or
• (d) a self-employed commercial truck owner-operator who imports, offers for transport, handles or transports dangerous goods within Canada.

Registration

17.3 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a person to whom this Part applies at the time of its coming into force must register on the registration database relating to dangerous goods on the Department of Transport website by providing the following information within one year after the day on which this Part comes into force:

• (a) the person’s Canada Revenue Agency business number, if any;
• (b) the person’s name and the address of their headquarters;
• (c) for each site, the phone numbers and email addresses of both a contact person and their replacement when absent;
• (d) the addresses of all sites where dangerous goods are imported, offered for transport, handled or transported;
• (e) the mode of transportation of dangerous goods used at each site;
• (f) for each site, the classes and divisions of dangerous goods that were imported, offered for transport, handled or transported by the person in the year preceding the date of registration;
• (g) for each site, the importing, offering for transport, handling or transporting activities that were undertaken in the year preceding the date of registration; and
• (h) with respect to goods referred to in section 1.4.3.1.2 of the UN Recommendations, subsection 456(1) of the Explosives Regulations, 2013 or section 7.2 of these Regulations, the following information for each of those goods and for each site:
  • (i) the UN number,
  • (ii) the person’s ERAP number in relation to the dangerous goods,
  • (iii) the range of quantities that were imported, offered for transport, handled or transported in the year preceding the date of registration, and
  • (iv) the number of consignments in the year preceding the date of registration.

(2) A person to whom this Part does not apply at the time of its coming into force when it comes into force must register on the registration database relating to dangerous goods on the Department of Transport website by providing at least the information referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (e) within 90 days after the day on which their importing, offering for transport, handling or transporting of dangerous goods activities begin.

Renewal

17.4 A person must renew their registration annually on the anniversary date of their initial registration by updating the information referred to in subsection 17.3(1) on the registration database relating to dangerous goods on the Department of Transport website, and information provided under paragraphs 17.3(1)(f) to (h) relates to the year preceding the day on which the registration is renewed.

Changes to Information

17.5 A person must update the registration database relating to dangerous goods on the Department of Transport website within 30 days after any change occurs to the information that they provided under paragraphs 17.3(1)(a) to (e) on registration or annual renewal.

Coming into Force

30 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

• contain personal information
• contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
• express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
• contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
• contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
• constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
• encourage or incite any criminal activity
• contain a language other than English or French
• otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that public email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.