Vol. 134, No. 31 — July 29, 2000

COMMISSIONS

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL

NOTICE NO. HA-2000-003

Appeals

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal will hold public hearings to consider the appeals listed hereunder. Unless otherwise specified, the hearings will be held beginning at 9:30 a.m., in the Tribunal's hearing room, Standard Life Centre, 18th Floor, 333 Laurier Avenue W, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G7. Interested persons planning to attend should contact the Tribunal at (613) 991-5767 for further information and to ensure that the hearings will be held as scheduled.

Customs Act

Appellant v. Respondent (Commissioner of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency)

August 2000

Date	Appeal Number	Appellant
16	AP-99-085	Bio Agri Mix Ltd.
	Goods in Issue:	Chlortetracycline feed grade
	Dates of Entry:	May 17, 1996, to September 10, 1997
	Tariff Items at Issue
	Appellant:	2309.90.39
	Respondent:	2309.90.99
21	AP-99-117	Laxus Products Ltd.
	Goods in Issue:	Animal slippers
	Dates of Entry:	November 20, 1997, to November 18, 1998
	Tariff Items at Issue
	Appellant:	9503.41.00 or 9503.49.00
	Respondent:	6405.20.90

July 21, 2000

By Order of the Tribunal

MICHEL P. GRANGER
Secretary

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL

DETERMINATION

Architect and Engineering Services

Notice is hereby given that, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, further to a judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal (Docket No. A-195-00) made on June 23, 2000, hereby amends as follows the recommendation that it made in its determination (File No. PR-99-034R) of March 6, 2000, on the complaint filed by MIL Systems (a Division of Davie Industries Inc.), of Ottawa, Ontario, and Fleetway Inc., of Halifax, Nova Scotia, under subsection 30.11(1) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, R.S.C. 1985, (4th Supp.), c. 47, as amended by the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, S.C. 1993, c. 44, concerning Solicitation No. W8483-6-EFAA/B of the Department of Public Works and Government Services on behalf of the Department of National Defence:

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal further recommends that the Department of Public Works and Government Services and the Department of National Defence re-evaluate the technical merits of the proposals submitted by MIL Systems (a Division of Davie Industries Inc.) and Fleetway Inc., a joint venture, and by Fleetway Inc. and the proposal submitted by Siemens Westinghouse Incorporated, in accordance with the evaluation methodology set out in the request for Proposal, and proceed thereon with this procurement as provided in the Request for Proposal and the Agreement on Internal Trade.

Further information may be obtained from: The Secretary,  Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Standard Life Centre, 15th Floor, 333 Laurier Avenue W, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G7, (613) 993-3595 (Telephone), (613) 990-2439 (Facsimile).

Ottawa, July 21, 2000

MICHEL P. GRANGER
Secretary

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL

DETERMINATION

Professional, Administrative and Management Support Services

Notice is hereby given that, after completing its inquiry (File No. PR-2000-004), the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) made a determination on July 20, 2000, with respect to a complaint filed by Kildonan Associates Inc. (the complainant), of Orléans, Ontario, under subsection 30.11(1) of  the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, R.S.C. 1985,  (4th Supp.), c. 47, as amended by the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, S.C. 1993, c. 44, concerning Solicitation No. DND 99/0630 of the Department of National Defence (the Department). The solicitation was for the supply of administrative support services for the Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal Project.

The complainant alleged that the Department has improperly found its proposal to be non-compliant.

Having examined the evidence presented by the parties and considered the provisions of the Agreement on Internal Trade and the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Tribunal determined that the complaint was not valid.

Further information may be obtained from: The Secretary,  Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Standard Life Centre, 15th Floor, 333 Laurier Avenue W, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G7, (613) 993-3595 (Telephone), (613) 990-2439 (Facsimile).

Ottawa, July 21, 2000

MICHEL P. GRANGER
Secretary

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL

INQUIRY

Construction Services

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) has received a complaint (File No. PR-2000-023) from K-Lor Contractors Services Ltd. (the complainant), of Calgary, Alberta, concerning a procurement (Tender No. E0224-00R014/A) by the Department of Public Works and Government Services (the  Department). The solicitation is for the construction of a secure landfill site in Argentia, Newfoundland. Pursuant to subsection 30.13(2) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act and subsection 7(2) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Procurement Inquiry Regulations, notice is hereby given that the Tribunal has decided to conduct an inquiry into this complaint.

The complainant alleged that the Department has improperly found its proposal to be non-compliant.

Further information may be obtained from: The Secretary,  Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Standard Life Centre, 15th Floor, 333 Laurier Avenue W, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G7, (613) 993-3595 (Telephone), (613) 990-2439 (Facsimile).

Ottawa, July 17, 2000

MICHEL P. GRANGER
Secretary

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL

INQUIRY

Telecommunications Services

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) has received a complaint (File No. PR-2000-024) from AT&T Canada Corp., of Toronto, Ontario, concerning a procurement (Solicitation No. U6158-000401/A) by the Department of Public Works and Government Services on behalf of the Department of Industry. The solicitation is for the acquisition of Asynchronous Transfer Mode Network Services. Pursuant to subsection 30.13(2) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act and subsection 7(2) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Procurement Inquiry Regulations, notice is hereby given that the Tribunal has decided to conduct an inquiry into this complaint.

It is alleged that the procurement process is being conducted in a discriminatory manner in violation of several articles of the applicable trade agreements.

Further information may be obtained from: The Secretary,  Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Standard Life Centre,  15th Floor, 333 Laurier Avenue W, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G7, (613) 993-3595 (Telephone), (613) 990-2439 (Facsimile).

Ottawa, July 18, 2000

MICHEL P. GRANGER
Secretary

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES

The following notices are abridged versions of the Commission's original notices bearing the same number. The original notices contain a more detailed outline of the applications,  including additional locations and addresses where the complete files may be examined. The relevant material, including the notices and applications, is available for viewing during normal business hours at the following offices of the Commission:

— Central Building, Les Terrasses de la Chaudière, 1 Promenade du Portage, Ground Floor, Hull, Quebec K1A 0N2, (819) 997-2429 (Telephone), 994-0423 (TDD), (819) 994-0218 (Facsimile);

— Bank of Commerce Building, Suite 1007, 1809 Barrington Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K8, (902) 426-7997 (Telephone), 426-6997 (TDD), (902) 426-2721 (Facsimile);

— Kensington Building, Suite 1810, 275 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2B3, (204) 983-6306 (Telephone), 983-8274 (TDD), (204) 983-6317 (Facsimile);

— 530-580 Hornby Street, Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3B6, (604) 666-2111 (Telephone), 666-0778 (TDD), (604) 666-8322 (Facsimile);

— C.R.T.C. Documentation Centre, 405 De Maisonneuve Boulevard E, 2nd Floor, Suite B2300, Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5, (514) 283-6607 (Telephone), 283-8316 (TDD), (514) 283-3689 (Facsimile);

— C.R.T.C. Documentation Centre, 55 St. Clair Avenue E,  Suite 624, Toronto, Ontario M4T 1M2, (416) 952-9096 (Telephone), (416) 954-6343 (Facsimile);

— C.R.T.C. Documentation Centre, Cornwall Professional Building, Room 103, 2125 11th Avenue, Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3X3, (306) 780-3422 (Telephone), (306) 780-3319 (Facsimile);

— C.R.T.C. Documentation Centre, Scotia Place Tower Two, 19th Floor, Suite 1909, 10060 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3R8, (780) 495-3224 (Telephone), (780) 495-3214 (Facsimile).

Interventions must be filed with the Secretary General, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2, together with proof that a true copy of the intervention has been served upon the applicant, on or before the deadline given in the notice.

Secretary General

CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

DECISIONS

The complete texts of the decisions summarized below are available from the offices of the CRTC.

2000-271 July 17, 2000

Native radio programming undertakings and networks
Across Canada

Renewed - Broadcasting licences for the native radio programming undertakings and radio networks listed in the appendix to the decision, from September 1, 2000, to August 31, 2001.

2000-272 July 17, 2000

Logan Lake T.V. Society
Logan Lake, British Columbia

Approved — Application to make changes to the television and radio services offered as noted in the decision.

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

PUBLIC NOTICE 2000-105

Call for comments on proposed changes to conditions of licence for native radio undertakings whose licences are due to expire August 31, 2000

There are currently 19 Type B, one Type A non-exempt native radio programming undertakings and three native radio networks whose licences currently expire on August 31, 2000. The Commission has received renewal applications for these undertakings (see list below) and is seeking comment on proposals to amend conditions of licence for these undertakings in the areas of Canadian content and advertising.

In Decision CRTC 2000-271 released today, the Commission renewed, for administrative reasons, the broadcasting licences for the native radio programming undertakings listed below, from September 1, 2000, to August 31, 2001.

The Commission has granted this administrative renewal in order to allow time to review the issues on which it wishes to seek comment.

Canadian content

Following the policy reviews for commercial, community and campus radio stations, these stations are required to devote at least 35 percent of musical selections from content category 2 (popular music) to Canadian selections.

