Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 153, Number 49: GOVERNMENT NOTICES

December 7, 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 addressed

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 Nova Scotia Regulations for the Control of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Electricity Producers in Nova Scotia, 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 December 7, 2019, on the Department of the Environment’s Environmental Registry.

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 a substance — 4,7-methano-1H-indene, 3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro- (dicyclopentadiene), CAS RN footnote 1 77-73-6 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

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

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

And whereas it is proposed to conclude 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.

Public comment period

As specified under subsection 77(5) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, 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

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of dicyclopentadiene

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 4,7-methano-1H-indene, 3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro-, hereinafter referred to as dicyclopentadiene (DCPD). The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) for DCPD is 77-73-6. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment as it met categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.

DCPD does not naturally occur in the environment. According to information submitted in a survey issued pursuant to section 71 of CEPA, the total manufactured quantity reported in Canada in 2011 was over 10 000 000 kg and the total import quantity was in the range of 1 000 000 to 10 000 000 kg.

DCPD is primarily used in industrial applications such as the manufacture of petroleum feedstock, and paints and coatings, and is used as an intermediate in the manufacturing of building or construction materials. It is also identified as a minor constituent in products available to consumers such as automotive engine oil enhancers and gasoline. DCPD may be used in food packaging materials.

The ecological risk of DCPD was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Hazard profiles are based principally on metrics regarding mode of toxic action, chemical reactivity, food web–derived internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical and biological activity. Metrics considered in the exposure profiles include potential emission rate, overall persistence, and long-range transport potential. A risk matrix is used to assign a low, moderate or high level of potential concern for substances on the basis of their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of ERC analysis, DCPD is considered unlikely to cause ecological harm.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from DCPD. It is proposed to conclude that DCPD 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.

Modelled data suggest that the potential for exposure to DCPD via environmental media and food is negligible for the general population of Canada. There is no potential for direct food contact associated with its use in food packaging materials. The predominant sources of DCPD exposure to the general public are from use of automotive engine oil enhancers, refuelling with gasoline, and from evaporative emissions in the vicinity of gasoline service stations and gasoline bulk storage facilities.

DCPD has been reviewed internationally through the Cooperative Chemicals Assessment Programme of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the National Center for Environmental Assessment of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and existing reviews were used to inform the assessment of potential health effects of DCPD. In laboratory studies, potential health effects of DCPD include effects on kidneys and adrenal glands.

Margins between estimated exposure to DCPD from the use of automotive engine oil enhancers, refuelling with gasoline, and from evaporative emissions in the vicinity of gasoline service stations and gasoline bulk storage facilities, and levels at which critical health effects were observed, are considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that DCPD 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.

Proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that dicyclopentadiene does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The draft 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 after screening assessment of a substance — Lotus corniculatus extract, CAS RN footnote 2 84696-24-2 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

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

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on Lotus corniculatus extract pursuant to section 74 of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude 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.

Public comment period

As specified under subsection 77(5) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, 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

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of Lotus corniculatus extract

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 Lotus corniculatus extract. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) for Lotus corniculatus extract is 84696-24-2. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment as it met categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.

Lotus corniculatus is a plant that is also known by the common name of bird’s-foot trefoil. According to information reported in surveys conducted under section 71 of CEPA, Lotus corniculatus extract was not manufactured in or imported into Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg, although Lotus corniculatus seed and flower extracts were notified as being present in cosmetic products in Canada.

The ecological risk of Lotus corniculatus extract was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Hazard profiles are based principally on metrics regarding mode of toxic action, chemical reactivity, food web–derived internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical and biological activity. Metrics considered in the exposure profiles include potential emission rate, overall persistence and long-range transport potential. A risk matrix is used to assign a low, moderate or high level of potential concern for substances on the basis of their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, Lotus corniculatus extract is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from Lotus corniculatus extract. It is proposed to conclude that Lotus corniculatus extract 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.

The general population of Canada may be exposed to Lotus corniculatus extract through the use of cosmetics, including body lotion and lip balm. Some phenotypes of Lotus corniculatus are known to produce cyanogenic glycosides, and the possibility exists that products containing Lotus corniculatus extract could expose consumers to hydrogen cyanide. Although all plant extracts are multiconstituent mixtures of various phytochemicals, based on the known chemistry of Lotus corniculatus, hydrogen cyanide is considered the most toxicologically relevant substance.

