Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 153, Number 19: GOVERNMENT NOTICES

May 11, 2019

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Notice concerning the availability of an equivalency agreement and of a report that summarizes how any comments or notices of objection were dealt with

Pursuant to subsection 10(7) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, notice is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment has entered into and makes available the Agreement on the Equivalency of Federal and Saskatchewan Regulations for the Control of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Producers in Saskatchewan, 2020.

Notice is also hereby given pursuant to subsection 10(6) of the Act of the availability of a report summarizing how comments and notices of objection were addressed further to the 60-day public comment period. The agreement and the report are available as of May 11, 2019, on the Environmental Registry of the Department of the Environment.

Contact

Magda Little
Director
Electricity and Combustion Division
Department of the Environment
351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0H3
Email: ec.electricite-electricity.ec@canada.ca

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of 42 substances of the gas oils and kerosenes group specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) or subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas 41 substances identified in Annex II below are substances identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on one substance pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act and on the 41 substances pursuant to section 74 of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude that the substances meet one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor in Council that these substances be added to Schedule 1 of the Act.

Notice is furthermore given that the ministers have released a risk management scope document for these substances to initiate discussions with stakeholders on the development of risk management actions.

Public comment period

Any person may, within 60 days after publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment written comments on the measure the ministers propose to take and on the scientific considerations on the basis of which the measure is proposed. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be sent to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, by fax to 819‑938‑5212, or by email to eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca. Comments can also be submitted to the Minister of the Environment using the online reporting system available through Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Single Window.

In accordance with section 313 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person who provides information in response to this notice may submit with the information a request that it be treated as confidential.

Jacqueline Gonçalves
Director General
Science and Risk Assessment Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

Gwen Goodier
Acting Director General
Industrial Sectors, Chemicals and Waste Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX I

Summary of the draft screening assessment of the Gas Oils and Kerosenes Group

Pursuant to section 68 or 74 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of substances referred to collectively under the Chemicals Management Plan as the Gas Oils and Kerosenes Group. Forty-two of the substances in this group were identified as priorities for assessment as they met the categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA or were considered a priority on the basis of other human health concerns. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers (CAS RN) footnote 1 and their Domestic Substances List (DSL) names are listed in Annex II.

Gas oils and kerosenes are complex and highly variable combinations of hydrocarbons produced either directly through atmospheric distillation of crude oil or by the cracking of heavier vacuum distillation streams into lighter fractions. Gas oils contain straight and branched chain alkanes (i.e. paraffins and cycloparaffins), cycloalkanes, aromatic hydrocarbons, and mixed aromatic cycloalkanes, predominantly in the carbon range of C9 to C30. Kerosenes consist of hydrocarbons in the range of C9 to C16. The major components of kerosenes are branched and straight chain alkanes and cycloalkanes. The aromatic hydrocarbon content of gas oils and kerosenes can be variable, especially for the gas oils, ranging from less than 1% by weight (wt%) to approximately 98 wt%; however, more typically, the range of aromatic content of gas oils is from 20 to 80%. For kerosenes, aromatic hydrocarbons do not normally exceed 25% by volume, though one kerosene with a CAS RN is defined as consisting predominantly of aromatic hydrocarbons. Gas oils and kerosenes are considered to be of unknown or variable composition, complex reaction products or biological materials (UVCBs).

In site-restricted and industry-restricted uses, gas oils and kerosenes may be consumed at the refinery where they are produced, blended into substances leaving the refinery under different CAS RNs, or transported by truck or train to other petroleum or non-petroleum sector facilities for use as feedstocks or to be blended with other feedstocks, resulting in new CAS RNs. Twenty-seven of the gas oils and kerosenes in this assessment were identified (via their identification through the corresponding CAS RNs) as being used industrially, as petroleum diluents, or in lubricants, petroleum production aids, printing inks, adhesives and sealants, paints and coatings, or as industrial processing aids (e.g. cleaners, degreasers). The aromatic contents of the gas oils and kerosenes used in these industries are unknown; therefore, aromatic contents ranging from 20 to 80 wt% were considered in the ecological assessment. Empirical and modelled aquatic toxicity data for gas oils and kerosenes indicate a moderate to high hazard. The gas oils and kerosenes are also present in products available to consumers, including in automotive and furniture polishes, and household cleaning products. These products have been determined via analytical testing to have a low benzene, toluene, and xylenes content as well as a very low polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon content. Due to their similarity of sources, production, properties and hazard, gas oils and kerosenes have been assessed together in this report.

The ecological screening assessment uses a group-based approach that focuses on gas oils and kerosenes with an aromatic content ranging from 20 to 80 wt%, which includes the 42 substances listed in Annex II that were identified as priorities for assessment. Given that the compositional variability that exists within and between gas oils and kerosenes that have different CAS RNs can lead to their interchangeable use (provided they meet property specifications), the ecological portion of the assessment focuses on the broader class of gas oils and kerosenes.

The uses of gas oils and kerosenes identified as having the highest potential for release to the environment and considered in this assessment are the formulation of lubricants or lubricant additives; formulation of various products including oil–water separation aids, printing inks, adhesives and sealants, processing aids, and paints and coatings; the industrial application of certain formulated products including printing inks, and adhesives and sealants; the use of processing aids by paper mills; the use of processing aids by facilities in other sectors, including plastics and rubber, fabricated metal, machinery, and transportation equipment; and the application of biosolids containing gas oils and kerosenes to agricultural land. Environmental concentrations and compositions of gas oils and kerosenes following wastewater treatment were estimated and compared to modelled predicted no-effect concentrations based on the predicted composition of gas oils and kerosenes in the effluent.

There is a risk of harm predicted to the environment for low- and high-aromatic content gas oils and kerosenes when used by paper mills as processing aids. For the use of processing aids in other industrial sectors, the level of risk to the environment was estimated to be low. A low risk of harm to the environment was also found for the other exposure scenarios considered. Components of gas oils and kerosenes might accumulate in sediment near points of discharge; however, there is no information on their environmental concentration or the impact of these substances to sediment organisms.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is a risk of harm to the environment from gas oils and kerosenes with an aromatic content of 20 wt% or greater. It is proposed to conclude that the gas oils and kerosenes with an aromatic content of 20 wt% or greater meet the criteria under paragraph 64(a) of CEPA as they are entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity. However, it is proposed to conclude that gas oils and kerosenes with an aromatic content of 20 wt% or greater do not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(b) of CEPA as they are not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

A critical health effect for the initial categorization of gas oils and kerosenes was carcinogenicity, based primarily on classifications by international agencies. Based on the likelihood that gas oils and kerosenes contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), the European Commission classifies a number of the gas oils and kerosenes CAS RNs as Category 1B (10 substances) carcinogens (“may cause cancer”), but considers these substances not carcinogenic if they are refined to contain less than 3% w/w PAHs as extracted by dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). Adverse reproductive and developmental effects were also considered in the risk characterization of gas oils and kerosenes.

Gas oils and kerosenes used as ingredients in products available to consumers are refined to contain a low level of PAHs. To confirm that Canadian gas oil and kerosene products available to consumers have low levels of PAHs, 28 readily available products were tested for PAHs. Only residual to low levels (low parts per billion to low parts per million) of PAHs were found. According to the European Commission classification, these gas oils and kerosenes are therefore not considered to be carcinogenic.

Based on the carbon range of the gas oils and kerosenes, other potential components that may lead to health effects are benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX). To determine the level of these substances in Canadian gas oil and kerosene products available to consumers, 24 readily available products were tested for BTEX. Benzene was not detected in any household cleaning product and was present in only very low levels in one engine cleaning product; one anti-rust product; and in a firearm powder, lead and rust removing solvent containing gas oils and kerosenes.

