Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, III, IV and VI to VIII – Air Navigation Services): SOR/2025-98

Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 159, Number 7

Registration
SOR/2025-98 March 12, 2025

AERONAUTICS ACT

P.C. 2025-401 March 12, 2025

Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, III, IV and VI to VIII – Air Navigation Services) under section 4.9footnote a of the Aeronautics Act footnote b.

Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, III, IV and VI to VIII – Air Navigation Services)

Amendments

1 (1) The definition flight service station in subsection 101.01(1) of the Canadian Aviation Regulations footnote 1 is repealed.

(2) The definitions air traffic advisory services, ATC unit or air traffic control unit, ATS or air traffic services and ATS operations certificate in subsection 101.01(1) of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

air traffic advisory services
means the provision by an ATS unit of aviation safety information, including aviation weather information and serviceability reports in respect of aerodromes and radio navigation aids, but does not include the provision of IFR air traffic control messages; (services consultatifs de la circulation aérienne)
ATC unit or air traffic control unit
means an ATS unit that provides air traffic control services; (unité ATC ou unité de contrôle de la circulation aérienne)
ATS or air traffic services
means air traffic control services, air traffic advisory services and flight information services; (ATS ou services de la circulation aérienne)
ATS operations certificate
means a certificate issued under Part VIII that authorizes its holder to operate an air traffic control unit or a flight services unit; (certificat d’exploitation des ATS)

(3) Paragraph (a) of the definition appropriate frequency in subsection 101.01(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(4) Subsection 101.01(1) of the Regulations is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

ATS unit or air traffic services unit
means an operational facility that provides air traffic services related to the movement of aircraft on the manoeuvring area of an aerodrome or to the operation of aircraft within airspace and for which an ATS site manual has been approved by the Minister under Subpart 1 of Part VIII; (unité ATS ou unité des services de la circulation aérienne)
contact approach
means an approach in which the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft proceeds to the destination aerodrome by following visual references on the surface; (approche contact)
FS unit or flight services unit
means an ATS unit that provides services, other than air traffic control services, for the safe movement of aircraft; (unité FS ou unité des services de vol)
GNSS
means global navigation satellite system; (GNSS)
RNAV or area navigation
means a method of navigation that allows an aircraft to follow a flight path that is within a navigational aid’s range or the capabilities of a self-contained navigation system or that is within a combination of these ranges and capabilities; (RNAV ou navigation de surface)
wake turbulence
means the turbulent air behind an aircraft caused by any of the following:
  • (a) wing-tip vortices,
  • (b) rotor-tip vortices,
  • (c) jet engine thrust stream,
  • (d) rotor downwash,
  • (e) prop wash. (turbulence de sillage)
2 Subpart 1 of Part VIII of Schedule II to Subpart 3 of Part I of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Column I

Designated Provision

Column II

Maximum Amount of Penalty ($)
Individual Corporation
SUBPART 1 — AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES
Section 801.01 5,000 25,000
Section 801.02 3,000 15,000
Section 801.06 5,000 25,000
Section 801.22 5,000 25,000
Section 801.23 5,000 25,000
Subsection 801.30(1) 5,000 25,000
Subsection 801.30(3) 3,000 15,000
Section 801.40 3,000 15,000
Section 801.41 3,000 15,000
Section 801.42 3,000 15,000
Section 801.43 3,000 15,000
Section 801.44 3,000 15,000
Section 801.45 3,000 15,000
Section 801.46 3,000 15,000
Section 801.47 3,000 15,000
Section 801.48 3,000 15,000
Section 801.49 3,000 15,000
Section 801.50 3,000 15,000
Section 801.51 3,000 15,000

3 Paragraph 106.01(f) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

4 Paragraph 107.01(2)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

5 The portion of section 402.07 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

402.07 The holder of an air traffic controller licence may, in accordance with Part VIII and the personnel licensing standards, provide or supervise air traffic control services to

6 Section 600.01 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

appropriate ATS unit
means
  • (a) with respect to aircraft operations within a control zone or on the movement area of an aerodrome,
    • (i) the ATC unit identified for the aerodrome in the Canada Air Pilot or Canada Flight Supplement, or
    • (ii) if the ATC unit is not in operation or an ATC unit is not identified, the FS unit identified in the Canada Air Pilot or Canada Flight Supplement as providing air traffic services to the aerodrome;
  • (b) with respect to aircraft operations within an MF area or on the movement area of an aerodrome, the FS unit identified in the Canada Air Pilot or Canada Flight Supplement as providing air traffic services to the aerodrome; and
  • (c) with respect to any other situation, the ATS unit identified in an aeronautical publication as providing air traffic services in the airspace concerned; (unitĂ© ATS compĂ©tente)
visual approach
means an approach in which the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft operating in VMC proceeds to the destination aerodrome by using visual reference to the surface and, as applicable, by maintaining visual separation from, and avoiding the wake turbulence of, a preceding aircraft. (approche visuelle)

7 Section 601.28 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

601.28 A person who has responsibility for or control over an obstacle to air navigation shall report immediately any deterioration of a marking or any failure or malfunction of a light required under this Division to the appropriate ATS unit.

8 The heading before section 602.30 of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Largage de carburant

9 The portion of section 602.30 of the French version of the Regulations before paragraph (b) is replaced by the following:

602.30 Il est interdit de larguer du carburant d’un aĂ©ronef en vol, Ă  moins que les conditions suivantes ne soient rĂ©unies :

10 Paragraph 602.105(h) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

11 The portion of subsection 602.124(1) of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

602.124 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft shall, except when taking off or landing, or when being vectored by an ATC unit, ensure that the aircraft is operated at or above

12 Subsection 602.125(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

602.125 (1) The pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft shall transmit position reports over compulsory reporting points specified on an IFR chart unless advised by the appropriate ATC unit that the aircraft is an identified aircraft.

