Vol. 135, No. 51 — December 22, 2001

GOVERNMENT NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Appointments

Name and Position	Order in Council
Auditor General of Canada	2001-2228
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Special examiner
Canadian Film Development Corporation
Bélanger, Charles	2001-2270
Member and Chairperson
Stursberg, Richard	2001-2269
Executive Director
Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board
Full-time Members
Simpson, Charles H.	2001-2226
Thériault, Camille H.	2001-2225
Colville, David C.	2001-2267
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Vice-Chairman
Ernst & Young	2001-2227
Auditor
Auditor General of Canada
Joint Auditor
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Gerein, The Hon. William Frank	2001-2261
Government of Saskatchewan
Administrator January 2 to 31, 2002, and February 14 and 15, 2002
Joynt, Lorraine	2001-2231
Canada Pension Plan
Review Tribunal
Member— North York
LeBlanc, Léonard J.	2001-2229
National Parole Board
Full-time Member and Vice-Chairperson
MacNeill, Donald Charles	2001-2224
Blue Water Bridge Authority
Member
Morden, The Hon. John W.	2001-2260
Government of Ontario
Administrator December 26, 2001, to January 4, 2002
Morin, The Hon. Benoît	2001-2233
Court of Appeal of the Province of Quebec
Puisne Judge
Nunavut Wildlife Management Board	2001-2230
Members
McCormick, Kevin Joseph
Mike, Meeka
Philp, The Hon. Alan R.	2001-2259
Government of Manitoba
Administrator December 22, 2001, to January 29, 2002
Prévost, Gilbert	2001-2223
Canada Elections Act
Returning Officer — Hull-Aylmer
Rowe, The Hon. Malcolm H.	2001-2234
Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland
Judge of Appeal
Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland
Member ex officio
Thompson, Carl R., Q.C.	2001-2235
Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland
Judge
Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland
Member ex officio
von Finckenstein, Konrad	2001-2232
Commissioner of Competition

December 13, 2001

JACQUELINE GRAVELLE
Manager

[51-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

RADIOCOMMUNICATION ACT

Notice No. DGTP-011-01 — Update of Guidelines on the Licensing Process and Spectrum Release Plan (2001 Edition)

The purpose of this notice is to announce a new edition, known as the 2001 Edition, of the above-referred policy document to update the first edition published in October 1999. At the time of its initial publication, Industry Canada indicated that the spectrum release plan would be updated regularly to provide more certainty as to which spectrum resources were being considered for licensing. In addition, as proposed in the Framework for Spectrum Auctions in Canada, the Department indicated it would issue an updated forecast of certain types of spectrum to be released and the timing of future competitive licensing processes.

One of the highlights of the new Edition is a forecast on the release of additional spectrum for advanced mobile services including those of the third generation (3G). The Department wishes to use this policy paper to outline the steps in a work plan which will lead to the licensing of new spectrum.

The policy document also serves to update the spectrum resources (frequency bands and satellite orbital positions) for which first-come, first-served licensing will continue to be used and the spectrum resources for which the competitive licensing process will likely be used. The policy paper reflects the various spectrum policy and licensing decisions taken by the Department since the Spectrum Release Plan was issued in 1999. A competitive licensing process will typically be considered in situations where there is, or is likely to be, more demand for a particular spectrum resource than there is supply. The policy document provides a best estimate of certain types of spectrum to be released and the timing for initiating competitive licensing.

This notice is available electronically as follows:

World Wide Web (WWW)
http://strategis.gc.ca/spectrum

or can be obtained in hard copy, for a fee, from: Tyrell Press Ltd., 2714 Fenton Road, Gloucester, Ontario K1T 3T7, sales1@ tyrellpress.ca (Electronic mail), 1-800-267-4862 (Canada toll-free telephone), 1-800-574-0137 (United States toll-free telephone), (613) 822-0740 (Worldwide telephone), (613) 822-1089 (Facsimile); and DLS, St. Joseph Print Group Inc., 45 Sacré-Cœur Boulevard, Hull, Quebec K1A 0S7, 1-888-562-5561 (Canada toll-free telephone), 1-800-565-7757 (Canada toll-free facsimile), (819) 779-4335 (Worldwide telephone), (819) 779-2833 (Worldwide facsimile).

December 14, 2001

MICHAEL HELM
Director General
Telecommunications Policy Branch

[51-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXTRADITION ACT

Treaty on Extradition Between the Government of Canada and the Government of Sweden

Signed at Stockholm on February 15, 2000, by Philippe Kirsch, Canadian Ambassador and Anna Lindh, Minister, Department of Foreign Affairs for the Kingdom of Sweden, which entered into force on October 30, 2001.

The Government of Canada and the Government of Sweden,

Desiring to make more effective their cooperation in the prevention and suppression of crime by concluding a Treaty on Extradition,

Affirming their respect for each other's legal systems and judicial institutions,

Have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE 1

Obligation to Extradite

Each Contracting State agrees to extradite to the other, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, any person within its territory who is wanted for prosecution or the imposition or enforcement of a sentence in the Requesting State for an extraditable offence.

ARTICLE 2

Extraditable Offences

1. For the purposes of this Treaty, extradition shall be granted for conduct that constitutes an offence under the laws of both Contracting States punishable by deprivation of liberty for a period of at least two years or by a more severe penalty.

2. For greater clarity, the Contracting States confirm that the conduct referred to in paragraph 1 includes conspiring in, attempting, preparing for, or participating in, the commission of an offence.

3. Where the request for extradition relates to a person sentenced to deprivation of liberty by a court of the Requesting State for any extraditable offence, extradition shall be granted if a period of at least six months of the sentence remains to be served.

4. For the purpose of this Article;

(a) it shall not matter whether the laws of the Contracting States place the conduct constituting the offence within the same category of offences or denominate the offence by the same terminology;

(b) in determining whether conduct is an offence against the law of the Requested State the totality of the conduct alleged against the person whose extradition is sought shall be taken into account and it shall not matter whether, under the laws of the Contracting States, the constituent elements of the offence differ.

5. An offence of a fiscal character, including an offence against a law relating to taxation, customs duties, foreign exchange control or any other revenue matter, is an extraditable offence. Extradition may not be refused on the ground that the law of the Requested State does not impose the same kind of tax or duty or does not contain a tax, duty, customs, or exchange regulation of the same kind as the law of the Requesting State provided that the conduct for which extradition is sought is an offence in the Requested State.

6. Where the offence has been committed outside the territory of the Requesting State extradition shall be granted where the law of the Requested State provides for jurisdiction over an offence committed outside its territory in similar circumstances or the person sought is a national of the Requesting State.

7. Extradition may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty irrespective of when the offence in relation to which extradition is sought was committed, provided that:

(a) it was an offence in the Requesting State at the time of the conduct constituting the offence; and

(b) the conduct alleged would, if it had taken place in the Requested State at the time of the making of the request for extradition, have constituted an offence against the law in force of the Requested State.

8. If the request for extradition relates to a sentence of both imprisonment and a pecuniary sanction, the Requested State may grant extradition for the enforcement of both the imprisonment and the pecuniary sanction.

9. If the request for extradition relates to a number of offences, each of which is punishable under the laws of both States, but some of which do not meet the other requirements of paragraphs 1 and 3, the Requested State may grant extradition for such offences provided that the person is to be extradited for at least one extraditable offence.

ARTICLE 3

Mandatory Refusal of Extradition

Extradition shall not be granted in any of the following circumstances:

(a) where the offence for which extradition is requested is considered by the Requested State to be a political offence or an offence of a political character;

(b) where there are substantial grounds for believing that the request for extradition has been made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of the person's race, religion, nationality or political beliefs;

(c) where final judgment has been passed in the Requested State upon the person sought in respect of the offence for which the person's extradition is requested;

(d) where the prosecution or the punishment for the offence for which extradition is requested would be barred by prescription under the law of the Requesting State or the Requested State;

(e) where the offence for which extradition is requested constitutes an offence under military law that is not an offence under ordinary criminal law.

ARTICLE 4

Discretionary Refusal of Extradition

Extradition may be refused in any of the following circumstances:

(a) where the offence for which extradition is requested is subject to the jurisdiction of the Requested State and that State will prosecute that offence. In such a case, before refusing, the Requested State, after consulting with the Requesting State, shall decide whether to extradite the person or submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. In making its decision, the Requested State shall consider all relevant factors, including but not limited to:

(i) the time and place of commission of each offence or place of intended commission;
(ii) the place where injury occurred or was intended to occur;
(iii) the respective interests of the Contracting States;
(iv) the nationality of the person and victim;
(v) the habitual place of residence of the person; and
(vi) the availability and location of the evidence;

(b) where the person sought is being prosecuted by the Requested State for the offence for which extradition is requested or the competent authorities of the Requested State have decided, in accordance with the law of that State, not to prosecute or to terminate the prosecution that has been instituted;

(c) where the offence carries the death penalty under the law of the Requesting State, unless that State undertakes that the death penalty will not be sought, or if a sentence of death is imposed it will not be carried out;

(d) where, in exceptional cases, the Requested State while also taking into account the seriousness of the offence and the interests of the Requesting State considers that because of the personal circumstances, particularly the age or health, of the person sought, the extradition would be incompatible with humanitarian considerations;

(e) where the person sought has been finally acquitted or convicted in a third state for the same offence for which extradition is requested and, if convicted, the sentence imposed has been fully enforced or is no longer enforceable;

(f) where the person sought was a young offender within the meaning of the law of the Requested State at the time of the offence and the law that will apply to that person in the Requesting State is not consistent with the fundamental principles of the law of the Requested State dealing with young offenders;

(g) where the person sought is in the Requested State as the result of extradition from a third state and any consent of that third state required for re-extradition is denied.

ARTICLE 5

Extradition of Nationals

1. Extradition may be refused where the person whose extradition is requested is a national of the Requested State.

2. Where the Requested State refuses extradition pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall submit the case to its competent authorities in order that proceedings for the prosecution of the person in respect of all or any of the offences for which extradition has been sought may be taken. That State shall inform the Requesting State of any action taken and the outcome of any prosecution.

ARTICLE 6

Channels of Communication

Requests for extradition and any subsequent correspondence shall be made through the diplomatic channel.

ARTICLE 7

Documentation to be Submitted

1. The following documentation shall be submitted in support of a request for extradition:

(a) in all cases:

(i) information about the description, identity, location and nationality of the person sought;
(ii) a statement prepared by a prosecutor or a public official of the conduct constituting the offence for which extradition is requested indicating the place and date of the commission of the offence, the nature of the offence and reproducing the test of the legal provisions describing the offence and the applicable penalty. This statement shall also indicate:

— that these legal provisions were in force both at the time of the commission of the offence and at the time of the extradition request;

— whether or not the prosecution of the offence, the imposition or the enforcement of any penalty for it is barred by reason of prescription; and

— where the offence occurred outside the territory of the Requesting State, the legal provisions establishing its jurisdiction.

(b) in the case of a person accused or sought for prosecution for an offence:

(i) the original or a copy of the order of arrest or of any document having the same force and effect, issued in the Requesting State; and
(ii) in the event that the law of the Requested State so requires, evidence that would justify committal for trial of the person sought if the conduct had occurred in the Requested State.

For that purpose, a summary of the facts of the case setting out the evidence, including evidence of the identity of the offender, shall be admitted in evidence as proof of the facts contained therein provided that the prosecutor who produces it certifies that the evidence described in the summary was obtained in accordance with the law of the Requesting State.

The summary may include any reports, statements reproductions or other useful documentation.

The summary may contain evidence gathered in the Requesting State or elsewhere and shall be admitted in evidence whether or not such evidence would otherwise be admissible under the law of the Requested State.

(c) in the case of a person sought for the enforcement of a sentence:

(i) the original or a copy of the judgment or other document setting out the conviction and sentence to be served; and
(ii) if a portion of the sentence has already been served, a statement by a public official specifying the portion of the sentence which remains to be served.

(d) in the case of a request from Canada relating to a person who has been convicted but not sentenced:

(i) the original or a copy of the order of arrest;
(ii) the original or a copy of a document establishing that the person has been convicted; and
(iii) a statement that a sentence is to be imposed.

2. In the case of a person convicted by default the requirements relating to the submission of documentation set out in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 shall apply. If, however, it is established that the charge containing notice of the date and place of trial or the judgment rendered by default has been personally served on the person sought and that person has not appeared or availed himself or herself of the rights to appeal and retrial, the requirements relating to the submission of documentation referred to in subparagraphs (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall apply.

3. All documents, and copies of documents, submitted in support of a request for extradition and appearing to have been certified or issued by a judicial authority, a prosecutor or a public official of the Requesting State or made under their authority, shall be admitted in extradition proceedings in the Requested State without having to be taken under oath or solemn affirmation and without proof of the signature or of the official character of the person appearing to have signed or certified them.

4. Any translation produced in the Requesting State of documents submitted in support of a request for extradition shall be admitted for all purposes in extradition proceedings.

ARTICLE 8

Authentication of Supporting Documentation

No authentication or certification of documentation submitted in support of the request for extradition shall be required.

ARTICLE 9

Language

All documents submitted in accordance with this Treaty shall be in or translated into an official language of the Requested State.

ARTICLE 10

Additional Documentation

If the Requested State considers that the documentation furnished in support of a request for extradition is not sufficient in accordance with this Treaty to enable extradition to be granted, that State may request that additional documentation be furnished within such time as it specifies.

ARTICLE 11

Simplified Extradition

To the extent permitted by the law of the Requested State, extradition may be granted pursuant to the provisions of this Treaty notwithstanding that the requirements of Article 7 have not been complied with provided that the person sought consents to being extradited.

ARTICLE 12

Provisional Arrest

1. In case of urgency, the Requesting State may apply in writing for the provisional arrest of the person sought. Such application may be communicated directly between the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Sweden and the Department of Justice in Canada, in which case the facilities of the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) may be used.

2. An application for provisional arrest shall include:

(a) information concerning the description, identity, location and nationality of the person sought;

(b) an indication of the intention to request extradition;

(c) the name, date and place of the offence and a brief description of the facts of the case;

(d) information concerning the existence of an order of arrest or of a conviction; and

(e) information concerning the maximum penalty that could be imposed for the offence under the law of the Requesting State or the sentence that has been imposed.

3. The Requested State shall promptly inform the Requesting State of the measures taken pursuant to it.

4. Provisional arrest shall be terminated if the request for extradition has not been received after the arrest:

(a) by Canada, within sixty days, or

(b) by Sweden, within forty days.

5. If the request for extradition is received within the applicable period specified in paragraph 4 but is not accompanied by the documentation required under Article 7, the competent authorities of the Requested State may, to the extent permitted by its law, extend that period for receipt of the documentation.

6. The person sought may be granted interim release at any time, subject to the conditions deemed necessary to ensure that the person does not leave the country.

7. The expiry of the applicable period specified in paragraph 4 does not preclude the initiation of subsequent extradition proceedings if a request for extradition is subsequently received.

ARTICLE 13

Conflicting Requests

1. Where requests are received from two or more States for the extradition of the same person either for the same offence or for different offences, the Requested State shall determine to which of those States the person is to be extradited and shall notify those States of its decision.

2. In determining to which State a person is to be extradited, the Requested State shall have regard to all the relevant circumstances, and, in particular, to:

(a) the relative seriousness of the offences if the requests relate to different offences;

(b) the time and place of commission of each offence;

(c) the respective dates of the requests;

(d) the nationality of the person sought; and

(e) the ordinary place of residence of the person.

ARTICLE 14

Surrender

1. The Requested State shall, as soon as a decision on the request for extradition has been made, communicate that decision to the Requesting State. Reasons shall be given for any complete or partial rejection of an extradition request.

2. Where extradition is granted, the Requested State shall inform the Requesting State of the length of time for which the person claimed was detained in custody as a result of the extradition request.

3. Where extradition is granted, the Requested State shall surrender the person from a point of departure in its territory convenient to the Requesting State.

4. The Requesting State shall remove the person from the Requested State within such reasonable period as the Requested State specifies and, if the person is not removed within that period, the Requested State may refuse to extradite that person for the same offence.

5. If circumstances beyond its control prevent a Contracting State from surrendering or removing the person to be extradited, it shall notify the other Contracting State. The Contracting States shall decide upon a new date of surrender and the provisions of paragraph 4 shall apply.

ARTICLE 15

Postponed or Temporary Surrender

1. Where the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the Requested State for an offence other than that for which extradition is requested, the Requested State may surrender the person sought or postpone surrender until the conclusion of the proceedings or the service of the whole or any part of the sentence imposed. The Requested State shall inform the Requesting State of any postponement.

2. Where a person has been found extraditable, the Requested State may, to the extent permitted by its law, temporarily surrender the person sought for the purpose of prosecution in accordance with conditions to be determined with the Requesting State. A person who is returned to the Requested State following a temporary surrender may be finally surrendered in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty to serve any sentence imposed.

ARTICLE 16

Surrender of Property

1. To the extent permitted by its law, the Requested State shall, at the request of the Requesting State, seize and surrender property:

(a) that may be required as evidence; or

(b) that has been acquired as a result of the offence and which, at the time of the arrest, is found in the possession of the person sought or is discovered subsequently.

2. Property seized pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be surrendered notwithstanding that extradition, having been granted, cannot be carried out due to the death or escape of the person sought.

3. Where property is liable to seizure or confiscation, the Requested State may, in connection with pending criminal proceedings, temporarily retain or surrender it on condition that it be returned.

4. Any rights that the Requested State or third parties may have acquired in the property shall be preserved. Where these rights exist, the property shall be returned without charge to the Requested State as soon as possible after the trial.

ARTICLE 17

Rule of Specialty

1. A person who has been extradited shall not be prosecuted, sentenced or detained for any offence committed prior to surrender other than the offences for which that person was extradited, nor shall the person's liberty be restricted for any other reason, except:

(a) where the Requested State consents;

(b) where the person, having had an opportunity to leave the Requesting State, has not done so within forty-five days of final discharge, or has returned to that State after having left it; or

(c) where the person extradited consents before a judicial authority in the Requesting State.

2. A request for the consent of the Requested State under paragraph 1 shall, upon the request of the Requested State, be accompanied by the relevant documentation required by Article 7 as well as a record of any statement made by the extradited person in respect of the offence concerned.

3. If the charge for which the person was extradited is subsequently changed, that person may be prosecuted or sentenced provided the offence under its new description is:

(a) based on substantially the same facts contained in the extradition request and its supporting documentation; and

(b) punishable by the same maximum penalty as, or a lesser maximum penalty than, the offence for which that person was extradited.

ARTICLE 18

Re-extradition to a Third State

1. Where a person has been surrendered, the Requesting State shall not extradite the person to any third State for an offence committed before that person's surrender unless:

(a) the Requested State consents to that extradition; or

(b) the person has had an opportunity to leave the Requesting State and has not done so within forty-five days of final discharge in respect of the offence for which that person was surrendered by the Requested State or has voluntarily returned to the Requesting State after having left it.

2. The Requested State may request the production of the documentation submitted by the third state in relation to any consent pursuant to sub-paragraph l(a).

ARTICLE 19

Transit

1. To the extent permitted by its law, transit through the territory of one of the Contracting States shall be granted on a request by the other Contracting State. The request for transit:

(a) may be transmitted by any means affording a record in writing; and

(b) shall contain the information referred to in paragraph 2 of Article 12.

2. No authorization for transit shall be necessary when air travel is used and no landing is scheduled in the territory of the transit State. In the case of an unscheduled landing, that State may require the request for transit provided for in paragraph 1. The transit State shall detain the person in transit until the request is received and the transit is carried out, provided that the request is received within twenty-four hours after the unscheduled landing.

ARTICLE 20

Expenses

1. The Requested State shall make all necessary arrangements for and meet the cost of any proceedings arising out of a request for extradition including a prosecution as a result of a refusal to grant extradition on the basis of nationality.

2. The Requested State shall bear the expenses incurred in its territory in the arrest of the person whose extradition is sought, and in the maintenance in custody of the person until surrender to the Requesting State.

3. The Requesting State shall bear the expenses incurred in conveying the person extradited from the territory of the Requested State.

ARTICLE 21

Conduct of Proceedings

1. In the case of a request for extradition presented by Sweden, the Attorney General of Canada shall conduct the extradition proceedings before the Canadian courts.

2. In the case of a request for extradition presented by Canada, the extradition proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the law of Sweden.

ARTICLE 22

Entry into Force and Termination

1. This Treaty shall be ratified; the instruments of ratification shall be exchanged in Ottawa as soon as possible.

2. This Treaty shall enter into force on the date of the exchange of the instruments of ratification.

3. On its entry into force this Treaty shall terminate and replace the Treaty between Sweden and Canada concerning Extradition, signed at Stockholm on 25 February 1976, and amended by an exchange of Notes between Sweden and Canada at Stockholm on 18 and 25 November 1980.

4. This Treaty shall apply to any request presented after its entry into force even if the offence for which extradition is requested was committed before that date. However, any request for extradition presented prior to the entry into force of the Treaty shall be governed by the provisions of the 1976 Treaty.

5. Either Contracting State may terminate this Treaty at any time by written notification to the other State. The termination shall be effective six months after the date of receipt of such notice.

In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Treaty.

Done in duplicate at Stockholm on the 15th day of February 2000, in English, French and Swedish languages, all texts being equally authentic.

For the Government of Canada

PHILIPPE KIRSCH
Ambassador

For the Government of Sweden

ANNA LINDH
Minister
Department of Foreign Affairs

[51-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES ACT

Appointment of the Queen's Printer for Canada

Pursuant to subsection 19(1) of the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, I, Alfonso Gagliano, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, do hereby appoint Guy Mc Kenzie, Executive Director of Communication Canada, as Queen's Printer for Canada, effective November 19, 2001.

ALFONSO GAGLIANO
Minister of Public Works
and Government Services

[51-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Foreign Bank Order

Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions), on behalf of the Minister of Finance, has consented to JPMorgan Chase Bank, pursuant to subsection 521(1) of the Bank Act, acquiring shares of or ownership interests in J.P. Morgan Securities Canada Inc. in such numbers as to cause the entity to become a non-bank affiliate of the foreign bank, effective October 23, 2001.

December 11, 2001

NICHOLAS LE PAN
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[51-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Foreign Bank Order

Notice is hereby given that the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions), on behalf of the Minister of Finance, has consented to JPMorgan Chase Bank, a foreign bank, pursuant to subsection 521(1) of the Bank Act, acquiring or holding, directly or indirectly, all or substantially all of the assets of Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York, an authorized foreign bank, in relation to the carrying on of business in Canada by Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York, effective October 23, 2001.

December 11, 2001

NICHOLAS LE PAN
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[51-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

JPMorgan Chase Bank — Amended Order Permitting a Foreign Bank to Establish a Branch in Canada

JPMorgan Chase Bank — Amended Order to Commence and Carry on Business by an Authorized Foreign Bank

— Pursuant to subsection 524(1) of the Bank Act, the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions), on behalf of the Minister of Finance, issued an amended order on November 10, 2001, permitting JPMorgan Chase Bank to maintain a branch in Canada to carry on business in Canada under the name JPMorgan Chase Bank.

— Pursuant to subsection 534(1) of the Bank Act, the Superintendent of Financial Institutions issued an amended order approving the commencement and carrying on of business in Canada by JPMorgan Chase Bank effective November 10, 2001.

December 11, 2001

NICHOLAS LE PAN
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[51-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

INSURANCE COMPANIES ACT

BMO Life Insurance Company — Order to Commence and Carry on Business

Notice is hereby given of the issuance, pursuant to subsection 53(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, of an order to commence and carry on business authorizing BMO Life Insurance Company and in French, BMO Compagnie d'assurance-vie, to insure risks falling within the following classes of insurance: life insurance, accident and sickness insurance, and loss of employment insurance, effective November 14, 2001.

December 11, 2001

NICHOLAS LE PAN
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[51-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT

MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY ACT

Request for Comments on Possible Measures to Prevent Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning

Notice is hereby given that the Department of Transport is requesting comments from interested parties on possible measures to prevent motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning.

Summary

Motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning occurs as a result of exposure to carbon monoxide, which is a colourless, almost odourless gas. The symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning include headache, nausea, dizziness, and general disorientation, which may progress to unconsciousness and even death if the concentration of the gas is sufficient or if exposure is prolonged. Canada began regulating the carbon monoxide content of exhaust gas as it exits the tailpipe in 1971; the current limit of 2.1 g/km was set in 1987. Recent studies indicate that the actual carbon monoxide concentration of a newly manufactured vehicle is 1 000 parts per million or less; however, the content is higher during cold starts, especially at low ambient temperatures, and during acceleration.