Consistent with these policies, the Commission is considering increasing the minimum Canadian content level for category 2 (popular) musical selections for non-exempt native radio stations. The Commission is proposing to give native radio undertakings renewing their licences amended conditions of licence requiring that a minimum of 35 percent of the musical selections from content category 2 broadcast during each broadcast week are devoted to Canadian selections. The Commission calls for comments on this proposal.

Advertising

Consistent with the native broadcasting policy set out in Public Notice CRTC 1990-89, non-exempt native ratio stations are currently subject to a condition of licence limiting the amount of advertising they broadcast to an average of four minutes per hour, with a maximum of six minutes in any given hour.

The Commission seeks comment on these advertising restrictions, including whether these restrictions remain appropriate for native radio licensees.

Non station-originated programming

Some native radio broadcasters air blocks of programming that originate on another radio station in order to avoid having to sign off at the end of their daily programming. The Commission seeks information from interested parties respecting this practice and the impact, if any, it may have on commercial stations operating in the same market.

If there is a negative impact on the other broadcasters in the market, what remedies might be appropriate?

Call for comments

The Commission invites written comments that address the issues identified above. The deadline dates for receiving comments are indicated later in this notice.

The Commission will not formally acknowledge written comments. It will, however, fully consider all comments and they will form part of the public record of the proceeding, provided that the procedures for filing set out hereunder have been followed.

RENEWAL OF RADIO PROGRAMMING UNDERTAKING LICENCES

The Commission hereby announces that it has received licence renewal applications for the following radio programming undertakings. These licences currently expire on August 31, 2000. However, in Decision CRTC 2000-271 released today, the licences were renewed administratively until August 31, 2001.

RADIO PROGRAMMING UNDERTAKINGS

  1. Greg Johnson
  Eskasoni Indian Reserve, Nova Scotia

  2. Melvin Augustine
  Big Cove, New Brunswick

  3. Radio Ntetemuk Inc.
  Betsiamites, Quebec

  4. CKRK K-103 Mohawk Radio Kahnawake Association
  Kahnawake, Quebec

  5. Radio communautaire MF Lac Simon inc.
  Lac-Simon (Abitibi), Quebec

  6. Radio Essipit Haute Côte-Nord inc.
  Les Escoumins, Tadoussac and Sacré-Coeur, Quebec

  7. Corporation de radio Kushapetsheken Apetuamiss Uashat
  Maliotenam and Sept-Îles, Quebec

  8. Jean-Guy Whiteduck
  Maniwaki (River Desert Reserve), Quebec

  9. Douglas Martin
  Maria (Reserve), Quebec

10. Corporation médiatique Teuehikan
Mashteuiatsh (Pointe-Bleue), Quebec

11. Société de communication Ikito Pikogan ltée
Pikogan, Quebec

12. Gespegewag Communications Society
Restigouche, Quebec

13. Comité de la radio communautaire Huronne-Wyandot inc.
Wendake (Village-des-Hurons), Quebec

Ontario Region

14. Southern Onkwehon: We Nishinabec Indigenous  Communications Society
Ohsweken, Ontario

Western Canada and Territories Region

15. Native Communication Inc.
Thompson, Manitoba

16. Natotawin Broadcasting Inc.
La Ronge, Montreal Lake, Prince Albert, etc., Saskatchewan

17. Greenville Television Association
Greenville, British Columbia

18. Northern Native Broadcasting
  Terrace, British Columbia

19. Native Communications Society of the Western N.W.T.
Yellowknife, Northwest Territories

20. Northern Native Broadcasting, Yukon
Whitehorse, Yukon Territory

RADIO NETWORK UNDERTAKINGS

21. James Bay Cree Communications Society
Mistissini Lake, Quebec

22. Société de communication Atikamekw-Montagnais inc.
Wendake, Quebec

OTHER NATIVE RADIO UNDERTAKINGS AFFECTED

Aboriginal Multi-media Society of Alberta

Deadline

The Commission will accept comments and interventions that it receives on or before August 21, 2000. Those undertakings applying for licence renewal will then have until September 5, 2000, to file written replies to the comments.

July 17, 2000

[30-1-o]

CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

PUBLIC NOTICE 2000-106

Atlantic and Quebec Region

1. Wesley United Church Radio Board
St. John's, Newfoundland

To amend the broadcasting licence for VOWR St. John's.

Deadline for intervention: August 24, 2000

July 20, 2000

[30-1-o]

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INFORMATION REVIEW COMMISSION

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INFORMATION REVIEW ACT

Appeal Board — Decision of the Appeal Board

Pursuant to paragraph 27(1)(a) of the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act ("HMIRA"), the Chief Appeals Officer of the Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission hereby gives notice of the decision of the Appeal Board dated June 21, 2000, respecting an appeal by Ethyl Corporation from the decision and order of the Screening Officer in relation to the claim for exemption bearing Registry Number 1196-006 and the relevant material safety data sheet ("MSDS") dated January 17, 1997, for the controlled product HiTEC 509 Performance  Additive.

Summary of Decision of the Appeal Board

Appeal Number: A-98-001

On December 1, 1997, the Screening Officer notified the Appellant, Ethyl Corporation, that the claim for exemption in respect of the controlled product HiTEC 509 Performance Additive had been found to be valid. However, the Screening Officer found that the MSDS for the controlled product did not comply with the provisions of the Hazardous Products Act ("HPA") and the Controlled Products Regulations ("CPR"), in certain respects.

Pursuant to subsection 17(1) of the HMIRA, the Screening Officer issued three compliance orders to disclose on the MSDS that: (1) subacute ingestion of an ingredient in the controlled product has been shown to cause adverse effects on the immune system in laboratory animals; (2) an ingredient in the controlled product has shown positive results in a screening test for mutagenicity; and (3) caffeine interacts synergistically with an ingredient in the controlled product. Pursuant to section 20 of the HMIRA, Ethyl Corporation appealed.

The Board appointed an expert pursuant to section 44 of the HMIRA and section 11 of the Inquiries Act to provide independent expert advice with respect to the matter under appeal.

With respect to Order 1, Ethyl Corporation claimed that the ingredient, which was administered to laboratory animals by oral gavage, poses no risk to humans as ingestion is an unlikely route of entry. Furthermore, since the ingredient has a very low vapour pressure, exposure would be insufficient to cause absorption through the skin or by inhalation, and moreover that the absorbed dose would be even lower because the ingredient is a very small percentage of the controlled product. For these reasons, the Appellant submitted that the Screening Officer's order to disclose immune system effects on laboratory animals would unnecessarily worry the workers.

The Board expert disagreed with Ethyl Corporation's view that disclosure was not necessary under the circumstances. The Board expert stated that the ingredient has been shown to have adverse effects on the immune system of laboratory animals and therefore Order 1 of the Screening Officer should be upheld with the slight modification that the word "subacute" be deleted since immune system effects have been seen in both short- and long-term studies. The Board expert pointed out that this would be consistent with other information on the MSDS of record which contains references to other effects of ingestion exposure under the heading "Chronic Effects of Overexposure."

With respect to Order 2, the Board expert cited a World Health Organization publication which stated that in four out of five screening tests the ingredient in question was found to be non-mutagenic. In the one study where the ingredient tested positive, the Board expert inferred that the result was not statistically significant because it was not stated to have been so.

With respect to Order 3, the Board expert found critical limitations in the study relied upon by the Screening Officer. Absent further studies, he concluded that there is no compelling evidence of a combined toxicity of caffeine and the ingredient in question.

Consequently, the Board expert agreed with the Appellant that the Screening Officer's Order 2 for positive mutagenicity and Order 3 for caffeine synergism should be overturned.

Section 23 of HMIRA states that:

(2) An appeal board may dispose of an appeal by:

Decision in regard to Order 1 While the ingredient may be a small percentage of the controlled product, studies have found that administered orally it affects the immune system of laboratory animals. Accordingly, and pursuant to paragraph 23(2)(a) of the HMIRA, the Board dismissed the appeal and confirmed Order 1 of the Screening Officer.

Decision in regard to Order 2 The Board found that the weight of scientific opinion at this time did not justify ordering the Appellant to state on the MSDS that an ingredient in the controlled product had tested positive for mutagenicity. Pursuant to paragraph 23(2)(b) of the HMIRA, the Board allowed the appeal and rescinded Order 2 of the Screening Officer.

Decision in regard to Order 3 Guided by the Board expert's critique of the study relied upon by the Screening Officer, the Board found insufficient evidence for requiring the Appellant to state on the MSDS that caffeine is toxicologically synergistic with the ingredient. Pursuant to paragraph 23(2)(b) of the HMIRA, the Board allowed the appeal and rescinded Order 3 of the Screening Officer.

There were no submissions from affected parties.

Dated at Toronto, Ontario, this 21st day of June, 2000.

A copy of this notice is available to any person, on request, by writing to the Chief Appeals Officer, Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission, 200 Kent Street, Suite 9000, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0M1, (613) 993-4472 (Telephone), (613) 993-5016 (Facsimile).

July 20, 2000

SHARON WATTS
Chief Appeals Officer

[30-1-o]

NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with extensible hypertext markup language (XHTML 1.0 Strict).