Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 156, Number 6: GOVERNMENT NOTICES
February 5, 2022
DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Notice of intent to amend the Domestic Substances List under subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999
Whereas the 10 substances set out in this notice are specified on the Domestic Substances List;footnote 1
Whereas the Minister of the Environment previously published orders in the Canada Gazette, Part II, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA),footnote 2 amending the Domestic Substances List to indicate that subsection 81(3) of that Act applies to the substances;footnote 3, footnote 4
Whereas the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) are satisfied that the 10 substances are only being manufactured or imported into Canada by any person for a limited number of uses;
And whereas the ministers suspect that the information concerning a significant new activity in relation to any of the 10 substances set out in this notice may contribute to determining the circumstances in which these substances are toxic or capable of becoming toxic within the meaning of section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999,
Therefore, notice is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment intends to amend the Domestic Substances List pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 by varying the requirements under the significant new activities provisions in relation to those substances set out in this notice.
Public comment period
Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and can be submitted using the online reporting system available through Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Single Window, by mail to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, or by email to substances@ec.gc.ca.
The final screening assessments for these substances may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.
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.
Marc D’Iorio
Assistant Deputy Minister
Science and Technology Branch
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment
ANNEX
1. The note to Group B in Part 2 of the Domestic Substances List is proposed to be amended by deleting the following in numerical order from Group B:
- 101-61-1 S′
- 131-18-0 S′
- 492-80-8 S′
- 569-61-9 S′
- 10034-93-2 S′
- 15545-48-9 S′
- 24602-86-6 S′
- 25321-14-6 S′
- 55290-64-7 S′
2. Part 2 of the List is proposed to be amended by deleting substance “79-07-2 S′” in Column 1 and the significant new activity in Column 2 opposite the reference to that substance.
| Column 1 Substance |
Column 2 Significant new activity for which substance is subject to subsection 81(3) of the Act |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
10034-93-2 S′ |
|
COMING INTO FORCE
4. This Order would come into force on the day on which it is registered.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
(This explanatory note is not part of the Notice of Intent.)
Description
The Notice of Intent (NOI) is an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed amendments to the Domestic Substances List (DSL) to vary the significant new activity (SNAc) requirements of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) for 10 substances, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Act.
In January 2015, a public commitment was made by the Department of the Environment and the Department of Health to review all SNAc requirements that were adopted between 2001 and 2014.footnote 5 The purpose of the review is to ensure that SNAc requirements are consistent with current information, policies and approaches.footnote 6 Resulting changes to SNAc requirements are expected to provide greater clarity of scope and improve ease of compliance, while protecting Canadians and their environment.
This NOI reflects the results of the review of SNAc requirements for certain substances identified as High Hazard, Not in Commerce.footnote 7 Of the 10 substances, 9 were included in Order 2012-87-06-02 Amending the DSL, published in May 2013, which applied the SNAc provisions to 52 substances with high hazard potential, and 1 substance was included in Order 2010-87-05-02 Amending the DSL, published in November 2010, which applied the SNAc provisions to 2-chloroacetamide.
Within 60 days of publication of the NOI, any person may submit comments to the Minister of the Environment (the Minister). These comments will be taken into consideration during the development of the Order amending the DSL to vary the SNAc requirements for 10 substances.
The DSL amendments are not in force until the Order is adopted by the Minister, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of CEPA. The Order must be published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.
Applicability of the proposed Order
At this time, it is proposed that the Order amending the DSL would require any person (individual or corporation) engaging in a significant new activity in relation to the substances listed in tables 1A, 1B and 2 below to submit a Significant New Activity Notification (SNAN) containing all of the information prescribed in the Order at least 90 days prior to the import, manufacture or use of the substance for the significant new activity.
| CAS RN table a2 note a |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
|
Any activity involving, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of any Group B substance, other than an activity related to
|
|
Table a2 note(s)
|
||
| CAS RN |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
10034-93-2 |
Any activity involving, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of any Group B substance, other than an activity related to
|
|
| CAS RN |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
| 79-07-2 | Any activity to which the Pest Control Products Act does not apply and which involves, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of Acetamide, 2-chloro- (2-chloroacetamide). |
1. In relation to any substance in Column 1 opposite to this section, any activity involving, in a calendar year, more than 100 kg of the substance. |
|
Any activity involving, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of any Group B substance, other than an activity related to
|
In order to address human health concerns for six of the substances listed in tables 1A and 1B, the proposed Order would target the use of the substances in consumer products to which the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) applies, as well as in cosmetics as defined in section 2 of the Food and Drugs Act (FDA). In addition, in order to address both human health and environmental concerns resulting from indirect exposures, the proposed Order would target the use of the substances in any other activities not related to consumer products involving the substances in a quantity greater than 1 000 kg in a calendar year.
For the 4 substances with previous pesticidal uses (Table 2), any activity related to drugs and use in drugs would now require notification in the proposed Order definition. For the 6 substances in tables 1A and 1B, any activity related to drugs and use in drugs would now require notification in the proposed Order definition when these substances are involved in a quantity greater than 1 000 kg of the substance in a calendar year. The SNAc Order, which is currently in force for 9 of the 10 listed substances, contains an exclusion for any activity related to drugs and use in drugs.
The order for the four substances with previous pesticidal uses (Table 2) would also target any activity involving more than 100 kg of the substance, in a calendar year, including special category uses. Special category activities include use as a research and development substance, site-limited intermediate substance, or an export-only substance. The terms “research and development substance” and “site-limited intermediate substance” are defined in subsection 1(1) of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers). An export-only substance is a substance that is manufactured or imported in Canada and destined solely for foreign markets.
Activities not subject to the proposed Order
Activities involving the use of the six substances in tables 1A and 1B in the manufacture of consumer products or cosmetics that contain the substance at a concentration of less than either 0.1% or 1%, depending on the substance, would be excluded from the application of the proposed Order. Similarly, the importation of the substance in a consumer product or cosmetic would not be subject to the proposed Order if the total quantity of the substance used is 10 kg or less in a calendar year. Additionally, for activities involving the use of the substance in any other activities not related to consumer products, if the total quantity used is less than 100 kg or 1 000 kg, depending on the substance, that use would also be exempt from the proposed Order.
For the six substances listed in tables 1A and 1B, the proposed Order would not apply to the use of the substance in “special category activities.” Special category activities include use as a research and development substance, a site-limited intermediate substance, or an export-only substance. These activities would not require the submission of a SNAN as these activities are not expected to result in exposure to the general population in Canada. The terms “research and development substance” and “site-limited intermediate substance” are defined in subsection 1(1) of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers). An export-only substance is a substance that is manufactured or imported in Canada and destined solely for foreign markets.
In relation to all substances, the proposed Order would not apply to uses of the substances that are regulated under the Acts of Parliament listed in Schedule 2 of CEPA, including the Pest Control Products Act, the Fertilizers Act and the Feeds Act. It would also not apply to transient reaction intermediates, impurities, contaminants, partially unreacted intermediates, or in some circumstances to items such as, but not limited to, wastes, mixtures or manufactured items. However, it should be noted that individual components of a mixture may be notifiable under the proposed Order. See subsection 81(6) and section 3 of CEPA, and section 3 of the Guidance Document for the Notification and Testing of New Chemicals and Polymers for additional information.
Four of the substances in this NOI are known to have previous pesticidal uses. Chloroacetamide (CAS RN 79-07-2) had previously been registered as a pest control product and this use was subject to provisions under the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA).footnote 8 Pesticidal uses of chloroacetamide have been discontinued in Canada since 2009, and it is no longer registered under the PCPA. The three other substances (CAS RNs 15545-48-9, 24602-86-6, and 55290-64-7) have never been registered under the PCPA. Any future pesticidal uses of these four substances would be subject to the PCPA and require premarket assessment.
Information to be submitted
The NOI sets out the proposed requirements for information that would need to be provided to the Minister 90 days before the day on which the substance is imported, manufactured or used for a significant new activity. The Department of the Environment and the Department of Health will use the information submitted in the SNAN to conduct human health and environmental assessments within 90 days after the complete information is received.
The information requirements in the proposed Order relate to general information in respect of the substance, details surrounding its use, and exposure information. Some of the proposed information requirements are set out in the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers).
As an outcome of the review process, some of the information requirements in the current Orders for nine of the substances are proposed to be varied (all except chloroacetamide, CAS RN 79-07-2). While some information requirements are proposed to be removed, additional toxicity testing requirements (one benthic study in addition to two pelagic studies) are proposed to be included in any SNAN to provide hazard data on a relevant species for these nine substances as they may partition to sediment.
Additional guidance on preparing a SNAN can be found in section 4 of the Guidance Document for the Notification and Testing of New Chemicals and Polymers.
Compliance
When assessing whether or not a substance is subject to the SNAc provisions,footnote 9 a person is expected to make use of information in their possession or to which they have access. The phrase “to which they have access” means information in any of the notifier’s offices worldwide or other locations where the notifier can reasonably have access to the information. For example, manufacturers are expected to have access to their formulations, while importers or users of a substance, mixture, or product are expected to have access to import records, usage information and the relevant Safety Data Sheet (SDS).footnote 10
Although an SDS is an important source of information on the composition of a purchased product, it should be noted that the goal of the SDS is to protect the health of workers in the workplace from specific hazards of chemical products. Therefore, an SDS may not list all product ingredients that may be subject to an order due to human health or environmental concerns. Any person requiring more detailed information on product composition is encouraged to contact their supplier.
If any information becomes available that reasonably supports the conclusion that a substance is toxic or capable of becoming toxic, the person who is in possession or who has knowledge of the information and is involved in certain activities with the substance is obligated, under section 70 of CEPA, to provide that information to the Minister without delay.
In cases where a person takes possession and control of a substance from another person, they may not be required to submit a SNAN, under certain conditions, if their activities were covered by a SNAN submitted by the supplier on behalf of its clients.
Any person who transfers the physical possession or control of a substance subject to an Order should notify all persons to whom the physical possession or control is transferred of the obligation to comply with the Order, including the obligation to notify the Minister of any significant new activity and to provide all the required information outlined above.
A pre-notification consultation (PNC) is available for notifiers who wish to consult during the planning or preparation of their SNAN to discuss any questions or concerns they have about the prescribed information and test plans.
Where a person has questions concerning their obligations to comply with a notice or Order, believes they may be out of compliance, or would like to request a PNC, they are encouraged to discuss their particular circumstances by contacting the Substances Management Information Line.footnote 11
CEPA is enforced in accordance with the publicly available Compliance and Enforcement Policy for the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. In instances of non-compliance, consideration is given to the following factors, when deciding which enforcement measure to take: nature of the alleged violation, effectiveness in achieving compliance with CEPA and its regulations, and consistency in enforcement.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Notice of intent to amend the Domestic Substances List under subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999
Whereas the 46 substances set out in this notice are specified on the Domestic Substances List; footnote 1
Whereas the Minister of the Environment previously published orders in the Canada Gazette, Part II, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), footnote 2 amending the Domestic Substances List to indicate that subsection 81(3) of that Act applies to the substances; footnote 12, footnote 13, footnote 14, footnote 15
Whereas the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) are satisfied that the substances are not being manufactured in or imported into Canada by any person in a quantity greater than 100 kg in any one calendar year;
And whereas the ministers suspect that the information concerning a significant new activity in relation to any of the 46 substances set out in this notice may contribute to determining the circumstances in which these substances are toxic or capable of becoming toxic within the meaning of section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999,
Therefore, notice is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment intends to amend the Domestic Substances List pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 by varying the requirements under the significant new activity provisions in relation to those substances set out in this notice.
Public comment period
Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and can be submitted using the online reporting system available through Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Single Window, by mail to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, or by email to substances@ec.gc.ca.
The final screening assessments for these substances may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.
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.
Marc D’Iorio
Assistant Deputy Minister
Science and Technology Branch
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment
ANNEX
1. The note to Group B in Part 2 of the Domestic Substances List is proposed to be amended by deleting the following in numerical order from Group B:
- 55-18-5 S′
- 62-50-0 S′
- 75-25-2 S’
- 79-00-5 S′
- 96-09-3 S′
- 106-87-6 S′
- 116-14-3 S′
- 131-52-2 S′
- 141-90-2 S′
- 593-60-2 S′
- 823-40-5 S′
- 3296-90-0 S′
- 13463-39-3 S′
- 26447-14-3 S′
- 59-88-1 S′
- 62-55-5 S′
- 76-01-7 S′
- 79-16-3 S′
- 96-18-4 S′
- 110-88-3 S′
- 123-39-7 S′
- 135-20-6 S′
- 331-39-5 S′
- 606-20-2 S′
- 1120-71-4 S′
- 4170-30-3 S′
- 13840-56-7 S′
- 39156-41-7 S′
- 60-35-5 S′
- 66-27-3 S′
- 78-88-6 S′
- 94-58-6 S′
- 100-63-0 S′
- 115-28-6 S′
- 123-73-9 S′
- 136-35-6 S′
- 591-78-6 S′
- 615-28-1 S′
- 1694-09-3 S′
- 10046-00-1 S′
- 25376-45-8 S′
- 103122-66-3 S′
2. The note to Group A of the List is proposed to be amended by deleting the substance “64742-66-1 S′” from Group A in Part 2 of the List.
3. Part 2 of the List is proposed to be amended by deleting the substances “107-05-1 S′”, “117-82-8 S′” and “38465-55-3 S′” in Column 1 and the significant new activity in Column 2 opposite the reference to that substance.
| Column 1 Substance |
Column 2 Significant new activity for which substance is subject to subsection 81(3) of the Act |
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| Column 1 Substance |
Column 2 Significant new activity for which substance is subject to subsection 81(3) of the Act |
|---|---|
38465-55-3 S′ |
|
COMING INTO FORCE
6. This Order would come into force on the day on which it is registered.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
(This explanatory note is not part of the Notice of Intent.)
Description
This Notice of Intent (NOI) is an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed amendments to the Domestic Substances List (DSL) to vary the significant new activity (SNAc) requirements of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) for 46 substances, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of the Act.
In January 2015, a public commitment was made by the Department of the Environment and the Department of Health to review all SNAc requirements that were adopted between 2001 and 2014.footnote 5 The purpose of the review is to ensure that SNAc requirements are consistent with current information, policies and approaches.footnote 6 Resulting changes to SNAc requirements are expected to provide greater clarity of scope and improved ease of compliance, while protecting Canadians and their environment.
This NOI reflects the results of the review of SNAc requirements for certain substances identified as High Hazard, Not in Commerce.footnote 7 Of the 46 substances, 42 were included in Order 2012-87-06-02 Amending the DSL, published in May 2013, which applied the SNAc provisions to 52 substances with high hazard potential; 3 substances were included in various orders published during the “Challenge” initiative of the Chemicals Management Plan (Batches 6 and 9) between 2009 and 2012; and 1 was included in Order 2008-87-01-01 Amending the DSL, published in June 2008, which applied the SNAc provisions to 145 substances determined to be persistent, bio-accumulative, and inherently toxic to non-human organisms (PBiT).
Within 60 days of publication of the NOI, any person may submit comments to the Minister of the Environment (the Minister). These comments will be taken into consideration during the development of the Order amending the DSL to vary the SNAc requirements for 46 substances.
The DSL amendment is not in force until the Order is adopted by the Minister, pursuant to subsection 87(3) of CEPA. The Order must be published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.
Applicability of the proposed Order
At this time, it is proposed that the Order amending the DSL would require any person (individual or corporation) engaging in a significant new activity in relation to the substances listed in tables 1A, 1B and 2 below to submit a Significant New Activity Notification (SNAN) containing all of the information prescribed in the Order at least 90 days prior to the import, manufacture or use of the substances for the significant new activity.
| CAS RN table b2 note a |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
117-82-8 |
Any activity involving, in a calendar year, more than 100 kg of the substance 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-methozyethyl) ester |
|
64742-66-1 |
Any activity involving, in a calendar year, more than 100 kg of any Group A substance. |
|
Table b2 note(s)
|
||
CAS RN |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
|
Any activity involving, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of any Group B substance, other than an activity related to
|
|
107-05-1 |
Any activity involving, in a calendar year, more than 100 kg of the substance 1-Propene, 3-chloro- |
| CAS RN |
Current definition |
Proposed variation |
|---|---|---|
38465-55-3 |
Any activity involving, in any one calendar year, more than 100 kg of the substance Nickel, bis[1-[4-(dimethylamino) phenyl]-2-phenyl-1,2-ethenedithiolato(2-)S,S′]-. |
1. In relation to any substance in Column 1, opposite to this section, any activity involving, in a calendar year, the use of more than 1 000 kg of the substance. |
In order to address human health concerns for the 45 substances listed in tables 1A and 1B, the Order would target the use of the substances in consumer products to which the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) applies, as well as in cosmetics as defined in section 2 of the Food and Drugs Act (FDA). In addition, in order to address both human health and environmental concerns resulting from indirect exposures, the proposed Order would target the use of the substances in any other activities not related to consumer products involving the substances in a quantity greater than 1 000 kg in a calendar year.
In order to address the ecological concern for the remaining substance listed in Table 2, activities that would require notification, following the proposed Order, would include any activity involving, in a calendar year, more than 1 000 kg of the substance. Also for this substance, the proposed Order would also target special category activities. Special category activities include use as a research and development substance, site-limited intermediate substance, and an export-only substance. The terms “research and development substance” and “site-limited intermediate substance” are defined in subsection 1(1) of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers). An export-only substance is a substance that is manufactured or imported in Canada and destined solely for foreign markets.
Activities not subject to the proposed Order
Activities involving the use of the 45 substances in tables 1A and 1B, in the manufacture of consumer products or cosmetics that contain the substance at a concentration of less than either 0.1% or 1%, depending on the substance, would be excluded from the application of the proposed Order. Similarly, the importation of the substance in a consumer product or cosmetic would not be subject to the proposed Order if the total quantity of the substance used is 10 kg or less in a calendar year. In addition, for activities involving the use of the substance in any other activities not related to consumer products, if the total quantity used is less than 1 000 kg, that use would also be exempt from the proposed Order.
For the 45 substances listed in tables 1A and 1B, the proposed Order would not apply to the use of the substance in “special category activities.” Special category activities include use as a research and development substance, a site-limited intermediate substance, or an export-only substance. These activities would not require the submission of a SNAN as these activities are not expected to result in exposure to the general population in Canada. The terms “research and development substance” and “site-limited intermediate substance” are defined in subsection 1(1) of the New Substance Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers). An export-only substance is a substance that is manufactured or imported in Canada and destined solely for foreign markets.
In relation to all substances, the proposed Order would not apply to uses of the substances that are regulated under the Acts of Parliament listed in Schedule 2 of CEPA, including the Pest Control Products Act, the Fertilizers Act and the Feeds Act. It also would not apply to transient reaction intermediates, impurities, contaminants, partially unreacted intermediates, or in some circumstances to items such as, but not limited to, wastes, mixtures or manufactured items. However, it should be noted that individual components of a mixture may be notifiable under the proposed Order. See subsection 81(6) and section 3 of CEPA, and section 3 of the Guidance Document for the Notification and Testing of New Chemicals and Polymers for additional information.
Information to be submitted
The NOI sets out the proposed requirements for information that would need to be provided to the Minister 90 days before the day on which the substance is imported, manufactured or used for a significant new activity. The Department of the Environment and the Department of Health will use the information submitted in the SNAN to conduct human health and environmental assessments within 90 days after the complete information is received.
The information requirements in the proposed Order relate to general information in respect of the substance, details surrounding its use, and exposure information. Some of the proposed information requirements are set out in the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers).
Additional guidance on preparing a SNAN can be found in section 4 of the Guidance Document for the Notification and Testing of New Chemicals and Polymers.
Compliance
When assessing whether or not a substance is subject to the SNAc provisions,footnote 9 a person is expected to make use of information in their possession or to which they have access. The phrase “to which they have access” means information in any of the notifier’s offices worldwide or other locations where the notifier can reasonably have access to the information. For example, manufacturers are expected to have access to their formulations, while importers or users of a substance, mixture, or product are expected to have access to import records, usage information and the relevant Safety Data Sheet (SDS).footnote 10
Although an SDS is an important source of information on the composition of a purchased product, it should be noted that the goal of the SDS is to protect the health of workers in the workplace from specific hazards of chemical products. Therefore, an SDS may not list all product ingredients that may be subject to an order due to human health or environmental concerns. Any person requiring more detailed information on product composition is encouraged to contact their supplier.
If any information becomes available that reasonably supports the conclusion that a substance is toxic or capable of becoming toxic, the person who is in possession or who has knowledge of the information and is involved in certain activities with the substance is obligated, under section 70 of CEPA, to provide that information to the Minister without delay.
In cases where a person receives possession and control of a substance from another person, they may not be required to submit a SNAN, under certain conditions, if the activities were covered by a SNAN submitted by the supplier on behalf of its clients.
Any person who transfers the physical possession or control of a substance subject to an Order should notify all persons to whom the physical possession or control is transferred of the obligation to comply with the Order, including the obligation to notify the Minister of any significant new activity and to provide all of the required information outlined above.
A pre-notification consultation (PNC) is available for notifiers who wish to consult during the planning or preparation of their SNAN to discuss any questions or concerns they have about the prescribed information and test plans.
Where a person has questions concerning their obligations to comply with a notice or Order, believes they may be out of compliance, or would like to request a PNC, they are encouraged to discuss their particular circumstances by contacting the Substances Management Information Line.footnote 11
CEPA is enforced in accordance with the publicly available Compliance and Enforcement Policy for the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. In instances of non-compliance, consideration is given to the following factors, when deciding which enforcement measure to take: nature of the alleged violation, effectiveness in achieving compliance with CEPA and its regulations, and consistency in enforcement.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Publication of final decision after screening assessment of a substance — benzoxazole, 2,2’-(1,4-naphthalenediyl)bis- (fluorescent brightener 367), CAS RNfootnote 16 5089-22-5 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(6) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)
Whereas fluorescent brightener 367 is a substance identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;
Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on fluorescent brightener 367 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.
Steven Guilbeault
Minister of the Environment
Jean-Yves Duclos
Minister of Health
ANNEX
Summary of the screening assessment of fluorescent brightener 367
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 benzoxazole, 2,2′-(1,4-naphthalenediyl)bis- (CAS RN 5089-22-5), hereinafter referred to as fluorescent brightener 367. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment as it met the categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.
Fluorescent brightener 367 does not occur naturally in the environment. According to information submitted in response to a CEPA section 71 survey, it was not manufactured in, or imported into, Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg per year during the 2011 calendar year. Under the Cosmetic Regulations, fluorescent brightener 367 was declared as present in certain nail polishes.
The ecological risk of fluorescent brightener 367 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, fluorescent brightener 367 is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.
Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from fluorescent brightener 367. It is concluded that fluorescent brightener 367 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 constitutes or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.
As no empirical information was identified on the toxicological characteristics of fluorescent brightener 367, the potential health effects of this substance were based on toxicological data available for an analogue, fluorescent brightener 184 (CAS RN 7128-64-5). In studies with fluorescent brightener 184, no critical health effects were observed in subchronic and chronic studies up to the highest doses tested. The general population is not expected to be exposed to fluorescent brightener 367 from environmental media, food or drinking water. A comparison of levels of exposure from use of nail polish containing fluorescent brightener 367 with the highest dose tested in laboratory studies resulted in margins of exposure that are considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effect and exposure databases.
Considering all the information presented in this screening assessment, it is concluded that fluorescent brightener 367 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 therefore concluded that fluorescent brightener 367 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 final decision after screening assessment of a substance — nonane, 2,2,4,4,6,8,8-heptamethyl- (heptamethylnonane; HMN), CAS RNfootnote 16 4390-04-9 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(6) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)
Whereas HMN is a substance identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;
Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on HMN 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.
Steven Guilbeault
Minister of the Environment
Jean-Yves Duclos
Minister of Health
ANNEX
Summary of the screening assessment of heptamethylnonane
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 nonane, 2,2,4,4,6,8,8-heptamethyl-, hereinafter referred to as heptamethylnonane (HMN). The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) for HMN is 4390-04-9. This substance is among those substances identified as priorities for assessment as it met categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.
HMN is a highly branched aliphatic hydrocarbon and is not known to naturally occur in the environment. The substance is primarily used as a skin conditioning agent, emollient, or solvent in self-care products. According to information submitted in response to a CEPA section 71 survey, the substance was reported to be imported into Canada in quantities ranging from 10 000 kg to 100 000 kg and was not reported to be manufactured in Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg.
The ecological risk of HMN 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, HMN is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.
Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is a low risk of harm to the environment from HMN. It is concluded that HMN 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.
HMN is considered to be of low human hazard potential due to the lack of genotoxic, reproductive or developmental effects, and other adverse effects relevant to human health at doses up to 1 000 mg/kg bw/day on the basis of oral studies conducted on HMN, and up to 1 393 mg/m3 on the basis of inhalation studies conducted on a structurally related substance. As HMN is considered to be of low hazard potential and the risk to human health is considered to be low, estimates of exposure to the general population were not derived.
Considering all the information presented in this screening assessment, it is concluded that HMN 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 therefore concluded that HMN 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 a substance — propane, 1-nitro- (1-nitropropane), CAS RNfootnote 16 108-03-2 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)
Whereas a summary of the screening assessment conducted on 1-nitropropane 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 (the ministers) propose to take no further action on this substance at this time.
Steven Guilbeault
Minister of the Environment
Jean-Yves Duclos
Minister of Health
ANNEX
Summary of the screening assessment of 1-nitropropane
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 human health concerns.
According to information submitted in response to a CEPA section 71 survey, between 1 000 kg and 10 000 kg of 1-nitropropane was imported in 2011, but it was not manufactured in Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg. Reported uses in Canada include use in paints and coatings. It 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 on the basis of their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, 1-nitropropane is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.
Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is low risk of harm to the environment from 1-nitropropane. It is concluded 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 effect of concern for 1-nitropropane was reproductive and 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.
Considering all the information presented in this screening assessment, it is concluded 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.
Overall conclusion
It is therefore concluded that 1-nitropropane 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 HEALTH
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999
Guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D)
Pursuant to subsection 55(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, the Minister of Health hereby gives notice of the final guidelines for Canadian drinking water quality for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D). The technical document for these guidelines is available on the Water Quality website. This document underwent a public consultation period of 90 days in 2020 and was updated taking into consideration the comments received.
