Codes Development System Review

The Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC) and the Provincial/Territorial Policy Advisory Committee on Codes (PTPACC) jointly requested a performance review of the coordinated development system for the National Construction Codes (Codes). For the purpose of this performance review, the CCBFC and PTPACC jointly struck the Joint Task Group on Code Development System Review (JTG CDSR) in order to provide for balanced input. The JTG published its first phase report in 2016 focusing on the coordinated code development system.

The current phase of the JTG CDSR work deals with the code development process. The JTG CDSR has made significant progress in reviewing each step of the process from an internal lens as well as from an external perspective. However, to round up and complete the review of the process, the JTG CDSR wishes to have the input from external participants in the national code development process.

The JTG CDSR will incorporate the feedback from the survey into its final report and consider the feedback when forming its final recommendations to the CCBFC in the fall of 2019.

The JTG CDSR agreed to use a survey to gain a more precise view of stakeholders’ perceptions of the code development system and its processes. The results will support the continuous improvement of the code development system into a transparent, open, evidence-based system that promotes and facilitates stakeholder engagement.

The survey questions cover five aspects of the stakeholder’s experience:

  1. Stakeholder function
  2. Completing and submitting Code Change Requests (CCRs)
  3. Participation in public reviews
  4. Membership on the CCBFC and its SCs and TGs
  5. Participation as an observer

1 Stakeholder Function

Balanced input into decision making is one of the key features of the national code development system. The CCBFC makes sure that the input from members and stakeholders is as balanced as possible, such that all relevant sectors and geographical areas of the country are represented.

1.1 Please indicate in which principal role you interact with the national codes development system: (required)
1.2 In this role, are you representing/speaking for an entire association, group or organization? (required)
1.3 Please select one region/province/territory in which you primarily engage with national construction codes?(required)

2 Completing and Submitting Code Change Requests (CCRs)

An important feature of the code development and maintenance process is the extent of public involvement. The development process typically starts with a code change request (CCR) that can be submitted by anyone. The code development process is common for all codes— from the initial proposing and consideration of code change requests to the publication of approved changes. CCRs can be submitted online by anyone.

2.1 Have you provided one or more code change requests (CCRs) for the following codes? (required)
2.1.1 If yes, please select all documents on which you have submitted a CCR previously:
2.1.2 If yes, were you satisfied with how your request(s) was/were handled?
2.1.3 If yes, were the submission instructions clear?
2.1.4 If yes, did you interact with committees or Codes Canada staff regarding your submission?
2.1.5 If yes, did you learn about the final outcome of your request?
2.1.5.1 If not, would you like to be notified?
2.1.5.2 If yes, do you think your request(s) proceeded in a timely manner?
2.2 If you have not submitted a CCR previously, please indicate a reason why not

Select all that apply

3 Participation in public reviews

Public reviews on the final text of proposed changes to the national codes are held in the fall each year (except for code publication years). All changes combined generate on average around 1000 comments. Each comment is considered and addressed by one or more of the technical committees before their final recommendation(s) on the proposal are made to the CCBFC for a decision regarding the incorporation of the proposed change in the next edition of a code. Public review comments can be submitted online by anyone.

3.1 Are you aware that public reviews of proposed changes occur 4 times in a 5-year code cycle? (required)
3.2 Have you participated in a public review? (required)
3.2.1 If you have not participated, is there a reason why not? (Select all that apply)
3.2.2 If you have submitted one or more comments to public review, were you satisfied with how your comments were handled?
3.2.3 If you have submitted one or more comments to public review, were the instructions to participate clear?
3.2.4 If you have submitted one or more comments to public review, did you interact with committees or Codes Canada staff regarding your comment?
3.2.5 If you have submitted one or more comments to public review, did you learn about the final disposition of your comment(s)?
3.2.5.1 If not, would you like to be notified?
3.2.5.2 If yes, do you think your comment proceeded in a timely manner?
3.3 Do you believe that holding public reviews of proposed code changes 4 times in 5 years is too frequent?

4 Participation on the CCBFC and its Committees

Balanced input from stakeholders is – in some ways – achieved through committee members who are nominated and selected based on a balanced matrix by region and by sector. At the same time broader participation in the national system by various associations and institutions also takes place through participation as observers at meetings.

4.1 Have you been or are you currently a member of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes or any of its standing committees (SCs) or Task Groups (TGs)?(required)
4.1.1 If you are not a current or past member, have you been an observer at meetings of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes or any of its standing committees (SCs) or Task Groups (TGs)?
4.1.1.1 If you have not been an observer at a committee meeting, please indicate why? (Select all that apply)
4.1.1.2 If yes, did you receive sufficient advance notice of the time and location of the meeting?
4.1.1.3 Did you have access to the agenda materials?
4.1.1.4 What was the extent of your participation at the meeting? Select all that apply:
4.1.1.5 If you have participated at a face-to-face meeting, how have you participated:
4.1.1.6 If you have participated at a meeting in person, was the venue (city and facility) conducive to your participation?(required)
4.1.1.7 If you have participated via tele/web-conference, was the tele/web-conferencing technology conducive to your participation?
4.1.1.8 If you have answered no to question 4.1.1.6 or 4.1.1.7 please tell us why? Select all that apply:
4.1.2 If you are not a current or past member, have you ever applied to be a candidate on the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes?
4.1.3 If you are not a current or past member, have you ever applied to be a candidate on a Standing Committee or on a Task Group?
4.1.3.1 If you have never applied to be a member on a committee, please tell us why? Select all that apply:
4.1.4 If you have answered yes to question 4.1.3, please select all SCs you applied for:

Select Standing Committees

  
4.1.5 Please select the most relevant reason as to why you applied to SC and TGs:
4.1.6 Were the instructions for the online application process clear?
4.1.7 Did you feel you had sufficient information about the mandate of the committees when applying?
4.1.8 Rate your overall experience with the application process on a scale of 1 to 5: (“5” being the most positive and “1” the least positive).
4.1.9 Was your application handled in an efficient manner (e.g., notification of candidate review/selection process, length of time to receive a response about outcome, etc.)?
4.1.10 Was your application accepted?
4.1.11 Would you consider submitting your name as a candidate again?
  

For any additional information or question, please Contact Codes Canada.

Date modified: