SDS Confidentiality Decisions and Orders

Summary#

This Canada Gazette notice (published December 28, 2019) reports decisions and related actions under the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act by the Department of Health’s screening officer. It lists claims for exemption from ingredient disclosure that were found valid, describes required corrections to safety data sheets (SDSs) or labels, notes cases where the officer ordered disclosure, and lists newly filed claims for exemption.

What it does#

• Confirms that a number of claims for exemption (requests to keep some ingredient identities or concentrations confidential on SDSs/labels) were found valid by the screening officer. Examples include claims for:
  • MacDermid Enthone, Inc. — ENTHOBRITE® NCZ CONDITIONER (RN 9725).
  • Afton Chemical Corporation — HiTEC® 6590 Fuel Additive (RN 10120).
  • Innospec Fuel Specialties LLC — OGI-7682 (RN 10287).
• Notes that, for some claims, the subject of the claim published earlier was changed before the decision (for example, RNs 10120, 10121, 11889, 12004, 12013, 12172).
• Explains that when an SDS or label didn’t meet legal requirements, claimants were generally given up to 30 days to submit a signed undertaking and an amended SDS or label fixing the problems.
• Publishes summaries of the undertakings where companies corrected SDSs or labels. Corrections ranged from adding missing hazard classifications, common chemical names or synonyms, toxicity values, first-aid and emergency measures, to fixing misleading or incomplete handling and storage instructions.
  • Example issues corrected included missing classification for narcotic effects, disclosure of ingredient synonyms (e.g., for “solvent naphtha” or “methanol”), and addition of product oral or inhalation toxicity estimates.
• Notes cases where the screening officer issued formal orders to disclose information because the claimant either did not provide a satisfactory undertaking or did not comply in time. For example:
  • RN 9858 (a product from the list of decisions) was ordered to disclose additional hazard information and supplier contact details.
  • Several other RNs (e.g., 10323, 10366, 12093, 12172) were also ordered to amend SDSs and disclose specified information.
• Lists newly filed claims for exemption (requests currently under review). One example is Ingevity Corporation’s INDULIN XD-70 with registry number 03348860.
• Reminds affected parties that they may appeal a screening officer’s decision; an appeal must be started within 45 days of the notice (the Gazette text gives the appeal form and filing address).

Who's affected#

• Companies that make, import or supply the specific chemical products named in the notice.
• Employers and workers who use those products, because SDSs and labels inform safe handling, personal protective equipment, and emergency response.
• Emergency responders and health professionals who rely on accurate SDS information in a spill or exposure.
• People who buy or store these products (including industrial and commercial purchasers) may notice updated SDSs or labels.
• The general public is unlikely to be directly affected unless they handle these specific products.

Why it matters#

• SDSs and labels are the main source of safety information for hazardous products. Corrections and ordered disclosures improve the information available to workers, employers, and emergency responders.
• The decisions show how the system balances companies’ claims to protect confidential business information with the public interest in clear hazard and emergency details.
• If you work with or manage the named products, expect updated SDSs or labels and, in some cases, new or clarified hazard and first-aid information that can affect training, storage, and emergency planning.