After consideration of the types of products available to consumers and their use patterns, long-term dermal exposure of the general population to gas oils and kerosenes is not expected. However, dermal and inhalation exposure may occur to the gas oils and kerosenes from the intermittent use of such products. The levels of PAHs in these products result in a maximum benzo[a]pyrene equivalent exposure of 0.1 µg/kg-bw per event. A comparison of levels of refined gas oils and kerosenes that Canadians can be exposed to from products available to consumers and levels associated with effects following intermittent acute dermal and oral exposures in laboratory studies were considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure data sets.

After consideration of the types of products available to the general population in Canada and their use patterns, estimates of exposure from inhalation of benzene and other monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from the use of paste varnish and engine cleaners were calculated. A comparison of levels of BTEX components that Canadians can be exposed to from these products and levels associated with effects following intermittent acute inhalation exposure in laboratory studies were considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure data sets.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that the 42 gas oils and kerosenes listed in Annex II do not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA as they are not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that the 42 substances in the Gas Oils and Kerosenes Group meet one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The draft screening assessment as well as the risk management scope document for these substances is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

Annex II

Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) and Domestic Substances List (DSL) name of priority gas oils and kerosenes

CAS RN

DSL name

8008-20-6

Kerosene (petroleum)

64741-43-1

Gas oils (petroleum), straight-run

64741-44-2

Distillates (petroleum), straight-run middle

64741-49-7

Condensates (petroleum), vacuum tower

64741-58-8

Gas oils (petroleum), light vacuum

64741-60-2

Distillates (petroleum), intermediate catalytic cracked

64741-77-1

Distillates (petroleum), light hydrocracked

64741-85-1

Raffinates (petroleum), sorption process

64741-90-8

Gas oils (petroleum), solvent-refined

64741-91-9

Distillates (petroleum), solvent-refined middle

64742-06-9

Extracts (petroleum), middle distillate solvent

64742-13-8

Distillates (petroleum), acid-treated middle

64742-14-9

Distillates (petroleum), acid-treated light

64742-30-9

Distillates (petroleum), chemically neutralized middle

64742-31-0

Distillates (petroleum), chemically neutralized light

64742-38-7

Distillates (petroleum), clay-treated middle

64742-46-7

Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated middle

64742-47-8

Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light

64742-72-9

Distillates (petroleum), catalytic dewaxed middle

64742-77-4

Distillates (petroleum), complex dewaxed middle

64742-79-6

Gas oils (petroleum), hydrodesulfurized

64742-81-0

Kerosine (petroleum), hydrodesulfurized

64742-87-6

Gas oils (petroleum), hydrodesulfurized light vacuum

64742-88-7

Solvent naphtha (petroleum), medium aliph.

64742-91-2

Distillates (petroleum), steam-cracked

64742-94-5

Solvent naphtha (petroleum), heavy arom.

64742-96-7

Solvent naphtha (petroleum), heavy aliph.

68333-88-0

Aromatic hydrocarbons, C9-17

68477-30-5

Distillates (petroleum), catalytic reformer fractionator residue, intermediate-boiling

68477-31-6

Distillates (petroleum), catalytic reformer fractionator residue, low-boiling

68814-87-9

Distillates (petroleum), full-range straight-run middle

68915-96-8

Distillates (petroleum), heavy straight-run

68915-97-9

Gas oils (petroleum) straight-run, high-boiling

68919-17-5

Hydrocarbons, C12-20, catalytic alkylation by-products

68921-07-3 table 1 note a

Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light catalytic cracked

92704-36-4

Gas oils (petroleum), straight-run, clay-treated

128683-26-1

Distillates (petroleum), full-range atm.

128683-27-2

Distillates (oil sand), straight-run middle

128683-28-3

Gas oils (petroleum), full-range

128683-29-4

Gas oils (oil sand), hydrotreated

128683-30-7

Gas oils (oil sand)

129893-10-3

Residues (petroleum), vacuum, hydrocracked, middle distillate fraction

Table 1 note(s)

Table 1 Note a

This substance was not identified under subsection 73(1) of CEPA but was included in this assessment as it was considered a priority on the basis of other human health concerns.

Return to table 1 note a referrer

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of final decision after screening assessment of phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester (TCP), CAS RN footnote 2 1330-78-5, specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(6) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas TCP is a substance identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;

Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on the substance pursuant to section 74 of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is concluded that the substance does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to take no further action on this substance at this time under section 77 of the Act.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the screening assessment of TCP

Pursuant to section 74 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester, commonly known as tricresyl phosphate or TCP (CAS RN 1330-78-5). TCP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping, which includes organic substances that have a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment, as it met the categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.

TCP does not occur naturally in the environment. Results from a 2011 industry survey indicated that TCP was not manufactured in Canada in 2011 but 1 000 to 10 000 kg of neat TCP substance and between 100 and 1 000 kg of TCP in mixtures and commercial products or products available to consumers were imported into Canada. In Canada, confirmed uses of TCP include uses in adhesives and sealants, automobile parts, aircraft applications, fire-resistant lubricant and grease additives, and electrical and electronic applications. Internationally, TCP is used as a flame retardant and plasticizer in household applications such as furniture upholstery backcoating, in adhesives and sealants, automobile parts, aircraft applications, electronic and electrical applications, various extruded manufactured items such as flexible polyvinyl chloride (PVC), vinyl tarpaulins. It is also used as an extreme pressure additive in lubricants and as a fire-resistant hydraulic fluid.

Current commercial products marketed as TCP consist primarily of a mixture of m-TCP and p-TCP isomers, with the o-TCP isomer at approximately 0.05%. The three isomers are considered to possess identical physical chemical properties for the purpose of this assessment. They are characterized by a moderate water solubility and octanol–water partition coefficient, and a low vapour pressure and melting point.

TCP is not shown to be persistent in water, soil, sediment or air based on modelled and limited experimental data. Results from empirical and modelled hydrolysis data suggest a fast degradation rate that increases with rising environmental pH. On the basis of TCP’s low modelled volatility, short half-life in air (18.74 h) and estimated characteristic travel distance of 363 km, it is not expected to reside in air long enough to be atmospherically transported a significant distance from its emission source.

TCP is considered to have low to moderate bioconcentration and bioaccumulation potentials on the basis of empirical fish bioconcentration studies and modelled data. TCP is considered to be rapidly metabolized in fish.

Based on the available empirical ecotoxicity studies and modelled data, TCP is considered to have a moderate to high level of toxicity to aquatic organisms with acute and chronic effects demonstrated from approximately 0.001 to 1 mg/L. There are no sediment, soil or wildlife toxicity data for TCP.

It is expected that TCP may be released to the Canadian environment as a result of industrial processing activities through wastewater. Although TCP can be found in commercial products and products available to consumers, information on release to the environment from this route is limited, and releases are expected to be diffuse and minimal, particularly when considering the low level of use for this substance identified in Canada. Exposure scenarios were developed for industrial releases, where release to water results in minor TCP partitioning to sediment. Although there are no soil toxicity data, exposure to soil-dwelling mammals from the application of biosolids containing TCP was estimated. To address the potential exposure to wildlife predators consuming fish with accumulated TCP, total daily intake modelling was performed for mink and river otters as representative wildlife species. Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with the available toxicity information, were performed and showed a low potential for risk for aquatic organisms, soil-dwelling mammals, and fish-eating mammals.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from TCP. It is concluded that TCP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(a) or (b) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity or that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

No classifications of the health effects of TCP (containing <0.1% of o-TCP) by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. On the basis of available information, TCP is not carcinogenic or genotoxic. On the basis of animal studies, the critical health effects of exposure to TCP are effects on the ovaries and adrenal cortex. The main sources of exposure for the general population in Canada are expected to be environmental media (air, dust, soil, and water); food, including breast milk; and from the use of products available to consumers such as furniture (with treated upholstery or foam) and lubricants.

