Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 157, Number 24: Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Recall Information)

June 17, 2023

Statutory authority
Motor Vehicle Safety Act

Sponsoring department
Department of Transport

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues

Safety recalls have increased over the past 20 years. The number of safety recalls issued each year has increased from 248 in 2002, to 794 in 2021. In 2021 alone, 127 separate companies issued safety recalls affecting over 4 million vehicles and vehicle equipment.^{footnote 3}

It is estimated that up to one in five vehicles in use on Canada’s roads has an unresolved safety recall. This estimation is based on TC’s analysis of recall completion rates reported by regulated companies. Based on the 33.3 million registered vehicles in 2019, this means that approximately 6.6 million unsafe vehicles are still circulating on Canadian roads, potentially endangering not only the occupants, but also other road users. Unresolved safety issues affecting vehicles and vehicle equipment can lead to property damage, injury or even death. This problem persists, even though companies must send safety recall notices to vehicle owners. A survey of safety recall information available on the internet reveals that not all companies publish this information online, and there is a marked lack of consistency in what is made available. Regulatory requirements can be strengthened to further help make Canadians aware of unresolved safety issues by making safety recall information available faster and more accessible to Canadians by having it published online.

Background

Road safety in Canada is a shared responsibility among all levels of government, industry partners, and all road users. Under the MVSA, TC is responsible for developing and enforcing the regulations — that is, the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (MVSR), the Motor Vehicle Tire Safety Regulations (MVTSR), and the Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems and Booster Seats Safety Regulations (RSSR), hereafter all three referred to as “the regulations” — and safety standards that apply to new and imported vehicles and vehicle equipment. Regulated companies must certify that all new vehicles and vehicle equipment imported to Canada or manufactured in one province and sold in another comply with all applicable requirements and safety standards in effect on their date of manufacture. For clarity, under the MVSA, TC does not regulate aftermarket or replacement parts such as brake components; therefore, such parts are not included in this regulatory proposal.

A regulated company, as defined under the MVSA, is a company that manufactures, sells or imports any vehicle or vehicle equipment of a prescribed class.^{footnote 4} It shall, on becoming aware of a non-compliance or a defect in the design, construction or functioning of the vehicle or vehicle equipment that affects or is likely to affect the safety of any person, notify the Minister, current owners and prescribed persons (e.g. a retailer, distributor, final-stage manufacturer) in accordance with the notification requirements set out in the regulations. However, the safety risk will continue to exist until the non-compliance or safety defect is corrected.

A written notice to the Minister is required at the time a company becomes aware of a defect or non-compliance with a vehicle or vehicle equipment. The information required is general in scope, with a view to expediting this initial notification. The current regulations require companies to provide more detailed information in a written notice of defect or notice of non-compliance that is sent to current owners and prescribed persons as soon as possible, but no later than 60 days after having notified the Minister. “Safety recall” is the common term used to describe both notices of non-compliance and notices of defect.

Companies must submit a follow-up report to the Minister, updating specific information regarding the scope of the issue and planned corrective measures within 65 days of providing the notice to the Minister. For two years following the original notice to the Minister, companies must submit quarterly reports to update the Minister on the progress of the corrective measures put in place. If the Minister determines that a safety recall has not been corrected in an adequate number of vehicles, tires, or restraint systems, the MVSA also provides the Minister with the authority to order companies to re-notify owners and prescribed persons.

The safety recall notices can be sent electronically or by mail to the current owners and prescribed persons. Most notices are sent by mail, a process which can be time-consuming and does not guarantee that required information reaches its intended recipients, e.g. in the case of a change of ownership and/or address. This means that some owners may continue to use their vehicle or vehicle equipment without knowledge of an unresolved safety issue. Depending on the issue, an outstanding safety recall could lead to property damage, injury or even death.

Currently, companies are not required to publish the information about safety recalls online; however, some companies voluntarily do so. As there are no requirements around publishing recall information online, the information made available on websites is inconsistent, may be difficult to find, and/or may not be offered in both official languages.

Safety recalls have increased over the past 20 years. The number of safety recalls issued each year has increased from 248 in 2002, to 794 in 2021. In 2021 alone, 127 separate companies issued safety recalls affecting over 4 million vehicles and vehicle equipment. It is estimated that up to one in five vehicles in use on Canada’s roads today has an unresolved safety recall. Based on a total of 33.3 million registered vehicles in 2019, if one in five vehicles did not have the issue resolved, then approximately 6.6 million unsafe vehicles are still circulating on Canadian roads, endangering not only the occupants but also other road users.

In 2014, Bill C-31, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014, and other measures, received royal assent. Among other changes, the Bill addressed key gaps in the motor vehicle safety notification regime, including providing the Minister with the authority to require that a company issue a notice of defect, and introduced new notice of non-compliance requirements. It also enabled the Governor in Council to establish regulations for the safety information contained in notices of non-compliance, and to revise the reporting regime to enhance TC’s oversight of notices of defect and non-compliance.

In 2018, the Government of Canada (the Government) amended the MVSA under Bill S-2, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act, to strengthen the enforcement and compliance regime to further protect the safety of Canadians. Section 10.3 of the MVSA was amended under Bill S-2 to introduce a new authority to require companies, which are designated by the Minister to give notice of a defect or non-compliance, to make information available for the vehicle or vehicle equipment in the notice. Previously, the Minister did not have the authority to designate companies; therefore, potential solutions to reduce unresolved safety issues would have to be applied to all regulated companies. This added flexibility provides the Minister with the discretion to designate companies to which certain requirements would apply. The designation of companies would be made according to procedures established by the Minister. For example, one element that the Minister could consider when exercising discretion is a company’s total volume of importations or manufactured vehicles as this is a relevant consideration to reduce the overall risk of death, injury and property damage. Since the coming into force of S-2, TC’s priority has been to establish the regulatory framework for the amendments to the MVSA made under S-2. This regulatory proposal is one of three initiatives related to this effort that have been proposed since 2018.

TC is aware that, while a company may attempt to notify current owners and prescribed persons of a safety recall, a vehicle owner may not have the repairs completed promptly. In other situations, a notice may not reach the current owner, for example, where they have changed address, but have not registered the change of address with the company. An analysis of recall completion rates shows that older vehicles are more likely to fall in this latter population than newer recalled vehicles. Older vehicles with expired warranties are also less likely to see regular servicing or servicing at the company dealerships where clients are commonly informed about recalls. Owners may also not be aware of how to access safety recall information for older vehicles.

To make it easier for vehicle owners to find out if there is an unresolved safety recall notice on their vehicle, and to support any person seeking information on potential safety issues with a particular vehicle, the proposed amendments would introduce a requirement that companies designated by the Minister provide a search tool for safety recall notices associated with the vehicle’s identification number. Under the MVSR, every vehicle of a prescribed class manufactured in one province and sold in another or imported for sale in Canada is required to have a unique 17-character VIN. The VIN is an alphanumeric code configuration that provides information regarding the manufacturer, year of production, make and model, and several technical details that uniquely identify a specific vehicle. The VIN is needed to facilitate vehicle identification for safety research and for vehicle safety recall campaigns. The VIN is also used by provincial and territorial jurisdictions for registration purposes. Several other entities, such as vehicle distributors, financial institutions, insurance companies and police departments, use the vehicle identification number for warranty validation, insurance claim verification, safety recall campaigns and vehicle theft investigation.

Objective

The objective of this regulatory proposal is to make safety recall information available faster and more accessible (i.e. by publishing it online) for vehicle owners, vehicle equipment owners and prescribed persons, as well as for the general public who may have an interest but who do not necessarily own the vehicle or vehicle equipment. Increasing the availability and accessibility of recall information is intended to directly influence recall completion rates, and to reduce the risk of death, injury and property damage resulting from unresolved vehicle and vehicle equipment defects and non-compliances.

