Renewal of the Federal Agenda on the Reduction of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Consumer and Commercial Products: response to comments on the 2021 consultation document
On this page
Background
In March 2021, the Government of Canada published a consultation document on the proposed renewal of the Federal Agenda on the Reduction of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Consumer and Commercial Products, for a 30-day period to solicit comments from stakeholders.
This document summarizes the comments received from stakeholders and our responses on how they have been considered in the development of the final renewed Federal Agenda for the Reduction of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Consumer and Commercial Products that was published in the Canada Gazette, part I. The comments are organized by topic.
Overarching comments
Consultation process
Comment summary: The 30-day consultation period was too short.
Response: The period chosen was the same as for the consultations on the federal agenda renewal that occurred in 2010. An extension was granted to anyone who requested one.
Background information – Figure 1
Comment summary: Emissions data in Figure 1 is outdated and misleading as it shows an increase in emissions from paints and solvents, whereas emissions have been decreasing since 2009. Furthermore, it focusses on the paints and solvents sector, instead of including all the consumer and commercial product sectors.
Response: The goal of Figure 1 was to illustrate a concept, showing how increases in product use slowly erode gains made through previous regulatory action. The goal was not to present any particular values or sector, and it is recognized that the values in the figure are outdated. Figure 1, or the data it contains, are not used in the final federal agenda Notice of intent.
Background information – Table 1
Comment summary: Emission values in Table 1 are not accurate and data gathered from studies, such as the Cheminfo 2020 study on architectural coatings, should be used instead.
Response: The goal of Table 1 was to show the relative contribution of each sector to overall emissions from consumer and commercial products. This exercise requires data generated using the same methodology for all product types and sectors, with the Air Pollutant Emissions Inventory (APEI) being the only comprehensive dataset. As such, it was not possible to use other data, such as the ones generated through the Cheminfo study. The data in Figure 1 is not used in the Notice of Intent.
Decrease in smog air health advisories
Comment summary: There were only four smog Air Health Advisories issued in Ontario within the last six years.
Response: The Government of Canada recognizes the significant improvements that have been made in the last few decades with regards to smog. It is true that there are fewer severe smog episodes in Canada then there were 20 years ago. However, based on the most recent information (2016 to 2018), approximately one third of the population in Canada lives in areas where at least one Canadian ambient air quality standard is not met. In addition, there is robust scientific evidence of health effects at very low concentrations of these pollutants. The Health Canada Smog Science Assessment concluded that Ozone and PM2.5 should be treated as having no safe level.
Impact of each planned action on air quality
Comment summary: Information was requested on the impact of each planned action on air quality.
Response: The federal agenda is a planning document and it is intended to inform stakeholders very early in the process. As such, information on the impact of each planned action on air quality is not currently available. This information will be generated and shared with stakeholders during the instrument development process.
Cost effectiveness of planned actions
Comment summary: Some questioned the cost effectiveness of the actions being proposed.
Response: The cost effectiveness values presented in the consultation document were taken from preliminary studies, some of which were dated. These values will be updated and shared with stakeholders during the instrument development process.
Approach to selecting the planned actions
Commercial and industrial products
Comment summary: The Government of Canada should focus only on commercial and industrial products, especially those for which there are no measures in place because they emit the majority of VOCs.
Response: The sectors were chosen based on four guiding principles. These principles include the need to focus on sectors for which actions would be cost effective, while considering the benefits. This principle encompasses the need to target the highest emitting sectors, if emission reductions for these sectors are practical, feasible and cost efficient. This, for example, was not the case for high VOC emitting windshield washer fluid. There were also sectors (pesticides and solvent degreasing) for which no actions are currently being proposed. This is because additional data is required to determine if actions are needed and would be practical, efficient and cost effective for these sectors. We will also work collaboratively with partners when chemicals are regulated under other pieces of legislation. The Notice of intent includes studies to gather more information on these sectors, which may be the subject of actions post 2030.
Selecting U.S. jurisdiction for alignment
Comment summary: A regulatory body indicated its support for alignment with California rules in order to help them meet their air quality objectives. However, industry representatives support alignment with U.S. states that border Canada because:
- these states have similar climates as Canada;
- there are technical issues associated with California rules;
- there will be higher VOC/GHG emissions if products need to be applied more frequently because of poorer performance in a colder climate.
Response: The Government of Canada understands the need to consider climate differences between national and international jurisdictions (e.g., California and Canada), and this was acknowledged in the consultation document. Choosing the U.S. jurisdiction with which to align will occur during the instrument development process, after analyzing the facts and having further discussions with stakeholders.
Reactivity-based limits
Comment summary: A commenter recommended reactivity-based limits.
Response: While the Government of Canada understands the usefulness of reactivity-based limits, one of the guiding principles was to align with requirements in the North American market. No requirements for the selected sectors in the North American market include reactivity-based limits.
Type of risk management instrument
Comment summary: A commenter recommended that the federal government explore non-regulatory options instead of focusing on regulations.
Response: The Government of Canada is exploring both regulatory and non-regulatory options, where it makes sense to do so. If amendments to the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Concentration Limits for Architectural Coatings Regulations and the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Concentration Limits for Automotive Refinishing Products Regulations are excluded, the Government of Canada is planning three new actions for sectors not currently subject to any federal instrument:
- regulations for industrial adhesives and sealants, in line with our goal to align with requirements in the North American market and create a level-playing field for businesses;
- regulations targeting portable fuel containers, but only if the voluntary standard, that was developed by the Canadian General Standards Board at the request of environment and Climate Change Canada, is not effective in driving the market towards low emitting containers, i.e., significant reductions are not achieved following the implementation of the non-regulatory instrument; and
- a non-regulatory instrument for the printing sector. This instrument would target only a segment of the printing sector (printing on plastic packaging). This sub-sector is well suited to a focused non-regulatory instrument.
Planned actions
Architectural coatings
Comment summary: The need to further regulate the sector was questioned. If nevertheless this measure is implemented, there is support for alignment with the Ozone Transport Commission’s (OTC) Phase II model rule for architectural coatings. A commenter noted that the 2019 California Air Resources Board (CARB) Suggested Control Measure for architectural coatings has yet to be implemented by any California Air Districts. Even the OTC phase II model is only partially adopted by member states. Climate considerations were also mentioned.
Response: The Government of Canada will choose the U.S. jurisdiction for alignment once the instrument development process is started, after analyzing the facts and having further discussions with stakeholders.
Automotive refinishing
Comment summary: The reduction potential of this measure is questioned, and a study is requested. ECCC should conduct a study in 2022 not 2021, and, if alignment should happen, it should be postponed to 2024.
Response: The Government of Canada acknowledged, in the consultation document, that the reductions that could be gained from aligning with the latest OTC model were unknown. These reductions will be quantified and shared with stakeholders prior to implementing any changes to the current concentration limits. For this reason, a study will be undertaken in 2023. The implementation date in the Federal Agenda will be moved to 2026.
Industrial and commercial adhesives and sealants
Comment summary: There are technical challenges in applying this measure in Canada due to the differences in climate and the auto industry’s safety, durability and performance requirements. Additionally, abatement technologies are already in use in industrial facilities, which are subject to provincial requirements.
ECCC should work to get OTC rule consistency that is optimal for the Canadian industry in terms of technical capabilities and timeline.
Response: The Government of Canada understands the need to consider climate differences between California and Canada, and this was acknowledged in the consultation document. The Government of Canada will also consider industry’s current requirements, as well as their concerns regarding safety, durability and performance requirements. Ultimately, the concentration limits will be selected after analyzing the facts and having further discussions with stakeholders. This will be done as part of the instrument development process.
Other activities
VOC definition in Schedule I of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA)
Comment summary: There is wide stakeholder support for alignment with U.S. EPA VOC definition; however, it was noted that ECCC should seek input from industry prior to any update.
Response: Stakeholders will be consulted according to our Schedule I amendment process prior to any update to the VOC definition.
Aerosol coatings
Comment summary: Some stakeholders requested that aerosol coatings be excluded from the renewed agenda. The status of the market is well known and has not changed since the last study. As such, there is no need to re-evaluate potential reductions with a new study.
Response: The aerosol sector is no longer included in the “other activities” section of the Notice of Intent (i.e., the Government of Canada is not recommending to validate conclusions with a new study).
Solvent degreasing & pesticides
Comment summary: One commenter indicated that pesticides should not be covered under this federal agenda, as they fall under the Pest Management Regulatory Agency’s (PMRA) mandate.
Response: The study on pesticides will be conducted in collaboration with the PMRA.
Auto parts coatings
Comment summary: Auto industry representatives noted that their sector has already achieved significant reductions since 2005 and there are very limited opportunities for additional cost-effective reductions. Reducing VOCs would increase GHG and NOx emissions. If measures are nevertheless required, industry should be consulted and will need lead-time to implement.
Response: The Government of Canada is not proposing to implement measures for these sectors between 2022 and 2030, but rather to discuss with provincial authorities (who already regulate these sectors) the potential need for a federal instrument. If no feasible measures exist beyond those already required by provinces, further measures will not be proposed. If, on the other hand, there is a need for such measures, industry will be consulted prior and during instrument development, which would occur post 2030.
Plastic, rubber, leather and glass coatings
Comment summary: There is a need to validate the reduction potential for this sector. There is, however, some support for developing a CCME/federal guidelines that aligns with US guidelines. Canadian guidelines should be developed through consultations with paint manufacturers, applicators, and provincial jurisdictions.
Response: The Government of Canada is not proposing to implement measures for these sectors between 2022 and 2030, but rather to discuss with provincial authorities (who already regulate these sectors) the potential need for a federal instrument. If no feasible measures exist beyond those already required by provinces, further measures will not be proposed. If, on the other hand, there is a need for such measures, industry will be consulted prior and during instrument development, which would occur post 2030.
Other comments
Volatile Organic Compound Concentration Limits for Certain Products Regulations
Comment summary: We received comments on the Volatile Organic Compound Concentration Limits for Certain Products Regulations. Final regulations were published in Canada Gazette on January 5, 2022.
Response: These comments are not within the scope of the Federal Agenda renewal and, as such, are not included in this document.
Page details
- Date modified: