Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 155, Number 7: Accessible Transportation Planning and Reporting Regulations

February 13, 2021

Statutory authority
Accessible Canada Act

Sponsoring agency
Canadian Transportation Agency

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues

The core issue is the presence of barriers that limit accessibility for persons with disabilities in the Canadian transportation network. Barriers to accessibility are at the heart of inequalities between Canadians with and without disabilities. Persons with disabilities have a right to equal access to the Canadian transportation network, and the ACA promotes equality of opportunity and protects people from discrimination.

The CTA is required to put regulations in place within two years of the coming into force of the ACA.

Regulations that establish requirements for TSPs to create accessibility plans, feedback processes and progress reports — and the duty to consult with persons with disabilities when developing these plans and reports — are a crucial and necessary step toward both eliminating existing barriers and preventing the introduction of others. These planning and reporting requirements will require TSPs to critically assess their organization’s operations and services in order to enable them to identify barriers and put into place plans to eliminate them. Feedback processes will allow persons with disabilities to take an active role in this process of identifying barriers, as well as establish a mechanism through which TSPs may be held accountable and ensure that meaningful progress is being made. The creation of progress reports will also serve as an accountability mechanism and ensure that TSPs are making meaningful progress toward the elimination of barriers in order to create a barrier-free federal transportation network for persons with disabilities and all Canadians.

Background

Overview

Accessibility is a human right that necessitates respect for dignity, equal opportunity, barrier-free environments, autonomy, inclusive design and meaningful involvement. It is recognized as a fundamental right in a number of international instruments and treaties, including the UNCRPD.

In 2015, the Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities was mandated to lead consultations with Canadians to inform the development of new federal accessibility legislation. Following these consultations, the Minister was mandated to create a barrier-free Canada by January 1, 2040. As the plain language summary of the ACA indicates, in response to this mandate, the ACA would “lead to more consistent accessibility in areas within federal jurisdiction across Canada and would ensure that the Government of Canada leads by example.”

In 2017, approximately 22% of Canadians (6.2 million) aged 15 years and older reported being limited in their daily activities due to a disability. This percentage is expected to increase with the population in Canada aging, since the prevalence of disability increases with age. Every day, barriers prevent Canadians with disabilities from being able to access necessary services and buildings, and barriers continue to impact the participation of persons with disabilities across all aspects of work, family, and community life.

Accessible Canada Act

The stated purpose of the ACA is to benefit all persons in Canada, especially persons with disabilities, through the realization of a Canada without barriers. This will be achieved by the proactive identification, removal, and prevention of barriers in key priority areas, including in transportation.

The ACA defines a barrier as “anything — including anything physical, architectural, technological or attitudinal, anything that is based on information or communications or anything that is the result of a policy or a practice — that hinders the full and equal participation in society of persons with an impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment or a functional limitation.” It further defines disability as “any impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication or sensory impairment — or a functional limitation — whether permanent, temporary or episodic in nature, or evident or not, that, in interaction with a barrier, hinders a person’s full and equal participation in society.”

In establishing a framework for accessibility, the legislation employs a sectoral approach that leverages and builds upon existing accessibility mandates. That is, under the ACA, the CTA, ESDC, and the CRTC maintain responsibility for accessibility within their respective jurisdictions.

The ACA creates a framework for developing accessibility standards and regulations, reporting on accessibility, and enforcing accessibility requirements, as well as monitoring implementation. Under the ACA, regulated entities — entities that are subject to the federal government’s jurisdiction as established in section 7 of the ACA — must comply with new planning and reporting requirements related to accessibility. In the case of the CTA, these regulated entities are TSPs, comprised of Crown corporations and agencies such as VIA Rail Canada, Marine Atlantic, CATSA and the CBSA, and private sector entities, including airlines, ferry operators, passenger railways, and bus carriers, airports and other terminals.

Canadian Transportation Agency

The CTA is an independent, quasi-judicial tribunal and regulator responsible for ensuring that the national transportation system runs efficiently, protecting the rights of persons with disabilities to accessible transportation, and providing consumer protection for air passengers. The CTA has had, since 1988, a mandate to protect the fundamental human right of persons with disabilities to accessible transportation services. Under Part V of the Canada Transportation Act (the Act), all TSPs in the federal transportation network must, up to the point of undue hardship, remove barriers to the mobility of persons with disabilities to facilitate equal access to the federal transportation network.

In enforcing this mandate, the CTA’s point of departure is universal accessibility. Universal accessibility differs from individual accommodation in that it is an engaged and innovative approach that proactively endeavours to avoid and remove barriers to accessibility on a systematic basis.

Guiding principles

The requirements of the ACA are to be carried out in recognition of, and in accordance with, the following principles provided in section 6 of the ACA:

• (a) all persons must be treated with dignity regardless of their disabilities;
• (b) all persons must have the same opportunity to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have regardless of their disabilities;
• (c) all persons must have barrier-free access to full and equal participation in society, regardless of their disabilities;
• (d) all persons must have meaningful options and be free to make their own choices, with support if they desire, regardless of their disabilities;
• (e) laws, policies, programs, services and structures must take into account the disabilities of persons, the different ways that persons interact with their environments and the multiple and intersecting forms of marginalization and discrimination faced by persons;
• (f) persons with disabilities must be involved in the development and design of laws, policies, programs, services and structures; and
• (g) the development and revision of accessibility standards and the making of regulations must be done with the objective of achieving the highest level of accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Objective

The main objective of the proposed Regulations is to contribute to the ACA’s goal of the realization of a barrier-free Canada by establishing regulations that would ensure the development of processes that will work toward providing persons with disabilities with equitable access to the Canadian transportation network so they can fully participate in the social and economic aspects of Canadian society. The proposed Regulations would do this by ensuring that TSPs specifically consider accessibility in the design, development and delivery of programs, policies and services, which would help to identify, remove, and prevent barriers to accessibility in the federal transportation network.

Description

The proposed Regulations would create a set of requirements for the development of accessibility plans, progress reports and feedback processes, and through consultation and the feedback received, they would allow for the identification and removal of barriers to an accessible transportation network.

Key elements of the ACA

Accessibility planning and reporting can play a significant role in supporting a broader culture change on accessibility. The ACA requires TSPs to develop and publish accessibility plans that take into account the principles of the ACA and address their policies, programs, practices and services in relation to the identification and removal of barriers, and the prevention of new barriers, in the following priority areas:

• 1. Information and communication technologies;
• 2. The procurement of goods, services, and facilities (e.g. to ensure that equipment and terminals are accessible);
• 3. The design and delivery of programs and services;
• 4. Transportation;
• 5. The built environment, to the extent that the built environment is a passenger aircraft, passenger train, passenger bus, passenger vessel, aerodrome passenger terminal, railway passenger station, bus passenger station, or marine passenger terminal; and
• 6. Communication, other than information and communication technologies, related to items 1 – 5, above.

TSPs must also, in their plans, identify any provisions of regulations made under subsection 170(1) of the Act that apply to them, such as those of the Accessible Transportation for Persons with Disabilities Regulations (ATPDR).

Under the ACA, TSPs must also prepare progress reports that provide updates on the progress made in implementing accessibility plans and on other accessibility-related progress that has been accomplished.

Accessibility plans and progress reports would be subject to public feedback that TSPs would be required to take into consideration. The ACA requires TSPs to establish a process for receiving and responding to feedback on the implementation of their accessibility plans, and the barriers encountered by persons that deal with them. They must also publish a description of the feedback process. Therefore, Canadians would be able to monitor what TSPs are doing to address barriers to accessibility and to hold them accountable. TSPs would also need to regularly prepare and publish updated accessibility plans to describe the progress that has been made and take account of the feedback received from persons with disabilities.

TSPs subject to these proposed Regulations would need to consult with persons with disabilities in the preparation of their accessibility plans and progress reports and explain how they did so. Furthermore, progress reports would need to set out the feedback received and how it was considered.

Key provisions included in the CTA’s ACA regulations

In recognition of the human right to accessible transportation, the proposed Regulations have been designed to bring the core ACA provisions into effect in as timely a manner as possible while also providing TSPs with sufficient time to develop and implement their accessibility plans, and to collect and consider information received in feedback processes.

Recognizing that TSPs have different means to develop and implement their initial accessibility plans and progress reports, the proposed Regulations would stagger the coming into force of the requirements to publish the initial accessibility plan and the progress reports, based on classes of TSPs:

• For Class 1 TSPs — departments, agencies, and Crown Corporations — the fixed date in the proposed Regulations is December 31, 2021 (so they would be required to have their initial accessibility plans published by December 31, 2022);
• For Class 2 TSPs — private sector TSPs with 100 or more employees — the fixed date in the proposed Regulations is June 1, 2022 (so they would be required to have their initial accessibility plans published by June 1, 2023); and
• For Class 3 TSPs — private sector TSPs with fewer than 100 but 10 or more employees — the fixed date in the proposed Regulation is June 1, 2023 (so they would be required to have their initial plans published by June 1, 2024).