The margins of exposure between estimates of intake from environmental media, food and from contact with products available to consumers, and effect levels are considered to be adequate to address uncertainties in the exposure and health effects databases. Therefore, it is concluded that TCP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Overall conclusion

It is concluded that TCP does not meet any of the criteria set out under section 64 of CEPA.

The screening assessment for this substance is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations and recommendations for benzene, 1,1′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[2,3,4,5,6-pentabromo- (DBDPE), CAS RN footnote 3 84852-53-9 (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on DBDPE pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is concluded that the substance meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor in Council that this substance be added to Schedule 1 to the Act.

Notice is furthermore given that the ministers are releasing a proposed risk management approach document for this substance on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website to continue discussions with stakeholders on the manner in which the ministers intend to develop a proposed regulation or instrument respecting preventive or control actions in relation to the substance.

Public comment period on the proposed risk management approach document

Any person may, within 30 days after publication of the proposed risk management approach document, file with the Minister of the Environment written comments on the proposed risk management approach document. More information regarding the proposed risk management approach may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be sent to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, by fax to 819‑938‑5212, or by email to eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca.

In accordance with section 313 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person who provides information in response to this notice may submit with the information a request that it be treated as confidential.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the screening assessment of DBDPE

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of benzene, 1,1′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[2,3,4,5,6-pentabromo-. This substance, commonly known as decabromodiphenyl ethane, or DBDPE, is identified by the Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) 84852-53-9. This substance is included in the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping under Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: the application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. DBDPE was identified as a priority for assessment on the basis of ecological concerns identified through the CEPA New Substances program. While this substance is not on the Domestic Substances List (DSL), it has been in commerce in Canada since the transitional period between the establishment of the DSL and the coming into force of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) [January 1, 1987, and July 1, 1994].

On the basis of information gathered from a survey conducted under section 71 of CEPA, as well as data from the New Substances program, DBDPE imports to Canada ranged from 1 000 000 to 10 000 000 kg in 2011, including DBDPE in neat form, in formulations, and in commercial products or products available to consumers. DBDPE is used in Canada as an additive flame retardant in many applications, such as plastic and rubber materials, electrical and electronic equipment, adhesives and sealants.

DBDPE does not occur naturally in the environment. Globally, sources of exposure to DBDPE are primarily waste streams or effluents of manufacturing and processing plants using DBDPE as an additive flame retardant, but also releases from products available to consumers or commercial products in service. DBDPE has become commercially important since the early 1990s as a flame retardant in its own right, and more recently as an alternative for the structurally similar flame retardant decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE).

Generally, DBDPE is characterized by very low water solubility, low vapour pressure, and a very high organic carbon–water partition coefficient and octanol–water partition coefficient. A close structural analogue, decaBDE, was considered for read-across of certain physical-chemical properties, as well as to predict substance behaviour in the environment. DBDPE has been measured in the Canadian environment, as well as internationally, with the highest concentrations near urban and industrial areas. When released to the environment, DBDPE is expected to predominantly reside in soil and sediment. Particle-bound transport may contribute to long-range transport and deposition in remote areas.

Experimental and modelled data indicate that aerobic biodegradation (including in the presence of plants) and anaerobic biodegradation of DBDPE are limited and that DBDPE is expected to be persistent in water, soil, and sediment. Limited DBDPE transformation was also identified in high temperature applications and recycling. Studies report that photodegradation of DBDPE may proceed quickly in solvents, but more slowly in other matrices or substrates, and modelled predictions for atmospheric degradation suggest DBDPE is persistent in air (gas phase half-life greater than four days). Although degradation of DBDPE is expected to be slow or limited, there is uncertainty with respect to ultimate transformation products in the environment. Potential DBDPE transformation products were evaluated based on predictions from photodegradation studies, biodegradation/metabolism modelling and considering the analogue decaBDE. DBDPE debromination was expected to continue from nona- and octa-bromo diphenyl ethanes (BDPEs) through the formation of hepta-, hexa-, and pentaBDPEs (similar to decaBDE), or lead to a hydroxylated nonaBDPE pathway. As there are no experimental data, quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) modelling was conducted to assess the characteristics of these potential DBDPE transformation products. Preliminary modelling indicates DBDPE transformation products can be considered analogues to lower brominated polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and would be persistent, would be bioaccumulative in some cases, and potentially highly toxic to aquatic organisms. The Ecological Screening Assessment on PBDEs (June 2006) concluded that lower brominated PBDEs, namely tetraBDE, pentaBDE and hexaBDE, satisfy the criteria outlined in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA.

There is a limited amount of empirical data on DBDPE accumulation in biota, but these data combined with DBDPE physical and chemical properties indicate a lower potential for bioaccumulation in organisms.

Based on soil chronic toxicity testing, DBDPE has the potential to cause reproductive effects at high concentrations in earthworms as well as effects on plant survival and growth. No effects up to the highest tested dose (5 000 mg/kg) were observed for sediment organisms in chronic toxicity tests. A water (pelagic) critical toxicity value (CTV) was not determined for DBDPE in this assessment, based on uncertain aquatic test results. It is considered that sediment and soils are more relevant for assessing exposure to DBDPE due to its high hydrophobicity and expected fate in the environment.

It is expected that DBDPE may be released to the Canadian environment as a result of industrial processing activities. Additive use of DBDPE in products suggests diffuse emissions may occur from commercial products or products available to consumers and, although there are uncertainties, the rate is assumed to be low in comparison to industrial point sources during incorporation of the substance into products. Industrial scenarios (that considered available site information), with DBDPE release to water and predicted partitioning to sediment and releases to soil, were used to estimate exposure. Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information, were performed for the sediment and terrestrial compartments (soil and wildlife). These analyses showed that current risks posed by DBDPE itself are low.

A risk quotient analysis for DBDPE transformation products was not conducted, given the lack of information on transformation products quantity in Canada. However, the findings of this analysis are consistent with the concerns expressed in the 2010 Ecological State of the Science Report on Decabromodiphenyl Ether in that DBDPE is expected to transform to lower brominated products in a manner similar to decaBDE. Transformation products, which are predicted to be harmful to the environment, are expected to represent a minor fraction relative to parent DBDPE; however, they are similar to predicted/measured fractions of analogue decaBDE debromination products, and if DBDPE levels in the environment continue to increase (e.g. owing to its use as a replacement flame retardant), the pool of potential brominated transformation products could become important.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment for DBDPE and the potential for persistence, bioaccumulation and inherent toxicity of its transformation products, there is a risk of harm to the environment from DBDPE. It is concluded that DBDPE meets the criteria under paragraph 64(a) of CEPA, as it is entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity. However, it is concluded that DBDPE does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(b) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

No classifications of the health effects of DBDPE by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. No chronic or carcinogenicity studies using DBDPE were identified. On the basis of the available information regarding genotoxicity, DBDPE is not considered genotoxic. No adverse effects were observed in sub-chronic animal studies. In two separate developmental toxicity studies, no treatment-related maternal or developmental effects were observed in laboratory animals exposed to DBDPE via the oral route. Limited biomonitoring data in humans are available.

The highest doses tested in laboratory animal studies, with no treatment-related effects, are six to seven orders of magnitude higher than the estimates of exposure to DBDPE from environmental media or products available to consumers for the Canadian general population. This margin is considered adequate to account for uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases. Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that DBDPE does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA.

Overall conclusion

It is concluded that DBDPE meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

It has also been determined that DBDPE meets the persistence criteria, but not the bioaccumulation criteria, as set out in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA. However, DBDPE may contribute to the formation of persistent, bioaccumulative, and inherently toxic transformation products, such as lower brominated BDPEs, in the environment.

The screening assessment and the proposed risk management approach document for this substance are available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations and recommendations for benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2-(2-propenyloxy)- (ATE), CAS RN footnote 4 3278-89-5 (paragraph 68(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas ATE is a substance that was included in the organic flame retardants grouping under the Government of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan due to its use as a flame retardant and potential use as an alternative for other flame retardants that are subject to regulatory controls or phase-out in Canada and/or internationally;

Whereas this substance is not on the Domestic Substances List and is therefore subject to the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers), whereby importing or manufacturing this substance may be subject to pre-market notification and appropriate risk management measures, where applicable;

And whereas the results of the state of the science report indicate that current quantities in use in Canada are unlikely to pose a risk to the environment and to human health,

Notice is hereby given that a summary of the state of the science report on ATE conducted pursuant to paragraph 68(b) of the Act is annexed hereto.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the state of the science report for ATE

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have prepared a state of the science (SOS) report on benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2-(2-propenyloxy)- (ATE) [CAS RN 3278-89-5].

The purpose of this report is to review the current science on ATE and provide an updated analysis of the potential for harm to the Canadian environment and to human health.

This substance is included in the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow ignition and spread of fire. ATE was identified as a priority for action on the basis of potential ecological concerns identified from an evaluation conducted in response to notification received pursuant to the New Substances provisions of CEPA. While this substance is not on the Domestic Substances List (DSL) and is therefore subject to section 81 of the Act, it has been in commerce in Canada since the transitional period between the establishment of the DSL and the coming into force of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) [between January 1, 1987, and July 1, 1994].

ATE does not occur naturally in the environment. ATE is not currently manufactured in Canada. A survey conducted under section 71 of CEPA determined that in 2011, fewer than five respondents imported a total of between 100 000 and 1 000 000 kg of ATE into Canada. Uses of ATE in Canada are presumed to be consistent with international uses, including as a flame retardant for expandable polystyrene (EPS), polyolefin, electronic products, polyamide/polyimide wire insulation, adhesives, coatings and industrial textiles.

According to the Inventory Update Report of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, 4.5 to 230 tonnes (10 000 to 500 000 lbs) of ATE were produced nationally in the United States in 2006. The number of manufacturing, processing, and use sites was reported in the range of 1 to 99. ATE is estimated to have a low production volume (LPV) in the European Union (EU), where LPV is defined as being from 10 to 1 000 tonnes per year.

ATE has a low predicted vapour pressure and moderate Henry’s Law constant, high experimental and predicted log Kow, and log Koc, and very low modelled and empirical water solubility.

ATE has been measured in the Canadian environment (air, water and biota) and internationally (air, water, sediment, biosolids and biota). On the basis of the results gathered from modelling data, ATE is expected to reside predominantly in soil and sediment, depending on the compartment of release, with less than 3% residing in water. ATE has a short atmospheric half-life, with rapid degradation after release to air when in the gas phase. Physical and chemical properties suggest that in the air, a low percentage of the substance will be adsorbed on particles and the majority will be present in the gas phase (99%). Long-range transport models indicate that ATE is not expected to be subject to long-range transport in the environment.

Experimental and modelled biodegradation data indicate that ATE exhibits moderate persistence in water, soil and sediment. Empirical data suggest that ATE is persistent when adsorbed to soils or sediment. Modelled data suggest that ATE will mineralize in months, likely within less than a year.

Modelled data indicate that ATE may bioaccumulate in biota and has the potential for biomagnification.

On the basis of the results gathered from an empirical aquatic toxicity testing, ATE has the potential to cause adverse effects to pelagic organisms (fish and crustaceans). Modelling also suggests potential effects for aquatic organisms at low concentrations. No soil, sediment or wildlife toxicity data were available. No effects (oral LD50) at levels greater than 2 000 mg/kg-bw/day in Sprague-Dawley rats suggests that harm to mammalian wildlife is unlikely for current industrial release.

Four potential ATE transformation products were predicted using environmental fate modelling. Three of the four substances can be identified: 3-(2,4,6- tribromophenoxy)propane-1,2-diol (CAS RN 51286-98-7), benzene, 2,4-dibromo-1-(2-propenyloxy)- (CAS RN 69227-61-8), and 2,4,6-tribromophenol (CAS RN 118-79-6). Results of modelling indicated that some of these transformation products may have potential to accumulate to some extent in fish and that one is also expected to be moderately to highly toxic to algae, daphnids and fish. Two potential metabolites of ATE were predicted, 2,4,6- tribromophenol (2,4,6-TBP) and acrolein. However, there is low confidence in the metabolic prediction as ATE was outside the model domain. Acrolein is not expected to persist or bioaccumulate in the environment, but is acutely toxic to aquatic organisms. 2,4,6-TBP was determined to be persistent in air and biosolids. The potential for bioconcentration of the substance was determined to be moderate and the substance is acutely toxic to aquatic organisms.

ATE is found in commercial products and products available to consumers as an additive and reactive flame retardant. As a reactive flame retardant, release from electronic products is not expected; however, release from products where ATE is used additively (e.g. expandable polystyrene or EPS) would be expected, but would be minimal and diffuse. The greatest releases of ATE to the environment are expected as a result of industrial use (i.e. product manufacturing). Industrial release scenarios developed to provide estimates of exposure to the aquatic environment, including sediment and biosolids media, indicated that the risk of harm to organisms in these media from ATE exposure is low, based on current levels. To evaluate the potential ecological effects of ATE, critical body residue (CBR) calculations were conducted for fish on the basis of the estimated concentration in water from the industrial release scenario. The estimated CBR values were found to be below the threshold for lethality under acute and chronic exposures. However, using the water solubility limit for ATE, these CBR thresholds are exceeded, showing that a toxic hazard owing to its lethality is nevertheless possible at higher concentrations in water.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this SOS report, there is a low potential for harm to the environment from ATE.

For the human health evaluation, exposure of the general population to ATE from environmental media (air, water and food) is estimated to be low. Exposure to the general population from use of products available to consumers (i.e. electronic products and expandable polystyrene) is expected to be minimal based on its properties as a reactive flame retardant in plastic and low potential for exposure with expandable polystyrene containing ATE as an additive flame retardant.

No classifications of the health effects of ATE by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. Limited empirical health effect data for ATE were available. Analyses from several lines of evidence were inconclusive with respect to the potential for genotoxicity or carcinogenicity. Exposure of the general population through environmental media and products available to consumers in Canada is expected to be low; therefore, the potential harm to human health is considered to be low. As an additional line of evidence, it is also noted that the estimated intake of ATE from environmental media and food for the general population is below the lowest threshold of toxicological concern value established.

Overall outcome

Although present estimated levels of exposure of ATE are not indicative of harm to the environment or to human health, there may be concerns if import and use quantities were to increase in Canada.

As ATE is a commercial alternative to other flame retardants, there is a possibility that quantities could increase in Canada. Given that ATE is not on the DSL, the substance will continue to be subject to section 81 of the Act and to the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) of CEPA, which will ensure pre-market notification of any new import or manufacture of this substance and will allow restrictions to be put in place, as needed.