13 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 602.127:

Contact Approach — Authorization

602.127.1 A pilot-in-command shall not conduct a contact approach unless authorized by the appropriate ATC unit.

Contact Approach — Conditions

602.127.2 (1) Before requesting authorization to conduct a contact approach, the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft shall

(2) When conducting the contact approach, the pilot-in-command shall

Visual Approach — Authorization

602.127.3 A pilot-in-command shall not conduct a visual approach unless authorized by the appropriate ATC unit.

Visual Approach — Conditions

602.127.4 (1) Before requesting authorization to conduct a visual approach, the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft shall

(2) Before accepting authorization to conduct a visual approach, the pilot-in-command shall

(3) When conducting the visual approach, the pilot-in-command shall

14 Section 602.134 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

602.134 Any person operating an aircraft who wishes to receive air traffic services referred to in section 801.24 in English or French shall make their request known to the appropriate ATS unit by means of an initial radiocommunication in English or French.

15 Section 700.01 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

visual approach
means an approach in which the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft operating in VMC proceeds to the destination aerodrome by using visual reference to the surface and, as applicable, by maintaining visual separation from, and avoiding the wake turbulence of, a preceding aircraft; (approche visuelle)

16 Paragraph 705.46(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

17 Paragraph 705.58(2)(b) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

18 Paragraph 705.59(2)(b) of the French version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

19 (1) The definition air traffic services or ATS in subsection 800.01(1) of the Regulations is repealed.

(2) The definition operational location in subsection 800.01(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

operational location
means the physical location of an ATS unit; (emplacement opérationnel)

(3) Subsection 800.01(1) of the Regulations is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

altitude reservation
means an airspace of defined dimensions within controlled airspace reserved for the use of a civil or military agency during a specified period and whose location is fixed or moves in relation to the aircraft that operate within it; (réservation d’altitude)
conflict resolution
means an air traffic control service provided to avoid potential conflicts between identified aircraft that are in communication with an air traffic controller; (résolution de conflit)
CVFR aircraft
means an aircraft operating in controlled VFR flight; (aéronef CVFR)
identified aircraft
means an aircraft whose position as indicated on a situation display is confirmed by an air traffic controller; (aéronef identifié)
visual approach
means an approach in which the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft operating in VMC proceeds to the destination aerodrome by using visual reference to the surface and, as applicable, by maintaining visual separation from, and avoiding the wake turbulence of, a preceding aircraft. (approche visuelle)

20 Subpart 1 of Part VIII of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Subpart 1 — Air Traffic Services

Division I — Prohibitions
Alcohol or Drugs — Air Traffic Controllers and Flight Service Specialists

801.01 No person shall act as an air traffic controller or a flight service specialist

Air Traffic Control Clearances or Air Traffic Control Instructions

801.02 No air traffic controller shall issue an air traffic control clearance or air traffic control instruction except in accordance with

[801.03 to 801.05 reserved]

Division II — ATS Operations Certificate
Requirement for ATS Operations Certificate

801.06 No person shall operate an ATS unit unless the person holds and complies with the provisions of an ATS operations certificate that authorizes the person to operate the ATS unit.

Application for ATS Operations Certificate

801.07 An application for an ATS operations certificate shall be submitted to the Minister along with a copy of the proposed ATS site manual for each operational location to be listed on the certificate.

Issuance of ATS Operations Certificate

801.08 (1) The Minister shall issue an ATS operations certificate to an applicant, authorizing the applicant to operate an ATS unit, if

(2) The Minister shall approve the ATS site manual if it

Contents of ATS Operations Certificate

801.09 An ATS operations certificate shall contain

Contents of ATS Site Manual

801.10 (1) An ATS site manual shall set out the types of air traffic services that are provided by the holder of the ATS operations certificate at a specific operational location.

(2) An ATS site manual shall contain

[801.11 to 801.20 reserved]

Division III — Provision of Air Traffic Services
Provision of Services in Class A, B, C, D and E Airspace

801.21 (1) The air traffic services provided to aircraft operating in Class A or Class B airspace shall include air traffic control services.

(2) The air traffic services provided to aircraft operating in Class C airspace shall include

(3) The air traffic services provided to aircraft operating in Class D airspace shall include

(4) The air traffic services provided to aircraft operating in Class E airspace shall include

Provision of Air Traffic Services

801.22 No holder of an ATS operations certificate shall provide air traffic services at an operational location unless the location is listed on the ATS operations certificate and, in the case of air traffic control services, the services are provided in accordance with

Provision of Air Traffic Services in Accordance with ESCAT Plan

801.23 If the holder of an ATS operations certificate is notified by the Minister of National Defence of the implementation of the ESCAT plan, the certificate holder shall ensure that air traffic services are provided to aircraft in accordance with the plan.

Units That Provide Air Traffic Services in English and French

801.24 An ATS unit set out in column 1 of the table to this section shall provide air traffic advisory services, relay services of IFR traffic control messages and air traffic control services in the languages set out in columns 2 to 4, respectively.

TABLE
Item

Column 1

Air Traffic Services Unit

Column 2

Language of Service ― Air Traffic Advisory Services

Column 3

Language of Service ― Relay Services of IFR Air Traffic Control Messages

Column 4

Language of Service ― Air Traffic Control Services
1 Gatineau (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
2 ĂŽles-de-la-Madeleine (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
3 Kuujjuaq (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
4 La Grande Rivière (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
5 Mont-Joli (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
6 Rouyn (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
7 Sept-ĂŽles (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
8 Val-d’Or (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
9 Montréal (area control centre) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
10 Montréal (Mirabel International Airport) (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
11 Montréal (Mirabel International Airport) (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
12 Montréal (Pierre Elliot Trudeau International Airport) (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
13 Ottawa (Macdonald-Cartier International Airport) (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
14 Québec (FS unit) English and French English and French Services not available
15 Québec (Jean Lesage International Airport) (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
16 St-Honoré (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
17 St-Hubert (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
18 St-Jean (Quebec) (air traffic control tower) English and French English or French, as used by originating ATC unit English and French
19 Any temporary ATS unit located in Quebec English and French English or French, as used by originating ATS unit English and French
Units That Provide Aeronautical Radiocommunication Services in English

801.25 All ATS units and FS units shall provide aeronautical radiocommunication services in English.

[801.26 to 801.29 reserved]

Division IV — Training and Competency of Flight Service Specialists
Prohibition and Training

801.30 (1) No holder of an ATS operations certificate shall permit a person to act as a flight service specialist at an ATS unit that the holder operates, and no person shall act as a flight service specialist, unless the person

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of a person who, under supervision, acts as a flight service specialist while undergoing

(3) The holder of an ATS operations certificate shall

[801.31 to 801.39 reserved]

Division V — Separation
Wake Turbulence Separation

801.40 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain wake turbulence separation between aircraft, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.40 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, if

Airport Separation

801.41 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation between aircraft at a controlled aerodrome, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.41 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, if one of the aircraft is operating on the manoeuvring area, taking off or landing.

Initial IFR Separation on Departure

801.42 Unless ATS surveillance separation under section 821.06 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards is applied, an air traffic controller shall, on departure, establish and maintain an initial IFR air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.42 of that standard, between

CMNPS Separation

801.43 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain, within Canadian minimum navigation performance specifications (CMNPS) airspace and the CMNPS transition area, air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.43 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between aircraft that can be operated in accordance with CMNPS.

RNPC Separation

801.44 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain, within required navigation performance capability (RNPC) airspace, air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.44 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between aircraft that can be operated in accordance with RNPC.

Separation — Class F Airspace and Restricted Airspace

801.45 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.45 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between Class F airspace or restricted airspace and an IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft.

Separation — Photographic Survey Flights

801.46 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.46 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between an aircraft used to conduct photographic survey flights and an IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft.

Separation — Altitude Reservations

801.47 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.47 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between

Military IFR Aircraft Separation — Formation Flights

801.48 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.48 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between a formation flight conducted by military IFR aircraft and another IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft.

Separation — USAF Bomber Cell Formation Flights

801.49 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.49 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between a United States Air Force (USAF) bomber cell formation and an IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft.

Separation — Turbojet Aircraft Approach and Penetration Turns

801.50 An air traffic controller shall maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.50 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between a turbojet aircraft conducting a jet approach or penetration turn and an IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft and between turbojet aircraft conducting a jet approach or penetration turn.

Separation — Fuel Dumping

801.51 An air traffic controller shall establish and maintain air traffic control separation, in accordance with the requirements of section 821.51 of Standard 821 — Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards, between an aircraft jettisoning fuel in flight and another aircraft.

21 Section 804.22 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

804.22 This Division applies in respect of the making and reporting of the assessment of runway visibility at an aerodrome.

22 Section 804.23 of the Regulations and the heading before it are replaced by the following:

Visibility Markers and Conversion Tables

804.23 (1) Before the operator of an aerodrome gives permission to a person to make or report an assessment of runway visibility at an aerodrome, the operator shall produce a visibility markers chart that meets the requirements of section 824.23 of Standard 824 — Runway Visibility Assessment Standards.

(2) If runway edge lights are used to assess the runway visibility, the operator shall produce a conversion table before giving their permission.

23 Section 900.07 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

900.07 A person who operates a remotely piloted aircraft shall ensure that the appropriate ATS unit or user agency is notified immediately any time the aircraft is no longer under the person’s control and inadvertently enters or is likely to enter into Class F Special Use Restricted airspace, as specified in the Designated Airspace Handbook.

24 Section 901.15 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

901.15 A pilot of a remotely piloted aircraft shall ensure that the appropriate ATS unit or user agency is notified immediately any time the aircraft is no longer under the pilot’s control and inadvertently enters or is likely to enter into controlled airspace.

25 The Regulations are amended by replacing “flight service station” with “air traffic services unit”, with any necessary modifications, in the following provisions:

26 The Regulations are amended by replacing “air traffic control unit or flight service station”, “air traffic control unit, a flight service station”, “air traffic control unit, the flight service station” and “air traffic control unit, flight service station” with “air traffic services unit”, with any necessary modifications, in the following provisions:

27 The Regulations are amended by replacing “air traffic control unit or flight service station”, “air traffic control unit or flight service”, “air traffic control unit, a flight service station”, and “air traffic control unit, flight service station” with “air traffic services unit”, with any necessary modifications, in the following provisions:

28 The French version of the Regulations is amended by replacing “services de la navigation aĂ©rienne” with “services de navigation aĂ©rienne” in the following provisions:

Coming into Force

29 These Regulations come into force on the day after the day on which they are published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues: As part of Transport Canada’s (TC) Regulatory Review Initiative, low-risk longstanding and emerging shortcomings were identified with respect to air navigation services. Failure to address those issues could impact the safe, orderly, and expeditious operation of aircraft within airspace for which Canada is responsible.

Description: The Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, III, IV and VI to VIII – Air Navigation Services) [Regulations] will make 50 amendments to clarify regulatory requirements, facilitate the adoption of innovative technologies, and codify pilot responsibilities with respect to certain flight operations.

