Ban on Certain Toxic Substances

Summary#

The federal government published a proposal on May 14, 2022 called the Prohibition of Certain Toxic Substances Regulations, 2022. If adopted, it would tighten or extend bans on several long-lasting, bioaccumulative chemicals (and add two new ones) and phase out many products that contain them, while allowing a few time-limited exemptions and permits.

What it does#

• Replaces the current rules with a new regulation under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 that covers a set list of substances and products.
• Proposes to prohibit the manufacture, use, sale and import of these substances and products (with specific exemptions and permit rules):
  • New additions targeted for prohibition: Dechlorane plus (DP) and decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE).
  • Existing targets with tighter limits: perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs).
• Allows short-term permits (up to 3 years) to keep making or importing DP, DBDPE or HBCD when no feasible alternative exists; permit applicants must show plans to transition off the substance.
• Sets “incidental presence” concentration limits below which a substance is allowed to be present without triggering the ban: for example 1 ppm for PFOS/PFOA/LC-PFCAs, 100 ppm for HBCD, and 500 ppm (or 10 ppm in some materials) for PBDEs.
• Includes targeted, time-limited exemptions for specific uses and replacement parts so legacy products can be serviced, for example:
  • aircraft engine fan case rub strips until December 31, 2030;
  • some vehicle replacement parts (for PBDE/decabDE) until December 31, 2036;
  • certain replacement parts and service uses allowed for up to 20 years;
  • limited use of certain firefighting foams (AFFF) containing PFOA/LC-PFCAs for emergency use and testing until December 31, 2025.
• Requires labs to report uses above 10 g per year and tightens record-keeping rules (records must be kept in Canada).
• Aims to simplify and consolidate the current regulatory text and remove redundant terms.

Who's affected#

• Manufacturers, importers and sellers of products that currently contain these chemicals, especially: automotive makers and parts suppliers, aerospace firms, electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) manufacturers, and wire and cable producers.
• Fire services and organizations that use aqueous film‑forming foams (AFFF) for fuel fires.
• Chemical manufacturers and suppliers of flame retardants and specialty PFAS-type chemicals.
• Retailers and businesses that hold existing inventory or service legacy products (because some legacy parts are exempt for limited times).
• Indigenous and northern communities are highlighted as groups that could benefit most from reduced pollution, because traditional diets can lead to higher exposure to persistent pollutants.
• Government estimates about 74 companies affected, including 13 small businesses.

Where the effects are uncertain: availability and performance of alternatives for DP and DBDPE in some safety‑critical uses (e.g., flame retardants in certain vehicle, aerospace or electrical parts).

Why it matters#

• The substances targeted are persistent and can build up in wildlife and people. Cutting their use should reduce long-term contamination in water, fish and ecosystems.
• The proposal is explicitly tied to protecting endangered whales (the Southern Resident Killer Whale and the St. Lawrence Estuary Beluga) and to Canada’s ability to ratify listings under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.
• There are real trade-offs: government estimates industry compliance costs of about $12,753,000 (present value) and government administrative costs of about $1,471,000, for a total of about $14,224,000 over 10 years. Those costs reflect testing, reformulation, certification and other transitions.
• For businesses and emergency services this could mean finding and validating new chemicals or changing equipment and procedures. In some cases suitable substitutes are not well established, which raises concerns about safety, performance and supply-chain disruption.
• Important note: this is a proposed regulation (published for comment), not a final law. The government invited feedback and may change details (including exemptions, timelines and thresholds) before any final rule is adopted.