Halocarbons: response to comments on P2 notice working document
May 2014
On March 28, 2014 Environment Canada held an electronic consultation by emailing a Consultation Document to interested stakeholders. The Consultation Document contained a draft proposed Pollution Prevention Planning Notice for halocarbons used as a refrigerant. Stakeholders were given until April 30, 2014 to comment on the draft proposed Pollution Prevention Planning Notice. This document presents a summary of comments submitted by stakeholders and responses to the comments.
Section 1: Definitions
Comment 1
It is important to ensure that the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice and all associated programs are aligned with existing provincial regulations, especially with respect to definitions such as refrigerant.
Response to Comment 1
Environment Canada is aware that the definition of refrigerant in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice is not the same as in provincial regulations. Environment Canada has opted for this definition as it better reflects what refrigerants are. Environment Canada has added a definition for halocarbon refrigerant in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice to further improve on clarity.
Comment 2
With respect to the halocarbon definition, it would be useful to add "as per CEPA Schedule 1" at the end of the sentence for clarity purposes. The definition would read as follows: "halocarbon means a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC), or hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) as per CEPA Schedule 1".
Response to Comment 2
The definitions in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) also apply to instruments made under the Act. As such, in this Pollution Prevention Planning Notice, the terms "chlorofluorocarbon", "hydrochlorofluorocarbon" and "hydrofluorocarbon" have the same meaning as in Schedule 1 of CEPA 1999. Therefore, there is no need to add "as per CEPA Schedule 1".
Section 2: Person or class of persons required to prepare and implement a Plan
Comment 3
Wholesalers should be subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning notice.
Response to Comment 3
Only those persons subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice are responsible for developing and implementing a stewardship program, namely manufacturers, importers and reclaimers. Wholesalers could simply be service providers (i.e., collection services) retained by the stewardship program. Environment Canada believes there is no added value to target wholesalers in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.
Comment 4
A number of stakeholders expressed disagreement with exempting the following persons from the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice:
a) importers of equipment pre-charged with halocarbon refrigerant;
b) importers of halocarbon refrigerants to be used exclusively in domestic appliances, mobile refrigeration and air conditioning sectors.
Comment 5
Other stakeholders expressed support for exempting persons that import refrigerants to be used exclusively in mobile air conditioning systems.
Response to Comments 4 and 5
Response to Comments 4 and 5: The decision to exclude vehicles air conditioning does not imply that Environment Canada considers that refrigerants remaining in end-of-life vehicles (ELVs) should not be managed. In fact, in September 2013, Environment Canada commissioned a study on refrigerants remaining in light-duty ELVs. The final report shows that the total amount of refrigerant contained in these light-duty ELVs is estimated at 306 tonnes, across Canada. Environment Canada considers that this quantity of refrigerant is not negligible and needs to be properly managed.
Environment Canada concluded that, at this time, air conditioning systems in vehicles could be excluded from the scope of the Notice and instead be addressed under an alternative proposal. In June 2011 the Automotive Recyclers of Canada and the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers Association proposed to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment a nation-wide environmental management system (EMS) for recyclers of ELVs. Environment Canada considers that, if successfully implemented, the EMS proposal, which is still under consideration by the CCME, could be a suitable approach to responsibly manage halocarbon refrigerants recovered by recyclers.
For domestic appliances we propose to rely, at this time, on the existing infrastructure, which includes municipal/regional programs and voluntary retailer take-back programs. It is estimated that this existing infrastructure recovers and recycles as high as 92 percent of all domestic appliances entering the waste stream annually.
Environment Canada considers that there is limited added value to include importers of pre-charged systems in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice based on the volumes of halocarbon refrigerants involved. Environment Canada estimates that the amount of halocarbon refrigerant brought into Canada from imported pre-charged systems is negligible compared to the amount imported or manufactured, in bulk, in CanadaFootnote1. The additional benefits gained by stewardship program(s) would therefore be negligible.
Refrigerants that enter Canada in containers shipped with large chillers are considered bulk imports. Importers of these refrigerants are subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.
Environment Canada has removed the exemption for importers of halocarbon refrigerants used in mobile refrigeration systems. This decision is based on the fact that:
a) refrigerants used in this sector are typically purchased through stationary sector wholesalers; and
b) mobile refrigeration systems need to be maintained and repaired by trained Transport Refrigeration Technician, who’s work is typically limited to mobile refrigeration systems making it possible to identify halocarbon refrigerants recovered from mobile refrigeration systems.
Comment 6
A previous proposal offered to exclude pre-charged equipment imported into Canada, but proposed to target Canadian manufacturers who may choose to import more sustainable, costlier, low-global warming potential (GWP) refrigerant material such as HFO-1234yf in bulk quantities from outside Canada.
Response to Comment 6
All proposals prepared by Environment Canada, including the proposed Pollution Prevention Planning Notice, have targeted chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) used as refrigerants. Environment Canada never intended to target HFO-1234yf because this substance is not listed on Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999). As such, Environment Canada does not have the authority under CEPA 1999 to control HFO-1234yf. Therefore, HFO-1234yf is not targeted by the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.
Comment 7
The draft proposed Pollution Prevention Planning Notice excludes persons that export out of Canada all the halocarbon refrigerants that they manufactured, reclaimed and imported. There should be an additional requirement that these refrigerants be stored in bonded warehouses and other steps to ensure that the refrigerants are exported and not simply sold into the Canadian market.
Response to Comment 7
Environment Canada is revising the Ozone-depleting Substances Regulations, 1998 and will propose a permitting system for the import and export of all halocarbons (as is currently the case for ozone-depleting substances). Permits will be an effective way to track exports of these substances.
Comment 8
The Pollution Prevention Notice does not cover foam from the domestic appliance sector. The foam in these appliances represents a significant source of halocarbons in many provinces and territories.
Response to Comment 8
At this time, Environment Canada is proposing a stewardship program for halocarbon refrigerants. The inclusion of foams may be considered in the future.
Section 4: Factors to consider in preparing the Plan
Comment 9
Clarifications were sought from Environment Canada on what is meant by "giving priority to pollution prevention activities" and how it would be enforced.
Response to Comment 9
Giving priority to pollution prevention activities is inherent in the instrument as it is a Pollution Prevention Planning Notice. Therefore persons subject to the Notice should consider how to eliminate the substance or risk at the source rather than controlling it. It is a standard factor to consider in all Pollution Prevention Notices and can include activities such as inventory control, training staff, education, etc.
Comment 10
Some stakeholders disagreed with the provision in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice that stewardship program(s) accept recovered halocarbons without regard to the contaminants contained in the halocarbon because of potential flammability risks.
Response to Comment 10
Environment Canada understands the concern related to the flammability of hydrocarbons in refrigerants and is proposing that only refrigerants mixtures with up to 4% hydrocarbons should be accepted by stewardship programs. This is in line with the maximum concentration of hydrocarbons found in the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) designated mixtures.
Comment 11
In the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice there are references to "heating ventilating and air conditioning contractors". These references need to be changed to "heating ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration (HVACR) contractors".
Response to Comment 11
All references in the Notice have been changed to "heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration (HVACR) contractors".
Comment 12
Some stakeholders had concerns with the provision in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice to establish a baseline for collection in the first year of the program and increase that level each 5 year increment after the program is implemented.
Response to Comment 12
The objective of these provisions in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice is to monitor and evaluate performance of the stewardship program(s) to provide the necessary information to continually improve on its performance over time. Environment Canada recognizes that there are external factors, such as regulatory phase-out of certain halocarbons that will influence the quantity of surplus/unwanted halocarbon refrigerants. On that basis, Environment Canada has revised the paragraphs related to targets and requests that the stewardship program(s) develop their own targets per five-year periods. With this new approach, Environment Canada no longer sees the need to establish a baseline level and has removed this provision.
Comment 13
The provision to reclaim or destroy used halocarbons in 6 months or any specified time period is not realistic. Such a provision will increase program costs by preventing the optimization of processing batches in minimum quantities. In addition, delays in permits and destruction facility maintenance shutdowns cause delays in destruction schedules past the 6 month threshold.