The state of the science report for this substance is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations and recommendations for the substances benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester (TBB), CAS RN footnote 5 183658-27-7, and 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester (TBPH), CAS RN 26040-51-7 (paragraph 68(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas TBB and TBPH are substances that were included in the organic flame retardants grouping under the Government of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan due to their use as flame retardants and potential uses as alternatives for other flame retardants that are presently subject to regulatory controls or phase-out in Canada and/or internationally;

Whereas the substances are not on the Domestic Substances List and are therefore subject to the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers), whereby importing or manufacturing these substances may be subject to pre-market notification and appropriate risk management measures, where applicable;

Whereas under the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) certain restrictions on TBPH, with respect to use, handling, exposure and release, are currently in effect for several notifiers;

And whereas the results of the state of the science report indicate that current quantities in use in Canada are unlikely to pose a risk to the environment and to human health, and that this finding can be attributed, in part, to the control measures and regulatory requirements that currently apply to these substances,

Notice is hereby given that a summary of the state of the science report on TBB and TBPH conducted pursuant to paragraph 68(b) of the Act is annexed hereto.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the state of science evaluation of TBB and TBPH

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have prepared a state of the science (SOS) report for benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester (TBB) and 1,2benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester (TBPH).

The purpose of this report is to review the current science on TBB and TBPH and provide an updated analysis of their potential harm to the Canadian environment and human health.

Both substances are part of the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. The two substances subject to this state of the science report were identified as priorities for action on the basis of potential ecological and human health concerns. Furthermore, TBPH has been in commerce in Canada since the transitional period between the establishment of the Domestic Substances List (DSL) and the coming into force of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) [between January 1, 1987, and July 1, 1994]. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers (CAS RNs), the common name, the abbreviation, and the Non-domestic Substances List (NDSL) or the U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) names of these substances are listed below.

Substance identities of TBB and TBPH

CAS RN

Common name (abbreviation)

NDSL or TSCA name

183658-27-7

2-ethylhexyl-2,3,4,5 tetrabromobenzoate (TBB)

benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester
(TSCA name)

26040-51-7

bis(2-ethylhexyl) 3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalate (TBPH)

1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester (NDSL name)

TBB and TBPH do not occur naturally in the environment. These substances are used primarily as additive flame retardants in polyurethane foams and/or as plasticizers. TBPH can be used alone or in commercial mixtures with TBB (TBB/TBPH mixture). Commercial TBB/TBPH mixtures may contain only TBB and TBPH, or may include organophosphates. CAS RN 219632-53-8 represents the mixture containing only TBB and TBPH.

Based on aggregated data from a survey conducted under section 71 of CEPA and from the New Substances Program, TBB and TBPH imports into Canada ranged between 10 000 and 100 000 kg for each substance in 2011. TBPH production estimates in the United States between 1990 and 2012 were 450 to 4 500 tonnes per year. No production estimates for TBB were available.

The TBB/TBPH mixture containing organophosphates is generally considered as an alternative for the commercial pentabromodiphenyl ether mixture (pentaBDE), which is subject to either regulatory action or reported voluntary phase-out in most jurisdictions. TBPH alone is also used as a plasticizer for polyvinyl chloride and neoprene. In Canada, mixtures containing only TBB and TBPH, or that also include organophosphates, are imported as additive flame retardants in manufactured items containing flexible polyurethane foam (mattresses, pillows, cushions, and any seating, furniture and furnishings), while TBPH alone is also imported as an additive flame retardant.

Although no studies could be found that attempted to measure TBB and TBPH in the soil compartment, these compounds have been measured and detected in all other environmental compartments in North American samples. Higher concentrations in biota have been associated with landfill sites, and both compounds have been detected in various Arctic organisms.

TBB and TBPH are characterized by very low water solubility, very low vapour pressure, and high to very high octanol–water partition coefficients. When released to the environment, TBB and TBPH are expected to predominantly reside in soil and/or sediment, depending on the compartment of release, with a small amount remaining in water.

Experimental and modelled data indicate that the aerobic biodegradation potential of TBB and TBPH is limited, and that these compounds are expected to persist in water, soil, and sediment. TBB and TBPH may persist in the air compartment via sorption to fine particulates and, consequently, be subject to long-range transport, as is further supported by the presence of TBB and TBPH in remote environments.

Empirical data suggest a limited potential for accumulation of TBB and TBPH in the tissues of biota. Metabolism products for TBB and TBPH were detected in in vitro and in vivo bioaccumulation studies.

On the basis of the results of acute and chronic toxicity testing, TBB and TBPH have demonstrated toxicity to aquatic organisms at low concentrations. Toxicity data for soil and sediment organisms were not identified.

TBB and TBPH are expected to be released to the environment from industrial sources and manufactured items primarily through wastewater. Risk quotient analyses integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information were performed for scenarios involving industrial releases and for residential releases from manufactured items. A low potential for risk in the aquatic compartment was calculated for TBPH and a TBB/TBPH mixture. A low potential for risk from TBB was also calculated for small mammals (e.g. shrew) following application of biosolids to soil. Critical body residue analysis for TBB demonstrated a low risk to fish from dietary exposure, and a low risk to mammals (e.g. mink and river otter) consuming those fish.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this SOS report, there is currently a low potential for harm to the environment from TBB and TBPH.

No classifications of the health effects of TBB or TBPH by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. On the basis of the available information on the health effects of TBB or TBPH and the TBB/TBPH mixture, the critical effects for characterization of risk to human health were effects on the reproductive system. The available information did not indicate carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.

The main sources of exposure for the general population in Canada are expected to be environmental media (air, dust, soil, and water); food, including breast milk; and the use of products available to consumers, such as foam-containing furniture.

A comparison of levels between estimates of intake from environmental media, food, and breast milk, and from contact with products available to consumers and critical effect levels is considered adequate to account for uncertainties in the exposure and health effects databases. Therefore, the potential for harm to human health from TBB and TBPH is considered to be low.

Overall outcome

Although present estimated levels of exposure of TBB and TBPH are not indicative of harm to the environment or to human health, there may be concerns if import and use quantities were to increase in Canada.

As TBB and TBPH are among commercial alternatives to high-volume legacy flame retardants, like the polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and noting that TBPH has high-production volume status in other jurisdictions, there is a probability that quantities could increase in Canada. Given that TBB and TBPH are not on the DSL, they will continue to be subject to the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) of CEPA. This will require pre-market notification of any new import or manufacture of these substances and will allow restrictions to be put in place, as needed. In addition, the current manner in which these substances are restricted (e.g. conditions on use, handling, disposal, and release) under the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) will remain in place, ensuring that industrial releases are minimized, and that record keeping of substance use and quantity is maintained.

The state of the science report for this substance is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations and recommendations for 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo- (EBTBP), CAS RN footnote 6 32588-76-4, specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on EBTBP pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is concluded that the substance does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health propose to take no further action on EBTBP at this time.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the screening assessment of EBTBP

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2- ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo- (CAS RN 32588-76-4), commonly known as ethylene bis(tetrabromophthalimide) and denoted by the abbreviation EBTBP. EBTBP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment on the basis of possible human health concerns (related to potential for exposure).

EBTBP does not occur naturally in the environment. Results from an industry survey conducted for the year 2011 indicated that EBTBP was not manufactured in Canada in 2011; however, 1 000 to 10 000 kg of neat EBTBP substance, 10 000 to 100 000 kg of formulation and 100 000 to 1 000 000 kg of EBTBP in manufactured items were imported into Canada.

EBTBP is used in Canada solely as a flame retardant, including in plastic and rubber materials and in the automotive sector. This substance is used as an alternative to decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE). Globally, EBTBP is used as a flame retardant in plastics, rubbers and textiles. This substance is also used in electronic applications and components.

Releases to the environment are likely to occur as a result of the manufacture, transport, use, and disposal of EBTBP or materials containing EBTBP.

Few measured physical and chemical data are available on EBTBP. EBTBP is characterized by low modelled water solubility, and very low modelled vapour pressure and Henry’s Law constant and very high modelled values for the octanol–water partition coefficient. Modelled physical and chemical properties indicate that EBTBP will likely distribute into sediment and soil, binding to the organic fraction of particulate matter. Further, long-range transport in water is not likely for EBTBP because of its limited water solubility and high organic carbon–water partition coefficient. EBTBP is characterized by a short gas phase modelled half-life of 6.5 hours; however, more than 99% of the chemical is expected to partition to the particulate aerosol phase, where degradation in air would be very limited. When adsorbed to atmospheric aerosols, EBTBP is expected to reside in air long enough to be transported through the atmosphere at a significant distance from its emission sources.