Rationale: The Regulations will respond to the Government of Canada (the Government) commitment in Budget 2018 to conduct targeted regulatory reviews, with a focus on identifying and addressing regulatory irritants and bottlenecks to innovation, competitiveness, and economic growth. The Regulations will improve consistency in the interpretation of certain regulatory requirements to enhance compliance and facilitate the adoption of innovative technologies for identifying obstacles to safe landing and take-off of aircraft, as well as for transmitting aircraft positions.

Issues

Several low-risk issues with the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) related to air navigation services were identified through the TC Regulatory Review Initiative (discussed in more detail below). While these issues may not have a substantial impact, failure to address them could negatively affect the safe, orderly, and expeditious operation of aircraft within the airspace for which Canada is responsible. These issues include:

Inefficient, missing, and duplicative definitions: Some definitions in the CARs do not clearly identify the specific types of services provided by the different operational units that provide air navigation services. Furthermore, there are cases of multiple definitions for the same terminology in different parts of the CARs. These inconsistencies could lead to misinterpretation of requirements and, therefore, unintended non-compliance.

Perceived ambiguity in regulatory requirements: Certain requirements do not accurately reflect the policy intent of the CARs. This ambiguity could lead to differences in interpretations of the regulatory requirements, thereby affecting compliance and/or enforcement. For example:

Unnecessarily prescriptive requirements: Certain existing regulatory requirements are unnecessarily prescriptive, which makes the adoption of new/innovative technologies difficult. For example, the requirements regarding obstacle clearance and transmission of position reports are restrictive since they prescribe the use of a particular technology (radar). Such requirements have the practical effect of restricting the adoption of other emerging technologies that can provide the same service more efficiently, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and Multilateration (MLAT).

Unenforceable recognized best practices: Certain pilot-operating practices that are critical to aviation safety (e.g., pilot responsibilities for the conduct of contact and visual approaches), are not specified in the CARs. Rather, they are outlined in TC’s Aeronautical Information Manual (TC AIM) and, therefore, cannot be enforced.

Insufficient reference to incorporated standard: The CARs only require that Air Traffic Control (ATC) clearances and/or instructions be provided in accordance with Standard 821 - Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards (Standard 821). However, it is not always clear for air traffic controllers which part of Standard 821 to use in different situations (scenarios) when issuing clearances and/or instructions. Making broad reference to Standard 821 in the CARs does not take into consideration the structure of the standard, which has dedicated sections for issuing air traffic control clearances or instructions for different scenarios, such as phase of flight (e.g., take-off, landing), type of operation (e.g., fuel dumping, photographic surveys) and type of airspace (e.g., restricted airspace).

Concerns raised by the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations (SJCSR): In May 2011, the SJCSR identified minor issues with requirements in the CARs related to aviation weather services. These issues include inconsistencies between the English and French versions and unclear regulatory text, which may lead to different interpretations and potential regulatory compliance issues.

Structure of the Air Traffic Services subpart: The structure of this subpart makes it challenging to identify the different types of ATS offered by air navigation service providers and the required personnel training and competencies for those services. Although this information is available in the CARs, it is not organized in a way that is easy for ATS personnel to follow.

Inconsistent terminology between the CARS and other TC and NAVIGATION CANADA (NAV CANADA) documents: In some cases, the terminology used in the CARs differs from that used in other TC and NAV CANADA documents, which could lead to different interpretations. This is particularly the case with the French equivalent of “fuel dumping” and “visual approach”. While the CARs use “approche Ă  vue” and “vidange”, TC AIM and NAV CANADA use “approche visuelle” and “largage”.

Background

The Regulations constitute one of many regulatory proposals identified under TC’s Aviation Safety Regulatory Review initiative (the Initiative). The Initiative falls under the Civil Aviation component of TC’s Transportation Sector Regulatory Review Roadmap (the Roadmap) and aims to update and modernize the CARs so that they respond to the needs and emerging priorities of the aviation industry. The Roadmap responds to the Government’s 2018 commitment to undertake a targeted review of regulatory requirements and practices that are bottlenecks to innovation and growth in the Canadian transportation sector.

In summer 2019, a task team comprised of internal and external subject matter experts reviewed over 70 longstanding and emerging irritants related to air navigation services and developed proposed solutions. The Regulations are the result of the exercise conducted by that task team.

Air navigation services in Canada

In 1996, through the Civil Air Navigation Services Commercialization Act, Canada privatized its civil air navigation system by transferring the responsibility for managing its wide expanse of domestic airspace and the North Atlantic oceanic airspace to NAV CANADA. NAV CANADA is the main provider of ATS for non-military aircraft in Canada. TC retained regulatory control of how NAV CANADA provides its services.

NAV CANADA is responsible for providing air navigation services to assist with aircraft take-off from an aerodrome, transit airspace, and with landing safely at a destination aerodrome within Canadian airspace or any other airspace for which Canada has responsibility. These services are provided by different ATS units supported by personnel specially trained for their services. These ATS units include

TC oversight

TC uses regulatory and non-regulatory tools to exercise its oversight of air navigation services.

The CARs are a set of rules that govern civil aviation in Canada with a focus on safety. They were established in 1996, replacing the former Air Regulations and Air Navigation Orders. The CARs are organized in ten Partsfootnote 2 and include requirements related to aircraft identification and registration; operation of aerodromes/airports/heliports; personnel licensing and training; airworthiness; general operating and flight rules; commercial air services; air navigation services; remotely piloted aircraft systems; and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to ICAO’s Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) set out in Volume IV of Annex 16 to the Convention.

