Registration

SOR/2008-73 March 11, 2008

MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY ACT

Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Door Locks and Door Retention Components)

P.C. 2008-543 March 11, 2008

Whereas, pursuant to subsection 11(3) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (see footnote a), a copy of the proposed Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Door Locks and Door Retention Components), substantially in the form set out in the annexed Regulations, was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on December 2, 2006, and a reasonable opportunity was thereby afforded to interested persons to make representations to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities with respect to the proposed Regulations;

Therefore, Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, pursuant to section 5 (see footnote b) and subsection 11(1) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (see footnote c), hereby makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Door Locks and Door Retention Components).

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE MOTOR VEHICLE
SAFETY REGULATIONS (DOOR LOCKS AND
DOOR RETENTION COMPONENTS)

AMENDMENTS

1. Subsection 2(1) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (see footnote 1) is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

“back door” means a door or door system on the back of a motor vehicle through which passengers can enter or leave the vehicle or cargo can be loaded or unloaded, but does not include

(a) a trunk lid, or

(b) a door or window that is composed entirely of glazing material and whose latches or hinge systems are attached directly to the glazing material; (porte arrière)

2. Item 206 of Schedule III to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Column I	Column II	Column III Classes of Vehicles
		Bus	Motorcycle
Item (CMVSS)	Description		Enclosed Motorcycle	Open Motorcycle	Limited-speed Motorcycle	Motor Tricycle
206	Door Locks and Door Retention Components	X	X

Column I	Column II	Column III Classes of Vehicles
Item (CMVSS)	Description	Restricted use Motorcycle	Multi- purpose Passenger Vehicle	Passenger Car	Snow- mobile	Snow- mobile Cutter
206	Door Locks and Door Retention Components		X	X

Column I	Column II	Column III Classes of Vehicles
Item (CMVSS)	Description	Trailer	Trailer Converter Dolly	Truck	Vehicle Imported Temporarily for Special Purposes	Low speed Vehicle	Three-wheeled Vehicle
206	Door Locks and Door Retention Components			X			X

3. Section 206 of Schedule IV to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

206. (1) Subject to subsection (2), every enclosed motorcycle, multi-purpose passenger vehicle, three-wheeled vehicle, passenger car and truck that is equipped with side doors or back doors shall be so equipped in accordance with

(a) Technical Standards Document No. 206, Door Locks and Door Retention Components, as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as TSD 206); or

(b) the general requirements, performance requirements and test procedures that are set out in ECE Regulation No. 11, entitled Uniform Provisions Concerning the Approval of Motor Vehicles with regard to Door Locks and Door Retention Components, in the version in effect on June 11, 2007, as amended from time to time by any 03 series of amendments subsequent to that date (hereinafter referred to as ECE Regulation No. 11).

(2) Subject to subsection (5), until August 31, 2009, every enclosed motorcycle, multi-purpose passenger vehicle, three-wheeled vehicle, passenger car and truck that is equipped with side doors or back doors may be so equipped in accordance with TSD 206 as it read on August 23, 1996, instead of in accordance with subsection (1).

(3) Beginning on September 1, 2009, every bus with a GVWR of 4 536 kg or less that is equipped with side doors or back doors shall be so equipped in accordance with subsection (1).

(4) For the purposes of paragraph 6.3.2 of ECE Regulation No. 11, the locking device shall be the device referred to in paragraph 6.3.2.1(a) or (b) of that Regulation.

(5) Despite sections S5.1.1.2 and S5.4.1.2 of TSD 206 as it read on August 23, 1996, compliance with sections S4.1.1.3 and S4.4.1.4 of that document shall be demonstrated in accordance with paragraph S5.1.1.4(a) or (b) of the document referred to in paragraph (1)(a).

(6) This section expires on January 1, 2010.

4. Subsection 401(3) of Schedule IV to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(3) This section does not apply to vehicles equipped with a back door, as defined in subsection 2(1) of these Regulations.

COMING INTO FORCE

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

REGULATORY IMPACT
ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Description

The Canadian safety standard on door locks and door retention components, which is part of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (MVSR), (see footnote 2) is being amended to incorporate by reference the substance of the global technical regulation on door locks and door retention components contained in the corresponding regulations for the United States and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE).

This amendment is intended to reduce the risk of inadvertent door opening and subsequent occupant ejection by improving the requirements for sliding doors, double doors and rear-hinged side doors. It is also extending the application of the Canadian safety standard to buses with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kg or less, including 12 and 15 passenger vans. Furthermore, it is offering an alternative dynamic inertial test procedure to the current mathematical inertial calculation method, which is more representative of real-world conditions. Finally, it is removing any potential impediment to trade by being in complete harmony with the United States and the many other countries (see footnote 3) that adopted the global technical regulation in question.