The proposed amendments would require companies to publish information online for all safety recalls in a timely manner. Although many companies already offer such recall information on their websites, the proposed amendments would standardize the availability and the type of information, provide a timeline by which such information must be made available and facilitate Canadians’ ability to find recall information. The proposed amendments would also provide an additional means for companies to make recall information available, which could be particularly useful to people who have changed address, or purchased a vehicle or vehicle equipment second-hand, and where a company does not have the current owner’s personal contact information.

Description

The proposed amendments would amend three regulations under the MVSA: the MVSR, the MVTSR, and the RSSR. Similar amendments are proposed to each of the regulations with an additional amendment to the MVSR proposing to introduce requirements for vehicle companies specifically designated by the Minister. Further details regarding the proposed amendments are described below.

The proposed amendments would require from the companies that issue a safety recall to also publish certain information contained in the recall on their websites. This requirement would help fill the gap in situations where an owner has not registered a change of address with the company or where there has been a transfer of ownership. The proposed amendments would also allow any person to check if a vehicle or vehicle equipment is subject to a safety recall. For individual vehicles, as detailed further below, the proposed amendments would require companies designated by the Minister to include an online search tool that would provide safety recall information that is specific to the VIN.

It is expected that these amendments would reduce the time delay in disseminating safety recall information since such information would be published online and, therefore, would be available sooner than any mailed notifications.

The proposed requirement for companies to publish safety recalls online would be in addition to written notifications already required under existing regulations.

Designated and non-designated companies

The proposed amendments would introduce two separate sets of requirements for displaying information to be published on the companies’ websites: one set of requirements for vehicle companies that are designated by the Minister, and a separate set for all other (i.e. non-designated) vehicle and vehicle equipment companies. The requirements will improve the overall availability and accessibility of safety information for all Canadians. Having the authority to designate any company by way of section 10.3 of the MVSA, the Minister would carry out this designation by way of formal correspondence to respective companies. As a first step, the intention is for the Minister to designate high-volume vehicle companies for which it is determined that the application of certain requirements would be most effective in reaching a larger population of vehicles affected by safety recalls, thereby improving the overall safety of Canadians, while at the same time minimizing the burden to other (e.g. smaller) companies. Applying similar requirements to low-volume companies would likely have less effect on overall safety (e.g. a smaller percentage of vehicles would be affected), and would be costly for lower-volume companies to implement.

Basic safety recall information required to be published online by companies

Designated or not, companies would be required to publish safety recall information on their websites that is accessible and free of charge. In addition, designated companies would be required to have a free web-based service to allow any person to search for vehicle-specific recall information using the 17-digit VIN, hereafter referred to as the VIN Tool as detailed further below.

Companies would need to publish on their websites the same basic information for each safety recall, including contact information for any questions related to a safety recall, the method to use to report a suspected safety issue, and the process to follow to advise a company of a change in ownership. The proposed amendments do not require any new information to be provided; they only require the publication of the same information already provided in safety recall notices to owners and prescribed persons under the current regulations. This information includes, but is not limited to, details such as

• the make, model, and model year of the affected vehicle;
• descriptions of the nature of the defect, the safety risks to persons and the corrective measures to be taken in respect of the defect or non-compliance;
• the precautions that may be taken to minimize the safety risk until corrective measures are undertaken; and
• when the corrective measures are expected to be available.

The published safety recall information would be required to remain on the companies’ websites for at least 15 years for vehicles and 10 years for vehicle equipment, each from the day the Minister is notified of the safety recall. Notifications for safety recalls given to the Minister before the proposed amendments come into force would not be required to be published on companies’ websites, in which case a statement to that effect must be displayed and contact information included to obtain any missing safety recall information.

Non-designated companies with no pre-existing website would not be required to publish online and, therefore, would not be required to develop a new website. Nevertheless, all companies must still provide the safety recall notices in paper or electronic form to inform the Minister, owners, and prescribed persons as specified in the regulations.

For non-designated companies, the proposed amendments would require that safety recall information be provided online within 10 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister. In addition, these companies would be required to update the information within 7 days of any changes. As with designated companies, TC recognizes that some details may not be available on the required day for publication. Therefore, the proposed amendments would require that (i) a description of the corrective measures and (ii) an indication of when the parts and/or facilities will be available to correct the issue be published within 7 days of the information becoming available. This approach is consistent with the current regulations for notifications to the Minister. Alternatively, non-designated companies could choose to comply with the proposed requirements specific to designated companies. In other words, instead of publishing safety recall information for all vehicle models on the company’s website, a non-designated vehicle company could choose to include a VIN Tool, which would provide specific safety recall information only for that one vehicle.

VIN Tool requirement for designated companies

Designated companies would be required to publish safety recall information on the companies’ respective website through a VIN Tool. The public would have access to this VIN Tool on the vehicle company’s website. Once a person has input a vehicle’s unique 17-digit VIN, the VIN Tool would display a list of all safety recalls associated with the unique vehicle. Unless the corrective measures for a safety recall have been implemented, the same information as required by all non-designated companies would be available through the VIN Tool, as detailed above. For recalls where the corrective measures have already been implemented, details regarding the precautions to minimize the safety risk (e.g. should the vehicle be parked outdoors if there is a fire risk), and when corrective measures would be available would be redundant, and as such, would not need to be published. If the VIN is incorrect or not recognized, a statement to that effect must be published through the companies’ VIN Tool to prevent the recipient from any potential misinterpretation and better ensure that important safety information is not inadvertently missed.

The proposed amendments would provide newly designated companies one year from the date that they are designated to establish a VIN Tool on their website. The occurrence of any new safety recalls within that period must be made available online within the 30 days immediately following the one-year period. In addition, following the initial one-year period, all subsequent safety recalls would have to be available through the online VIN Tool within 30 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister. The published information would need to be updated within 7 days of any change to the information. TC recognizes that some details may take more time to gather and, therefore, if this information is not available when the recall information is first published, the proposed amendments would require that details regarding (i) a description of the corrective measures and/or (ii) an indication of when the parts and facilities are available to correct the issue be published within 7 days of becoming available.

Other proposed amendments

The proposed amendments would amend the notice of defect and notice of non-compliance requirements within the MVSR, indicating that a company is not required to provide to a prescribed person the VIN for each affected vehicle, in the instance where safety recall information is published in accordance with the requirements for designated companies. In addition, the proposed amendments would clarify that such details must be published on the company website when information is directed at the Canadian market.

Finally, for clarification and without change to the substance of the current regulatory text, the proposed amendments include revising the French text in three locations under section 15 of the MVSR to reference “numéro d’identification du véhicule” in place of “numéro d’identification.”

Regulatory development

Consultation

As detailed below, TC consulted extensively with stakeholders in a variety of ways, including through the TC online consultation portal, Let’s Talk Transportation (LTT); the publication of an informal consultation document to further engage stakeholders; and several informal discussions.

An LTT notice was published online^{footnote 5} on October 21, 2020, and was open for comment for 37 days (until November 27, 2020), to gather feedback from stakeholders and the general public. Among other details, the LTT notice requested comments on proposing that high-volume and low-volume companies would have different sets of requirements regarding the safety recall information to be published online. Several comments were received from industry associations, namely, the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association (CVMA), Global Automakers Canada (GAC), the Motorcycle & Moped Industry Council (MMIC) and the Truck & Engine Manufacturer Association (EMA).