February 4, 2022
Greg Carreau
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of Health
ANNEX
Guideline value
The maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) for 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) in drinking water is 0.10 mg/L (100 µg/L).
Executive summary
This guideline technical document was prepared in collaboration with the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water and is based on assessments of 2,4-D completed by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and supporting documents.
Exposure
2,4-D is an herbicide used mainly to control broadleaf weeds. In 2018 (the most recent year for which data are available), it was one of the top 10 active ingredients sold in Canada. It is used on turf, forests, woodlots, terrestrial feed, food crops, and industrial and domestic non-food sites. Various forms of 2,4-D, including the free acid, salts and esters, are used in herbicide formulations, and all release the acid as the active ingredient.
Exposure of Canadians to 2,4-D is expected to be low despite its widespread use. Very low levels of 2,4-D in sources of drinking water have been found in many Canadian provinces. 2,4-D does not tend to accumulate in food, and inhalation exposure is not expected to be significant.
Health effects
Animal studies have consistently found that 2,4-D affects the kidneys of mice and rats. There are no studies regarding kidney effects of 2,4-D in humans. Although some agencies consider 2,4-D to be possibly carcinogenic, international drinking water agencies have all assessed 2,4-D based on its non-cancer effects.
Analytical and treatment
The establishment of a drinking water guideline takes into consideration the ability to both measure the contaminant and remove it from drinking water supplies. 2,4-D can be detected at levels well below the MAC of 0.10 mg/L.
Treatment technologies are available to effectively reduce 2,4-D concentrations in drinking water. Activated carbon adsorption is recognized as the best available technology. Biological filtration processes can also reduce 2,4-D concentrations. However, conventional treatment is not effective for 2,4-D removal. Typical oxidation/disinfection processes used in drinking water treatment also have limited potential to reduce 2,4-D concentrations.
At the residential scale, a number of certified treatment devices are currently available for the removal of 2,4-D. These devices rely mainly on adsorption (activated carbon) and reverse osmosis technologies.
Application of the guideline
Note: Specific guidance related to the implementation of drinking water guidelines should be obtained from the appropriate drinking water authority in the affected jurisdiction.
The guideline for 2,4-D is protective against health effects from exposure to 2,4-D in drinking water over a lifetime. Any exceedance of the MAC should be investigated and followed by the appropriate corrective actions if required. For exceedances in source water where there is no treatment in place, additional monitoring to confirm the exceedance should be conducted. If it is confirmed that source water 2,4-D concentrations are above the MAC then an investigation to determine the most appropriate way to reduce exposure to 2,4-D should be conducted. This may include use of an alternate water supply or installation of a water treatment system. Where treatment is already in place and an exceedance occurs, an investigation should be conducted to verify treatment and determine if adjustments are needed to lower the treated water concentration below the MAC.
2,4-D is a chlorophenoxyacetic acid herbicide registered for commercial and domestic use in Canada to control broadleaf weeds. Applications can be made to agricultural crops, forested areas, lawn and turf (including residential uses), and other industrial sites. It is foliar-applied when weeds are actively growing, which, considering the broad use pattern, can be season-long (e.g. spring to fall). In areas of high use, 2,4-D can be introduced into surface water and possibly into groundwater through runoff and infiltration or as the result of spills. 2,4-D is non-persistent to slightly persistent in water and soil and undergoes rapid biological degradation under aerobic conditions. However, in oxygen-deprived environments such as anaerobic groundwater, the biological degradation of 2,4-D is rather limited.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT
CANADA SHIPPING ACT, 2001
Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
Notice of an addition to the fees charged by Western Canada Marine Response Corporation pursuant to an arrangement required by subsection 168(1) of the Canada Shipping Act, 2001
Description
Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (“WCMRC”) is a certified response organization pursuant to section 169 of the Act in respect of a rated capability of 10 000 tonnes and a geographic area covering the waters bordering British Columbia (including the shorelines associated with such waters) and excluding waters north of 60° north latitude. This notice establishes an additional bulk oil cargo fee for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project, to be charged in addition to the registration and bulk oil cargo fees, and any amendments thereto, as published by notice in Part I of the Canada Gazette.
Definitions
1. In this notice of fees,
- “Act”
- means the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. (Loi)
- “BOCF”
- means the bulk oil cargo fee payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Act, and any amendments thereto, as published by notice in Part I of the Canada Gazette. [droits sur les produits pétroliers en vrac (DPPV)]
- “registration fees”
- means the registration fees payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Act, and any amendments thereto, as published by notice in Part I of the Canada Gazette. (droits d’enregistrement)
- “TMEP BOCF”
- means the Trans Mountain Expansion Project bulk oil cargo fee, a fee charged on crude oil shipments in bulk loaded onto a ship (bulk oil) and intended for international destinations and destinations north of 60° north latitude, except shipments of jet fuel, from the Westridge oil handling facility owned by Trans Mountain Pipeline L.P. [droits sur les produits pétroliers en vrac du projet d’expansion de Trans Mountain (DPPV PETM)]
Trans Mountain Expansion Project bulk oil cargo fee
2. In relation to the arrangement with WCMRC for the Westridge oil handing facility, the TMEP BOCF will be determined by multiplying the total number of tonnes of oil loaded, within the meaning of the TMEP BOCF definition, by the TMEP BOCF rate per tonne of bulk oil.
3. The TMEP BOCF rate applicable is twenty-five dollars and thirteen and six-tenths cents ($25.136) per tonne of bulk oil, plus all applicable taxes, from January 1, 2022.
4. The TMEP BOCF will be charged in addition to the registration fees and BOCF, as amended from time to time, as published by notice in Part I of the Canada Gazette.
Interested persons may, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice, file notices of objection that contain the reasons for the objection to the Manager, Marine Safety and Security, Transport Canada, Place de Ville, Tower C, 10th Floor, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8, 613‑993‑8196 (fax), marinesafety-securitemaritime@tc.gc.ca (email). All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, the name of the response organization submitting the list of proposed amended fees, and the date of publication of the notice of proposed amended fees.
January 1, 2022
Mark Johncox, CA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT
CANADA SHIPPING ACT, 2001
Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
Notice of an amendment to the fees charged by Western Canada Marine Response Corporation pursuant to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Canada Shipping Act, 2001
Description
Western Canada Marine Response Corporation (“WCMRC”) is a certified response organization pursuant to section 169 of the Act in respect of a rated capability of 10 000 tonnes and a geographic area covering the waters bordering British Columbia (including the shorelines associated with such waters) and excluding waters north of 60° north latitude.
Definitions
1. In this notice of fees,
- “Act”
- means the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. (Loi)
- “asphalt”
- means a derivate of oil that is commercially described as road or paving asphalt or unblended roofers flux, that has a specific gravity equal to or greater than one, that is solid at 15 degrees Celsius and that sinks to the bottom as a solid when immersed in water. (asphalte)
- “BOCF”
- means bulk oil cargo fee. [droits sur les produits pétroliers en vrac (DPPV)]
- “CALF”
- means capital asset/loan fee. [droits d’immobilisations et d’emprunt (DIE)]
- “oil handling facility”
- means an oil handling facility that is prescribed pursuant to the Act and is located in WCMRC’s geographic area. (installation de manutention d’hydrocarbures)
- “ship (bulk oil)”
- means a ship that is constructed or adapted primarily to carry bulk oil in its cargo spaces. [navire (avec produits pétroliers en vrac)]
Registration fees
2. The registration fees that are payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Act are the registration fees set out in Part I of this notice.
PART I
3. In relation to an arrangement with WCMRC, the total registration fee payable by a prescribed oil handling facility shall be determined as set out in section 5 of this Part.
4. In relation to an arrangement with WCMRC, the total registration fee payable by a ship shall be determined as set out in section 6 of this Part.
5. The registration fee applicable in respect of the annual membership fees is seven hundred and seventy-five dollars and zero cents ($775.00) per prescribed oil handling facility, plus all applicable taxes, from January 1, 2015.
6. The registration fee applicable in respect of the annual membership fees is seven hundred and seventy-five dollars and zero cents ($775.00) per ship, plus all applicable taxes, from January 1, 2015.
Bulk oil cargo fees
7. The bulk oil cargo fees that are payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Act are the bulk oil cargo fees set out in Part II of this notice.
PART II
8. This part applies to the loading and unloading of oil within WCMRC’s Geographic Area of Response (GAR).
9. In relation to an arrangement with WCMRC, the total BOCF payable by a prescribed oil handling facility shall be determined by multiplying the total number of tonnes of bulk oil unloaded (and in the case of bulk oil intended for international destinations and destinations north of 60° north latitude loaded at the prescribed oil handling facility) by the BOCF per tonne for each type of oil set out in sections 11 and 12 of this Part.
10. In relation to an arrangement with WCMRC, the total BOCF payable by a ship (bulk oil) shall be determined,
- (a) in the case of bulk oil loaded onto the ship (bulk oil) and intended for international destinations and destinations north of 60° north latitude, by multiplying the total number of tonnes of bulk oil loaded at an oil handling facility that is within WCMRC’s geographic area, and that does not have an arrangement with WCMRC, by the BOCF per tonne for each type of oil set out in sections 11 and 12 of this Part;
- (b) in the case of bulk oil unloaded from the ship (bulk oil), by multiplying the total number of tonnes of bulk oil unloaded at an oil handling facility that is within WCMRC’s geographic area, and that does not have an arrangement with WCMRC, by the BOCF per tonne for each type of oil set out in sections 11 and 12 of this Part;
- (c) in the case of bulk oil loaded onto the ship (bulk oil) outside WCMRC’s geographic area which is transferred within WCMRC’s geographic area to another ship for use as fuel by such ship, by multiplying the total number of tonnes of bulk oil transferred by the BOCF per tonne for each type of oil set out in sections 11 and 12 of this Part; and
- (d) in the case of bulk oil received by the ship (bulk oil) within WCMRC’s geographic area from another ship as cargo where such bulk oil is intended for international destinations and destinations north of 60° north latitude, by multiplying the total number of tonnes of bulk oil received by the BOCF per tonne for each type of oil set out in sections 11 and 12 of this Part.
11. The BOCF applicable in respect of oil (other than asphalt) is
- (a) an amended fee of one dollar and ninety-two and eight-tenths cents ($1.928) per tonne, plus all applicable taxes, from January 1, 2022.
12. The BOCF applicable in respect of asphalt is
- (a) an amended fee of ninety-six and four-tenths cents ($0.964) per tonne, plus all applicable taxes, from January 1, 2022.
Capital asset loan fees
13. The capital asset/loan fees that are payable to WCMRC in relation to an arrangement required by subsections 167(1) and 168(1) of the Act are the capital asset/loan fees set out in Part III of this notice.
PART III
14. The capital asset/loan fee (“CALF”) is determined according to the following:
- (a) on the basis of cost per tonne;
- (b) by multiplying a capital asset/loan fee rate (“CALFR”) by the applicable quantity of bulk oil loaded or unloaded within WCMRC’s Geographic Area of Response (“GAR”), and where applicable, bulk oil cargo transferred between ships within WCMRC’s GAR;
- (c) by dividing the forecast annual Funds Required for Capital Purchases (1) of WCMRC, plus the provision for tax (2) by the forecast Annual Volume (3) of bulk oil cargo to be loaded or unloaded within WCMRC’s GAR (4);
- (d) Funds Required for Capital Purchases (1) = Annual Capital Budget plus the annual principal bank loan repayment, less amortization of capital assets (excluding amortization of assets purchased previously with the BOCF);
- (e) Provision for tax (2) = (Funds Required for Capital Purchases less amortization of capital assets purchased previously with the BOCF) multiplied by the applicable rate of tax;
- (f) Annual Volume (3) = Total volume of bulk oil cargo unloaded plus total volume of bulk oil loaded for international destinations and north of 60° north latitude within WCMRC’s GAR and, where applicable, bulk oil cargo transferred between ships within WCMRC’s GAR; and
- (g) GAR (4) = Geographic area of response for which WCMRC is certified to operate.
15. The CALFR calculated by the formula above is applicable to all products except asphalt. The CALFR for asphalt is 50% of the rate for all other products.
16. The CALF applicable in respect of asphalt is
- (a) an amended fee of zero cents ($0.000) per tonne, from January 1, 2015.
17. The CALF applicable in respect of other products is
- (a) an amended fee of zero cents ($0.000) per tonne, from January 1, 2015.
Interested persons may, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice, file notices of objection that contain the reasons for the objection to the Manager, Marine Safety and Security, Transport Canada, Place de Ville, Tower C, 10th Floor, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5, 613‑993‑8196 (fax), marinesafety-securitemaritime@tc.gc.ca (email). All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, the name of the response organization submitting the list of proposed amended fees, and the date of publication of the notice of proposed amended fees.
January 1, 2022
Mark Johncox, CA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT
RAILWAY SAFETY ACT
Notice of intent for the implementation of enhanced train control in Canada
Notice is hereby given that Transport Canada intends to implement enhanced train control (ETC) in Canada to add an important layer of safety to Canada’s railway operations.