Background

Global technical regulations

Global Technical Regulations are developed in accordance with the Agreement Concerning the Establishing of Global Technical Regulations for Wheeled Vehicles, Equipment and Parts Which Can Be Fitted and/or Be Used on Wheeled Vehicles, also known as the 1998 Agreement or Global Agreement (see footnote 4).

The 1998 Agreement is administered by the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29), which was established in 1952 within the Inland Transport Committee of the ECE. The 1998 Agreement establishes a process by which countries can jointly harmonize and develop global technical regulations addressing the safety of wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts. The 1998 Agreement also addresses environmental protection systems, energy sources and theft prevention.

Canada became the first Contracting Party to ratify the 1998 Agreement on June 22, 1999. The 1998 Agreement came into force on August 25, 2000, and currently has 29 Contracting Parties (see footnote 5).

Working Parties, serving to assist the WP.29 in developing global technical regulations, are made up of technical experts from the Contracting Parties, industry and consumers/road users. The public, vehicle manufacturers and suppliers are represented by non-governmental organizations accredited with the ECE. Each Working Party meets at least twice per year to develop harmonized motor vehicle safety regulations and to discuss specifics of the regulations being drafted, such as test methodologies, limit values, vehicle/component performance standards, and approval or certification markings.

During the 126th session of WP.29 in March 2002, the Executive Committee of the 1998 Agreement (AC.3) adopted a program of work that included development of a global technical regulation to address inadvertent door opening in crashes as well as to discuss and evaluate relevant issues concerning requirements for door locks and door retention components and to make recommendations regarding the development of a global technical regulation on door locks and door retention components.

The formal proposal was adopted by the AC.3 at its May 2004 session and by the WP.29 during its 134th session on November 18, 2004, making the global technical regulation on door locks and door retention components the first to be established in the United Nations according to the 1998 Agreement (ECE/TRANS/180/Add.1). In accordance with the Notice of Intent published in the Canada Gazette of October 2, 2004, the Government of Canada voted in approval of this global technical regulation.

While the global technical regulation is an attempt at creating a globally harmonized regulation, the United States and the ECE adopted slightly different versions of the global technical regulation into their respective jurisdictions (see footnote 6) while still maintaining the same safety level as the global technical regulation. The Government of Canada agrees with the content of the global technical regulation but adopting the document as such would not be effective for the reasons mentioned below.

Section 206 of the MVSR

Currently, the Canadian safety standard reproduces, in the official languages of Canada, the content of the United States safety standard governing door locks and door retention components by means of a Technical Standards Document (TSD 206). The amendment to the Canadian safety standard is twofold:

•  First, the updated version of the safety standard is being adopted through amendment to the TSD 206.
•  Second, the latest version of ECE Regulation No. 11, entitled Uniform Provisions Concerning the Approval of Motor Vehicles with regard to Door Locks and Door Retention Components, is being incorporated by reference, as alternative to those of the TSD 206.

Hence, the Canadian safety standard will be harmonized with both the United States and the ECE, and manufacturers provided the alternative of complying with either the provisions of the TSD 206 or ECE Regulation No. 11.

In section 6.3.2 of ECE Regulation No. 11, two options are offered as an additional locking feature for rear side doors: (a) a child safety lock; or (b) a lock release/engagement device located inside the vehicle and readily accessible to the driver of the vehicle or an occupant seated adjacent to the door. At the present time, the child safety lock of option (a) is not mandatory in Canada or in the United States. The child safety lock, when activated, eliminates any possibility of a door opening unintentionally while the vehicle is in motion, whether or not the door lock is engaged. On the other hand, option (b) is already standard practice in Canada since the Canadian safety standard requires that when the door lock is engaged, both the inside and outside release controls be inoperative. Consequently, there will be no additional cost associated with this design option. While the United States safety standard adopted option (b), the Government of Canada is of the opinion that the level of vehicle safety will be maintained with either of the two options; hence, manufacturers are allowed to choose either option offered by the ECE Regulation No. 11.

This amendment also repeals the phase-in period provision of the Canadian safety standard since it is no longer effective. The phase-in period was adopted when the Canadian safety standard was amended in December 1996 because some vehicles could not have conformed to the new requirements by the initially proposed date of September 1, 1997.

Currently, the Canadian safety standard allows manufacturers to certify to the inertial test using either a specified mathematical calculation or an equivalent test procedure. However, the latter procedure is not provided in the ECE Regulation No. 11 or the United States safety standard. Instead, the ECE and the United States provide an alternative to the mathematical calculation, which consists of a dynamic inertial test procedure. To facilitate global harmony, the Canadian safety standard is amended to allow manufacturers to choose between the calculation and the dynamic test.

