Vol. 150, No. 41 — October 8, 2016

GOVERNMENT NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of a substance — phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester (TCP), CAS RN (see footnote 1) 1330-78-5 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester is a substance on the Domestic Substances List identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (the Act);

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on the substance 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 the 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www. chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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 phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester

Pursuant to section 74 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of phosphoric acid, tris(methylphenyl) ester, commonly known as tricresyl phosphate or TCP (Chemical Abstracts Service Registry No. 1330-78-5). TCP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping under Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment based on human health concerns (related to potential for exposure), but not for ecological concerns (did not meet criteria for persistence or potential for bioaccumulation, but met criteria with respect to inherent toxicity to non-human organisms).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Overall proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that TCP 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of a substance — 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo- (EBTBP), CAS RN (see footnote 2) 32588-76-4 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and 68(c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo- is a substance on the Domestic Substances List;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on the substance 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 the 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo-

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of 1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, 2,2′-(1,2ethanediyl)bis[4,5,6,7-tetrabromo- (CAS RN 32588-76-4), commonly known as ethylene bis(tetrabromophthalimide) and denoted with the abbreviation EBTBP. EBTBP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment based on possible human health concerns (related to potential for exposure) but not for ecological concerns (met criteria for persistence but results were unclear with respect to potential for bioaccumulation and inherent toxicity to non-human organisms).

EBTBP does not occur naturally in the environment and is used solely as a flame retardant.

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

EBTBP is used in Canada as a flame retardant in plastic and rubber materials, and in the automotive sector. This substance has been marketed as a general purpose alternative to decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE). In 1999, consumption of EBTBP in the European Union was estimated at 5 000 tonnes, and in 2006, market production of EBTBP in the United States was reported at less than 5 000 tonnes. Globally, EBTBP is used as a flame retardant in plastics, rubbers and textiles. This substance is also used in electronic applications and components.

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

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

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

Based on modelled and limited experimental biodegradation data, EBTBP is expected to be subject to only limited biodegradation. Overall, EBTBP is considered to be very persistent in water, sediment, soil and atmospheric aerosols, but not in air.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is proposed to conclude that EBTBP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Overall proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that EBTBP 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of a substance — 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine (melamine), CAS RN (see footnote 3) 108-78-1 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine is a substance on the Domestic Substances List identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on the substance 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 the 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www. chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine

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 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine (CAS RN 108-78-1), commonly known as melamine, a substance included in the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping under Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. Melamine was identified in the categorization of the Domestic Substances List (DSL) under subsection 73(1) of CEPA as meeting criteria for “greatest potential” for exposure of individuals in Canada. The substance also met categorization criteria for persistence, but not for bioaccumulation or inherent toxicity to non-human organisms.

Melamine does not occur naturally in the environment. It is not manufactured in Canada; however, imports of melamine, as a pure substance or blended into products, in the range of 10 million to 100 million kilograms were reported for the year 2011. In Canada, melamine has numerous industrial applications; its predominant use is in the manufacture of polyurethane foams and melamine-based resins for application in laminates, plastics, paints and coatings. Globally, melamine is used primarily in the synthesis of melamine–formaldehyde resins for similar applications, and in adhesives and moulding compounds. Due to its high nitrogen content, melamine has also been used globally as a fertilizer. In Canada, sources of exposure to melamine are primarily from waste streams or effluents of manufacturing of melamine-based resins and, to a lesser degree, from processing plants using melamine to manufacture products with flame retardant properties. Discharges to the environment can be direct or via municipal waste water treatment systems. Melamine is a compact and stable molecule characterized by high water solubility, negligible vapour pressure, and low to negligible organic carbon–water and octanol–water partition coefficients. Monitoring of melamine in environmental media has not been conducted in Canada. When released to the environment, melamine is expected to predominantly reside in water and, to a lesser degree, in soil, depending on the compartment of release.

Melamine does not degrade rapidly in the environment; it has a long half-life in air and has relatively slow biodegradation rates in water and soil. Melamine has a limited potential to bioaccumulate in tissues of organisms. It has very low bioconcentration factors in fish, and residue clearance rates from numerous organisms including mammals, fish and birds are known to be fast.

Based on empirical evidence from short- and long-term studies, melamine has a low toxicity to aquatic and soil-dwelling organisms. As the toxic effects of melamine exposure were more pronounced in long-term studies and those encompassing sensitive life stages, results from these types of studies were generally more informative. In contrast, in the multiple short-term studies, the toxicity limit for melamine could not be defined since the highest concentration tested showed no effects.

It is expected that melamine may be released to the Canadian environment as a result of industrial processing activities. Although melamine can be found in consumer or commercial products, it is expected that release to the environment via this route is minimal. Industrial scenarios, where melamine is released to water, were developed to provide estimates of exposure. Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information, were performed for the aquatic compartment. These analyses showed that the risk that melamine represents to organisms and the broader integrity of the environment in Canada is unlikely.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this screening assessment, there is low risk of harm to organisms or to the broader integrity of the environment from melamine. It is proposed to conclude that melamine 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 and that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends.

The main sources of exposure to melamine for the general population in Canada are expected to be from environmental media (water, soil), food and from the use of consumer products. Biomonitoring data were also available from relevant populations (United States).

Based principally on the weight-of-evidence assessments of international agencies and available information, critical effects associated with exposure to melamine are carcinogenicity and effects on the urinary system. Available information indicates that melamine is not genotoxic. Comparison of levels between critical effects in animal studies and estimates of exposure from environmental media or consumer products was considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases.

On the basis of the adequacy of the margins between estimates of exposure and critical effect levels in experimental animals, it is proposed to conclude that melamine 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 proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that melamine 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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of a substance — 1,4:7,10-dimethanodibenzo[a,e] cyclooctene,1,2,3,4,7,8,9,10,13,13,14,14-dodecachloro-1,4,4a,5,6,6a,7,10,10a,11,12,12a-dodecahydro- (DP), CAS RN (see footnote 4) 13560-89-9 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and 68(c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas 1,4:7,10-dimethanodibenzo[a,e]cyclooctene,1,2, 3,4,7,8,9,10,13,13,14,14-dodecachloro-1,4,4a,5,6,6a,7,10,10a, 11,12,12a-dodecahydro- is a substance on the Domestic Substances List;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on the substance pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (the Act) is annexed hereby;

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

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

Notice is further given that the ministers propose risk management measures to achieve the objective of reducing releases of the substance into the environment.

Notice is also hereby given that the ministers have released a risk management scope document for the substance to initiate discussions with stakeholders on the development of a risk management approach.

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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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

Virginia Poter
Director General
Industrial Sectors, Chemicals and Waste Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of 1,4:7,10-dimethanodibenzo [a,e]cyclooctene,1,2,3,4,7,8,9, 10,13,13,14,14-dodecachloro1,4,4a,5,6,6a,7,10,10a,11,12, 12a-dodecahydro-

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of 1,4:7,10- dimethanodibenzo[a,e]cyclooctene,1,2,3,4,7,8,9,10,13,13,14,14- dodecachloro-1,4,4a,5,6,6a,7,10,10a,11,12,12a- dodecahydro-, commonly known as Dechlorane Plus® (Dechlorane Plus or DP) [Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) 13560-89-9]. DP is a substance within the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping under Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: the application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. DP was identified as a priority for assessment based on other human health concerns (i.e. based on intermediate potential for exposure to Canadians) but not for ecological concerns (it met criteria for persistence but results were unclear with respect to potential for bioaccumulation and inherent toxicity to non-human organisms).

DP does not occur naturally in the environment. Based on responses to a survey conducted under section 71 of CEPA, DP imports to Canada ranged from 1 000 kg to 10 000 kg in 2011 for use as an additive flame retardant in several applications. Known international uses of DP include applications in wire and cable jacketing, electronics, appliances, automobiles, hard plastic connectors, and plastic roofing materials. DP has been produced for the last 40 years, although not in Canada, and is currently marketed as an alternative/replacement for decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) in a range of flame retardant applications of electronic wiring and cables, automobiles, plastic roofing materials, and hard plastic connectors. DP is a high production volume substance in the United States, and manufacturing in China has recently been reported. Recent estimates of DP production range from 450 000 kg to 4 500 000 kg for importation/production in the United States.