Very small private sector TSPs with fewer than 10 employees would not be subject to the proposed Regulations. This is accomplished by establishing a fourth class without a fixed date.

The proposed Regulations would prescribe the following additional elements.

• Require that each accessibility plan be followed by two subsequent progress reports. TSPs would need to publish progress reports by their fixed date in any year that they are not required to submit an accessibility plan, which would allow persons with disabilities to track progress and provide feedback. The cycle would progress as follows:
  • Year 1 — Accessibility Plan
  • Year 2 — Progress Report
  • Year 3 — Progress Report
  • Year 4 — Updated Accessibility Plan
• Require that TSPs include headers in their accessibility plans for each element of the plan that is required under subsections 60(1) and 60(5) of the Act, which include information and communication technologies; procurement of goods, services, and facilities; design and delivery of programs and services; transportation; the built environment, to the extent that the built environment is a passenger aircraft, passenger train, passenger bus, passenger vessel, aerodrome passenger terminal, railway passenger station, bus passenger station, or marine passenger terminal; and communication, other than information and communication technologies, related to items previous elements.
• Specify that accessibility plans, feedback processes and progress reports must be published in clear, simple and concise language. This means that grammar should be simple, and technical words should be avoided where possible, such that the text is easily understandable.
• Require that accessibility plans, feedback processes and progress reports be published where they are easily found on the TSP’s main digital platform that it owns, operates or controls and that it uses to communicate information to the public, and in a manner that makes it accessible either directly or by way of a direct hyperlink. They must also be published in an accessible format, i.e. that meets the requirements of Level AA conformance with the last bilingual version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), as amended from time to time. The WCAG would be incorporated by reference and is ambulatory, which means that the standard is updated as newer versions are revised and published.
• Require TSPs that do not use a digital platform to publish accessibility plans and progress reports and make them available in a conspicuous location in the main reception area of each publicly accessible business location so that persons with disabilities would be able to access them.
• Allow persons with disabilities to request accessibility plans or progress reports by any means through which a TSP communicates with the public, which may include in person, on the phone, by email, mail, or by other means as appropriate.
• Allow for persons with disabilities to request a copy of an accessibility plan or progress report in specified alternative formats. The person would be able to request the plans and reports in print, large print or in an electronic format that is compatible with adaptive technology that assists persons with disabilities. TSPs would be required to make their plans or reports available to the person in the requested format as soon as feasible after the request, but no later than 15 days after the request for a Class 1 or Class 2 TSP, and no later than 20 days after the request for a Class 3 TSP. Accessibility plans may also be requested in braille or audio formats, with the proposed Regulations requiring Class 1, 2 and 3 TSPs to provide these alternative formats within 45 days following the receipt of the request.
• Require that within 48 hours from the time of publication, TSPs notify the CTA that an accessibility plan, a feedback process or a progress report has been published and, if applicable, include in the notification a link to the relevant Uniform Resource Locator (URL), or the addresses of the publicly accessible business locations where a print copy of the plan, process or report is available.
• Allow persons with disabilities to provide their feedback by any means through which a TSP communicates with the public. This could include in person, on the phone, by email, mail, or by other means as appropriate.
• Require that TSPs allow persons with disabilities to submit feedback anonymously if they prefer.

Regulatory development

Consultation

On December 2, 2019, the CTA met with its Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC) — which includes representatives from the community of persons with disabilities, TSPs and other interested parties — and indicated that it would be launching consultations. The CTA published a discussion paper the following day, welcoming feedback from the public and stakeholders for three months, from December 3, 2019, to February 28, 2020. The CTA invited representatives of the community of person with disabilities as well as TSPs to meet with its staff to discuss their comments and concerns.

The stakeholders that were consulted include the following:

• 1. Persons with disabilities, and their advocacy organizations;
• 2. Air carriers, both domestic and foreign;
• 3. Rail carriers, both domestic and foreign, that operate across a national, provincial, or territorial border;
• 4. Marine carriers, both domestic and foreign, that operate across a national, provincial, or territorial border;
• 5. Bus carriers, both domestic and foreign, that operate across a national, provincial, or territorial border;
• 6. Operators of terminals located in Canada that serve air carriers, and rail, marine, or bus carriers that operate across a national, provincial, or territorial border;
• 7. Ports located in Canada that serve cruise ships; and
• 8. CATSA and the CBSA.

The CTA received 108 written submissions, including 67 from the public, 16 from the community of persons with disabilities, 21 from TSPs, and 4 from government entities. The CTA also held five meetings with the community of persons with disabilities and four with TSPs.

During consultations, representatives of the community of persons with disabilities, the general public and industry provided views on a number of issues central to the proposed Regulations.

Timing of initial accessibility plans

With respect to the timing of the submission of initial accessibility plans, the community of persons with disabilities and the public were of the view that 12 to 24 months would be sufficient, whereas most TSPs suggested a timeline of 24 months.

In response to the feedback received, the proposed Regulations would allow for a staggered implementation approach over a three-year period to allow enough time for different TSPs to conduct assessments and consultations, and to develop their initial accessibility plans. Given that separate consultation processes for each TSP could generate multiple consultations, having staggered implementation dates for different classes of TSPs would also reduce consultation fatigue, a concern raised by representatives of persons with disabilities.

Specificity of accessibility plans

Community representatives indicated that accessibility plans should specify both the actions — including timelines — for TSPs to remove identified barriers as well as how TSPs will measure success. They also suggested that accessibility plans should provide detailed explanations of training, and include information about the hiring of persons with disabilities.

Pursuant to the ACA, the proposed Regulations can only prescribe the form and manner in which initial accessibility plans and updated plans are to be published. Therefore, these suggested elements were not included in the proposed Regulations.

Feedback processes

Members of the disability community and the public indicated that TSPs should be expected to respond to concerns raised by those providing feedback and making complaints. Some stated that persons with disabilities should be fairly compensated for their contributions to the development of the accessibility plans and progress reports. Persons with disabilities also expressed a preference for in-person engagement with TSPs. For example, one representative suggested that TSPs establish co-chaired advisory committees that include representatives from the disability community.

TSPs also provided a range of suggestions. Some responses emphasized that carriers should be allowed to define feedback intervals and processes, while others emphasized collecting feedback from individuals through the Web, telephone, email, forms, or accessibility surveys. One suggested that requiring a diversity of feedback options would be an unreasonable and disproportionate burden.

In response to this input and in accordance with the requirement set out in the ACA that TSPs consider feedback received, the proposed Regulations would enable persons with disabilities to provide feedback through any means that the TSP uses to communicate with the public, and also to provide it anonymously.

Progress reports

For both the community of persons with disabilities and TSPs, views with respect to progress reports varied considerably, although the range of recommendations from each group was comparable. Suggestions for the publication of initial reports varied between three months to a year and the frequency of updated reports similarly varied from a quarterly to an annual basis thereafter.

The proposed Regulations would include a three-year cycle — with accessibility plans being followed by two subsequent progress reports — so there is sufficient time for persons with disabilities to follow progress and provide feedback to TSPs, as well as for TSPs to review the feedback received and to address concerns related to identified barriers in subsequent accessibility plans.

Publication of documents on digital platforms

Members of the disability community and the public, as well as TSPs, agreed that information should be published in a prominent location, meet accessibility standards, and include multiple forms of access. The disability community and public also emphasized the importance of a variety of accessible formats. The proposed Regulations would require that accessibility plans, progress reports, and feedback processes be posted on accessible digital platforms and be easy to find.

Alternative formats

Responses across stakeholder groups varied in relation to which alternative formats should be made available.

Some representatives of persons with disabilities suggested that multiple accessible formats should be available on demand, whereas others indicated that this could be burdensome and time consuming. Community suggestions included establishing a telephone request line or adding electronic text on websites, and ensuring that information is readily available in electronic text and in audio and visual formats that are easily converted into other formats. A range of formats was suggested, including those compatible with screen readers or screen magnification software for iOS and Android platforms, DAISY readers or mobile applications, electronic files that are formatted for refreshable braille displays and alternate format hard copy materials, including large print or braille.

TSPs did not generally comment on proposed formats, although they shared their experiences with providing transported-related information in various accessible formats. They widely indicated that print, large print and especially braille formats are virtually never requested by passengers given the wide availability of adaptive technologies. TSPs also commented on the time frames within which they would be required to provide accessible formats on request; suggestions varied from “in a timely manner,” to days or several weeks.