ETC technologies enhance safety for passenger and freight trains by preventing certain railway accidents caused by human error. ETC technologies act as a driver assist mechanism, alerting the train crew to danger and, at their highest functionality, slowing or stopping a train to prevent a collision or derailment.
ETC will make Canada’s rail transportation system safer by preventing certain rare, but potentially high consequence, railway accidents. ETC supports crews with a wide range of innovative safety solutions, from assisting in recognizing and following signals to automatically reducing speed to prevent a collision. ETC will enable railways to work together, share tracks and safely move people and freight faster through high-volume corridors. ETC will enable real-time information sharing between trains, rail wayside (trackside) devices, and back-office software applications for speed restrictions, train location and speed, and the state of signal and switch devices.
To advance the use of ETC in Canada, notice is hereby given that Transport Canada is implementing policy direction that may require railway companies to develop and adhere to new and/or amended rules respecting safe railway operations to help ensure that railway signals are consistently recognized and followed. In the interest of maintaining the interoperability of rail operations, rules may also be established or amended to provide cohesive operational principles aligned with the functionalities of ETC Systems.
The vision about ETC may be articulated as follows:
- ETC will add a layer of safety to Canada’s already safe rail transportation system. ETC will support crews by automatically stopping trains in the case of human error and preventing a possible collision or derailment. ETC will enable railways to work together, share tracks and safely move people and freight faster through high-volume corridors in a cohesive system.
- To realize this objective, Transport Canada is committed to working with all stakeholders, including railways, shippers, labour organizations, and the broader public sector. Through these efforts, Canada’s rail transportation network work will be better, faster and safer for passengers and shippers alike.
Transport Canada is communicating to Canadians and interested stakeholders its current policy direction with respect to this important initiative. The information provided in this notice of intent is only a representation of Transport Canada’s policy direction and should not be interpreted as proposed regulations.
Background
Canada’s national rail network is the third largest in the world, with a total track length in excess of 40 000 km. The rail network primarily transports freight; however, passenger travel constitutes a growing portion of rail activities. Severe train safety incidences and collisions for passenger travel and freight movement are rare events, but when they do occur, they have the potential to result in injuries and fatalities, along with environmental and property damage.
The current method of controlling train movements in Canada is “rule-based,” governed by the Canadian Rail Operating Rules, and with train movements managed and supervised by rail traffic controllers. Low density corridors follow occupancy control system rules with verbal clearances and other instructions issued to train crews who are responsible for complying with these instructions. Centralized traffic control is used on higher density corridors, with wayside signals indicating speed limits and clearances, again with train crews responsible for observing and correctly responding to these wayside signals.
Currently, there is no regulatory requirement for technologies to be installed on board locomotives to protect against operation above the permitted speed or to ensure a wayside signal indication is followed. Reliance is placed solely on train crews. Since the system is “rule-based,” there have been occasions when unintended rule violations have occurred because of a temporary lapse in situational awareness and resulted in derailments. It is this potential for human error that ETC systems are primarily intended to address. The core objectives of ETC systems in Canada will be to prevent
- train-to-train collisions;
- derailments caused by excessive train speed;
- unauthorized entry of a train into a work zone; and
- train movement through a misaligned track switch leading a train to be on the wrong track.
The safety benefits of ETC are widely recognized. Following railway signal indications is a Transportation Safety Board (TSB) Watchlist item and implementing physical fail-safe train controls has been a long-standing recommendation of the TSB.footnote 17 Furthermore, in 2018, the Rail Safety Act Review Panel recommended that Government and industry develop, in partnership, a Canadian approach to foster the implementation of ETC in a staged and cost-effective manner.
Interoperability
Canada’s rail network is an “open” network, meaning that compatible trains owned and operated by one railway company can operate in rail corridors that it owns and maintains, as well as in corridors owned and maintained by any other railway company. In North American, Canadian companies operating in the United States have had to comply with the 2008 Congressional mandate to implement positive train control prior to the December 31, 2020, statutory deadline set forth by Congress for implementing positive train control. Any ETC technology solution adopted in Canada will have to preserve interoperability among Canadian operators and compatibility with positive train control.
Supporting this “interoperability” requirement is a critical factor in developing and deploying ETC in Canada. The need for interoperability will require standards for equipment installed on locomotives and in the rail corridor as well as protocols for ETC data communications. Interoperable train control solutions in Europe and the United States have proven to be complex, with significant effort required to develop the necessary standards, specifications and designs. While Canada can certainly benefit from work that has taken place in other jurisdictions, developing an interoperable train control solution for Canada will be equally challenging, as there is no simple “off-the-shelf” solution.
ETC system functionality
Transport Canada retained the Canadian Rail Research Laboratory (CaRRL) of the University of Alberta to conduct an in-depth review of the potential impact that various train control approaches could have had on past occurrences on the Canadian rail network, and to study the feasibility of implementing various approaches to train control in Canada. The key findings of the CaRRL review were published on Transport Canada’s website in May 2018. The CaRRL report proposed different “levels” of ETC functionality falling into two categories: Driver Advisory Systems and Automatic Train Protection Systems. These two categories of ETC systems represent different grades of functionality.
- The Driver Advisory Systems would provide a variety of information and alerts to train crews to enhance their situational awareness. Train crews would still be responsible for rule compliance, so such systems may reduce, but not eliminate, the probability of human error. Historically, these types of crew alert systems have been used to optimize fuel usage or to improve compliance with an operating timetable and would have to be modified to perform this ETC function.
- The Automatic Train Protection System would also have Driver Advisory Systems’ capabilities, providing information and alerts to a train crew, but in addition would provide automatic (“fail-safe”) enforcement by applying the train brakes if a significant safety risk were imminent. Such systems are specifically designed to prevent derailments caused by excessive train speed, train collisions from “STOP” signal violations, and derailments as a result of operation over misaligned track switches. However, Automatic Train Protection Systems would only be fully operational for safety-critical functions in corridors that are equipped to support such systems.
Both systems can be implemented as an “overlay” on the existing centralized traffic control and occupancy control methods of train control. Both could offer other operational business case benefits to railway companies, in addition to safety benefits.
Risk-based assessment
Significant progress toward ETC implementation in Canada has been made based on foundational work done by Government, industry, and academia under the auspices of the Advisory Council on Railway Safety (ACRS). In a 2016 study, ACRS concluded that a targeted, risk-based, corridor-specific implementation of train control technologies would be the best option for Canada. The report is available on Transport Canada’s website.