Following the LTT notice, TC disseminated a document to all interested stakeholders on May 5, 2021, to seek further input on the proposed amendments. This discussion document included a listing of what information could/should be provided on companies’ websites, what criteria may be used to designate companies, and what timelines would be reasonable coming-into-force dates for the requirements. There were also questions for companies to ensure that regulatory text could be drafted in a way to minimize burden, while achieving the goal of providing the necessary safety information. TC subsequently held two information sessions to help guide interested parties through the document, highlight areas of particular interest for feedback, and provide input in the development of the proposed amendments. Following the information sessions, TC hosted additional consultation sessions with interested stakeholders. Stakeholders were generally receptive and supportive throughout these consultations. Comments expressing concern and requiring further clarifications are addressed below.

The United States’ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was also consulted and is supportive of the proposed amendments and has indicated that access to this type of recall data would be beneficial to them for the purpose of identifying vehicles imported from Canada with an outstanding safety recall before the vehicle is registered/operated in the United States.

Summary of the comments received from additional consultations

Consultations mainly focused on the idea of establishing two sets of requirements regarding the safety recall information to be published online: one for high-volume vehicle companies, which would require a VIN Tool, referred to as designated companies (i.e. companies designated by the Minister by way of section 10.3 of the MVSA), and one for all other vehicle and vehicle equipment companies, referred to as non-designated companies.^{footnote 6} It was presented that, while companies would be required to publish safety recall information on their websites that is accessible and free of charge, designated companies would additionally be required to have a freely accessible web-based VIN Tool.

While section 10.3 of the MVSA provides the Minister with the authority to designate any company that issues a safety recall, it does not require TC to inform industry of the Minister’s designation criteria. To ensure clarity and predictability about the potential impacts of the proposed amendments for stakeholders, TC shared its intended criteria for designating companies. Designation criteria would include (but would not necessarily be limited to) those companies that manufacture, import, or distributes a total of 2 500 or more vehicles of the following prescribed classes per year: passenger car; three-wheeled vehicle; multi-purpose passenger vehicle (with a gross vehicle weight rating [GVWR] of 4 536 kg or less); truck (with a GVWR of 4 536 kg or less); motorcycle; restricted-use vehicle; or snowmobile. A non-designated company would include the remaining companies that manufacture, import, or distribute vehicles, and all companies that manufacture, import, or distribute vehicle equipment. Stakeholders did not raise concerns about such designation criteria.

TC received comments from stakeholders regarding making the information available in Canada’s two official languages. Safety recall information is intended for use by the general public, including owners and prescribed persons. Therefore, consistent with the Official Languages Act, TC would require this information to be provided in both official languages to ensure that members of the public can obtain the necessary information to address potential safety issues. The proposed amendments would not add any incremental translation requirements because it does not introduce any new information requirements, i.e. companies are already required under the existing regulations to provide all the relevant information in both languages.

Comments were received regarding the format of the information, the way it would be made available to Canadians and the requirement for providing a contact for how to report a suspected safety issue. It is TC’s view that the information must be made available on a company’s website. However, the layout and format in which the information is made available would be left at the company’s discretion. A company could choose to provide a link to TC’s recalls website, but the information must also be available on its website. Regarding the requirement to provide contact information to report a suspected safety issue, companies sought further clarification about who must be listed as a contact, not indicating a particular preference. The proposed amendments would leave this requirement open for the company to decide (e.g. the contact could be the company, a dealer or TC).

Some stakeholders commented about the amount of information to be published and noted that the information differs from what is currently required to be made available through the NHTSA’s VIN-based recall online search tool. Furthermore, they noted that the proposed timelines for information to be made available do not align with those of the NHTSA and also differ from TC’s existing requirements for notifications. While there are some differences with the safety recall information required by the NHTSA, TC is not requesting any new information. The information being requested by TC is already required under the current regulations in the safety recall notices to be provided to owners and prescribed persons. Regarding the timeline for the information to be made available, the purpose of this regulatory amendment is to make recall information available faster and more accessible to Canadians. TC believes that such information can be made available faster online than by mail. Therefore, the proposed amendments would require companies to make recall information available online within 10 days after notifying the Minister, but the proposed amendments would also allow for delays in publishing some information that might not be available at the time of the initial publication, with the understanding that the information published online is subsequently updated when more information becomes available.

Comments were received from stakeholders regarding who would be responsible for publishing information online for imported vehicles. In this instance, the importer would ultimately be responsible for ensuring that the prescribed information is available online. However, stakeholders indicated that the importer of the vehicle may not be the one who controls information about safety recalls. TC considered this comment and, in alignment with sections 10 and 10.1 of the MVSA, the proposed amendments provide that the importer need not publish safety recall information on its website if it is already published on the website of a company that manufactured or sold the vehicle.

Stakeholders’ primary concern with a requirement to publish the completion date for a repair is that it would place a regulatory burden on some companies to obtain the information from a third party that completes recall repairs, generally dealerships. TC agreed that the repair completion date would not need to be provided, as it would create additional burden on the company and may also be of limited benefit, but TC is of the view that an indication that the corrective measures have been completed is necessary to inform any person seeking information on a potential safety issue and to achieve the goal of reducing unresolved safety recalls by providing complete information on the status of such repairs.

Regarding access to historical safety recall data, stakeholders expressed concerns that they may be required to retroactively publish recall information. TC clarified that, while this information for recalls issued before the proposed amendments come into force should be made available, this information would not be required on a company’s website. Instead, the proposed amendments would require companies to publish how a person can obtain the safety recall information about prior recalls. TC believes that this information would be beneficial, for instance, in the case of a change of vehicle ownership.

Regarding the order in which information would be published through a company’s website VIN Tool, stakeholders commented that requiring outstanding safety recall notices first before those that were completed was not in alignment with the United States’ requirements. The proposed amendments would require that all safety recall information, whether outstanding or completed, should appear first before any other information, such as technical bulletins, which are not related to safety recalls.

A stakeholder commented about having to inform TC of any changes to the website address where the safety recall information is published. The main concern was that such a requirement would create an added administrative burden that may be difficult to manage, given that a company’s information technology department may make frequent minor changes, which could create unintentional compliance violations. TC agreed that requesting this information was not necessary, given that a company’s website is publicly available.

Finally, TC consulted on the time frames under which companies would be required to comply with the regulations. During consultations, TC had proposed that non-designated companies would have 90 days from the day on which the proposed amendments are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, to publish information online, and designated companies would have 180 days, from the date that the company is informed of its designation by the Minister, to publish a compliant VIN Tool. The consumer group advocate, the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA), indicated that this was not aggressive enough and that 90 days was acceptable for both non-designated and designated company requirements. The associations representing the majority of vehicle manufacturers (GAC and CVMA), with some experience in developing such websites, expressed a need for more time. The CVMA requested a minimum of one year for companies to establish the VIN Tool, and GAC requested a minimum of two years for both non-designated and designated company requirements. GAC also requested TC’s support through evaluating website mock-ups, at a company’s request, and providing assurance that website development plans are aligned with proposed requirements before hardcoding is undertaken.

After carefully considering all stakeholder comments regarding the timelines, TC concluded that 180 days would be appropriate for non-designated companies to publish recall information on their websites, and one year would be appropriate from the date on which companies are designated to publish a VIN Tool on their websites. Regarding comments on providing website development support, TC does not have the mandate to provide such assistance. That said, TC would continue to provide clarifications to any questions stakeholders may have about complying with the proposed amendments.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an analysis was undertaken to determine whether the proposal is likely to give rise to modern treaty obligations. The assessment examined the geographic scope and subject matter of the proposal in relation to modern treaties in effect and no modern treaty obligations were identified.

Instrument choice

Currently, the regulations require companies to notify owners and prescribed persons of a safety recall and how to have it corrected. Nevertheless, it is estimated that approximately 6.6 million vehicles are circulating on Canadian roads with an unresolved safety recall, potentially endangering not only the occupants but also other road users. Publishing safety recalls online will make this information available faster and more accessible for vehicle owners, vehicle equipment owners and prescribed persons, as well as for the general public. It is expected that this will lead to the correction of a greater number of safety recalls and benefit the safety of all Canadians.

TC examined a non-regulatory approach to making recall information available online; however, it concluded that this approach would lead to inconsistencies in how and what information was published online. For example, while some companies have decided to voluntarily publish information online or have created a VIN Tool, not all companies do. Of those that do make information available, the information is not always consistent or provided in an accessible format (i.e. bilingual). In some cases, necessary information is inadvertently omitted or the information is not easily found on the company’s website.

Some companies have indicated they are waiting for regulations before they commit to publishing recall information online or develop a VIN Tool. Establishing requirements in regulations would ensure that a common approach is taken, that consistent information is available from different companies, and that recall information is available in both official languages.

While a regulatory approach would ensure consistency of provided information and a level playing field, prior to the 2018 amendment to the MVSA, such requirements would have to apply to all companies, resulting in considerable burden without proportionate benefits to the smaller companies. However, this was addressed in the amendment to the MVSA in 2018 introducing the authority to require companies designated by the Minister to make information available for vehicles or vehicle equipment affected by a safety recall. This allows the Minister to target companies where requirements would be most effective, without causing unnecessary burden to other companies. Given these advantages, TC has decided to move forward by way of a regulatory approach.

Regulatory analysis

The analysis that follows is based on the assumption that the Minister would designate companies based on criteria considered through pre-regulatory consultations. The designation criteria considered with stakeholders included those companies that manufacture, import, or distribute a total of 2 500 or more vehicles of the following prescribed classes per year: passenger car; three-wheeled vehicle; multipurpose passenger vehicle (with a gross vehicle weight rating [GVWR] of 4 536 kg or less); truck (with a GVWR of 4 536 kg or less); motorcycle; restricted-use vehicle; or snowmobile. While the threshold of 2 500 vehicles is also utilized for importation and interprovincial shipment requirements under the MVSR, it must be noted that by way of section 10.3 of the MVSA, the Minister has the authority to consider other criteria when exercising their discretion. Non-designated companies would include the remaining companies that manufacture, import, or distribute vehicles, and all companies that manufacture, import, or distribute vehicle equipment.

The proposed amendments would improve the access to and availability of information, with the aim of improving the completion rate of safety recalls and reducing losses from property damage, injuries and death resulting from vehicle and vehicle equipment defects. The proposed amendments would result in present value incremental costs of $1.20 million to designated and non-designated companies, and to the Government of Canada over the 10-year time frame from 2023 to 2032 (discounted at a 7% rate to 2023). Non-designated companies would assume $0.30 million of the costs, and designated companies would assume $0.88 million of the costs over the same 10-year period related to website development. Government would assume $0.02 million in costs related to time spent conducting audits. In addition, the proposed amendments would result in a decrease in human consequences (e.g. injuries and fatalities) associated with outstanding safety recalls to vehicles and vehicle equipment, and a decrease in the number of safety recall re-notifications being sent electronically or by mail. Cost savings related to the decrease in human consequences and written re-notifications (which are a non-quantifiable benefit) are discussed further in the “Qualitative benefits” section. Despite the fact that the proposed amendments would result in a monetized cost, TC anticipates that the qualitative benefits to safety would outweigh the monetized costs.

Analytical framework

The costs and benefits for the proposed amendments have been assessed in accordance with the Canadian Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS), which can be found through the Cabinet Directive on Regulation: Policy on Cost-Benefit Analysis. Where possible, impacts are quantified and monetized, with only the direct costs and benefits for stakeholders being considered in the cost-benefit analysis.

Benefits and costs associated with the proposed amendments are assessed based on comparing the baseline scenario with the regulatory scenario. The baseline scenario depicts what is likely to happen in the future if the Government of Canada does not implement the proposed amendments. The regulatory scenario provides information on the intended outcomes as a result of the proposed amendments.

The analysis estimates the impact of the proposed amendments over a 10-year period from 2023 to 2032. Unless otherwise stated, all costs are expressed in 2021 Canadian dollars and are discounted to 2023 at a 7% discount rate.

Affected stakeholders

The proposed regulatory amendments would affect designated and non-designated companies, with the majority of costs being borne by designated companies. In total, 196 non-designated companies and 28 designated companies would be affected by the proposed amendments.^{footnote 7}Based on available recall data, 90 of the 196 existing identified non-designated companies are vehicle manufacturers/importers. All vehicle and vehicle equipment manufacturers would benefit from a decrease in the number of written re-notifications that would need to be sent, due to the anticipated increase in recall completion. In addition, having fewer vehicles operating with outstanding safety recalls may also reduce potential liability and reputational harm to companies. Costs for non-designated and designated companies would be related to publishing recall information on their websites.

Vehicles or vehicle equipment in use on Canadian roads with outstanding safety recalls can pose a risk to people inside and outside the vehicle. The proposed amendments would be expected to increase awareness of recalled vehicles and equipment, and therefore decrease the number of recalled vehicles and equipment on the road. This awareness would provide a benefit to Canadians in the form of a reduction in human consequences.

TC would be affected by the proposed amendments, as existing officers would be conducting audits of company websites to ensure compliance. The proposed amendments would not be expected to increase the number of required inspectors; however, the estimated time costs for existing inspectors are calculated for this analysis.

Baseline and regulatory scenarios

In the baseline scenario, vehicle and equipment manufacturers would not be required to publish the information about their safety recalls online. As is currently the case, 11% and 71% of non-designated and designated companies, respectively, would continue to voluntarily publish their recall information online.^{footnote 8} Notifications and re-notifications of safety recalls would continue to be sent at the same rate. Recall completion would be expected to continue at historical rates. Registrations and recalls per registration were forecast based on historical rates. Over the 10-year time frame, it is estimated that there would be an average of 380 annual recalls pertaining to non-designated companies, and 415 pertaining to designated companies. TC estimates, based on its analysis of recall completion rates reported by regulated companies, that one in five safety recalls are outstanding for Canadian vehicles. This is further substantiated by the NHTSA’s recall completion rate for vehicles under three years old, which has been estimated at 80%.^{footnote 9} Manufacturers are required to repair vehicles when a safety recall is addressed. Companies are required to notify Canadians of recall notices in both official languages. Only those companies regulated under the MVSR are required to provide contact information, located in the owner’s manual, indicating how the owner can contact TC to report a safety concern relating to a vehicle.

In the regulatory scenario, vehicle and equipment manufacturers would be required to publish their information about recalls online unless they are a non-designated company with no pre-existing website. It is anticipated that recall completion would increase for both non-designated and designated companies. This increase in recall completion would cause a decrease in human consequences related to vehicle and vehicle equipment safety defects. The increase in recall completion would also result in a decrease in the number of written re-notifications sent to owners and prescribed persons by mail or electronically. Manufacturers would still be required to address a safety recall. Although there would be an increase in recalls completed, the requirement to apply corrective measures is part of existing requirements and is therefore excluded from this analysis. Companies would be required to publish recall notices on their websites in the prescribed format in both official languages. This would not result in incremental translation costs for companies, as they would already have been sending written notices in both official languages. All companies regulated under the MVSR, the MVTSR and the RSSR (i.e. vehicle and vehicle equipment companies) would be required to provide information on their website for reporting a suspected safety issue. The information provided would be at the discretion of the company and could include contact information for TC, a company or a dealer. There would be no anticipated difference in costs regarding industry communication to TC related to the requirement to list a contact. This is because the requirement would not impact the number of companies listing TC as a contact relative to the baseline scenario. As a result of the requirements with respect to implementation, start-up costs for designated companies were assumed to occur in year one, while ongoing costs would occur for the years following. Costs are assumed to begin in year one for non-designated companies, as they would still need to publish recall information online for any recalls occurring within the year prior to coming into force.^{footnote 10}

Benefits and costs

In total, the regulatory amendments would result in incremental present value costs of $1.20 million to non-designated companies, designated companies, and TC over the 10-year time frame. These costs would be related to the need for companies to set up or modify and maintain a website for publishing product recalls if the company did not already publish such information in alignment with the proposal. Costs to Government would be related to time spent conducting audits.

The proposed regulatory amendments would be expected to increase the number of recalls being completed on vehicles and vehicle equipment with safety issues. The increase in recall completion would mean that fewer written re-notifications would be sent out by companies on a regular basis. The increase in recall completion would also result in a decrease in injuries and severe injuries resulting from unresolved vehicle or vehicle equipment safety issues. This decrease would depend on how much recall completion rates are increased over the time frame. Benefits are discussed further in the “Qualitative benefits” section.

Costs

Industry

The proposed amendments would require non-designated and designated companies to publish information about product recalls on their websites. Of the $1.20 million in total costs, $1.18 million would be incurred by industry, with $0.30 million (26%) attributed to non-designated companies, and the remaining $0.88 million (74%) attributed to designated companies.

Non-designated companies

For non-designated companies, should they have a website, they would be required to publish recall information on the website. If the non-designated company does not have a website, it would not bear incremental costs. Currently, 21 out of 196 of non-designated companies are already in compliance with the proposed amendments on a voluntary basis, and 13 additional companies do not have existing websites. From a scan of website developers, it is estimated that it would take the remaining 162 companies three hours at an hourly rate of $34.43 plus 25% overhead, to update a website upon issuing a recall. Assuming an average of 17 additional non-designated companies per year (based on the average number of non-designated companies publishing a recall online for the first time from 2019 to 2022), it is forecasted that the total number of non-designated companies would increase to 366 by 2032, with 301 of these companies being impacted by the amendments. Based on this forecasting, it is estimated that an impacted non-designated company would issue an average of 1.34 recalls per year over the analytical time frame. Taking this into account, non-designated companies would bear annual undiscounted website editing costs of $173.5, on average. The total present value per non-compliant non-designated company with websites would be $1,000 over the analytical time frame, which corresponds to a total cost of $0.30 million for the 301 affected companies.

Designated companies

It is estimated that 20 of 28 designated companies, or 71%, are already in compliance with the proposed amendments voluntarily. For the designated companies that are not in compliance, they would bear costs associated with the setup, updating, and maintenance of a VIN Lookup tool on their website. Based on a scan of website developers, the average annual undiscounted cost per company to maintain this type of tool is estimated to be $10,101. Additionally, it is estimated that start-up costs for designated companies would be $43,639 (undiscounted) per company. The total present value per non-compliant designated company is therefore estimated to be $0.11 million over the analytical time frame, which corresponds to a total cost of $0.88 million for the eight companies.

Government

TC would incur some costs related to the proposed amendments regarding inspector audits of websites. Existing TC officers would audit websites twice annually to ensure compliance with the proposed amendments. It is estimated that this would take each inspector five minutes per website and would not result in any incremental costs to industry. Total present value costs for Government would total $18,933, or an average annual cost of $1,893. Note that recall audits are already being performed in the baseline scenario by inspectors, and that the proposed amendments would not result in the hiring of additional full-time employees. These government costs would be managed within existing resources.

Qualitative benefits

Benefits associated with the proposed amendments would come from cost savings due to a reduction in the number of unresolved safety recalls, based on a greater awareness of recalls. It is assumed that there would be an increase in recall completion for non-designated and designated companies resulting from information being more accessible (this therefore assumes that the reason defects are not currently being repaired is due to lack of information on the customers’ end). This increase in recall completion would mean that there would be fewer human consequences caused by unresolved safety issues, less financial burden on companies to send re-notifications to owners and prescribed persons, and the potential for reduced liability and reputational harm to companies. There is also anticipated to be an increase in the speed of recall notification due to the new communication medium. This could provide benefits in the form of defects being repaired sooner than in the baseline scenario.

The decrease in the number of vehicles with outstanding safety recalls on the road would lead to a decrease in the number of injuries and severe injuries caused by collisions with these vehicles. The effect of repairing vehicle defects on the severity of collisions is calculated in Bae and Benitez-Silva’s paper The Effects of Automobile Recalls on the Severity of Accidents, where it is found that repairing recalled vehicles decreases the number and severity of injuries, as well as having a minimal effect on fatalities; however, there was found to be no effect on the number of collisions.^{footnote 11} Therefore, having fewer vehicles with outstanding safety recalls on the road would mean a lower number of injuries, severe injuries, and fatalities for Canadians. A table depicting the major and minor injury costs based on the Value of Statistical Life (VSL)^{footnote 12} ($2021 Can$) is presented below.^{footnote 13}

Table 1: Major and minor injury costs

Degree of human consequence	VSL fraction (% of fatality)
Fatality	$8,254,709 (100%)
Major injury	$1,107,782 (13.42%)
Minor injury	$55,306 (0.67%)

The decrease in the severity of accidents would also likely result in a decrease in collision externalities, such as property damage, emergency service costs, vehicle repair costs, hospital costs, legal costs, delays, fuel consumption, and pollution.

The decrease in the number of vehicles with outstanding safety recalls on the road would also lead to a reduction in written re-notifications to owners. This reduction would result in cost savings for companies, who would have fewer owners and prescribed persons to re-notify of a safety issue with their vehicles or vehicle equipment. A reduction in negative outcomes from failures that are attributed to unresolved safety recalls can potentially reduce liability and reputational harm to companies.

The benefits in this section were not able to be quantified because of a lack of data on the exact amount that recall repairs would increase, or the increase in the speed of recall completion due to the proposed amendments. Without this information, the decreases in human consequences and time and mailing costs related to written notifications for companies are not quantifiable. A small increase in defect or non-compliance repairs would generate a small benefit, while a large increase would generate a large benefit. Given the potential safety benefits associated with the amendments, TC anticipates that the benefits of the proposed amendments are likely to outweigh the monetized costs.

Cost-benefit statement

• Number of years: 10 years from 2023 to 2032
• Base year for costing: 2021
• Present value base year: 2023
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 2: Monetized costs (expressed in thousands, rounded to the nearest thousand; all values presented have been discounted)

Impacted stakeholder	Description of cost	2023	Average from 2024 to 2031)	2032	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Industry (designated)	Website development cost	$349	$60	$44	$876	$125
Industry (non-designated)	Website development cost	$38	$30	$23	$301	$43
Government	Audit costs	$1	$2	$2	$19	$3
All stakeholders	Total costs table b2 note a	$388	$92	$69	$1,195	$170
Table b2 note(s) Table b2 note a Values in table may not add to totals due to rounding. Return to table b2 note a referrer

Positive impacts

• Reduction in human consequences due to increased recall completion for Canadians.
• Reduction in written re-notifications from designated and non-designated companies, resulting in decreased costs.

Sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis was conducted on the discounting values used. The central analysis used a 7% discount rate as recommended by TBS. For the purpose of the sensitivity analysis, the table below presents the results had a 0% discount been used, as well as a 3% discount rate. These three discount rates were selected as in line with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Cost Benefit Analysis Guide for Regulatory Proposals.

Table 3: Monetized costs (expressed in millions)

Discount rates	0%	3%	7% (Central analysis)
Present value costs	$1.51	$1.35	$1.20

Small business lens

Designated companies have high sales volume; therefore, they would not be considered small businesses. Based on a scan of sources, it is estimated that 23 of the currently affected 196 non-designated companies would be considered small businesses.^{footnote 14} Two of these companies are already aligned with the proposed amendments by publishing recall information on their websites. Based on TC analysis, there would be 39 small businesses affected by the end of the time frame. Noteworthy is that there may be other small businesses that did not have a website and were not identified due to lack of publicly available information. These businesses would remain unaffected by the proposed amendments as they do not have websites and would therefore not be required to publish information. If a non-designated company does not have an existing website, then it will not be required to create one in order to publish information online.

Small businesses with websites would assume costs relating to publishing recalls on their existing website. This information would be similar to the information that they are currently required to share with customers via written notification; therefore, the costs of the proposed amendments to small businesses are expected to be low. The notification requirement will remain in place. Over the 10-year time frame, costs to small businesses are expected to total $39,212. This breaks down to a cost of $1,005 per impacted company over the 10-year time frame, or an annualized cost of $143.

While no specific flexibilities have been provided directly to small businesses with these proposed amendments, small businesses (as non-designated companies) would only be required to publish recall information online if they have a pre-existing website. Therefore, if the small business did not have an existing website, it would not be incrementally impacted by the introduction of the regulatory amendments.

Small businesses may benefit from the proposed amendments due to increased recall completion resulting in fewer written recall re-notifications being sent out by mail or electronically to those who did not repair their vehicle after the first notification.

The small business lens studies all costs to small businesses split into compliance and administrative costs. Compliance costs are costs related to complying with the proposed amendments, while administrative costs involve the administrative burden on industry. In this case, all costs to small businesses associated to this proposed amendment would be considered compliance costs.

Small business lens summary

• Number of years: 10 years, from 2023 to 2032
• Base year for costing: 2021
• Present value base year: 2023
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 4: Costs to small businesses

Activity	Number of impacted small businesses	Annualized value	Present value
Compliance cost: website recall publications	39	$5,583	$39,212
Cost per impacted small business	n/a	$143	$1,005

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply to these regulatory amendments, as there would be no incremental change in administrative costs to or burden on business.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

An analysis was undertaken to identify regulatory approaches being used in other international jurisdictions to determine where regulatory cooperation or alignment may be possible, while meeting the desired public policy objective. This analysis focused in particular on regulations in place or under development for adoption in the United States. Canada’s long-standing practice has been to consider alignment with the United States’ standards where they are compatible with Canadian requirements, given the integrated nature of the North American automotive market and manufacturing platform.

With respect to the online VIN-based search service, this analysis found that the development of regulations similar to those of the NHTSA would meet the Canadian objectives. The LTT was published in the fall of 2020 and further informal consultations took place in May 2021. The notice and informal consultations ultimately helped TC’s decision to align the proposed Regulations with those of the United States by requiring a Canadian VIN-based search service through the Internet. However, there are certain aspects in which this regulatory proposal differs from the United States’ requirements:

1. Information in Canada must be made available in both official languages;
2. While the United States scheme only regulates high-volume light vehicle companies, the current regulatory proposal includes other (lower volume) companies that issue recalls, but would hold them to a lesser requirement;
3. Canada regulates additional prescribed classes of vehicles that are not regulated under the NHTSA (such as restricted-use vehicles and snowmobiles), which would be included; and
4. Some of the information required in the Canadian VIN-based search service would be different from the United States system.

The requirement for information to be available in both official languages is part of the Official Languages Act. The proposed amendments would regulate high-volume vehicle companies as well as all other companies so that owners and prescribed persons are able to access recall information faster through a company’s website. Smaller motor vehicle companies and motor vehicle equipment companies (non-designated) would be required to publish on their website information that is currently being mailed out to owners, whereas high-volume vehicle companies (designated) would be required to create an online VIN search tool.

The MVSA regulates additional prescribed classes of vehicles other than those that are federally regulated by the NHTSA, including certain off-road vehicles such as snowmobiles and restricted-use vehicles. In the United States, off-road vehicles are regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which does not share NHTSA’s safety recall requirements.

In some instances, the proposed requirements for the Canadian VIN Tool would differ from the existing requirements of the United States VIN Tool. TC believes that these additional requirements would not place a significant burden on companies and would provide owners with necessary information and tools to reduce potential harm from outstanding safety issues. For instance, TC believes it is important for the VIN Tool to indicate if the VIN entered is not recognized by the company and to include information stating that the repair was completed. Requiring a company to list completed recalls provides an immediate and positive confirmation to the reader. TC believes that since a company would be required to display all outstanding safety recalls, displaying completed recalls should require little more than minor programming changes to display the status as completed, rather than remove the recall completely. TC also believes it is in the owner’s best interest to know of any precautions that they can take to minimize the safety risk until the vehicle is repaired. Lastly, the proposed Regulations would require companies to provide contact information on their website to facilitate reporting a suspected safety issue.

The proposed amendments are not covered under the current Regulatory Cooperation Council Motor Vehicles Working Group work plans. Nonetheless, TC’s Multi-Modal and Road Safety Programs Directorate engages in dialogue and cooperation with the NHTSA on automotive safety. Discussions related to these proposed amendments took place with the respective programs at NHTSA, and the latter is supportive of the Canadian regulatory amendments.

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, and the TC Policy Statement on Strategic Environmental Assessment (2013), the strategic environmental assessment process was followed for this proposal and a sustainable transportation assessment was completed. No important environmental effects are anticipated as a result of this proposal. The assessment took into account potential effects to the environmental goals and targets of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy.

Gender-based analysis plus

This regulatory proposal is not expected to have differential impacts on Canadians based on factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, disability status, age, etc. The proposed amendments are expected to benefit Canadians in general since they would add a way for people to access safety recall information in a faster and more convenient manner for affected vehicles and vehicle equipment, while still maintaining the existing requirements to be informed of safety recalls in the form of written notification. Canadians who do not have reliable access to the Internet (e.g. due to factors such as income or where they live) or who do not typically seek out information online are less likely to benefit from these changes than other Canadians. However, they will not be adversely affected by this proposal since the existing means of communicating safety recall information would still be maintained.

TC has evaluated feedback received from the public and stakeholders on the LTT platform with regard to the proposal to introduce a VIN Tool. There were no concerns raised by the industry stakeholders or the public related to gender-based analysis plus.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

The proposed amendments would come into force on the day on which they are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, with the exception of requirements for non-designated companies, which would come into force 180 days after the day on which these Regulations are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

Currently, no companies have been designated by the Minister under the MVSA. TC plans to designate companies after the proposed amendments come into force. Companies that are designated by the Minister would be required to comply with the VIN Tool and website publication requirements within one year from the date that they are informed of their designation. Non-designated companies would be required to comply with the Regulations 180 days after the Canada Gazette, Part II, publication.

Companies are responsible for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the MVSA and its regulations. TC intends to conduct audit inspections of information published by companies to verify compliance with the proposed requirements. TC would ensure that notices of defect and non-compliance published online contain, at a minimum, the information required by the MVSR, and that companies act in accordance with timelines specified by the Regulations. TC would also closely monitor public complaints and may undertake detailed inspections upon receiving information highlighting potential contraventions.

Under the authority of the MVSA, designated inspectors may make written requests for records and/or enter a place believed on reasonable grounds to contain records related to a vehicle or equipment, with a view to verifying compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. When a violation is detected, TC uses a graduated approach to enforcement. As is detailed in TC’s oversight policy, tools such as warnings, prosecutions, or revocations can be used to address violations. In all cases, the enforcement response taken by TC would continue to be tailored to achieve both compliance and deterrence.

Contact

Denis Brault
Senior Regulatory Development Engineer
Multi-Modal and Road Safety Programs
Transport Canada
330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
Email: RegulationsClerk-ASFB-Commisauxreglements@tc.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Recall Information) under subsections 10(1)^{footnote a} and 10.1(1)^{footnote b}, section 10.3^{footnote c} and subsection 11(1)^{footnote d} of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act ^{footnote e}.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 75 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Denis Brault, Senior Regulatory Development Engineer, Standards and Regulations, Multi-Modal and Road Safety Programs, Department of Transport, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5 (email: RegulationsClerk-ASFB-Commisauxreglements@tc.gc.ca).

Ottawa, June 8, 2023

Wendy Nixon
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Recall Information)

Amendments

Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations

1 (1) Paragraph 15(9)(b) of the French version of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations ^{footnote 15} is replaced by the following:

• b) pour chaque véhicule susceptible d’avoir le défaut, la marque, le modèle, l’année de modèle, le numéro d’identification du véhicule et tout autre renseignement nécessaire pour en permettre l’identification;

(2) Subsection 15(10) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(10) The company is not required to provide to the prescribed person the vehicle identification number required under paragraph (9)(b) if

• (a) the vehicle identification number is published on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market with the number, title or other identification that is assigned by the company to the associated notice of defect; or
• (b) the information contained in the notice of defect is published in accordance with section 15.05.

2 (1) Paragraph 15.01(9)(b) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• b) pour chaque véhicule susceptible d’être non conforme, la marque, le modèle, l’année de modèle, le numéro d’identification du véhicule et tout autre renseignement nécessaire pour en permettre l’identification;

(2) Subsection 15.01(10) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(10) The company is not required to provide to the prescribed person the vehicle identification number required under paragraph (9)(b) if

• (a) the vehicle identification number is published on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market with the number, title or other identification that is assigned by the company to the associated notice of defect; or
• (b) the information contained in the notice of defect is published in accordance with section 15.05.

3 Paragraph 15.02(1)(f) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• f) le numéro d’identification du véhicule de chaque véhicule susceptible d’avoir le défaut ou d’être non conforme, à moins que ces renseignements soient transmis au ministre en application de l’alinéa (3)a) ou soient affichés conformément aux paragraphes 15(10) ou 15.01(10).

4 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 15.03:

15.04 [Reserved]

Publication of Information by Designated Companies

15.05 (1) A company that is designated by the Minister and that gives a notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister under subsection 10(1) or 10.1(1) of the Act must make the following information available, in both official languages, on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market, via a search tool that provides access to the information by carrying out a search by vehicle identification number:

• (a) the date on which the notice was given to the Minister;
• (b) the make, model and model year of the vehicle;
• (c) the number, title or other identification assigned by the company to the notice;
• (d) the motor vehicle safety recall number that is issued by the Department of Transport;
• (e) if the corrective measures in respect of a defect or non-compliance have not been implemented
  • (i) a description of
    • (A) the nature of the defect, including the causes, and the location of the defect, or
    • (B) the non-compliance, including the causes,
  • (ii) a description of the safety risk to persons arising from the defect or non-compliance,
  • (iii) a statement that the defect or non-compliance could cause a crash, if applicable,
  • (iv) if the defect or non-compliance is not likely to cause a crash, the type of injury that may result from the defect or non-compliance,
  • (v) a description of the corrective measures to be taken in respect of the defect or non-compliance and how they are to be implemented,
  • (vi) any precautions that may be taken to minimize the safety risk until the corrective measures are implemented, and
  • (vii) a statement that the parts and facilities that are necessary to correct the defect or non-compliance are available or, if they are not, the earliest date by which they are expected to be available;
• (f) if the corrective measures in respect of a defect or non-compliance have been implemented
  • (i) the information referred to in subparagraphs (e)(i) and (v), and
  • (ii) a statement that the corrective measures have been implemented;
• (g) if applicable, a statement indicating that information in respect of notices given before a specified date is not available on the website and how to obtain the information;
• (h) on each web page where the information referred to in paragraphs (a) to (g) is displayed
  • (i) the contact information of the person at the company or at an automobile dealership who can be contacted for any questions related to a notice,
  • (ii) how a person can report a potential safety concern relating to a vehicle,
  • (iii) how a person can inform the company of a transfer of ownership of a vehicle or a change of address, and
  • (iv) the date on which the information was last updated.

(2) The information referred to in subparagraphs (1)(h)(i) to (iii) must also be displayed on the web page containing the search tool.

(3) The company must publish the information referred to in subsection (1) as soon as feasible, but not later than 30 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister, and must update the information within seven days after any change is made.

(4) Despite subsection (3), if the information referred to in subparagraph (1)(e)(v) or (vii) is not available on the day on which it is to be published, the company must publish the information within seven days after it becomes available.

(5) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) remains available on the website for at least 15 years beginning on the day on which the company gives the notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister.

(6) If a search by vehicle identification number is carried out and the vehicle identification number is not associated with any notice of defect or non-compliance that is available on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market, the company must ensure that a statement to that effect, as well as the following information, is displayed:

• (a) the make, model and model year of the vehicle;
• (b) if applicable, a statement indicating that information in respect of notices given before a specified date is not available on the website and how to obtain the information;
• (c) the contact information of the person at the company who can be contacted for more information;
• (d) how a person can report a potential safety concern relating to a vehicle;
• (e) how a person can inform the company of a transfer of ownership of a vehicle or a change of address;
• (f) the date on which the information referred to in subsection (1) was last updated.

(7) If the vehicle identification number is not recognized by the search tool, the company must ensure that a statement to that effect, as well as the contact information of the person at the company who can be contacted for more information, is displayed.

(8) The company must ensure that the search tool is available either on the homepage of the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market or by way of a hyperlink that contains the word “Recall” or “Recalls”, written in any combination of upper and lower case letters, and that is prominently displayed on that homepage.

(9) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsections (1), (6) and (7) is

• (a) available free of charge and with no requirement to register or to provide any information other than the vehicle identification number; and
• (b) displayed before any other information on the search tool results page.

(10) This section applies to a company one year after the day on which it is designated by the Minister, but it does not apply if the requirements of the section have been met by another company that manufactured, sold or imported the vehicle.

5 The reference “15.04 [Reserved]” after section 15.03 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Publication of Information

15.04 (1) A company that gives a notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister under subsection 10(1) or 10.1(1) of the Act must publish the following information, in both official languages, on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market:

• (a) the date on which the notice was given to the Minister;
• (b) the make, model and model year of the vehicles included in the notice;
• (c) the number, title or other identification assigned by the company to the notice;
• (d) the motor vehicle safety recall number that is issued by the Department of Transport;
• (e) a description of
  • (i) the nature of the defect, including the causes, and the location of the defect, or
  • (ii) the non-compliance, including the causes;
• (f) a description of the safety risk to persons arising from the defect or non-compliance;
• (g) a statement that the defect or non-compliance could cause a crash, if applicable;
• (h) if the defect or non-compliance is not likely to cause a crash, the type of injury that may result from the defect or non-compliance;
• (i) a description of the corrective measures to be taken in respect of the defect or non-compliance and how they are to be implemented;
• (j) any precautions that may be taken to minimize the safety risk until the corrective measures are implemented;
• (k) a statement that the parts and facilities that are necessary to correct the defect or non-compliance are available or, if they are not, the earliest date by which they are expected to be available;
• (l) if applicable, a statement indicating that information in respect of notices given before a specified date is not available on the website and how to obtain the information;
• (m) on each web page where the information referred to in paragraphs (a) to (l) is displayed
  • (i) the contact information of the person at the company or at an automobile dealership who can be contacted for any questions related to the notice,
  • (ii) how a person can report a potential safety concern relating to a vehicle,
  • (iii) how a person can inform the company of a transfer of ownership of a vehicle or a change of address, and
  • (iv) the date on which the information was last updated.