In response to this feedback, the proposed Regulations would require that accessibility plans and progress reports be made available in an electronic format that is compatible with an adaptive technology that assists persons with disabilities, as well as print and large print, braille and audio. Time frames for making alternative formats available would vary somewhat depending on the format requested and the class of TSP.

Small TSPs

Members of the disability community and public suggested that the proposed Regulations should apply in the same manner to TSPs of all sizes.

TSPs, on the other hand, indicated that requirements might need to be more flexible for smaller organizations, depending on their cost and/or complexity. They also recommended providing more lead time for small TSPs to meet the requirements.

Given the importance of accessibility, the proposed Regulations would establish the same requirements for TSPs of different sizes for nearly all obligations. However, the deadlines for TSPs to come into compliance would be staggered based on the number of employees. Very small TSPs with fewer than 10 employees would not be subject to these regulatory requirements.

With respect to small TSPs who may not use a digital platform, some representatives of both the disability community and the public recommended that the CTA host a site for these circumstances. Community and TSP representatives also recommended a variety of alternative publication approaches, including email, mail and telephone, and that documents be available at TSPs’ locations.

To ensure consistency concerning where plans and reports are to be found, the proposed Regulations would require TSPs that do not use a digital platform to publish their documents and make them available in a conspicuous location in the main reception area of each publicly accessible business location. TSPs that do not have a website would not be required to establish one to publish their documents.

CTA notification

Members of the public generally agreed that the CTA should be notified on the same day that reports are published, whereas TSPs’ responses with respect to such notification varied considerably.

Given that not all TSPs have the same ability to publish and notify at the same time, and given that not all TSPs will be available on weekends, the proposed Regulations would prescribe that TSPs must notify the CTA of publication within 48 hours.

COVID-19 Pandemic

While most consultations were held prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the CTA has continued to engage with stakeholders throughout 2020. The CTA has also, in writing, advised stakeholders who participated in the consultations of its intent to proceed, as planned, to put regulations in place by the statutory deadline of July 2021.

TSPs agree that accessibility is important and did not raise substantive concerns about the impact of the pandemic on the proposed Regulations in principle. However, they have requested sufficient time for implementing new requirements given the operational and financial disruptions caused by the pandemic.

The CTA has heard from members of the disability community that they do not want to see the regulatory development process delayed, as these proposed regulations support a fundamental human right.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultations

The ACA applies to federal TSPs (it applies to carriers, the terminals that serve them, as well as CATSA and CBSA) that operate or carry out an undertaking or business that is within the legislative authority of Parliament, which includes Northern and remote areas served by small carriers and terminals (which could be owned by Indigenous peoples). As a result, a First Nation Band or Council, insofar as they own carriers or terminals, would be implicated in applying regulations made under the ACA, including the development of plans and progress reports.

The CTA’s initial assessment is that the Crown does not have a duty to consult Aboriginal groups with respect to the development of the proposed Regulations, given that there does not appear to be a potential adverse impact of the proposed Regulations on potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, as recognized by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Considering that the CTA’s initial assessment of the Crown’s duty to consult is fact dependent, the CTA will remain attentive to any new information that could impact this initial assessment.

The CTA was particularly interested in hearing from Indigenous communities and representative organizations, and welcomed input that would enable the CTA to better understand the nature, extent and importance of accessible transportation issues affecting Indigenous communities and that could be considered in the development of the proposed Regulations.

As part of its consultation process, the CTA made efforts to contact the Land Claims Agreement Coalition and its members as well as a range of federal Indigenous organizations, including the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC), the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK), the Métis National Council (MNC), the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (Congress), Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, Nunatsiavut Government, Grand Council of the Crees, Teslin Tlingit Council, Selkirk First Nation, Little Salmon/Carmacks First Nation, and First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun.

During consultations, one organization met with the CTA to discuss a range of topics including the CTA’s ACA regulations. The group encouraged the CTA to take a broad approach and include gender-based analysis, noting that the CTA’s consultation paper did not explicitly mention Indigenous persons, who constitute a substantial proportion of the population of the North and remote areas. With respect to the ACA in particular, the organization indicated that they were of the view that in-person feedback processes (e.g. round tables) have been the most productive, and that this type of feedback is important for remote communities, as they may not have Internet access, which may impede their participation in virtual consultations. While the ACA allows TSPs flexibility in designing their feedback processes, the CTA intends to reflect these views and propose best practices in guidance.

Instrument choice

The development of regulations is necessary because the ACA requires them to be developed by July 2021. This statutory requirement was established to address a fundamental human right. Therefore, no other options were considered.

Regulatory analysis

Cost-benefit analysis

Purpose

The cost-benefit analysis (CBA) measures the incremental impacts on the affected Canadian stakeholders (governments, consumers, businesses and other organizations) from the proposed Regulations. Incremental impacts reflect the difference between two scenarios: what would happen in the absence of the proposed Regulations (baseline scenario); and what is expected to happen when the proposed Regulations are implemented (regulatory scenario). These scenarios are described in the next two sections.

That the CBA measures incremental impacts is important to remember when reviewing the following analysis. Even if an impact of the proposed Regulations is determined to be out of scope, or not incremental to the baseline scenario, it does not mean that the cost or benefit of the impact does not exist. These impacts are real, and sometimes substantial; however, in accordance with the Policy on Cost-Benefit Analysis, because they do not stem from the proposed Regulations, they are not considered.

Potential costs and benefits that arise from the following are out of scope when analyzing the costs and benefits of federal regulatory proposals:

• A regulatory proposal’s enabling legislation, in this case, the ACA; and
• Related policies or programs that are already in place at the time the proposed Regulations come into force.

Costs and benefits to be analyzed are those that stem solely from the new requirements of the proposed Regulations.

Baseline scenario

The baseline scenario defines the environment that would have existed in the absence of the proposed Regulations. It is the scenario against which the costs and benefits of the proposed Regulations are assessed.

The baseline scenario consists of the following Act and regulations:

• the ACA and corresponding regulations fixing the date for the provisions in the ACA to come into effect; and
• the ATPDR.

In the baseline scenario, the ACA is in force. Sections 60 to 62 of the ACA establish the obligation for TSPs to produce and publish an initial accessibility plan, a feedback process and progress reports respecting the implementation of their accessibility plan. The accessibility plans, progress reports and feedback processes will be referred to as the “required documents” in this analysis when discussing these documents together.

In addition to sections 60 to 62, subsection 63(1.1) of the ACA states that the CTA must make at least one regulation under subsection 63(1) within the period of two years that begins on the day on which this subsection comes into force. Subsection 63(1) of the ACA outlines several possible areas for potential regulations to be made. This analysis assumes that in the baseline scenario, the CTA would make the regulation pursuant to paragraph 63(1)(a), that is, fixing the date in which TSPs would have to begin complying with sections 60 to 62 of the ACA.

In the baseline scenario, like the regulatory scenario, private TSPs with fewer than 10 employees are not subject to the proposed Regulations. These entities are excluded given significant limitations in their capacity to comply with the new planning and reporting requirements.

In the baseline scenario, the proposed Regulations apply equally to any TSP that must comply with any provision of any regulations under subsection 170(1) of the Canada Transportation Act and for which a date has been fixed for the initial accessibility plan. These regulations include the ATPDR, the Personnel Training for the Assistance of Persons with Disabilities Regulations (PTR) and the Air Transportation Regulations (ATR).

The ATPDR play a significant role in the baseline scenario. Subsection 4(1) of the ATPDR requires that if an obligated TSP makes available to the public information about any transportation-related service or facility, the TSP must ensure that it is compatible with adaptive technology if made available in an electronic format, or made available in braille, large print and audio formats on request.

This CBA considers an accessibility plan, progress report and feedback process as “information about any transportation-related service or facility.” Therefore, in the baseline scenario, those TSPs subject to the ATPDR are required to make this information available in alternate formats.

The ATPDR applies to large TSPs. The CTA recently held consultations on a proposed Phase II ATPDR, which would extend the ATPDR to small TSPs. Based on the input received in those consultations, the CTA determined that further discussions are needed to better understand the operating realities of these TSPs and the needs of the communities they serve.

Regulatory scenario

The regulatory scenario includes the legislative requirements of the ACA that will be in effect. However, in addition to the above-noted regulation (made pursuant to paragraph 63(1)(a) of the ACA) fixing or determining, for the purposes of subsection 60(1), a day in respect of which a regulated entity is required to comply, the proposed Regulations would also be in place, specifying the form and manner in which the required documents are to be prepared (further discussed in the “Costs” section).