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

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

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

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

Industrial scenarios were developed to provide estimates of exposure, based on available industrial site information including potential quantities used. These scenarios involved industrial wastewater release to surface water resulting in DP partitioning to sediment, and DP in wastewater partitioning to biosolids, followed by biosolids application to soil. Risk quotient analyses, integrating conservative estimates of exposure with toxicity information, were performed for sediment and soil organisms, as well as for wildlife. Results of these analyses indicate that although in most scenarios DP poses a low risk to organisms based on current levels of use and release in Canada, at least one soil exposure scenario suggests predicted environmental concentrations of DP approach a level that could result in risk to soil organisms (i.e. the risk quotient is 0.78).

DP’s high persistence suggests potential for build-up in the environment from past and current emissions, resulting in long-term exposures in sediment and soil. DP is expected to strongly adsorb to suspended solids/particulates when released to surface water, either directly from industrial activities or indirectly via waste-water treatment systems, and eventually settle in depositional sediment areas (i.e. sinks). Several studies have reported DP sediment concentrations in the Great Lakes region that exceed the predicted environmental concentrations for sediment developed from industrial scenarios based on quantities in use in Canada, suggesting that DP exposure in specific areas of Canada could be underestimated and precaution is warranted. Risk quotient analyses that compare these upper measured sediment values to the predicted no-effect concentration of sediment could result in values greater than 1, indicating risk to sediment-dwelling organisms. It should be noted that DP is a high production volume substance in the United States; past and/or present environmental transport of DP from the northern United States, in particular manufacturing near the Great Lakes, may therefore contribute to DP exposure in Canada.

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

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

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

There are eight orders of magnitude between estimates of exposure from environmental media and food and the highest dose level tested. These margins are considered to be adequate to account for uncertainties in the exposure and health effect databases. Therefore, it is proposed to conclude that DP does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Overall proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that DP meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA. DP is proposed to meet the persistence and bioaccumulation criteria as set out in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations under CEPA.

The draft screening assessment as well as the risk management scope document for the substance is available on the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

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

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on benzene, 1,1′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[2,3,4,5,6-pentabromo- (the substance) pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act is annexed hereby;

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

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

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

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 Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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

Virginia Poter
Director General
Industrial Sectors, Chemicals and Waste Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of benzene, 1,1′-(1,2-ethanediyl)bis[2,3,4,5,6-pentabromo-

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

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

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

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

Experimental and modelled data indicate that aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation of DBDPE is limited and that DBDPE is expected to be persistent in water, soil, and sediment. Studies report that photodegradation of DBDPE may proceed quickly in solvents, but more slowly in other matrices/substrates, and modelled predictions for atmospheric degradation suggest DBDPE is persistent in air (gas phase half-life >4 days). Although degradation of DBDPE is expected to be slow or limited, there is uncertainty with respect to ultimate transformation products in the environment. Potential DBDPE transformation products were evaluated based on predictions from photodegradation studies, biodegradation/metabolism modelling and considering analogue decaBDE. DBDPE debromination was expected to continue from nona and octaBDPEs through the formation of hepta-, hexa-, and pentaBDPEs (similar to decaBDE), or lead to a hydroxylated nonaBDPE pathway. As there are no experimental data, quantitative structure-activity relationship modelling was conducted to assess the characteristics of these potential DBDPE transformation products. Preliminary modelling indicates DBDPE transformation products can be considered analogues to lower brominated polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and would be persistent, bioaccumulative in some cases, and potentially highly toxic to aquatic organisms. The ecological screening assessment on PBDEs (June 2006) concluded that lower brominated PBDEs, namely tetraBDE, pentaBDE and hexaBDE, satisfy the criteria outlined in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA.

Empirical data indicate that DBDPE may accumulate to some degree in the tissues of biota (low to moderate bioaccumulation potential); however, at present there is inadequate evidence indicating that the substance has the potential for high bioaccumulation.

Based on soil chronic toxicity testing, DBDPE has the potential to cause reproductive effects at high concentrations to earthworms as well as effects on plant survival and growth. No effects up to the highest tested dose (5 000 mg/kg) were observed for sediment organisms in chronic toxicity tests. No water (pelagic) critical toxicity value (CTV) is determined for DBDPE in this assessment, based on uncertain aquatic test results. Information gaps on the toxicity of DBDPE to wildlife and effects on pelagic, sediment and terrestrial species from prolonged (e.g. lifetime and mutigenerational) exposure, as well as recent aquatic and sediment analogue decaBDE studies reporting effects at low concentrations, highlight the possibility that future DBDPE toxicity studies may determine similar effects at low concentrations. This uncertainty was considered in the application of precaution for the assessment.

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

A risk quotient analysis for DBDPE transformation products was not conducted given the lack of information on the quantity of transformation products in Canada. Transformation products are expected to represent a minor fraction relative to parent DBDPE; however, they are similar to predicted/measured fractions of analogue decaBDE debromination products, and if DBDPE levels in the environment continue to increase (e.g. due to use of the substance as a replacement flame retardant), the pool of potential brominated transformation products could become important.

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

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

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

Overall proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that DBDPE meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA. It is proposed that DBDPE meets the persistence, but not bioaccumulation criteria as set out in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA. However, DBDPE may contribute to the formation of persistent, bioaccumulative, and inherently toxic transformation products, such as lower brominated BDPEs, in the environment.

The draft screening assessment as well as the risk management scope document for the substance is available on the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of two substances — 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) [TCPP], CAS RN (see footnote 6) 13674-84-5 and 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1) [TDCPP], CAS RN 13674-87-8 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and 68(c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) and 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1) are substances on the Domestic Substances List;

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

Whereas it is proposed to conclude that 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) meets one or more of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act;

Whereas it is proposed to conclude that 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1) does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act;

And whereas options will be considered for follow-up activities to track changes in environmental and human exposure to 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1),

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) intend to recommend to his Excellency the Governor in Council that 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) be added to Schedule 1 of the Act.

Notice is furthermore given that the ministers propose to take no further action on 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1) at this time.

Notice is further given that the ministers have released a risk management scope document for 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) to initiate discussions with stakeholders on the development of a risk management approach.

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 measures the ministers propose to take and on the scientific considerations on the basis of which the measures are proposed. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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

Virginia Poter
Director General
Industrial Sectors, Chemicals and Waste Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

David Morin
Director General
Safe Environments Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1) and 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1)

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 on 2-propanol, 1-chloro-, phosphate (3:1), hereinafter referred to as TCPP, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN) 13674-84-5, and 2-propanol, 1,3-dichloro-, phosphate (3:1), hereinafter referred to as TDCPP, CAS RN 13674-87-8. TCPP and TDCPP are part of the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping under Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. These two substances were identified as a priority for assessment based on human health concerns (related to potential for exposure) but not for ecological concerns (met criteria for persistence but not potential for bioaccumulation or inherent toxicity to non-human organisms).

TCPP and TDCPP are discrete organic chemicals that do not occur naturally in the environment. According to information identified from a survey issued under section 71 of CEPA, there is no manufacturing of either TCPP or TDCPP in Canada. Both substances were predominantly imported into Canada as pure substances or in manufactured items. The total import volumes in 2011 ranged from 1 000 000 to 10 000 000 kg of TCPP, and from 100 000 to 1 000 000 kg of TDCPP.

TCPP is used as an additive flame retardant for manufacturing of building or construction materials in Canada (e.g. polyurethane spray foam insulation), and is also contained in imported products of polyurethane spray foam insulation with the same functional use. TCPP is also imported in Canada in the manufactured products of flexible polyurethane foam (used in upholstered furniture and mattresses) and as a textile waterproofing spray intended for consumer use. Available information indicates the potential for migration of flame retardants from foam objects. The commercial products, referred to as TCPP, may consist of four chain isomers of TCPP (including another three substances, with the CAS RNs 76025-08-6, 76649-15-5, and 6145-73-9). The composition is dominated by TCPP (up to 85%); the balance is composed by the other three isomers in varying amounts, based on commercial products provided by different suppliers. The chain isomers of TCPP are considered to possess identical physical and chemical properties for the purpose of this risk assessment; data reported in studies that have been carried out using the commercial products of TCPP (i.e. a mixture of chain isomers) are considered valid for assessing TCPP.

TDCPP is used as an additive flame retardant in the manufacturing of flexible polyurethane foam in Canada (used in upholstered furniture and mattresses). The substance is imported as a pure substance and in products with the same functional use.