There are limited empirical data on persistence, bioaccumulation and environmental toxicity available for EBTBP. Few analogous structures with empirical data are available for EBTBP. However, some experimental persistence and environmental toxicity data for the closest analogue, decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE), were considered as read-across information for these endpoints, which in turn are partly considering read-across information from its structural analogue decaBDE.

According to the modelled and limited experimental biodegradation data, EBTBP is expected to be subject to limited biodegradation. Overall, EBTBP may persist in water, sediment, soil, and atmospheric aerosols, but not in air.

According to the only available fish bioconcentration study, EBTBP has a low to moderate potential for bioconcentration. However, this empirical result was not reliable because the concentrations in this study were higher than the water solubility of EBTBP. Nevertheless, EBTBP has a very high octanol–water partition coefficient and very low water solubility, resulting in limited bioavailability even through dietary exposure. EBTBP is therefore expected to have a low potential to bioaccumulate in organisms.

It is expected that EBTBP may be released to the Canadian environment as a result of industrial processing activities. Although EBTBP can be found in commercial products or products available to consumers, information on releases to the environment from this route is limited, and releases are expected to be diffused and minimal compared to industrial releases. Industrial scenarios, on the basis of available site information, were developed to estimate releases to water. Predicted sediment concentrations were determined according to the equilibrium partitioning. EBTBP exposure in soils was estimated on the basis of a scenario of biosolids application.

Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information, were performed for the sediment and terrestrial compartments (soil). The limited available empirical toxicity data for EBTBP are indicative of a low level of acute toxicity to aquatic and mammalian (rodent) organisms. Considering EBTBP’s low bioavailability, very low water solubility and very high octanol–water partition coefficient, EBTBP is unlikely to have acute toxicity effects on aquatic organisms. A risk analysis was therefore not performed for aquatic organisms. An equilibrium sediment–water partition approach was used to estimate the concentration of EBTBP in bottom sediment. Sediment exposure scenarios were developed as an extension of the industrial aquatic release scenarios to determine equilibrium sediment predicted environmental concentrations (PECs). Soil exposure scenarios were developed as an extension of the aquatic scenarios using biosolids concentration and production rates on the basis of site-specific wastewater treatment plants.

While empirical and modelled biodegradation data suggest EBTBP is very stable in water, soil and sediment, EBTBP is not expected to be highly bioavailable or to highly accumulate in organisms, and is not expected to present risk in the environment on the basis of current estimated exposures.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from EBTBP. It is concluded that EBTBP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(a) or (b) of CEPA as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

No classifications of the health effects of EBTBP by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. No chronic or carcinogenicity studies on EBTBP were found. On the basis of the available information regarding genotoxicity, EBTBP is not genotoxic in vitro.

No adverse effects were observed in laboratory animals exposed orally to EBTBP at the highest doses tested in short-term and sub-chronic studies. In developmental toxicity studies, no treatment-related maternal or developmental effects were observed in laboratory animals exposed to EBTBP via the oral route up to the highest dose tested.

The highest doses tested in laboratory animal studies, with no treatment-related effects, are six orders of magnitude higher than the estimates of EBTBP intake from environmental media for the Canadian general population. This margin is considered to be adequate to account for uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases.

On the basis of the information presented in this screening assessment, it is concluded that EBTBP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Overall conclusion

It is concluded that EBTBP does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The screening assessment for this substance is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations and recommendations for 1,4:7,10-dimethanodibenzo[a,e]cyclooctene,1,2,3,4,7,8,9,10,13,13,14,14-dodecachloro- 1,4,4a,5,6,6a,7,10,10a,11,12,12a-dodecahydro- (Dechlorane Plus), CAS RN footnote 7 13560-89-9, specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on Dechlorane Plus pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is concluded that the substance meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor in Council that this substance be added to Schedule 1 to the Act.

Notice is furthermore given that the ministers are releasing a proposed risk management approach document for this substance on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website to continue discussions with stakeholders on the manner in which the ministers intend to develop a proposed regulation or instrument respecting preventive or control actions in relation to the substance.

Public comment period on the proposed risk management approach document

Any person may, within 30 days after publication of the proposed risk management approach document, file with the Minister of the Environment written comments on the proposed risk management approach document. More information regarding the proposed risk management approach may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be sent to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, by fax to 819‑938‑5212, or by email to eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca.

In accordance with section 313 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person who provides information in response to this notice may submit with the information a request that it be treated as confidential.

Catherine McKenna
Minister of the Environment

Ginette Petitpas Taylor
Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the screening assessment of Dechlorane Plus

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of 1,4:7,10-dimethanodibenzo[a,e] cyclooctene, 1,2,3,4,7,8,9,10,13,13,14,14-dodecachloro-1,4,4a, 5,6,6a,7,10,10a,11,12,12a-dodecahydro-, commonly known as Dechlorane Plus® (Dechlorane Plus or DP), Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) 13560-89-9. DP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: the application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. DP was identified as a priority for assessment on the basis of other human health concerns.

DP does not occur naturally in the environment. On the basis of information gathered from the survey conducted under section 71 of CEPA, DP imports to Canada ranged from 1 000 to 10 000 kg in 2011 for use as an additive flame retardant in several applications. Known international uses of DP include applications in wire and cable jacketing, electronics, appliances, automobiles, hard plastic connectors, and plastic roofing materials, and similar uses are known or expected in Canada. DP is currently marketed as an alternative or replacement for decabromodiphenyl ether (DecaBDE) in a range of flame-retardant applications of electronic wiring and cables, automobiles, plastic roofing materials, and hard plastic connectors. While DP is not produced in Canada, it is a high production volume substance in the United States, and manufacturing in China has recently been reported. Recent estimates of DP production range from 450 000 to 4 500 000 kg import and production in the United States.

DP release to the environment is most likely to occur during the manufacturing, formulation or industrial use stages. Releases to the environment are expected to occur primarily through wastewater, with some release to water directly from industrial sites. Although DP can be found in commercial products or products available to consumers, information on releases to the environment from such products is limited, and releases are expected to be diffuse and low relative to industrial and wastewater treatment system point source releases. Generally, DP is characterized by very low water solubility, low to very low vapour pressure, and a very high organic carbon–water partition coefficient and octanol–water partition coefficient. When released to the environment, DP is expected to predominantly reside in soil or sediment, depending on the compartment of release, with less than 4% remaining in air or water. On the basis of some detection of DP in remote Arctic areas, and a possibly high predicted transfer efficiency (persistent organic pollutant model of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), particle-bound transport may be important for long-range transport of this substance. DP has been measured in the Canadian environment, as well as internationally, in most media.

Experimental and modelled data indicate that aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation of DP is very limited and that DP is expected to be highly persistent in water, soil, and sediment. Modelled predictions for DP in air suggest a half-life of less than one day for the gas phase, but DP is most likely to be sorbed to airborne particulates, and therefore persistence in air could be longer.

Published bioaccumulation and biomagnification studies, as well as widespread measurements in biota, indicate that DP may be highly bioaccumulative and may biomagnify in organisms and food webs.