There are essentially two types of exhaust gas poisoning: unintentional, which usually occurs as a result of poor vehicle maintenance, and self-inflicted. The incidence of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning has decreased steadily since the imposition of emissions controls, declining to a low of 9 deaths in 1997, the most recent year for which statistics are available. Suicides, which represent about 90 percent of all exhaust gas poisonings in Canada, have fluctuated between a high of 385 in 1986 and a low of 260 in 1989 over the 20-year period from 1978 to 1997. There were 268 self-inflicted poisonings in 1997, which accounted for 7.3 percent of all suicides in Canada.

The Department could adopt one of three approaches to the problem of preventing exhaust gas poisonings. It could maintain the status quo, adopt a non-regulatory approach, or introduce regulatory requirements. Given that the death rate from unintentional poisonings has declined significantly and is expected to continue to decrease, further action may not be necessary. The incidence of exhaust gas poisoning suicides remains essentially stable, and it may be possible to undertake effective measures to reduce these fatalities.

A non-regulatory approach could consist of conducting an information campaign that would warn the public of the hazards of exhaust gas poisoning and explain how to prevent it. A regulatory approach could consist of three possible initiatives. A vehicle interior air quality test could be mandated, such as that used by the Russian Federation; air quality monitors could be specified for all motor vehicles; or suicide-resistant tailpipes could be required for passenger vehicles.

Introduction

This notice is being published in response to a submission made in January 2001 by an individual who requested that the Department of Transport undertake specified measures to prevent injury and death caused by carbon monoxide poisoning from motor vehicle exhaust gas. The request, which was also submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation, was supported by five health- and environment-related organizations and a number of individuals. In March 2001, the Department also received a request from a vehicle operator who described his nearly fatal experience with accidental exhaust gas poisoning and who requested that carbon monoxide detectors with audible alarms be mandated for all large trucks.

This notice presents an overview of the scientific mechanism of motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning, an analysis of the incidence of death in Canada from exhaust gas poisoning, and an examination of the various courses of action open to the Department in attempting to prevent the injuries and deaths that occur due to exhaust gas poisoning.

The Mechanisms of Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning

Carbon Monoxide Poisoning

While several constituents of exhaust gas are harmful, carbon monoxide (CO) is the most potentially dangerous. It is a colourless, almost odourless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbonaceous material, which includes coal, wood, paper, oil, gasoline, gas, explosives, and cigarettes. (see footnote 1) When inhaled, carbon monoxide is absorbed through the lungs into the blood where it combines with the hemoglobin in red blood cells to form carboxyhemoglobin, which is a very stable compound. The affinity of carbon monoxide to hemoglobin being much greater than that of oxygen, CO replaces the oxygen in the first site of the hemoglobin molecule and blocks the release of oxygen from the remaining three inner sites. The oxygen deprivation that ensues affects the muscles, heart, and brain most acutely, with the greatest burden being borne by the heart. Not only is it deprived of oxygen in its own right, the heart also attempts to compensate for the reduced supply to the rest of the body by increasing the blood flow.

The symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning include headache, nausea, dizziness, and general disorientation, which may progress to unconsciousness and death. A low level of exposure decreases work or exercise capacity and causes angina attacks in people with chronic angina. Visual perception, manual dexterity and performance in sensory motor tasks, such as driving, are also reduced. In serious cases, pulmonary edema, pneumonia, kidney failure and permanent brain damage may result; however, even in mild poisonings, symptoms such as irritability, restlessness, prolonged delirium, depression, anxiety and memory impairment may persist for many months after the incident.

The severity of the symptoms and the time before their onset depend on the concentration of carbon monoxide in the air, the duration of exposure, the degree of physical exertion of the victim and individual susceptibility. People with heart and respiratory problems, those taking depressant medication, individuals who are under the influence of alcohol, pregnant women, fetuses, and newborns are most susceptible to the adverse effects of carbon monoxide. Table 1 outlines the principal signs and symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning at increasing blood concentrations of carboxyhemoglobin.

Table 1: Principal Signs and Symptoms of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning at Different Concentrations of Carboxyhemoglobin^*

Carboxyhemoglobin Concentration (%)	Principal Signs and Symptoms
0.3 - 0.7	Normal endogenous level.
2.5 - 5	No symptoms. Compensatory increase in blood flow to certain vital organs. Chest pain of angina pectoris is provoked by less exertion.
5 - 10	Mild sensitivity to light.
10 - 20	Tightness across the forehead. Slight headache. Abnormal visual response. Possibly slight breathlessness on exertion. May be lethal to fetus and patients with severe heart disease.
20 - 30	Slight or moderate headache and throbbing in the temples. Flushing. Nausea. Fine manual dexterity abnormal.
30 - 40	Severe headache, vertigo, nausea, and vomiting. Weakness. Irritability and impaired judgement. Fainting on exertion.
40 - 50	Same as above, but more severe with greater possibility of collapse and loss of consciousness.
50 - 60	Possibly coma with intermittent convulsions and Cheyne-Stokes respiration.
60 - 70	Coma with intermittent convulsions. Depressed respiration and heart action. Possibly death.
70 - 80	Weak pulse and slow respiration. Depression of respiratory centre leading to death.

^* There is considerable individual variation in the occurrence of symptoms.

Table 2 describes the signs and symptoms associated with different concentrations of carbon monoxide.

Table 2: Main Physiological Effects at Increasing CO Concentrations (see footnote 2)

Concentration of CO (p.p.m.)*	Signs and Symptoms of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
50	Permissible exposure level for 8 hours as set by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
200	Mild frontal headache in 2 to 3 hours
400	Frontal headache and nausea after 1 to 2 hours. Occipital headache after 2.5 to 3.5 hours.
800	Headache, dizziness, and nausea in 45 minutes. Collapse and possible death in 2 hours.
1 600	Headache, dizziness, and nausea in 20 minutes. Collapse and death in 1 hour.
3 200	Headache and dizziness in 5 to 10 minutes. Unconsciousness and danger of death in 30 minutes.
6 400	Headache and dizziness in 1 to 2 minutes. Unconsciousness and danger of death in 10 to 15 minutes.
12 800	Immediate unconsciousness. Danger of death in 1 to 3 minutes.

^* p.p.m. stands for parts per million.

The Carbon Monoxide Content of Exhaust Gas

In Canada, motor vehicle exhaust emissions have been regulated by law since 1971, at which time the permissible level for carbon monoxide was set at 24.1 g/km. In 1975, the limit was lowered to 15.4 g/km, and in 1987, the Department of Transport reduced the level again to 2.1 g/km where it remains today. As a result of the imposition, in the late 1990s, of more stringent limits on other pollutants, such as oxides of nitrogen, the CO concentration of exhaust gas has continued to decline. Increasingly strict limits on these pollutants, which are presently being phased in and will come into full force in 2004, will reduce actual CO emissions even further. According to information provided by the Department of the Environment, as of 1998, almost 80 percent of the passenger vehicles in Canada's existing vehicle fleet conformed to the 2.1 g/km carbon monoxide emission limit.

Research conducted for the Department indicates that the average concentration of carbon monoxide in the exhaust gas of a late-model motor vehicle is 1 000 p.p.m. or less. (see footnote 3) Since Table 2 indicates that a concentration as low as 800 p.p.m. is likely to produce serious symptoms of CO poisoning, it is most important that exhaust gas not be allowed to enter the interior of the vehicle. The exhaust system is designed to prevent any such infiltration; however, with time the system may deteriorate, a problem that can only be addressed through regular vehicle maintenance.

In addition to preventing exhaust gas infiltration, good vehicle maintenance also serves to reduce emissions levels, a fact that is underscored by a study done by the Department of the Environment that measured the gaseous and particulate matter emissions of 75 in-use, light-duty passenger cars and trucks in the Vancouver area. (see footnote 4) The sample, which was representative of the vehicle fleet in British Columbia, included 50 passenger cars, 10 of which had failed their AirCare inspection, and 20 light-duty trucks, 2 of which had failed. According to the results of the study, the CO emissions of these vehicles ranged from 0.39 g/mile (0.24 g/km), which is considerably lower than the permissible CO limit, to 71.2 g/mile (44.2 g/km). The higher emissions were generally found in older vehicles and in vehicles that had not passed their inspection.

The association between vehicle age and emissions levels is further corroborated by a two-week study conducted in the year 2000 in Denver, Colorado. Using remote sensing equipment to measure tailpipe carbon monoxide emissions, this study found that the mean CO concentration of the 23 000 vehicles measured was 4 300 p.p.m., but that vehicles manufactured in the early 1980s had average tailpipe CO concentrations of approximately 14 000 p.p.m., while those of year 2000 models were only about 1 000 p.p.m. (see footnote 5)

Although the average emission of carbon monoxide from a newly manufactured vehicle is 1 000 p.p.m., and often lower, emissions are higher during cold starts, when the vehicle is idling, and during acceleration. In a separate study, the Department of the Environment compared the emissions of a 1993 Buick Regal during both hot and cold starts and at different ambient temperatures. (see footnote 6) The results showed that CO emissions were 32 times greater when the engine was cold, one reason being that the catalytic converter must be heated to its operating temperature by the exhaust gas passing through it in order to reach peak efficiency.

The study also established that the ambient temperature can greatly influence the level of emissions. During the course of five 300-second cold start tests conducted on different days, the CO emissions of the Buick Regal were found to be 73.4 g, 40.2 g, and 34.9 g at -10°C, as compared to 14.6 g and 15.8 g at 24°C. It took from 90 to 110 seconds, depending on the ambient temperature, for CO emissions to drop to idling levels, which as already mentioned are higher than when the vehicle is travelling. Acceleration of the vehicle produced CO emissions that were comparable to those of a cold start.

Exhaust Gas Poisoning by Asphyxiation

While exposure to carbon monoxide is a known mechanism of exhaust gas poisoning, another possible cause is asphyxiation. Exhaust gas contains little or no oxygen; consequently, if it is allowed to accumulate inside the vehicle in sufficient quantity, the air will be depleted of oxygen. Exhaust gas also contains carbon dioxide, which, under conditions of oxygen deprivation, stimulates the breathing reflex, thereby accelerating the asphyxiation process and increasing the body's uptake of carbon monoxide. The elevated temperature and water vapour content of exhaust gas further increase the rate of CO absorption.

The Department is not aware of any exhaust gas poisonings by asphyxiation, as accident investigators do not measure blood oxygen levels. Table 3 outlines the physiological effects of diminishing oxygen concentrations.

Table 3: Main Physiological Effects of Different Oxygen Concentrations (see footnote 7)

Oxygen Concentration (% Volume)	Signs and Symptoms of Oxygen Deprivation
23.5	Maximum safe level established by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
21	Oxygen concentration of air
19.5	Minimum safe level established by OSHA and the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
17	Impairment of judgement
16	First signs of anoxia (oxygen deprivation) appear.
16 to 12	Breathing and pulse rate increase, muscular co-ordination is slightly impaired.
14 to 10	Emotional upset, abnormal fatigue upon exertion, disturbed respiration.
10 to 6	Nausea and vomiting, inability to move freely; loss of consciousness may occur.
6	Convulsive movements and gasping respiration occur; respiration stops, then heart action ceases.

The Incidence of Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning in Canada

In order to gauge the incidence of exhaust gas poisoning in Canada and to understand the trends governing its occurrence, the Department analyzed statistical data compiled by Statistics Canada. Deaths due to exhaust gas poisoning are comprised of suicides, unintentional poisonings and exhaust gas poisonings for which it could not be determined whether the injury was inflicted accidentally or purposely. Table 4 shows the incidence of each type of poisoning and the total exhaust gas poisoning deaths that occurred over the 20-year period from 1978 to 1997, the most recent year for which statistics were available.

Table 4: Incidence of Death by Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning in Canada for 1978 to 1997(see footnote 8)^*

Year	Number of Suicides	Number of Unintentional Deaths	Undetermined Whether Injury Accidentally or Purposely Inflicted	Total Number of Deaths by Motor Vehicle Gas Poisoning
1978	292	74	41	407
1979	328	73	45	446
1980	331	63	19	413
1981	307	67	28	402
1982	312	73	22	407
1983	362	81	6	449
1984	317	55	12	384
1985	329	41	10	380
1986	385	68	13	466
1987	NA*	NA	NA	NA
1988	340	40	14	394
1989	260	44	9	313
1990	278	37	6	321
1991	276	20	7	303
1992	330	46	12	388
1993	294	33	9	336
1994	322	36	10	368
1995	385	30	10	425
1996	310	24	17	351
1997	268	9	17	294

^* The data for 1987 were unavailable.

As Table 4 shows, the total number of exhaust gas poisonings fluctuated between 294 and 466, with the low value occurring in 1997 and the high figure in 1986. Since exhaust gas poisonings are classified statistically within the larger category of external causes of death, which includes all accidental fatalities and excludes deaths due to disease, the incidence of death by exhaust gas poisoning may be compared to that due to external causes. Figure 1 demonstrates that a very small percentage, from 2.2 percent to 3.4 percent, of the premature deaths that occurred in Canada from 1978 to 1997 were caused by exhaust gas poisoning.

Figure 1: Incidence of Death by Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning as a Percentage of Accidental Deaths in Canada(see footnote 9)

^* This value is an extrapolation as statistical data for the year 1987 were not available.

Unintentional Deaths by Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning

Unintentional deaths account for only a small proportion of fatal exhaust gas poisonings — about 10 percent for the 10-year period from 1988 to 1997. In actual numbers, unintentional deaths ranged from a high of 81 in 1983 to a low of 9 in 1997, which represents a discernible decrease in incidence. For instance, the 10-year average for the period from 1978 to 1988 was 66 fatalities, while the average for 1989 to 1997 was 32, a decline of half. Increasingly stringent carbon monoxide emission limits may be credited with much of this reduction in deaths. Figure 2 correlates the number of unintentional deaths due to exhaust gas poisoning with the permissible carbon monoxide emission levels for the years from 1970 to 1997.

Figure 2: Number of Unintentional Deaths as a Function of Permissible Carbon Monoxide Vehicle Emissions Limits

^* This value is an extrapolation as statistical data for the year 1987 were not available.

Since accidental exhaust gas poisoning may be viewed as one of the risks associated with the use of motor vehicles, its incidence can be compared to that of motor vehicle accident deaths. According to Figure 3, which charts the deaths due to unintentional exhaust gas poisoning as a percentage of all motor vehicle traffic accident deaths for the years 1979 to 1997, unintentional deaths ranged from a high of 1.87 percent in 1983 to a low of 0.30 percent in 1997. In other words, the incidence of death due to unintentional exhaust gas poisoning is exceedingly low when compared to that of motor vehicle accidents as a whole.

Figure 3: Incidence of Unintentional Exhaust Gas Poisoning Deaths as a Percentage of Motor Vehicle Accident Deaths

^* This value is an extrapolation as statistical data for the year 1987 were not available.

According to two recent statistical studies published by the U.S. Department of Transportation, factors that influence the risk of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning are the season of the year and whether the vehicle is moving or stationary. For the year 1993 and the years 1995 to 1997, these studies showed that 35 percent of accidental poisonings took place in the winter months of December, January and February, with spring and fall having incidences of about 26 percent each and summer showing the lowest rate of about 14 percent. (see footnote 10) It was also documented that the vehicle was stationary in approximately 75 percent of cases and moving in about 25 percent of cases.

With more stringent limits on exhaust pollutants other than carbon monoxide already in place, which serve to decrease CO emissions, the risk of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning is expected to continue to decline.

Self-inflicted Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning

Suicide by exhaust gas poisoning is accomplished either by allowing the vehicle to idle with the windows open in an enclosed space or by redirecting the exhaust gas from the tailpipe into the interior of a sealed vehicle. The concentration of carbon monoxide in the exhaust gas of newly manufactured vehicles is sufficiently low that, when the exhaust gas is diluted by the ambient air in an enclosed space, the first method is largely ineffective. Anecdotal evidence indicates that, in numerous instances, even many hours spent in a closed garage with the engine running resulted in symptoms no more serious than general disorientation. By contrast, the second method can be lethal, as the exhaust gas enters the vehicle interior and replaces the ambient air with a gaseous mixture that may cause CO poisoning, asphyxiation, or a combination of both. The lethality of this latter method is a function of vehicle age, engine maintenance, engine displacement, the interior volume of the vehicle and its air exchange rate.

Table 4 above shows that the number of suicides by exhaust gas poisoning for the 20 years from 1978 to 1997 fluctuated between a high of 385 in 1986 and a low of 260 in 1989. Figure 4 below shows that, as a percentage of all suicides, self-inflicted exhaust gas poisonings varied between 10.5 percent and 7.3 percent, with a slight decline in incidence since 1989. In Canada, as elsewhere in the world, statistics indicate that men commit suicide more frequently than women, with an average of 3.5 men taking their own lives in Canada for every woman who does so. Self-inflicted exhaust gas poisoning is favoured by men, an average of 4.25 of whom use it for every woman who does. As a method, exhaust gas poisoning ranks fourth in Canada after suicide by firearms, hanging and suffocation, and the ingestion of drugs or other harmful substances. (see footnote 11)

Figure 4: Incidence of Suicide by Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning in Canada

^* This value is an extrapolation as statistical data for the year 1987 were not available.

According to the available data, the incidence of suicide by exhaust gas poisoning and its ranking as a method vary considerably between countries. (see footnote 12) In Sweden, for instance, self-inflicted exhaust gas poisonings account for 15 percent of all suicides by men and 3 percent of all suicides by women, and like Canada, it is the fourth most frequently used method. In New Zealand, exhaust gas poisonings increased from about 10 percent of suicides in 1994 to nearly 30 percent in 1996. In Australia, this method was the second most frequently used in 1998 after hanging, and since 1990, it has consistently represented about 20 percent of all suicides. Australia's rate per 100 000 persons increased from 1.3 to 2.9 from 1979 to 1998; however, the numbers have stabilized, with 509 deaths in 1995 and 508 in 1998.

Based on statistics compiled by the Department, the rate of suicide by exhaust gas poisoning in the United States declined steadily from 1993 to 1997, from 5.4 percent in 1993 to 4.5 percent in 1997. The average rate of suicide by exhaust gas poisoning in Canada for the 10 years from 1988 to 1997 was 8.3 percent, which is considerably less than that of Sweden, New Zealand, and Australia, but greater than that of the United States.

Possible Approaches to Preventing Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning in Canada

There are three possible approaches to the problem of mitigating motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning, each of which is outlined and discussed below. The present situation could be allowed to continue unchanged, a non-regulatory approach could be adopted, or the Department could mandate a performance test or the installation of one or more safety devices on specified classes of newly manufactured motor vehicles. A combination of a non-regulatory and a regulatory approach could also be adopted.

Maintaining the Status Quo

Statistics indicate that the incidence of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning has declined to a very low level since the introduction of motor vehicle emissions controls. Moreover, the anticipated decrease in carbon monoxide emissions that will result from more stringent limits on other pollutants is expected to reduce the number of unintentional deaths even further.

In contrast, the incidence of suicide by exhaust gas poisoning is much greater, and it has declined very little. According to research conducted in a number of countries, restricting the means available for committing self-destructive acts can reduce the overall suicide rate. Even when planned, many suicide attempts are impulsive, the act itself resulting from "psychological pain or despair coupled with the availability of the means by which to inflict self-injury." (see footnote 13) If access to the means can be limited at such a moment, a suicide attempt may be averted, and a subsequent attempt may not necessarily take place. Alternatively, if a highly lethal method can be rendered less harmful, survival will be more likely, allowing the troubled person to be identified and given appropriate treatment. If properly treated, many of those who attempt suicide once will not do so again.

Reducing access to the means of self-injury is a cornerstone of the U.S. National Strategy for Suicide Prevention, which was recently published by the Center for Mental Health Services. The Strategy outlines 11 goals for the prevention of suicide, the fifth of which is to "promote efforts to reduce access to lethal means and methods of self-harm." Objective 5.5 of this goal is, by 2005, to "improve automobile design to impede carbon monoxide-mediated suicide." Australia also adopts the approach of reducing access to means in its proposal to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), World Forum on the Harmonization of Motor Vehicle Regulations, in which it requested that a global technical regulation be introduced to make air quality monitors mandatory on motor vehicles. The cost-benefit analysis of the proposal assumes that such a device would deter 40 percent of those who attempt to commit suicide by exhaust gas from making another attempt, whether through the use of a vehicle or by other means. (see footnote 14)

Given that the incidence of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning has declined significantly since the 1970s, that carbon monoxide exhaust emissions are continuing to be reduced, and that many provinces are now instituting exhaust gas testing programs, it is expected that accidental poisonings will decrease further and may be eliminated altogether. The incidence of self-inflicted poisoning, however, is much higher and remains essentially stable.

A Non-regulatory Approach

This approach would consist of conducting an information campaign to warn the public of the hazards of motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning, especially in older vehicles. A press release and an information leaflet would be issued describing the symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning and outlining how to prevent it, with an emphasis on the importance of maintaining the vehicle exhaust system. (see footnote 15) This information could also be published on the Department's Road Safety Web site under "Safety Issues for Canadians," which already provides advice on air bags, anti-lock brake systems, bus safety, child safety, and several other subjects. A special effort would be made to reach people whose work requires them to spend long periods of time in a motor vehicle, such as transport truck operators.

The information leaflet would be an adjunct to the booklet called "Winter Driving: You, your car and winter storms" that is jointly published by the Canadian Automobile Association and Emergency Preparedness Canada. This booklet, which is also available on the Emergency Preparedness Canada Web site, (see footnote 16) provides specific information on how to avoid exhaust gas poisoning in emergency situations. Information on the dangers of exhaust gas poisoning is also currently provided in the owner's manuals of most motor vehicles, whether manufactured in North America or abroad.

The advantage of conducting an information campaign is that, in the Department's experience, public education is an effective tool for disseminating safety information. However, an information campaign would target unintentional deaths only, and it could remind those contemplating suicide of the effectiveness of exhaust gas poisoning as a method. Furthermore, this approach would do nothing to reduce the accessibility or lethality of this form of suicide.

An important non-regulatory initiative undertaken voluntarily by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) is the adoption of the requirement for recreational vehicles to be equipped with carbon monoxide detectors. The CSA provides certification services for manufacturers who wish to use registered CSA Marks, which, when affixed to a vehicle, indicate that the vehicle was built in accordance with the applicable CSA standards. In July 1999, the CSA revised the standard governing recreational vehicles and, among other changes, added a requirement that carbon monoxide detectors be installed in all recreational vehicles equipped with, or designed for the future installation of, an internal combustion engine, as well as in all slide-in campers. (see footnote 17) Many consumers are aware of the safety benefits of CSA certification and seek to purchase products that bear CSA Marks.

A Regulatory Approach

This approach would consist of several possible initiatives. An air quality test of the vehicle interior, such as that used by the Russian Federation, could be introduced; an air quality monitor could be required for all newly manufactured motor vehicles; or suicide-resistant tailpipes could be mandated on passenger vehicles and light trucks.

Vehicle Interior Air Quality Test

Since 1976, the Russian Federation has required that all newly manufactured motor vehicles, except motorcycles, pass an interior air quality test at the time of manufacture. The test, which sets a limit of 20 mg/m³ (17.2 p.p.m.) on the concentration of carbon monoxide, is conducted under two conditions: with the vehicle travelling at a constant speed of 50 km/h and with the vehicle stationary while its engine idles. According to the information presented by the Russian Federation in an informal document submitted to the ECE, no more than 2.5 percent of the vehicles evaluated fail this test. The main causes of failure are design faults of the exhaust system, the fuel tanks or other fuel system components, and sealants. (see footnote 18)

The advantage of an interior air quality test is that it ensures that exhaust gas and fuel vapours are not present in harmful concentrations inside the vehicle at the time of manufacture; however, such a test cannot provide a warning with regard to changes in air quality that may take place due to deterioration of the exhaust system, which is the most frequent cause of unintentional exhaust gas poisoning. Furthermore, an interior air quality test does not address the problem of self-inflicted exhaust gas poisonings.

Mandatory Air Quality Monitors

At its simplest, an air quality monitor would be capable of detecting the oxygen and carbon monoxide concentrations inside a motor vehicle and sounding an alarm if an unsafe level of either gas was reached. Additional features could include the monitoring of other gases or pollutants, such as carbon dioxide, benzene, and oxides of nitrogen; a visual display of the level of the gases being monitored; engine shutdown if a critical concentration of gases accumulated in a stationary vehicle; or automatic lowering of power windows, if the vehicle was so equipped, when a predetermined threshold was reached.

This approach would require that alarm thresholds be specified in a safety standard, for which the workplace oxygen and carbon monoxide concentration limits set by a number of health and safety organizations could serve as a basis. Table 5 presents the limits set by the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Inc. (ACGIH).

Table 5: Oxygen and Carbon Monoxide Safety Limits Set by Several Health and Safety Organizations (see footnote 19)

Gas	WHO	OSHA	NIOSH	ACGIH
O2	--	19.5%	19.5%	--
CO	9 p.p.m.	50 p.p.m.	35 p.p.m.	25 p.p.m.

In their study, Parkes and Burk suggested a carbon monoxide threshold of 70 p.p.m. because this level would ensure that the carboxyhemoglobin concentration remained below 10 percent, a level that produces only very mild symptoms (see Table 1). (see footnote 20) J. Moller, in his work modelling the different signatures of oxygen and carbon monoxide, suggested the thresholds that are set out in Table 6. (see footnote 21)

Table 6: Hazard Warning Levels Recommended by J. Moller

Warning Level	Oxygen	Carbon Monoxide
Low	19.5%	35 p.p.m.
Moderate	17.0%	100 p.p.m.
Critical	16.0%	200 p.p.m.

Setting appropriate warning thresholds is important, not only for safety reasons, but in order to prevent false alarms. Research indicates that carbon monoxide levels well above the limits shown in Table 5 may be reached inside vehicles for short periods of time in slow-moving traffic, in underground parking lots, and while driving through tunnels. (see footnote 22) For instance, carbon monoxide levels in the Fort Pitt Tunnel in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, are known to increase to 125 p.p.m. when traffic has slowed to a crawl and to rise as high as 250 p.p.m. when traffic has stopped entirely because of a collision. The carbon monoxide level inside an underground parking garage has been estimated at 100 to 200 p.p.m. for periods of 10 to 20 minutes when a large number of cars, all running cold and therefore producing high concentrations of CO, are waiting to exit. Mandating air quality monitors would also probably lead to increased public awareness of air pollution levels while driving. (see footnote 23)

With regard to the probable cost of factory-installed air quality monitors, three estimates were found in the literature. The earliest, taken from a research paper published in 1991 by the U.S. Department of Transportation, estimates a cost below $25.00 USD ($38.00 CAD) (see footnote 24) per unit in quantities of 250 000 for a monitor equipped with a metal oxide semiconductor gas sensor. (see footnote 25) The second estimate, published in the Federal Register of September 19, 1997, was based on a quote obtained by a petitioner from the Quantum Group, a manufacturer of detectors. The cost of $16.00 USD did not include installation, which the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated would add 50 percent to the price, for a total of $24.00 USD ($36.50 CAD). The most recent estimate of $16.00 AUD (about $13.00 CAD) for the monitor alone was provided by Australia in its proposal to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe.

The latter two estimates did not specify the type of sensor, which is an important consideration. Electrochemical sensors are inexpensive but have a maximum life of six to eight years, with declining sensitivity and accuracy over time; whereas non-dispersive infrared sensors are more costly but do not need replacement. The requirement to change the sensors, even once, would seriously reduce the potential effectiveness of air quality monitors as a safety measure. In order for air quality monitors to be as effective as possible in reducing the risk of exhaust gas poisoning, it would be necessary for them to be maintenance-free.

It is possible that mandating air quality monitors for all newly manufactured vehicles would reduce the overall suicide rate; however, given the cost of air quality monitors, they may not prove to be cost-effective. In addition, because of the time normally required to prepare and publish a regulatory amendment, it would be several years before the requirement for air quality monitors in motor vehicles would come into effect and approximately ten years before a significant proportion of the fleet would be equipped with them. In the meantime, it is expected that the likelihood of suffering fatal carbon monoxide poisoning from exhaust gas will continue to decline.

Mandatory Suicide-resistant Tailpipes

A suicide-resistant tailpipe is designed so as to prevent the attachment of a hose to the end of the tailpipe. Screening near the tip prevents the insertion of a hose into the tailpipe, and hidden venting allows the exhaust gas to escape under the vehicle should a hose or bag be taped to the outside lip. Draft specifications developed by Australia require that the tip have an outside maximum diameter greater than 50 mm and an internal diameter no less than 15 mm. The hidden vent must have a low resistance, and it must be positioned so that the airflow over the exhaust system when the vehicle is travelling ensures that the exhaust gas will be discharged beyond the rear of the vehicle. The Australian design has been tested to ensure that it does not alter engine performance. (see footnote 26)

According to the results of a study to assess the feasibility of installing after-market suicide-resistant tailpipe tips at the time the exhaust system of a vehicle is repaired, such tips would cost $4.00 CAD each. (see footnote 27) It is expected that the cost of suicide-resistant tailpipes as original equipment on newly manufactured vehicles would consist mainly of a one-time redesign and retooling expense. Ford and Nissan have already developed effective and aesthetic prototype designs.

Since, according to Australian data, a hose is used to redirect the exhaust gas to the interior of the vehicle in 96 percent of suicides by exhaust gas poisoning, requiring the installation of suicide-resistant tailpipes could substantially reduce the number of deaths due to self-inflicted exhaust gas poisoning. Any initiatives to make suicide-resistant tailpipes mandatory, either as original or replacement equipment, would have to be undertaken with discretion so as not to call attention to the efficacy of motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning as a method of suicide.

Request for Comments on Possible Measures to Prevent Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Poisoning

Automotive manufacturers, importers, public safety organizations, and other interested parties are requested to make their comments on this notice at the address provided below before February 1, 2002. Comments should be supported by data wherever possible. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments on the following questions:

— Given the current carbon monoxide emission levels of newly manufactured motor vehicles and bearing in mind expected future reductions, is there a need for any action on the part of the Department?

— Would an information campaign be effective in lowering the incidence of unintentional motor vehicle exhaust gas poisoning?

— Should automotive manufacturers be required to provide air quality monitors as standard equipment on motor vehicles?

— Should automotive manufacturers be required to provide suicide-resistant tailpipes on motor vehicles?

— Should carbon monoxide detectors be required in motor homes, or is it sufficient that the Canadian Standards Association specify them as standard equipment?

Contact

Comments, questions and requests for additional information regarding this notice, as well as requests for a summary of the comments received, should be directed to Dan Davis, Chief, Standards and Regulations, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate, Department of Transport, 330 Sparks Street, Place de Ville, Tower C, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5, (613) 990-2913 (Facsimile), regsclerkcommis@tc.gc.ca (Internet address).

BRIAN JONAH
Director
Motor Vehicle Standards and Research

[51-1-o]

BANK OF CANADA

Balance Sheet as at December 5, 2001

ASSETS	amount
1. Gold coin and bullion
2. Deposits in foreign currencies:
(a) U.S. Dollars $	313,361,865
(b) Other currencies	4,105,841
Total $	317,467,706
3. Advances to:
(a) Government of Canada
(b) Provincial Governments
(c) Members of the Canadian Payments Association	331,866,668
Total	331,866,668
4. Investments
(At amortized values):
(a) Treasury Bills of Canada	12,331,800,922
(b) Other securities issued or guaranteed by Canada maturing within three years	8,799,429,829
(c) Other securities issued or guaranteed by Canada not maturing within three years	16,977,416,368
(d) Securities issued or guaranteed by a province of Canada
(e) Other Bills	428,107,752
(f) Other investments	2,633,197
Total	38,539,388,068
5. Bank premises	146,822,098
6. All other assets	283,276,434
Total $	39,618,820,974

LIABILITIES	amount
1. Capital paid up $	5,000,000
2. Rest fund	25,000,000
3. Notes in circulation	36,587,541,015
4. Deposits:
(a) Government of Canada $	1,936,669,978
(b) Provincial Governments
(c) Banks	333,436,993
(d) Other members of the Canadian Payments Association	48,211,356
(e) Other	249,325,334
Total	2,567,643,661
5. Liabilities in foreign currencies:
(a) To Government of Canada	148,074,785
(b) To others
Total	148,074,785
6. All other liabilities	285,561,513
Total $	39,618,820,974

NOTES	amount
MATURITY DISTRIBUTION OF INVESTMENTS IN SECURITIES ISSUED OR GUARANTEED BY CANADA NOT MATURING WITHIN 3 YEARS (ITEM 4(c) OF ABOVE ASSETS):
(a) Securities maturing in over 3 years but not over 5 years	$	3,682,740,398
(b) Securities maturing in over 5 years but not over 10 years		9,046,322,761
(c) Securities maturing in over 10 years		4,248,353,209
	$	16,977,416,368
TOTAL VALUE INCLUDED IN ALL OTHER ASSETS RELATED TO SECURITIES PURCHASED UNDER RESALE AGREEMENTS	$
TOTAL VALUE INCLUDED IN ALL OTHER LIABILITIES RELATED TO SECURITIES SOLD UNDER REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS	$

I declare that the foregoing return is correct according to the books of the Bank.

