no-one,
Re.91.495.
This is the same as the current regulation, CAR 166A, the reference to not having to operate into wind was a change to the long standing rules, several years ago, so that Regionals, who have always arrived on the nearest runway to where they have come from, and depart pointing as close to where they are going, regardless of traffic, would no longer be committing an offense each time they operated out of wind.
In short, schedule and cost trumps risk minimization (aka "safety").
As for the example given, don't worry about Part 91, the Act, which is not changing, covers that, S.20A.
If you read the summary document you will see that vety little is new compared to the current rules
I wish. If you believe the summary, you probably believe in the tooth fairy.
Somebody did work out the number of new strict liability criminal offense, but I don't have the numbers.
Tootle pip!!
PS: For wind limitations, see the Limitations section of the AFM.