Canadian Parliament Debate on Standards Incorporated by Reference

Loading
loading...

Canadian Parliament Debate on Standards Incorporated by Reference

October 7, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , , ,
No Comments

What happened to Canada?

“The Jack Pine” | Tom Thomson (1916) | National Gallery of Canada

 

Originally posted January 2014

In these clips — selected from Canadian Parliamentary debate in 2013 — we observe three points of view about Incorporation by reference (IBR); a legislative drafting technique that is the act of including a second document within a main document by referencing the second document.

This technique makes an entire second (or referenced) document a part of the main document.  The consensus documents in which we advocate #TotalCostofOwnership concepts are incorporated by reference into legislation dealing with safety and sustainability at all levels of government.  This practice — which many consider a public-private partnership — is a more effective way of driving best practices for technology, and the management of technology, into regulated industries.

🍁

In Canadian debate over incorporation by reference, former Member of Parliament Craig Scott drew an important distinction between incorporating a fixed document and incorporating one “as amended from time to time.”

A fixed, or static, incorporation places an identifiable edition of an external standard into law. When the standards developer publishes a new edition, that revision does not automatically acquire legal force. The responsible public authority must act again to adopt it. 

An ambulatory incorporation works differently. When a standard is incorporated “as amended from time to time,” later revisions may become binding law automatically—without another regulatory amendment or further intervention by Parliament.

Scott’s concern was therefore not incorporation by reference itself, but who effectively exercises legislative authority after incorporation.  If a private, international or standards-development organization can revise a document whose future editions automatically become enforceable, part of the law-making function has effectively moved outside government.

The distinction also raises questions of public access and historical certainty. Citizens must be able to know not only what an incorporated standard requires today, but which edition constituted binding law at a particular time.

The engineering advantage is obvious: ambulatory incorporation keeps regulation current. The constitutional question is equally clear: who changes the law?

.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Vm0eQotyzo0

Parent legislation — such as the Higher Education Act of 1965, the Clean Air Act and the Energy Policy Act – almost always require intermediary bureaucracies to administer the specifics required to accomplish the broad goals of the legislation.  With the gathering pace of governments everywhere expanding their influence over larger parts of the technologies at the foundation of national economies; business and technology standards are needed to secure that influence.  These standards require competency in the application of political, technical and financial concepts; competencies that can only be afforded by incumbent interests who build the cost of their advocacy into the price of the product or service they sell to our industry.  Arguably, the expansion of government is a reflection of the success of incumbents in business and technical standards; particularly in the compliance and conformity industries.

About two years ago, the US debate on incorporation by reference has been taken to a new level with the recent statement released by the American Bar Association (ABA):

16-164-Incorporation-by-Reference-ABA-Resolution-and-Report

The American National Standards Institute responded to the ABA with a statement of its own.

16-164-ANSI-Response-to-ABA-IBR-06-16 (1)

The incorporation by reference policy dilemma has profound implications for how we safely and economically design, operate and maintain our “cities-within-cities” in a sustainable manner but, admittedly, the results are only visible in hindsight over a time horizon that often exceed the tenure of a typical college or university president.

A recent development — supporting the claims of ANSI and its accredited standards developers — is noteworthy:

The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) manages a website — Standards.GOV — that is a single access point for consensus standards incorporated by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations: Standards Incorporated by Reference Database.   Note that this database does not include specific reference to safety and sustainability codes which are developed by standards setting organizations (such as NFPA, ICC, IEEE, ASHRAE and others) and usually incorporated by reference into individual state public safety and technology legislation.


LEARN MORE:

 

Illumination 400

October 6, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
,
No Comments

IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee

NEC Section 226.6 Conductor Size and Support (B) Festoon Lighting

EC&M Article 225: Outside Branch Circuits

Electrical Time: Definition of Festoon Lighting

“Starry Night Over the Rhône” 1888 Vincent van Gogh


Today we refresh our understanding of the moment in illumination technologies for outdoor lighting systems— related but different from our exploration of building interior illumination systems in Illumination 200.  Later in 2024 we will roll out Illumination 400 (Holiday illumination) and Illumination 500 which explores litigation related to public illumination technology.  As cities-within-cities the shared perimeter of a campus with the host municipality has proven rich in legal controversy and action.

Illumination technology was the original inspiration for the electric utility industry; providing night-time security and transforming every sector of every economy on earth.  Lighting load remains the largest component of any building’s electric load — about 35 percent– making it a large target for energy regulations.

Our inquiry begins with selections from the following documents…

International Electrotechnical Commission TC 34 Lighting

IEC 60364 Electrical Installations in Buildings

2023 National Electrical Safety Code

IEEE P3001.9 – Recommended Practice for the Design of Power Systems Supplying Lighting Systems in Commercial and Industrial Facilities

Institution of Engineering and Technology: Recommendations for Energy-efficient Exterior Lighting Systems

2023 National Electrical Code: Article 410  (While the bulk of the NEC concerns indoor wiring fire hazards, there are passages that inform outdoor lighting wiring safety)

2019 ASHRAE 90.1: Chapter 9 Lighting

Illumination Engineering Society: Various titles

ISO/TC 274 Light and lighting

Salt Water River Project: Outdoor Lighting Standards

US DOE-EERE Building Energy Codes Program

…and about 20 other accredited, consortia or ad hoc standards developers and publishers aligned principally with vertical incumbents.  Illumination was the original inspiration (i.e. the first “killer app”) for the electrical power industry in every nation.  Its best practice literature reflects a fast-moving, shape-changing domain.

Click in today with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Upper Wharfedale Primary Federation School District Yorkshire Dales

McGill University: Before electricity, streets were filled with gas lights

Outdoor lighting systems can be owned and maintained by different entities depending on the context and location. Here are some examples of ownership regimes for outdoor lighting systems:

  1. Public ownership: In this case, outdoor lighting systems are owned and maintained by the local government or municipal authority. The lighting may be installed in public spaces such as parks, streets, and other outdoor areas for the safety and convenience of the public.
  2. Private ownership: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned by private individuals or organizations. For example, a business owner may install outdoor lighting for security or aesthetic reasons, or a homeowner may install outdoor lighting in their garden or yard.
  3. Co-owned: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned jointly by multiple entities. For example, a residential community may jointly own and maintain outdoor lighting in their shared spaces such as parking areas, community parks, or recreational facilities.
  4. Utility ownership: Outdoor lighting systems may be owned and maintained by utility companies such as electric or energy companies. These companies may install and maintain street lights or other lighting systems for the public good.
  5. Third-party ownership: In some cases, a third-party entity may own and maintain outdoor lighting systems on behalf of a public or private entity. For example, a lighting contractor may install and maintain lighting in a public park on behalf of a local government.

The ownership regime of an outdoor lighting system can have implications for issues such as installation, maintenance, and cost-sharing. It is important to consider ownership when designing and implementing outdoor lighting systems to ensure their long-term effectiveness and sustainability.

More

International Commission on Illumination

National Electrical Manufacturers Association

National Electrical Contractors Association

Representative Specifications

Sam Houston State University | Division 26500 Interior and Exterior Lighting

University of Delaware | Division 265100 Interior Lighting

Cal Poly University San Luis Obispo | Division 265100 Interior Lighting

Relevant Research

Enhancing the Sustainability of Outdoor Floodlighting for Cultural Heritage Buildings

The Performance and Impact of LED Floodlights in an Outdoor Electrical Substation During Misty Weather Conditions

Replacement of HPS Luminaires with LED Luminaires for the Lighting Requirements of an Outdoor Electrical Substation

 

Education, Health & Sport Essential Works

October 6, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Abstract: A new committee* under the Industrial and Commercial Power Systems (I&CPS) Department of the Industry Applications Society (IAS) received approval at the October 2014 IAS Annual Meeting, in Vancouver. This committee will be dedicated to the special needs and characteristics of the Educational and Healthcare segments of the US and World economies. For example, these two segments of the US economy, alone, annually spend $60 billion on electrical and telecommunication systems; yet, these two segments are either underrepresented, or not represented at all, in most electrical engineering forums, code writing, and/or standards writing institutions. (May 2015)

A few of the University’s Electrical Engineers

APERÇU
Education, Health & Sport Essential Works

The change from IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee
to IEEE Education, Health & Sport Essential Works Committee
is more than a change of label. It better describes the territory.

“Facilities” directs attention toward buildings. Our work has never stopped at
the building envelope. Universities, schools, hospitals and athletic enterprises
depend upon networks of electrical power, communications, water, transportation,
energy storage, emergency systems and digital infrastructure extending across
campuses and into the surrounding public utility fabric.

Facilities describes the containers;
Essential Works describes the systems that make them work.

Essential Works is therefore the larger and more accurate idea.
It directs attention toward the infrastructure necessary for an educational
settlement to function continuously, safely and economically.

Replacing Healthcare with Health broadens the
field as well. Health encompasses hospitals and clinical facilities but also
research laboratories, public health, student health, rehabilitation, wellness
and the increasingly interconnected medical and research systems found on
university campuses.

Adding Sport recognizes another substantial class of infrastructure.
Stadiums, arenas, natatoria, field houses and outdoor athletic complexes present
demanding problems of illumination, power quality, emergency power, broadcasting,
communications, crowd safety, refrigeration and increasingly sophisticated
digital systems.

The three words — Education, Health & Sport — describe enduring
human activities. Essential Works describes the technical systems
that sustain them.

That is closer to what the committee actually does: not merely standards for
facilities, but engineering for the complex settlements in which people
learn, heal, compete and live.

 

“The Boy Friend”

October 5, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , ,
No Comments

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Cheesy Hamburger Skillet

October 5, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
,
No Comments

Michigan Central

C

CLICK HERE FOR RECIPE

MSU’s Extension’s Beef Production program supports Michigan’s beef industry through research, education, and outreach to enhance producer profitability, sustainability, and quality of life. It focuses on key areas like nutrition, genetics, grazing management, health, reproduction, and economics. Notable efforts include advancing grass-fed beef systems, feedlot management, and beef x dairy crossbreeding.

Conducted at facilities such as the Lake City and Upper Peninsula Research Farms, the program offers workshops, resources (e.g., pricing tools, disease prevention guides), and youth education via 4-H market beef projects and family recipes.

Family Housing

October 5, 2026
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Fitchburg State University: Expansion of On-Campus Family Housing

University of Washington: UH4 Housing Project

University of Santa Cruz: Early Education Center

“Kindergarten” 1885 Johann Sperl

Today at the usual hour we examine recent case studies of residential building projects that support family formation.

University of Santa Cruz: New child care center, student housing

University of Kentucky: Graduate and Family Housing

University of Utah: Sunnyside Apartments – Family and Graduate Housing

University of Colorado Boulder: Graduate and Family Housing

The Married Student

Once upon a time the American university once understood that a student might also be a husband and father.

After World War II, the G.I. Bill brought millions of veterans into higher education. They were older than the customary undergraduate population and many arrived with wives and children. At the University of Michigan, roughly one-third of the first great wave of returning veterans were married. The University responded with Veterans Village, apartments at Willow Run and, eventually, the Northwood married-student communities.

The University of Idaho and others managed much the same problem. Veterans returned to campus with wives and young children, overwhelming housing designed principally for single students. Idaho assembled three temporary “Vet Villages” from trailers and surplus federal buildings. Those makeshift communities were eventually succeeded by purpose-built married-student and family housing.

These were not peripheral welfare programs. They were physical accommodations to a national policy: educate returning American servicemen without requiring them to postpone marriage and family life while doing so.

Michigan’s Northwood and Idaho’s family housing therefore belong to an important architectural and social tradition. The university did not assume that education and family formation occupied separate stages of life. It built for both.

As universities again expand family housing, the useful question is not simply how many apartments they are building. It is whether the institution still understands the purpose that gave rise to them: making higher education compatible with forming and supporting a young family — an American family.  

Related:

Maternity Metrix

Homophily Michigan

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Standards Michigan
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content