Globally, TCPP and TDCPP are used as flame retardants and plasticizers, in textile upholstery, paints and adhesives.

TCPP is highly soluble in water and has a low octanol–water partition coefficient, while TDCPP possesses moderate water solubility and a moderate octanol–water partition coefficient. Both substances have a low vapour pressure and do not dissociate in water. Empirical studies indicate that neither substance is rapidly biodegradable. Both substances are considered to be very stable in water, sediment and soil, but not air (gas phase). Based on findings from environmental sampling studies, TCPP and TDCPP have been found associated with particulates in air where they are considered to be very persistent. Both substances have been detected in air samples over the Arctic areas in Canada and Europe and are considered to have potential for long-range transport when adsorbed to aerosols.

Potential environmental releases of TCPP and TDCPP are from industrial activities (during their blending with a polyol) and from use of products that contain these substances. Releases from industrial activities are expected to primarily enter water via wastewater treatment systems. Based on its physical and chemical properties, TCPP will partition to water, with insignificant amounts partitioning to sediments. TDCPP may be found in both sediment and water, to some extent. Unlike TCPP, which is expected to remain predominantly dissolved in effluents, TDCPP, given its greater propensity to adsorb to solids, is likely to be found adsorbed to wastewater treatment system biosolids, which ultimately may be applied to soils. Emissions from manufactured items and products are expected to enter in air or to dust, and ultimately precipitate in water and soil. However, it is expected that releases to the environment via this route are minimal and diffuse.

As would be expected based on the physical and chemical properties of these substances, laboratory studies have reported low bioconcentration factors and rapid metabolism for TCPP and TDCPP, indicating that both substances have a limited potential to accumulate in aquatic biota. Significant exposure in higher trophic level organisms through the food chain is not expected for TCPP and TDCPP. Rapid excretion of biotransformation products observed in the mammalian studies suggests that metabolites are also unlikely to bioaccumulate.

Empirical toxicity data have been identified for both substances. TCPP has moderate toxicity to aquatic organisms and terrestrial plants, while TDCPP has shown considerably higher toxicity to aquatic organisms, including effects on the endocrine system in fish. Additional sub-lethal effects (i.e. neurotoxicity and genetic effects in birds) are also noted in both in vivo and in vitro studies. Data for endpoints from in vitro studies that show linkage to organism level effects have been considered in the risk assessment for these two substances.

Considering the environmental fate and available toxicity data for these two substances, risk quotient analyses were conducted in the aquatic compartment for TCPP and in the aquatic, sediment and soil compartments for TDCPP. Outcomes from the risk quotient analyses indicate that the risk associated with exposure of these two substances to organisms due to releases from industrial uses and consumer products is low at current predicted levels of release.

Considering all available lines of evidence presented in this draft screening assessment, there is low risk of harm to organisms and the broader integrity of the environment from TCPP or TDCPP. It is therefore proposed to conclude that TCPP and TDCPP do not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(a) or (b) of CEPA as they are 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.

Based on available information on concentrations in environmental media and results from a survey under section 71 of CEPA, the general population is expected to be exposed to TCPP and TDCPP from environmental media (air, water, dust), from food and during the use of consumer products containing these substances (i.e. in products such as spray foam and waterproofing products and manufactured items such as foam-containing upholstered furniture). Several biomonitoring studies are also presented in the draft screening assessment for TDCPP, while only limited biomonitoring data are presented for TCPP.

Based on the available information and classifications by other international regulatory agencies, critical effects for characterization of the risk to human health from exposure to TDCPP are carcinogenicity and non-cancer effects on the kidneys and testes. Tumours were observed in multiple organ sites, including kidney and liver in both sexes, testes (in males) and adrenal gland (in females) in a two-year carcinogenicity study in rats. Results of genotoxicity tests were mixed in vitro and mostly negative in vivo.

The margins of exposure between estimates of exposure from environmental media (air, water, dust and food, including breast milk) to TDCPP and the critical effect levels for cancer and non-cancer effects are considered to be adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases. The margins between estimates of exposure resulting from the use of manufactured items containing TDCPP and the critical effect levels for cancer and non-cancer effects are considered adequate to account for uncertainties in the exposure and health effect databases.