Transport Canada’s policy direction supports this recommendation for Canada’s ETC approach. A corridor-specific implementation offers the potential to be more cost-effective, as investments in safety improvements on a given corridor can be tailored to the actual safety risk in that corridor. This approach enables companies to focus their resources on the higher risk corridors. The higher the risk level in a given corridor, the higher the likely complexity of the train control technical solution for that corridor. The determination and assessment of that risk should be a rigorous undertaking by rail operators. It is understood that solutions will have to be found to maintain interoperability requirements while having corridor-specific ETC. Finding such solutions will be a primary challenge in developing and implementing ETC on Canada’s rail network.
The Canadian rail industry is already supporting ETC by progressing risk-prioritization criteria and a methodology to rank corridors with respect to risk. Risk assessments would consider both the likelihood of preventable derailments and collisions in each corridor (frequency of occurrence), as well as the potential consequences of such occurrences, with consideration of factors such as the corridor characteristics, passenger and freight traffic, dangerous goods. Any assessment of the likelihood of preventable derailments and collisions will not be based solely on historical data, but will also include a probability assessment that looks ahead and takes into account, among other things, potential changes to traffic patterns in a given corridor. Given this risk assessment methodology must be robust and consistently applied across Canada by all regulated railways, it will be necessary for the guiding principles to be set out in the regulatory framework and subject to Transport Canada approval.
These corridor-specific risk assessments will establish
- The safety risks in each corridor (i.e. the risk of train collisions and derailments as a consequence of train crew human errors);
- The appropriate ETC technology solutions in each corridor to mitigate these safety risks; and
- The ranking of corridors in priority for implementing the selected technology solutions.
Highest risk corridors would be equipped with Automatic Train Protection equipment. In these corridors
- Both the locomotives and the corridors would be equipped to support this level of functionality.
- Only those trains equipped to support Automatic Train Protection would be permitted to operate in these corridors. All other trains would be prevented by technology from operating in these corridors.
- Railways may choose to implement Automatic Train Protection technology compatible with what has been installed to provide positive train control in the United States, given both are designed to provide fail-safe operation.
Lower risk corridors would be equipped with Driver Advisory System equipment. In these corridors
- Crews would be assisted by an on-board display of operating authorities with a warning when they are approaching the limit of operating authority (e.g. their speed, a stop signal, a work zone).
- The level of enhanced protection for trains would be determined by capabilities of equipment installed on the locomotive, and information provided from any ETC equipment installed in the corridor.
- If selected wayside equipment is installed, the system can warn the crew of additional dangers, such as switches in the wrong position.
Very low risk corridors would retain conventional train control approaches. In these corridors
- It may not be feasible or warranted to equip the locomotives and the corridor with ETC equipment.
- Adherence to traditional administrative rules by crews would provide protection.
Communication technologies
Industry is also working towards establishing minimum ETC system functionalities, and communications standards to ensure interoperability among railways. Supporting ETC functionality across ETC-equipped corridors will require secure and reliable communication between railway back-office equipment (and, where applicable, corridor-specific wayside equipment) and all ETC-equipped trains operating in the various corridors. In addition, the greater the ETC system capability being implemented in a corridor, the greater the need for communication systems to transmit increasing amounts of information assessing a train’s safety status and related information quickly and accurately. A variety of solutions may be needed to establish communications systems for data and voice exchanges.
To support interoperability across Canada’s rail network, new communication system standards and protocols may need to be developed. This would include consideration of bandwidth requirements (volume of data to be communicated), message latency (time to communicate a given message), and network reliability and availability (time required to establish a connection; frequency of lost connections; susceptibility to interference, etc.). This communication system network would need to be implemented in parallel with equipping the various corridors and the trains and locomotives operating in those corridors.
Designing and delivering corridor-specific, locomotive-specific, and communications network-specific ETC equipment will require the development of technical specifications and standards for Driver Advisory Systems and the Automatic Train Protection Systems to address establishing system-level requirements, operating requirements, and performance requirements. A mechanism for managing the evolution of specifications, and standards as new functionalities are introduced and/or to correct specification errors, will also have to be developed.
Way forward
Establishing an ETC system for Canadian railways is a priority for Transport Canada, and is consistent with Transportation 2030, Transport Canada’s strategic plan for a safe, secure, green, innovative and integrated transportation system that supports trade and economic growth, a cleaner environment and the well-being of Canada’s middle class.
To build on the efforts to develop ETC in Canada that have already been made, additional industry and government leadership and co-ordination will be required in areas, such as
- Stakeholders will need to consider the overall management, governance and organizational structures for implementing ETC;
- Technology suppliers will play an important role in the development of the ETC implementation approach, as they will be critical for successful implementation and may be a source for innovative ETC solutions;
- Systems integration management will be required from a technical, operational, and regulatory perspective; and
- Revisions to the regulatory framework may be required, along with the maintenance of ETC specifications and standards.
The successful implementation of ETC requires a long-term, coordinated, whole-of-government approach. Transport Canada will work with the following federal government partners and others to bring ETC to Canada:
- Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED), for wireless communications and for promotion of innovative technology solutions;
- Standards Council of Canada (SCC-CCN), to facilitate development a technical specification for interoperable communications;
- Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), to allow industry to access frequencies usually used by wireless services providers;
- Public Safety Canada (PS), for ensuring secure telecommunications for effective roll-out of ETC.
Transport Canada intends to move forward with amendments to the regulatory framework to ensure the safety benefits of ETC are realized in Canada. As a starting point, Transport Canada has entered a Memorandum of Understanding with the Standards Council of Canada to develop a national technical specification on interoperability. In November 2021, the SCC-CCN issued a request for proposals for the development of a national technical specification for interoperability. This technical specification will be an essential first step for ETC implementation, ensuring that critical information, such as train position and train speed, can be communicated reliably and securely between railways, notwithstanding the chosen train control technology.
Comments
Your views are critical to achieve the vision for ETC implementation in Canada. Questions and comments regarding this notice of intent can be submitted until April 30, 2022, and may be directed to the Director, Regulatory Affairs, Rail Safety, Transport Canada, ASRR, Enterprise Building, 427 Laurier Avenue West, 14th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5, TC.RailSafetyConsultations- ConsultationSecuriteFerroviaire.TC@tc.gc.ca.
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 Executive Officer | Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse | |
| Member | Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board | |
| Chief Executive Officer | Canadian Dairy Commission | |
| Deputy Chief Commissioner | Canadian Human Rights Commission | |
| Member | Canadian Human Rights Commission | |
| Member | Canadian Museum of Nature | |
| Chairperson | Invest in Canada Hub | |
| Chief Executive Officer | Invest in Canada Hub | |
| Director | Invest in Canada Hub | |
| Commissioner | Law Commission of Canada | |
| President | Law Commission of Canada | |
| Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime | Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime | |
| Privacy Commissioner | Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada | |
| Chairperson | Patented Medicine Prices Review Board Canada | |
| Director (Federal) | Québec Port Authority | |
| Director | Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority |