This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 Annual Report for April 2011 to March 2012
- Executive Summary
- 1 Administration (Part 1)
- 2 Public Participation (Part 2)
- 3 Information Gathering, Objectives, Guidelines and Codes of Practice (Part 3)
- 4 Pollution Prevention (Part 4)
- 5 Controlling Toxic Substances (Part 5, Section 5.1)
- 5 Controlling Toxic Substances (Part 5, Sections 5.2 and 5.3)
- 6 Animate Products of Biotechnology (Part 6)
- 7 Controlling Pollution and Managing Waste (Part 7)
- 8 Environmental Emergencies (Part 8)
- 9 Government Operations and Federal and Aboriginal Lands (Part 9)
- 10 Compliance and Enforcement (Part 10)
- Appendix A: Contacts
5 Controlling Toxic Substances (Part 5, Section 5.1)
- 5.1 Existing Substances
Part 5 of CEPA 1999 includes specific provisions for data collection, assessment and management of new and existing substances in Canada. CEPA 1999 introduced a requirement for the government to sort through, or “categorize,” the substances on the Domestic Substances List. The categorization process identified substances that:
- were suspected to be inherently toxic to humans or to the environment, and are persistent (take a very long time to break down) and/or bioaccumulative (collect in living organisms and end up in the food chain); or
- present the greatest potential for exposure to Canadians.
As a result of the September 2006 completion of the categorization exercise, Environment Canada and Health Canada identified approximately 19 000 substances that needed no further action at that time and approximately 4300 chemical substances that needed screening assessments. These 4300 substances are being addressed under the CMP. Activities under the CMP include data collection, risk assessment, risk management, research, compliance promotion, enforcement and monitoring/surveillance.
In October 2011, the government renewed its commitment to pursue the CMP for the next five years. This next phase will build on successes and lessons learned from the first phase of the CMP and will continue to focus efforts to protect the health of Canadians and their environment. Key elements of the next phase of the CMP will include:
- completing assessments of approximately 500 substances across 9 categories; these categories represent substances that have been grouped based on shared similar characteristics (such as structural or functional similarities);
- investing in additional research for substances like BPA, flame retardants and substances that affect hormone function;
- addressing approximately 1000 additional substances in the next 5 years through other initiatives, including rapid screening of substances;
- updating the commercial use information of substances through mandatory reporting to inform risk assessment and risk management activities;
- continuing the assessment and management (where required) of priority substances identified through the first phase of the CMP (e.g., petroleum sector stream substances and the Challenge).
5.1 Existing Substances
Through the Challenge program of the CMP, the government committed to addressing the 200 highest-priority substances. These 200 substances were divided into a number of smaller groups or “batches” that were addressed sequentially. Each batch of substances in the Challenge progressed through various information gathering, screening assessment, risk management, and compliance promotion and enforcement (where appropriate) stages. Through this process, these substances have been assessed, and to date 42 have been found to meet one or more of the criteria in section 64 of CEPA 1999. During the 2011–2012 period, risk assessment and risk management work was ongoing to complete this initiative.
The Groupings Initiative
One of the current key initiatives under the CMP is the Groupings Initiative where the Government of Canada has announced it will assess and manage, where appropriate, the potential health and ecological risks associated with nine groups of substances. On October 8, 2011, an announcement was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I. This initiative includes:
- aromatic azo- and benzidine-based substances;
- boron-containing substances;
- certain internationally classified substances with potential for exposure to individuals in Canada;
- certain organic flame retardants;
- cobalt-containing substances;
- methylenediphenyl diisocyanates and diamines;
- selenium-containing substances;
- substituted diphenylamines.
In December 2011, a Notice was issued in the Canada Gazette, Part I under section 71 of CEPA 1999. This Notice collected information on a subset of the aromatic azo- and benzidine-based substances covered in this initiative.
The Petroleum Sector Stream Approach
The Petroleum Sector Stream Approach includes approximately 160 substances identified as priorities for action through the categorization process and that were set aside to be addressed in a sectoral approach. A large portion of high-priority petroleum substances are used or manufactured during petroleum refining or bitumen/heavy crude oil upgrading activities. Data collection, risk assessment and, where appropriate, risk management is continuing on this initiative.
In December 2011, a Notice was issued in the Canada Gazette on Stream 4 substances. This notice collected information on a subset of the Petroleum Sector Stream Approach Substances that are likely used outside the petroleum sector, are not primarily used as fuels, and may be present in products available to consumers.
The Polymers Approach
In March 2012, the Government of Canada released its proposed polymer approach for a 60-day public comment period. A tiered approach is proposed, taking into account the data requirements in the New Substances Program under CEPA 1999 and the timing of upcoming information-gathering initiatives.
The Rapid Screening Approach
The rapid screening approach uses a series of qualitative and quantitative steps to efficiently evaluate the likelihood that a substance may cause harm, given conservative estimates of exposure. At each step in the rapid screening process, any substance that appears to present a potential for harm will be identified as requiring further assessment. For those substances that pass through all steps of the rapid screening without being identified as requiring further assessment, the government will conclude that the substances do not meet any of the criteria as set out under section 64 of CEPA 1999.
The Domestic Substances List Inventory Update
In 2011 and 2012, the Government of Canada conducted consultations with stakeholders on the lessons learned and proposed approach to the second phase of the Domestic Substances List Inventory Update to be implemented in 2012.
Screening assessments are conducted to determine whether substances meet or are capable of meeting the criteria in section 642 of CEPA 1999. The results of the screening assessments are published in draft form on the Chemical Substances website, and the ministers of the Environment and Health publish a notice in the Canada Gazette, Part I. Interested parties can file written comments on the measure the ministers proposed and on the scientific considerations on the basis of which the measure is proposed during a 60-day public comment period. After taking into consideration comments received, the ministers may, if they deem it appropriate, revise the screening assessment report and the proposed measure.
Table 3 lists the 2011–2012 assessment conclusions and measures for 661 existing substances. This total reflects draft and/or final assessment decisions for 23 substances in batches 1, 2, 6, 8 and 11 of the challenge, 28 substances from the petroleum stream sector approach, as well as assessment decisions for 545 substances or groups of substances through a rapid screening approach.
|Substances or Number of Substances||Type of Assessment||Meet s. 64 Criteria||Proposed SNAc||Proposed Measure||Draft Notice*||Final Notice*|
|Triclosan||Screening Pilot Project – joint with PMRA||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2012 Mar. 31|
|Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl-||Challenge – Batch 2||No||NFA||2008 May 17||2012 Feb. 25|
|DecaBDE||Human Health State of the Science||n/a||n/a||2012 Feb. 11|
|1,2-Dibromoethane||Screening Pilot Project||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2011 Dec. 17|
|1,1-Dichloroethene||Screening Pilot Project||No||NFA||2011 Dec. 17|
|Aniline||PSL1 follow-up||No||NFA||2010 Nov. 6||2011 Dec. 10|
|Quinoline||Screening Pilot Project||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2010 July 31||2011 Nov. 19|
|Propanedinitrile, [[4-[[2-(4-cyclohexylphenoxy)ethyl]ethylamino]-2-methylphenyl]methylene]-||Challenge – Batch 1||No||NFA||2010 July 3||2011 Sept. 10|
|2-Naphthalenol, 1-[[4-(phenylazo)phenyl]azo]-||Challenge – Batch 6||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 3-[[2,2'-dimethyl-4'-[[4-[[(4-methylphenyl)sulfonyl]oxy]phenyl]azo][1,1'-biphenyl]-4-yl]azo]-4-hydroxy-, disodium salt||Challenge – Batch 6||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Butanamide, 2,2'-[(3,3'-dimethoxy[1,1'-biphenyl]-4,4'-diyl)bis(azo)]bis[N-(2-methylphenyl)-3-oxo-||Challenge – Batch 6||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Phenol, 4-[[2-methoxy-4-[(4-nitrophenyl)azo]phenyl]azo]-||Challenge – Batch 6||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Phosphonic acid, [[3,5-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxyphenyl]methyl]-, monoethyl ester, calcium salt (2:1)||Challenge – Batch 8||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester||Challenge – Batch 11||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|2-Propanone, reaction products with diphenylamine||Challenge – Batch 11||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N'-mixed tolyl and xylyl derivs.||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N'-mixed Ph and tolyl derivs.||Challenge – Batch 11||Yes||Add to Schedule 1||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|2-Furancarboxaldehyde||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Ethanedial||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|2-Propenoic acid, ethyl ester||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Hexanoic acid, 2-ethyl-||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Bismuthine, triphenyl-||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Cyclotetrasiloxane, heptamethylphenyl-||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Benzene, 1,1'-(chlorophenylmethylene)bis[4-methoxy-||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Phenol, 2-phenoxy-, trichloro deriv.||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Siloxanes and Silicones, Me 3,3,3-trifluoropropyl, Me vinyl, hydroxy-terminated||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Siloxanes and Silicones, di-Me, reaction products with Me hydrogen siloxanes and 1,1,3,3-tetramethyldisiloxane||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Siloxanes and Silicones, di-Me, hydrogen-terminated||Challenge – Batch 11||No||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Phenol, 4,4'-(1-methylethylidene)bis-, reaction products with hexakis(methoxymethyl)melamine||Challenge – Batch 11||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sept. 10|
|Hexabromocyclododecane||Screening Pilot Project||Yes||Add to Schedule 1 and the implementation of VE||2010 Aug. 28||2011 Nov. 12|
|Long-chain chlorinated alkanes (carbon chain length 18-38)||Human Health State of the Science||n/a||n/a||2011 Sept. 3|
|8 Substances||Petroleum Sector Stream 1 – heavy fuel oils and gas oils||No||Yes||NFA||2010 May 29||2011 Sept. 3|
|20 Substances||Petroleum Sector Stream 1 – low-boiling-point naphthas||No||Yes||NFA||2010 Aug. 14||2011 Sept. 3|
|53 Substances with High Hazard Potential||Screening Assessment||No||Yes||NFA||2011 July 2|
|3 Substances||Screening Assessment – Micro-organisms – Pseudomonas aeruginosa||No||Yes||NFA||2011 July 2|
|Chlorinated naphthalenes||Screening Assessment||Yes||Add to Schedule 1, and the implementation of VE||2009 July 18||2011 July 2|
|545 Substances||Rapid Screening Approach||No||NFA||2011 June 18|
* The dates are those on which the draft and final notices were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I.
5.1.2 Siloxane D5 Board of Review
The Siloxane D5 Board of Review was established by the Minister of the Environment under subsection 333(1) of CEPA 1999. The mandate of the Board of Review was to inquire into the nature and extent of the danger posed by siloxane D5, which is one of many silicone-based substances in use in Canada.
The Board conducted a scientific review of studies and reports on siloxane D5, and assessed the extent of the danger posed by the substance. The Board took into account both the information considered in the 2009 screening assessment plus additional scientific information that had become available since that time. This included 47 new scientific studies from industry, 24 published scientific studies, 6 scientific reports from Environment Canada, and 3 reports from other regulatory jurisdictions. The Board of Review submitted its report, together with its recommendations and the evidence that was presented to it, to the Minister of the Environment on October 20, 2011.
In February 2012, after consideration of all available information including the Board's report and recommendations, the Government of Canada published a revised final decision on Siloxane D5 in the Canada Gazette, Part I. The government concluded that D5 is not entering the environment in a quantity or under conditions that constitute a danger to the environment.
5.1.3 Risk Management
For chemical substances assessed and found to meet the definition of toxic, steps are taken to control their use and prevent, reduce or eliminate their release into the environment. This is known as “risk management.” Risk management instruments include regulations, pollution prevention (P2) plans, environmental performance agreements, permits, charges, substance lists, guidelines and codes of practice. These instruments can address any aspect of the substance's life cycle, from the research and development stage through manufacture, use, storage, transport and ultimate disposal or recycling. In addition to implementing existing risk management instruments during the reporting period, 26 risk management instruments were published to address toxic substances.
126.96.36.199 Addition of Substances to Schedule 1
Along with the results of the screening assessment, the ministers must publish in the Canada Gazette their final recommendation to the Governor in Council by choosing one of the following three options: adding a substance to Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999 (the List of Toxic Substances), adding it to the Priority Substances List for further assessment, or concluding that no further action is necessary for the substance.
Ministers may recommend the addition of a substance to Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999 to the Governor in Council if a screening assessment shows that a substance meets one or more of the criteria in section 64 of CEPA 1999. The Governor in Council may then approve an order specifying its formal addition to Schedule 1. The decision to recommend adding substances to Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999 obliges the ministers to develop risk management instruments.
Table 4 lists the substances or groups of substances that were proposed to be added to Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999 in 2011–2012. Table 5 lists the substances or groups of substances that were added to Schedule 1 in 2011–2012.
|Quinoline||2011 Dec. 17|
|Hexabromocyclododecane||2011 Dec. 10|
|2-Naphthalenol, 1-[[4-(phenylazo)phenyl]azo]-||2011 Oct. 15|
|Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester||2011 Oct. 15|
|Reaction products of 2-propanone with diphenylamine, containing diisopropyldimethylacridan||2011 Oct. 15|
|N,N-mixed phenyl and tolyl derivatives of 1,4-benzenediamine||2011 Oct. 15|
|Mercury and its compounds||2011 Oct. 1|
|Polychlorinated naphthalenes, which have the molecular formula C10H8–nCln in which “n” is greater than 1||2011 Aug. 6|
* The dates are those on which the draft orders were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I.
|Propane, 2-nitro-||2012 Mar.28|
|Benzene, 1-methyl-2-nitro-||2012 Mar.28|
|Phenol, 2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-(1-methylpropyl)-||2012 Mar.28|
|Methylium, [4-(dimethylamino)phenyl]bis[4-(ethylamino)-3-methylphenyl]-, acetate||2012 Mar.28|
|Benzene, (chloromethyl)-||2011 Dec. 21|
|Methanone, bis[4-(dimethylamino)phenyl]-||2011 Dec. 21|
|2-Butanone, oxime||2011 Dec. 21|
|n-Butyl glycidyl ether||2011 Dec. 21|
|Chlorinated alkanes that have the molecular formula CnHxCl(2n+2–x) in which 10 ≤ n ≤ 20||2011 Oct.12|
|Tributyltins, which contain the grouping (C4H9)3Sn, and Tetrabutyltins, which have the molecular formula (C4H9)4Sn||2011 July 6|
* The dates are those on which the final orders were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.
188.8.131.52 Significant New Activity Notices
Significant New Activity Notices can be issued for a chemical substance so that any major changes in the way it is used are reported to the Government of Canada. This approach ensures that government experts can evaluate whether a new use poses a risk to human health or the environment, and determine the conditions under which the new use will be allowed, if at all.
In 2011–2012, Notices of intent to apply the Significant New Activity provisions of CEPA 1999 were published for 65 substances, and final orders were published for 10 substances (Table 6). A person who intends to use, manufacture or import any of these substances for a new activity must provide prescribed information prior to initiating the new activity.
|Assessment||Substances or Number of Substances||Notice of Intent*||Final Order*|
|Batch 1||4 substances||2010 July 3||2011 Dec. 21|
|Batch 3||3 substances||2011 Apr. 2||Pending|
|Batch 4||2 substances||2011 July 30||Pending|
|Batch 5||1 substance||2011 July 30||Pending|
|Batch 6||1 substance||2011 Nov. 26||Pending|
|Batch 7||2 substances||2012 Mar. 3||Pending|
|Batch 11||6 substances||2010 Oct. 2||2011 Sep. 14|
|Not In Commerce Substances with High Hazard Potential||53 substances||2011 July 2||Pending|
|Micro-organisms||3 substances||2011 July 2||Pending|
* The dates are those on which the notices of intent and final orders were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I and Part II, respectively. Note that registration of final orders usually occurs before the order is published.
On February 26, 2011, Environment Canada published the proposed Regulations Respecting Products Containing Certain Substances Listed in Schedule 1 to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. Mercury and mercury compounds were the only substances targeted by the proposed regulations. The proposed regulations were published for a 75-day comment period, which ended on May 12, 2011. Comments were received from industry, non-governmental organizations and the public. A Response to Comments document was published in November 2011. The final regulations are targeted for publication by the fall of 2012, with a delayed entry into force.
On July 23, 2011, Environment Canada published the proposed Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012. The regulations would prohibit the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or import of benzenamine, N-phenyl, reaction products with styrene and 2,4,4-trimethylpentene, short-chain chlorinated alkanes, polychlorinated naphthalenes and tributyltins in Canada, and of products containing these substances. These substances would be added to the list of substances already controlled under the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2005 and their subsequent amendments. The final regulations are expected to be published in early 2013.
On August 27, 2011, the proposed Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I. The regulatory approach applies a stringent performance standard to new coal-fired units and units that have reached the end of their economic life. Publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I initiated a 60-day formal public comment period. Comments received were taken into consideration in the refinement of the proposed regulations in preparation for the final publication in the Canada Gazette, Part II. The final regulations were published in 2012.
Table 7 lists all of the proposed and final regulations published under Part 5 of CEPA 1999 in 2011–2012.
|Regulations||Draft Notice*||Final Regulations*|
|Regulations Amending the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2012||2011 July 23|
|Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations||2011 Aug. 27|
|Regulations Amending the Tetrachloroethylene (Use in Dry Cleaning and Reporting Requirements)||2010 May 22||2011 Oct. 12|
|Export of Substances on the Export Control List Regulations||2011 Aug. 06|
* The dates are those on which the draft notice and final regulations were published in the Canada Gazette, Part I and Part II, respectively. Note that registration of final orders usually occurs before the order is published.
184.108.40.206 Pollution Prevention Planning
The provisions within Part 4 of CEPA 1999 allow the Minister of the Environment to require designated persons to prepare, implement and report on pollution prevention (P2) plans for toxic substances. P2 planning notices provide the flexibility for industry to determine the best methods within their processes and activities to meet the risk management objective within the notice.
In fiscal year 2011–2012, three proposed notices and one final notice were published; five other P2 planning notices were active.
Pollution Prevention Planning Notices published
Polyurethane and other foam sector (except polystyrene) – toluene diisocyanates
A final P2 planning notice published in the Canada Gazette, Part II on November 26, 2011, addresses harmful substances implicated in the polyurethane and other foam sector (except polystyrene). This sector-based P2 planning notice will allow the addition of other substances, as may be required in the future, with substance-specific risk management objectives and requirements.
The first group of substances to be addressed is toluene diisocyanates, which are used to manufacture polyurethane foam used in household furniture, automotive upholstery, and packaging. This P2 planning notice may affect up to 50 facilities.
Synthetic rubber manufacturing sector – isoprene
A proposed notice published in the Canada Gazette, Part I on January 1, 2011, addresses harmful substances that are released from resin and synthetic rubber manufacturing industries. This was followed by a 60-day comment period. Comments received were considered during the development of the final notice, which will be published in 2012.
This sector-based P2 planning notice will allow the addition of other substances, as may be required in the future, with substance-specific risk management objectives and requirements. The first substance addressed by the notice is isoprene or 1,3 butadiene, 2-methyl-. The substance is used mainly in the production of rubber for vehicle tires and inner tubes, a wide variety of products including medical equipment, toys, shoe soles, textiles, paints, and pressure-sensitive adhesives. This P2 planning notice will currently have an impact on one facility within the resin and synthetic rubber sector.
Cyclotetrasiloxane, octamethyl- (siloxane D4) in industrial effluents
A proposed notice was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I on January 15, 2011, and was followed by a 60-day comment period. In addition, an information session was held on October 26, 2011, where stakeholders were given further opportunity to provide their comments. The comments received were then considered during the development of the final notice, which will be published in 2012. The notice requires that industrial facilities manufacturing or using D4 or a mixture containing D4 above a given threshold develop and implement a plan to keep effluents below a set standard. Thirty-four facilities are expected to be subject to this P2 planning notice, mostly in Ontario and Quebec.
Active Pollution Prevention Planning Notices
On April 18, 2009, a proposed P2 planning notice under CEPA 1999 was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I outlining requirements for the owners and/or operators of certain dental facilities to prepare and implement P2 plans with respect to mercury releases from dental amalgam waste.
The final notice was published on May 8, 2010. The notice applies to dental facilities that have not implemented all of the best management practices set out in Appendix A of the notice or in the Memorandum of Understanding Respecting the Implementation of the Canada-wide Standard on Mercury for Dental Amalgam Waste between the Canadian Dental Association and Environment Canada for the voluntary implementation of the Canada-wide Standard on Mercury for Dental Amalgam Waste.
The deadlines for declarations of preparation and implementation were September 13 and December 13, 2010, respectively. A lower number of schedules than expected were received, prompting Environment Canada to commission a survey of dentists across Canada in order to evaluate the level of implementation of the best management practices listed in the P2 Notice. The final version of the survey is expected in June 2012 and will provide Environment Canada with information on how to best target activities to increase compliance with the P2 Notice.
Mercury releases from mercury switches in end-of-life vehicles
This notice applies to certain vehicle manufacturers and steel mills, and it required preparation of a P2 plan by July 2008. The risk management objective is to reduce releases of mercury to the environment through participation in a mercury switch management program. Interim progress reports were submitted in 2009 to Environment Canada. All reporting companies indicated that 64 011 switches were collected in 2008, the first year of the switch collection program. This represented a capture rate of 19.7%. The submission deadline for declarations of implementation was in January 2012.
Preliminary analysis of these declarations indicate that the risk management objective of reducing releases of mercury to the environment through participation by vehicle manufacturers and steel mills in a mercury switch management program in Canada has been achieved. However, it was found that there are fewer switches available for collection than originally estimated, and therefore the recovery target of 90% could not be reached. A final performance report on this P2 Notice will be published in 2012.
Base metal smelters and refineries, and zinc plants
This notice applies to 11 base metal smelters and refineries, and zinc plants. Nine of these facilities are subject to 2008 and 2015 annual limit targets for air releases of sulphur dioxide and PM. In addition, one of these nine facilities is subject to a 2008 annual limit target for mercury and another facility is subject to a 2008 annual limit target for dioxins and furans. In 2010, one facility permanently ceased its operations while another shut down its copper smelting operations only. Environment Canada received annual interim reports from the facilities, and analysis of the 2011 data show the following emission reductions:
- The sector reported additional reductions in 2011 over previous years for all toxic substances released. These reductions are attributed mainly to the closure of two facilities; one of them was the largest source of air pollutants from the sector.
- Facilities reported overall reductions of 50% for sulphur dioxide, 61% for PM, 83% for mercury, 56% for arsenic, 85% for cadmium, 55% for lead, 70% for nickel, and 36% for dioxins and furans, compared with 2005 releases.
To date, progress towards achieving the limit targets for the four toxic substances is as follows:
- Sulphur dioxide: eight out of nine facilities met the 2008 limit targets, and five out of nine facilities have met the 2015 limit targets.
- Particulate matter: all facilities (nine out of nine) met the 2008 limit targets, and seven out of nine have met the 2015 limit targets.
- Mercury: the only facility subject to the mercury limit target met the 2008 target.
- Dioxins and furans: the only facility subject to the dioxins and furans limit target has met the 2008 target.
Four facilities have submitted their declarations of implementation, which state that these facilities have declared that the P2 plan requirements have been fully implemented either because all the tasks set out in their P2 plan had been completed or because of a partial or complete cessation of their operations.
Nonylphenol and its ethoxylates contained in products
Manufacturers and importers are required to consider reducing the total quantity of nonylphenol and its ethoxylates (NPE) used to manufacture products and imported in products by 95%. The P2 planning notice is successfully reducing NPE use. Overall on-site use of nonylphenol and its ethoxylates was reduced by approximately 96%. Importation of nonylphenol and its ethoxylates was reduced by approximately 94%.
Inorganic chloramines and chlorinated wastewater effluents
This notice applies to owners or operators of 85 wastewater systems that in 2004 or 2005 discharged, to surface waters, 5000 cubic metres per day or more of effluent with a total residual chlorine concentration of greater than 0.02 mg/L. The risk management objective is to achieve and maintain a concentration of total residual chlorine that is less than or equal to 0.02 mg/L in the effluent released to surface water, by December 15, 2009. The deadline for submitting a declaration that the P2 plan had been implemented was July 15, 2010. As of March 31, 2012, 69 wastewater system operators had declared that they had fully implemented their plans, while an additional 2 systems have been granted time extensions to implement their plans, for which the deadlines have not yet passed.
220.127.116.11 Environmental Performance Agreements
Environment Canada uses a range of tools to protect the environment, including voluntary, non-regulatory agreements with industry that commit certain sectors or companies to specific challenges or performance levels. An Environmental Performance Agreement is negotiated around the key principles and design criteria outlined in Environment Canada's Policy Framework for Environmental Performance Agreements.
Environmental Performance Agreement on production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons in Canada with E.I. DuPont Canada Company
This performance agreement came into effect on January 1, 2010. As a result, DuPont agreed to limit its annual production level of HCFCs in Canada to no more than 122.9 ozone-depleting potential tonnes, which represents 15% of Canada's baseline production level (or an 85% reduction). This is well below the 75% reduction required by the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
In January 2012, E.I. DuPont Canada submitted its second annual report under this agreement. DuPont's production level of HCFCs in Canada conforms to the performance objective of the agreement.
Environmental Performance Agreement with Rio Tinto Alcan concerning atmospheric emissions of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
The performance objectives outlined in the agreement are being achieved at all covered facilities. Since 2007, Rio Tinto Alcan's PAH emissions have been reduced by more than 110 tonnes, and further reductions are expected before the agreement ends in 2015. Environment Canada publishes an annual report update that is available online.
Environmental Performance Agreement with the Vinyl Council of Canada and the Tin Stabilizers Association
Under this five-year agreement (2008–2013), the two industrial organizations implement a best management practices guideline to minimize releases of the organotin-based stabilizers used in polyvinyl chloride processing.
A key element of this agreement is a requirement to verify whether the practices set out in the guideline have been implemented by the approximately 34 affected facilities.
A verification team consisting of industry and Environment Canada representatives will conduct site visits during the duration of the agreement. Remedial action plans are developed and implemented where required to address any deficiencies identified by the verification team. All facilities visited by the verification team to date had either already implemented practices set out in the guideline or have in place an action plan and schedule to address and remedy any deficiencies identified by the team.
In February 2012, Environment Canada published the third annual progress report, which summarized the results of the site verifications conducted during the March 10, 2010–March 9, 2011, period.
Environmental Performance Agreement respecting perfluorinated carboxylic acids (PFCAs) and their precursors in perfluorinated products sold in Canada
In March 2010, the Environmental Performance Agreement respecting long-chain PFCAs and their precursors in perfluorinated products was finalized. This agreement is a key component of a comprehensive Action Plan for PFCAs that was published in 2006. The agreement is intended to incite participating companies to:
- work towards the reduction of residual perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), residual long-chain PFCAs and residual precursors in their perfluorochemical products sold in Canada, and by 95% by December 31, 2010, and to eliminate them by December 31, 2015;
- collect and report information on their perfluorochemical products sold in Canada that contain PFOA, long-chain PFCAs and precursors (residual and non-residual).
Companies participating in this agreement have submitted baseline and annual reporting data, and the data received from companies demonstrates that significant progress is being made in reaching the targets set out in the agreement and that companies are reducing residual PFOA and long-chain PFCAs in their perfluorochemical products sold in Canada.
18.104.22.168 Codes of Practice
Codes of practice are issued by the Minister of Environment under 54(1) of CEPA 1999. Environmental codes of practice specify procedures, practices or quantities of releases relating to facilities and activities during any phase of development and operation involving a substance, and any subsequent monitoring activities.
A final Code of Practice for the Management of Tetrabutyltin in Canada was published on November 5, 2011, to minimize the releases of tetrabutyltin to the aquatic environment. The Code identifies best management procedures and practices for activities involving the import, distribution, manufacture and use of tetrabutyltin.
22.214.171.124 Use of Monitoring and Surveillance to Measure Performance of Risk Management Activities
The CMP Monitoring and Surveillance Program collects data on the concentration of chemical substances in environmental compartments at locations across Canada. Environmental compartments include surface water, sediment, air, aquatic biota and wildlife. Wastewater system influent, effluent and biosolids as well as landfill leachate and gas are also monitored at select locations representing a range of input and treatment system types.
The program has collected data on many substances including PBDEs, perfluorinated compounds (including PFOS and PFCAs), HBCD, siloxanes, triclosan, BPA and metals in relevant compartments, to provide measured environmental data for risk assessment and risk management decision making. The collection of data on these substances will establish baseline information and ultimately allow for the analysis of temporal trends--a key element of measuring the performance of risk management activities.
126.96.36.199 Substance-specific Risk Management Results
Canada has reduced its domestic sources of anthropogenic (human-induced) mercury releases by approximately 90% since the 1970s. However, transboundary mercury emissions are rising and now account for more than 95% of mercury deposition in Canada. Accelerated global efforts will be critical to meeting Canadian environmental and human health goals. Accordingly, the Government of Canada is committed to taking further actions at home and internationally to minimize and, where feasible, eliminate anthropogenic mercury releases.
The risk management strategy for mercury, published in 2010, reiterates the Government of Canada's active participation on the international committee for the preparation of a global, legally binding treaty on mercury, which was established by the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Program in 2009. The treaty will drive all countries to reduce their mercury emissions and minimize health and environmental impacts associated with these emissions. Since negotiations were launched in 2010, three sessions have taken place. Negotiations are to be completed by 2013.
A proposed risk management strategy for lead was published by Health Canada in July 2011. The strategy provides a comprehensive description of the government's progress to date in managing lead, and outlines current and anticipated management activities. The strategy was published for a 60-day public comment period that ended in September 2011. Health Canada and Environment Canada reviewed the comments submitted and have considered them in their review of the strategy. The final risk management strategy is planned to be published in 2012.
In addition to public consultations on the various risk assessments and risk management measures outlined in sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.3 above, Environment Canada and Health Canada undertook various other CMP-related consultations in 2011–2012.
A number of draft documents were published by Environment Canada and Health Canada for consultation, including:
- The draft State of the Science Report on Lead (July 2011) (Health Canada only).
- An update on the human health assessment of Long-Chain Chlorinated Alkanes (September 2011).
- The human health state of the science report on decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) (February 2012).
- A proposed polymers approach (March 2012).
- A preliminary assessment report for triclosan (March 2012).
- A Notice concerning the updated draft screening assessment of substances of low concern using the rapid screening approach.
Environment Canada published Risk Management Approaches for 60-day comment periods for:
- 2-Propanone, reaction products with diphenylamine (September 2011)
- Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester (September 2011)
- 1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N'-mixed Phenyl and tolyl derivatives (September 2011)
- Hexabromocyclododecane (November 2011)
- Quinoline (November 2011)
Also published for comment were a proposed Risk Management Strategy for Lead (July 2011) by Health Canada and a consultation document on the proposed risk management for phenol, 2,6-bis (1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-(1-methylpropyl) (December 2011) by Environment Canada.
The Departments also hosted stakeholder consultation activities on a variety of other topics, including:
- the draft Proposed Pollution Prevention Planning Notice for Halocarbon Refrigerants (October 17, 2011);
- the proposed Pollution Prevention Plan to manage Siloxane D4 in industrial effluents (October 26, 2011);
- an Environmental Performance Agreement respecting BPA in paper recycling mill effluents (October 2011 to March 2012);
- the Proposed Subgrouping of aromatic azo- and benzidine-based substances (March 2012);
- the development of Proposed Environmental Release Guidelines for MAPBAP acetate (March 2012);
- the proposed approaches for VOC emission reductions in aerosol coatings in Canada (March 7, 2012). A consultation document will be published in May 2012; and
- possible development of control measures for establishing VOC concentration limits for cutback asphalt and emulsified asphalt. A consultation document will be published in fall 2012.
2 Under section 64 of CEPA 1999, a substance is toxic if it is entering or may enter the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that:
- (a) have or may have an immediate or long-term harmful effect on the environment or its biological diversity;
- (b) constitute or may constitute a danger to the environment on which life depends; or
- (c) constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.
- Date modified: