9. Other Changes to International Agreements

Currently, the EIHWR sets out insurance requirements for Canadian exporters, importers and the carriers of hazardous waste and hazardous recyclable materials subject to these regulations. For, exports and imports for recycling consistent with the OECD Decision of wastes destined for recovery operations, the Canadian exporter or importer must have $1 million coverage for any damage to third parties or environmental clean-up. All other imports and exports (for disposal or for recycling outside of the OECD regime) must have $5 million coverage. Carriers must have valid coverage as is required in the jurisdiction through which they will travel.

The revised regulation should also clarify the amounts of insurance required and the scope of insurance coverage required. Again, there are two parallel initiatives in this area, one domestic and one international that will have to be examined.

In December 1999, Parties to the Basel Convention adopted a Protocol on Liability and Compensation for Accidents Resulting from Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and Their Disposal. To ensure prompt compensation of victims, this Protocol sets out who should be held liable and the extent of this liability, including establishing minimum insurance requirements. This Protocol sets out a requirement for strict liability of the exporter until the hazardous waste/hazardous recyclable material is transfer to the receiving facility at which time the facility operator becomes strictly liable. It also provides the right of recourse for the strictly liable person to sue other persons involved on a fault basis.

This Protocol is not yet in force internationally. Canada has not yet decided whether it will accede to this agreement. Extensive stakeholder consultations and complete review of the impact of such a decision would be required before any such decision is made.

In addition to working towards a national regime for ESM, provinces and Environment Canada have agreed to review the current liability requirements for the generators and facilities that manage hazardous wastes and hazardous recyclable materials. In Canada, liability is generally transferred from the generator to the facility at the time of entry into the facility. However, in other jurisdictions such as the United States, the generator retains some residual responsibility. There is anecdotal evidence that some hazardous wastes are being exported to Canada from the United States because of the different levels of liability.

In July 2000, Environment Canada announced its intention to introduce an enhanced liability regime so that hazardous waste generators remain responsible for their waste even after it leaves their site. Making the generator responsible, from generation of the hazardous waste through to its disposal or recycling, will ensure that generators will be more accountable for the wastes that they generate.

Once again, there will be specific consultation processes on these initiatives. Should Canada decide to accede to the Protocol or should a new domestic liability regime be established within the time frame proposed for this amendment, this will have to be taken into account in the EIHWHRMR. However, the consultation process on the new regulations will provide stakeholders an opportunity to discuss options for implementing liability coverage and the level of coverage that would be appropriate for various types of activities. This could then be fed into the discussions on the national liability regime and future discussions on the Basel Protocol.

CEPA, 1999 includes a specific authority to prohibit, completely or partially the import, export or transit of hazardous wastes or hazardous recyclable materials in order to implement international environmental agreements binding on Canada. Examples of this type of prohibition, which are already in place in the current EIHWR, are the prohibition on exports to Antarctica and the prohibition to export to a country that has notified Canada that it prohibits the import of the hazardous waste in question..

In 1995, Parties to the Basel Convention adopted an amendment to the Convention that would prohibit the export of hazardous wastes from developed to developing countries. This amendment is not yet in force and Canada has made no decision with respect to ratification of this amendment. CEPA, 1999 provides the authority to implement such a prohibition should Canada decide to ratify this amendment. The discussions on whether or not to ratify and implement the ban will occur outside of the consultation process on the EIHWHRMR. However stakeholders will be informed of any planned consultation specifically on this matter.

In 1997, the OECD decided to examine areas for harmonization of requirements and procedures under Council Decision C(92)39 with those under the Basel Convention. This OECD Council Decision applies only to transboundary movements of recyclable materials within the OECD area. Draft amendments to this Decision have recently been completed and are expected to be adopted by member countries in the coming months. The OECD has also worked to consolidate and amend several other Council Decisions regarding the transboundary movements of waste and recyclable materials, including Council Decision C(88)90, which sets out the definition of hazardous waste/recyclable materials and the tables for the International Waste Identification Code (IWIC).

The amended Council Decision C(92)39 will continue to require notification and allow for written or 30-day tacit consent for transboundary movements of hazardous (amber) recyclable materials. The concept of pre-consented recycling facilities with 7-day tacit consent was also retained. Non-hazardous (green) recyclable material will continue to be subject to controls normally applied to commercial transactions.

In addition to revisions to the waste lists discussed above, these amended Decisions includes the same technical changes that will be taken into account when revising the current regulations, such as simplification of the classification coding that had previously used the IWIC code tables and formal adoption of specific notification and movement documents similar to those adopted by the Basel Convention.

However, the changes also include more policy-oriented issues that may be considered during the present consultations on possible changes to the regulations:

Page details

Date modified: