Vol. 136, No. 49 — December 7, 2002

Federal Halocarbon Regulations, 2002

Statutory Authority

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

Sponsoring Department

Department of the Environment

REGULATORY IMPACT
ANALYSIS STATEMENT

Description

The Montreal Protocol

Recognizing that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and Halons deplete the ozone layer and have adverse effects on the environment, Canada, along with 23 other nations, signed the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer on September 16, 1987.

Parties to the Protocol, now totaling over 180, have implemented control measures to achieve emissions reductions of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODSs). These reductions are intended to prevent damage resulting from the gradual destruction of the ozone layer and thus contribute to protecting the ecosystem and human health. Since 1987, Canada has adopted regulations to meet its Montreal Protocol commitments.

Current Federal Halocarbon Regulations

In 1999, Environment Canada published the current Federal Halocarbon Regulations under the authority of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, now replaced with the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The purpose of these Regulations is to reduce and prevent emissions of ozone-depleting substances and of their halocarbon alternatives from equipment used on federal and aboriginal lands and by federal works and undertakings.

The current Federal Halocarbon Regulations apply to halocarbon refrigeration, air conditioning, fire extinguishing and solvent cleaning systems as well as any associated container or device that is located on federal land or aboriginal land, or is a part of a federal work or undertaking. The Federal Halocarbon Regulations address ODSs as well as their Halocarbon alternatives that have a high global warming potential, namely hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs).

The Proposed Federal Halocarbon Regulations, 2002

The proposed Federal Halocarbon Regulation, 2002 will replace the current Federal Halocarbon Regulations. The purpose of the proposed Regulations is to implement regulatory measures to achieve an orderly transition from CFCs and Halons to alternative substances and technologies, as per Canada's Strategy to Accelerate the Phase-Out of CFC and Halon Uses and to Dispose of the Surplus Stocks, and to address administrative issues that have been identified concerning the current Regulations. The proposed Regulations are essentially the same as the existing Federal Halocarbon Regulations, with the exception of the implementation of new initiatives under Canada's Ozone Layer Protection Program and addressing various administrative issues, which are outlined below. Due to the substantial changes to the structure of the current Regulations and for the additional requirements, it was decided to propose new Regulations that would replace the existing ones.

The proposed Regulations include the following new measures:

— Prohibit charging mobile refrigeration systems with CFCs effective three months after the coming into force of these Regulations;

— Prohibit charging refrigeration systems with CFCs effective January 1, 2005;

— Prohibit charging air conditioning systems with CFCs effective January 1, 2005;

— Prohibit charging of chillers with CFCs at the next major overhaul of the chiller effective 2005. Prohibit charging chillers with CFCs effective 2015;

— Prohibit charging fixed fire extinguishing systems, hereinafter 1301 Total Flooding Systems, with Halons effective January 1, 2005. The Minister could grant a refill permit on the condition that the system is replaced with an alternative within a year from the date of issuance of the permit. This provision would expire December 31, 2009. Effective January 1, 2010, charges would be prohibited. This prohibition is subject to critical use exemptions;

— Amend the application section to reflect Part 9 under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The proposed Regulations would apply to departments, boards and agencies of the Government of Canada; to federal works and undertakings; to aboriginal land, federal land, persons on that land and other persons in so far as their activities involve these lands; and to Crown corporations, as defined in subsection 83(1) of the Financial Administration Act, hereinafter the regulated community;

— Add bromochloromethane (Halon 1011) to the list of controlled substances as per Canada's international commitments.

The proposed Regulations will come into force at the date of their registration.

Alternatives

1. Under a voluntary approach, the regulated community would not be legally required to comply with specific criteria; consequently, this approach would not ensure that the expected objectives of controlling ODS releases and their halocarbon alternatives are achieved. Therefore, this approach has been rejected.

2. An economic instrument implementing a charge (fee) would require that equipment owners within the regulated community monitor their releases of ODSs and their halocarbon alternatives since a charge would be expressed in dollars per kilogram of releases. This monitoring has been considered cost prohibitive.

3. A tradable permit system would require equipment owners within the regulated community to monitor the volume of purchased or released ODSs and their halocarbon alternatives since each permit issued would correspond to a used or released volume over one year. This annual volume would be used as a baseline. Thus, the implementation of this economic instrument would require users to measure and report on their ODS and halocarbon alternative uses and/or releases. In addition, implementation of an emission-trading instrument would require that a database be established before its promulgation, which would delay the control of targeted dates and would also involve significant administration costs. Therefore, this approach has also been rejected.

4. A regulation has been selected as the best option to achieve expected environmental goals of adding further controls on ODS releases and their halocarbon alternatives in the shortest time frame while minimizing the impact on the regulated community.

Benefits and Costs

It is estimated that the proposed Regulations will reduce the release of 1 146 tonnes (2 464 Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP) tonnes) of CFCs and Halons into the atmosphere over the 2003 to 2014 time period.

Overall, there is a net benefit to Canadian society from implementing the proposed Regulations. The net benefit (benefits minus costs) is estimated to be in the order of $88 million. Benefits stem from avoided impact on ecosystems and on human life, whereas regulation compliance and ODS disposal costs will be incurred. There are also costs to the Government to implement and enforce the proposed Regulations. It is anticipated that the proposed Regulations will have a small impact on the above costs.

Uncertainty analysis concludes that the net benefit is always positive, indicating a low risk that the proposed Regulations will result in a negative net benefit. All figures are reported in year 2002 dollars and estimated using a central discount rate of five percent.

Problem Identification

The proposed Regulations will accelerate the phase-out of CFC and Halon use in the regulated community and will also require the disposal of surplus CFC and Halon stocks. By ensuring the safe recovery and disposal of surplus ODSs, the proposed Regulations will avoid the release of a significant quantity of ODSs into the atmosphere. Only CFC and Halon uses are targeted by the proposed Regulations, as these are the only substances for which surpluses are expected in the near future. (see footnote a) 

The proposed Regulations will help avoid further depletion of the ozone layer. The avoided release of CFCs and Halons created by the accelerated phase-outs is expected to reduce the negative effects of ultra-violet radiation on humans and ecosystems. Thus, the proposed Regulations are expected to generate societal benefits in terms of avoided impact on humans and ecosystems. These impacts can be identified, and in many cases, quantified and monetized.

In addition, the replacement of older refrigeration and air conditioning equipment with newer energy efficient alternatives is expected to yield cost savings to owners as well as a reduction in emissions that contribute to air pollution and global climate change. Given the difficulty of quantifying and monetizing these benefits, they have not been taken into account in the monetized estimate of the net benefit. If these benefits were monetized, the net benefit of the proposed Regulations would be much larger.

The proposed Regulations will cause owners within the regulated community to replace equipment and thus increase costs. Although CFC and Halon disposal costs will be incurred as a result of the proposed Regulations, equipment owners will have access to an industry-led CFC disposal service that is funded through an existing importation levy on HCFCs. Thus, the equipment owners subject to the proposed Regulations will not pay directly for the disposal costs of their surplus CFC stocks. There is no similar disposal program for Halon surplus stocks in Canada at the present time. The disposal costs for surplus CFC and Halon stocks have been accounted for in the analysis of the impact of the proposed Regulations.

Analysis of the Net Benefit

Regulatory policy requires the identification and monetization of costs, benefits and net benefit of regulatory proposals. In the following section, the results of the net benefit analysis of the proposed Regulations are presented.

The net benefit analysis identifies, quantifies and monetizes the costs and benefits of the proposed Regulations. The results of the analysis insure that the proposed Regulations provide a net benefit to Canadian society. A positive net benefit satisfies a regulatory policy requirement that states that the benefits of a proposed Regulation must exceed the costs.

In the following section, the steps taken to estimate the costs, benefits and net benefit of the proposed Regulations are presented.

Step 1: Define Targeted Sectors and Phase-out Measures

As a first step, the targeted sectors and the accelerated phase-out measures for the targeted equipment are identified. The proposed Regulations target the equipment and CFC and Halon uses identified in Table 1.

Table 1: Equipment and Sectors Targeted by the Proposed Regulations

Equipment Targeted	Uses of Equipment by Sector
Chillers	Commercial, industrial and residential buildings
Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration*	Commercial and industrial buildings
Mobile Refrigeration	Transportation
1301 Total Flooding Systems	Commercial and industrial sectors

^* Commercial air conditioning will not be impacted by the proposed Regulations because the sector is not using CFCs.

One implementation option (Measure 1 of Table 2, below) was investigated for chiller equipment. (see footnote 1)  The option assumes that 120 units that are 25 years old and younger will be required to be retrofitted over a period of 10 years starting in 2005. It is important to note that the proposed chiller option applies to approximately 30 percent of the current chiller population. Approximately 70 percent of the current population will not be affected by the accelerated phase-out because the equipment is reaching the end of its effective life span.

The phase-out measures (Measures 2 through 4) for commercial/industrial refrigeration, mobile refrigeration and Total Flooding Systems are presented in Table 2. The disposal of surplus stocks of CFCs and Halons will be on-going throughout the life of the proposed Regulations.

Table 2: Proposed Regulatory Measures

Measure	Phase-out Start	Phase-out End	Years
Measure 1. Chiller Retrofit	2005	2014	10
Measure 2. Retrofit of Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration	2005	2014	10
Measure 3. Retrofit of Mobile Refrigeration	2003	2007	5
Measure 4. Replacement of 90% of 1301 Total Flooding Systems — and 10% not covered by proposed Regulations due to a critical use exemption.	2005	2014	10
The Disposal of Surplus Stocks	2003	2014	12

Step 2: Identify Inventories and Forecast Baseline

In this step, the baseline CFC and Halon quantities and equipment inventory for the starting years of the regulatory measures are estimated. CFC and Halon starting equipment and standing stock inventories were obtained from Smale, 1999 (see footnote b)  and Shapiro, 1998 (see footnote c)  respectively. It was estimated that the regulated community account for 10 percent of the national CFC and Halon inventory presented in the Smale and Shapiro reports, with the exception of the mobile refrigeration sector, which accounts for 50 percent. For the chillers sector, the Chemicals Control Division at Environment Canada provided estimates of the starting equipment inventory. The CFC chiller inventory is based on information obtained from industry. CFC and Halon emission reductions attributable to the proposed regulations are provided in Table 3.

Table 3: Emission Reductions Attributable to the Proposed Regulations Ozone Depleting Substance (ODS)^*

Measures	Inventory
1. Chillers — equipment	60	ODS tonnes
Standing stock disposal and losses**	343	ODS tonnes
2. Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration - equipment	202*	ODS tonnes
Standing stock disposal	216*	ODS tonnes
3. Mobile Refrigeration — equipment	123	ODS tonnes
Standing stock disposal	38	ODS tonnes
4. 1301 Total Flooding Systems (assumes 10% of starting inventory is not covered by phase-out) — equipment	66*	ODS tonnes
Standing stock disposal	97*	ODS tonnes

^* It is important to note that these values are not adjusted to ODP values and are scaled in the net benefit analysis based on the ODP value of the CFCs and Halons controlled. For example, the ODP value for Halons is 10, indicating that the ODP inventory in the Total Flooding Systems is 660 ODP tonnes. It is estimated that 46% of the CFCs in commercial/industrial equipment has an ODP value of 0.334 (R-502), while 64% of the standing stock is R-502 with the same ODP value of 0.334.

^** CFC operating losses from chiller equipment have been accounted for in the estimate of emission reductions attributable to the proposed Regulations.

For the 1301 Total Flooding Systems, it was assumed that 40 percent of the Halon inventory is in bulk storage and will be subject to the disposal measure. This assumption implies that 60 percent of the total inventory would be subject to the proposed Regulations through equipment replacement or retrofitting. However, due to critical use exceptions, 10 percent of the equipment inventory is not subject to the proposed Regulations. Then, 54 percent of the total inventory is subject to Measure 4.

To estimate the number of retrofits and equipment replacements that will result from the proposed Regulations, the total ODS tonnes in Table 3 are divided by the amount of CFCs and Halons in the equipment. The number of retrofits and replacements are then multiplied by the cost of retrofits and replacements to estimate the compliance costs of the proposed Regulations. The average ODS in a single piece of equipment was assumed to be (see footnote 2) :

— Chillers — 500 kg

— Commercial/Industrial refrigeration — 121 kg

— Mobile Refrigeration — 15 kg

— Total Flooding Systems — 46 kg

The average ODS in mobile refrigeration equipment is based on a weighted estimate of the varying types of equipment covered in this sector.

Step 3: Estimation of Costs and Benefits

The following section provides the assumptions used to estimate the monetized costs and benefits of the proposed Regulations.

Estimation of Costs

The costs of the proposed Regulations stem from an accelerated phase-out of equipment using CFCs and Halons. Incremental compliance costs will be incurred due to acceleration in the number of equipment retrofits and replacements, plus the disposal of surplus stocks. Government enforcement costs will also result from the proposed Regulations.

Compliance Costs — These are the costs to replace or retrofit equipment in order to comply with the proposed Regulations. Data on compliance costs for equipment retrofits and replacements was obtained from ARC, 1997. (see footnote d)  Subsequent to the report, Environment Canada supplemented and verified the cost estimates. For example, compliance costs for the mobile refrigeration measure are based on a weighted estimate of the varying equipment covered in this sector. Also, discussions with industry identified recent estimates of the cost of disposing of CFCs and Halons.

The equipment compliance cost assumptions used to estimate the compliance costs of the proposed Regulations are presented in Table 4, items 1 to 4. Low, central and high costs identify a range where the actual compliance costs are most likely to fall. These ranges are used in the uncertainty analysis, which is discussed below.

Table 4: Compliance Cost Assumptions ($/unit in 2002)

Measure	Low	Central	High
1. Chiller Retrofit	$54,075	$77,250	$100,425
2. Retrofit of Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration	$5,768	$8,240	$10,712
3. Retrofit of Mobile Refrigeration	$182	$260	$338
4. Replacement of 1301 Total Flooding Systems	$4,679	$6,684	$8,689
Disposal of Surplus Stocks per tonne	$4,200	$6,000	$7,800

^* It is assumed that the replacement life of retrofitted chillers will be extended by 10 years beyond the normal capital life.

As mentioned earlier, the equipment owners would not pay directly for the costs of disposing of their surplus stock of CFCs. Instead, an industry-led initiative, financed through an import levy on HCFCs, will collect and dispose of the surplus stock of CFCs. Thus, the cost of disposing of CFC stock will not burden the equipment owners, but rather importers of HCFCs and ultimately various users of HCFCs. As mentioned earlier, there is no similar disposal program for Halon surplus stocks in Canada at the present time.

Government Enforcement Costs — It is anticipated that two additional enforcement years of effort will be required per year as a result of the proposed Regulations. This increase in enforcement costs is based on estimates of the increased scope of the regulated community and on the current rates of non-compliance. That is, it is expected that two additional full-time equivalent (FTE) positions will be required each year during a 12-year period covered by the proposed Regulations. It should be noted that the above enforcement costs do not take into consideration expenses associated with legal fees if non compliance results in prosecutions.

Each FTE is valued at $60,000 plus 20 percent overhead, and total enforcement costs are projected to be $144,000 per year. Thus the incremental government enforcement costs resulting from the proposed Regulations are estimated to be $144,000 per year for 12 years. The discounted value using a five percent discount rate over the 12-year period equals $1.16 million.

Summary of Compliance Costs

The total compliance costs are presented in Table 5, and estimated to be in the order of $31 million.

Table 5: Compliance Costs Including Disposal of Surplus Stocks Millions ($2002), discounted at 5%

Measure	Present Value of Costs
1. Chiller Retrofit	$ 8.1
2. Retrofit of Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration	$11.4
3. Retrofit of Mobile Refrigeration	$ 2.3
4. Replacement of 1301 Total Flooding Systems	$ 7.4
Government Costs	$ 1.2
Total	$30.6

Estimation of Benefits

Since the early 1990s, Environment Canada has been conducting studies that estimate the monetized benefits of banning the production, importation and uses of ODSs. These studies estimate the benefits created by reduced ODS emissions, the subsequent avoidance in a thinning in the ozone layer and then changes in the exposure of humans and ecosystems to ultra-violet radiation. The benefits of proposed Regulations that reduce the release of ODSs are avoided future damages to humans and ecosystems.

Environment Canada uses a method developed by ARC to estimate the monetary value of reducing the release of one tonne of an ODS. The monetized estimate can also be used on an ozone depleting potential (ODP) basis and applied or scaled to a class of chemicals with an ODP value.

The types of benefits that are monetized include:

— Health — avoided skin cancers, cataracts and cancer fatalities;

— Materials — avoided damages to synthetic polymers in the commercial sector;

— Fisheries — avoided damages of ultra-violet radiation on aquatic ecosystems; and

— Agricultural — avoided damages of ultra-violet radiation on crops.

The ARC method uses an ultra-violet radiation exposure model developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency to estimate health benefits and also transfers non-health benefits (materials, fisheries and agricultural) to the Canadian context. There have been a wide range of health and non-health benefit values reported by ARC. The low-end estimate for health and non-health benefits from regulatory programs (bans), if Canada acts alone, is $11,000 to $45,000, with a central value of $22,000 per tonne of ODP removed. This low-value benefit assumes that Canada acts alone and would not receive a portion of the larger global benefit created if all countries act to reduce ODS emissions. The high-end benefit estimate is in the order of $700,000 if Canada acts within the context of the Montreal Protocol (joint action of signatories). That is, a global reduction in ODS emissions would produce global benefits from which Canada would benefit more than if it acted alone.

Phase-out strategies for CFC and Halon uses are also being implemented by a number of signatories to the Montreal Protocol. Therefore, some combination of global and Canada-alone benefits must be factored into the analysis.

To be conservative (underestimate the benefits), the analysis assumes a benefit range, which is weighted towards the low-end benefit values, produced by ARC (i.e. more weight is placed on the lower benefit when Canada acts alone). The range used in the analysis includes a low ($11,025), central ($22,050), and high ($234,000) benefit value per tonne of ODP removed. The high value reflects the fact that one third of signatories are taking action to accelerate the phase-out of CFC and Halon uses ($700,000/tonne×0.33 = $231,000/tonne).

This range produces a mean for health and non-health benefit value in the order of $88,000 per tonne of ODP removed. It is recognized that the uncertainty inherent in this monetized benefit is significant. Consequently, uncertainty testing (discussed below) is conducted to identify the impact of the uncertainty in the benefits estimate on the net benefit (present value of benefits minus costs) of the proposed Regulations.

Summary of Benefits

The estimated benefits are presented in Table 6, and are predicted to be in the order of $119 million.

Table 6: Summary of Benefits Including Surplus Stock Disposal Millions ($2002), discounted at 5%

Measure	Present Value of Costs
1. Chiller Retrofit	$ 25.1
2. Retrofit of Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration	$ 16.6
3. Retrofit of Mobile Refrigeration	$ 12.4
4. Replacement of 1301 Total Flooding Systems	$ 64.6
Total	$118.7

Step 4: Calculate the Net Benefit and Present the Results

Chillers — The results of net benefit analysis [Net Present Value (NPV) estimate] for the chillers sector are presented in Table 7, below. As can be seen, the option produces a positive NPV. The range of the NPV is always positive, indicating a high probability that the option will yield a positive benefit to society.

Other Measures — Table 7 also provides an overview of the analysis results for the other measures. All measures produce significant benefits i.e. NPVs are always positive. The benefits for Measure 4 and the disposal of surplus stocks is high given that the Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP) value for Halon 1311 is 10. These ODP factors are used to scale the ODS tonnes removed by the proposed Regulations to benefit estimates generated for ODP values (i.e. given that the benefits are reported per tonne of ODS).

Table 7: Analysis Results — Net Present Value Millions ($2002), discounted at 5%

Measures Including Surplus Stock Disposal	Costs	Benefits	Net Benefit
1. Chiller Retrofit	$ 8.19	$25.15	$17.0
2. Retrofit of Commercial/Industrial Refrigeration	$11.43	$16.59	$ 5.2
3. Retrofit of Mobile Refrigeration	$ 2.36	$12.40	$10.0
4. Replacement of 1301 Total Flooding Systems	$ 7.39	$64.56	$57.2
Enforcement	$ 1.25	—	-$1.3
Total	$30.63	$118.69	$88.1

The Net Benefit of the Proposed Regulations

The net benefit of the proposed Regulations, including enforcement costs, is estimated to be in the order of $88 million. The net benefit is significantly positive, indicating that the proposed Regulations are desirable from a societal perspective.

Step 5: Uncertainty Analysis

Uncertainty is factored into the analysis through the definition of uncertainty ranges around key variables, such as those contained in Table 4.

The statistical software @Risk was used to factor uncertainties into the estimate of the net benefit. @Risk uses Monte Carlo sampling techniques to determine an expected value and confidence intervals for each of the proposed regulatory measures. Consequently, the estimated net benefit is really a mean value, or central estimate, of a probability distribution of likely net benefit outcomes. This distribution of possible outcomes also provides insight on if and when the net benefit is negative given the uncertainty assumptions built into the analysis. The likelihood of a negative net benefit estimate provides a notion of the level of risk in the regulatory proposal.

Variables used in the uncertainty testing include:

— All costs are assumed to be +/- 30 percent;

— Benefits fall in the range $11,025, $22,050 and $234,000;

— The number of retrofits per year are +/- 29 percent; and

— The ODS change in the equipment is +/- 20 percent.

In total, about 25 variables were sampled and subject to uncertainty testing. Given this rigor, the results of the analysis can be considered to be reliable from a statistical perspective.

Discount rate sensitivity testing was completed at one and nine percent. Alternative discount rates have no impact on the outcome: at a high discount rate the net benefit is significantly positive.

The uncertainty testing indicates that the net benefit estimate is always positive, which means that even with the most conservative assumptions (high costs and low benefits), the net benefit of the proposed Regulations is positive. Thus, even with very conservative assumptions, the net benefit of the proposed Regulation would be positive. A conclusion from the uncertainty testing is there is a low risk that the proposed Regulations will result in a negative net benefit.

Consultation

Consultations with affected stakeholders were held by Environment Canada between November 2001 and February 2002, which included the distribution of information and a series of meetings. Information with respect to the proposed Regulations was also available on Environment Canada's Stratospheric Ozone Web site. Stakeholders included representatives from Federal Departments, Assembly of First Nations, Indian Bands, Crown Corporations, Boards, Agencies, federal works and undertakings, industry groups/associations, provincial/territorial authorities and service providers, environmental groups and equipment manufacturers. The objective of the consultations was to solicit comments on the proposed Federal Halocarbon Regulations, 2002.

The results of the consultations were summarized in a Summary of Comments document prepared and circulated by Environment Canada and a subsequent document presented the responses to the comments from Environment Canada.

Changes have been made to the proposed Regulations to address some of the concerns raised from stakeholders. For example, concerns were expressed regarding the proposed requirement that a certificate indicating successful completion of an environmental awareness course be valid in the province in which the work is being done. Environment Canada now proposes not to amend the definition of certificate in order to avoid duplication of provincial/territorial environmental awareness training certification. Comments were also raised with respect to the proposed January 1, 2004 CFC refill prohibition for air conditioning and refrigeration systems. Environment Canada now proposes that the CFC refill prohibition for air conditioning and refrigeration equipment (excluding chillers) be effective January 1, 2005.

Comments were also received on the proposed definition of "major overhaul" as it relates to the proposed CFC phase-out approach for chillers. Some stakeholders argued that the proposed definition captures regular inspection and preventative maintenance activities and consequently does not reflect the intent of the CFC phase-out approach. An extensive consultation with equipment manufacturers and industry representatives has established that the proposed definition of "major overhaul" reflects extensive work procedures and not regular inspection and preventative activities. Therefore, Environment Canada is satisfied that the proposed definition accurately reflects the intent of Canada's Strategy to Accelerate the Phase-Out of CFC and Halon Uses and to Dispose of the Surplus Stocks to implement a staged phase-out approach effective upon significant repairs or procedures. This approach provides for an opportunity to incorporate conversions or replacements at the major overhaul of the system.

Further to publication in Part I of the Canada Gazette, any comments provided to Environment Canada will be taken into consideration prior to having these proposed Regulations published in Part II of the Canada Gazette.

Compliance and Enforcement

Since the proposed Regulations will be promulgated under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, CEPA enforcement officers will apply the Compliance and Enforcement Policy implemented under the Act. The policy outlines measures designed to promote compliance, including education, information, promoting of technology development and consultation on the development of the proposed Regulations.

When verifying compliance with the proposed Regulations, CEPA enforcement officers will abide by the CEPA Compliance and Enforcement Policy. This policy sets out the range of possible responses to violations: warnings, directions, environmental protection compliance orders, ticketing, ministerial orders, injunctions, prosecution, and environmental protection alternative measures (which are an alternative to a court trial after the laying of charges for a CEPA, 1999 violation). In addition, the policy explains when Environment Canada will resort to civil suits by the Crown for costs recovery.

When, following an inspection or an investigation, a CEPA enforcement officer discovers an alleged violation, the officer will choose the appropriate enforcement action based on the following factors:

— Nature of the alleged violation — This includes consideration of the damage, the intent of the alleged violator, whether it is a repeat violation, and whether an attempt has been made to conceal information or otherwise subvert the objectives and requirements of the Act.

— Effectiveness in achieving the desired result with the alleged violator — The desired result is compliance within the shortest possible time and with no further repetition of the violation. Factors to be considered include the violator's history of compliance with the Act, willingness to cooperate with enforcement officials, and evidence of corrective action already taken.

— Consistency — Enforcement officers will consider how similar situations have been handled in determining the measures to be taken to enforce the Act.

Contacts

Alex Cavadias, Acting Section Head, Ozone Protection Programs Section, Chemicals Control Division, National Office of Pollution Prevention, Department of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, (819) 953-1132 (Telephone), (819) 994-0007 (Facsimile), alex.cavadias@ec.gc.ca (Electronic mail); Céline Labossière, Senior Economist, Regulatory and Economic Analysis Branch, Economic and Regulatory Affairs Directorate, Department of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, (819) 997-2377 (Telephone), (919) 997-2769 (Facsimile), celine. labossiere@ec.gc.ca (Electronic mail).

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to subsection 332(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (see footnote e) , that the Governor in Council, pursuant to section 209 of that Act, proposes to make the annexed Federal Halocarbon Regulations, 2002.

Any person may, within 60 days after the publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to the proposed Regulations or a notice of objection requesting that a board of review be established under section 333 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (see footnote f)  and stating the reasons for the objection. All comments and notices must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Chief, Chemicals Control Division, Department of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3.

A person who provides information to the Minister of the Environment may submit with the information a request for confidentiality under section 313 of that Act.

Ottawa, December 5, 2002

EILEEN BOYD
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

FEDERAL HALOCARBON REGULATIONS, 2002

INTERPRETATION

1. The definitions in this section apply in these Regulations.

"Act" means the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. (Loi)

"air conditioning system" means an air conditioning system, including any associated equipment, that contains or is designed to contain a halocarbon refrigerant. (système de climatisation)

"bromofluorocarbon" means a fully halogenated bromofluorocarbon each molecule of which contains one, two or three carbon atoms and at least one atom of bromine and one atom of fluorine. (bromofluorocarbure)

"certificate" means a certificate recognized by three or more provinces indicating successful completion of an environmental awareness course in recycling, recovery and handling procedures in respect of halocarbon refrigerants as outlined in the Refrigerant Code of Practice. (certificat)

"certified person", in respect of a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system, means a service technician who holds a certificate. (personne accréditée)

"charging" means to add a halocarbon to a system. (charger)

"chiller" means an air conditioning system or refrigeration system that has a compressor, an evaporator, a secondary refrigerant and a refrigeration capacity of more than 350 kW, as rated by the manufacturer. (refroidisseur)

"chlorofluorocarbon" means a fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbon each molecule of which contains one, two or three carbon atoms and at least one atom of chlorine and one atom of fluorine. (chlorofluorocarbure)

"fire extinguishing system" means fire extinguishing equipment, including portable or fixed equipment and any associated equipment, that contains or is designed to contain a halocarbon fire-extinguishing agent. (système d'extinction d'incendie)

"halocarbon" means a substance set out in Schedule 1, whether existing alone or in a mixture, and includes isomers of any such substance. (halocarbure)

"hydrobromofluorocarbon" means a hydrobromofluorocarbon each molecule of which contains one, two or three carbon atoms and at least one atom of hydrogen, one atom of bromine and one atom of fluorine. (hydrobromofluorocarbure)

"hydrochlorofluorocarbon" means a hydrochlorofluorocarbon each molecule of which contains one, two or three carbon atoms and at least one atom of hydrogen, one atom of chlorine and one atom of fluorine. (hydrochlorofluorocarbure)

"hydrofluorocarbon" means a hydrofluorocarbon each molecule of which contains only carbon, hydrogen and fluorine atoms. (hydrofluorocarbure)

"installation" does not include the reactivation of a system by the same owner at the same site. (installation)

"leak" means a release of a halocarbon from a system. (fuite)

"military vehicle" means a vehicle that is designed to be used in combat, or in a combat support role, but does not include an administrative vehicle. (véhicule militaire)

"own" means to hold a right in or to have possession, control or custody of, to be responsible for the maintenance, operation or management of, or to have the power to dispose of, a system. (être propriétaire)

"perfluorocarbon" means a fully fluorinated fluorocarbon each molecule of which contains only carbon and fluorine atoms. (perfluorocarbure)

"portable fire extinguisher" means a cylinder or cartridge containing a halocarbon that is used for extinguishing fires, that has a charging capacity of 25 kg or less and that can be carried or wheeled to the site of a fire. (extincteur portatif)

"purge system" means a purge unit on a refrigeration system or air conditioning system, including any associated recovery equipment. (système à vidange)

"reclaimed", in respect of a halocarbon, means recovered, re-processed and upgraded through processes such as filtering, drying, distilling and treating chemically in order to restore the halocarbon to industry-accepted re-use standards as verified by chemical analysis. (régénéré)

"recovered", in respect of a halocarbon, means

(a) collected after it has been used; or
(b) collected from machinery, equipment, a system or a container during servicing or before dismantling, decommissioning or destruction of the machinery, equipment, system or container. (récupéré)

"recycled", in respect of a halocarbon, means recovered and, if needed, cleaned by a process such as filtering or drying, and re-used to charge a system. (recyclé)

"Refrigerant Code of Practice" means the Environmental Code of Practice for Elimination of Fluorocarbon Emissions from Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems, published by the Department of the Environment in March, 1996, as amended from time to time. (Code de pratique en réfrigération)

"refrigeration system" means a refrigeration system, including any associated equipment, that contains or is designed to contain a halocarbon refrigerant. (système de réfrigération)

"service" includes any modification, topping-up, maintenance, repair, moving, dismantling, decommissioning, destruction, start-up and testing of a system, but does not include testing related to the manufacture and production of the system. (entretien)

"ship" has the same meaning as in subsection 122(1) of the Act. (navire)

"small air conditioning system" means an air conditioning system that is not contained in a motor vehicle and that has a refrigeration capacity of less than 19 kW as rated by the manufacturer. (petit système de climatisation)

"small refrigeration system" means a refrigeration system that is not contained in a motor vehicle and that has a refrigeration capacity of less than 19 kW as rated by the manufacturer. (petit système de réfrigération)

"solvent system" means an application or system that uses halocarbons as solvents, including cleaning applications and associated equipment containing or designed to contain a halocarbon solvent. A solvent system does not include those applications or systems that use halocarbons as laboratory analytical standards or laboratory reagents or in a process in which they are converted to another substance or are generated but ultimately converted to a different substance. (système de solvants)

"system", unless the context requires otherwise, means an air conditioning system, a fire extinguishing system, a refrigeration system or a solvent system. (système)

APPLICATION

2. (1) These Regulations apply in respect of systems located in Canada that are

(a) owned by Her Majesty in right of Canada, a board or an agency of the Government of Canada, a Crown corporation, as defined in subsection 83(1) of the Financial Administration Act, or a federal work or undertaking; or
(b) located on aboriginal lands or federal lands.

(2) These Regulations do not apply to foam products.

PROHIBITIONS

3. No person shall release, or allow or cause the release of, a halocarbon that is contained in

(a) a refrigeration system or air conditioning system, or any associated container or device, unless the release results from a purge system that emits less than 0.1 kg of halocarbons per kilogram of air purged to the environment;
(b) a fire extinguishing system or any associated container or device, except to fight a fire that is not set for training purposes, or unless the release occurs during the recovery of halocarbons as referred to in section 7; or
(c) a container or equipment used in the re-use, recycling, reclamation or storage of a halocarbon.

4. (1) No person shall install a system that operates or is intended to operate with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1 unless authorized to do so by a permit issued under these Regulations.

(2) Effective January 1, 2005, no person shall install a solvent system that operates or is intended to operate with a halocarbon listed in item 11 or 12 of Schedule 1 unless authorized to do so by a permit issued under these Regulations.

5. (1) No person shall use a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1 as a solvent in a solvent system.

(2) Effective January 1, 2005, no person shall use a halocarbon listed in item 11 or 12 of Schedule 1 as a solvent in a solvent system unless authorized to do so by a permit issued under these Regulations.

6. (1) No person shall store, transport or purchase a halocarbon unless it is in a container designed and manufactured to be refilled and to contain that specific type of halocarbon.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of halocarbons used as laboratory analytical standards or laboratory reagents.

RECOVERY

7. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a person that installs, services, leak tests or charges a refrigeration system, an air conditioning system or a fire extinguishing system, or that does any other work on any of those systems that may result in the release of a halocarbon, shall recover, into a container designed and manufactured to be refilled and to contain that specific type of halocarbon, any halocarbon that would otherwise be released during those procedures.

(2) A person that recovers halocarbons from a fire extinguishing system shall use recovery equipment with a transfer efficiency of at least 99% as referred to in the publication ULC/ORD-C1058.5-1993, of the Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada, entitled Halon Recovery and Reconditioning Equipment.

(3) The reference to the publication in subsection (2) shall be read as excluding its preface.

8. (1) Before dismantling, decommissioning or destroying any system, a person shall recover all halocarbons contained in the system into a container designed and manufactured to be refilled and to contain that specific type of halocarbon.

(2) Before dismantling, decommissioning or destroying a system, a person shall affix a notice to the system containing the information set out in item 1 of Schedule 2.

(3) No person shall remove a notice referred to in subsection (2) except to replace it with another such notice.

(4) In case of the dismantling, decommissioning or destruction of any system, the owner shall keep a record of the information contained in the notice referred to in subsection (2).

INSTALLATION, SERVICING, LEAK TESTING AND CHARGING

Refrigeration Systems and Air Conditioning Systems

9. (1) Only a certified person may install, service, leak test or charge a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system or do any other work on the system that may result in the release of a halocarbon.

(2) A person who does any of the work referred to in subsection (1) shall do so in accordance with the Refrigerant Code of Practice.

(3) No person shall charge a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1 for the purpose of leak testing the system, except when recommended in the Refrigerant Code of Practice.

10. (1) A certified person who conducts a leak test on a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system shall affix a notice to the system containing the information set out in item 2 of Schedule 2.

(2) No person shall remove a notice referred to in subsection (1) except to replace it with another such notice.

(3) The owner shall keep a record of the information contained in the notice referred to in subsection (1).

11. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the owner shall conduct a leak test, at least once every 12 months, of all of the components of a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system that come into contact with a halocarbon.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to small refrigeration systems or small air conditioning systems, or to air conditioning systems that are designed for occupants in motor vehicles.

12. Subject to section 14, no person shall charge a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system unless, before charging it,

(a) a certified person leak-tests the system; and
(b) if a leak is detected, the certified person notifies the owner and the owner repairs the leak.

13. As soon as possible in the circumstances after a leak from a refrigeration system or air conditioning system is detected, and in any case within seven days after the day on which the leak is detected, the owner of the system shall

(a) repair the leak;
(b) isolate the leaking portion of the system and recover the halocarbon from that portion; or
(c) recover the halocarbon from the system .

14. (1) If a leak is detected from a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system and it is necessary to charge the system to prevent an immediate danger to human life or health, section 12 does not apply to the system during the period in which the danger persists, up to a maximum of seven days after the day on which the leak is detected.

(2) If a refrigeration system or an air conditioning system is cha(i) the circumstances leading up to the immediate danger to human life or health and the nature of the danger,
(ii) the amount of halocarbon charged to the system, and
(iii) the date of repair of the leak or recovery of the remaining halocarbon from the system.rged under the circumstances described in subsection (1):

(a) the person who charged the system shall immediately notify its owner of the charge; and
(b) the owner shall, within seven days after receiving notice under paragraph (a), submit a written record to the Minister describing

15. No person shall charge an air conditioning system that is designed for occupants in motor vehicles with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1.

16. Effective three months after the coming into force of these Regulations, no person shall charge a refrigeration system that is installed in, attached to, or that normally operates in, on or in conjunction with a means of transportation, other than one for use on a military ship or a chiller, with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1.

17. Effective January 1, 2005, no person shall charge a system listed below with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1:

(a) a refrigeration system (other than one for use on a military ship, a chiller, or a small refrigeration system);
(b) an air conditioning system (other than one for use on a military ship, a chiller, or a small air conditioning system); and
(c) a chiller that has undergone an overhaul that includes a procedure or repair that

(i) required the replacement or modification of any internal sealing devices or any internal mechanical parts, or
(ii) resulted from the failure of an evaporator or condenser heat exchanger tube.

18. Effective January 1, 2010, no person shall charge a system listed below with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1:

(a) a refrigeration system for use on a military ship; and
(b) an air conditioning system for use on a military ship.

19. Effective January 1, 2015, no person shall charge any chiller with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1.

20. No person shall install or operate or permit the operation of a purge system unless it emits less than 0.1 kg of halocarbons per kilogram of air purged to the environment.

Fire Extinguishing Systems

21. (1) Except in accordance with the standards set out in the publication ULC/ORD-C1058.18-1993, of the Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada, entitled The Servicing of Halon Extinguishing Systems, no person shall install, service, leak-test or charge a fire extinguishing system, or do any other work on the system that may result in the release of a halocarbon.

(2) The reference to the publication in subsection (2) shall be read as excluding its preface.

22. No person shall charge a fire extinguishing system with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1 for the purpose of leak-testing the system.

23. (1) Subject to subsection (2), every owner of a fire extinguishing system shall leak-test the system at least once every 12 months in accordance with the standards set out in the document referred to in section 21.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to fire extinguishing systems whose cylinder or cartridge has a charging capacity of 10 kg or less and that are located in military vehicles, or to portable fire extinguishers.

24. Subject to section 27, no person shall charge a fire extinguishing system unless, before charging it,

(a) the system is leak-tested; and
(b) if a leak is detected, the person that conducts the test referred to in paragraph (a) notifies the owner and the owner repairs the leak.

25. (1) Subject to subsection (2) and section 27, no person shall service a fire extinguishing system without first

(a) notifying the owner of the intended service; and
(b) affixing a notice to the control panel of the system to indicate that it is out of operation during the period of service.

(2) Paragraph (1)(b) does not apply to portable fire extinguishers.

26. As soon as possible in the circumstances after a leak from a fire extinguishing system is detected, and in any case within seven days after the day on which the leak is detected, the owner of the system shall

(a) repair the leak;
(b) isolate the leaking portion of the system and recover the halocarbon from that portion; or
(c) recover the halocarbon from the system.

27. (1) If a leak is detected from a fire extinguishing system and it is necessary to charge the system to prevent an immediate danger to human life or health, sections 24 and 25 do not apply to the system during the period in which the danger persists, up to a maximum of seven days after the day on which the leak is detected.

(2) If a fire extinguishing system is charged under the circumstances described in subsection (1):

(a) the person who charged the system shall immediately notify its owner of the charge; and
(b) the owner shall, within seven days after receiving notice under paragraph (a), submit a written record to the Minister describing

(i) the circumstances leading up to the immediate danger to human life or health and the nature of the danger,
(ii) the amount of halocarbon charged to the system, and
(iii) the date of repair of the leak or recovery of the remaining halocarbon from the system.

28. No person shall charge a portable fire extinguisher, other than one for use on an aircraft, a military vehicle or a military ship, with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1, unless authorized to do so by a permit issued under these Regulations.

29. Effective January 1, 2005, no person shall charge a fire extinguishing system, other than one for use on an aircraft, a military vehicle or a military ship, with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1, unless authorized to do so by a permit issued under these Regulations.

SERVICE LOGS

30. (1) The owner of a refrigeration system, an air conditioning system or a fire extinguishing system shall maintain a written record, or a record in an electronic format compatible with that used by the Minister, in which the information set out in item 3 or 4, as the case may be, of Schedule 2 is entered whenever the system is installed, serviced, leak tested or charged or if any other work is done on it that may result in the release of a halocarbon.

(2) The owner of a solvent system shall maintain a written record, or a record in an electronic format compatible with that used by the Minister, in which the information set out in item 5 of Schedule 2 is entered whenever the system is charged with more than 10 kg of a halocarbon.

RELEASE REPORTS

31. In the event of a release of 100 kg or more of a halocarbon from a system, or from a container or equipment used in the reuse, recycling, reclamation or storage of a halocarbon, the owner of the system, container or equipment shall submit the following reports to the Minister, within the periods indicated:

(a) within 24 hours after the release is detected, a verbal or written report, or a report in an electronic format compatible with that used by the Minister, that indicates the type of halocarbon released and the type of system, container or equipment from which it was released; and
(b) within 14 days after the day that the release is detected, a written report, or a report in an electronic format compatible with that used by the Minister, that indicates the information set out in item 6 of Schedule 2.

32. (1) In the event of a release of more than 10 kg but less than 100 kg of a halocarbon from a system, or from a container or equipment used in the reuse, recycling, reclamation or storage of a halocarbon, the owner of the system, container or equipment shall submit to the Minister a report in written format, or in an electronic format compatible with that used by the Minister, that contains the information set out in item 6 of Schedule 2.

(2) The owner shall submit the release report required by subsection (1) twice annually, not later than 30 days after January 1 and July 1 for each calendar half-year.

PERMITS

33. (1) Effective January 1, 2005, if an owner of a fire extinguishing system, other than a portable fire extinguisher, that is not to be used on an aircraft, military ship or military vehicle proposes to charge the system with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1, the owner shall submit to the Minister an application for a permit on a form that the Minister provides, and that contains the information set out in item 7 of Schedule 2.

(2) Subject to subsection (3), the Minister shall issue the permit, which shall be valid until one year from the date of issuance or until December 31, 2009, whichever occurs first.

(3) A permit issued under this section is not renewable and may only be issued once in respect of any system.

34. No person shall operate a fire extinguishing system that contains a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule I if a permit for the system was issued under section 33 and has expired.

35. (1) If no technically and financially feasible alternative to the use of a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 or 11 and 12 of Schedule I, as the case may be, exists that could have a less harmful impact on the environment and on health, an owner shall submit to the Minister an application for a permit on a form that the Minister provides, and that contains the information set out in item 8 or 9, as the case may be, of Schedule 2, if the owner proposes to

(a) install a fire extinguishing system that operates or is intended to operate with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1 as a fire extinguishing agent;
(b) charge a portable fire extinguisher that is not to be used on an aircraft, military ship or military vehicle with a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 of Schedule 1; or
(c) effective January 1, 2005

(i) charge a fire extinguishing system, other than a portable fire extinguishing system, that is not to be used on an aircraft, military ship or military vehicle,
(ii) install a solvent system that operates or is intended to operate with a halocarbon listed in item 11 or 12 of Schedule 1, or
(iii) use a halocarbon listed in item 11 or 12 of Schedule 1 as a solvent in a solvent system.

(2) Unless a permit has already been issued under subsection 33(2), the Minister shall issue the permit, valid for one year beginning on the date of issuance, if the owner, on the form,

(a) declares that no technically and financially feasible alternative to the use of a halocarbon listed in any of items 1 to 9 or 11 and 12 of Schedule 1, as the case may be, exists that could have a less harmful impact on the environment and on health; and
(b) provides information in support of the declaration.

36. (1) The Minister may refuse to issue a permit under subsection 33(2) or 35(2) or may cancel a permit issued under one of those subsections if any false or misleading information has been submitted in support of the application for the permit.

(2) The Minister shall not cancel a permit unless the Minister

(a) has provided the permit holder with written reasons for the cancellation; and
(b) has given the permit holder an opportunity to make representations, either verbally or in writing, in respect of the cancellation.

RECORDS, REPORTS AND NOTICES

37. (1) Owners shall keep all records and reports required by these Regulations in Canada for a period of at least five years after the date that they are prepared or submitted, respectively.

(2) Subject to subsection (3), owners shall keep a copy of all records, reports and notices required by these Regulations with respect to a system at the premises or site at which the system is located.

(3) In the case of a system located on unoccupied premises, an unoccupied site or a means of transportation, the owner shall keep a copy of all records, reports and notices required by these Regulations with respect to that system at a single location occupied by the owner.

REPEAL

38. The Federal Halocarbon Regulations (see footnote 3)  are repealed.

COMING INTO FORCE

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

SCHEDULE 1
(Sections 1, 4, and 5, subsection 9(3), sections 15 to 19, 22, 28 and 29, subsection 33(1) and sections 34 and 35)

LIST OF HALOCARBONS

Item	Halocarbon
1.	Tetrachloromethane (carbon tetrachloride)
2.	1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform), not including 1,1,2-trichloroethane
3.	Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)
4.	Bromochlorodifluoromethane (Halon 1211)
5.	Bromotrifluoromethane (Halon 1301)
6.	Dibromotetrafluoroethane (Halon 2402)
7.	Bromofluorocarbon other than those set out in items 4 to 6
8.	Bromochloromethane (Halon 1011)
9.	Hydrobromofluorocarbon (HBFC)
10.	Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)
11.	Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)
12.	Perfluorocarbon (PFC)

SCHEDULE 2
(Subsections 8(2) and 10(1), section 30, paragraph 31(b) and subsections 32(1), 33(1) and 35(1))

INFORMATION TO BE CONTAINED IN FORMS

Item	Column 1 Provision of Regulations	Column 2 Type of Form	Column 3 Information to be Contained on Form
1.	8(2)	Destruction, Dismantling or Decommissioning Notice for a System	(a) name and address of owner (b) name of the operator of the system (c) specific location of the system before its destruction, dismantling or decommissioning (d) name of service technician that recovered halocarbons (e) certificate number of service technician (if applicable) (f) name of employer of service technician (if applicable) (g) type and quantity of halocarbon and date recovered (h) type and charging capacity of system (i) final destination of system
2.	10(1)	Leak Test Notice for Refrigeration System and Air Conditioning System	(a) name and address of owner (b) name of operator of the system (c) specific location of the system (d) name of certified person (e) certificate number (f) name of employer of certified person (if applicable) (g) type of halocarbon contained in system
3.	30(1)	Refrigeration System or Air Conditioning System Service Log	(a) name and address of owner (b) name of operator of the system (c) specific location of the system (d) name of certified person (e) certificate number (f) name of employer of certified person (if applicable) (g) description of system (h) dated list of leak tests, leaks detected and leak repairs (i) type and quantity of halocarbon and date recovered (j) type and charging capacity of system
4.	30(1)	Fire Extinguishing System Service Log	(a) name and address of owner (b) name of operator of the system (c) specific location of the system (d) name of service technician (e) certificate number of service technician (if applicable) (f) name of employer of service technician (if applicable) (g) specific location of the system, serial number and weight (h) dated list of leak tests, leaks detected and leak repairs (i) type and quantity of halocarbon and date recovered (j) type and charging capacity of system
5.	30(2)	Solvent System Service Log	(a) name and address of owner (b) name of operator of the system (c) specific location of the system (d) name of service technician (e) certificate number of service technician (if applicable) (f) name of employer of service technician (if applicable) (g) type and quantity of halocarbon and date charged to the system (h) type and charging capacity of system
6.	31(b) and 32	Halocarbon Release Report	(a) name and address of owner
			(b) type and quantity of halocarbon released
			(c) date of release
			(d) type and description of system (e) circumstances leading to the release, corrective action and actions to prevent subsequent releases
7.	33(1)	Request for a Permit to Charge a Fire Extinguishing System with a Halocarbon	(a) name and address of applicant (b) type and weight of halocarbon
			(c) charging capacity of system
			(d) request for confidentiality under subsection 313(1) of the Act
8.	35(1)	Request for a Permit to Install a Fire Extinguishing System or Solvent System	(a) name and address of applicant (b) type and quantity of halocarbon (c) charging capacity of system (d) request for confidentiality under subsection 313(1) of the Act (e) declaration referred to in subsection 35(2) and supporting information
9.	35(1)	Request for a Permit to Charge a Fire Extinguishing System or Solvent System with a Halocarbon	(a) name and address of applicant (b) type and quantity of halocarbon (c) charging capacity of system
			(d) request for confidentiality under subsection 313(1) of the Act
			(e) declaration referred to in subsection 35(2) and supporting information

[49-1-o]

Footnote a 

Federal Provincial Working Group on Controls Harmonization — ODS, January, 2000. Canada's Proposed Strategy to Accelerate the Phasing-Out of Uses of CFCs and Halons and to Dispose of the Surplus Stocks.

Footnote 1 

Eight other phase-out options were considered but the costs of the options were considered prohibitive and the options were therefore dropped. That is, the other options were not economically feasible.

Footnote b 

Smale, 1999. ODS INVENTORY UPDATE and PREDICTIVE INVENTORY MODEL VALIDATION. Prepared for Environment Canada.

Footnote c 

Shapiro, 1998. Options for the Management Surplus Ozone Depleting Substances in Canada. Prepared for Environment Canada.

Footnote 2 

Source: ARC 1997 and subsequent updating by Environment Canada.

Footnote d 

ARC, 1997. Socio-economic Assessment of a Ban on the Use of Existing Products and Equipment Containing CFCs and Halons. Prepared for Environment Canada.

Footnote e 

S.C. 1999, c. 33

Footnote f 

S.C. 1999, c. 33

Footnote 3 

SOR/99-255

NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with extensible hypertext markup language (XHTML 1.0 Strict).