(2) The company must publish the information referred to in subsection (1) as soon as feasible, but not later than 10 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister, and must update the information within seven days after any change is made.

(3) Despite subsection (2), if the information referred to in paragraph (1)(d), (i) or (k) is not available on the day on which it is to be published, the company must publish the information within seven days after it becomes available.

(4) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) remains available on the website for at least 15 years beginning on the day on which the company gives the notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister.

(5) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) is available

• (a) free of charge and with no requirement to register or to provide any information; and
• (b) either on the homepage of the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market or by way of a hyperlink that contains the word “Recall” or “Recalls”, written in any combination of upper and lower case letters, and that is prominently displayed on that homepage.

(6) A company is not required to meet the requirements of this section if

• (a) they have been met by another company that manufactured, sold or imported the vehicle;
• (b) the company has been designated by the Minister;
• (c) the company meets the requirements of section 15.05; or
• (d) the company does not have a website to communicate information directed at the Canadian market.

Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems and Booster Seats Safety Regulations

6 The Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems and Booster Seats Safety Regulations ^{footnote 16} are amended by adding the following after section 110.03:

Publication of Information

Information on website

110.04 (1) A company that gives a notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister under subsection 10(1) or 10.1(1) of the Act must publish the following information, in both official languages, on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market:

• (a) the date on which the notice was given to the Minister;
• (b) the model name and number of the restraint systems or booster seats included in the notice and any other information that is necessary to permit their identification;
• (c) the number, title or other identification assigned by the company to the notice;
• (d) the motor vehicle safety recall number that is issued by the Department of Transport;
• (e) a description of
  • (i) the nature of the defect, including the causes, and the location of the defect, or
  • (ii) the non-compliance, including the causes;
• (f) a description of the safety risk to persons arising from the defect or non-compliance;
• (g) the type of injury that may result from the defect or non-compliance;
• (h) a description of the corrective measures to be taken in respect of the defect or non-compliance and how they are to be implemented;
• (i) any precautions that may be taken to minimize the safety risk until the corrective measures are implemented;
• (j) a statement that the parts and facilities that are necessary to correct the defect or non-compliance are available or, if they are not, the earliest date by which they are expected to be available;
• (k) if applicable, a statement indicating that information in respect of notices given before a specified date is not available on the website and how to obtain the information;
• (l) on each web page where the information referred to in paragraphs (a) to (k) is displayed
  • (i) the contact information of the person at the company who can be contacted for any questions related to the notice,
  • (ii) how a person can report a potential safety concern relating to a restraint system or booster seat,
  • (iii) how a person can inform the company of a transfer of ownership of a restraint system or booster seat or a change of address, and
  • (iv) the date on which the information was last updated.

Date of publication

(2) The company must publish the information referred to in subsection (1) as soon as feasible, but not later than 10 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister, and must update the information within seven days after any change is made.

Exception

(3) Despite subsection (2), if the information referred to in paragraph (1)(d), (h) or (j) is not available on the day on which it is to be published, the company must publish the information within seven days after it becomes available.

Minimum period of availability of information

(4) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) remains available on the website for at least 10 years beginning on the day on which the company gives the notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister.

Availability of information

(5) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) is available

• (a) free of charge and with no requirement to register or to provide any information; and
• (b) either on the homepage of the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market or by way of a hyperlink that contains the word “Recall” or “Recalls”, written in any combination of upper and lower case letters, and that is prominently displayed on that homepage.

Exception

(6) A company is not required to meet the requirements of this section if

• (a) they have been met by another company that manufactured, sold or imported the restraint system or booster seat; or
• (b) the company does not have a website to communicate information directed at the Canadian market.

Motor Vehicle Tire Safety Regulations

7 The Motor Vehicle Tire Safety Regulations ^{footnote 17} are amended by adding the following after section 13.03:

Publication of Information

Information on website

13.04 (1) A company that gives a notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister under subsection 10(1) or 10.1(1) of the Act must publish the following information, in both official languages, on the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market:

• (a) the date on which the notice was given to the Minister;
• (b) the brand name, size designation, type and tire identification number of the tires included in the notice and any other information that is necessary to permit their identification;
• (c) the number, title or other identification assigned by the company to the notice;
• (d) the motor vehicle safety recall number that is issued by the Department of Transport;
• (e) a description of
  • (i) the nature of the defect, including the causes, and the location of the defect, or
  • (ii) the non-compliance, including the causes;
• (f) a description of the safety risk to persons arising from the defect or non-compliance;
• (g) a statement that the defect or non-compliance could cause a crash, if applicable;
• (h) if the defect or non-compliance is not likely to cause a crash, the type of injury that may result from the defect or non-compliance;
• (i) a description of the corrective measures to be taken in respect of the defect or non-compliance and how they are to be implemented;
• (j) any precautions that may be taken to minimize the safety risk until the corrective measures are implemented;
• (k) a statement that the parts and facilities that are necessary to correct the defect or non-compliance are available or, if they are not, the earliest date by which they are expected to be available;
• (l) if applicable, a statement indicating that information in respect of notices given before a specified date is not available on the website and how to obtain the information;
• (m) on each web page where the information referred to in paragraphs (a) to (l) is displayed
  • (i) the contact information of the person at the company who can be contacted for any questions related to the notice,
  • (ii) how a person can report a potential safety concern relating to a tire,
  • (iii) how a person can inform the company of a transfer of ownership of a tire or a change of address, and
  • (iv) the date on which the information was last updated.

Date of publication

(2) The company must publish the information referred to in subsection (1) as soon as feasible, but not later than 10 days after the day on which the company gives the notice to the Minister, and must update the information within seven days after any change is made.

Exception

(3) Despite subsection (2), if the information referred to in paragraph (1)(d), (i) or (k) is not available on the day on which it is to be published, the company must publish the information within seven days after it becomes available.

Minimum period of availability of information

(4) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) remains available on the website for at least 10 years beginning on the day on which the company gives the notice of defect or non-compliance to the Minister.

Availability of information

(5) The company must ensure that the information referred to in subsection (1) is available

• (a) free of charge and with no requirement to register or to provide any information; and
• (b) either on the homepage of the website that the company uses to communicate information directed at the Canadian market or by way of a hyperlink that contains the word “Recall” or “Recalls”, written in any combination of upper and lower case letters, and that is prominently displayed on that homepage.

Exception

(6) A company is not required to meet the requirements of this section if

• (a) they have been met by another company that manufactured, sold or imported the tire; or
• (b) the company does not have a website to communicate information directed at the Canadian market.

Coming Into Force

8 (1) Subject to subsection (2), these Regulations come into force on the day on which they are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

(2) Sections 5 to 7 come into force on the 180th day after the day on which these Regulations are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

• contain personal information
• contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
• express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
• contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
• contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
• constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
• encourage or incite any criminal activity
• contain external links
• contain a language other than English or French
• otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that public email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.