Response to Comment 13
Environment Canada has removed this provision regarding the destruction or reclamation of refrigerants within 6 months. The time that a stewardship stores recovered refrigerants before treatment is to be considered when prioritizing pollution prevention activities, which includes inventory control.
Comment 14
Some stakeholders expressed concerns related to the costs for an independent third-party audit, which for a smaller stewardship program may be a significant disadvantage.
Response to Comment 14
A third-party auditor provides more assurance that credible audits are conducted. To alleviate the concern of cost associated with conducting audits, the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice asks that audits be conducted every three years. As suggested by a stakeholder in subsequent discussions, Environment Canada now refers to the ISO 19011:2011 standard, entitled "Guidelines for auditing management systems", in the proposed Notice as it is a more appropriate standard for these audits.
Comment 15
There were concerns about the provision to publicly report the quantity of halocarbons reclaimed or destroyed by a stewardship program.
Response to Comment 15
Environment Canada understands the concern about publicly reporting on reclamation activities. The provisions in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice regarding public reporting have been modified so that stewardship programs can aggregate the quantities destroyed with the quantities reclaimed in the public report. If there are still confidentiality concerns about reporting aggregate quantities, the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice provides flexibility so that programs can determine the information that they make publicly available.
Comment 16
Concern was raised about the provision allowing an importer to withdraw from a stewardship program under certain conditions. They understood that this provision also applied to manufacturers of halocarbon refrigerants.
Response to Comment 16
The Pollution Prevention Planning Notice does not contain provisions for manufacturers and reclaimers of halocarbon refrigerants to withdraw from a stewardship program. Only importers of small quantities can withdraw from a stewardship program under certain conditions, namely - (i) their imports are below 100 kg for five consecutive years and remain below that threshold after they withdraw, and (ii) only if these importers have never manufactured or reclaimed halocarbon refrigerants.
Section 6: Period within which the Plan is to be implemented
Comment 17
A comment was made to the effect that providing 24 months for the implementation of the Pollution Prevention Plan is too long. It was suggested that this time frame be reduced to 12 months.
Response to Comment 17
The Declaration of Implementation (Schedule 5 of the Notice) requires information that can only be obtained after operating the program for one full year. Therefore, to comply with the timeline to submit the Declaration of Implementation, a program must start its operations no later than 12 months after a company becomes subject to the final Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.
Results of the first environmental compliance audit must be provided in the Declaration of Implementation. To allow programs to conduct this audit after one full year of operation and report the results, the timeline to submit the Declaration of Implementation has been extended to 30 months.
To alleviate the concern about the delays being too long, the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice has a new provision to the effect that stewardship programs start accepting recovered halocarbon refrigerants no later than 12 months after a company becomes subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.
Miscellaneous
Comment 18
The details of the draft proposed Pollution Prevention Notice cover both reclamation and destruction. Concern was raised that each person designated would need a reclamation component for their company, which was not considered feasible.
Response to Comment 18
Response to Comment 18: Persons subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice do not need to reclaim or destroy refrigerants at their site. These activities can be performed at the site of other persons subject to the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice and/or persons other than those subject to the Notice (such as service providers).
Comment 19
There are a number of requirements in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice regarding reporting of stewardship program results and retention of records by designated persons. A stakeholder understood that these requirements do not seem to include the option of having a stewardship program provide the needed data and retention of records for a group of designated companies. The stakeholder requested that this topic be considered in the Pollution Prevention Notice and provisions be added to allow this approach.
Response to Comment 19
Response to Comment 19: The submission of both declarations (Schedule 1 and Schedule 5 of the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice) must be done at the company level. However, the administrator of a stewardship program can complete the declarations on behalf of the companies and then simply have the companies sign, date and submit their declarations. The annual public reporting can be done at program level.
Comment 20
The draft Pollution Prevention Notice uses the word "import". Concern was raised that Environment Canada has used in the past the term "importer" and "importer of record" interchangeably. A suggestion was made that it would be useful if the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice clarifies what is meant by "import" and that "import" indicates that it relates to the importer of record.
Response to Comment 20
Response to Comment 20: The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA (1999)) and its regulations, such as the Ozone-depleting Substances Regulations, 1998, use the term "import". For consistency, the term "import" is being used in the Pollution Prevention Planning Notice.