Technical Competency 1.6 – Safety Regulations, Codes, and Standards

Safety forms the ethical and professional foundation of engineering practice. Regardless of discipline or level of responsibility, engineers hold a duty of care to protect human life, the environment, and infrastructure, making safety an inseparable element of sound engineering practice.

Upholding this duty requires engineers to demonstrate competency in understanding and applying safety requirements as defined in applicable codes, standards, and regulations. Technical Competency 1.6 evaluates an engineer’s knowledge of the safety regulations, codes, and standards applicable to their work, and the effectiveness with which these requirements are integrated across design, operations, system planning, construction, and maintenance.

Description of Technical Competency 1.6:

The purpose of Technical Competency 1.6 is to assess an engineer’s ability to identify and apply safety requirements relevant to their area of practice. This includes compliance with applicable regulations and codes, adherence to industry-specific standards, and the use of procedures informed by recognized good engineering practice. Technical competency 1.6, as outlined in the Competency-Based Assessment (CBA) guidelines published by most Canadian professional engineering regulators using the 34-competency framework, is as follows:

“You know the safety regulations, codes, and standards used in Canada or the equivalent international standard”.

The regulators that use the 22-competency framework, such as APEGA, Engineers Yukon, and NAPEG, define this competency as follows:

“…use of engineering knowledge to identify, manage, and control hazards or provide for safe system operations”.

What Are Safety Codes, Regulations, and Standards?

Safety codes, regulations, and standards collectively define the requirements for design, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning of engineered systems. These requirements ensure that engineered systems operate reliably under normal conditions, maintain predictable behavior under abnormal conditions, and protect workers and the public from harm.

Safety Codes:

Safety codes are legally enforceable requirements that define minimum expectations for safe performance of an engineered system or process. In Canada, safety oversight is shared across federal, provincial/ territorial jurisdictions. Federally regulated sectors operate under national legislation, while most infrastructure, industrial, and electrical safety requirements are administered at the provincial or territorial level.

Although the structure varies by jurisdiction, safety codes are generally grouped into common categories such as electrical safety, building and structural safety, pressure equipment, fire protection, and occupational health and safety. Provinces typically adopt national model codes or CSA standards and enforce them through their own legislative frameworks. 

When documenting engineering experience, applicants are not expected to list all applicable codes. Instead, they must demonstrate that they identified relevant safety requirements, understood their intent, and applied them appropriately in design decisions, operational planning, or risk mitigation. Strong examples show how safety codes influenced engineering judgment, not simply that compliance was required.

Safety Regulations:

Safety regulations in Canada operate under distinct federal and provincial jurisdictions, determined by the scope and nature of the safety risks being regulated. These regulations are laws established through legislation to prevent harm to people, the environment, and critical infrastructure by defining mandatory safety obligations, regulatory authority, and accountability. They establish who is legally responsible for managing safety risks, who enforces compliance, and how safety responsibilities are assigned across engineering activities.

Federal safety regulations apply to nationally regulated systems, such as interprovincial transportation and the movement of hazardous materials, while provincial regulations govern safety within provincial boundaries, including utilities, construction, and industrial facilities. Federal legislation, such as the Canada Transportation Act and the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, along with provincial legislation, including the Safety Codes Act in Alberta, the Safety Standards Act in British Columbia, and the Electricity Act and Occupational Health and Safety Act in Ontario, illustrates some examples of regulatory frameworks that establish safety oversight across Canada.

Safety Standards:

Safety standards establish recognized technical benchmarks for managing safety risks in engineering systems and activities. Published by organizations such as but not limited to CSA, IEC, ISO, IEEE, ASME, NFPA, and ASTM, standards define performance expectations, analytical methods, testing and verification requirements, system classifications, and lifecycle considerations related to safety. Unlike regulations, which create legal obligations, or codes, which often prescribe minimum technical requirements, safety standards are typically performance-based, allowing engineers to apply professional judgment to achieve acceptable safety outcomes.

In practice, standards address discipline-specific risks across the full lifecycle of systems and equipment. Examples include IEC 61508 for functional safety of electrical, electronic, and programmable electronic systems; the IEEE C37 series for protection and control of electrical power systems; the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Section VIII) for mechanical and pressure-retaining equipment; CSA S16 for structural steel design and CSA S6 for highway bridge design in civil engineering; and the CSA N285 series for nuclear pressure boundary and safety-related components. These standards reflect industry best practices and are frequently referenced by regulations or adopted within safety codes to support consistent and defensible safety outcomes.

Safety Across the Engineering Lifecycle:

Safety in Planning & Design:

Safety considerations begin at the planning and design stage, where engineering decisions establish the baseline level of risk for the entire lifecycle of a system. In process industries, for example, engineers are required to design systems that can safely transition to a shutdown state when abnormal operating conditions occur. Functional safety standards such as IEC 61508 (CSA C22.2 NO. 61508-1:17) and IEC 61511 (CSA C22.2 NO. 61511-1:17) provide the framework for identifying hazardous scenarios, assigning Safety Integrity Levels (SIL), and designing safety instrumented functions using independent sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements. Regulatory expectations often require that hazardous processes be shut down within defined time limits to prevent escalation, such as thermal runaway or overpressure.

A practical example includes designing an emergency shutdown system for a chemical processing unit where loss of cooling could lead to vessel overpressure. The engineer would perform a hazard and operability study, determine the required SIL for the shutdown function, select appropriate instrumentation and control logic, and verify that the system meets response time and reliability requirements specified in the standard. Demonstrating competency involves explaining how safety standards guided design, architecture, redundancy, diagnostics, and failure response.

Safety in Construction and Commissioning:

During construction and commissioning, safety risks shift from design considerations to immediate and physical hazards present on site. Civil and structural engineering works must comply with occupational safety legislation and recognized standards such as CSA S16 for structural steel and CSA S6 for bridges and heavy infrastructure. Engineers are responsible for ensuring that construction sequencing, temporary supports, and load assumptions remain within safe limits defined during design.

For example, during commissioning of an industrial facility or structure, the engineer may be responsible for verifying that temporary bracing is adequate, that energized equipment is isolated during testing, and that commissioning activities comply with permits and inspection requirements. This may include coordination with inspectors, ensuring pressure testing or energization occurs only after formal approvals, and verifying that safety barriers and exclusion zones are established. Competency is demonstrated by showing how construction and commissioning risks were actively managed through engineering oversight and regulatory compliance.

Safety in Operations and Maintenance:

Once a system enters service, safety depends on well-defined operating limits and maintenance practices. In electrical systems, engineers must address hazards such as electric shock and arc flash by complying with electrical safety regulations and standards. IEEE 1584 is commonly used to perform arc flash hazard analysis, determine incident energy levels, and define required personal protective equipment.

A realistic example includes reviewing an operating facility where maintenance personnel must work near energized high-voltage equipment. The engineer may assess fault levels, calculate arc flash incident energy, define approach boundaries, and specify arc-flash-rated clothing and lockout procedures. Operating and maintenance procedures are then developed to ensure work is performed within safe limits. Demonstrating competency involves explaining how safety risks were evaluated, how standards informed protective measures, and how procedures were implemented to protect workers.

Safety in Decommissioning and Disposal:

Safety responsibilities extend through decommissioning and disposal activities. Industrial and process facilities must comply with environmental regulations such as the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and applicable provincial environmental approvals. These regulations require that wastewater, flue gases, and residual materials be treated to specified limits before discharge.

For example, when decommissioning a process plant, an engineer may be responsible for ensuring that contaminated wastewater is treated to meet regulatory discharge limits and that emissions from dismantling activities are controlled. This may involve designing or verifying treatment systems, coordinating environmental monitoring, and ensuring compliance documentation is in place. Competency is demonstrated by showing how environmental and public safety risks were identified and mitigated during system shutdown and end-of-life activities.

For engineering applicants, competency in safety standards is demonstrated by showing how relevant standards were identified, interpreted, and applied to real engineering problems. Strong examples explain how standards informed design criteria, protection schemes, safety factors, verification activities, or operating limits, and how trade-offs were evaluated when multiple standards applied. Rather than listing standards by name, effective submissions show how standards were used to manage safety risks and support sound engineering judgment within the broader regulatory and code framework.

Guidelines for Internationally Trained Engineers

Engineers trained and practicing outside Canada often develop strong technical and safety competencies using international standards such as IEC and ISO. The Professional Engineering regulator may recognize this experience, provided applicants can clearly demonstrate how their work aligns with Canadian regulatory and standards frameworks.

A key step is understanding how international standards are incorporated into Canadian practice. In Canada, the Standards Council of Canada (SCC) oversees the national standardization system and accredits Standards Development Organizations such as CSA Group, ULC, BNQ, and CGSB. These organizations often adopt IEC and ISO standards through formal processes, resulting in Canadian-adopted standards (for example, CSA standards harmonized with IEC). During adoption, standards may be published as identical, modified, or supplemented with Canadian national deviations to reflect local safety expectations, climate conditions, legal frameworks, or operational practices.

For applicants, this adoption process is not just an institutional background; it provides a practical bridge between international and Canadian experience. When describing past work, engineers should identify the original international standard used, then explain whether a Canadian equivalent exists and how the intent and safety outcomes are comparable. For example, experience applying IEC 61508 for functional safety can be mapped to its Canadian counterpart adopted under CSA C22.2 NO. 61508-1:17 with discussion of how risk assessment, Safety Integrity Levels, and lifecycle controls meet Canadian expectations, even where specific clauses differ.

Applicants should also show awareness that standards do not operate in isolation. In Canada, standards are frequently referenced by codes and regulations, which give them legal force. Electrical safety standards may be referenced by provincial electrical codes, building standards by building codes, and industrial safety standards by occupational health and safety regulations. Demonstrating competency means showing how design, testing, commissioning, and operational decisions were influenced not only by standards, but by the regulatory framework that enforced them.

When describing experience, applicants should clearly distinguish between regulations, codes, and standards. It should be clear how the applicable safety requirements were identified and measures applied in practice. This includes determining whether safety oversight was national or sub-national, understanding mandatory versus performance-based requirements, and selecting standards that were recognized or adopted within the regulatory framework. Where experience was gained outside Canada, applicants should focus on demonstrating equivalency in safety intent, governance, and professional judgment.

Conclusion

Technical Competency 1.6 is demonstrated by showing how safety was built into engineering decisions at every stage of work. Strong examples explain how regulations set legal responsibility, how codes define minimum safety requirements, and how standards guide safe technical solutions. Applicants should focus on how risks were identified, controlled, and documented within the correct jurisdiction.