Browse regulations

Excludes nuclear facility employment from Part II of Canada Labour Code but applies Ontario's Occupational Health and Safety Act with modifications; gives primacy to Nuclear Safety and Control Act in case of inconsistency; modifies evidence gathering provisions to use Criminal Code instead of Provincial Offences Act; expands police definition to include on-site nuclear response forces.

Redundant regulatory layering that creates complexity without clear safety benefit. Nuclear facilities are already comprehensively regulated by the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, a modern federal statute designed specifically for this high-risk industry. Imposing Ontario's provincial OHSA framework adds administrative burden, potential conflicts, and compliance costs while the substitution of Criminal Code for Provincial Offences Act provisions is a trivial adjustment. The 'primacy' clause acknowledging Nuclear Safety and Control Act's superiority demonstrates this regulation's superfluous nature. Ontario's OHSA was not designed for nuclear facilities; the specialized federal regulator already possesses the expertise and mandate. This represents the kind of regulatory duplication that inflates bureaucracy, increases costs passed to consumers, and creates uncertainty for operators without improving safety outcomes—the opposite of restoring liberty and competitiveness.

Sections 1-7 of this regulation have been repealed by SOR/2007-303, section 44. The regulation appears to be a shell or consolidated version with all substantive provisions removed.

Already repealed and legally obsolete. No remaining legal effect, so maintaining it on the books creates regulatory noise and confusion without any purpose.

This regulation document contains sections 1-68, all marked as '[Repealed, SOR/2007-115, s. 402]' — representing a fully repealed regulatory framework with no current legal force.

The regulation is already fully repealed and therefore obsolete. Maintaining repealed text in the regulatory corpus creates confusion, wastes administrative resources, and imposes unnecessary compliance burden through legal uncertainty. Complete removal from active databases would clarify the law and reduce the regulatory clutter that impedes understanding of current rules.

This regulation has been entirely repealed. Every section from 1 to 82 is marked as repealed by SOR/2007-115, s. 401, indicating the entire regulatory instrument was formally rescinded. The document contains no operative provisions.

Repealed regulations are legally inert and serve no purpose. Their continued publication creates confusion, wastes administrative resources, and pollutes the regulatory corpus with dead letter. The regulation should be formally deleted from the statute books to maintain legal clarity and reduce unnecessary complexity.

These regulations have been repealed as of SOR/2007-15, s. 5 and are no longer in effect.

Regulations are already repealed and obsolete, eliminating any current regulatory burden on Canadians.

Regulation sections 1-3, all repealed by SOR/2006-128, s.1. Original content unknown; document indicates these provisions are no longer in force.

Obsolescent: already repealed. The repeal indicates the original regulation likely imposed net costs—distorting incentives, restricting liberty, or creating inefficiencies—without offsetting benefits. Its removal eliminates those burdens, consistent with pro-liberty reform.

Regulations 1-4 were repealed in 2006 by SOR/2006-337, section 5, indicating they are no longer in effect and have been removed from the legal code.

These regulations have already been repealed and are obsolete, representing unnecessary regulatory burden that has been eliminated. Keeping repealed regulations would create confusion and maintain dead regulatory weight.

All 19 sections of this regulation have been repealed by Statutory Order SOR/2005-313, section 100. The document shows only repealed provisions with no current legal effect.

Already repealed and therefore irrelevant; maintaining repealed provisions on the books creates legal confusion and administrative burden for no benefit.

Federal regulation consisting of sections 1-5, all repealed by SOR/2007-108, section 5. No enforceable provisions remain.

Already fully repealed; original provisions were flawed enough to warrant abolition. Maintaining dead law creates confusion, administrative burden, and legal uncertainty without any benefit.

Regulation document shows sections 1-6 as repealed by SOR/2007-303, s. 44; no active substantive provisions remain.

Already repealed; no current regulatory burden exists. Reviving repealed sections would reintroduce unnecessary restrictions without benefit.

The regulation document shows all sections (1-50) as repealed by SOR/2007-86 or SOR/2005-285, with no active provisions remaining.

The regulation is already fully repealed and thus obsolete. Keeping repealed provisions in the statute books creates unnecessary clutter and confusion without any benefit.

This regulation consists of sections 1-9, all marked as '[Repealed, SOR/2007-192, s. 1]'. It indicates that these provisions were formally repealed by a 2007 amendment and are no longer in force. The original subject matter of the repealed rules is not stated in the provided text.

These regulations are already repealed and have no legal effect. Keeping them in the codified regulations creates confusion and adds to the complexity and cost of compliance and legal research. Deleting them entirely (if they are still published as part of the Act) would reduce regulatory clutter and make it clearer what rules are currently applicable, thereby improving liberty and reducing the burden on citizens and businesses who might otherwise need to interpret their status. The original flaws that led to repeal are irrelevant now, but the presence of dead letter provisions is a hidden cost in terms of time and legal uncertainty.

This regulatory document contains no current provisions - all sections (1-49) are marked as repealed by various statutory orders (SOR/2007-86, SOR/95-352, SOR/2004-28, SOR/2002-425). It appears to be a skeletal framework or table of contents for legislation that has been fully repealed.

The regulation is entirely repealed and contains no enforceable provisions. Retaining repealed statutes on the books creates legal uncertainty, wastes administrative resources, and may mislead citizens about their legal obligations. This is purely obsolete material with zero remaining legal effect.

Regulation document containing only repeal notices indicating all provisions (sections 1-26, organized in parts) were repealed by SOR/2007-303, section 44. No substantive regulatory text remains.

Fully repealed and obsolete; retaining repealed provisions creates legal uncertainty, wastes administrative resources reviewing dead letter, and undermines clarity of the law.

These regulations have been repealed and are no longer in effect, with the repeal occurring in 2007 under SOR/2007-303, section 44.

Regulations are already repealed and obsolete, representing unnecessary regulatory burden that has been eliminated. No justification exists to maintain repealed regulations that have been successfully removed from the legal framework.