Hydrogen cyanide is a systemic toxicant that interferes with the ability of cells to use oxygen by disrupting the electron transport chain, thereby inhibiting cellular respiration. In rodent studies, hydrogen cyanide has effects on the male reproductive system, whereas low levels of hydrogen cyanide exposure are associated with neuropathies and thyroid disturbances in humans. Margins between estimates of cyanide exposure from Lotus corniculatus extract used in cosmetics and critical effect levels are considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases for all endpoints.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that Lotus corniculatus extract 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.

Proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that Lotus corniculatus extract does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The draft 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 a substance — corn, steep liquor, CAS RN footnote 3 66071-94-1 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on corn, steep liquor pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude 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.

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

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of corn, steep liquor

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 corn, steep liquor, hereinafter referred to as CSL. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) for CSL is 66071-94-1. This substance was identified as a priority on the basis of potential human health concerns.

CSL is a substance of unknown or variable composition, complex reaction product or biological material (UVCB). CSL does not occur naturally in the environment; it is a by-product of the corn wet milling process, consisting of the water soluble extracts of corn soaked (steeped) in water. In Canada, CSL is primarily used as a corrosion inhibitor and anti-scaling agent in antifreeze and de-icing products, as a formulant in registered pest control products, and as an animal feed ingredient. It is also used as an attractant in carp bait. According to information submitted pursuant to a CEPA section 71 notice for the 2011 reporting year, CSL was manufactured in Canada in quantities over 10 000 000 kg and was imported into Canada in quantities between 100 000 and 1 000 000 kg.

The ecological risk of CSL was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Hazard profiles are based principally on metrics regarding mode of toxic action, chemical reactivity, food web–derived internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical and biological activity. Metrics considered in the exposure profiles include potential emission rate, overall persistence, and long-range transport potential. A risk matrix is used to assign a low, moderate or high level of potential concern for substances on the basis of their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, CSL is considered unlikely to cause ecological harm.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from CSL. It is proposed to conclude that CSL 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.

With respect to human health, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) found CSL to be of low concern for hazard to human health. Furthermore, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) determined that lactic acid, which is the major individual component of CSL on a dry weight basis, does not present a hazard to human health based on its low hazard profile, and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) concluded that no limit needs to be set for the acceptable daily intake for lactic acid and that there is no concern for human health at current levels of intake. In consideration of the available information from international assessments, CSL is considered to be a substance of low hazard potential, and therefore the risk to human health is considered to be low.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that CSL 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.

Proposed conclusion

It is therefore proposed to conclude that CSL does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The draft 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 a substance — propane, 1-nitro- (1-nitropropane), CAS RN footnote 4 108-03-2 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on propane, 1-nitro- (1-nitropropane) pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude 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.

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

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of propane, 1-nitro-

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 propane, 1-nitro-, hereinafter referred to as 1-nitropropane. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) for 1-nitropropane is 108-03-2. This substance was considered a priority on the basis of other human health concerns.

According to information submitted to a survey issued pursuant to a CEPA section 71 notice, 1-nitropropane was not reported to be manufactured in Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg in 2011, and a quantity ranging from 1 000 to 10 000 kg was imported into Canada in the same calendar year. Reported uses in Canada include use in paints and coatings. The substance is also a solvent in markers and cosmetic nail brush cleaners.

The ecological risk of 1-nitropropane was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Hazard profiles are based principally on metrics regarding mode of toxic action, chemical reactivity, food web–derived internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical and biological activity. Metrics considered in the exposure profiles include potential emission rate, overall persistence, and long-range transport potential. A risk matrix is used to assign a low, moderate or high level of potential concern for substances based on their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, 1-nitropropane is considered unlikely to cause ecological harm.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from 1-nitropropane. It is proposed to conclude that 1-nitropropane 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.

1-Nitropropane was reviewed internationally through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Cooperative Chemicals Assessment Programme and the Screening Information Dataset Initial Assessment Profile was used to inform the health effects section of this screening assessment. The main end point of concern for 1-nitropropane was reproductive/developmental toxicity.

The estimated exposure of the general population in Canada to 1-nitropropane through environmental media and food is negligible. General population exposure to 1-nitropropane can occur from its use as a solvent in marker ink, spray paint primers, and in cosmetic nail brush cleaners. The margins between estimated inhalation exposure from use of products available to consumers to 1-nitropropane and the critical effect levels are considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases. The risk to human health from incidental oral exposure to markers is considered to be low.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that 1-nitropropane 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.

Proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that 1-nitropropane does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

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

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Appointments

Name and position

November 20, 2019

Diane Bélanger
Official Documents Registrar

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Appointments

Name and position

Order in Council

Chatwood, Susan

2019-1095

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council

 

Member

 

Pham, Thao

2019-1193

Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Operations), Privy Council Office

 

November 27, 2019

Diane Bélanger
Official Documents Registrar