The regulatory scenario, as described earlier in the “Description” section, establishes three classes of TSPs for which the application of the proposed Regulations would be staggered over a three-year time period. TSPs with fewer than 10 employees would not be subject to the requirements.

Stakeholders

TSPs

TSPs in the context of the proposed Regulations are companies that provide services to the travelling public and that are regulated by one or more of the following regulations: the ATPDR, the ATR and the PTR. These include private sector air, rail, bus and marine carriers and terminals, as well as departments, agencies or Crown corporations.

Under the proposed Regulations, TSPs would be affected differently based on their class and whether or not they are subject to the ATPDR. The ATPDR apply to a wide range of air, rail, bus and ferry terminals and ports, as well as to the activities and responsibilities of CATSA and the CBSA. Since subsection 4(1) of the ATPDR requires information provided to the public to be available in accessible formats, the similar requirements in the proposed Regulations would not impose incremental costs on TSPs regulated by the ATPDR.

This analysis assumes that the number of TSPs remains constant for the 10-year period of the analysis. The following table displays the breakdown of TSPs by class.

Table 1: Summary of TSPs per class

TSP Classification	Number of TSPs table b1 note a
Class 1	7
Class 2	39
Class 3	72
Table b1 note(s) Table b1 note a If a TSP has subsidiaries or one TSP owns or operates multiple terminals, it is counted as a single TSP for the purposes of this CBA. Of the 118 TSPs, 69 are subject to the ATPDR. Return to table b1 note a referrer

Persons with disabilities

The provisions in the proposed Regulations are expected to make it easier for persons with disabilities to read and understand accessibility plans and allow them to provide feedback to TSPs, as well as to make the best transportation-related decisions based on their particular needs. This is discussed in more detail below.

CTA

The CTA will incur costs related to ensuring that the accessibility plans, feedback processes and progress reports are in the form and manner prescribed in the proposed Regulations.

Benefits and costs

This analysis quantifies (i.e. monetizes) impacts where possible and provides a qualitative assessment of the costs and benefits where quantification was not possible. This CBA is estimated over a 10-year analysis period from June 2021 to June 2030.

Costs

Web accessibility

The proposed Regulations would require that TSPs publish required documents on the main publicly used digital platform that they own, operate or control and that they use to communicate information to the public, and in a manner that makes the documents accessible either directly or by way of a direct hyperlink, at minimum, in an accessible format that is compliant with Level AA conformance with the last bilingual version of the WCAG. These web accessibility requirements would not apply in respect of a TSP that does not own, operate or control a digital platform; however, such a TSP would be required to publish physical copies of the documents and make them available. The latest bilingual version of the WCAG is 2.0; however, version 2.1 was published in June 2018 (in English). Given that the first accessibility plan would not be published until June 1, 2022, this analysis assumes that a bilingual version of the WCAG 2.1 will be available by then.

In order to be WCAG 2.1 compliant, a digital platform must be robust. Guideline 4.1 indicates that this means that the platform maximizes compatibility with current and future user agents, and assistive (adaptive) technologies. Therefore, the requirement for electronic formats to be compatible with adaptive technology that is intended to assist persons with disabilities is embedded within the WCAG-compliant requirement.

The cost to TSPs for complying with the WCAG 2.1 requirements would include the cost for an IT developer to make the required changes to become WCAG-compliant and an audit by internal or external personnel to verify that all features of the web accessibility are working correctly. In addition, the proposed Regulations require that the documents be WCAG-compliant in both English and French, thus imposing the additional cost of translation. These costs are applicable for each version of the accessibility plan and progress reports over the course of the 10-year analysis period for each TSP.

It is assumed that both French and English accessibility plans for Class 1 and Class 2 TSPs (larger TSPs) would be 10 pages in length, progress reports would be 5 pages long, and the feedback process half a page. The required documents for Class 3 TSPs (smaller TSPs) were assumed to be half the length, with the exception of the feedback process, which was also assumed to be half a page. The IT developer would require several hours per page to ensure compliance with WCAG 2.1. The number of hours per page was derived from industry feedback and is different for smaller and larger TSPs. The web development cost of converting the required documents to WCAG 2.1 was estimated by multiplying the average wage rate of the IT developer by the total number of hours per document to convert (number of pages per document multiplied by hours per page to convert).

The audit/verification cost of ensuring compliance was estimated by multiplying the number of hours needed to complete the audit per document by the wage rate of the auditor. The auditor is assumed to be a third-party consultant and the number of hours is based on an internal CTA consultant report.

The incremental cost of becoming WCAG 2.1-compliant for the applicable TSPs (subject to the ATR or the PTR only) is estimated to be $445,659 net present value [NPV] (2019 CAD) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $63,452. This is the sum of the total IT developer cost for making the bilingual required documents WCAG 2.1-compliant and the total audit/verification costs.

Print, large print and braille

This analysis does not assess the cost of potential requests for regular print formats of the required documents. It is assumed that minimal requests will be made for this format, based on feedback received from TSPs. In addition, it is assumed that most people who would like a regular print version would print it themselves due to the time lag involved in receiving the print version from the TSPs. The cost to TSPs would involve just the cost of the paper and postage to mail it to the requester. A small cost per TSP is expected per year for this format.

The CTA conducted a survey of all TSPs to determine how many requests for large print and braille a TSP might receive for any of the required documents. TSPs were asked how many requests per year, over the last three years (on average), were received. Of the 21 respondents to the survey, the majority (84%) stated that they received no requests for the alternate format. The remaining respondents (16%) received between 1 and 10 requests per document per year.

The overall average number of requests for large print and braille from all responses was less than one request per year, per document that they currently have published. Given that responses were received from roughly 17% of TSPs subject to the ACA, most of whom are within the third class of TSPs (smaller TSPs), the responses cannot be taken as fully representative of the entire population of TSPs. Therefore, this analysis assumes that larger TSPs will receive three requests per year for large print and braille per required document, and smaller TSPs will receive two.

This analysis estimates the cost of a master copy, plus three copies for larger TSPs and two copies for smaller TSPs, as explained in the previous paragraph. The master copy is estimated by multiplying the number of pages per required document by the cost per page. For large print and braille, it is assumed that the content of the required documents will take more space, thus requiring more pages than what was estimated in the web accessibility section. It is assumed that the large print documents will be 1.5 times the length of the regular print format for both larger and smaller TSPs. The cost per page was based on quotes received from third-party companies that produce alternate formats. In addition to the development of the master copies, the cost of printing the copies for the TSPs is estimated. The cost to print is calculated by multiplying the number of pages per copy of the large print and braille documents by the cost to print per page. This is then multiplied by the number of copies of the required document for the given year. An additional cost to fulfill the request is also calculated by multiplying the number of requests a TSP receives by the appropriate employee wage. It is assumed that it would take 20 minutes to fulfill one request.

It is estimated that the incremental cost to TSPs for providing large print and braille formats would be $68,731 NPV (2019 CAD) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $9,786.

Audio

Similar to the other alternate formats, TSPs have indicated that they do not receive many requests for audio versions of documents. It is believed that most, if not all, persons with disabilities who would like an audio version, would turn to e-readers. This analysis assumes one copy will be requested per required document. It is important to note that the highest cost with the audio format is in creating the first copy, as any subsequent request would not require the audio file to be reproduced. Therefore, the assumption of one request per TSP would capture the main cost to TSPs, even if the actual number of requests were higher. The request will either be for a French or English version of the required document. The cost per audio format is similar for French and English versions.

The cost per TSP of producing an audio version of a required document is calculated by multiplying the total number of words in the document by the cost per word for converting the document to audio. This analysis assumes that each required document (accessibility plans and progress reports) will have 250 words per page. Therefore, multiplying 250 by the corresponding number of pages of the required document results in the total number of words. The cost per word is estimated using internal CTA contracts and invoices from third-party contractors for previous conversions of documents into audio versions. This analysis assumes that TSPs would also use third-party contractors to produce the audio formats.

It is estimated that the incremental cost to TSPs for providing an audio format is $111,441 NPV (2019 Can$) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $15,867.

Second progress report

Subsection 62(1) of the ACA states that TSPs must prepare and publish, in accordance with the ACA and regulations made under subsection 63(1), a progress report respecting the implementation of its accessibility plan. The proposed Regulations require TSPs in Classes 1 to 3 to publish a progress report in each year between updated accessibility plans. The following table helps visualize the additional requirement of the proposed Regulations. This table is for illustration purposes only and does not reflect specific timelines for the required documents for all TSPs.

Table 2: Accessibility plan implementation requirements

Year	Deliverable
Year 1	Initial accessibility plan
Year 2	Progress report 1
Year 3	Progress report 2
Year 4	Updated accessibility plan
Year 5	Progress report 1
Year 6	Progress report 2
Year 7	Updated accessibility plan
Year 8	Progress report 1
Year 9	Progress report 2
Year 10	Updated accessibility plan

In the above table, progress report 1 is a requirement under the ACA, and thus its creation and publication are not considered in the analysis. Progress report 2 is a requirement of the proposed Regulations and is therefore considered an incremental cost in this analysis. It is important to note that the costs for alternate formats described above include both progress reports 1 and 2, as the requirement to provide alternate formats would be established in the proposed Regulations. The cost estimated in this section is only related to the actual creation and publication of the second progress report.

It is assumed that the second progress report would take less time (half the time) to produce than the first progress report given that a lot of the content would likely be taken directly from the first report. This analysis assumes it would take 7.5 hours (one business day) to develop each page of the second progress report. This analysis assumes the progress report would be 5 pages in length for Class 1 and 2 TSPs and 2.5 pages for Class 3 TSPs. The cost per TSP of the second progress report was estimated by multiplying the number of hours per page by the total number of pages by the wage rate of support workers of TSPs as reported by Statistics Canada. This was then multiplied by the number of TSPs to calculate the industry cost.

The total cost to all TSPs for producing the second progress report is estimated to be $177,811 NPV (2019 Can$) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $25,316.

Notification to the CTA

Under the proposed Regulations, TSPs would be required to notify the CTA, by electronic means (e.g. email, Web portal), of the publication of their accessibility plans, progress reports and feedback processes within 48 hours of publication and include a hyperlink to the URL of the document in the notice, where applicable. It is assumed that senior management level employees would make this notification.

This analysis assumes that it will take the employee 20 minutes to make the notification to the CTA. The cost is estimated by multiplying the time it takes to make the notification by the employee’s wage rate.

It is estimated that notifying the CTA will cost TSPs $15,689 NPV (2019 Can$) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $2,234.

Compliance monitoring cost

The CTA would carry costs related to monitoring compliance with the proposed Regulations, which includes ensuring that the CTA has been notified when a required document has been published, and verifying that it is in the appropriate form and follows the appropriate manner as prescribed in the proposed Regulations. The CTA would also review other aspects of the required documents, such as the content being complete as per the requirements of the ACA. As a result of content requirements falling under the ACA, and not the proposed Regulations, the review of content is not included in the cost estimates below.

The CTA can assess the costs based on traditional monitoring activities. A factor was applied to the cost estimate to exclude the tasks related to the ACA requirements. It was assumed in this analysis that only 15% of the estimated time was related to the compliance monitoring tasks borne by the proposed Regulations. The estimated per-document cost of compliance monitoring was multiplied by the number of required documents per year to calculate the total cost.

The compliance monitoring costs are estimated at $59,185 NPV (2019 Can$) over the 10-year period, or an annualized average of $8,427.

Benefits

Time savings

By having access to the required documents in a format amenable to their specific disability (as described in the cost section), persons with disabilities save time in reading and understanding those documents. It is expected that, of the population of persons with disabilities, it is those with vision impairments who will benefit most from this provision. It is assumed that this benefit would mostly be attributed to the digital platform accessible versions, given the low demand for the other alternative formats mentioned in the cost section.

As discussed earlier, since the requirement for alternate formats is also present in the ATPDR, persons with disabilities using the services of TSPs subject to the ATPDR would have access to the required documents in an accessible format in the baseline scenario. Approximately 273 000 persons with disabilities would benefit from alternate formats, of which roughly 250 000 use the services of TSPs subject to the ATPDR. Therefore, approximately 23 000 persons with disabilities per year would experience the incremental time savings benefit, which is estimated to be $1,938,000 NPV (2019 Can$), or an annualized average benefit of $275,928.

For simplicity, the methodology used for calculating this benefit is described in four steps.

1. Determine the number of persons with disabilities that would save time with accessible formats:

The population of persons with moderate or severe vision impairments over the age of 15 was taken from Statistics Canada’s 2017 Canadian Survey on Disability, and adjusted downwards by the percentage of persons with disabilities who are online and by the percentage of persons with disabilities who travel each year (non-commuter travel). This CBA estimates that 58% of persons with disabilities are online in year one of the analysis (from the U.S. Census Bureau’s publication: Americans With Disabilities: 2010), growing by 1% per year throughout the analysis period, and from Statistics Canada’s Participation and Activity Limitation Survey that 57% engage in non-commuter travel.

2. Determine the time saved per person with disability:

(a) This analysis borrows the following data from the 2017 Final Regulatory Impact Analysis by the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (hereafter the “Access Board”) to update federal Section 508 Standards and Section 255 Guidelines. The Access Board is an independent federal agency devoted to accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Table 3: Analysis of time saved per person with disability

Variable	Proxy	Estimate
Average number of required documents visited annually per person with disability (electronically)	Average number of visits to federal government websites annually	15
Percentage of time lost with inaccessible website	N/A	18%

(b) In the absence of an accessible digital platform, it is assumed that a person with a disability would spend 15 minutes reviewing required documents.

(c) In total, persons with disabilities are assumed to spend 225 minutes annually reviewing the required documents from TSPs (15 required documents reviewed multiplied by 15 minutes per required document). Of the 225 minutes, 18%, or roughly 41 minutes, is assumed to be time lost due to the inaccessible website.

3. Determine the total time-saving benefit:

Multiplying the time savings per person, per year from step 2, by the number of persons with disabilities affected from step 1 equals the total time saved by all persons with disabilities impacted by the digital platform accessibility requirement in the proposed Regulations for a given year. The total time-saving benefit is equal to the total time saved by all persons with disabilities multiplied by the average wage rate of persons with disabilities. The wage rate is estimated as the median total income of tax filers aged 15 years and over (Statistics Canada Table 11-10-0072-01) divided by the number of hours worked per week (assumed to be 40 hours/week).

4. Apply the ATPDR factor:

As noted earlier, the majority of passengers with disabilities use the services of TSPs that are subject to the ATPDR. Since the benefits to these passengers would be accrued in the baseline scenario as well, such benefits must be removed from the calculation in step 3 above. Based on internal calculations of passengers by modes of transportation over the last few years, it is estimated that roughly 8% of all passengers are not served by TSPs that are subject to the ATPDR (92% are served by TSPs that are subject to the ATPDR). This analysis assumes that passengers with disabilities are served by TSPs that are subject to the ATPDR at the same rate as all passengers. Therefore, the time savings benefit to persons with disabilities, as a result of the proposed Regulations, is the total time savings benefit from step 3 multiplied by the ATPDR factor of 8%.

In addition to the direct benefits accrued to persons with disabilities from the time saved reviewing plans and reports in a format of their choice, persons with disabilities would also experience a reduction in the anxiety that exists with not having access to documents in accessible formats. This benefit is estimated to be $77,520 NPV (2019 Can$), an annualized average benefit of $11,037.

In the baseline, where digital platform accessibility is not necessary for the required documents, for TSPs not subject to the ATPDR, persons with vision impairments would have difficulty in reading and understanding the content, causing some anxiety. This was alluded to in the time savings benefit. An anxiety premium, expressed as a percentage of time, is applied to the time saved benefit from above to calculate the reduced cost of anxiety to persons with disabilities associated with the easier consumption of content with the accessible digital platform format.

The U.S. Department of Transportation, in their final regulatory impact analysis of Rulemaking on Enhanced Airline Passenger Protections (2009, p. 22), used an anxiety premium of 0.01 for all passengers in their calculation. Furthermore, in a study by the Mental Health Foundation, Living with Anxiety (PDF), it is suggested that anxiety levels for persons with disabilities to be four times higher than that of non-disabled persons on average. Therefore, this analysis uses an anxiety premium of 4%.

This analysis only considers visually impaired persons with disabilities; however, persons with cognitive/learning disabilities are also likely to benefit from the accessible format requirements of the proposed Regulations. One of the standards of WCAG compliance is clarity in the content, and that the webpage is easily navigable. Presumably, this would be helpful to many people, but more so persons with learning or cognitive disabilities. The amount of time this group of persons with disabilities may save is difficult to estimate, and is thus not monetized; however, it is worth noting the potential benefit to this group.

Increased independence and participation

Finally, the accessible formats of the required documents would provide persons with disabilities with some independence. Persons with disabilities would not have to rely on family, friends or other assistance to read and understand the required documents. Such independence would provide them the opportunity to be actively involved in the decision-making process of which TSP they will use. The accessible formats enable the participation of persons with disabilities in important family and work-related travel decisions, thus increasing their self-worth and overall quality of life.

Staggered implementation of classes

As explained in the regulatory scenario, TSPs in the first three classes created by the proposed Regulations will have different dates by which they have to publish their initial accessibility plan, and as a result, all of the subsequent progress reports and accessibility plans. Over the 10-year analysis period, this results in a time value of money benefit for certain TSPs.

There is no benefit to the first class from the proposed Regulations as their timeline to publish the initial accessibility plan does not change between the baseline and regulatory scenarios. TSPs in the second and third classes can delay their initial accessibility plan by one and two years respectively, thus experiencing a financial benefit from the delayed investments required in publishing the documents.

The time value of money principle states that individuals or companies would prefer to make payments later due to the fact there is a time preference for current consumption over future consumption. The concept explains that the money you have now is worth more than the identical sum in the future due to earning capacity. To calculate the amount of the benefit, the cost of producing the accessible formats of the required documents is discounted by one and two years respectively by an appropriate market rate. This benefit is embedded in the digital platform accessibility and alternate formats costs described above. It acts to bring down the overall costs of those provisions.

Summary

The proposed Regulations would result in a cost to TSPs and the CTA of $878,514 PV, benefits to persons with disabilities of $2.02M PV for a net present benefit of $1.14M, expressed in 2019 Canadian dollars, over the 10-year period following the coming into force of the proposed Regulations. The benefits of the proposed Regulations to Canadians outweigh the cost to TSPs and the CTA. Persons with disabilities are expected to benefit from a decrease in time wasted reading and understanding inaccessible documents, and reduced anxiety that comes with the availability of accessible formats. In addition to the monetized benefits, persons with disabilities would experience heightened independence, and would be able to increase their participation in important personal and professional travelling decisions.

Consolidated cost-benefit summary

• Base year for costing: 2019
• Present value base year: 2021
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 4: Monetized costs

Impacted stakeholder	Description of cost	Base year 2021	Year 4 2024	Year 7 2027	Final year 2030	Total (present value)	Annualized value
CTA	Monitoring and compliance	$0	$13,491	$8,230	$8,230	$59,185	$8,427
TSPs	Web accessibility / Adaptive technology	$0	$237,913	$193,077	$193,077	$445,659	$63,452
	Large print and braille	$0	$30,444	$30,444	$30,444	$68,731	$9,786
	Audio	$0	$50,699	$50,699	$50,699	$111,441	$15,867
	Second progress report	$0	$11,024	$11,024	$11,024	$177,811	$25,316
	Notification to the CTA	$0	$4,214	$2,634	$2,634	$15,689	$2,234
All stakeholders	Total costs	$0	$347,786	$296,109	$296,109	$878,514	$125,081

Table 5: Monetized benefits

Impacted stakeholder	Description of benefit	Base year 2021	Year 4 2024	Year 7 2027	Final year 2030	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Canadians: Persons with disabilities	Time savings	$0	$355,234	$385,247	$418,881	$1,938,000	$275,928
	Reduced anxiety	$0	$14,209	$15,410	$16,755	$77,520	$11,037
All stakeholders	Total benefits	$0	$369,444	$400,656	$435,637	$2,015,520	$286,965

Table 6: Summary of monetized costs and benefits

Impacts	Base year 2021	Year 4 2024	Year 7 2027	Final year 2030	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Total costs	$0	$347,786	$296,109	$296,109	$878,514	$125,081
Total benefits	$0	$369,444	$400,656	$435,637	$2,015,520	$286,965
Net benefit	$0	$21,658	$104,547	$139,528	$1,137,006	$161,875

Qualitative benefit

• Increased independence and participation for persons with disabilities

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies since there is an incremental increase in administrative burden on business, and a new regulatory title is being introduced. The proposed Regulations include a requirement that TSPs notify the CTA upon publication of any of the required documents to demonstrate compliance.

Table 7: One-for-one rule summary

	Values to report in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement: Unit of measure — Constant 2012 Canadian dollars, present value base year 2012
Annualized administrative costs	$1,102
Annualized administrative costs per business	$9.76

It is assumed that for each publication of the required documents under the proposed Regulations a TSP will require 0.33 hours of a manager or senior manager’s time to notify the CTA of a TSP’s publication. Using the National Occupation Classification (NOC), the average of management and senior management wages is used as the closest proxy to estimate the hourly cost for a TSP to notify the CTA. The frequency of these costs is expected to be annual with each published report. In total there are 118 stakeholders subject to these administrative burdens. Over a 10-year period, the total administrative cost is $15,557 or $9.76 annually for each TSP.

Small business lens

The small business lens applies because, in addition to the administrative costs, small businesses would face compliance costs under these Regulations. This includes any upfront costs associated with the digital platform accessibility of the required documents and/or the production of physical copies of alternate formats for accessibility plans, feedback process descriptions or progress reports. This would be an ongoing cost related to the various updates of the required documents.

The ACA establishes the requirements that regulated entities must follow. That said, the proposed Regulations have considered, and reduced, the potential burden they may impose on small businesses by creating classes which allow TSPs with 10 to 99 employees more time to comply with the provisions in the proposed Regulations. This extra time allows them to better prepare and plan for the eventual compliance with the proposed Regulations. The delay in incurring the costs related to the provisions also results in a compliance cost savings for small businesses.

Additional flexibility was provided with respect to the amount of time small- to medium-sized TSPs have to provide required documents in alternative formats (e.g. print, large print or in an electronic format that is compatible with adaptive technology). The proposed Regulations require Class 1 and 2 TSPs to provide alternative formats within 15 days upon request, whereas Class 3 TSPs would have 20 days within which to provide alternative formats.

It is also worth noting another step that has been taken in order to mitigate the impact on small businesses was to exclude businesses with fewer than 10 employees from the requirements given their limited capacity to comply. The proposed Regulations identify these businesses as a class (Class 4) but do not fix a date by which these TSPs must produce an accessibility plan.

To ensure a consistent application of the proposed Regulations, and to ensure that persons with disabilities experience a consistent level of service, engagement and access across the transportation sector in Canada, other flexibilities for small business were not considered. A barrier-free transportation system is essential to the inclusion and full participation of persons with disabilities in Canadian society.

In total, there are 74 small businesses who would be subject to the proposed Regulations. The total present value of costs to small business owners is $4,190 per owner or $597 per small business annualized.

Small business lens summary

• Number of small businesses impacted: 74
• Number of years: 10 (2021 to 2030)
• Base year for costing: 2019
• Present value base year: 2021
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 8: Compliance costs

Activity	Annualized value	Present value
Web accessibility / Adaptive technology	$26,959	$189,349
Large print and braille	$1,549	$10,882
Audio	$4,356	$30,597
Second progress report	$10,042	$70,534
Total compliance cost	$42,907	$301,362

Table 9: Administrative costs

Activity	Annualized value	Present value
Notification to the CTA	$1,238	$8,697
Total administrative cost	$1,238	$8,697

Table 10: Total compliance and administrative costs

Totals	Annualized value	Present value
Total cost (all impacted small businesses)	$44,145	$310,059
Cost per impacted small business	$597	$4,190

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The proposed amendments are not related to a work plan or commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum; however, consideration was given in the design and development of the proposed Regulations to ensure alignment and minimize differences and duplication between jurisdictions.

Domestic

The interdepartmental nature of the ACA provides a framework for collaboration among the federal organizations responsible for different aspects of its administration, compliance and enforcement.

The CTA is collaborating with ESDC and the CRTC to align, to the extent possible, regulatory approaches with the goal of maximizing consistency and minimizing duplication and administrative burden. For instance, in response to comments received from persons with disabilities and industry, the CTA has developed classes of regulated entities that are similar to those of ESDC, based on numbers of employees and also distinguishing between the public sector (departments, agencies and Crown corporations) and the other TSPs, in order to adapt the coming into force of the requirements for the publishing of the initial accessibility plans and feedback processes. Therefore, the proposed Regulations include staggered implementation timelines, as ESDC has done. In order to simplify the application of the proposed Regulations for TSPs, these classes are comparable to those used by ESDC, such that TSPs with fewer than 10 employees are not subject to the proposed Regulations. Requirements related to accessible and alternative formats, the publishing of progress reports and notifying the CTA within 48 hours are also aligned with ESDC.

As some provinces have accessibility legislation under which they have established accessibility reporting requirements, an assessment of provincial requirements was conducted to help facilitate alignment between provincial and proposed federal requirements where possible. With respect to developing accessibility planning and reporting requirements, the CTA’s regulations align with a number of recent initiatives at the provincial level. For example, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act requires private sector organizations with more than 50 employees and all public sector organizations to develop and provide periodic updates on accessibility plans. Public sector organizations must develop their accessibility plans in consultation with persons with disabilities and post annual status reports to let the public know what they have accomplished in their accessibility plans. Nova Scotia’s Accessibility Act requires public sector organizations listed in this act to develop and update accessibility plans, and the Accessibility for Manitobans Act also requires public sector organizations to develop and update accessibility plans.