Based on the available information on the health effects of TCPP, the critical effects for the characterization of risk to human health are reproductive and developmental effects. Additionally, although no chronic or carcinogenicity studies are available, there is evidence to indicate that TCPP may be carcinogenic (read-across from analogues, quantitative structure activity relationships [QSAR] and structural alerts analyses).

The margin of exposure between estimates of exposure from environmental media (air, water, dust and food, including breast milk) to TCPP and the critical effect levels is considered to be adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases. The margins between estimates of exposure resulting from the use of certain manufactured items containing TCPP, specifically foam-containing upholstered furniture, and the critical effect levels are considered potentially inadequate to account for uncertainties in the exposure and health effect databases.

Based on the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that TCPP meets the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA as it is entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Based on the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that TDCPP 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 proposed conclusion

It is proposed to conclude that TCPP meets one or more criteria as set out in section 64 of CEPA. In addition, it is proposed to conclude that TCPP meets the persistence criteria but does not meet the bioaccumulation criteria as set out in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA.

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

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

Considerations for follow-up

TDCPP is expected to persist in the environment and has demonstrated effects to aquatic organisms at low concentrations. In addition, TDCPP possesses potential carcinogenicity. Although present estimated levels of exposure are not indicative of harm to the environment or human health, there may be concerns if import and use quantities were to increase in Canada, which is reasonable to expect for substances serving as commercial alternatives for substances currently subject to controls or considered for controls in Canada and internationally, such as the polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) or hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD).

Given the concerns related to the potential future increased use of this substance, follow-up activities will be considered to inform prioritization and evaluation of future new or increased use. There are a number of possible options for tracking future new or increased use of this substance. Amendment of the DSL to indicate that the Significant New Activity provisions apply with respect to TDCPP may be considered that would require notification and evaluation of potential new activities prior to these activities taking place in Canada. In order to monitor changes in the Canadian import, manufacture, use and release of TDCPP, this substance may be considered for addition to the National Pollutant Release Inventory or for DSL Inventory Update surveys administered under CEPA. Environmental monitoring in relevant matrices or biomonitoring may be considered to quantify and track potential increases in environmental and human exposure. The proposed path forward for tracking future changes in use patterns and/or environmental releases will be confirmed at the time of publication of the final screening assessment. This substance may be subject to further ecological and human health assessment, if warranted by new information.

The draft screening assessment for TCPP and TDCPP as well as the risk management scope document for TCPP is available on the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations for the substance benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2-(2-propenyloxy)- (ATE), CAS RN (see footnote 7) 3278-89-5 (paragraph 68(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2-(2-propenyloxy)- is a substance that was included in the organic flame retardants grouping under the Government of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan due to its use as a flame retardant and potential use as an alternative for other flame retardants, which are presently subject to regulatory controls or phase-out in Canada and/or internationally;

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

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

Notice is hereby given that a summary of the draft state of the science report on benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2- (2-propenyloxy)- conducted pursuant to paragraph 68(b) of the Act is annexed hereto.

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 scientific considerations presented in the draft state of the science report. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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 state of the science report on benzene, 1,3,5-tribromo-2(2-propenyloxy)-

Pursuant to section 68 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have prepared a draft state of the science (SOS) report on benzene, 1,3,5- tribromo-2-(2-propenyloxy)-, (2,4,6-tribromophenyl allyl ether) [ATE] (CAS RN 3278-89-5).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Results from critical body residue (CBR) modelling suggest that ATE does not have the potential to bioaccumulate; however, if environmental concentrations were to approach water solubility (0.24 mg/L), there would be potential for toxic effects.

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

ATE is found in consumer and commercial products as an additive and reactive flame retardant. As a reactive flame retardant, release from electronic products is not expected; however, release from products where ATE is used additively (EPS foam) would be expected, but would be minimal and diffuse. The greatest releases of ATE to the environment are expected as a result of industrial use (i.e. product manufacturing). Industrial release scenarios developed to provide estimates of exposure to the aquatic environment, including sediment and sludge media, indicated that risk of harm to organisms in these media from ATE exposure is low, based on current levels.

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

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

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

Overall proposed outcome

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

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

The draft state of the science report for this substance is available on the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of results of investigations for the substances benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester (TBB), CAS RN (see footnote 8) 183658-27-7, and 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester (TBPH), CAS RN 26040-51-7 (paragraph 68(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester and 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6- tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester are substances that were included in the organic flame retardants grouping under the Government of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan due to their use as flame retardants and potential use as alternatives for other flame retardants which are presently subject to regulatory controls or phase-out in Canada and/or internationally;

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

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

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

Notice is hereby given that a summary of the draft state of the science report on benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester and 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester conducted pursuant to paragraph 68(b) of the Act is annexed hereto.

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 scientific considerations presented in the draft state of the science report. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca). 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, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, 819-938-5212 (fax), eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca (email).

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 state of the science report on benzoic acid, 2,3,4,5-tetrabromo-, 2-ethylhexyl ester and 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, 3,4,5,6-tetrabromo-, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester

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

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

Both substances are part of the Certain Organic Flame Retardants (OFR) Substance Grouping of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which includes 10 organic substances having a similar function: application to materials to slow the ignition and spread of fire. The two substances subject to this state of the science report were identified as priorities for action based on potential ecological and human health concerns identified from evaluations conducted in response to notifications received pursuant to the New Substances provisions of CEPA. Furthermore, TBPH has been in commerce in Canada since the transitional period between the establishment of the Domestic Substances List (DSL) and the coming into force of the New Substances Notification Regulations (Chemicals and Polymers) [between January 1, 1987, and July 1, 1994]. The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number (CAS RN), common name, acronym, and name on the Non-Domestic Substances List (NDSL) or the United States Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of the substances are listed in the table below.

Identity information for TBB and TBPH, two substances from the OFR Substance Grouping

CAS RN

Common name (acronym)

NDSL or TSCA name

183658-27-7

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

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

26040-51-7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Overall proposed outcome

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

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

The draft state of the science report for these substances is available on the Government of Canada’s Chemical Substances Web site (www.chemicalsubstances.gc.ca).

[41-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Appointments

Name and position

Order in Council

Arora, Anil

2016-800

Chief Statistician of Canada

 

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

2016-830

Official Receivers

 

Amaratunge, Bernadeen

 

Bal, Jessmyn

 

Bard, Jennifer

 

Basiala, Claudia

 

Bouvet-Frechette, Antoine

 

Bussey, Catherine

 

Chan, Kelvin

 

Chau, Brian

 

Cozma, Maria Liliana

 

Evason, Yana

 

Ewers, Elaine Elizabeth

 

Fay, Julie Diane

 

Hiltz, Jennifer

 

Hornes, Milagros

 

Knott, Crystal

 

Marshall, Michelle

 

McNeill, Patrick

 

Millar, Melissa Ann

 

Ngu, Alexander

 

Persand, Sanjay

 

Prosolupov, Olha

 

Raymond, Melanie

 

Skiba, Wojciech (Mark)

 

Wallace, Martha

 

Government of Ontario

2016-814

Administrators

 

Feldman, The Hon. Kathryn N.

 

October 17 to October 21, 2016

 

Hoy, The Hon. Alexandra H.

 

October 5 to October 7, 2016

 

Sharpe, The Hon. Robert J.

 

October 16, 2016

 

Smith, The Hon. Heather J.

 

October 31, 2016

 

Laliberté, Pierre

2016-801

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

 

Acting Commissioner

 

Veterans Review and Appeal Board

 

Temporary Members

 

LeBlanc, Bernard Thomas

2016-808

O’Kurley, Brian

2016-809

Parkhouse, Owen J. W.

2016-810

Taylor, Brent

2016-811

Woodfield, Richard

2016-812

Watson, The Hon. Jack

2016-813

Government of Alberta

 

Administrator

 

September 28 to September 30, 2016

 

September 30, 2016

Diane Bélanger
Official Documents Registrar

[41-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

INSURANCE COMPANIES ACT

Brookfield Annuity Company — Letters patent of incorporation

Notice is hereby given of the issuance, pursuant to section 22 of the Insurance Companies Act, of letters patent incorporating Brookfield Annuity Company and, in French, La Compagnie de Rentes Brookfield on August 11, 2016.