Given the limited empirical aquatic toxicity data for DP (owing to low solubility in water), the toxicity potential in fish from dietary uptake in water was investigated using a critical body residue (CBR) approach. CBR results suggest DP in biota (Canadian fish tissue) does not reach tissue concentration resulting in acute or chronic lethality in aquatic organisms. Because of the lack of soil and sediment ecotoxicity data for DP, chronic toxicity data for two analogue substances, chlordane (CAS RN 57-74-9) and mirex (CAS RN 2385-85-5), were evaluated. Although these analogues are considered conservative, results suggest that DP can cause effects at low concentrations in sediment and soil organisms.

Industrial scenarios were developed to provide estimates of exposure based on available industrial site information, including potential quantities used. These scenarios involved industrial release to water resulting in DP partitioning to sediment and partitioning to wastewater biosolids, followed by their application to soil. In addition, recent monitoring data from wastewater treatment systems across Canada were used to further develop the exposure analysis. Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information, were performed for sediment and soil organisms, and wildlife. Results of these analyses indicate that DP could represent a risk to sediment-dwelling organisms. In addition, although in most soil scenarios DP posed a low risk to organisms on the basis of current levels of use and release in Canada, at least one soil exposure scenario suggests predicted environmental concentrations of DP approach a level that could result in risk to soil organisms.

The high persistence of DP suggests a potential for build-up in the environment from past and current emissions, resulting in long-term exposures in sediment and soil. DP is expected to strongly adsorb to suspended solids and particulates when released to surface water, either directly from industrial activities or indirectly via wastewater treatment systems, and eventually settle in depositional sediment areas (i.e. sinks). Several studies have reported DP sediment concentrations in the Great Lakes region that exceed the predicted environmental concentrations for sediment developed from industrial scenarios on the basis of quantities used in Canada, suggesting that DP exposure in specific areas of Canada could be underestimated and that precaution is warranted. It should be noted that DP is a high production volume substance in the United States; past and present environmental transport of DP from the northern United States, in particular as a result of manufacturing near the Great Lakes, may therefore contribute to DP exposure in Canada.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is risk of harm to the environment from DP. It is concluded that DP meets the criteria under paragraph 64(a) of CEPA, as it is entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity. However, it is concluded that DP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(b) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

No classifications of the health effects of DP by national or international regulatory agencies were identified. On the basis of the available information on genotoxicity, DP is considered unlikely to be genotoxic. In repeated-dose oral toxicity studies, no adverse effects were observed up to the highest dose level tested in animal studies.

The main sources of exposure for the general population in Canada are expected to be from environmental media (air, dust, soil, and water) and food, including breast milk.

On the basis of the estimates of intake from environmental media and food and no identified adverse health effects, risk from DP for the general population is considered to be low. Therefore, it is concluded that DP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Overall conclusion

It is concluded that DP meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA. DP has been determined to meet the persistence and bioaccumulation criteria as set out in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA.

The screening assessment and the proposed risk management approach document for this substance are available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Final guideline for Canadian drinking water quality for manganese

Pursuant to subsection 55(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, the Minister of Health hereby gives notice of the final guideline for Canadian drinking water quality for manganese. The technical document for this guideline is available on the Water Quality website. This document underwent a public consultation period of 60 days in 2016 and was updated to take into consideration the comments received.

May 11, 2019

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Guideline

The maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) for total manganese in drinking water is 0.12 mg/L (120 µg/L). The aesthetic objective (AO) for total manganese in drinking water is 0.02 mg/L (20 µg/L).

Executive summary

Manganese occurs naturally in the environment and is widely distributed in air, water and soil. It is not found in the elemental form in the environment but can exist in several oxidation states. Manganese may be present in water in the environment from natural sources (rock and soil weathering) or as a result of human activities (such as mining, industrial discharges and landfill leaching). It is used in various industries, including in the steel industry, in the manufacture of various products (e.g. fireworks, dry-cell batteries, fertilizers, fungicides, cosmetics and paints). Manganese may also be added to water as an oxidizing agent (permanganate) or as an impurity in coagulants used in the treatment of drinking water.

This guideline technical document reviews and assesses all identified health risks associated with manganese in drinking water. It incorporates new studies and approaches and takes into consideration the availability of appropriate treatment technology. Based on this review, the drinking water guideline for manganese is a maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) of 0.12 mg/L (120 µg/L), based on infants, the most sensitive population. Although the MAC established in this document is based on infants, this value is intended to protect all Canadians.

Health effects

Manganese is an essential element for humans. Deficiency is considered unlikely in Canada, as adequate amounts are obtained from food. A non-cancer endpoint was chosen for this assessment, as available studies are not adequate to support a link between manganese and cancer. Some studies in humans suggest an association between manganese in drinking water and neurological effects in children; however, these studies can only be used to support the choice of the key health effect. The effects observed in children are consistent with the neurological effects reported in the key animal studies used to establish the MAC.

Aesthetic considerations

Concerns regarding the presence of manganese in drinking water are often related to consumer complaints regarding discoloured water. The aesthetic objective (AO) of 0.02 mg/L (20 µg/L) is intended to minimize the occurrence of complaints related to discoloured water based on the presence of manganese oxides and to improve consumer confidence in drinking water quality.

Exposure

Manganese occurs naturally and is widely distributed in the environment. Canadians can be exposed to manganese through its presence in air, food, consumer products, soil and drinking water, with food being the main source of exposure. However, manganese is more readily absorbed from drinking water than when it is ingested with food. Levels of manganese in fresh water in Canada are usually below 0.1 mg/L, with some spikes reaching into the milligrams per litre range. Higher levels can occur under acidic or reducing conditions that are found in groundwater and some lakes and reservoirs as well as due to industrial discharges. Manganese is generally more prevalent in groundwater than in surface waters. Intake of manganese from drinking water is not expected through either skin contact or inhalation.

Analysis and treatment

There are several analytical methods available for analyzing total manganese in drinking water at levels well below the MAC and the AO. Total manganese includes both the dissolved and particulate forms of manganese in a water sample. Therefore, if the two forms are measured separately, the two concentrations must be added before comparison with the MAC and the AO.

Various methods are available to decrease manganese levels in drinking water to below the MAC. The choice of an appropriate method will depend on the form of manganese present in the source water. Most well-operated and optimized treatment plants can achieve manganese concentrations of 0.015 mg/L or less in the treated water, which would minimize the accumulation of manganese and the associated potential release of manganese or other contaminants in the distributed water. This would help prevent the presence of manganese at consumers’ taps above the AO and reduce consumer complaints related to discoloured water and the potential for higher manganese concentrations in drinking water (which could be above the MAC). It is recommended that utilities establish a treated water goal of 0.015 mg/L or less for the design and operation of manganese treatment plants. Several treatment technologies can be effective for manganese removal at the residential scale; however, there were no treatment units certified specifically for that purpose at the time of this report.

Distribution system

Low levels of manganese in source or treated water (current or historic) may accumulate in the distribution system and periodically lead to high levels of manganese at the tap. In addition, other contaminants (such as heavy metals) that deposit with manganese oxides in the distribution system may also be released into the water and reach consumers’ taps. It is recommended that utilities develop a distribution system management plan to minimize the likelihood of manganese release events in the distribution system. This typically involves maintaining stable water chemistry and minimizing several factors: the manganese levels entering the distribution system, the amount of manganese oxide deposits in the distribution system (through best practices for main cleaning); and physical and hydraulic disturbances.

International considerations

Drinking water guidelines, standards and guidance from other national and international organizations may vary due to the age of the assessments as well as differing policies and approaches.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency published a non-regulatory health advisory of 0.3 mg/L and established a secondary maximum contaminant level of 0.05 mg/L based upon aesthetic considerations for manganese in drinking water. The World Health Organization established a health-based value (HBV) of 0.4 mg/L, but determined it was not necessary to establish a formal drinking water guideline for manganese, since the HBV is well above concentrations normally found in drinking water. The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines report a health-based guideline of 0.5 mg/L and an aesthetic guideline of 0.1 mg/L for manganese in drinking water. In the European Union, the European Commission’s Council Directive lists manganese as an indicator parameter for drinking water, with a parametric value of 0.05 mg/L.

DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

CANADA PETROLEUM RESOURCES ACT

Issuance of exploration licences in the Beaufort Sea

Pursuant to paragraph 17(1)(b) of the Canada Petroleum Resources Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 36 (2nd supplement), the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada advises of her intent to issue new exploration licences to replace existing exploration licences in the Beaufort Sea in order to equitably restore the exploration licence term for a period commensurate with the appointment in 2015 of the Ministerial Special Representative, Rowland Harrison, to undertake an extensive review of the Canada Petroleum Resources Act. The following is a summary of the proposed new exploration licence terms.

Interest Owner

Existing Exploration Licence

Proposed New Exploration Licence

Licence No.

Effective Date

Expiry Date Term

New Effective Date

New Expiry Date

Length of New Term table 1 note 1

Table 1 Notes

Table 1 Note 1

Length includes an additional time of four years between the appointment of the Minister’s Special Representative (July 10, 2015) and the effective date of July 10, 2019, PLUS an additional time as of July 10, 2019, up to the remaining licence term.

Return to table 1 note 1 referrer

Table 1 Note *

denotes representative

Return to table 1 note * referrer

Imperial Oil Resources Limitedtable 1 note *
BP Exploration Operating Company Limited
ExxonMobil Canada Ltd.

EL476

September 1, 2012

July 31, 2019

July 10, 2019

July 31, 2023

4 years
21 days

Imperial Oil Resources Limitedtable 1 note *
BP Exploration Operating Company Limited
ExxonMobil Canada Ltd.

EL477

September 1, 2012

September 30, 2020

July 10, 2019

September 30, 2024

5 years
2 months
20 days

BP Exploration Operating Company Limited

EL478

September 1, 2012

September 30, 2020

July 10, 2019

September 30, 2024

5 years
2 months
20 days

BP Exploration Operating Company Limited

EL479

September 1, 2012

September 30, 2020

July 10, 2019

September 30, 2024

5 years
2 months
20 days

Chevron Canada Limited

EL481

September 1, 2012

August 31, 2021

July 10, 2019

August 31, 2025

6 years
1 month
21 days

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp.

EL483

September 1, 2012

September 30, 2020

July 10, 2019

September 30, 2024

5 years
2 months
20 days

Franklin Petroleum Canada Limited

EL485

September 1, 2012

August 31, 2021

July 10, 2019

August 31, 2025

6 years
1 month
20 days

Franklin Petroleum Canada Limited

EL488

March 6, 2013

March 5, 2022

July 10, 2019

March 5, 2026

6 years
7 months
23 days

Franklin Petroleum Canada Limited

EL489

March 6, 2013

March 5, 2022

July 10, 2019

March 5, 2026

6 years
7 months
23 days

Franklin Petroleum Canada Limited

EL491

March 6, 2013

March 5, 2022

July 10, 2019

March 5, 2026

6 years
7 months
23 days

Franklin Petroleum Canada Limited

EL496

June 1, 2014

May 31, 2023

July 10, 2019

May 31, 2027

7 years
10 months
21 days

For further information, please contact the Director, Petroleum and Mineral Resources Management Directorate, Natural Resources and Environmental Branch, Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, Ontario K1A 0H4.

May 11, 2019

The Honourable Carolyn Bennett, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE

Appointment opportunities

We know that our country is stronger — and our government more effective — when decision-makers reflect Canada’s diversity. The Government of Canada has implemented an appointment process that is transparent and merit-based, strives for gender parity, and ensures that Indigenous peoples and minority groups are properly represented in positions of leadership. We continue to search for Canadians who reflect the values that we all embrace: inclusion, honesty, fiscal prudence, and generosity of spirit. Together, we will build a government as diverse as Canada.

We are equally committed to providing a healthy workplace that supports one’s dignity, self-esteem and the ability to work to one’s full potential. With this in mind, all appointees will be expected to take steps to promote and maintain a healthy, respectful and harassment-free work environment.

The Government of Canada is currently seeking applications from diverse and talented Canadians from across the country who are interested in the following positions.

Current opportunities

The following opportunities for appointments to Governor in Council positions are currently open for applications. Every opportunity is open for a minimum of two weeks from the date of posting on the Governor in Council Appointments website.

Position

Organization

Closing date

Chief Administrator

Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada

 

Chairperson

Asia-Pacific Foundation of Canada

 

Chairperson and Director

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

 

Chairperson

Canada Foundation for Sustainable Development Technology

 

Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson

Canada Industrial Relations Board

 

Chairperson

Canada Lands Company Limited

 

President and Chief Executive Officer

Canada Lands Company Limited

 

Chairperson (joint federal Governor in Council and provincial Lieutenant Governor appointment)

Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

 

Chairperson

Canada Science and Technology Museum

 

Vice-Chairperson

Canada Science and Technology Museum

 

Board Member (Anticipatory)

Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization

 

Chairperson (Anticipatory)

Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization

 

Chief Executive Officer (Anticipatory)

Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization

 

Vice-Chairperson (Anticipatory)

Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization

 

Chairperson

Canadian Dairy Commission

 

Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson and Director

Canadian Energy Regulator

 

Chief Executive Officer

Canadian Energy Regulator

 

Lead Commissioner, Deputy Lead Commissioner and Commissioner

Canadian Energy Regulator

 

Pay Equity Commissioner

Canadian Human Rights Commission

 

Chairperson

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

 

Permanent Member

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

 

Regional Member (British Columbia/Yukon)

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

 

Regional Member (Quebec)

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

 

Chairperson and Member

Canadian Statistics Advisory Council

 

President (Chief Executive Officer)

Canadian Tourism Commission

 

President and Chief Executive Officer

Defense Construction (1951) Limited

 

Chairperson

Farm Credit Canada

 

President and Chief Executive Officer

Farm Credit Canada

 

Vice-Chairperson

Farm Products Council of Canada

 

Chairperson

The Federal Bridge Corporation Limited

 

Commissioner

Financial Consumer Agency of Canada

 

Chairperson

First Nations Financial Management Board

 

Chief Commissioner

First Nations Tax Commission

 

Deputy Chief Commissioner

First Nations Tax Commission

 

Director

Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation

 

Director (Federal)

Hamilton Port Authority

 

Sergeant-at-Arms and Corporate Security Officer

House of Commons

 

Member

International Authority

 

Commissioner and Chairperson

International Joint Commission

 

Member (appointment to roster)

International Trade and International Investment Dispute Settlement Bodies

 

Vice-Chairperson

Invest in Canada Hub

 

Chief Executive Officer

The Jacques Cartier and Champlain Bridges Incorporated

 

Librarian and Archivist of Canada

Library and Archives of Canada

 

Member

National Capital Commission

 

Government Film Commissioner

National Film Board

 

President

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

 

Auditor General of Canada

Office of the Auditor General

 

Chief Accessibility Officer (Anticipatory)

Office of the Chief Accessibility Officer

 

Ombudsperson

Office of the Ombudsperson for National Defence and Canadian Forces

 

Director (Federal)

Oshawa Port Authority

 

Chairperson

Pacific Pilotage Authority

 

Chief Executive Officer

Parks Canada

 

Vice-Chairperson and Member

Patented Medicine Prices Review Board

 

Member

Payment in Lieu of Taxes Dispute Advisory Panel

 

Commissioner

Public Service Commission

 

Member and Alternate Member

Renewable Resources Board (Gwich’in)

 

Member and Alternate Member

Renewable Resources Board (Sahtu)

 

Principal

Royal Military College of Canada

 

Vice-Chairperson (all streams)

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

 

Chairperson

Telefilm Canada