Nuclear: The Last Six Months
Of Federal Activity

About

This Report

This is a computer-generated report that shows all of the federal activity with respect to the keyword "Nuclear" over the last six months. This is a demonstration of the power of our government relations automation software.

Hansard

House: 6 Speeches
Senate: 18 Speeches

House Senate

Bills

Active: 0

Regulations

Filed: 4
Proposed: 0

Regulations

The House

Hon. Andrew Leslie (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Canada-U.S. Relations), Lib.)

December 6th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“...t Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Canada for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy”, done at Ottawa on November 2, 2018.”

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)

November 21st
Hansard Link

Statements by Members

“...d the 56th anniversary of the Soviet Union's pullout of its missiles from Cuba, ending the greatest nuclear threat to civilization. It also marked the 73rd anniversary since the Nuremberg trials began...”

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

October 17th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“... and peaceful solutions in conflicts around the world, and in this effort call for further work for nuclear disarmament. The specifics of their petition are for the creation of a department of peace a...”

Mr. Daniel Blaikie

September 26th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“...k for unanimous consent for a motion that would help bring a fair and lasting solution for Canadian Nuclear Laboratories workers who are facing the loss of their pension. Bill C-414, would provide another year for the government to provide and find a solution in conjunction with these workers. That is why I am hopeful that if you seek it you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practices of this House, Bill C-414, an act to amend the Jobs and Economic Growth Act (Canadian Nuclear Laboratories Ltd.) be deemed to have been read a second time and referred to a committee of ...”

Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville North—Burlington, Lib.)

June 20th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“...signatures, initiated by Barbara Birkett and a group of Oakville residents who are passionate about nuclear disarmament.

The petitioners say that the use of any nuclear weapons would have catastrophic consequences and nuclear weapons are the only weapons of mass destruction not yet prohibited by an international agreement. They call upon the Government of Canada to sign and ratify the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.”

Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)

June 20th
Hansard Link

Routine Proceedings

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the many workers at Canadian Nuclear Laboratories who were told three years ago this September that they would be kicked out of t...”


The Senate

Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate)

December 12th
Hansard Link

The Senate Statutes Repeal Act—Motion to Resolve that the Act and the Provisions of Other Acts not be Repealed Adopted

