Canadian Environmental Protection Act Research Articles

Determination of certain VOCs in paints and architectural coatings by dynamic headspace gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

A quantitative method for the determination of the following VOCs: acetone, dichloromethane, dimethyl carbonate, methyl acetate, tertiary butyl acetate, chlorobenzotrifluoride (4-CBTF) and propylene carbonate in paints was developed in support of Environment and Climate Change Canada's Automotive Refinishing Product and Architectural Coatings VOC Concentration Limits regulations. These compounds are excluded from the VOC definition by Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) regulations, and their content do not contribute to the overall VOC content in products for regulatory purposes. The method is based on Dynamic Headspace GC-MS. It was determined that activated carbon is the best trapping medium for these compounds. The technique has been compared to a currently used direct injection technique, with comparable results. Contrary to the direct injection method which requires complex sample handling prior to injection in the gas chromatograph, the dynamic headspace method practically eliminates the need for sample handling allowing for much shorter sample turnover and reducing the possibility of sampling handling errors.

New Substances Notification Regulations (Organisms) (NSNR(O)): Microbial Characterization and Key Elements for Importation to Canada

Any new substance imported into or manufactured in Canada is subject to New Substances Notification (NSN) under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) of 1999. The manufacturer or importer needs to comply with the New Substances Notification Regulations (NSNR) before the substance can be sold in the Canadian marketplace. While the section of the NSNR for biotechnology products has been in place since September 1, 1997, few microorganisms have been reviewed. The regulations also apply to various "higher" organisms such as fish, livestock, and insects (depending on the type of use). Applicants are required to provide a variety of technical information about their products in their NSN submissions to Environment Canada, the regulatory agency responsible for approving new substances in Canada. However, improper interpretation of the regulations leads to challenges for manufacturers/importers in the application process. There are ways to reduce an application's major deficiencies and/or potential for rejection. This paper aims to emphasize best practice tips for bringing new microorganisms to the Canadian marketplace that can benefit biotechnology product manufacturers at the forefront.
 https://doi.org/10.21423/jrs-v08singh

Investigating the impacts of plausible Canadian policies and their supporting mechanisms on export-based regional air pollution in China: A cement manufacturing case study

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) enables the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to develop policy to curtail international air pollution. However, regional air pollution generated during the manufacturing of products outside of Canada is not addressed in CEPA. Using cement manufacturing in China as a case study, three policy options were devised to manage export-based regional air pollution. The options investigated included Policy 1—an open border with direct support for domestic cement manufacturers, Policy 2—a restricted border with no support for domestic cement manufacturers, and Policy 3—a selective border with partial support for domestic cement manufacturers. An analytic hierarchy process, in conjunction with the three actionable solidarities of cultural theory, was applied to the policy options and their supporting mechanisms. Results indicated that Policy 3 was strongly favoured (52.5%), followed by Policy 2 (33.4%), with Policy 1 being the least favoured (14.2%). Regarding policy mechanisms, a verification process was preferred by all three solidarities. From the standpoint of a universal approach to trade it is recommended that an air quality agreement between China and Canada under CEPA be established with a framework to eventually incorporate environmental production declarations. With respect to cement exports, it is recommended that manufacturers in China provide emissions intensities and winter smog assessments.

Rationale for the regulated transition to non-lead products in Canada: A policy discussion paper

Lead gunshot, rifle bullets, and fishing weights are still allowed in Canadian provincially-regulated hunting and fishing, despite the contribution to lead exposure in humans, wildlife, and the environment. Non-lead gunshot and fishing weights are required in Canada only for waterfowl hunting, and angling in national parks and national wildlife areas. Lead wheel weights are also allowed and comprise a majority of the Canadian market. Effective non-lead substitutes for these products exist, and are already required in various American and European jurisdictions. Several analyses commissioned by the Canadian government in 2018 identified the problems of lead exposure attributable to these four lead products. Lead is already listed under Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) that authorizes the government to undertake measures to reduce exposure. CEPA could require, simultaneously, use of non-lead ammunition, fishing weights and wheel weights at the national level, following an appropriate phase-in period. The low provincial and territorial licence fees for hunting and fishing in Canada would offset any costs associated with use of lead substitutes. Costs for non-lead wheel weights would comprise a small percentage of the costs of new vehicles and new tire purchases. This regulatory initiative would complement other Canadian national bans on lead products. Because there is no safe threshold level for blood lead, use of non-lead products would benefit the health of humans, scavengers, upland game species, and fish-eating birds.

Occurrence of toluene in Canadian total diet foods and its significance to overall human exposure

ABSTRACTLevels of most VOCs in foods are usually low because of their volatility, and human exposure to VOCs is expected to be mainly via inhalation of ambient and indoor air. However, dietary exposures to VOCs can be significant to overall exposures if elevated concentrations of VOCs are present in foods consumed in high amounts and/or on a regular basis, and this was demonstrated in this study with the occurrence data of toluene from the recent 2014 Canadian Total Diet Study (TDS). Concentrations of toluene in the composite samples of most food types from the 2014 TDS are low and similar to the results from the previous 2007 TDS with some exceptions, such as beef steak (670 ng/g (2014 TDS) vs. 14 ng/g (2007 TDS)), poultry, chicken and turkey (307 ng/g (2014 TDS) vs. 8.8 ng/g (2007 TDS)). Toluene concentrations in most of the grain-based and fast food composite samples from the 2014 TDS are considerably higher than those from the 2007 TDS, with the highest level of 4655 ng/g found in the composite sample of crackers from the 2014 TDS (compared to 18 ng/g from 2007 TDS). Dietary exposure estimates for toluene based on the occurrence results from the 2014 TDS show that for most of the age groups, grain-based foods are the primary source, accounting for an average of 77.5% of the overall toluene intake from the diet. The highest dietary exposures to toluene were observed for the adult age groups, with estimated average exposures ranging from 177.4 to 184.5 µg/d. Dietary exposure estimates to toluene are well below oral doses associated with toxicological effects and also below the maximum estimated intake (819 µg/d) from air inhalation for adult group (20 – 70 years) based on the results from CEPA (Canadian Environmental Protection Act) assessment in 1992.

Risk science in the 21st century: a data-driven framework for incorporating new technologies into chemical safety assessment

One of the major challenges in chemical safety assessment is prioritisation of the large number of chemicals in commerce. Over the past five years, a new tiered approach to chemical safety assessment that uses margin of exposure (MOE) as the metric for determining the level of testing required, identifies chemicals of greatest concern. This paper evaluates the role of new technologies and novel tools in improving different steps of chemical risk assessment processes such as high throughput screening (HTS) in vitro assay platforms, high content biological omics assays, molecular biomarkers, quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) modelling, in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) and physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling. Other technologies such as functional genomics, bioinformatics, and computational biology can expedite the analysis. This new approach could potentially be used to prioritise and categorise chemicals on the domestic substance list (DSL) under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).

Challenges and opportunities in the risk assessment of existing substances in Canada: lessons learned from the international community

The evaluation and regulation of chemical substances have undergone a major overhaul in Canada, the USA and the European Union (EU) over the last decade. To facilitate increasing concerns over chemical safety, changes in regulations and strategic plans were introduced. Specifically, the Canadian parliament adopted a new amendment to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) in 1999, the US National Academy of Sciences published the 2007 NRC report TT21C, the US EPA developed the Strategic Plan in 2009, and the EU introduced new legislation in 2007 called Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH substances). A 2013 workshop held in Ottawa (Risk Sciences International) focused on regulatory issues and challenges faced by these nations. This review summarises many of the discussions held during the workshop and specifically, five challenges that Canada has encountered when assessing chemicals with limited data on Canada's Domestic Substances List (DSL).

Regulation of Chemical Risks: Lessons for TSCA Reform from Canada and the European Union

The United States Congress is considering reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976. This Article compares recent reforms in Europe and Canada in order to draw lessons for TSCA reform. In 2006, the European Union enacted the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation while Canada used existing authority under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) of 1999 to initiate the 2006 Chemicals Management Plan (CMP). Focusing on the tens of thousands of industrial chemicals now in use in the US, we offer several suggestions for TSCA reform based on the European and Canadian experiences. Congress should consider applying the Canadian approach to prioritization, where high-priority chemicals are identified for assessment and regulation based on limited data and modeling/screening exercises. To facilitate more expedient safety determinations, TSCA reform legislation should separate risk assessment from risk management decisions. Under either approach, improved chemicals governance will require significant new public and private investments in safety information and deliberations. Finally, Congress should consider applying European-style chemical registration to high-priority substances, placing the burden of generating data and proving the safety of specific uses on industry. In summary, an industry obligation to register high-priority chemicals and defend the safety of specific uses would bring new life to TSCA, enhance public health and environmental protection, and buttress public confidence in federal regulation of industrial chemicals.

Regulating Geoengineering Research through Domestic Environmental Protection Frameworks: Reflections on the Recent Canadian Ocean Fertilization Case

Field experiments related to the development of geoengineering technologies are now occurring in an increasing number of countries. Such projects are raising important questions about the adequacy of national environmental protection laws (EPLs) for regulating geoengineering activities, including their ability to enforce emerging international norms for geoengineering research.This article considers the application of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) to a 2012 controversy over ocean iron fertilization off the coast of British Columbia. This incident provides an important precedent for analyzing existing domestic legislation and administrative measures being called upon to regulate geoengineering activities outside of the laboratory. To date, the attention of legal scholars has mostly focused on the content and adequacy of international rules. However, as this case illustrates, the interpretation and implementation of these rules in domestic legal systems is critically important, as it is predominantly within domestic frameworks that such rules have direct legal effect on private and non-governmental actors. Our analysis highlights some key challenges for EPLs in regulating geoengineering activities, and draws some tentative conclusions regarding the structure of domestic environmental protection frameworks for regulating geoengineering research.

The Constitutionality of Federal Climate Change Legislation

Over the last decade, the Canadian government has not managed to produce a comprehensive climate change statute and has failed to adequately consider the constitutional implications of doing so. The Clean Air Bill, an unsuccessful 2006 amendment to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), focused on carbon credit trading and a technology fund credit mechanism to permit certain emissions-heavy industries to mitigate their production of greenhouse gases. However, this bill would likely have infringed on provincial jurisdiction over electricity generation facilities, trumping any attempt to address greenhouse gas emissions beneath the rubric of criminal law. The present federal government’s proposed coal-fired electricity generation regulations are similarly flawed. This paper thoroughly analyzes both pieces of legislation from a constitutional standpoint, using a rich body of case law to offer policymakers invaluable guidance in properly framing legally sound emission reduction statutes.

Tracking Environmental Crime Through CEPA: Canada's Environment Cops or Industry's Best Friend?

This paper examines shifts in the regulation and governance of environment crime over the 20 year period since the passage of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) in 1988, tracing its history, policies and enforcement record from 1989-2008. Documents assessed include Environment Canada’s enforcement data, Annual Reports, Reports on its Plans and Priorities, the Senate and House of Commons five-year reviews of CEPA 1988 and CEPA 1999 and the government’s response to these reviews. The purpose of the paper is to document the process and compromises that have shaped federal environmental protection, and explore the policy paralysis this has produced.

Engaging Expert Peers in the Development of Risk Assessments

The participation of external technical experts in the development of risk assessment documents and methodologies has expanded and evolved in recent years. Many government agencies and authoritative organizations have experts peer review important works to evaluate the scientific and technical defensibility and judge the strength of the assumptions and conclusions (OMB, 2004; IPCS, 2005; IARC, 2006; Health Canada, 2007; U.S. EPA, 2006). Expert advice has been solicited in other forms of peer involvement, including peer consultation in, for example, the U.S. EPA's Voluntary Children's Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP). This article discusses how the principles and practices of peer review can be extended to other types of peer involvement activities (i.e., peer input and peer consultation) to develop high-quality risk assessment work products. A comprehensive process for incorporating peer input, peer consultation, and peer review into risk assessment science is outlined. Four key principles for peer involvement-independence, inclusion of appropriate experts, transparency, and a robust scientific process-are discussed. Recent examples of peer involvement in the development of Health Canada's Priority Substances and Domestic Substance List (DSL) programs under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) serve to highlight the concepts.

Substance Profiling for Categorization and Screening Health Risk Assessments of Existing Substances Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA)

Substance Profiling for Categorization and Screening Health Risk Assessments of Existing Substances Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA)

Selected Volatile Organic Compounds in Residential Air in the City of Ottawa, Canada

Airborne levels of selected volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) that are priorities for exposure assessment under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) 1999 were measured in both indoor air and outdoor air of 75 residential houses, in the city of Ottawa, Canada, during the winter of 2002/2003. The houses were randomly selected using Ottawa 2001 population census data. VOCs were collected on adsorbent tubes and measured by thermal desorption GC/MS. Among 37 chemicals monitored, 17 were detected with a frequency greater than 80% in indoor air; 9 were between 30% and 80%; 7 were between 1% and 30%; and 4 were not detected. Concentrations of VOCs in both indoor and outdoor air are presented. Virtually all of the target VOCs were detected more frequently and were present at significantly higher levels, in indoor air than in outdoor air. As an indication of the contribution of indoor levels of these chemicals, ratios of the concentration found in indoor air to outdoor air (I/O) and the indoor source strength expressed in estimated emission rate per house are also presented. Compared with earlier published studies including a 1991/1992 Canadian national survey of VOCs in residential air, levels of target analytes in indoor air in this study were lower for a number of chemicals, indicating a possible trend toward decreased inhalation exposure to these chemicals in residential environments. This study has yielded up-to-date information on levels of a variety of priority airborne chemicals in residential air, which is being used to estimate current exposure to these substances as input to health risk assessments and risk management actions under CEPA 1999.

Canada, the Antarctic and the Madrid Protocol

The House of Commons of Canada passed Bill C-42, An Act respecting the protection of the Antarctic Environment, in June 2003. By it, Canada ratifies the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (the Protocol), which designates Antarctica as a natural reserve, devoted to peace and science. Through this legislation, Canada will have the legal instruments to manage and monitor its citizens and others on Canadian projects in the Antarctic with respect to the environmental codes of conduct established by the Madrid Protocol. Canadians have been involved in Antarctica since the first overwintering at the turn of the 19th century. The level of activity, over the years and today, is much greater than most people think. The Arctic Institute of North America, established in the 1940s, has always had an interest in both polar regions; its Act of Parliament refers to both hemispheres. ... The Antarctic Treaty of 1961 establishes that Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only. It prohibits military activity, nuclear tests, and radioactive waste disposal. It promotes international cooperation in research and suspends all sovereignty claims. The Antarctic Treaty System includes the Antarctic Treaty itself, the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (CCAS, 1972), the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR, 1980), and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (1991), also known as the Madrid Protocol. ... Canada acceded to the Antarctic Treaty and the CCAMLR in 1988 and to the CCAS in 1990. The Madrid Protocol entered into force in 1998, ratified by 29 nations. Canada signed it (agreed to it in principle) in 1991, but did not ratify it. Bill C-42 ... is summarized as follows: The purpose of this enactment is to protect the Antarctic environment, particularly by implementing the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. This enactment provides a permitting regime that gives the Minister the necessary powers to ensure that the activities undertaken by Canadian expeditions, Canadian vessels and Canadian aircraft in the Antarctic are subject to an environmental impact assessment prior to their occurrence. This enactment creates prohibitions to protect the Antarctic marine environment, specially protected areas and historic sites and monuments in the Antarctic, and species that are native to the Antarctic. The provisions of the legislation, including regulations adopted pursuant to the bill, apply to all, regardless of nationality, on Canadian expeditions (that is, expeditions organized in or proceeding from Canada) to the Antarctic. They apply to all Canadians, Canadian vessels, and aircraft in the Antarctic and to anyone at a Canadian station there. There will be a permit system for people and activities covered by the legislation. This will encompass such things as environmental impact assessment, specially protected areas, waste management, and emergency plans. ... There are monitoring, reporting, and inspection provisions to allow enforcement. In Canada, the enforcement provisions are in line with the Fisheries Act, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), and the Species at Risk Act (SARA). ... formal ratification of the Madrid Protocol shows our willingness as a nation to enforce these standards. ...

Releases from copper smelters and refineries and zinc plants in Canada: human health exposure and risk characterization

In these assessments of releases from copper smelters and refineries and from zinc plants as Priority Substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), available data were critically evaluated to determine if environmental exposure to selected components of these releases poses a risk to human health. The data on airborne levels of a variety of toxic substances near these facilities in Canada were obtained from the companies or provinces and systematically analyzed. Monitoring of ambient air near the Canadian copper smelters and refineries and zinc plants indicates that releases from these facilities result in increased potential for inhalation exposure of local human populations to several components of releases (As, Cd, Cr, Ni, Pb, SO 2 and PM 10). Airborne levels in the vicinity of these metal-processing operations overlap those associated with cardiorespiratory effects for PM 10, and exceed health-based guidelines for SO 2 and, near some facilities, Pb. In addition, the margin between levels of As, Cd, Cr and Ni near these facilities in Canada and carcinogenic potency for each of these metals is relatively small near copper smelters, larger near copper refineries, and intermediate near zinc plants. On this basis, the risk to human health from environmental exposure to releases from these facilities is considered to be high compared with other Priority Substances assessed under CEPA, especially for facilities where copper is smelted.

Limiting salt intake

An August 12 report released by Environment Canada concludes that road salts are toxic to the environment. The results of the 5‐year assessment indicate that the road salts that Canada typically uses each year pose a risk to lake and stream ecosystems, groundwater, and a variety of plants and animals.While the assessment report calls for road salts to be added to Canada s List of Toxic Substances maintained under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), Environment Canada states that it is not considering a ban on road salts, and that road safety issues will be considered when adopting any control measures.

Application of Uncertainty Factors in the Priority Substances Program and International Harmonization

The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) authorizes the Ministers of the Environment and of Health in Canada to investigate a wide variety of substances that may contaminate the environment and cause adverse effects on the environment and/or on human health. Under the Act, assessments have been completed for 44 environmental contaminants on the first Priority Substances List (PSL) and are relatively advanced for 25 compounds on the second PSL. The principles developed for the application of uncertainty factors in assessment of risks to human health for Priority Substances under CEPA are outlined, with emphasis on those aspects which are somewhat unique and/or evolving. The interface of developments in the Priority Substances program with an initiative of the International Programme on Chemical Safety in this area to effect greater harmonization of approaches is also described.

Screening candidate substances for the second priority substances list under the Canadian environmental protection act

Screening candidate substances for the second priority substances list under the Canadian environmental protection act

Assessments of priority substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act Variations in exposure and response

Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), assessments have been completed for 44 environmental contaminants on the first Priority Substances List. The principles developed for the assessment of risk to human health for Priority Substances under CEPA are outlined, with specific emphasis on variations in exposure and response. These include the estimation of total exposure from all media, the development of exposure potency indices for carcinogens in lieu of low dose risk estimates and incorporation of toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic data, where available, to modify traditionally adopted uncertainty factors for development of tolerable intakes, or concentrations, for non-neoplastic effects.