Most requirements for providing air navigation services are stated in Part VIII of the CARs and its associated standards (e.g., Standard 821). Other requirements related to ATC services are specified in other sections of the CARs, such as licensing (Part IV) and airspace structure, classification, and use (Part VI). To promote aviation safety, TC also uses non-regulatory tools, such as advisory documents. For example, TC AIM is an advisory document that provides flight crews with useful reference material for aircraft operation in Canadian airspace, including pilot responsibilities for conducting contact and visual approaches. An approach is a series of manoeuvres that a pilot performs to prepare an aircraft for landing. Pilots can be cleared to follow a published instrument procedure, or to fly a contact or visual approach under certain weather conditions, allowing them to manoeuvre visually.

The visibility requirements for conducting a contact approach are less than those for conducting a visual approach. In other words, the visibility must be more favourable when attempting a visual approach. Because of the lower visibility requirements for conducting a contact approach, an air traffic controller remains responsible for making sure that a safe distance is maintained between the aircraft conducting the contact approach and all other Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft. For visual approaches, the pilot will often assume responsibility for making sure that aircraft operate at a safe distance from each other when they have sighted, and have been instructed to follow, another IFR aircraft.

Standard 821 - Canadian Domestic Air Traffic Control Separation Standards

The CARs require air traffic controllers to provide ATC services to aircraft operating within controlled Canadian domestic airspace in accordance with Standard 821. This standard contains procedures for air traffic controllers to follow in helping pilots maintain sufficient spacing between aircraft based on several factors. These factors include phase of flight (take-off, en route, and landing), airspace class, aircraft certification, and type of operation being conducted by one of the aircraft (e.g., fuel dumping).

Objective

The objectives of the Regulations are to

Description

The Regulations will

Streamline and update terminology to facilitate interpretation of regulatory requirements

The following definitions in the CARs will be amended to facilitate the understanding of the services available at different operational units offering air navigation services, as well as their operational requirements.

The following new definitions will be introduced in the CARs to facilitate the understanding of the services available at different operational units offering air navigation services, as well as their operational requirements.

Other new definitions that will be introduced into the CARs include the following.

The global navigation satellite system (GNSS) acronym will be spelled out to facilitate the interpretation of regulatory provisions and associated standards in which the acronym is used.

The French version of the Regulations will be amended by replacing “services de la navigation aĂ©rienne” with “services de navigation aĂ©rienne” in several provisions, to align with the terminology used in the Civil Air Navigation Services Commercialization Act.

As a consequence of introducing a definition for ATS unit, several provisions of the CARs where ATC unit is used will be amended to replace references to “Flight Service Stations” and/or “Air Traffic Control unit” with “ATS unit” so as to align with the inclusive definition of ATS unit. The definition for ATS unit includes “Flight Service Stations” and “ATC units”.

Eliminate perceived ambiguities and enhance consistency in the interpretation of requirements

Certain provisions will be amended to clarify

The French version of the provisions related to fuel dumping in subpart 602 of the Regulations will be amended to adopt the French equivalent for the term “fuel dumping” (largage du carburant) used in Canadian ATS documents and ATS/pilot communications.

The French version of the provisions related to noise operating criteria at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome will be amended to adopt the French equivalent for “visual approach” (approche visuelle) currently used in the TC AIM and Navigation Canada procedures and in all communications between pilots and ATS providers in Canada.

Facilitate the adoption and use of innovative technologies

Unnecessarily prescriptive requirements may limit the adoption and use of emerging technologies. For example, the use of the terms “radar-vectored” and “radar-detected” in requirements intended to keep flights safe from obstacles, suggests that only information/data generated by radar technology can be used to meet the intent of those requirements. The use of this type of terminology precludes the use of other technologies, such as ADS-B and MLAT, which are increasingly being used worldwide to generate the same type of data. ADS-B is now the preferred method of surveillance for ATC units across the United States. As such, the Regulations will remove those terms thereby allowing the use of other technologies and making the CARs more performance based.

Make certain recognized best practices mandatory

The Regulations will codify recognized best practices, in the form of pilot responsibilities, that are critical for safety during the conduct of contact and visual approaches. These responsibilities will include ensuring that pilots are operating under the right meteorological conditions before requesting authorization to conduct either of these approaches, and after receiving authorization, complying with any ATC clearances or instructions. These recognized best practices are described in detail in TC AIM (RAC 9.6 — CONTACT AND VISUAL APPROACHES). The best practices described in the TC AIM are not enforceable as these practices are not regulatory requirements. To date, TC has relied on the good faith of pilots to assume their responsibilities when requesting authorization to conduct these approaches. Because these pilot responsibilities are critical to aviation safety, they will be codified as enforceable rules of conduct in the Regulations.

Facilitate application of procedures in Standard 821 to provide ATC separation

The Regulations will provide additional details making it easier for air traffic controllers to use the appropriate sections of Standard 821 when issuing instructions to ensure that aircraft operate at a safe distance from each other and other aviation obstacles (aircraft separation instructions).

Administrative monetary penalties

The existing requirement to provide aircraft separation instructions in accordance with Standard 821 is designated as enforceable via administrative monetary penalties with a maximum amount of $3,000 for an individual and $15,000 for a corporation. The Regulations will clearly identify which provision of Standard 821 air traffic controllers should use for different aircraft separation scenarios. This change will involve the creation of new sections in the CARs, each of which will be designated as enforceable via administrative monetary penalties (AMPs). Although this will result in an increase in the number of designated provisions, it will not represent any change for affected stakeholders because it will not involve any change to the existing requirement to provide separation instructions in accordance with the standard, which is already designated as enforceable via AMPs.

