Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 154, Number 27: GOVERNMENT NOTICES

July 4, 2020

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Ministerial Condition No. 20287

Ministerial condition

(Paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) have assessed information pertaining to the substance 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry No. 3470-98-2;

And whereas the ministers suspect that the substance is toxic or capable of becoming toxic within the meaning of section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (the Act),

The Minister of the Environment, pursuant to paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Act, hereby permits the manufacture or import of the substance in accordance with the conditions of the following annex.

Kevin Cash
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister
Science and Technology Branch

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ANNEX

Conditions

(Paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

1. The following definitions apply in these ministerial conditions:

2. The notifier may manufacture or import the substance in accordance with the present ministerial conditions.

Restrictions

3. The notifier shall not import the substance if it is present in

4. The notifier shall not import or manufacture the substance to use it to manufacture the following:

5. The notifier shall transfer the physical possession or control of the substance only to a person who agrees to use it in accordance with section 4.

Other requirements

6. The notifier shall, prior to transferring the physical possession or control of the substance to any person

Record-keeping requirements

7. (1) The notifier shall maintain electronic or paper records, with any documentation supporting the validity of the information contained in these records, indicating

(2) The notifier shall maintain the electronic or paper records mentioned in subsection (1) at their principal place of business in Canada, or at the principal place of business in Canada of their representative, for a period of at least five years after they are made.

Coming into force

8. The present ministerial conditions come into force on June 24, 2020.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Ministerial Condition No. 20350

Ministerial condition

(Paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) have assessed information pertaining to the substance amides, tall-oil fatty, N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl], Chemical Abstracts Service Registry No. 68650-79-3;

And whereas the ministers suspect that the substance is toxic or capable of becoming toxic within the meaning of section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (the Act),

The Minister of the Environment, pursuant to paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Act, hereby permits the manufacture or import of the substance in accordance with the conditions of the following annex.

Kevin Cash
Acting Assistant Deputy Minister
Science and Technology Branch

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

ANNEX

Conditions

(Paragraph 84(1)(a) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

1. The following definitions apply in these ministerial conditions:

2. The notifier may manufacture or import the substance in accordance with the present ministerial conditions.

Restrictions

3. The notifier may import the substance only to incorporate it as a component of asphalt or bitumen emulsions.

4. The notifier shall transfer the physical possession or control of the substance only to a person who agrees to use it in accordance with section 3.

5. At least 120 days prior to the manufacture of the substance in Canada, the notifier shall inform the Minister of the Environment, in writing, and provide the following information:

Disposal of the substance

6. The notifier or the person to whom the substance has been transferred must

Environmental release

7. Where any release of the substance or waste to the environment occurs, the person who has the physical possession or control of the substance or waste shall immediately take all measures necessary to prevent any further release, and to limit the dispersion of any release. Furthermore, the person shall, as soon as possible in the circumstances, inform the Minister of the Environment by contacting an enforcement officer designated under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.

Other requirements

8. The notifier shall, prior to transferring the physical possession or control of the substance, waste or containers or transportation vessels that contained the substance to any person

Record-keeping requirements

9. (1) The notifier shall maintain electronic or paper records, with any documentation supporting the validity of the information contained in these records, indicating

(2) The notifier shall maintain the electronic or paper records mentioned in subsection (1) at their principal place of business in Canada, or at the principal place of business of their representative in Canada, for a period of at least five years after they are made.

Coming into force

10. The present ministerial conditions come into force on June 24, 2020.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of six naphthalene sulfonic acids and salts specified on the Domestic Substances List (paragraphs 68(b) and (c) or subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas two of the substances identified in the annex below are substances identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on four substances pursuant to paragraphs 68(b) and (c) of the Act and on the two remaining substances pursuant to section 74 of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude that the substances do not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to take no further action at this time under section 77 of the Act for the two substances identified under subsection 73(1) of the Act.

Notice is further given that the ministers propose to take no further action on the other four substances at this time.

Public comment period

Any person may, within 60 days after publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment written comments on the measure the ministers propose to take and on the scientific considerations on the basis of which the measure is proposed. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be addressed to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, by fax to 819‑938‑5212, by email to eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca, or by using the online reporting system available through Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Single Window.

In accordance with section 313 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person who provides information in response to this notice may submit with the information a request that it be treated as confidential.

Jacqueline Gonçalves
Director General
Science and Risk Assessment Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

Greg Carreau
Acting Director General
Safe Environments Directorate
On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of the Naphthalene Sulfonic Acids and Salts Group

Pursuant to section 68 or 74 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of six of seven substances referred to collectively under the Chemicals Management Plan as the Naphthalene Sulfonic Acids and Salts Group. These six substances were identified as priorities for assessment as they met categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA or were considered a priority on the basis of other human health or ecological concerns. Although three substances in this Group did not meet categorization criteria, they were included in this assessment because they were determined to be priorities as a result of the approach for the identification of risk assessment priorities. A seventh substance was initially included in the Group; however, it was determined to be of low concern through other approaches, and the conclusion for this substance is provided in a separate report.footnote 1 Accordingly, this screening assessment addresses the six substances listed in the table below. The six substances addressed in this screening assessment are hereinafter referred to as the Naphthalene Sulfonic Acids and Salts Group (NSAs Group). The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers (CAS RNsfootnote 2), the Domestic Substances List (DSL) names and the acronyms of these substances are listed in the table below.

Substances in the Naphthalene Sulfonic Acids and Salts Group table a1 note a

CAS RN

DSL name

Acronym

1321-69-3

Naphthalenesulfonic acid, sodium salt

NaNSA

25322-17-2 table a1 note b

Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-

DNNSA

25619-56-1 table a1 note b

Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-, barium salt

BaDNNSA

57855-77-3 table a1 note c

Naphthalenesulfonic acid, dinonyl-, calcium salt

CaDNNSA

60223-95-2 table a1 note b

Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, dinonyl-

DNNDSA

68425-61-6

Naphthalenesulfonic acid,
bis(1-methylethyl)-, compd. with cyclohexanamine (1:1)

CDINSA

Table a1 note(s)

Table a1 note a

All substances are UVCBs (unknown or variable composition, complex reaction products, or biological materials).

Return to table a1 note a referrer

Table a1 note b

This substance was determined to be a priority as a result of the approach for the identification of risk assessment priorities.

Return to table a1 note b referrer

Table a1 note c

This substance was not identified under subsection 73(1) of CEPA but was included in this assessment as it was considered a priority on the basis of other human health concerns.

Return to table a1 note c referrer

All six substances in the NSAs Group are commercially produced and do not occur naturally in the environment. The six substances were included in surveys issued pursuant to section 71 of CEPA. According to information submitted, NaNSA was manufactured in a total quantity between 100 000 kg and 1 000 000 kg, and less than 1 000 kg of CaDNNSA was manufactured in Canada. The remaining substances in the Group were not manufactured in Canada but were imported into Canada in quantities of 1 000 kg to 100 000 kg for each substance. These substances have a variety of uses in fuels, lubricants, oil and natural gas extraction, paints and coatings, rubber materials, and water treatment.

The ecological risk of NaNSA was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, NaNSA is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.

The other five substances in the NSAs Group were assessed for ecological risk based on a mixture of empirical and analogue hazard data, which informed the fate and effects of these substances. Due to similarities in the chemical structures and effects of these substances, their hazard was considered as a group. Similarly, their ecological exposure was considered as a group due to the assumed potential for interchangeable industrial uses of the substances. Some of these substances may be persistent and bioaccumulative. The exposure scenarios examined in the ecological assessment included aquatic releases from lubricant oil blending, use of metal working fluids, formulation of paints and coatings, formulation of oil and gas products, and industrial use of paints. Exposure to soil via the application of biosolids to land, and exposure in sediment, were also considered. A low risk was identified from these five NSAs at current levels of exposure.

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

With respect to human health, BaDNNSA and CDINSA were evaluated using the approach applied in the Rapid Screening of Substances with Limited General Population Exposure assessment to determine if a substance requires further assessment on the basis of the potential for direct and indirect exposure of the general population. On the basis of this approach, the potential for exposure of the general population to BaDNNSA and CDINSA was considered to be negligible, indicating a low probability of risk to human health. Therefore, BaDNNSA and CDINSA are considered to be a low concern for human health at current levels of exposure.

For the four other substances, Canadians may be exposed to DNNSA, CaDNNSA and DNNDSA mainly through drinking water, while NaNSA is not released to the environment. In addition, DNNSA may be used as an antistatic agent in certain food packaging materials with potential for direct food contact. However, exposure from this food packaging use is expected to be negligible. The general population is not expected to be exposed to NaNSA, DNNSA or DNNDSA from the use of products available to consumers. The use of a general purpose aerosol lubricant containing CaDNNSA may result in intermittent inhalation and dermal exposures to this substance.

NaNSA was not identified as posing a high hazard to human health on the basis of classifications by other national or international agencies for carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, developmental toxicity, or reproductive toxicity. Further investigation into the potential health effects of NaNSA was not pursued as exposure of the Canadian general population to this substance is not expected. The health effects data for DNNSA, CaDNNSA and DNNDSA were limited; therefore, a read-across approach was used to inform the health effects characterization of these substances. On the basis of laboratory studies conducted on structurally related substances, the critical health effects of DNNSA, CaDNNSA, and DNNDSA are considered to be crystal formation in the kidneys and effects on the thyroid. Comparisons of levels of exposure to DNNSA or DNNDSA from environmental media to levels at which health effects occur result in margins that are considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases. Similarly, comparisons of levels of exposure to CaDNNSA from environmental media and from the use of a lubricant containing CaDNNSA to levels at which health effects occur result in margins that were considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that the six substances in the NSAs Group do not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA, as they are not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Proposed conclusion

It is therefore proposed to conclude that the six substances in the NSAs Group do not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of CEPA.

The draft screening assessment for these substances is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Publication after screening assessment of a substance — 1-propene, 2-methyl-, sulfurized (sulfurized isobutylene), CAS RNfootnote 2 68511-50-2 — specified on the Domestic Substances List (subsection 77(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999)

Whereas sulfurized isobutylene is a substance identified under subsection 73(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999;

Whereas a summary of the draft screening assessment conducted on sulfurized isobutylene pursuant to section 74 of the Act is annexed hereby;

And whereas it is proposed to conclude that the substance does not meet any of the criteria set out in section 64 of the Act,

Notice therefore is hereby given that the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health (the ministers) propose to take no further action on this substance at this time under section 77 of the Act.

Public comment period

As specified under subsection 77(5) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person may, within 60 days after publication of this notice, file with the Minister of the Environment written comments on the measure the ministers propose to take and on the scientific considerations on the basis of which the measure is proposed. More information regarding the scientific considerations may be obtained from the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website. All comments must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be addressed to the Executive Director, Program Development and Engagement Division, Department of the Environment, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3, by fax to 819‑938‑5212, by email to eccc.substances.eccc@canada.ca, or by using the online reporting system available through Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Single Window.

In accordance with section 313 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, any person who provides information in response to this notice may submit with the information a request that it be treated as confidential.

Jacqueline Gonçalves
Director General
Science and Risk Assessment Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of the Environment

Greg Carreau
Acting Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Summary of the draft screening assessment of sulfurized isobutylene

Pursuant to section 74 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Health have conducted a screening assessment of 1-propene, 2-methyl-, sulfurized (CAS RN 68511-50-2) hereinafter referred to as sulfurized isobutylene. This substance was identified as a priority for assessment, as it met categorization criteria under subsection 73(1) of CEPA.

Sulfurized isobutylene is a UVCB (which stands for substances of unknown or variable composition, complex reaction products, or biological materials) and does not occur naturally in the environment. In 2011, results from a survey issued pursuant to a CEPA section 71 notice indicated that it was not manufactured in Canada above the reporting threshold of 100 kg and that it was imported in quantities between 10 000 and 100 000 kg. Its primary use in Canada was reported to be as a lubricant and lubricant additive in lubricants and greases.

The ecological risk of sulfurized isobutylene was characterized using the ecological risk classification of organic substances (ERC), which is a risk-based approach that employs multiple metrics for both hazard and exposure, with weighted consideration of multiple lines of evidence for determining risk classification. Hazard profiles are based principally on metrics regarding mode of toxic action, chemical reactivity, food web–derived internal toxicity thresholds, bioavailability, and chemical and biological activity. Metrics considered in the exposure profiles include potential emission rate, overall persistence, and long-range transport potential. A risk matrix is used to assign a low, moderate or high level of potential concern for substances on the basis of their hazard and exposure profiles. Based on the outcome of the ERC analysis, sulfurized isobutylene is considered unlikely to be causing ecological harm.

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

Based on available information, the general population is expected to be exposed to sulfurized isobutylene from the use of products available to consumers (lubricants and greases) and from drinking water.

Based on observations in laboratory studies, the critical effects following dermal exposure to sulfurized isobutylene were decreased body weight gain and hematological effects. On the basis of the effects of a similar substance observed in laboratory studies, the critical health effect identified for chronic oral exposure was decreased pup weight in rats.

Comparison of levels of exposure to the general population with levels associated with critical health effects resulted in margins considered adequate to address uncertainties in the health effects and exposure databases.

On the basis of the information presented in this draft screening assessment, it is proposed to conclude that sulfurized isobutylene does not meet the criteria under paragraph 64(c) of CEPA, as it is not entering the environment in a quantity or concentration or under conditions that constitute or may constitute a danger in Canada to human life or health.

Proposed conclusion

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

The draft screening assessment for this substance is available on the Canada.ca (Chemical Substances) website.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT, 1999

Proposed Guideline for Canadian Drinking Water Quality for Diquat

Pursuant to subsection 55(3) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, the Minister of Health hereby gives notice of a proposed Guideline for Canadian Drinking Water Quality for Diquat. The proposed guideline document is available from July 3, 2020, on the Health Canada consultation web page. Any person may, within 90 days after publication of this notice, file with the Minister of Health written comments on the proposed document. Comments must be sent by email at HC.water-eau.SC@canada.ca, or by regular mail to the Water and Air Quality Bureau, Health Canada, 269 Laurier Avenue West, AL 4903D, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9.

July 3, 2020

Greg Carreau
Acting Director General
Safe Environments Directorate

On behalf of the Minister of Health

ANNEX

Proposed guideline

A maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) of 0.05 mg/L (50 µg/L) is proposed for diquat (measured as the cation) in drinking water.

Executive summary

This guideline technical document was prepared in collaboration with the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water and is based on assessments of diquat completed by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and supporting documents.

Exposure

In Canada, diquat is an herbicide that is deliberately applied to food crops and to water sources for weed control. The general Canadian population is therefore potentially exposed to diquat through food, and to a lesser extent, through drinking water. In 2016 (the most recent year for which data are available), more than 500 000 kg of diquat (as active ingredient) was sold in Canada. Very low levels of diquat have been detected in foods. Data provided by provinces and territories that monitor for diquat in source and drinking water indicate that levels of diquat are below the detection limit.

Health effects

In repeat-dose animal studies, diquat primarily targeted the eyes, causing cataracts, and also affected the kidneys and liver. The proposed MAC of 0.05 mg/L (50 µg/L) is based on cataract formation.

Analytical and treatment considerations

Currently, there is one method available for the analysis of diquat in drinking water. The method detection limit is about one to two orders of magnitude below the proposed MAC.

Treatment methods may remove diquat from drinking water supplies, although studies at all scales (bench, pilot or full) are limited or nonexistent. Granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption is likely the most effective treatment option and membrane filtration techniques (nanofiltration and reverse osmosis) and oxidation may also be effective. Due to lack of performance studies, it is recommended that pilot- and/or bench-scale testing be conducted prior to full-scale implementation.

In cases where diquat removal is desired at a small system or household level, for example, when the drinking water supply is from a private well, a residential drinking water treatment unit may be an option. Adsorption (activated carbon) and reverse osmosis represent the best potential technologies for diquat removal. When using a residential drinking water treatment unit, it is important to take samples of water entering and leaving the treatment unit and send them to an accredited laboratory for analysis to ensure that adequate diquat removal is occurring.

Application of the guideline

Note: Specific guidance related to the implementation of drinking water guidelines should be obtained from the appropriate drinking water authority in the appropriate jurisdiction.

