Registration

SOR/2008-143 May 1, 2008

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES ACT

Procurement Ombudsman Regulations

P.C. 2008-831 May 1, 2008

Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, pursuant to section 23.1 (see footnote a) of the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act (see footnote b), hereby makes the annexed Procurement Ombudsman Regulations.

PROCUREMENT OMBUDSMAN REGULATIONS

INTERPRETATION

1. The following definitions apply in these Regulations.

“Act” means the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act. (Loi)

“contracting department” means the department that awards the contract to which a complaint relates. (ministère contractant)

“working day” means a day that is not a Saturday or a holiday. (jour ouvrable)

APPLICATION

2. These Regulations apply

(a) with respect to sections 7 to 14, to a contract for the acquisition of materiel or services that is awarded after the coming into force of these Regulations;

(b) with respect to sections 15 to 22, to a contract for the acquisition of materiel or services if the facts or grounds on which the complaint is based arise after the coming into force of these Regulations; and

(c) with respect to section 23, to a contract for the acquisition of materiel or services if a dispute referred to in that section arises after the coming into force of these Regulations.

PERFORMANCE OF THE DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE PROCUREMENT OMBUDSMAN

EXCEPTION

3. The Procurement Ombudsman shall not perform the duties and functions referred to in subsection 22.1(3) of the Act in respect of the following departments:

(a) the Canadian Security Intelligence Service; and

(b) the staff of the Senate and the House of Commons.

REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL PRACTICES FOR ACQUIRING MATERIEL AND SERVICES

Review

4. (1) The Procurement Ombudsman shall review the practices of a department for acquiring materiel and services under paragraph 22.1(3)(a) of the Act if there are reasonable grounds to do so and shall take into consideration the following factors:

(a) consistency with relevant Cabinet policies and procedures, with relevant multi-departmental policies and procedures and with policies and procedures related to a national security exemption;

(b) consistency with the Financial Administration Act and regulations made under it;

(c) the resources that would be required of that department to respond to the review;

(d) the observations or findings of any previous audits or assessments; and

(e) the time that has elapsed since his or her previous review of the practices of that department.

(2) If the Procurement Ombudsman reviews the practices of a department under subsection (1), he or she may request that it provide any document or information necessary for the review.

Recommendations

5. Before making any recommendations under paragraph 22.1(3)(a) of the Act, the Procurement Ombudsman shall

(a) take into consideration the following factors:

(i) consistency with relevant cabinet policies and procedures, with relevant multi-departmental policies and procedures and with policies and procedures related to a national security exemption,

(ii) consistency with the Financial Administration Act and regulations made under it,

(iii) the seriousness of any inconsistency with the principles of fairness, openness and transparency, and

(iv) the potential impact that the recommendations could have on the government’s operations or resources; and

(b) provide an opportunity to the department whose practices have been subject to the review to make comments on the proposed recommendations and the reasons for them within 30 working days after their receipt.

6. (1) If the Procurement Ombudsman makes recommendations under paragraph 22.1(3)(a) of the Act, he or she shall provide them, together with reasons, within one year after the commencement of a review and shall also provide a copy of them to the Minister without delay.

(2) If the Procurement Ombudsman cannot provide the recommendations within the period set out in subsection (1), before the expiry of that period, he or she shall provide interim recommendations, together with the reasons for the delay, and shall provide the final recommendations within 120 working days after the provision of the interim recommendations.

REVIEW OF A COMPLAINT UNDER PARAGRAPH 22.1(3)(b) OF THE ACT

Filing of a Complaint Under Paragraph 22.1(3)(b) of the Act

7. (1) A complaint under paragraph 22.1(3)(b) of the Act shall be filed in writing with the Procurement Ombudsman

(a) within 30 working days after public notice of the award of contract to which the complaint relates; or

(b) if there was no public notice, within 30 working days after the day on which the award of contract became known or reasonably should have become known to the complainant.

(2) If, for reasons beyond the control of the complainant, the complainant is not able to file a complaint with the Procurement Ombudsman within the period set out in paragraph (1)(a) or (b), as the case may be, the Procurement Ombudsman may, at the request of the complainant, extend those periods to a maximum of 90 working days.

(3) If a complainant has previously contacted the contracting department to object to the award of a contract within the period set out in paragraph (1)(a) or (b), as the case may be, a complaint under subsection (1) shall be filed in writing with the Procurement Ombudsman within 30 working days after day on which the contracting department denied the objection.

(4) The complaint is filed when the following information and documents are submitted to the Procurement Ombudsman:

(a) the name and address of the complainant;

(b) information identifying the contract to which the complaint relates, including the date of public notice of the award of contract or, if there was no public notice, the date of award of that contract, if known;

(c) the name of the contracting department and, if applicable, of the department for which the materiel or services are intended under the contract to which the complaint relates;

(d) information and documents establishing that the complainant meets the requirement set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act;

(e) a clear and detailed statement setting out the facts and grounds on which the complaint is based;

(f) a declaration by the complainant stating that the facts and grounds on which the complaint is based are not and have not been the subject of an inquiry before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal or a proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction; and

(g) upon request of the Procurement Ombudsman for the purpose of section 13,

(i) a calculation, together with supporting documents, of the net profit that the complainant would have realized, had it been awarded that contract, at the lower of the amount it bid, if any, and the amount at which the contract was awarded, without including the value of any options or any extensions of the contract, less the cost of submitting the bid, if any, and

(ii) the complainant’s costs of submitting the bid and supporting documentation.

Review

8. The Procurement Ombudsman shall determine whether to review a complaint referred to in subsection 7(1) within 10 working days after the filing of the complaint, and shall, without delay, notify the complainant and the contracting department of his or her decision and, at that time, provide that department with a copy of the complaint.

9. (1) The Procurement Ombudsman shall review a complaint referred to in subsection 7(1), if

(a) the contract, the award of which is the subject of the complaint, is not covered by any of the exemptions or exceptions in the Agreement, as defined in section 2 of the Agreement on Internal Trade Implementation Act, including those made under articles 1802 to 1806 of the Agreement, and is one to which the Agreement would apply if its value, as determined under article 505 of the Agreement, were not less than the amount set out in article 502 of the Agreement;

(b) the requirements set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act and section 7 have been met;

(c) the facts and grounds on which the complaint is based are not and have not been the subject of an inquiry before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal or a proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction; and

(d) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the contract was not awarded in accordance with regulations made under the Financial Administration Act.

(2) If the Procurement Ombudsman reviews the complaint under subsection (1), he or she may request that the complainant or the contracting department provide any document or information necessary for the review.

10. The Procurement Ombudsman shall end the review and notify the complainant and the contracting department of that fact and the reasons for it, if

(a) the complainant withdraws the complaint;

(b) one or more of the requirements set out in section 7 or 9 have not been met;

(c) the award of contract has been cancelled; or

(d) the Procurement Ombudsman determines that the complaint is frivolous or vexatious.

Procedures

11. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Procurement Ombudsman shall review complaints under a simple process and allow the contracting department 15 working days after the receipt of the notice referred to in section 8 to provide its comments on the complaint.

(2) The Procurement Ombudsman shall review a complaint under an expanded process on the request of the complainant or the contracting department, or if the Procurement Ombudsman determines that the circumstances warrant an expanded process, taking into consideration any relevant factors, including the following:

(a) the nature of the complaint;

(b) the value of the contract;

(c) the complexity of the bid requirements or the procurement process; and

(d) the potential impact that the findings and any recommendations could have on the government’s operations or resources.

(3) The Procurement Ombudsman shall without delay notify the complainant and the contracting department that a complaint is to be reviewed under an expanded process.

(4) Under an expanded process, the Procurement Ombudsman shall

(a) provide the contracting department with a period of at least 25 working days after the receipt of the notice referred to in subsection (3) to provide comments with respect to the complaint and may, on the request of that department, allow it to provide its comments after that period, having regard to the complexity of the bid requirements or the procurement process;

(b) provide the complainant with a copy of the department’s comments and an opportunity to respond within 10 working days after the receipt of the copy and may, on the request of the complainant, allow it to provide its response after that period, having regard to the complexity of the bid requirements or the procurement process; and

(c) provide the department with a copy of the complainant’s response and an opportunity to respond within 10 working days after the receipt of the copy if the complainant raises new arguments or evidence in its response and may, on the request of the department, allow the department to provide its response after that period, having regard to the complexity of the bid requirements or the procurement process.

Findings

12. (1) For the purpose of his or her review, the Procurement Ombudsman shall take into consideration any relevant factors, including the following:

(a) whether the complainant would have had a reasonable prospect of being awarded the contract, but for the actions of the contracting department;

(b) the seriousness of any deficiency in complying with the regulations made under the Financial Administration Act;

(c) the failure or refusal of the complainant to provide information about its goods and services at the request of the contracting department;

(d) the degree to which the complainant was prejudiced;

(e) the degree to which the fairness, openness or transparency of the procurement process was prejudiced; and

(f) whether any of the parties acted in bad faith.

(2) The Procurement Ombudsman shall not substitute his or her opinion for the judgment of the persons involved in the acquisition process for the contract in relation to the assessment of any bid, unless there is insufficient written evidence to support that assessment or the assessment is unreasonable.

Recommendations

Compensation

13. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Procurement Ombudsman may recommend payment of

(a) compensation in respect of the profit that the complainant would have realized if, but for the actions of the contracting department, it had been awarded the contract, which compensation may not exceed the lesser of

(i) the net profit that the complainant would have realized, had it been awarded the contract, at the lower of the amount that it bid, if any, and the amount at which the contract was awarded, without including the value of any options or any extensions of the contract, less the cost of submitting the bid, if any; and

(ii) 10% of the value of the contract awarded without including the value of any options or any extensions of the contract, less the cost of submitting the bid, if any; or

(b) compensation equal to the costs of submitting the bid but that compensation may not exceed 10% of the value of the contract awarded, without including the value of any options or any extensions of the contract.

(2) If a competitive process was held, the complainant must have submitted a bid in respect of the contract to which the complaint relates, unless it was prevented from doing so because of the actions of the contracting department.

Findings and Recommendations

14. The Procurement Ombudsman shall provide his or her findings or any recommendations under subsection 22.2(3) of the Act within 120 working days after the day on which the complaint is filed.

REVIEW OF A COMPLAINT UNDER PARAGRAPH 22.1(3)(c) OF THE ACT

Filing of a Complaint Under Paragraph 22.1(3)(c) of the Act

15. A person may file a complaint under paragraph 22.1(3)(c) of the Act only if, in addition to meeting the requirement set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act, the person has been awarded the contract to which the complaint relates.

16. (1) A complaint under paragraph 22.1(3)(c) of the Act shall be filed in writing with the Procurement Ombudsman within 30 working days after the day on which the complainant became aware, or reasonably should have become aware, of the grounds on which the complaint is based.

(2) If, for reasons beyond the control of the complainant, the complainant is not able to file a complaint with the Procurement Ombudsman within the period set out in subsection (1), the Procurement Ombudsman may, at the request of the complainant, extend that period to a maximum of 90 working days.

(3) If a complainant has previously contacted the contracting department to object to the administration of a contract within the period set out in subsection (1), a complaint under that subsection shall be filed in writing with the Procurement Ombudsman within 30 working days after day on which the contracting department denied the objection.

(4) The complaint is filed when the following information and documents are submitted to the Procurement Ombudsman:

(a) the name and address of the complainant;

(b) information identifying the contract to which the complaint relates and, on the request of the Procurement Ombudsman, a copy of that contract;

(c) the name of the contracting department and, if applicable, the department for which the materiel or services are intended under the contract to which the complaint relates;

(d) information and documents establishing that the complainant meets the requirements set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act and in section 15; and

(e) a statement of the complaint, setting out the facts and grounds on which the complaint is based.

Review

17. The Procurement Ombudsman shall determine whether to review a complaint referred to in subsection 16(1) within 10 working days after the filing of the complaint, and shall, without delay, notify the complainant and the contracting department of his or her decision, and provide that department with a copy of the complaint.

18. (1) The Procurement Ombudsman shall review a complaint referred to in subsection 16(1), if the requirements set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act and in sections 15 and 16 have been met and the interpretation and application of the terms and conditions or the scope of the work of the contract are not in dispute between the parties.

(2) If the Procurement Ombudsman reviews the complaint under subsection (1), he or she may request that the complainant or the contracting department provide any document or information necessary for the review.

19. The Procurement Ombudsman shall end the review and notify the complainant and the contracting department of that fact and the reasons for it, if

(a) the complainant withdraws the complaint;

(b) one or more of the requirements set out in subsection 22.2(1) of the Act, section 15 or 16 have not been met; or

(c) the Procurement Ombudsman determines that the complaint is frivolous or vexatious.

Findings and Recommendations

20. For the purpose of the review, the Procurement Ombudsman shall take into consideration any relevant factors, including the following:

(a) whether the administration of the relevant contract was conducted in a reasonable manner in the circumstances; and

(b) whether any of the parties acted in bad faith.

21. The Procurement Ombudsman may not make recommendations

(a) altering the terms and conditions of a contract; or

(b) providing a remedy other than as specified in the contract.

22. The Procurement Ombudsman shall provide, in accordance with subsection 22.2(3) of the Act, his or her findings and any recommendations within 120 working days after the day on which the complaint is filed.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS

23. (1) If a party to a contract requests an alternative dispute resolution process under paragraph 22.1(3)(d) of the Act with respect to a dispute on the interpretation or application of a contract’s terms and conditions, the Procurement Ombudsman shall ask the other parties if they agree to participate in such a process and to bear the costs of that process, within 10 working days after the request, and permit those parties 10 working days to respond to his or her request.

(2) The Procurement Ombudsman shall receive a request that is in writing and includes

(a) the names of the parties to the contract;

(b) a copy of the contract; and

(c) a brief summary of the facts in issue.

(3) Within 10 working days after receiving the last of the other parties’ responses,

(a) if all parties agree, the Procurement Ombudsman shall submit to the parties a proposal for an alternative dispute resolution process; and

(b) if the parties do not agree, the Procurement Ombudsman shall notify the party who made the request that the request cannot be granted.

COMING INTO FORCE

24. These Regulations come into force on the day on which section 307 of the Federal Accountability Act, chapter 9 of the Statutes of Canada, 2006, comes into force, but if it is after that day, they come into force on the day on which they are registered.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Context

The Federal Accountability Act (FedAA) received Royal Assent on December 12, 2006. Sections 306 and 307 of the FedAA amend the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act to create the position of Procurement Ombudsman to review, report and make recommendations on procurement practices in government, and to hear complaints from suppliers. Sections 306 and 307 will be brought into force by an Order in Council.

The Ombudsman’s performance of his or her duties and functions is to be further set out through regulations. Subsection 22.1(3) of the FedAA states that the Procurement Ombudsman shall, in accordance with the Regulations, carry out his/her mandate. The Regulations need to be in place at the same time as sections 306 and 307 are brought into force and the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman is formally established and begins its review functions.

Requirements of the FedAA

The legislation specifies that the Ombudsman will be appointed by the Governor in Council for a term of not more than five years and will be responsible for four main functions:

1. reviewing procurement practices of departments to assess their openness, fairness and transparency and to make recommendations to the relevant department for the improvement of those practices;

2. reviewing supplier complaints respecting compliance with any regulations made under the Financial Administration Act (FAA) regarding procurement processes to which the Agreement on Internal Trade would apply, but where the value of the procurement is below the value thresholds for that agreement;

3. reviewing supplier complaints respecting the administration of a contract; and

4. ensuring the provision of an Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) process on the request of each party to a contract.

The FedAA states that the Procurement Ombudsman is to perform any other duty or function respecting departmental procurement practices as assigned by order of the Governor in Council or the Minister.

The FedAA also specifies that a complaint may only be filed after the award of the contract and that the Procurement Ombudsman may not recommend the cancellation of a contract.

Description of the Regulations

While the FedAA establishes the Procurement Ombudsman’s authority and activities, the Regulations will provide certain additional specifics as to the manner by which that authority is exercised.

The Regulations may not exceed the authority provided by the FedAA. For example, with regard to confidentiality of information, the Regulations cannot give the Procurement Ombudsman the special protection provided to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) by subsection 24(1) of the Access to Information Act (ATIA). The CITT is specifically exempted by legislation from the ATIA and the Privacy Act with respect to confidentiality of information provided to it and has its own confidentiality protection powers in its own legislation. For the Procurement Ombudsman, protection of information will be provided through the applicable provisions of the ATIA and Privacy Act.

Reviewing procurement practices of federal organizations: This activity would be undertaken on the initiative of the Procurement Ombudsman. While the Regulations do not prescribe when a review would take place, the Procurement Ombudsman would examine the department’s practices if there were reasonable grounds to review and assess those practices (e.g., frequent complaints about one federal organization, findings of previous audits or assessments).

When deciding to review departmental practices, the Procurement Ombudsman must take into consideration relevant factors, including: consistency with relevant government-wide policies and procedures; consistency with the FAA and the regulations made under it; and the resources that would be required of the department to respond to the review.

Reviewing supplier complaints respecting the award of a contract: Within 30 working days after public notice of the award of the contract, a supplier could make a written complaint about a department’s non-compliance with regulations under the FAA regarding procurement processes (to which the Agreement on Internal Trade would apply, but where the procurement value was below the value thresholds for that Agreement (i.e., under $25K for goods and under $100K for services). The Procurement Ombudsman would only review complaints that have not been the subject of an inquiry before the CITT or a proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction.

The Procurement Ombudsman would decide within ten working days whether to review the contract, and would notify the complainant and the department without delay. This decision would be based on criteria set out in the Regulations. The information requirements are the minimum required for the department to be able to identify the procurement and the basis of the complaint so that the department may provide a speedy and comprehensive reply.

Two processes are set out in the Regulations: a simple process, for reviewing what is anticipated to be the majority of complaints; and an expanded process, with more structure and longer timeframes, for reviewing more complex complaints. These two processes take into account the variety and complexity of the contract involved in the complaint and are intended to minimize the burden on suppliers (e.g., small or medium-sized enterprises) and departments, and address their capacity to provide information to the Procurement Ombudsman.

The simple process would be appropriate, for example, in the case of a procurement for a commodity, such as desks or office equipment. Using the simple process, the Procurement Ombudsman would review the complaints and allow the contracting department 15 working days to provide comments.

The expanded process could be required in the case of a large contract (e.g. $99,000) for information technology services, with complicated technical specifications, where the complaint involved the application of the evaluation criteria. In this instance, the department involved would request more time (at least 25 days) to review the matter and provide a response to the Procurement Ombudsman. The structure and timeframes of the expanded process are similar to those set out in the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Procurement Inquiry Regulations (www.citt-tcce.gc.ca/procure/index_e.asp). The Regulations require the Procurement Ombudsman to provide findings and recommendations within 120 days of the receipt of the complaint. The Procurement Ombudsman may recommend either bid preparation costs or net profits to a maximum of 10% of the value of the contract awarded.

Reviewing supplier complaints respecting the administration of a contract: Within 30 working days of the complainant’s being aware of the grounds for a complaint (e.g., not receiving payment; invoices being lost), a supplier could make a written complaint about a department’s administration of their contract. The Procurement Ombudsman would decide within 10 working days whether to review the complaint, and would notify the complainant and the department without delay. This decision would be based on criteria set out in the Regulations (e.g., only the contractor can file a complaint regarding its contract). The Procurement Ombudsman may make recommendations, but only within the terms of the contract. The Regulations require the Procurement Ombudsman to provide findings and recommendations within 120 days of the receipt of the complaint.

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) process on the request of each party to a contract: Either party to a contract could request the ADR process when there was a dispute regarding the interpretation of application of the contract’s terms and conditions. Within ten days of receipt of the request, the Procurement Ombudsman would ask all parties if they agree and these parties would have another ten days to respond. An ADR process would only be undertaken if all parties agree.

The Regulations would exempt the Canadian Security Intelligence Service from the various Procurement Ombudsman’s reviews as knowledge of their procurement could compromise their operations. An exemption has also been made for procurement by the Senate and the House of Commons because of the political sensitivity of information dealt with by these organizations.

Alternatives

An alternative was considered during the development of proposals for the FedAA, that being to not make regulations. Regulations are required, however, in order for the Procurement Ombudsman to implement his or her mandate. The specifics in the Regulations would provide federal departments, industry and suppliers with greater certainty about the Procurement Ombudsman’s activities.

Benefits and costs

The Regulations would not impose any new costs on federal departments and agencies that are not already required under the FedAA.

The Regulations would take into account the financial and human resource costs to the private sector. For example, the review of supplier complaints regarding the procurement process could be carried out using one of two processes set out in the Regulations. The simple process for responding to complaints would allow enterprises to make complaints in non-complex matters in an easy and simple way, with minimal costs to the supplier doing so. This addresses concerns expressed that the complaints process be user-friendly for small- and medium-sized enterprises. The process for a contractor requesting a review of a complaint regarding the administration of its contract, such as late payment of an invoice, would involve only submitting sufficient information, as detailed in the Regulations, for the Procurement Ombudsman to review the complaint and the relevant government department to be able to respond to it.

The Regulations would also take into account government operational requirements as well as the resource costs to federal government organizations required to respond to the Procurement Ombudsman. For example, the expanded process for responding to supplier complaints, which would set out more structure and timeframes, could be used in situations where the complexity of the bid requirements or the procurement process would require a department to expend a significant amount of resources in providing an adequate response to Procurement Ombudsman’s reviews.

Consultation

The development of the FedAA’s provisions was the subject of significant consultations with major stakeholders within the federal public service between January and June 2006.

There were no concerns raised on the FedAA’s provisions related to the Procurement Ombudsman during the debates that occurred between April 11 and November 9, 2006, in the House of Commons, the Senate or parliamentary committees, with the exception of the change in name from “Procurement Auditor” to “Procurement Ombudsman.”

PWGSC engaged in a consultative process involving approximately 50 departments, whose input has been reflected in the development of the Regulations.

The Regulations were pre-published in the Canada Gazette, Part I on December 22, 2007 for 30 days. The time frame for comments was extended to February 1st at the request of industry associations.

A number of comments were received from industry associations, government departments and the Procurement Ombudsman Designate. All commentators have received written responses to their comments or suggestions on the Regulations.

Some suggested changes could not be accommodated as there was no authority in the FedAA to make such changes in the Regulations or the suggested change was not in keeping with the adjudicative process. For example, the suggestion that the Procurement Ombudsman accept complaints for review prior to contract award would be against the FedAA, which specifies that a complaint may only be filed after the award of the contract. The involvement of any other party, except the contracting authority and the contractor, in a complaint would not be in keeping with the adjudicative process. Some suggested changes to the Regulations were easily accommodated, such as the inclusion of a clause that would permit the supplier to make an objection to the contracting department and the timeframe for filing a complaint to the Procurement Ombudsman to begin only once the department had responded to the objection. In a few cases, some commentators made opposing suggestions. For example, it was suggested that timeframes be shortened to be consistent with those of the CITT, while it was also suggested that timeframes be lengthened to take into account that small suppliers would be the most likely to file complaints with the Procurement Ombudsman. All suggested changes were reviewed and discussed with the group or individual making the comment to arrive at an optimum response. For example, given the inexperience of the small suppliers with the CITT complaints process, it was decided that more time should be permitted so as not to unnecessarily disqualify complaints.

Compliance and enforcement

A report of the Procurement Ombudsman must be tabled annually in Parliament.

Contact

Christine Cowan
Manager
Trade Agreements Strategy and CITT Coordination
Acquisitions Branch
Public Works and Government Services Canada
Place du Portage, Phase III, 7C2
11 Laurier Street
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0S5
Telephone: 819-956-6411
Fax: 819-956-1265
Email: Christine.Cowan@pwgsc.gc.ca

Footnote a
S.C. 2006, c. 9, s. 307

Footnote b
S.C. 1996, c. 16

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).