As per the United States safety standard, the Government is extending the application of the Canadian safety standard to buses with a GVWR of 4,536 kg or less. Currently, large vans such as 12 and 15-passenger vans do not fall within the application of the Canadian safety standard since they have a designated seating capacity of more than 10 and therefore meet the definition of a bus. However, these vehicles currently have the same door locks and door retention components as smaller vans that already meet the requirements of the Canadian safety standard. This addition is also being reflected in Schedule III to the MVSR, which specifies the standards that apply to each class of vehicles.

Finally, the amendment is adding a definition to the MVSR for the term “back door.” Given that the term is used in the MVSR, it is more appropriate if this term is defined in the regulatory text for consistency.

Alternatives

The other following options were considered:

• Maintain the status quo and do not adopt the global technical regulation into Canadian regulations;
• Incorporate the substance of the global technical regulation into the text of the Canadian safety standard; and
• Incorporate by reference the global technical regulation.

The idea of maintaining the status quo was rejected since Canada supports the 1998 Agreement and voted for registration of the global technical regulation. Failure to adopt the global technical regulation would jeopardize Canada’s status in the WP.29 as a champion of the international harmonization of motor vehicle safety regulations.

Adding the requirements of the global technical regulation into the Canadian safety standard was contemplated. However, this option was not accepted because it did not constitute the optimal solution to facilitate the global harmonization of regulations.

At the time of pre-publication, it was proposed to incorporate by reference any version of the global technical regulation that was in effect 24 months before the date of completion of a vehicle by the manufacturer. Although the global technical regulation includes all the specific technical provisions, it does not provide effective dates, which would require additional consultation domestically. The option retained, following pre-publication, was to incorporate by reference the ECE Regulation No. 11. Such incorporation will offer the same outcome i.e., offering an alternative to manufacturers to certify their product with a dynamic test, while fulfilling Canada’s obligation towards the WP.29 since the ECE Regulation No. 11 has been revised based largely on the global technical regulation. In addition, the ECE Regulation is a better fit to Canadian regulations since it includes effective dates much like other Canadian standards.

Incorporating TSDs by reference, as amended from time to time in the MVSR, permits Canada to align its motor vehicle safety requirements with those of the United States. The automotive industry fully supports their use. Manufacturers are informed of any changes to the TSD through Transport Canada’s Web site and through a simple notification and publication in the Canada Gazette Part I.

Benefits and costs

This amendment provides more flexibility to manufacturers by requiring that they comply with either the United States version of the global technical regulation (i.e., TSD 206) or the version of the global technical regulation that has been adopted by the ECE (i.e., ECE Regulation No. 11). By being in complete harmony with the United States and the ECE, the Canadian safety standard removes any potential impediment to trade between the countries involved. Therefore, the changes are not expected to affect market efficiency and competition, regional balance, technological change, inflation, employment, and are not hindering harmonization with other countries. There are no additional costs to the automotive industry, the public or the government arising from implementation and enforcement of the new requirements.

Requiring a test on sliding doors, strengthening the test requirements for double and rear-hinged side doors and increasing the coverage of the Regulations to buses offer better protection to the public. This amendment will also benefit both the public in general and the manufacturers as it aligns the Canadian requirements with the main regulating bodies in terms of motor vehicle safety. As a consequence it will remove any potential impediment to trade with the United States and the many other countries (see footnote 7) that adopted the global technical regulation in question.

Under the Department’s Strategic Environmental Assessment policy, a preliminary evaluation of the possible effects of this amendment was completed. It was determined that this amendment has no impact on the environment.

Consultation

The Government’s proposal to make these amendments was prepublished in the Canada Gazette Part I, on December 2, 2006, and a 75-day consultation period was allotted. The Government received questions and comments from the Truck Manufacturers Association (TMA), the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association (CVMA) and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers of Canada (AIAMC).

The TMA expressed a concern, which was eventually echoed by the CVMA and the AIAMC, that the proposed mandatory date (September 1, 2008) for meeting either the TSD 206 or the ECE Regulation No. 11 preceded that of the United States, which is now set for September 1, 2009. All three associations commented that the implementation timing should not be different in Canada and in the United States because it creates a period where manufacturers have to meet different standards. For this reason, the mandatory date to meet the new requirement is now September 1, 2009. This will make these amendments more manageable for the industry while still offering early compliance acceptability.

The AIAMC requested to be allowed the option of complying with either the inertial mathematical calculation or the dynamic test when choosing to meet the current version of TSD 206. The MVSR were modified accordingly to allow the two test options for the current version of TSD 206 to be available to manufacturers as soon as the amendments come into force (upon registration).