The proposed guideline is protective against health effects from exposure to diquat in drinking water over a lifetime. Any exceedance of the proposed MAC should be investigated and followed by the appropriate corrective actions if required. For exceedances in source water where there is no treatment in place, an investigation to determine the most appropriate way to reduce exposure to diquat should be conducted. This may include use of an alternate water supply or installation of treatment. Where treatment is already in place and an exceedance occurs, an investigation should be conducted to verify diquat efficacy of treatment and determine if adjustments are needed to lower the treated water concentration below the proposed MAC.

International considerations

Other national and international organizations have drinking water guidelines, standards and/or guidance values. Variations in these values can be attributed to the age of the assessments or to differing policies and approaches, including the choice of key study and the use of different consumption rates, body weights and source allocation factors. The three international values established for diquat are based on cataract formation in rats and differ in their interpretation of this study, and in the selection of body weights and source allocation factors.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency has established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 0.02 mg/L, while the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council has established a guideline value of 0.007 mg/L for diquat in drinking water. The World Health Organization has calculated a non-regulatory health-based value of 0.03 mg/L (30 µg/L) for diquat.

The European Union does not have a specific parametric value for individual pesticides. Instead, the EU has a value of 0.1 µg/L for any individual (single) pesticide, and a value of 0.5 µg/L for total pesticides found in drinking water. In establishing these values, the EU did not consider the science related to each pesticide, such as health effects. The values are rather based on a policy decision to keep pesticides out of drinking water.

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR GENERAL

Appointments

June 25, 2020

Diane Bélanger
Official Documents Registrar

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT

Notice No. TIPB-001-2020 — Petition to the Governor in Council concerning Telecom Decision CRTC 2019-433

Notice is hereby given that a petition from AFX Communications has been received by the Governor in Council (GIC) under section 12 of the Telecommunications Act with respect to a decision issued by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) concerning the compensation owed to AFX by Bell Canada for toll-free calls originating from AFX operated payphones.

Subsection 12(1) of the Telecommunications Act provides that, within one year after a decision by the CRTC, the GIC may, on petition in writing presented to the GIC within 90 days after the decision, or on the GIC’s own motion, by order, vary or rescind the decision or refer it back to the CRTC for reconsideration of all or a portion of it.

In their petition, dated March 17, 2020, the petitioning party requests that the GIC vary Telecom Decision CRTC 2019-433, AFX Communications – Application with respect to reports and compensation for toll-free calls over payphones. The reasons for this request are included in the petition.

Submissions regarding this petition should be filed by August 4, 2020. All comments received will be posted on Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website.

Submitting comments

Submissions should be addressed to the Director General, Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, preferably in electronic format (Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF) to the following email address: ic.telecomsubmission-soumissiontelecom.ic@canada.ca. Written copies can be sent to the Director General, Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 235 Queen Street, 10th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H5.

All submissions should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, the publication date, the title and the notice reference number (TIPB-001-2020).

Obtaining copies

Copies of the petition filed by the concerned party, as well as copies of all relevant documents and submissions received in response, may be obtained electronically on the Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website, under “Gazette Notices and Petitions.” It is the responsibility of interested parties to check the public record from time to time to keep abreast of submissions received.

Official versions of notices can be viewed on the Canada Gazette website.

July 4, 2020

Patricia Brady
Director General
Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch

DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT

Notice No. TIPB-002-2020 — Petition to the Governor in Council concerning Telecom Decision CRTC 2020-80

Notice is hereby given that a petition from the National Pensioners Federation and Public Interest Advocacy Centre has been received by the Governor in Council (GIC) under section 12 of the Telecommunications Act with respect to a decision issued by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) concerning the provision of paper bills to customers who request them.

Subsection 12(1) of the Telecommunications Act provides that, within one year after a decision by the CRTC, the GIC may, on petition in writing presented to the GIC within 90 days after the decision, or on the GIC’s own motion, by order, vary or rescind the decision or refer it back to the CRTC for reconsideration of all or a portion of it.

In their petition, dated June 1, 2020, the petitioning parties request that the GIC rescind or refer back to the CRTC for reconsideration Telecom Decision CRTC 2020-80, Public Interest Advocacy Centre and National Pensioners Federation – Application regarding paper billing by Koodo Mobile. The reasons for this request are included in the petition.

Submissions regarding this petition should be filed by August 4, 2020. All comments received will be posted on Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website.

Submitting comments

Submissions should be addressed to the Director General, Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, preferably in electronic format (Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF) to the following email address: ic.telecomsubmission-soumissiontelecom.ic@canada.ca. Written copies can be sent to the Director General, Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 235 Queen Street, 10th Floor, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H5.

All submissions should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, the publication date, the title and the notice reference number (TIPB-002-2020).

Obtaining copies

Copies of the petition filed by the concerned parties, as well as copies of all relevant documents and submissions received in response, may be obtained electronically on the Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website, under “Gazette Notices and Petitions.” It is the responsibility of interested parties to check the public record from time to time to keep abreast of submissions received.

Official versions of notices can be viewed on the Canada Gazette website.

July 4, 2020

Patricia Brady
Director General
Telecommunications and Internet Policy Branch

PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE

Appointment opportunities

We know that our country is stronger — and our government more effective — when decision-makers reflect Canada’s diversity. The Government of Canada has implemented an appointment process that is transparent and merit-based, strives for gender parity, and ensures that Indigenous peoples and minority groups are properly represented in positions of leadership. We continue to search for Canadians who reflect the values that we all embrace: inclusion, honesty, fiscal prudence, and generosity of spirit. Together, we will build a government as diverse as Canada.

We are equally committed to providing a healthy workplace that supports one’s dignity, self-esteem and the ability to work to one’s full potential. With this in mind, all appointees will be expected to take steps to promote and maintain a healthy, respectful and harassment-free work environment.

The Government of Canada is currently seeking applications from diverse and talented Canadians from across the country who are interested in the following positions.

Current opportunities

The following opportunities for appointments to Governor in Council positions are currently open for applications. Every opportunity is open for a minimum of two weeks from the date of posting on the Governor in Council appointments website.

Position

Organization

Closing date

Member

Atlantic Pilotage Authority

  

Chairperson

Canada Council for the Arts

  

President and Chief Executive Officer

Canada Lands Company Limited

  

Member (Federal)

Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

  

Chief Executive Officer

Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse

  

President

Canadian Commercial Corporation

  

Chief Executive Officer

Canadian Energy Regulator

  

Commissioner (full-time), Commissioner (part-time)

Canadian Energy Regulator

  

Director

Canadian Energy Regulator

  

Chief Commissioner

Canadian Grain Commission

  

Commissioner

Canadian Grain Commission

  

Member

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal

  

Chairperson

Canadian International Trade Tribunal

  

Director

Canadian Museum for Human Rights

  

Permanent Member

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

  

Executive Director

Canadian Race Relations Foundation

  

Member (Alberta and Northwest Territories)

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

  

Member (Atlantic and Nunavut)

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

  

President

Canadian Space Agency

  

Chairperson

Canadian Transportation Agency

  

Temporary Member

Canadian Transportation Agency

  

Chief Administrator

Courts Administration Service

  

President

Destination Canada

  

Director

Export Development Canada

  

Chairperson

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board

  

Vice-Chairperson

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board

  

Chairperson

Great Lakes Pilotage Authority Canada

  

Director (Federal)

Hamilton-Oshawa Port Authority

  

Assistant Deputy Chairperson

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada

  

Member (appointment to roster)

International Trade and International Investment Dispute Settlement Bodies

  

Chairperson

Marine Atlantic Inc.

  

Director (Federal)

Nanaimo Port Authority

  

Secretary

National Battlefields Commission

  

Member

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

  

Taxpayers’ Ombudsman

Office of the Taxpayers’ Ombudsman

  

Member

Payments in Lieu of Taxes Dispute Advisory Panel

  

Chairperson

Polar Knowledge Canada

  

Member

Polar Knowledge Canada

  

President

Polar Knowledge Canada

  

Director

Public Sector Pension Investment Board

  

Member

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

  

President

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

  

Registrar

Supreme Court of Canada

  

Member

Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada

  

Vice-Chairperson

Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada

  

Member

Transportation Safety Board of Canada