Canadian Finishing and Coatings Manufacturing: Nov/Dec 2022 - 12

CPCA CORNER
regarded approach to chemicals management around the world
and one that has been adopted by multiple countries including
the United States and Australia. Yet, the Environmental NGOs
have disparaged the Act as not strong enough and that it must be
changed and focus on prohibition of more chemicals in products
in Canada. CPCA has argued that we respect the approach taken
to chemicals management to date and strongly recommend
that it remain as-is with minor modifications to update certain
aspects of the Act. It remains to be seen what impact Bill S-5 will
have on chemicals now used in thousands of CASE products in
Canada.
Government is heavily suggesting that digital solutions will
be also part of their labelling proposal and those may include QR
codes at point-of-sale in addition to traditional physical labels.
Bill S-5 Completes Second Reading in the House
- Referred to ENVI Committee for Debate
Bill S-5, An Act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection
Act, 1999, to make related amendments to the Food and Drugs Act
and to repeal the Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Virtual Elimination
Act, completed its Second Reading on November 3, 2022. The
Bill has now been referred to the House of Commons Standing
Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development
(ENVI).
CPCA sent comprehensive comments to key Members of
Parliament highlighting the coatings industry's concerns with
many of the amendments made by the Senate, which were
rushed, un-informed and threaten to create many challenges for
the chemicals industry at-large in Canada.
Review of Bill S-5 began in the House of Commons Standing
Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development
in late November. Environmental Minister Steven Guilbeault
is scheduled to appear on December 2, to wrap up witness
testimony. Clause-by-clause review of the Bill is scheduled to
begin no later than December 9 and MPs have stated that they
hope to finish clause-by-clause by December 13. However, this
is a very ambitious timeline judging by how long the process
took in the Senate and it is likely that the committee will have to
continue their work into 2023.
It is hoped that the elected representatives of the House of
Commons will reverse some of the 65 unnecessary and hastily
added amendments to the Bill that was first tabled in the Senate,
which was rarely ever done in the history of Parliament. Even
Senators complained that they were not equipped to review the
Bill or add so many amendments, which were done in only 13
meetings. This is not the optimal way to 'modernize' a widely
12
www.cfcm.ca
PMRA Publishes 'What We Heard' Report on
Targeted Review of the Pest Control Products Act
(PCPA)
The Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) has
published a summary of comments received during the recent
consultation on modernizing pesticide review processes under
the PCPA.
CPCA's comments highlighted that risk-based assessments
must continue to be prioritized over hazards and they must be
balanced with the economic and social benefits of the pesticide
in question. It also called for greater alignment in timelines, data
sharing, and decision making between PMRA and the United
States, Canada's largest trading partner. CPCA also supported
greater transparency initiatives as long they do not impinge
on confidential business information (CBI) and test data
protection. PMRA noted that there was a high level of support
for increased efficiencies and business process modernization,
while maintaining a science and evidence-based approach to
assessments.
Regarding the modernized review process, the main
areas of divergence were that pesticide manufacturers and
user groups are in favour of modernizing the PCPA under
the current regulatory framework, while NGO groups are
pushing for legislative change by reviewing the PCPA. With
respect to improved transparency and access to data, pesticide
manufacturers were strongly opposed to any revisions in the
definitions and handling of CBI and confidential test data (CTD)
while NGOs supported restrictions on CTD to be as limited as
possible with a clear test of harms to commercial interests in
the case of CBI. Pesticide manufacturers suggested that PMRA
adopt an approach similar to the US EPA where all non-CBI
information is located in an accessible " docket. "
Regarding the use of real-world data, pesticide users and
industry commented that PMRA could use real-world data
instead of using overly conservative models in decision-making,
or to refine risk assessments when a conservative model indicates
a risk may be unacceptable. " Chemical-specific " use information
should only be requested in response to an identified risk of
concern. In contrast, some NGOs noted that real-world data is
often incomplete and that PMRA should put clear policies in
place so that modelling is not automatically regarded as " overly
conservative " . Additional comments received from NGOs were
on expanding risk assessment practices to capture a wider range
of risks, including cumulative health impacts, occupational
risks, and impacts on environmental justice and climate change.
They also challenged the use of personal protective equipment
(PPE) as a mitigation measure against occupational risk and
residential exposure.
http://www.cfcm.ca
Canadian Finishing and Coatings Manufacturing: Nov/Dec 2022

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Canadian Finishing and Coatings Manufacturing: Nov/Dec 2022
