Page 10 - EPR-Report-Card-2011

Basic HTML Version

What the Jurisdictions are Doing
Newfoundland and Labrador
Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) is committed to advancing EPR policies. Under the authority
of its Waste Management Regulations, it recently implemented an EPR program for waste paint
and containers and is in the process of developing EPR programs for used oil, electronic waste
and household hazardous waste with a goal of implementation by 2015. The province currently
has stewardship programs in place for beverage containers, used tires and used motor oil.
The province has set a 70% target for recovery of paint products and has established a
penalty mechanism for failure to meet this target. Performance reports are required annually
and are to be made public on the producer’s website.
The government has designated the Newfoundland and Labrador Multi Material
Stewardship Board (MMSB) to oversee EPR programs and, under the Waste Management
Regulations, requires that plans be submitted to and approved by the board. Detailed
communication plans for EPR programs are specified under the regulation and MMSB ensures
that adequate initial and ongoing education and promotion of a given EPR program is executed
with appropriate messaging.
Federal Government
Canada has committed to EPR and has endorsed the CCME CAP for EPR. However, it has not
implemented EPR regulations for toxic materials or products containing toxics for which it has
authority under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. EPR is noted as under de-
velopment, as being considered or in the process of being developed, but steps to use the EPR
authority that the federal government has appear tentative at best.
Lack of federal EPR action on mercury-containing products has created confusion as
provincial jurisdictions are uncertain whether they should regulate and some provinces have
moved forward to designate mercury-containing products under their EPR programs as a
result. The lack of federal government initiative represents a lost opportunity for national
harmonization. EPR was cited as a viable management option in the federal government’s
risk management strategy of December 2006 for mercury-containing products, but the
option appears to have disappeared in subsequent documents, suggesting that the federal
government’s commitment to use EPR instruments has weakened over time.
Action has been limited to the use of Pollution Prevention Planning Notices (P2 Notices)
for automobile mercury switches and a proposal for halocarbon refrigerants. P2 Notices are
not EPR programs and the unclear results of the mercury switches program to date suggest P2
planning is a weak instrument to ensure program performance and producer responsibility.
For example, no enforceable measures or targets exist and steel mills, which had no role in
automobile company decisions to use mercury switches, are covered under the Notice.
The federal government has been a national leader in the development and promotion of EPR
through the co-hosting of a series of national EPR workshops, the provision of EPR guidance
documents and the maintenance of a national program inventory. The federal government also
played a leading role in the preparation of the CCME Canada-wide Action Plan.