Address concerns raised by the SJCSR

In response to the SJCSR’s concerns, the Regulations will include minor amendments to

Restructure air traffic service provisions (Subpart 1 of Part VIII of the CARs — ATS)

This subpart regulates the air traffic services in Canadian domestic airspace and international airspace for which Canada has accepted responsibility. The existing structure of this subpart makes it challenging to identify the different types of ATS offered by air navigation service providers and the required personnel training and competencies for those services. The Regulations will reorganize this subpart in favour of a structure that facilitates interpretation and clearly distinguishes ATC separation services from other ATS. The new structure will also clarify the required personnel training and competencies for those services.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Consultations prior to prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I

In spring 2019, TC completed a stakeholder mapping exercise. Given that NAV CANADA is the main provider of ATS for non-military aircraft in Canada, it was identified as the main stakeholder with the most interest and influence in the civil air navigation industry. Midwest-ATC Service Inc. was also identified as a stakeholder, but with limited interest and limited impact. Their limited impact is because they only provide ATC services on a contractual basis to the Canadian Department of National Defence out of the Southport airport in Manitoba.

In summer 2019, a task team comprised of subject matter experts from TC and NAV CANADA was created to review longstanding and emerging irritants related to the provisions of air navigation services.

In August 2021, TC issued a Notice of Proposed Amendments (NPA) through the Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council (CARAC) to give other civil aviation industry stakeholders (e.g., pilots, air operators) an opportunity to provide feedback over a 60-day comment period. The CARAC members include approximately 1100 stakeholders from the industry.

TC received comments from a pilot association, the United States Federal Aviation Authority, and NAV CANADA, and took those comments into consideration when developing this regulatory proposal.

The pilot association agreed with the intent of the proposed amendments but raised questions about the language that would be used in the Regulations in relation to the conduct of contact and visual approaches. TC confirmed that it intended to mirror the language currently used in the TC AIM, and the association was satisfied with this approach. Other suggestions raised during the consultations related to the definitions for ATC unit and Area Navigation. Those suggestions were also taken into consideration in the development of proposed amendments to the CARs. For example, the definition of ATC unit will be amended to clarify that the primary mandate of such a unit is to provide air traffic control services. Also, the ICAO definition for Area Navigation will be adopted as it provides the flexibility to accommodate emerging innovative technologies.

In December 2021, TC contacted Midwest-ATC Service Inc. to determine if the organization had any concern or feedback with respect to the proposed amendments. Midwest-ATC Service Inc. acknowledged receipt of the NPA and indicated it did not have any concerns with the proposed amendments.

Prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I

The Regulations were prepublished in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on December 9, 2023, followed by a 30-day comment period. TC received 21 submissions that included a total of 36 different comments. Feedback was received from NAV CANADA, an industry association, and a flight training institution. Some of the submissions were made anonymously.

Fifteen comments were immaterial as they raised concerns that are not within the scope of the regulatory proposal prepublished in the Canada Gazette, Part I. More specifically, the concerns were about restrictions on persons with a history of mental illness from flying hot air balloons, blimps, drones or other aircraft, concerns about the use of animals to study or test for pollutants from air fuel, and the use of firearms at airports by wildlife control agents. Those topics are not related to the substance of the Regulations.

One of the 21 comments deemed relevant to the Regulations was simply an expression of support for the regulatory proposal by an aviation industry association. The remaining 20 relevant comments touched on services provided at different operational units, definitions, requirements for conducting contact and visual approaches, types of air traffic services provided in different airspace classes, air traffic control separation, language requirements for providing air traffic services, and notifications regarding the deterioration of a marking/lighting on an obstacle to air navigation.

Services provided at operational units

Two comments from NAV CANADA questioned the accuracy of the description of services provided at FICs and FS units in the “Background” and “Description” sections, respectively, of the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS). NAV CANADA argued that the description of FICs erroneously suggested that FICs provide air traffic information, while the description of FS unit should be more specific in scope to include FSS. The “Background” section of this RIAS has been revised to clarify that FICs do not provide air traffic control services. However, the description of FS unit has not been modified to cover FSS because the proposed definition applies to the CARs and is not specific to how NAV CANADA structures its services between FIC, FSS, or other ATS Units. FSS is specific to how NAV CANADA structures its services. However, the definition of FS units in the Regulations has been revised to clarify that FS units do not provide air traffic control services.

Definitions

TC received five comments from NAV CANADA regarding new or amended definitions included in the Regulations. Three of the comments suggested modifications to the proposed definitions for certain terminology and operational units to adequately identify the services they provide. They suggested that the definitions for “FS unit”, “ATS Operations certificate” and “Air traffic advisory services” should be more specific in scope to include FSS. Following discussions with NAV CANADA, non changes were made to these definitions because they apply to the CARs and TC’s oversight program, and are not specific to how NAV CANADA structures its service between FICs, FSSs, or other ATS Units. Furthermore, the proposed definition for the term “ATS Operations Certificate” adequately covers all the services for which an ATS Operations certificate is required in the CARs.

Of the two other NAV CANADA comments on definitions, one requested clarification on the implications of the proposed definitions for “identified aircraft” while the other suggested the need to add a definition for “air traffic control separation”. NAV CANADA thought it was necessary to include a definition for “air traffic control separation” to distinguish the term from “separation” as it is otherwise used in that section of the CARs. However, following discussions between TC and NAV CANADA, it was agreed that there was no need to modify the definition for “identified aircraft” nor was there the need to include a definition for “air traffic control separation”. Regarding the definition of the term “identified aircraft”, it is important that only the ATC unit informs the pilot that the aircraft is identified as it relieves the pilot from the responsibility of making compulsory position reports. The concept of air traffic control separation is well explained in Standard 821, making it unnecessary to include a definition for the term in the CARs.

Contact and visual approaches

The requirements for conducting contact and visual approaches generated a total of seven comments, four from an anonymous source, two from NAV CANADA, and one from a flight training institution.

With respect to contact approaches, one comment suggested that, as is the case in the TC AIM, the definition of contact approach should include the condition that such an approach be authorized only when there is an approved functioning instrument approach or a published GNSS approach for the airport. TC subject matter experts reviewed the suggestion and determined that it was unnecessary given that this condition is already included in Standard 821.

Two comments, one from an anonymous source and one from a flight training institution, identified a duplication of minimum altitude requirements to ensure obstacle clearance in the proposed conditions for requesting contact approaches. These requirements are already captured under instrument flight rule requirements in part VI of the CARs. The Regulations have been amended to eliminate the duplication.

With respect to visual approaches, questions were received on whether TC was implementing a new policy by making operating an aircraft in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and establishing visual contact with the aerodrome of intended landing prerequisites for requesting authorization to conduct visual approaches. TC notes that the introduction of visual approach requirements simply codifies into the CARs requirements for requesting authorization to conduct visual approaches, which are currently in the TC AIM. Therefore, this is not a new policy.

NAV CANADA suggested adding that the pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft may request authorization to conduct a visual approach if they can establish visual contact with a preceding aircraft destined for the same aerodrome of intended landing. However, following discussions between NAV CANADA and TC, both organizations agreed that the suggested addition does not apply to visual approaches and was, therefore, not necessary.

Finally, NAV CANADA suggested that the French term for “visual approach” be changed from “approche Ă  vue” to “approche visuelle” in order to align with terminology used in other TC and NAV CANADA documentation. The TC AIM and NAV CANADA’s procedures use “approche visuelle”, which is also currently used in all communications between pilots and ATS in Canada. In response to the comment from NAV CANADA, the Regulations were updated to replace “approche Ă  vue” with “approche visuelle” when reference is being made to the concept of “visual approach”. The phrase “approche Ă  vue”, as used in other parts of the CARs, refers to a different concept and will be retained where appropriate.

Air traffic services provided in different airspace classes

Proposed amendments to clarify the types of air navigation services available to aircraft operating in different types of airspace generated two comments from NAV CANADA. The organization indicated that the provisions describing the services that were available in Class C and D airspaces were not exhaustive (did not account for non-mandatory services), and erroneously implied that wake turbulence separation is to be applied only to runway operations. The Regulations were updated to indicate that other (non-mandatory) services may be provided in Class C and D airspaces.

Air traffic control separation

NAV CANADA suggested that the conditions on when to apply wake turbulence separation did not cover aircraft taking off from an adjacent airport (an airport that is close enough that an aircraft could potentially encounter the wake turbulence of a heavier aircraft when departing or arriving). Following discussions between TC and NAV CANADA, it was established that the omission was an oversight as wake turbulence separation is required for, and is currently being applied to, aircraft operating from an adjacent airport. The Regulations have been amended to require wake turbulence separation for aircraft taking off from an adjacent airport when another aircraft is flying at an altitude of less than 1,000 feet below a preceding aircraft. As wake turbulence separation is already being applied to aircraft taking off from an adjacent airport, adding the requirement to the Regulations is not expected to carry any incremental impact for air traffic controllers, pilots or operators.

NAV CANADA also suggested that proposed requirements for providing separation between Class F airspace or restricted airspace and an IFR aircraft or CVFR aircraft should be amended to clarify that pilots are responsible for such separation when conducting visual or contact approaches. Following discussions between NAV CANADA and TC, it was concluded that the suggested amendments were not necessary since pilot responsibilities for conducting contact and visual approaches are already covered in part VI of the CARs.

Language requirements for providing air traffic services

NAV CANADA indicated that the reference to temporary ATC unit in item 19 of the table that identifies language requirements for providing air traffic services at different ATS units is restrictive. The use of the term ATC units suggests that only ATC units are set up on a temporary basis, leaving out FS units which could also be set up on a temporary basis and does not cover other temporary ATS units. TC reviewed the table and agrees with NAV CANADA that other types of ATS units, such as FS units, are created on a temporary basis. As such, the Regulations have been amended to use the more inclusive term “temporary ATS units”.

Notifications regarding the deterioration of a marking/lighting on an obstacle to air navigation

NAV CANADA expressed concerns with respect to the proposed amendment to clarify the appropriate operational unit to send reports about any deterioration of a marking or any failure or malfunction of a light related to an obstacle to air navigation. NAV CANADA indicated that while ATS units are the right point of contact for such reports at this time, other operational units could also become a point of contact in the future when new technology is introduced. NAV CANADA was concerned that the Regulations would restrict the adoption of future innovations. Following discussions between NAV CANADA and TC, it was agreed to keep the Regulations as they are because they reflect current practices. Should new technology be introduced in the future, TC agreed to review this specific provision again in collaboration with NAV CANADA.

Summary of changes to the Regulations since prepublication

The following changes have been made to the Regulations since prepublication:

Due to an oversight, an amendment to paragraph 801.01(1)(a) that was included in the proposed Regulations was not captured in the RIAS that was prepublished in the Canada Gazette, Part I. The proposed amendment would have increased the amount of time air traffic controllers and flight service specialists would need to refrain from consuming alcohol before beginning work from eight hours to 12 hours. The objective of this proposed change was to align the requirement for air traffic controllers with the requirement in subsection 602.03(a) which obliges aircraft crew members to refrain from consuming alcohol for 12 hours before starting work. Following prepublication of the proposal, Transport Canada determined that the proposed amendment would require further consideration. As a result, the proposed amendment to paragraph 801.01(1)(a) has been removed from the Regulations pending additional policy work. Given that this change was not captured in the RIAS at prepublication, there is no impact to the cost-benefit analysis as a result of removing the proposed amendment from the Regulations.

