Vol. 136, No. 39 — September 28, 2002

GOVERNMENT NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of Final Decision on the Assessment of Two Substances — Releases from Primary and Secondary Copper Smelters and Copper Refineries and Releases from Primary and Secondary Zinc Smelters and Zinc Refineries — Specified on the Priority Substances List (Subsection 77(6) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of a report of the assessment of Releases from primary and secondary copper smelters and copper refineries and Releases from primary and secondary zinc smelters and zinc refineries, two substances specified on the Priority Substances List, is annexed hereby,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health intend to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor in Council that:

(1) Particulate matter containing metals that is released in emissions from copper smelters or refineries, or from both
(2) Particulate matter containing metals that is released in emissions from zinc plants
and
(3) Sulphur dioxide that has the molecular formula SO₂

be added to the List of Toxic Substances in Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999).

Notice furthermore is hereby given that consultations will be held on the development of a regulation or instrument respecting preventive or control action in relation to the said substances.

DAVID ANDERSON
Minister of the Environment

ANNE MCLELLAN
Minister of Health

Annex

Summary of the Report of the Assessment of the substances Releases from primary and secondary copper smelters and copper refineries and Releases from primary and secondary zinc smelters and zinc refineries specified on the Priority Substances List

Assessments of the two substances "Releases from primary and secondary copper smelters and copper refineries" and "Releases from primary and secondary zinc smelters and zinc refineries" have been conducted and reported together due to the similar nature of the two types of facilities and the common approach used in assessing their releases. For the purposes of these assessments, a smelter is defined as a facility that uses high-temperature chemical processes to recover base metals, while a refinery is a plant in which impurities are separated from metals using thermal or electrolytic processes. Zinc operations use integrated processes that are a combination of smelting and refining and are conventionally referred to as "zinc plants". The six copper smelters, four copper refineries and four zinc plants currently operating in Canada were considered in the assessments.

Releases from copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants are complex mixtures containing varying amounts of numerous substances. Since most releases (on a mass basis) are discharged to air and releases to air have the greatest potential for causing widespread effects, these assessments have focused on environmental and human health risks of air emissions. The components of releases to air that were examined most closely are sulphur dioxide (SO₂), the metals (largely in the form of particulate matter) copper, zinc, nickel, lead, cadmium, chromium and arsenic, and particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM₁₀). For facilities having multiple operations, source emission attribution was evaluated to estimate the fraction of ambient and deposited contaminants attributable to those operations that are the subject of these assessments.

Risk due to SO₂ released from copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants was assessed based on both direct exposure to SO₂ and associated acidic deposition. Effects thresholds for direct exposure to SO₂ were based on vegetation exposed for periods of 1 hour (acute) and one growing season (chronic). Results for direct exposure indicate that there is a risk to vegetation over varying areas near both copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants, to a maximum distance of about 10 km. For acidic deposition, it was determined that copper smelters contributed up to 8 percent (relative to all anthropogenic and natural sources) of the SO₂ resulting in acidic deposition at the four eastern Canadian receptor areas considered. Copper refineries and zinc plants were responsible for significantly lower fractions (up to 0.1 percent and 0.2 percent, respectively). U.S. sources were the largest contributors at all four receptor sites.

Endpoint organisms were identified for exposure to each metal examined in both aquatic and terrestrial environments (relating to deposition to surface waters and land, respectively). The 95th percentiles of natural background metal concentrations were used as lower limits for the effects thresholds. The transport and fate of metals deposited on surface waters and soils were modelled to permit estimation of critical metal deposition values ("critical loads") — defined as the amount of annual deposition required for steady-state metal concentrations to reach these low effect concentrations in receiving surface waters and soils. Probabilistic modelling was based on the range of receptor conditions (soil types, pH, lake size, etc.) encountered on the Canadian Shield. Estimated free metal ion concentrations were assumed to be representative of the concentration of biologically available metal.

