Archive Index
Review and Update of Canada's Code Development System
Joint CCBFC/PTCBS Task Group on the Code Development and Review Process
Joint CCBFC/PTCBS Task Group on Implementation of a New Code Development System

Joint CCBFC/PTCBS Task Group on the Code Development and Review Process

Terms of Reference   Members   Meetings

Terms of Reference

A joint Task Group of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC) and the Provincial/Territorial Committee on Building Standards (PTCBS) has been formed. The role of this Task Group is twofold: to recommend strategies aimed at ensuring appropriate levels of national/provincial/territorial participation in a uniform building, plumbing and fire code development and review process; and to establish a coordinated code public review process that accommodates the needs of the CCBFC and the provinces/territories.

In Canada, regulations pertaining to the safety of the public in buildings is the responsibility of the provinces and territories. Since 1941, CCBFC (and its predecessors, the Associate Committees on the National Building and Fire Codes) has produced model building and fire codes , which it has offered as the basis for provincial, territorial and municipal regulation.

It is widely recognized that Canada's economy, and the construction industry in particular, benefits where there is uniformity in the country's building and fire code requirements. These benefits include:

• Consistent levels of health and safety for all Canadians.
• A larger domestic market with common requirements, which facilitates the movement of goods and services within Canada.
• Reduction in the duplication of effort, which allows for cost sharing of technical development.
• The promotion, on a pan-Canadian basis, of cost-effective, technically progressive solutions.
• Credibility for Canadian technologies in international markets as a result of acknowledgement in a national code system.
• Reduction in design and compliance verification costs for those working in multiple jurisdictions

The National Building, Plumbing and Fire Codes were created with such benefits in mind, and to a great extent have been successful in achieving them. Some jurisdictions, however, have established their own comprehensive provincial and municipal code review processes in order to consult with their stakeholders and to address regional issues. The Strategic Plan of the CCBFC recognizes that much can be done to improve the model code development and review process to better reflect the needs of provincial/territorial authorities and code users, and to eliminate the need for overlapping processes, thus reducing the burden these processes can impose on stakeholders.

This exercise may result in fundamental changes to the code development process in Canada.

The following questions will be among those addressed by the Task Group:

1. Acknowledging the constitutional prerogative of the provinces and territories to adopt whatever code they wish and considering differing provincial/territorial issues and priorities, how could a uniform code technical development and review process be achieved?
• Designation of provincial/territorial authorities as the point of entry to the code development process?
• Improved liaisons between the CCBFC and provincial/territorial code development councils and committees?
• Improved liaisons between the CCBFC and provincial/territorial code authorities?
• Greater representation of provincial/territorial authorities on CCBFC committees?
• Earlier involvement of provincial and territorial authorities in the CCBFC code development process?
• Joint review of technical changes by provinces and territories prior to wider public review, or separate provincial public reviews funneled into a National review process?
• Inclusion of all provincial/territorial amendments in a national review package?
• Greater involvement of provincial and territorial in the process of selecting members for the CCBFC and its standing committees?
• CCBFC decisions on code change made subject to a ratification by provincial/territorial authorities, such as used by some Canadian Standards Development Organizations?
• A more frequent or continuous process instead of scheduled or periodic public reviews?
2. Considering geographical and economic realities, how could greater participation in a coordinated national/provincial/territorial code development and review process be achieved?
• More code development originating at the provincial/territorial level?
• More meetings held across Canada?
• Enhancement of the present decision-making process used by the CCBFC (broad consensus, public review, balanced matrix, individuals as members)?
• National conferences to discuss/decide code development as occurs in the USA?
• Greater use of the Internet?
3. How should the process deal with the possibility of contradictory policy and technical advice from stakeholder groups?
• Require stakeholder groups to refer issues to the Provincial/Territorial Committee on Building Standards (PTCBS) first?
• Create partnership agreements with provincial/territorial decision-making authorities specifying to whom the process will refer policy issues?
• Create liaison agreements between the process and stakeholder groups, such as the Canadian Council of Fire Marshals and Fire Commissioners (CCFM/FC), the Canadian Advisory Council on Plumbing (CACP) and the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Subcommittee on Building Codes and Housing?
• Establishing a dispute resolution mechanism?
4. Are there characteristics of model building, plumbing and fire codes that need to be accounted for in a code development process?
• Restrict the model building, plumbing and fire codes to a set of core minimum requirements and rely on provinces and territories to develop provisions for issues that do not have widespread application?
• Base the model codes, to the greatest extent possible, on technical correctness only?
• Give due consideration to cost impact?
• Increase the scopes of the model codes only when there is strong evidence of wide support in the code-affected community and among adopting authorities?

Click here for the meeting agendas and reports.

Get Acrobat Reader
Published: 2003-06-05	Important Notices