August 25, 2016

Jeremy Rudin
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[41-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Exchange Bank of Canada — Letters patent of continuance and order to commence and carry on business

Notice is hereby given of the issuance,

September 22, 2016

Jeremy Rudin
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[41-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Natixis — Order to commence and carry on business

Notice is hereby given of the issuance, pursuant to subsection 534(1) of the Bank Act, of an order authorizing a foreign bank, Natixis, to commence and carry on business in Canada, effective September 6, 2016. The foreign bank is permitted to carry on business in Canada under the name, in English, Natixis Canada Branch and, in French, Natixis, succursale canadienne.

September 19, 2016

Jeremy Rudin
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[41-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation — Order to commence and carry on business

Notice is hereby given of the issuance, pursuant to subsection 534(1) of the Bank Act, of an order authorizing a foreign bank, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, to commence and carry on business in Canada, effective October 3, 2016. The foreign bank is permitted to carry on business in Canada under the name, in English, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, Canada Branch and, in French, Banque Sumitomo Mitsui, succursale canadienne, effective October 3, 2016.

September 20, 2016

Jeremy Rudin
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[41-1-o]

PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE

Appointment opportunities

We know that our country is stronger — and our government more effective — when decision-makers reflect Canada’s diversity. Moving forward, the Government of Canada will use an appointment process that is transparent and merit-based, strives for gender parity, and ensures that Indigenous Canadians and minority groups are properly represented in positions of leadership. We will 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.

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 Web site (http://www.appointments-nominations.gc.ca/slctnPrcs.asp?menu=1&lang=eng).

Position

Organization

Closing date

Chairperson

Marine Atlantic Inc.

October 13, 2016

Chairperson

Ridley Terminals Inc.

October 13, 2016

Chairperson

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

October 24, 2016

Directors

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

October 24, 2016

Member

Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

October 24, 2016

Member

Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board

October 24, 2016

Member

Canada Agricultural Review Tribunal

October 24, 2016

Members

Canada Council for the Arts

October 24, 2016

Members — All regional divisions (full-time and part-time positions)

Parole Board of Canada

October 24, 2016

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

 

Commissioner of Lobbying

Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying

 

President

Public Service Commission

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Montréal Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Prince Rupert Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Sept-Îles Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

St. John’s Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Thunder Bay Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Vancouver Fraser Port Authority

 

Director (Federal Representative)

Windsor Port Authority

 

Upcoming opportunities

New opportunities that will be posted in the coming weeks.

Position

Organization

Full-time Member

National Energy Board

Chairperson

Patented Medicine Prices Review Board

Member

Patented Medicine Prices Review Board

Citizenship Judges

Citizenship Commission

Assistant Privacy Commissioner

Office of the Privacy Commissioner

Member

Military Judges Compensation Committee

Vice-Chairpersons (full-time position and part-time position)

Military Grievances External Review Committee

Members (full-time position and part-time position)

Military Grievances External Review Committee

Chairperson

Canadian Museum for Human Rights

Trustees

Canadian Museum for Human Rights

Members

National Film Board

Members

National Capital Commission

Chairperson

National Gallery of Canada

Vice-Chairperson

National Gallery of Canada

Trustees

National Gallery of Canada

Member

Telefilm Canada

President (Chief Executive Officer)

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

Chairperson

Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

Chairperson

VIA Rail Canada Inc.

Chairperson

Canadian Museum of History

Vice-Chairperson

Canadian Museum of History

Trustees

Canadian Museum of History

Chairperson

Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21

Trustees

Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21

Trustees

National Museum of Science and Technology

Members

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Vice-Chairperson

Polar Knowledge Canada

Members

Polar Knowledge Canada

Permanent Members

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

Chairperson

Canadian Museum of Nature

Trustees

Canadian Museum of Nature

Members

Veterans Review and Appeal Board

Executive Vice-Chairperson and Member

Parole Board of Canada

Ongoing opportunities

Opportunities posted on an ongoing basis.

Position

Organization

Full-time and Part-time Members (Appeal Division)

Social Security Tribunal

Full-time and Part-time Members (General Division — Income Security Section)

Social Security Tribunal

Full-time and Part-time Members (General Division — Employment Insurance Section)

Social Security Tribunal

Full-time and Part-time Members

Immigration and Refugee Board

[41-1-o]