Estimated annual metal deposition rates were compared with 25th percentile critical loads representative of effects on sensitive organisms under 25 percent of conditions in sandy soils or acidic lake water of the Canadian Shield. It was concluded that there is potential for effects on aquatic and/or soil-dwelling organisms from exposure to steady-state concentrations of metals in the vicinity of copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants resulting from emissions (especially of copper and zinc, respectively) from these facilities. Impacted areas were estimated to extend up to about 13-14 km from the facilities. In all cases, it is recognized that the range of impact is dependent on the emissions of the individual facilities as well as on local meteorology and geography. Range of impact is also dependent on the percentile of the critical load on which the comparisons are based. A lower percentile critical load, representing risk under a smaller fraction of Canadian Shield conditions, would result in estimation of impacts to greater distances. It is also recognized that emissions from zinc plants using exclusively pressure-leach technology will be significantly less than those from plants using roasting processes.

Screening-level evaluations of the environmental effects of aquatic releases from the three facilities (namely Cominco-Trail, Noranda-CCR and Noranda-CEZinc) that are not currently required to report their aquatic releases under the Metal Mining Liquid Effluent Regulations of the Fisheries Act were conducted. Constituents of releases to water considered in these assessments include all metal contaminants reported to be present, as well as ammonia, fluoride and pH. The results of the assessments of these three facilities indicated the potential for detrimental effects on the environment. However, the indicators of risk were fairly low, especially given the slightly conservative nature of the assessment.

The assessed facilities are also sources of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The former three contribute to global climate change, while VOCs contribute to tropospheric photochemical ozone creation, and some VOCs contribute to stratospheric ozone depletion. Emissions of all of these substances from copper smelters and refineries and zinc plants are, however, minor in comparison to those from other emission sources.

The health assessment addressed potential risks to nearby populations from current releases from copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants in Canada. Based on recent data, concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, nickel, lead, SO₂ and particulate matter in air are generally increased in the vicinity of most Canadian copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants in relation to both proximity to the facilities and background concentrations at remote sites.

The results of available epidemiological studies of human populations resident near copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants are inadequate to characterize the potential for both cancer and non-cancer effects from releases from such facilities. Based on assessments conducted previously on the Priority Substances List under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), carcinogenicity is considered to be the critical effect for arsenic, cadmium, chromium and nickel, in light of the sufficient weight of evidence for lung tumours in occupational populations or experimental animals following inhalation of compounds of each of these metals. The range of annual mean concentrations of PM₁₀ near Canadian copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants overlaps those associated with increased cardiorespiratory morbidity and mortality in recent extensive epidemiological studies of the general population exposed to ambient air pollution in various countries, including Canada. The concentrations of SO₂ in ambient air in the vicinity of all Canadian copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants occasionally exceed health-based guidelines intended to protect against cardiorespiratory effects. Although not directly considered in this assessment, it is also recognized that SO₂ is an important precursor in the secondary formation of respirable particulate matter, especially the fine fraction (PM_2.5). Levels of airborne lead also exceed health-based guidelines near certain of the Canadian facilities involved in smelting copper, indicating potential for lead-induced health effects.

Based on available data, it has been concluded that emissions from copper smelters and refineries and from zinc plants of metals (largely in the form of particulates) and of sulphur dioxide are entering the environment in quantities or concentrations or under conditions that have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity. Based on available data, it has been concluded that emissions from copper smelters and refineries and emissions from zinc plants are not entering the environment in quantities or concentrations or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends. Based on available data concerning the effects of PM₁₀, sulphur dioxide and compounds of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and nickel, it has been concluded that emissions from copper smelters and refineries and from zinc plants of PM₁₀, of metals (largely in the form of particulates) and of sulphur dioxide are entering the environment in quantities or concentrations or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health. Therefore, metals (largely in the form of particulates) contained in emissions from copper smelters and refineries, metals (largely in the form of particulates) contained in emissions from zinc plants, PM₁₀ and sulphur dioxide are considered "toxic" as defined in section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999).

There are a number of ongoing initiatives that address different release components of copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants. These include activities resulting from the Base Metals Smelting Sector Strategic Options Process, the Canada-wide Standards initiative for PM₁₀ and PM_2.5, and the Canada-wide Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000. There are also activities resulting from the addition of PM₁₀ to Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999. Any investigations of options to reduce exposure as a result of these assessments should be integrated with these initiatives.

Comparison of estimated exposure to arsenic, cadmium, chromium and nickel in the vicinity of Canadian copper smelters/ refineries and zinc plants with the tumorigenic potency indicates that the priority for investigation of options to reduce human exposure to releases from these facilities is considered to be in the high range for copper smelters, to range from low to high for copper refineries, and to range from low to high for zinc plants. Comparison of levels of lead, SO₂ and PM₁₀ in ambient air with health-based guidelines or with concentrations at which health effects have been observed also suggests that the priority for options analysis is high, especially for facilities where copper is smelted.

Given existing controls on effluents put in place by the companies or imposed by provincial governments or other authorities, federal prevention or control actions under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) are not recommended at this time. It is believed, however, that an increase in contaminant concentrations or loadings or changes in conditions affecting bioavailability (such as pH) have the potential to significantly increase risk to the environment. It is important that facility operators recognize that if information, such as monitoring data, shows a significant increase in contaminant concentrations or loadings or changes in conditions affecting bioavailability, such information may be subject to reporting under section 70 of CEPA 1999.

Assessment of releases from copper smelters/refineries and zinc plants necessitated evaluation of a limited number of components from the complex mixture of substances released. The constituents of emissions to air examined generally represent the substances released in the greatest quantity. This selection does not imply that other release constituents do not pose a risk. Investigations of options for risk management should also take into consideration other substances of potential concern, some examples of which include mercury, selenium, dioxins and furans.

The full Assessment Report may be obtained from the Priority Substances List Assessment Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/ substances/ese/eng/psap/final/main.cfm) or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

[39-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of Results of Investigations and Recommendations for a Substance — Di-n-Octyl Phthalate (Subsections 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of a follow-up report to the assessment of Di-n-Octyl Phthalate, a substance originally specified on the first Priority Substances List, is annexed hereby,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose to take no further action at this time in respect of the said substance.

Public Comment Period

Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Director, Existing Substances Branch, Department of the Environment, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3, (819) 953-4936 (Facsimile), or by electronic mail to PSL.LSIP@ec.gc.ca.

The comments should stipulate those parts thereof that should not be disclosed pursuant to the Access to Information Act and, in particular, pursuant to sections 19 and 20 of that Act, the reason why those parts should not be disclosed and the period during which they should remain undisclosed.

JOHN ARSENEAU
Director General
Toxic Pollution Prevention Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ROD RAPHAEL
Director General
Safe Environments Programme

On behalf of the Minister of Health

Annex

Summary of the Follow-up Report to the Assessment of the substance Di-n-Octyl Phthalate

Di-n-octyl phthalate is used as a plasticizer to impart flexibility to polymers, particularly polyvinyl chloride used to make products such as gloves, flooring and flexible sheets. There are no Canadian producers of this substance. It is estimated that approximately one tonne of di-n-octyl phthalate is used annually in Canada.

Di-n-octyl phthalate was included on the first Priority Substances List (PSL1) under the 1988 Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1988) for assessment of potential risks to the environment and human health. As outlined in the Assessment Report released in 1993, relevant data identified before August 1992 were considered insufficient to conclude whether di-n-octyl phthalate was "toxic" to human health as defined in paragraph 11(c) under CEPA 1988.

Critical data relevant to both estimation of exposure of the general population in Canada and assessment of effects were identified following release of the PSL1 assessment and prior to December 2000. Based on this information, the margin of exposure between bounding estimates of intake for the general public and the Lowest-Observed-Effect Level in an adequate study is considered sufficient to protect human health.

Based on available data, it is concluded, therefore, that di-n-octyl phthalate is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that may constitute a danger to human life or health. Therefore, the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose that di-n-octyl phthalate not be considered "toxic" to human health as defined in paragraph 64(c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

Based upon current use patterns, investigation of options to reduce exposure is not considered to be a priority at this time. Uses and emissions of this compound should continue to be monitored to ensure that exposure does not increase to any significant extent, and additional data should be considered upon development of more sensitive testing strategies for assessing endocrine disrupting effects, for which phthalates are likely early candidates.

The full Follow-up Report may be obtained from the Existing Substances Evaluation, First Priority Substances List Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/substances/ese/eng/PSAP/PSL1_IIC.cfm) or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

[39-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of Results of Investigations and Recommendations for a Substance — Styrene (Subsections 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of a follow-up report to the assessment of styrene, a substance originally specified on the first Priority Substances List, is annexed hereby,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose to take no further action at this time in respect of the said substance.

Public Comment Period

Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Director, Existing Substances Branch, Department of the Environment, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3, (819) 953-4936 (Facsimile), or by electronic mail to PSL.LSIP@ec.gc.ca.

The comments should stipulate those parts thereof that should not be disclosed pursuant to the Access to Information Act and, in particular, pursuant to sections 19 and 20 of that Act, the reason why those parts should not be disclosed, and the period during which they should remain undisclosed.

JOHN ARSENEAU
Director General
Toxic Pollution Prevention Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ROD RAPHAEL
Director General
Safe Environments Programme

On behalf of the Minister of Health

Annex

Summary of the Follow-up Report to the Assessment of the substance Styrene

Styrene, which appeared on the first Priority Substances List (PSL1), was assessed to determine whether it should be considered "toxic" as defined under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). It was concluded that styrene was not "toxic" under paragraphs 11(b) or 11(c) of CEPA; however, there was insufficient information to conclude whether it constituted a danger to the environment under paragraph 11(a). Information was lacking about the potential effects of styrene on aquatic organisms, on terrestrial vegetation through atmospheric exposure, and on wildlife through media other than air.

Since 1994, additional toxicity tests have been carried out on aquatic organisms. The results of these tests indicate that aquatic organisms are unlikely to be adversely affected by the concentrations of styrene found in Canadian surface waters. No information is available about the effects of styrene on wildlife. Based on toxicity studies conducted on laboratory animals, it is unlikely that wildlife would be adversely affected by the concentrations of styrene reported in food organisms or water in Canada. No information was identified about the potential effects of styrene on plants exposed through the atmosphere. Based on toxicity information available for several PSL1 substances that are structurally similar to styrene, it is concluded that terrestrial plants are unlikely to be adversely affected by the concentrations of styrene in air reported in Canada.

Based on the information available, it is concluded that styrene 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. Therefore, it is proposed that styrene not be considered "toxic" as defined in paragraph 64(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

The full Follow-up Report may be obtained from the Existing Substances Evaluation, First Priority Substances List Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/substances/ese/eng/PSAP/PSL1_IIC. cfm), or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

[39-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of Results of Investigations and Recommendations for a Substance — 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (Subsections 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas two summaries of a follow-up report to the assessment of 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane, a substance originally specified on the first Priority Substances List, are annexed hereby,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose to take no further action at this time in respect of the said substance.

Public Comment Period

Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment, comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be sent to the Director, Existing Substances Branch, Department of the Environment, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3, (819) 953-4936 (Facsimile), or by electronic mail to PSL.LSIP@ec.gc.ca.

The comments should stipulate those parts thereof that should not be disclosed pursuant to the Access to Information Act and, in particular, pursuant to sections 19 and 20 of that Act, the reason why those parts should not be disclosed and the period during which they should remain undisclosed.

JOHN ARSENEAU
Director General
Toxic Pollution Prevention Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ROD RAPHAEL
Director General
Safe Environments Programme

On behalf of the Minister of Health

Annex

Summary of the Follow-up Report to the Environmental Assessment of the substance 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane, which appeared on the first Priority Substances List (PSL1), was assessed to determine whether it should be considered "toxic" as defined under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). It was concluded that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane was not "toxic" under paragraph 11(b) of CEPA; however, there was insufficient information to conclude whether 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane constituted a danger to the environment under paragraph 11(a). Information was lacking about the potential effects of the substance on terrestrial biota.

No information is available concerning the effects of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane on wildlife. Based on currently available toxicity studies conducted on laboratory animals, it is unlikely that wildlife would be adversely affected by the concentrations of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane reported in the Canadian environment. No information was identified on the potential effects of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane on plants exposed through the atmosphere. Based on toxicity information available for several PSL1 substances that are structurally similar to 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, it is concluded that terrestrial plants are unlikely to be adversely affected by the concentrations of the substance reported in the Canadian atmosphere.

Based on the information currently available, it is proposed that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 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. Therefore, it is proposed that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane not be considered "toxic" as defined in paragraph 64(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. The results of the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) study will be evaluated when they become available, as they could affect the assessment of potential effects of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane on wildlife.

The full Follow-up Report may be obtained from the Existing Substances Evaluation, First Priority Substances List Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/substances/ese/eng/PSAP/PSL1_IIC.cfm) or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

Summary of the Follow-up Report to the Human Health Assessment of the substance 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane is not produced in nor imported into Canada, although it is released to the Canadian environment primarily in emissions to ambient air during production of other chemicals and from waste disposal sites; it also enters the Canadian environment as a result of long-range atmospheric transport from other countries. Information concerning the presence of 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane in products imported into Canada has not been identified.

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane was included on the first Priority Substances List (PSL1) under the 1988 Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1988) for assessment of potential risks to the environment and human health. As outlined in the Assessment Report released in 1993, relevant data identified before September 1992 were considered insufficient to conclude whether 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane was "toxic" to human health as defined in paragraph 11(c) under CEPA 1988.

Additional monitoring data were identified during the period following the release of the PSL1 Assessment Report (prior to December 2000), and estimates of exposure were accordingly updated. Additional critical toxicological data in experimental species or humans relevant to assessment of the human health risks for 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane have not been identified, although an important 13-week study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) is nearing completion. The available data provide some evidence that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane may be carcinogenic in humans, although information is inadequate as a basis for classification in Group II ("probably carcinogenic to humans"). Based on the limited available information, the margin of exposure between concentrations in the principal media of exposure (ambient and indoor air) for the general public and observed effect levels is considered sufficient to protect human health.

Based on available data, it is concluded, therefore, that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that may constitute a danger to human life or health. Therefore, the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose that 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane not be considered "toxic" to human health as defined in paragraph 64(c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

It is recommended that uses and emissions of this compound continue to be monitored to ensure that exposure does not increase to any significant extent and that the potential impact, if any, on the outcome of this assessment be considered when the final report of the NTP subchronic study is available.

The full Follow-up Report may be obtained from the Existing Substances Evaluation, First Priority Substances List Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/substances/ese/eng/PSAP/PSL1_IIC.cfm) or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

[39-1-o]

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication of Results of Investigations and Recommendations for the Substances — 1,2-Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-Dichlorobenzene, Trichlorobenzenes, Tetrachlorobenzenes, and Pentachlorobenzene (Subsections 68(b) and (c) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas a summary of a follow-up report to the assessment of 1,2-dichlorobenzene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, trichlorobenzenes, tetrachlorobenzenes, and pentachlorobenzene, substances originally specified on the first Priority Substances List, is annexed hereby,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health propose to take no further action at this time in respect of 1,2-dichlorobenzene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, and trichlorobenzenes.

Notice furthermore is hereby given that the Ministers of the Environment and of Health intend to recommend to Her Excellency the Governor in Council that tetrachlorobenzenes and pentachlorobenzene be added to the List of Toxic Substances in Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

Notice furthermore is hereby given that consultations will be held on the development of a regulation or instrument respecting preventive or control action in relation to tetrachlorobenzenes and pentachlorobenzene.

Public Comment Period

Any person may, within 60 days of publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment comments with respect to this proposal. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Director, Existing Substances Branch, Department of the Environment, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3, (819) 953-4936 (Facsimile), or by electronic mail to PSL.LSIP@ec.gc.ca.

The comments should stipulate those parts thereof that should not be disclosed pursuant to the Access to Information Act and, in particular, pursuant to sections 19 and 20 of that Act, the reason why those parts should not be disclosed and the period during which they should remain undisclosed.

JOHN ARSENEAU
Director General
Toxic Pollution Prevention Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ROD RAPHAEL
Director General
Safe Environments Programme

On behalf of the Minister of Health

Annex

Summary of the Follow-up Report to the Assessment of the substances 1,2-Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-Dichlorobenzene, Trichlorobenzenes, Tetrachlorobenzenes, and Pentachlorobenzene

1,2-Dichlorobenzene (1,2-DCB), 1,4-dichlorobenzene (1,4-DCB), trichlorobenzenes (TCBs), tetrachlorobenzenes (TeCBs) and pentachlorobenzene (QCB), which appeared on the first Priority Substances List (PSL1), were assessed to determine whether these substances should be considered "toxic" as defined under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). It was concluded in the PSL1 assessment that these compounds were not "toxic" under paragraph 11(b) or 11(c) of CEPA; however, there was insufficient information to conclude whether they could have immediate or long-term harmful effects on the environment, under paragraph 11(a). Concentration data for these chlorobenzenes (CBzs) in freshwater and marine sediments and soil environments were lacking. Corresponding data reporting effects on benthic and soil-dwelling organisms were also needed to complete this assessment.

Subsequent to the completion of the PSL1 assessments, a revised CEPA, CEPA 1999, came into effect. Paragraph 64(a) of CEPA 1999 has a definition of "toxic" that is similar to that in Paragraph 11(a) under the original CEPA and addresses whether a substance has or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment. However, in CEPA 1999, Paragraph 64(a) has been expanded to include effects on biodiversity. Research studies to address these issues for the CBzs of interest were funded, and emphasis was placed on studies that examined effects on benthic organisms exposed to the CBzs of interest. Additionally, recent literature was reviewed for new data on concentrations in sediment and soil for each of the CBzs under consideration and for information on the effects on organisms resulting from exposure to these compounds.

Both 1,2-DCB and 1,4-DCB are produced in Canada, based on reports from the early 1990s. 1,4-DCB is used more extensively than 1,2-DCB, primarily as an air freshener/deodorizer. During the mid-1990s, 40-45 tonnes of TCBs were expected to be imported into Canada, although imports of TeCBs and QCB were not anticipated.

The primary route of entry for CBzs into Canadian surface waters and associated sediments is via effluents from industrial and sewage treatment plants. 1,2-DCB, 1,4-DCB, TCBs, TeCBs and QCB have been identified in pulp and paper mill effluents. Effluents from iron and steel manufacturing contribute to loadings of TCBs, TeCBs and QCB, while petroleum refinery effluents have been reported to contain TeCBs and QCB. The more highly chlorinated benzenes, particularly hexachlorobenzene, are subject to reductive dechlorination, which may contribute to accumulation of the lower chlorinated homologues (e.g., DCBs and TCBs) in buried sediments. The main source of CBzs to Canadian soils is accidental spillage of industrial chemicals, although CBzs may be added to agricultural soils during amendment with sewage sludge. Industrial emissions to the atmosphere represent another route of entry into the Canadian environment.

Each of the CBzs under investigation in this report has been estimated to persist in sediment for longer than two years. The half-lives of 1,2-DCB, 1,4-DCB, TCBs and TeCBs in soil have been estimated to be approximately eight months, while QCB's half-life in soil has been estimated to be two years. Additionally, TeCBs and QCB are subject to atmospheric transport from their source to a remote area and, therefore, meet the criteria for persistence in air. All of the CBzs of interest in this report meet the criteria for persistence as defined in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA 1999 (Government of Canada, 2000), due to the persistence of these compounds in sediment and soil. The higher chlorinated products, TeCBs and QCB, also are persistent in air. The lower chlorinated benzenes (1,2-DCB, 1,4-DCB and TCBs) are not expected to bioaccumulate. However, the TeCBs and QCB do have the potential to bioaccumulate and meet the bioaccumulation criteria defined in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations. As the TeCBs and QCB were found to be persistent in the environment and to have the potential to bioaccumulate, risk assessments for these compounds were more conservative than for compounds not meeting the criteria as defined in the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations of CEPA 1999.

Maximum Canadian concentrations of each of the CBzs under consideration in this report were observed in sediment samples collected from the St. Clair River in Ontario. 1,4-DCB was the only CBz detected in Canadian soil samples.

The CBzs of interest in this report are known to cause both chronic and acute effects on benthic and soil-dwelling organisms. In general, benthic organisms are more sensitive to the CBzs than soil-dwelling species, based on toxicity studies to date.

Based on the information available, it is proposed that 1,2-DCB, 1,4-DCB and TCBs 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, but TeCBs and QCB are 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. Therefore, it is proposed that 1,2-DCB, 1,4-DCB and TCBs not be considered "toxic" as defined in paragraph 64(a) of CEPA 1999. It is, however, proposed that TeCBs and QCB be considered "toxic" as defined in paragraph 64(a) of CEPA 1999.

QCB and TeCBs are persistent, bioaccumulative, predominantly anthropogenic, and are proposed for consideration as "toxic" under paragraph 64(a) of CEPA 1999 and, as such, meet the criteria for Track 1 substances under the Toxic Substances Management Policy. Therefore, QCB and TeCBs should be subject to virtual elimination from the environment. Since QCB and TeCBs are not currently used in commerce in Canada, options to prevent their reintroduction into the Canadian market should be explored.

The full Follow-up Report may be obtained from the Existing Substances Evaluation, First Priority Substances List Report Page (http://www.ec.gc.ca/substances/ese/eng/PSAP/PSL1_IIC.cfm) or from the Inquiry Centre, Environment Canada, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3 (1-800-668-6767).

[39-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Designation Order

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to subsection 522.26(5) of the Bank Act, that the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions), on behalf of the Minister of Finance, designated ABN AMRO Holding N.V. on September 9, 2002, pursuant to subsection 508(1) of the Bank Act, to be a designated foreign bank for the purposes of Part XII of the Bank Act.

September 18, 2002

MAURIZIO BEVILACQUA
Secretary of State
(International Financial Institutions)

[39-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BANK ACT

Exemption Orders

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to subsection 522.26(5) of the Bank Act, that the Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions), on behalf of the Minister of Finance, determined that, pursuant to subsection 509(1) of the Bank Act, Part XII of the Act, other than sections 507, 508, and 509, subsection 522.25(3), sections 522.26 and 522.28, subsection 522.29(2) and section 522.3, does not apply to the following foreign banks:

Foreign Bank	Effective Date (m/d/y)
(1) Pitney Bowes Inc.	02/20/02
(2) Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.	03/01/02
(3) Sears, Roebuck and Co.	07/12/02
(4) Porsche AG	07/18/02
(5) Toyota Motor Corporation	07/30/02
(6) International Business Machines Corporation	08/15/02

September 18, 2002

NICHOLAS LE PAN
Superintendent of Financial Institutions

[39-1-o]

OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

BASIC RATE

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with subsection 25(7) of the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985, the Superintendent of Financial Institutions sets the basic rate, established pursuant to subsection 25(5) of the said Regulations, at $11.00 for the Office year beginning on April 1, 2003. In accordance with subsection 25(6) of the said Regulations, this rate applies to plans with a year-end between October 1, 2002, and September 30, 2003.

September 28, 2002

RONALD J. M. BERGERON
Senior Director

[39-1-o]

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).