Finally, at prepublication, there was an error in the proposed Regulations. The proposed amendment to section 804.22 inadvertently applied only to the French version of the CARs and did not include the intended removal of the reference to “a person” as described in the RIAS at prepublication. This error has been corrected in the Regulations: the reference to “a person” in section 804.22 has been removed to clarify that Division III (Runway Visibility) applies broadly to the assessment and reporting of runway visibility, rather than solely to the person who assesses and reports on it.

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 regulatory proposal is likely to give rise to modern treaty obligations. The assessment examined the geographic scope and subject matter of the regulatory proposal in relation to modern treaties in effect and after examination, no impacts have been identified in respect of the Government’s obligations in relation to Indigenous rights protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, or its modern treaty obligations.

Instrument choice

A careful review by a joint TC and NAV CANADA task team of the issues addressed under this regulatory proposal established that introducing regulatory amendments was the most effective way of resolving them. Given that most of the regulatory amendments are intended to (i) facilitate interpretation of existing regulatory requirements; (ii) make enforceable pilot procedures that are considered critical for aviation safety; and (iii) facilitate the adoption of some air navigation services technologies, amending the CARs was deemed to be the most effective way of resolving the identified issues. As such, no non-regulatory options were considered.

Regulatory analysis

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

Stakeholder profile

The Regulations will primarily affect two stakeholders: NAV CANADA and Midwest-ATC Service Inc.

NAV CANADA is a privately run, not-for-profit company that owns and operates Canada’s civil air navigation system. The organization was identified as the main stakeholder with the most interest and influence in the civil air navigation industry given that the organization is the only provider of ATS for non-military aircraft in Canada.

Midwest-ATC Service Inc. was also identified as a stakeholder, but with limited interest and limited impact given that the organization only provides ATC services on a contractual basis to the Canadian Department of National Defence out of the Southport Airport in Manitoba.

Benefits and costs

The Regulations will clarify regulatory requirements, and avert perceived ambiguity associated with certain terminology, which will result in improved aviation safety due to a better understanding of the regulatory requirements governing the provision of ATS and better compliance with these requirements. The Regulations will also integrate certain best practices, in the form of pilot responsibilities, to further strengthen aviation safety during the conduct of contact and visual approaches and will facilitate the adoption of new technology in the aviation sector, such as ADS-B and MLAT, by removing prescriptive requirements restricting the adoption of new technology to enhance efficiency in airspace management. This would particularly enable airline operators to operate more efficiently by planning their fuel usage and carriage, which would reduce their emissions and therefore better protect the environment. The Regulations are not expected to impose costs on the above-mentioned stakeholders. Even though the Regulations will require pilots to adopt certain best practices, it is expected that they already follow such practices. While there will be minimal cost to government related to learning about the new requirements in the Regulations and developing training material, this cost is not included in the analysis because it will occur before the Regulations are registered. There will also be minimal enforcement costs even though there is sufficient capacity and resources that TC can draw upon. TC will notify stakeholders of the Regulations via email; however, TC’s cost of developing such communication will be minimal.footnote 3

Small business lens

The small business lens does not apply to the Regulations, as there are no associated impacts on businesses.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The Regulations are not related to any commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum nor are they intended to address non-alignment with other jurisdictions. However, the Regulations will enhance alignment with requirements in other countries and regions. For example:

Strategic environmental assessment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, a preliminary scan concluded that a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

A gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) assessment was conducted to determine whether the Regulations will have differential impacts based on identity factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, and sexuality. The Regulations, which will mostly clarify existing requirements and codify existing practices related to the ongoing provision of air navigation services, are not expected to have differential impacts on the basis of identity factors, such as gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, religion, or age. While women are under-represented in the aviation industry, the Regulations are not expected to create or contribute to any barriers to the participation of women in the industry.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement

The Regulations will address simple and non-controversial issues regarding air navigation service requirements in the CARs. Most of the amendments will clarify existing requirements. They are expected to enhance compliance by increasing industry’s understanding of what is required to maintain a safe air transportation service.

The introduction of recognized best practices in the form of pilot responsibilities with respect to conducting contact and visual approaches will not result in proactive verification through routine inspections. Instead, in case of an incident, a reactive approach will be taken to assess whether a pilot’s responsibilities were fulfilled with respect to the approach (contact/visual).

Implementation

The Regulations will come into force the day after publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II. The delayed coming into force is to coordinate with other regulatory amendments that come into force the previous day.

TC’s inspectors are aware of the Regulations and will require minimal training to adapt inspection procedures accordingly.

Stakeholders will be notified of the publication and coming into force of the Regulations through the CARAC via email.

Compliance and enforcement

TC will enforce compliance with the Regulations through the tools in the Aeronautics Act. For contraventions of provisions designated under section 7.6 of the Aeronautics Act, an AMP could be issued. The AMPs carry a maximum fine of $5,000 for individuals and $25,000 for corporations. For provisions of the Regulations that have not been designated, TC may proceed by way of summary conviction, pursuant to section 7.3 of the Aeronautics Act. Alternatively, if it has grounds to do so, TC may proceed with the suspension or cancellation of a Canadian aviation document under sections 6.9, 7, or 7.1.

TC will conduct its implementation, compliance promotion and enforcement activities with existing resources, within existing departmental reference levels.

Contact

Steve Palisek
Acting Director
Regulatory Affairs (AARK)
Civil Aviation
Safety and Security Group
Transport Canada
Place de Ville, Tower C
330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
Telephone: 613‑993‑7284
Toll-free: 1‑800‑305‑2059
Email: TC.CARConsultations-RACConsultations.TC@tc.gc.ca

Website: www.tc.gc.ca