Larger test volumes for liquid meters

Summary#

This is a proposed change published in the Canada Gazette on July 4, 2026. It would let inspectors use larger test volumes when checking some liquid flow meters and would remove old paper- and location-specific wording so communications with the regulator can be digital or another method. Comments are invited for 30 days (it is a proposal, not final law).

What it does#

• For positive displacement liquid meters of size 65 mm (2½ inches) or smaller, the proposal raises the maximum known test quantity used in inspections from 900 L to 1 500 L. The existing limits of error for acceptance and in-service checks stay the same.
• It replaces many specific “paper” or “send to this physical address” rules in the Weights and Measures Regulations and the Electricity and Gas Inspection Regulations with technology-neutral wording. That means requirements that currently say “in writing,” “by registered mail,” or “keep original paper copies at X location” would be updated so the method of communication can change over time.
• A few minor fixes are included: cleanup of French wording, correction of obsolete references, and small wording or grammar corrections to align English and French versions.

Who's affected#

• Measurement Canada, which administers these rules.
• Authorized Service Providers (ASPs) — the companies that inspect and certify meters on behalf of Measurement Canada. They will be able to use a wider range of prover sizes (for example 1 000 L or 1 500 L provers).
• Businesses that use volumetric liquid meters in trade — for example fuel sites, water or wastewater operators, and industries that measure liquids for sale.
• Manufacturers and sellers of meters and provers (test equipment).
• Owners and operators covered by the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act, including some utilities, meter manufacturers, and small businesses that use measuring devices.
• If anything is unclear about who is affected, the proposal’s text and Measurement Canada’s guidance would be the place to check.

Why it matters#

• Inspectors and ASPs could test some high-flow meters in one visit using the right-size prover. That should cut the need for workarounds such as slowing flows or using more costly equipment (like pipe provers). That can save time and repair/inspection costs for businesses.
• Allowing larger test volumes better matches modern meter flow rates. That reduces the risk that a meter is unfairly flagged as non-compliant because the old test sizes no longer fit how meters operate.
• Making communication rules technology-neutral reflects current practice (Measurement Canada already issues some approvals electronically). It should reduce unnecessary mailing, make interactions easier, and could save small administrative costs for businesses.
• The regulatory analysis predicts a low overall cost impact. It notes a small annualized administrative saving (presented in 2012 dollars) of around $199, with postage-related savings of about $121. The department also says the changes would not affect Indigenous modern treaty obligations or require an environmental assessment.