3 responses


0 have signed. Let’s get to 7,500!

The government & TSSA is looking at implementing Path 1 and Path 2 regulations using the Alternate Rules Legislation. Path one updates our current regulations "TSSA Act 2000" using a more detailed rating system by using a safety score created by taking in account hazards, public safety, # of equipment ect not just KW ratings... Majority has accepted this path.

Path 2 is based on a Process Safety Management plan where a company has to design, engineer, an entire risk safety management plan (RSMP) that TSSA has to review, approve and audit. The problem that we all have with this is that TSSA does not currently have the data or resources to fully approve and audit such a plan. The other issue is that we all know how companies perform when left to their own devices. Parts of the plan will be ignored, plant culture will change, management will change, and when money is tight the maintenance budget is the first to be impacted. We have also seen where government agencies have their budgets cut and they download responsibility and where that ends up. You need to look no further than Boeing Max737, water testing (Walkerton), our Long Term Care facilities, etc.

That is why in the public consultation that was done last year there was a 61% acceptance of Path 1 and a 75% rejection of Path 2. Yet the government is pushing ahead despite the rejection of Path 2 by public, union, council, industry association, and is in fact implementing Path 2 before Path 1!
If you are a OE in Ontario, you should take some time to look up Bill 66, the TSSA Act 2000, Path 1 & Path 2 and the IPE website. Changes are coming to our profession, and we should ensure a balanced approach.