International

As is the case with other provinces, other countries also already incorporate planning and reporting requirements, particularly for public sector institutions. The United States includes record-keeping and reporting requirements for air carriers and communications companies, and compliance plans and progress reports for cities. Cities are also required to produce regional transportation plans as a condition of receiving federal funding, and many but not all of these plans include accessibility considerations. In the United Kingdom, schools are required to develop accessibility strategies and accessibility plans, and accessibility planning is also mandated in local transportation planning processes, which must include accessibility strategies. In terms of comprehensiveness, however, in conjunction with provincial counterparts, the ACA planning and reporting requirements establish Canada as a world leader with respect to accessibility planning and reporting generally, and accessible transportation planning and reporting in particular.

The proposed Regulations will also support Canada’s implementation of the UNCRPD, to which Canada is a party. The United Nations, to whom Canada periodically reports on its progress and new initiatives, monitors Canada’s implementation of the UNCRPD. The proposed Regulations represent concrete steps to ensure that persons with disabilities will have equal access to Canada’s national transportation system, contributing to Canada’s implementation of the UNCRPD and its broader leadership on human rights, and potentially serving as an example in other jurisdictions.

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, the CTA conducted a preliminary environmental assessment scan. This scan concluded that the proposed Regulations would have no direct or indirect environmental impact, and therefore a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus (GBA+)

Impacts

The proposed Regulations, which would operationalize key aspects of the ACA, are anticipated to have a significant positive impact on persons with disabilities who travel using the federal transportation network. The provisions in the proposed Regulations are expected to facilitate, for persons with disabilities, access to and understanding of accessibility plans and progress reports, as well as allow them to make the best transportation-related decisions based on their particular needs. Persons with disabilities would be able to play a major role in providing feedback to TSPs regarding the implementation of their accessibility plans.

Demographics

Occasionally, the media report negative experiences of persons with disabilities while using the transportation network. These cases, such as a couple in wheelchairs left alone for almost 12 hours at the airport or an amputee who had their scooter batteries seized while travelling, may appear to be isolated incidents. However, in 2019 – 2020, the CTA received 227 accessibility complaints, which represents a significant increase from the two previous years (122 for 2017 – 2018 and 182 for 2018 – 2019). These figures are indicative of the negative experiences that persons with disabilities have faced, and continue to face, related to barriers in accessing transportation services in Canada.

In Canada, 22% of the population over the age of 15 have at least one disability. Based on Statistics Canada’s Canadian Survey on Disability [CSD] (2017), persons with disabilities are represented at all levels of society in Canada. Among approximately 6.2 million Canadians who are members of the disability community, disability is not uncommon in the group of women and seniors. For instance, women experience disabilities at a higher rate than men (24% versus 20%). The prevalence of disability increases with age, from 13% for those aged 15 to 24 years to 47% for those aged 75 years and over. The disability rate among other vulnerable groups, such as Indigenous people, youth and visible minorities, is also worthy of reference. The disability rate among off-reserve Indigenous people aged 15 and older was 31% (compared with 22% in the general population). Although information about children with disabilities under the age of 15 in Canada is limited due to gaps in data, the CSD finds more than 1 in 10 youth aged 15 to 24 years have one or more disabilities. As well, the prevalence of disability among immigrant women aged 65 or older is significantly higher compared to non-immigrant women (40.8% versus 32.9%, respectively).

The provisions in the proposed Regulations would help all persons with disabilities, including men, women, visible minorities, youth, Indigenous people, LGBTQ2 persons, and seniors. Certain disabled persons may benefit more or less than other disabled persons, but there is no significant difference among the listed demographics.

While information associated with the travelling rate for each subgroup of the disability community is limited due to data gaps, Table 7.1 of Statistics Canada’s Disability Supports in Canada report provides some insights into the travel patterns of persons with disabilities. The report (published by Statistics Canada in 2001) found that approximately 22% of the respondents with disabilities who were 15 and older reported that they would travel long distances. Among approximately 750 000 Canadians with disabilities, 20% reported that they travelled but had difficulty. Despite there being no further analysis or data detailing what specific difficulties or barriers they had encountered while travelling, the finding suggests that persons with disabilities experience significant disadvantages when it comes to travelling.

Research suggests that access to transportation is indispensable for connecting people with society. By using the transportation network, people can travel independently to engage in different activities, such as going to work or their place of study, visiting family and friends, attending a social event or seeking medical help. This independence allows individuals to fully participate in society. However, persons with disabilities who have been encountering barriers while using the transportation system face fewer opportunities to interact within their communities. As a result, these “transportation disadvantaged” people are at risk of feeling excluded from society, as their social lives were hindered by the limited access to transportation.

Through this regulatory proposal, it is expected that persons with disabilities would have more equitable access to the Canadian transportation network. This would enable persons with disabilities to live more independently and participate fully in all aspects of life in their communities. Accessible transportation is a human right whose realization is essential to achieving equality, inclusion, and dignity for Canadians with disabilities. While the proposed Regulations specifically aim to benefit persons with disabilities who travel using the federal transportation network, the disability community in Canada is a diverse and intersectional group, and promoting inclusion through the removal of barriers would widely benefit all Canadians.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The CTA anticipates that the proposed Regulations will come into force by summer 2021.

These proposed Regulations have been developed with the intention to have an implementation approach staggered over three years.

New TSPs that are not captured when the proposed Regulations come into force, but become subject to these Regulations at a later date than the day fixed by regulations, would be required to publish their initial accessibility plans as follows:

• in the case of a Class 1 TSP, December 31 of the calendar year after the calendar year in which the TSP qualified; and
• in the case of a Class 2 or Class 3 TSP, June 1 of the calendar year after the calendar year in which the TSP qualified.

To assist TSPs in the implementation of the proposed Regulations, the CTA intends to provide guidance material on the development of accessibility plans, feedback processes and progress reports. Furthermore, the CTA will continue its engagement with persons with disabilities and TSPs.

The outcomes of the proposed Regulations will be measured by using multiple streams of data, which may include monitoring and enforcement activities, data from accessibility-related complaints, and surveys of or feedback from persons with disabilities.

Compliance and enforcement

The CTA employs a number of different tools and activities across the compliance continuum to monitor and enforce compliance by TSPs, and to identify and address instances of non-compliance. For example, the CTA proactively monitors and assesses compliance of regulated entities with legal obligations, through activities such as the review and follow-up to compliance self-assessment questionnaires, website and routine documentation reviews, desk inspections and on-site inspections to verify compliance, among others.

The CTA approach to compliance monitoring and enforcement is guided by its modern compliance monitoring and enforcement policy and enforcement process that were recently developed and published. In a situation where a TSP has violated a provision of the ACA intended to identify or remove barriers to the mobility of persons with disabilities, a designated enforcement officer of the CTA may issue a notice of violation (NOV) with a warning or an administrative monetary penalty (AMP) that the regulated entity is liable to pay. The amount of the penalty for each violation, which can be up to $250,000, is based on the level of severity of the violation and whether there is recurring non-compliance. In addition, once an NOV with an AMP has been issued, the CTA may, upon request by a TSP, enter into a compliance agreement subject to terms that the CTA considers appropriate for the purpose of ensuring the TSP’s compliance with its legal obligations.

All CTA costs associated with the proposed Regulations would be managed within existing reference levels.

Contact

Sonia Gangopadhyay
Director
Centre for Expertise in Accessible Transportation
Analysis and Outreach Branch
Canadian Transportation Agency
15 Eddy Street
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0N9
Telephone: 873‑353‑4498
Email: sonia.gangopadhyay@otc-cta.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Canadian Transportation Agency, pursuant to section 63 of the Accessible Canada Act^{footnote a} and subject to the approval of the Administrator in Council, proposes to make the annexed Accessible Transportation Planning and Reporting Regulations.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 65 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be addressed to Sonia Gangopadhyay, Director, Centre of Expertise for Accessible Transportation, Canadian Transportation Agency, 15 Eddy Street, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0N9 (tel: 873‑353‑4498; email: sonia.gangopadhyay@otc-cta.gc.ca).

Ottawa, February 4, 2021

Julie Adair
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Accessible Transportation Planning and Reporting Regulations

Definitions

Definitions

1 The following definitions apply in these Regulations.

Act

means the Accessible Canada Act. (Loi)

Agency

means the Canadian Transportation Agency. (Office)

average number of employees

means the sum of the highest number of employees employed by a regulated entity in each month of a calendar year divided by 12 and rounded to the nearest whole number or, if the value is equidistant between two whole numbers, rounded up to the nearest whole number. (nombre moyen d’employés)

employee

means a person employed by a regulated entity referred to in paragraph 7(1)(e) or (f) of the Act and includes a dependent contractor as defined in subsection 3(1) of the Canada Labour Code, but does not include

• (a) a person employed under a program designated by the employer as a student employment program; and
• (b) a student employed solely during their vacation period. (employé)

regulated transport entity

means a transport entity for which a day has been fixed under section 3. (entité de transport réglementée)

transport entity

means an entity or person included in one of the classes established under subsection 2(1). (entité de transport)

WCAG

means the most recent version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, published by the World Wide Web Consortium that is available in both English and French, as amended from time to time. (WCAG)

Classes

Classes

2 (1) For the purposes of these Regulations, the following classes are established:

• (a) Class 1, which consists of every regulated entity referred to in paragraphs 7(1)(a) to (c) of the Act that is required to comply with any provision of regulations made under subsection 170(1) of the Canada Transportation Act;
• (b) Class 2, which consists of every regulated entity referred to in paragraphs 7(1)(e) or (f) of the Act that is required to comply with any provision of regulations made under subsection 170(1) of the Canada Transportation Act and whose average number of employees in the previous calendar year is 100 or more;
• (c) Class 3, which consists of every regulated entity referred to in paragraphs 7(1)(e) or (f) of the Act that is required to comply with any provision of regulations made under subsection 170(1) of the Canada Transportation Act and whose average number of employees in the previous calendar year is 10 or more but fewer than 100; and
• (d) Class 4, which consists of every regulated entity referred to in paragraphs 7(1)(e) or (f) of the Act that is required to comply with any provision of regulations made under subsection 170(1) of the Canada Transportation Act and whose average number of employees in the previous calendar year is fewer than 10.

Deemed class

(2) If a regulated transport entity’s average number of employees decreases such that the entity qualifies as a member of a class having a lower average number of employees, that entity is deemed to have always been a member of that class.

Obligations before deemed change

(3) Despite subsection (2), if a regulated transport entity published an accessibility plan as a member of a particular class, it must fulfill its obligations relating to the feedback process and progress reports with respect to that accessibility plan as though it were still a member of that class.

Day fixed

3 (1) Subject to subsection (2), for the purposes of subsection 60(1) of the Act, the day fixed is

• (a) in respect of a Class 1 regulated entity, December 31, 2021;
• (b) in respect of a Class 2 regulated entity, June 1, 2022; and
• (c) in respect of a Class 3 regulated entity, June 1, 2023.

New transport entity

(2) If an entity or person qualifies as a Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 transport entity on a day after the day fixed under subsection (1) for their class, the day fixed for the purposes of subsection 60(1) of the Act in respect of that entity or person is

• (a) in the case of a Class 1 entity, December 31 of the calendar year after the calendar year in which the entity or person qualified; and
• (b) in the case of a Class 2 or Class 3 entity, June 1 of the calendar year after the calendar year in which the entity or person qualified.

Accessibility Plans

Form

4 A regulated transport entity must include headers in its accessibility plan for each element of the plan that is required under subsections 60(1) and (5) of the Act.

Publication of accessibility plans

5 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a regulated transport entity must electronically publish its most recent accessibility plan in clear, simple and concise language

• (a) on the main digital platform that the entity owns, operates or controls and that it uses to communicate information to the public;
• (b) in a manner that makes the plan accessible on the digital platform either directly on the homepage or home screen or by way of a direct hyperlink from that homepage or home screen; and
• (c) in a format that meets the requirements of Level AA conformance that are set out in the WCAG.

No public digital platform

(2) If the regulated transport entity does not use a digital platform to communicate information to the public, it must publish a print copy of its most recent accessibility plan in clear, simple and concise language and in a conspicuous location in the main reception area of each of its publicly accessible business locations.

Notice to Agency

6 A regulated transport entity must, by electronic means, notify the Agency of the publication of each version of its accessibility plan within 48 hours of publication and include in the notice a hyperlink to the Uniform Resource Locator of the plan or the addresses of the publicly accessible business locations where a print copy of the plan is available.

Alternate format

7 (1) A person may make a request that a regulated transport entity make its accessibility plan available to them in print, large print, braille, audio format or an electronic format that is compatible with adaptive technology that assists persons with disabilities.

Form and manner of request

(2) The person may make the request through any means by which the regulated transport entity communicates with the public.

Response time

(3) The regulated transport entity must make its accessibility plan available to the person in the requested format as soon as feasible after the request is received, but no later than

• (a) the 45th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for braille or an audio format
• (b) the 15th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for any other format and the entity is a member of Class 1 or Class 2; or
• (c) the 20th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for any other format and the entity is a member of Class 3.

Feedback

Feedback process

8 (1) A regulated transport entity must establish a process for receiving feedback for the purposes of subsection 61(1) of the Act by any means by which the regulated transport entity communicates with the public.

Anonymous feedback

(2) The feedback process must allow a person to provide feedback anonymously.

Acknowledgement of feedback

(3) The regulated transport entity must acknowledge receipt of feedback, other than anonymous feedback, in the same manner in which it was received.

Publication of feedback process

9 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a regulated transport entity must, for the purposes of subsection 61(2) of the Act, electronically publish a description of its process for receiving feedback in clear, simple and concise language

• (a) on the main digital platform that the entity owns, operates or controls and that it uses to communicate information to the public;
• (b) in a manner that makes the description accessible on the digital platform either directly on the homepage or home screen or by way of a direct hyperlink from that homepage or home screen; and
• (c) in a format that meets the requirements of Level AA conformance that are set out in the WCAG.

No public digital platform

(2) If the regulated transport entity does not use a digital platform to communicate information to the public, it must publish a print copy of the most recent description of its process for receiving feedback, in clear, simple and concise language and in a conspicuous location in the main reception area of each of its publicly accessible business locations.

Date of publication

(3) The regulated transport entity must publish the description of its feedback process on the same day that it publishes its accessibility plan.

Updated feedback process

(4) If the regulated transport entity updates its feedback process, it must publish an updated description of the process in the manner set out in subsection (1) or (2), as applicable, as soon as feasible.

Notice to Agency

10 A regulated transport entity must, by electronic means, notify the Agency of the publication of the description of its feedback process or of an updated description of its feedback process within 48 hours of publication and include in the notice a hyperlink to the Uniform Resource Locator of the description or updated description or the addresses of the publicly accessible business locations where a print copy of the description or updated description is available.

Progress Reports

Form of report

11 A regulated transport entity must include headers in its progress report for each element that is required under subsections 60(1) and 62(4) and (5) of the Act.

Publication of progress reports

12 (1) Subject to subsection (2), a regulated transport entity must electronically publish its most recent progress report in clear, simple and concise language

• (a) on the main digital platform that the entity owns, operates or controls and that it uses to communicate information to the public;
• (b) in a manner that makes the progress report accessible on the digital platform either directly on the homepage or home screen or by way of a direct hyperlink from that homepage or home screen; and
• (c) in a format that meets the requirements of Level AA conformance that are set out in the WCAG.

No public digital platform

(2) If the regulated transport entity does not use a digital platform to communicate information to the public, it must publish a print copy of its most recent progress report in clear, simple and concise language and in a conspicuous location in the main reception area of each of its publicly accessible business locations.

Time limit for publication — Class 1

13 (1) A Class 1 regulated transport entity must publish a progress report by December 31 in each calendar year in which it is not required to publish an accessibility plan.

Time limit for publication — Class 2 or Class 3

(2) A Class 2 or Class 3 regulated transport entity must publish a progress report by June 1 in each calendar year in which it is not required to publish an accessibility plan.

Notice to Agency

14 A regulated transport entity must, by electronic means, notify the Agency of the publication of its progress report within 48 hours of publication and include in the notice a hyperlink to the Uniform Resource Locator of the progress report or the addresses of the publicly accessible business locations where a print copy of the progress report is available.

Alternate format

15 (1) A person may make a request that a regulated transport entity make its progress report available to them in print, large print, braille, audio format or an electronic format that is compatible with adaptive technology that assists persons with disabilities.

Form and manner of request

(2) The person may make the request through any means by which the regulated transport entity communicates with the public.

Response time

(3) The regulated transport entity must make its progress report available to the person in the requested format as soon as feasible after the request is received, but no later than

• (a) the 45th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for braille or an audio format;
• (b) the 15th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for any other format and the entity is a member of Class 1 or Class 2; or
• (c) the 20th day after the day on which the request is received, if the request is for any other format and the entity is a member of Class 3.

Coming into Force

Registration

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