W. D. SINCLAIR
Acting Chief Accountant

I declare that the foregoing return is to the best of my knowledge and belief correct, and shows truly and clearly the financial position of the Bank, as required by section 29 of the Bank of Canada Act.

DAVID A. DODGE
Governor

Ottawa, December 6, 2001

[51-1-o]

BANK OF CANADA

Balance Sheet as at December 12, 2001

ASSETS	amount
1. Gold coin and bullion
2. Deposits in foreign currencies:
(a) U.S. Dollars $	316,556,063
(b) Other currencies	3,964,394
Total $	320,520,457
3. Advances to:
(a) Government of Canada
(b) Provincial Governments
(c) Members of the Canadian Payments Association	307,302,368
Total	307,302,368
4. Investments
(At amortized values):
(a) Treasury Bills of Canada	12,478,626,006
(b) Other securities issued or guaranteed by Canada maturing within three years	8,799,542,843
(c) Other securities issued or guaranteed by Canada not maturing within three years	16,977,211,090
(d) Securities issued or guaranteed by a province of Canada
(e) Other Bills	428,292,447
(f) Other investments	2,633,197
Total	38,686,305,583
5. Bank premises	148,724,140
6. All other assets	654,916,923
Total $	40,117,769,471

LIABILITIES	amount
1. Capital paid up $	5,000,000
2. Rest fund	25,000,000
3. Notes in circulation	36,845,620,352
4. Deposits:
(a) Government of Canada $	2,155,291,102
(b) Provincial Governments
(c) Banks	331,819,192
(d) Other members of the Canadian Payments Association	27,185,260
(e) Other	251,674,428
Total	2,765,969,982
5. Liabilities in foreign currencies:
(a) To Government of Canada	152,103,620
(b) To others
Total	152,103,620
6. All other liabilities	324,075,517
Total $	40,117,769,471

NOTES	amount
MATURITY DISTRIBUTION OF INVESTMENTS IN SECURITIES ISSUED OR GUARANTEED BY CANADA NOT MATURING WITHIN 3 YEARS (ITEM 4(c) OF ABOVE ASSETS):
(a) Securities maturing in over 3 years but not over 5 years	$	3,682,752,671
(b) Securities maturing in over 5 years but not over 10 years		9,046,191,141
(c) Securities maturing in over 10 years		4,248,267,278
	$	16,977,211,090
TOTAL VALUE INCLUDED IN ALL OTHER ASSETS RELATED TO SECURITIES PURCHASED UNDER RESALE AGREEMENTS	$	342,619,290
TOTAL VALUE INCLUDED IN ALL OTHER LIABILITIES RELATED TO SECURITIES SOLD UNDER REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS	$

I declare that the foregoing return is correct according to the books of the Bank.

W. D. SINCLAIR
Acting Chief Accountant

I declare that the foregoing return is to the best of my knowledge and belief correct, and shows truly and clearly the financial position of the Bank, as required by section 29 of the Bank of Canada Act.

DAVID A. DODGE
Governor

Ottawa, December 13, 2001

[51-1-o]

Footnote 1

The information contained in the first three paragraphs of this section and in Table 1 was taken from the Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, Third (Revised) Edition, Volume 1, International Labour Office, Geneva, Switzerland, 1989, pp. 395-9, and R. Grace, A. Guzman, M. Portnoff, and D. Purta, "Carbon Monoxide Monitor for Automobile Passenger Compartment," U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 807 761, July 1991, pp. 23-26.

Footnote 2

The information in this table was taken from the Web site of Industrial Scientific Corporation, www.indsci.comégas_co.html.

Footnote 3

M. Parkes and R. C. Burk, "A Review of the Potential Hazard of Carbon Monoxide Emissions in Gasoline Powered Vehicles and its Prevention," unpublished paper prepared by Carleton University for the Department of Transport, June 15, 2001.

Footnote 4

Lisa Graham, "Gaseous and Particulate Matter Emission from In-Use Light Duty Gasoline Motor Vehicles," ERMD Report No. 99-67, unpublished paper of the Environmental Technology Advancement Directorate, Environment Canada, not dated.

Footnote 5

Cited by Parkes and Burk.

Footnote 6

Lisa Graham, Kevin O'Leary, and Lianne Noseworthy, "Characterization of the Tailpipe and Evaporative Emissions of the Test Vehicle for the Residential Garage Study," ERMD Report No. 99-26768-1, unpublished paper of the Environmental Technology Advancement Directorate, Environment Canada, not dated.

Footnote 7

The information in this table was taken from the Web site of Industrial Scientific Corporation, www.indsci.com/gas_co.html.

Footnote 8

The date in this table were taken from the Statistics Canada publication, Causes of Death, Catalogue Number 84FO208, 1987 to 1997, and Catalogue Number 84-203, 1978 to 1986. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) categories used were: Suicide by motor vehicle exhaust gas (E952.0); Accidental poisoning by motor vehicle exhaust gas (E868.2); and Injury, undetermined accidentally or purposely inflicted, motor vehicle exhaust gas (E982.0).

Footnote 9

Tables showing the figures upon which figures 1 through 4 are based are available upon request.

Footnote 10

"Fatalities Associated with Carbon Monoxide Poisoning from Motor Vehicles in 1993", and "Fatalities Associated with Carbon Monoxide Poisoning from Motor Vehicles, 1995-1997," U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administratin, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, December 1996. Available on-line at: www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/pdf/CO_FINAL.pdf.

Footnote 11

Tables giving the incidence of suicide by gender and comparing the respective incidences and percentages of suicide by firearms, hanging and suffocation, the ingestion of drugs, and exhaust gas poisoning are also available upon request.

Footnote 12

The statistics presented in this paragraph are based on information provided in an informal document submitted by Australia to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe's Working Party 29 titled, "Uniform Provisions Concerning Cabin Air Quality to Reduce Fatigue and Prevent Accidental or Intentional Poisoning by Exhaust Gases," (123rd WP 29, 6-9 March 2001, agenda item 2.2).

Footnote 13

National Strategy for Suicide Prevention: Goals and Objectives for Action, a collaborative effort of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), available on the Internet at www.mentalhealth.org/publications/allpubs/SMA01-3518/index.htm.

Footnote 14

Informal document submitted by Australia to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, page 4.

Footnote 15

The U.S. Department of Transportation issued an advisory on the danger of carbon monoxide poisoning associated with motor vehicles in December 1996 at the time it released the results of the first statistical analysis of carbon monoxide poisoning in motor vehicles.

Footnote 16

The Emergency Preparedness Canada Web site may be consulted at www. ocipep.gc.ca.

Footnote 17

CSA International, Z240 RV Series-99, "Recreational Vehicles," p. 6.

Footnote 18

Informal document submitted by the Russian Federation to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe's Working Party 29 titled "Harmful Substance Concentration in the Air of Vehicle Cab/Compartment due to Access of Exhaust Gases and Fuel Vapors," (124th WP 29, 26-29 June 2001, agenda item 2.2.1).

Footnote 19

The WHO, OSHA, and NIOSH data contained in this table were taken from K. Galatsis, W. Wlodarski, B. Wells, and S. McDonald, "Vehicle Cabin Air Quality Monitor for Fatigue and Suicide Prevention," SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-0084, p. 2.

Footnote 20

M. Parkes and R. C. Burk, "A Review of the Potential Hazard of Carbon Monoxide Emissions in Gasoline Powered Vehicles and its Prevention," p. 6.

Footnote 21

J. Moller, "Modelling the Different Signatures of Accidental and Intentional in Car Motor Vehicle Gas Poisoning," unpublished paper prepared for the Australian Department of Health and Family Services Mental Health Branch, September 1998.

Footnote 22

Grace et al., pp. 14-17.

Footnote 23

P. Jefferiss, A. Rowell and M. Fergusson, "The Exposure of Car Drivers and Passengers to Vehicle Emissions: Comparative pollutant levels inside and outside vehicles," Greenpeace U.K., September 1992.

Footnote 24

The exchange rates used for the estimates given in this paragraph were those in effect on June 7, 2001.

Footnote 25

Grace et al, p. 52.

Footnote 26

J. Moller, C. Hutchings, J. Evans and B. Price, "Motor Vehicle Exhaust Gas Suicide Resistant Tailpipe: Design feasibility assessment," April 1998, unpublished paper.

Footnote 27

Ibid.

NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with extensible hypertext markup language (XHTML 1.0 Strict).