“...of the schedule: sections 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 7.1, 9 to 12, 14 and 16) and 85; 3.Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act, S.C. 1998, c. 32; 4.Preclearance Act, S.C. 1999, c. 20: -section 37; 5.Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, S.C. 1999, c. 34: -sections 155, 157, 158 and 160, subsections 161(1) and (4) and section 168; 6.Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12: -subsections 107(1) and (3) and section 109; 7.Marine Liability Act, S.C. 2001, c. 6: -section 45; 8.Yukon Act, S.C. 2002, c. 7: -sections 70 to 75 and 77, subsection 117(2) and sections 167, 168, 210, 211, 221, 227, 233 and 283; 9.An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, S.C. 2003, c. 26: -sections 4 and 5, subsection 13(3), section 21, subsections 26(1) to (3) and sections 30, 32, 34, 36 (with respect to section 81 of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act), 42 and 43; 10.Assisted Human Reproduction Act, S.C. 2004, c. 2: -sections 12 and 45 to 58; 11.Budget Implementation Act, 2005, S.C. 2005, c. 30: -Part 18 other than section 125; 12.An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions, S.C. 2005, c. 54: -subsection 27(2), section 102, subsections 166(2), 239(2), 322(2) and 392(2); and 13.An Act to amend the law governing financial institutions and to provide for related and consequential matters, S.C. 2007, c. 6: -section 28, subsections 30(1) and (3),88(1) and (3) and 164(1) and (3) and section 362; and 14.Budget Implementation Act, 2008, S.C. 2008, c. 28: -sections 150 and 162. She said: Honourable senators, I will deliver my speech in my allotted time since listening to it may be as exciting as watching paint dry. Today I rise to move Motion No. 235, which lists the acts and provisions of acts that are not to be repealed on December 31. This highly technical motion stems from a bill that received Royal Assent in 2008, namely the Statutes Repeal Act. This bill originated in the Senate and was introduced by the Honourable Senator Tommy Banks. It seeks to clean up federal legislation by repealing any act or provision of an act that has not come into force for 10 years. [English] Every year, in early January, the Senate and the House of Commons receive an annual report from the Minister of Justice listing laws and provisions of laws that received Royal Assent but that have not been brought into force for 10 years. [Translation] The Senate received such a report on January 31, 2018. On receipt of that report, the ministers responsible determine whether the acts or legislative provisions may indeed be repealed. [English] This year, there are 22 provisions from three different acts that will be repealed on December 31 by operation of the Statutes Repeal Act because the responsible ministers have not recommended that their repeal be deferred. These three acts are: Amendments and Corrections Act, 2003, S.C. 2004; An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions, S.C. 2005; and Budget Implementation Act, 2008, S.C. 2008. The reasons include that these provisions are no longer needed as the issues they were meant to address could be addressed by other means, including existing programs, or were amended by other legislation. In addition to those provisions, the Royal Assent of what was Bill C-70, An Act to give effect to the Agreement on Cree Nation Governance between the Crees of Eeyou Istchee and the Government of Canada, to amend the Cree-Naskapi (of Quebec) Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, on March 29 of this year, had the effect of repealing two provisions of one act that was listed in the 2018 report, sections 89 and 90 of the Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act. This is why they do not appear in the present motion despite appearing in the 2018 report. [Translation] Ten ministers recommended deferring the repeal of one entire act and 13 provisions of other acts that have not come into force since being enacted. There is a new statute among them this year, namely the Budget Implementation Act, 2008. [English] I now present the reasons behind the recommendations. [Translation] Some of you may recognize the provisions of acts that were not repealed last year. Let’s begin with the Minister of Finance. He is recommending a deferral of certain provisions in two acts, the first being An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to financial institutions. These particular provisions relate to the ability of a shareholder of a financial institution to appoint a proxy to take part in a shareholders’ meeting and act on behalf of the shareholder who appointed the proxy. More specifically, these provisions amend the definition of the term “solicitation” in the Bank Act, the Cooperative Credit Associations Act, the Insurance Companies Act and the Trust and Loan Companies Act. A deferral of the repeal of these provisions is recommended so that the work already under way to modernize the corporate governance of federally regulated financial institutions can continue and because no amendments would be adopted before December 31, 2018. [English] The second deferral recommendation concerns provisions of An Act to amend the law governing financial institutions and to provide for related and consequential matters. Section 28 of this act relates to the Bank Act special security regime. A deferral of repeal of section 28 is recommended in order for the department to develop regulations in this technical and complex area. The remaining not-in-force provisions of the act amend parallel sections in the Bank Act, the Cooperative Credit Associations Act and the Trust and Loan Companies Act to create a requirement for financial institutions to attempt communication with unclaimed balance holders via email, in addition to the current requirement of sending a notice to the person’s recorded address. The Department of Finance is currently consulting on amendments to modernize the federal Unclaimed Balances Framework, and deferral of repeal of these provisions is recommended until the review of the framework is complete. [Translation] The Minister of Foreign Affairs recommends the deferral of the repeal of an entire act and one provision of another act. The first recommendation concerns the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty must be ratified by 44 specified countries before coming into force, but eig...”

Senator Tkachuk

December 12th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading

“... C-48 as if accidents are, if not a daily occurrence, a clear and present danger. Then there is the nuclear industry. There has not been a single radiation-related fatality in the 50 years in which nuclear power has been operating in this country. It is one of the most closely monitored industries in Canada. It is subject to a world-class regulatory process. Yet with Bill C-69, the government, once again fixing what isn’t broken, is going to force the nuclear industry into a new process. Let’s look at the pipeline industry as well. Kinder Morgan has had no pipeline accident since 1953 on its current 1,150-kilometre route. The new pipeline, the expansion, is being built alongside the pipeline that is already in place. Seventy-three per cent of the route of the expansion will use the existing pathway, and 16 per cent will follow other existing infrastructure. Only 11 per cent of the route is built away from existing infrastructure to accommodate homes and businesses. The result is minimal impact on the landscape by adding to infrastructure that has been in place for 65 years. The resource industry is among the biggest high-wage employers for Indigenous and First Nations people. Cameco, the uranium company in Saskatchewan, in my province, was at one time the largest industrial employer of Indigenous people in Canada, employing 1,700 First Nations or Metis people. It’s now down to 600 due to a sluggish uranium market, which hasn’t been helped by our federal government, that forced cutbacks in its northern Saskatchewan operations. While Cameco hopes to get back to being the largest industrial employer of First Nations and Indigenous people, low global uranium prices and — as they have told me — ongoing uncertainty regarding impact assessment, carbon pricing, clean fuel standards and what they call “regulatory stacking” will be a factor in whether or not Cameco decides to open new mines. I was among a handful of senators that met on Bill C-48 with a group of First Nations representatives yesterday. They represent some 200 Indigenous communities. As far as they are concerned, the oil and resource industry is fundamental to the future of their communities — the future of their children. The jobs and the economic spin-offs in that industry are the answer to their poverty and a remedy to the rampant suicide epidemic that afflicts many of those communities. Bills like Bill C-48 and Bill C-69 are nothing more than nails in the coffin to them. These are their words. I am paraphrasing them, but these are their thoughts, not mine. For them, this is not an abstract policy debate. For them, this is as real as it gets. A recent study points out that every oil and gas project currently proposed in Western Canada implicates at least one First Nation community and provides potential employment opportunities for a group that is well below the national average in employment. As Kenneth Green has written, Bill C-48 and Bill C-69 will only make the situation worse for our First Nations. Senators, if you’re aware of these things, it’s certainly not because the Liberal government talks about them. They would prefer to lecture people about the horror of plastic straws and implement a carbon tax that will make no difference whatsoever in the rate of global GHG emissions. Better to do that than to talk about the fact that the modern pipeline industry emits three times less greenhouse gases than do cows and other ruminant animals. The last time the Liberals were in power, they did nothing. They signed the Kyoto Protocol and did nothing to meet their targets. In fact, they had no intention of meeting their targets, as Eddie Goldenberg, the former chief of staff to Prime Minister Chrétien, admitted later. He wasn’t the only one. Former Liberal environment minister Christine Stewart also stated at the time that the Liberals ignored climate change and didn’t act for 10 years, and she admitted the reason was politics. David Anderson, another Liberal environment minister under Paul Martin, said he was removed from that portfolio by Paul Martin not for failing to do his job on Kyoto, but for trying too hard to do his job. Stéphane Dion was chosen to replace him, Anderson said, because he was far less keen on Kyoto than was Anderson. We all know what happened under Dion. As former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff said to him during the leadership debates: You didn’t get it done. Honourable senators, former Liberal environment minister Christine Stewart’s words were not only accurately descriptive of the cynical efforts of the Liberal government she served at that time but prophetic about the Liberal government’s efforts on the environment. This bill and the Liberal government’s entire environmental program is designed to signal their virtuous intentions while doing very little for the environment and inflicting enormous damage on our oil and gas and entire resource industry. They want to kill not just the oil industry but the energy industry itself. They have said as much, and their actions indicate it. In Canada, we are blessed with hydro, uranium and natural gas. All of them emit less CO2 than coal and diesel. Yet there is no concentrated effort to use these energy sources to reduce CO2 because the environmental movement doesn’t like any of these options, so neither do the Liberals, who never met an environmental lobby they wouldn’t pander to. Couple this with the fact that Canada is a carbon sink that, by some estimates, absorbs 20 to 30 per cent more than we emit and with enough land mass to increase the amount of carbon we can absorb. But we don’t talk about that either. So all those solutions are at hand, and instead we provide subsidies for electric vehicles, which no one will buy without a subsidy, and a carbon tax which Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick and soon Alberta are opposed to because they fear, with good reason, that it is simply a revenue grab by the federal government. Enjoying the fruits of civilization and progress while addressing the impact it has on our environment is hard work. It means making tough decisions. The energy industry in Canada is a leader in working towards a cleaner environment. Their variety of products is itself a way to assist in decreasing CO2 emissions. Natural gas is a good substitute for coal. Liquefying it and sending it to Asia would have a positive effect in helping those nations reduce their carbon footprint. Nuclear power is another energy source that would have great benefits, as would hydro. What does the government do? It introduces Bill C-69, which will make projects more difficult for both industries. I met with representatives from the nuclear industry, in my office, and they estimate it will take them eight years to get a project app...”

Hon. Diane Bellemare (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate)

December 7th
Hansard Link

The Senate Statutes Repeal Act—Notice of Motion to Resolve that the Act and the Provisions of Other Acts not be Repealed

“...of the schedule: sections 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 7.1, 9 to 12, 14 and 16) and 85; 3.Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Implementation Act, S.C. 1998, c. 32; 4.Preclearance Act, S.C. 1999, c. 20: ...”

Hon. Elaine McCoy

December 7th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...e that would happen in Ontario, or the hydroelectric project at Muskrat Falls in Newfoundland, or a nuclear plant in Saskatchewan, or an oil sands plant in Alberta, or a damn in northern B.C. I just d...”

Hon. Tony Dean

October 31st
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...nsible authority for assessments has drawn some criticism. Currently, under CEAA 2012, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the Canadian Environmental Agency are involved. The expert panel recom...”

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson

October 30th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...fix it? This bill — let me use a dramatic word — trashes the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. They are gone. Canadians were told that the National Energy Board, in particular, had lost credibility as a prelude to these changes. The National Energy Board, I would say, has an international reputation for rigorous and effective work. Would the Government Leader in the Senate agree that the National Energy Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission have lost credibility?”

Senator Harder

October 30th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...es the assurance to stakeholders that the decisions can be actionable. With respect to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to which you refer, they are in fact staying on as part of an umbrella so that their expertise can be preserved, but there will be broader participation in the larger projects that involve the nuclear sector. (On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.) [Translation]”

Hon. André Pratte

October 23rd
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“... territory or Indigenous governing body if the project falls under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission or the new Canadian Energy Regulator. This means that many pipeline projec...”

Hon. Douglas Black

October 4th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...nts of the resource sector. That would be forestry, mining, renewables such as wind farms, fishing, nuclear, pipelines, and offshore oil and gas development — in summary, the Canadian resource economy...”

Senator D. Black

October 4th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...e criteria around the intersection of sex and gender. There it is. I would say as well the Canadian Nuclear Association is deeply unhappy with this legislation based on safety reasons — we can go into...”

Hon. Tony Dean

October 3rd
Hansard Link

Bill to Amend Certain Acts and Regulations in Relation to Firearms Second Reading—Debate Continued

“...alibrated to risk. For example, the flying of kites is more lightly regulated than the operation of nuclear power plants. It doesn’t mean that kites are not regulated. If we fly them close to high ten...”

Hon. Ghislain Maltais

October 3rd
Hansard Link

The Senate Motion Concerning Infrastructure of Newfoundland and Labrador—Debate Continued

“...am sure some of my Ontario colleagues will agree that their province is going to have to update its nuclear power plants over the next 15 years or so, but people are becoming increasingly skeptical about nuclear power. We all know how hard it is to transport oil. Senator Harder is well acquainted with t...”

Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate)

September 27th
Hansard Link

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Human Rights in Venezuela

“... to support the agreement reached by the principal parties, which is so important to containing the nuclear proliferation implied by the action that was taken.”

Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate)

September 27th
Hansard Link

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Human Rights in Iran

“...xercised, but it is not going so far as some countries have in terms of withdrawing support for the nuclear deal that is so important in the prevention of proliferation. (1440)”

Hon. Marilou McPhedran

September 26th
Hansard Link

Peace and Security

“...cil. Senators, today is the first anniversary of the signing of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, to which Canada is not a signatory, but almost two thirds of the UN member states support this new treaty. [Translation] The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is essential to maintaining peace and the freedom to live without fear. It is our duty as a nation and as individuals to work toward ending violence and keeping everyone safe. [English] At the UN General Assembly this week, we continue to showcase our Canadian values of gender equality and peace building on the international stage. Canada is running for a UN Security Council seat for 2020 and must show the world that we are ready to take on the responsibility of sitting on the most influential UN body. I was in the UN General Assembly with students, and we heard our Prime Minister promise the world that Canada is back. We must lead to ensure a sustainable, peaceful world free of violence and nuclear threat. Thank you. Meegwetch.”

Hon. Raymonde Saint-Germain

September 25th
Hansard Link

Export and Import Permits ActCriminal Code Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

“... technologies, meaning those for civil and military use; the Missile Technology Control Regime; the Nuclear Suppliers Group; and the Australia Group, which controls the export of chemical and biologic...”

Hon. Grant Mitchell

September 18th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

“...r projects reviewed by life-cycle regulators such as the Canadian Energy Regulator and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission would be shortened from 450 to 300 days. That’s 30 per cent. The minister ...”

Senator Mitchell

September 18th
Hansard Link

Impact Assessment BillCanadian Energy Regulator BillNavigation Protection Act Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

“... have the National Energy Board, together with offshore petroleum boards, and you have the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. They all have independent authority and they run separate assessments in ...”


Filed Regulations

Regulations Amending the Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations: SOR/2018-263

November 30, 2018 SOR/2018-263
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Gazette Link

“...lternatives. They proposed delaying the coal phase-out by a decade to allow enough time to deploy feasible and least-cost alternatives such as nuclear or hydro. However, the requests to delay the Amendments by either one year or a decade were not considered, as this will make it difficult for Canada...”


Prohibition of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations: SOR/2018-196

2018 October 1,
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Gazette Link

“...means an aircraft, ship, submarine or land vehicle designed to be used in combat or in a combat support role. (équipement militaire)

nuclear facility has the same meaning as in section 2 of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act. (installation nucléaire)

Non-application

In transit

2 (1) These Regulations do not appl...”

“...ed and that an asbestos management plan that meets the requirements set out in Schedule 1 has been implemented.

Servicing equipment of nuclear facilities

11 (1) A person may import, sell or use a product containing processed asbestos fibres to service equipment of a nuclear facility before January 1, 2023, if there is no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative available at the time of the import, sale or use, as the case may be.

Use or sale — nuclear facility equipment

(2) A person may use or sell the equipment referred to in subsection (1) if it was serviced using a pr...”

“... 2023.

Report and management plan

(3) A person who uses a product containing processed asbestos fibres to service equipment of a nuclear facility in accordance with subsection (1) must

(a) prepare and implement an asbestos management plan that meets the require...”

“... in subsection (4).

Contents of report

(4) The report must include the following elements:

(a) the name of the nuclear facility, its civic address in Canada and postal address; (b) the name of the individual who is authorized to act for that nuclear facility and their title, civic address in Canada, postal address, telephone number and email address; (c) the name and a description of the equipment of the nuclear facility that was serviced with the products containing processed asbestos fibres in the calendar year to which the report relates; (d) the name and a description of each type of product containing processed asbestos fibres that was used to service the equipment of the nuclear facility in the calendar year to which the report relates; (e) the estimated concentration and mass of asbestos in each product containin...”

“...g) a statement indicating that there was no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative available at the time the equipment of the nuclear facility was serviced and that an asbestos management plan that meets the requirements set out in Schedule 1 has been implemented. ...”

“...

(6) The holder of the permit must submit a report to the Minister within 90 days after the day on which their permit expires.

Nuclear facilities — import

20 (1) A permit issued under subsection (3) authorizes its holder, after December 31, 2022, to import and use a product containing processed asbestos fibres to service equipment of a nuclear facility, if there was no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative available at the time of the permit application.

Contents of permit application

(2) The application must include

(a) the nuclear facility’s name, civic address in Canada and postal address; (b) the name of the individual who is authorized to act for the nuclear facility and their title, civic address in Canada, postal address, telephone number and email address; (c) the name and a description of the equipment of the nuclear facility that will be serviced with each product referred to in the application; (d) the name and a description of each type of product r...”

“...6) The holder of the permit must submit a report to the Minister within 90 days after the day on which their permit expires.

Servicing nuclear facilities — product in Canada

21 (1) A permit issued under subsection (3) authorizes its holder to use a product containing processed asbestos fibres and that is in Canada to service equipment of a nuclear facility after December 31, 2022, if there was no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative available at the time of the permit application.

Contents of permit application

(2) The application must include

(a) the nuclear facility’s name, civic address in Canada and postal address; (b) the name of the individual who is authorized to act for the nuclear facility and their title, civic address in Canada, postal address, telephone number and email address; (c) the name and a description of the equipment of the nuclear facility that will be serviced with each product referred to in the application; (d) the name and a description of each type of product r...”

“...alkali industry; an exclusion until December 31, 2022, for the import, sale and use of products containing asbestos to service equipment in nuclear facilities if no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative is available; an exclusion until December 31, 2022, ...”

“...quired for the time-limited exclusions for the import, sale, and use of products containing asbestos to service military equipment and equipment in a nuclear facility.

The Regulations include permit provisions for unforeseen circumstances where asbestos, or products containing asbestos, ar...”

“..., 2023, the Regulations will also include permit provisions for the import and use of replacement parts containing asbestos to service equipment in a nuclear facility and military equipment when no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative is available. Permits issued will be va...”

“... indefinite exclusion for the re-use of asphalt containing asbestos in road infrastructure and mining site restoration.

Military equipment and nuclear facilities

The Department of National Defence has indicated that during military operations, it may be challenging to obtain asbest...”

“... if no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative was available.

Further, the Department of National Defence as well as nuclear facilities have replacement parts containing asbestos that are no longer being manufactured in their inventories. The equipment is designed to...”

“...include a four-year time-limited exclusion for the import, sale and use of replacement products containing asbestos to service military equipment and nuclear facilities if technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternatives are not available. After this period, a permit will be required ...”

“...f a four-year time-limited exclusion for the import, use, or sale of replacement parts containing asbestos for the Department of National Defence and nuclear facilities was not considered in the analysis of health impacts, as potential worker exposure is expected to be low in these sectors, given th...”

“...of highly technical operating procedures. However, as the exclusion is accompanied with annual reporting requirements and a permitting scheme for the nuclear sector, the administrative cost estimates have been updated to include these administrative costs.

Industry and government administrati...”

“...familiarize themselves with the administrative requirements of the Regulations. These stakeholders include laboratories, chlor-alkali facilities, and nuclear facilities. If these stakeholders wish to import and/or use asbestos or products containing asbestos under one of the Regulations’ limit...”

“...re at the end of 2029 and reporting will continue until the following year. It is estimated that reporting will take 3.5 hours per year. For the nuclear sector, the time-limited exclusion for the import, use, or sale of replacement parts containing asbestos will expire at the end of 2022 and re...”

“...information collected through mandatory surveys indicates that, with the exception of the cement pipe industry and replacement parts for equipment in nuclear facilities and for military equipment, there are no other known stockpiles of products containing asbestos in Canada. Therefore, the Departmen...”

“...ill maintain that the Regulations will not require the disposal of asbestos or products containing asbestos and would allow their use in military and nuclear equipment only when there is no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternatives available through specific exclusion or under ...”

“... an asbestos management plan. Occupational health and safety regulations will continue to apply to help protect workers.

Replacement parts for nuclear facilities

Comment: Nuclear facilities have highlighted that they have in their inventories replacement parts containing asbestos that are no longer manufactured. These parts were often manufactured or purchased at the same time as the equipment (i.e. nuclear reactors) and are designed to meet highly technical operating conditions. Nuclear sector stakeholders, and a nuclear sector regulatory agency requested additional time to identify and obtain asbestos-free replacement parts, as well as an exclusion to use or i...”

“... has modified the Regulations to include a four-year time-limited exclusion for the import, use or sale of replacements parts containing asbestos for nuclear facilities. This exclusion requires annual reporting and a statement that no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alternative wa...”

“.... After the four-year exclusion, the Regulations include a permitting scheme for the import, use or sale of replacement parts containing asbestos for nuclear facilities. The permitting scheme requires annual reporting and a statement that no technically or economically feasible asbestos-free alterna...”


Pipeline Financial Requirements Regulations: SOR/2018-142

25, 2018 June
NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD ACT
Gazette Link

“...nd security of the federal regime. This has included stronger legal frameworks and other measures, not only for pipelines, but also for the offshore, nuclear, marine and rail sectors. Changes have focused on the pillars of prevention, preparedness and response, liability and compensation.

...”


Portions of the Public Service General Divestiture Regulations: SOR/2018-143

2018 June 25,
PUBLIC SERVICE SUPERANNUATION ACT
Gazette Link

“...art of the Regulations.)

Issues

On September 13, 2015, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) transferred its subsidiary, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), to Canadian National Energy Alliance (CNEA), a private sector company. CNL is responsible for the management and operation...”


Was This Useful? Try Our Real-Time Alerts Product: Free Trial

Operated by Global-Regulation Inc.