The AIAMC supported the proposal to incorporate by reference the global technical regulation as an option to TSD 206. However, the AIAMC requested that the ECE regulation, which mirrors the global technical regulation, also be allowed as an alternative because many countries use the ECE regulations. The latter comment was also echoed by the CMVA. The AIAMC also supported permitting compliance with the rear side door lock requirements using either a child safety lock system or a locking device located within the interior of the vehicle.

The Government’s original expectations were that all Contracting Parties to the 1998 Agreement would incorporate by direct reference the global technical regulation document. However, since the ECE regulation was amended to mirror the global technical regulation, most Contracting Parties incorporated by reference the ECE regulation instead. The United States did not incorporate the ECE regulation but incorporated the requirements of the global technical regulation into the text of their safety standard with slight differences. For instance, the ECE regulation allows performing tests on incomplete vehicles while the United States requires that tests be performed on post-production vehicles only.

The CMVA additionally indicated that it would be unmanageable for them to have a variable conformance date scheme i.e. to be automatically effective 24-months after the coming into force of any amendment to the global technical regulation. They favour the reference to a specific date. The CMVA and the AIAMC also pointed out that some global technical regulation amendments could drive significant design changes, which would require a lead-time in excess of the proposed 24 months. The concern regarding the implementation of a variable conformance date scheme was resolved when it was decided to incorporate the ECE regulation by reference rather than the global technical regulation since the former includes dates of entry into force.

Because the regulation text refers specifically to ECE Regulation No. 11, amended up to series 03 of amendments, non-substantive amendments to the ECE regulation will be automatically incorporated into Canadian regulations with the same dates of entry into force that are established for the ECE regulation depending on the scope and complexity of the amendments. However, when an amendment to the ECE regulation is substantial enough to drive design changes that call for significant lead-time from the manufacturers’ standpoint, the ECE is required to use a new series number and, thus, the new amendment will not be effective in Canada until the Government has had the opportunity to assess the ECE amendment and determine the appropriateness of its inclusion in a revised Canadian safety standard.

In view of these comments, the incorporation by reference of the global technical regulation was withdrawn and the alternative retained became ECE Regulation No. 11.

Compliance and enforcement

Motor vehicle manufacturers and importers are responsible for ensuring that their products comply with the requirements of the MVSR. The Government monitors the self-certification programs of manufacturers and importers by reviewing their test documentation, inspecting vehicles, and testing vehicles obtained in the open market. When a defect is found, the manufacturer or importer must issue a notice of defect to owners and to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. If a vehicle does not comply with a safety standard, the manufacturer or importer may be subject to prosecution and, if found guilty, may be fined as prescribed in the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.

Contact

Eric Bergevin
Acting Senior Regulatory Development Engineer
Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate
Transport Canada
330 Sparks Street, 8th Floor, Tower C
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
Telephone: 613-998-2670
Fax: 613-990-2913
Email: bergeve@tc.gc.ca

Copies of TSD No. 206, “Door Locks and Door Retention Components,” Revision 1, may be obtained on the Internet at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/mvstm_tsd/index_e.htm

Footnote a
S.C. 1993, c. 16

Footnote b
S.C. 1999, c. 33, s. 351

Footnote c
S.C. 1993, c. 16

Footnote 1
C.R.C., c. 1038

Footnote 2
Section 206 of schedule IV to the MVSR, C.R.C., c. 1038

Footnote 3
Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement: Canada, United States of America, Japan, France, United Kingdom, European Community, Germany, Russian Federation, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Korea, Italy, South Africa, Finland, Hungary, Turkey, Slovakia, New Zealand, Netherlands + Antilles, Azerbaijan, Spain, Romania, Sweden, Norway, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malaysia, India, Lithuania, Moldova.

Footnote 4
Available at http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/
wp29gen/wp29glob/tran132.pdf

Footnote 5
Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement: Canada, United States of America, Japan, France, United Kingdom, European Community, Germany, Russian Federation, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Korea, Italy, South Africa, Finland, Hungary, Turkey, Slovakia, New Zealand, Netherlands + Antilles, Azerbaijan, Spain, Romania, Sweden, Norway, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malaysia, India, Lithuania, Moldova.

Footnote 6
The substance of the global technical regulations was incorporated in the corresponding ECE Regulations in November 2006. The United States also incorporated the substance of the global technical regulations in their domestic standard in February 2007.

Footnote 7
Contracting Parties to the 1998 Global Agreement: Canada, United States of America, Japan, France, United Kingdom, European Community, Germany, Russian Federation, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Korea, Italy, South Africa, Finland, Hungary, Turkey, Slovakia, New Zealand, Netherlands + Antilles, Azerbaijan, Spain, Romania, Sweden, Norway, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malaysia, India, Lithuania, Moldova.

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