Title of Regulatory Initiative
Vehicle Emissions and Fuel - Harmonization Between Canada and the US

Description and Objectives of Initiative
Harmonization in the area of vehicle emissions occurred as a result of policy decision taken in the 1970's to align with U.S. standards. In both Canada and the U.S. steps were taken domestically to reduce emissions from vehicles in order to reduce air pollution. The organization of the automotive industry was a factor facilitating harmonization. Since the creation of the Auto Pact in 1965, manufacturing of vehicles in North American was conducted on an integrated basis. Requirements for the composition of fuels are linked to vehicle engine technology with respect to fuels, the Canadian government ins following a policy of alignment to progressive nations include the United States.

In Canada and the U.S., the federal government has the authority to regulate new vehicles emission standards and the composition of fuels. U.S. standards for emissions have been made progressively more stringent since the 1970's due to domestic environmental pressures. Canada has by and large followed the U.S. and adopted its standards for vehicle emissions with modifications. Seen as the least cost approach to regulation in the North American market, harmonization for standards in this area has received support from the business community. Since harmonization has resulted in more stringent standards for Canada in was also supported by ENGOs.

On fuels, the U.S. led on requirements for lead free gasoline while Canada moved first on significant reductions in sulphur in gasoline. Thus improvements in standards with respect to the composition of fuels moved forward more or less in similar time frames in both countries.

Improvements in standards for fuels were resisted by the business community in Canada on a number of occasions.

Sector(s) Affected
Transportation, Oil and Gas Refining, Vehicle manufacturing, Health, and Environment.

Involvement of/Impact on Other Jurisdictions or Federal OGDs
Transport Canada used to administer vehicle emission standards until CEPA, 1999, when it came under the control of Environment Canada.

Assessment of the Initiative
In this case, harmonization resulted in Canada having stronger environmental protection. Due to the US' EPA, Canada does not have to do battle with the vehicle manufacturing industry and policy makers in Canada benefit from the vast resources involved in establishing appropriate standards in the US. However, some ENGOs have criticized Canada for not following the even more stringent California programs of regulation.

Title of Regulatory Initiative
Amendments to the New Substances Notification Regulations (NSNR) and New Substances Program.

Description and Purpose of Initiative
The NSNR under Part 5 of CEPA 1999 are an integral part of the federal government's pollution prevention strategy. As part of the 'cradle to grave' management approach for toxic substances laid out in the Act, the NSNR were created to ensure that no new substance is imported or manufactured in Canada prior to an assessment whether it is 'toxic' to the environment and human health, and any appropriate or required risk management measures have been taken. A 'new substance' refers to a substance that is not on the Domestic Substances List (DSL).

The NSNR specify the information that must be provided to meet notification obligations applying to a wide range of substances, including both chemicals and polymers (in effect since 1994) and products of biotechnology (in effect since 1997).

Any person who plans to import or manufacture a substance subject to notification under the NSNR must provide a notification package containing all information prescribed in the NSNR prior to import or manufacture, as well as the prescribed fee if applicable. The type of information required and the timing of the notification will depend on such factors as the type of substance, the quantity that will be imported or manufactures, whether or not it is listed on the Non-domestic Substances List (NSDL), the intended use of the substance and the circumstances associated with its introduction.

When a notification package is received, a joint assessment process is carried out by Environment Canada and Health Canada to determine potential adverse effects of the substance on the environment and human health. The assessment process, which must be completed within a time limit specified by the NSNR, results in either:

• a determination that the substance is not suspected of being 'toxic', or capable of becoming 'toxic';
• a suspicion that the substance is 'toxic' or capable or becoming 'toxic'; or
• a suspicion that a significant new activity (SNAc) may result in the substance becoming toxic if there was adequate information available to assess it.

Substances suspected of being toxic may be controlled by one of the measures laid out in CEPA 1999 including:

• controls on import or manufacture;
• prohibition of import or manufacture; or
• prohibition pending submission and assessment of additional information determined to be required by the Departments.

When it is suspected that a significant new activity (SNAc) in relation to the substance may result in the substance becoming toxic, a SNAc notice may be issued for the substance.

Over 10,000 new substance notifications have been received under the NSNR since 1994. In 2002, 991 notifications were received.

Assessment of the Initiative
When the NSNR (chemicals and polymers portion) were first promulgated in 1994, Environment Canada and Health Canada made a commitment to review them three years after their implementation, to benefit from everyone's (i.e. government and industry) experience with the regulations.

A multistakeholder consultative process was therefore initiated in 1999 to identify, discuss and develop consensus recommendations on ways to improve the NSNR and Program. The consultative process spanned over a two-year period and featured balanced representation from government, industry, and public advocacy groups. Seventy-six (76) consensus recommendations resulted from the consultations, as shown in the document 'Consultations on the CEPA New Substances Notification Regulations and New Substances Program - Final Report of the Multistakeholder Consultations'.

At the outset of the consultations, early agreement was achieved on the objectives of the consultations, the boundaries of the scope of consultations, procedural rules, and guiding principles to be weighed while making recommendations for change.

The issues to be discussed were organised into five understandable and manageable themes:

• Theme 1: Improving the environmental and human health assessments;
• Theme 2: Regulatory framework;
• Theme 3: transparency of the NSN regulatory process;
• Theme 4: Improving the responsiveness of the New Substances Program internationally; and
• Theme 5: Service Delivery.

Recommendations from the consultations concern revisions to the Regulations and Guidelines, changes in program procedures, increased transparency, further collaboration with industry on various issues, and intensifying international collaboration. Many of the recommendations touch on program policy and procedures, regulatory approach, and resource allocations. Some of the recommendations will be relatively easy to implement, others will be a challenge.

The changes to the NSNR and accompanying Guidelines will result in high standards for the protection of the environment and human health and timely, predictable and transparent program, while ensuring effective and efficient use of Government and Industry resources in a global marketplace.

The Government's response to the 76 consensus recommendations is documented in the report 'Consultations on the CEPA New Substances Notification Regulations and New Substances Program - Environment Canada/Health Canada Response to the Consultation Recommendations.' This document describes key considerations and directions the departments intend to pursue in the implementation of the recommendations.

The departments' overall approach for proceeding with the implementation of the recommendations is based on relative priority, timing, and ease of implementation. Highlights of the recommendations include:

For industry, the development of smarter regulation by:

• Simplifying the structure and the language of the regulation
• Eliminating the 'tracking' requirements
• Increasing volume thresholds for some notifications
• Providing opportunities for the use of class waivers and exemptions for low regulatory concern polymers and chemicals
• Reducing testing needed to essential requirements
• Generally shortening the required assessment periods
• Simplifying the notification requirements for R&D and site limited substances
• Providing for annual updates to the Non-Domestic Substances List
• Improved Guidelines to provide more extensive assistance to notifiers
• Examining feasibility of secure electronic filing by notifiers; and
• Promoting international regulatory co-operation and harmonisation efforts.

For the public

Simpler regulations;

• Periodic review of assessments and methodology (validation);
• Sharing occupational exposure information with provinces and other federal government departments;
• Incorporating endocrine disruption considerations in assessments;
• High exposure NDSL substances subject to increased testing
• Increasing transparency of program, including making assessment report summaries public.

The EC/HC Response commits both departments to pursue the implementation of the consensus recommendations in the most appropriate fashion, under various timelines. Anticipated payoffs include smarter regulations, a more efficient and transparent program, and improved services to clients.

Other Comments
The NSN program is promoting regulatory co-operation internationally Current NSB Program Initiatives include

• Canada chairs the OECD New Chemicals Task Force addressing the following multilateral issues amongst others:
  • Mutual acceptance of notifications
  • Standardisation of approval packages, exclusions and exemptions
  • The feasibility of a global chemical inventory
• Canada - US Four Corners Agreement
  • Facilitates work sharing and the exchange of assessment data with US EPA
  • Attempting to resolve CBI issues, and improve documentation of American decisions
  • Promote staff exchanges
  • Considering mutual recognition of notifications of low concern polymers
• Canada - Australia Bilateral
  • Regular consultation;
  • Information and work sharing;
  • Co-operative activities
  • Reduced duplication, time and costs for industry; Potential rebate of fees
  • Promotes international harmonisation; Better use of government resources

Title of Regulatory Initiative
Amendments to the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations made under the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA) (1996) to implement a CITES Personal and Household Effects Exemption

Description and Objectives of Initiative
Canada and over 160 other nations are Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which was adopted in 1975 to address threats to wildlife that may result from trade pressures. CITES involves monitoring and controlling trade in animal and plant species that are, or could become, threatened with extinction as a result of trade.

WAPPRIITA and the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations came into effect in 1996 and address the species to be protected by the Act and the permit requirements to authorize international movement of these species.

On January 15, 2000, amendments were made to the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations to improve the administration and enforcement of CITES in three areas: permit exemptions, labelling provisions and administrative matters. The objectives were: to streamline processes and eliminate controls that create an inconvenience for the public and increase costs to Government, while providing little conservation benefit for wildlife. The exemptions resulted in the elimination of the need to obtain CITES permits for certain personal and household effects under certain conditions.

There are a relatively small number of non-commercial personal and household effects associated with the movements of the tens of thousands of people that enter and leave Canada each day. Therefore, the effort spent trying to monitor and enforce this situation with respect to CITES-regulated species would be better spent on commercial shipments, which present a greater risk of harm to species in trade. Most activities covered by the exemptions and personally owned pet provisions present a low risk to the species involved.

The amendments implemented exemptions from CITES permit requirements for specific types of personal and household effects and personally-owned pets, including tourist souvenirs and black bear and sandhill crane hunting trophies being taken between Canada and the United States by hunters who are residents of Canada and the United States.

Sector(s) Affected
The travelling public in general, the tourist industry and the game outfitting industry.

Involvement of/Impact on Other Jurisdictions or Federal OGDs
Based on the numbers of CITES export permits issued by the provinces and territories and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, it was expected that the total number of CITES permits issued would decrease substantially. For hunting trophies alone, some 8 600 black bear and 100 sandhill crane CITES export permits would no longer be needed by United States hunters taking their legally harvested animals back home. This would result in substantial savings in staff time for the provincial and territorial offices that issue these permits. All provinces and territories also require a provincial or territorial export permit for black bears or have mandatory reporting by non-resident hunters, or both. Therefore, implementing the hunting trophy exemption would not result in a loss of information for provincial and territorial black bear management programs.

Key Stakeholders
Provincial and territorial wildlife departments, environmental non-government organizations, businesses, tourists and the travelling public in general.

Assessment of the Initiative
In ratifying the Convention, Canada agreed to implement the terms of the Convention with respect to the system of permits. The status quo of requiring permits for all international movements of CITES species, including all personal and household effects, placed an unnecessary administrative burden on the public and increased the cost to Government of administering the system, but produced little conservation benefit for traded species. On the other hand, revoking all CITES permit requirements for commercial, as well as personal and household goods, was not an option in view of Canada's international commitments, nor was it justifiable from the conservation perspective of the species involved in international trade. Implementing limited exemptions from permit requirements for personal and household effects was and still is recognized as legitimate by the Convention. A number of jurisdictions, including our major trading partners, the United States and the European Union, had already implemented personal and household effects exemptions. It was and is still the optimal solution.

The amendment has resulted in a 40% reduction in the number of CITES permits issued in Canada at the federal, provincial and territorial levels.