FEDERAL REG

SOR/2016-61: Regulations Amending the Pest Control Products Regulations (Miscellaneous Program)

REGISTRATION OF FEDERAL REGULATION - VIA OIC DATABASE, PRIOR TO PART II OF THE GAZETTE

Registered
March 29, 2016


REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT (This statement is not part of the Regulations.) Issues The Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations (SJCSR) has identified a number of issues with the Pest Control Products Regulations (PCPRs) and has recommended amending the PCPRs to address these issues. The amendments are administrative in nature and aim to correct discrepancies between the... (Click for more)


Published on March 29, 2016

Bill Summary

SOR/2016-61: Regulations Amending the Pest Control Products Regulations (Miscellaneous Program)

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT (This statement is not part of the Regulations.) Issues The Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations (SJCSR) has identified a number of issues with the Pest Control Products Regulations (PCPRs) and has recommended amending the PCPRs to address these issues. The amendments are administrative in nature and aim to correct discrepancies between the French and English versions, and to add clarity to certain regulatory provisions. Objectives The amendments have the following objectives: to correct discrepancies between the French and English versions; to add clarity to certain regulatory provisions; and to remove duplicative information requests. Description Remove inconsistencies The English and French versions of the PCPRs are inconsistent in describing “product name.” The English version uses only the term “product name” and the French version uses both “nom du produit” and “nom commercial” terms to describe the “product name.” Therefore, paragraphs 6(1)(c), 26(1)(a) and 36(1)(b) in the French version of the PCPRs are amended to clarify that the preferred term is “nom du produit” and references to “nom commercial” are now replaced with “nom du produit.” Clarifications of provisions In both the English and French versions, section 17.2 of the PCPRs indicates that the provisions “only” apply to applications to register a pest control product whose active ingredient has been determined by the Minister under subsection 7(2) of the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA) to be equivalent to the active ingredient of a registered pest control product. However, as the provision can also apply to situations where there is no application such as re-evaluations or special reviews, as in section 17.3 of the PCPRs, it is unnecessary to indicate “only” in section 17.2. Therefore, section 17.2 in the English version of the PCPRs is clarified by removing the word “only” and rephrasing the French version of the PCPRs to read “s’appliquent aux demandes.” The French version of paragraph 17.5(4)(a) of the PCPRs makes clear that the intended meaning to provide a one-year extension is for “each group of three minor uses,” where the English version is not clear whether an extension is to be granted upon the addition of a single minor use and then not again until the fourth minor use is added, or only upon the addition of every third minor use. Paragraph 17.5(4)(a) of the English version of the PCPRs, is amended to clarify that the exclusive use period is extended by one year for every three minor uses added to the registration, whether these are added one or more at a time, to a maximum exclusive period of 15 years. The English version of subsection 17.5(5) of the PCPRs indicates that “A one-year extension is cancelled” if a minor use is removed from the registration, such that the remaining number of minor uses is insufficient to support the extension of the exclusive use period. However, the English version is not clear, as it seems to only apply to an extension of one year and not to extensions of more than one year. The French version of subsection 17.5(5) is more clear in that it specifies that “each extension of one year is cancelled” and not only if there was a one-year extension. Subsection 17.5(5) of the English version of the PCPRs is amended to clarify (like the French version) that each extension of one year is cancelled if the registrant withdraws a minor use from their registration, or the Minister amends the registration and removes a minor use, such that the remaining number of minor uses is insufficient to support the extension. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, subsection 17.9(2) states that the parties “must” reach a negotiated settlement with respect to the compensation payable, for the reliance on a registrant’s test data, within 120 days after delivery of the agreement to determine compensation under section 66 of the PCPA. Subsection 17.9(2) is intended to set out a deadline to the mandated negotiations following which other procedural options apply, in accordance with further regulatory provisions (e.g. arbitration). The subsection is not intended to impose an obligation that a negotiated settlement “must” be reached or the parties are in violation of the Regulations. Therefore, in both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, subsections 17.9(2) and 17.9(3) are merged to clarify that if the parties fail to reach a negotiated settlement within 120 days, they can continue to negotiate if they both agree to do so, or other procedural options apply, in accordance with further regulatory provisions. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, subsection 41(4) indicates that the foreign product use certificate is valid for only one growing season and for only one importation, as well as being valid for one year after the day on which it is issued. It is unclear how the foreign product use certificate can both be valid for one calendar year and for one growing season. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, subsection 41(4) is amended to clarify that the validity period is as specified in the foreign product use certificate, but in no case shall exceed one calendar year. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, paragraph 42(1)(a) indicates that a person can import a foreign product if they hold a “foreign product use certificate;” but it does not specify to what foreign product the certificate applies. Paragraph 42(1)(a) of the PCPRs is amended to clarify that a person must hold a foreign product use certificate “in respect of that product” in English and “à l’égard de ce produit” in French. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, paragraph 42(1)(d) indicates that a person may import a foreign product if immediately after the importation, but in any case before its use, the certificate holder affixes to it a copy of the approved foreign product use label. The provision is unclear as the requirement to affix the copy “immediately” after importation makes the option of affixing before use redundant. Paragraph 42(1)(d) in the English and French versions of the PCPRs is amended to clarify that the approved foreign product use label must be affixed to each container imported as soon as practicable after the importation of the foreign product but in any case before its use. In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, subsection 50(1) indicates that the Minister must consider the health and environmental risks and whether the proposed experimental label meets the requirements of section 60. However, the Minister should only issue an authorization if he has determined that the proposed experimental label meets the requirements of section 60 and not “whether” it meets them. Subsection 50(1) in the English and French versions of the PCPRs is amended to clarify that the Minister will determine if the proposed experimental label meets the requirements of section 60. Remove duplicative information requests In both the French and English versions of the PCPRs, paragraphs 38(4)(d) and 38(5)(d) refer to receiving the information described in subparagraphs 26(1)(h)(ii) to (iv). It is unnecessary to request the information in subparagraph 26(1)(h)(iv) under paragraph 38(4)(d), as this information is not needed to find that the products are sufficiently similar and is only needed if proceeding to determine equivalency under paragraph 38(5)(d). As well, it is unnecessary in paragraph 38(5)(d) to request the information in subparagraphs 26(1)(h)(ii) to (iii), as that is already in the Minister’s possession through the process in paragraph 38(4)(d). Paragraph 38(4)(d) of the PCPRs is amended in both the French and English versions to clarify that the information to be received is as described in subparagraphs 26(1)(h)(ii) to (iii) in respect to both the foreign and domestic products. Paragraph 38(5)(d) in both the French and English versions of the PCPRs is amended to clarify that information to be received is as described in subparagraph 26(1)(h)(iv) in respect of both the foreign and domestic products. “One-for-One” Rule The “One-for-One” Rule does not apply to these amendments, as there is no change in administrative costs or burden to business. Small business lens The small business lens does not apply to these amendments, as there are no costs to small business. Rationale The amendments are in response to the SJCSR’s review of the PCPRs. The amendments are administrative in nature and aim to correct discrepancies between the French and English versions, and to add clarity to regulatory provisions. They will not have any policy or program impacts and will not impose any costs on the government or stakeholders. Contact Jordan Hancey Section Head Policy, Communications and Regulatory Affairs Directorate Pest Management Regulatory Agency Health Canada Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9 Telephone: 613-736-3552 Footnote a S.C. 2002, c. 28 Footnote 1 SOR/2006-124

This Bill does not amend any statutes.

Sign up for alerts on this Bill

Receive emails tracking this Bill's progress.

See all your alerts in a dashboard.

Set an alert with one click and you're done!