Search Climate Insights Directory

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) empowers the U.S. EPA to regulate chemicals across their lifecycle. Following 2016 amendments, the EPA must conduct risk evaluations based on hazard and exposure, without considering costs, to determine if a chemical poses an 'unreasonable risk.' If such a risk is found, the EPA must implement risk management rules, which can include bans or restrictions. The TSCA does not regulate chemicals in pesticides, tobacco, weapons, food, drugs, cosmetics, or medical devices, though these are considered as background exposures.

A joint submission by multiple NGOs and experts to the UN Special Rapporteur detailing systemic human rights violations in the U.S. linked to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The authors argue that the U.S. government has failed to regulate PFAS as a class, allowed military and industrial contamination of drinking water, and permitted corporate structures to shield polluters from accountability. The report highlights disproportionate impacts on Arctic Indigenous Peoples and Black and Latino communities, while noting the global transboundary movement of PFAS waste and pollution originating from the U.S.

The report provides a detailed overview of the EU's REACH and CLP regulations and the Chemical Strategy for Sustainability, alongside China's evolving environmental law system and its management of new and existing chemical substances. It highlights gaps in the EU's data availability and the nascent state of China's environmental risk assessment system, ultimately recommending institutionalised annual exchanges and capacity-building activities under the EU-China Environmental Policy Dialogue to share technical expertise and policy lessons.

The submission argues that the Canadian government's updated approach to PFAS is insufficient, specifically criticizing the proposal to exclude fluoropolymers from the PFAS class and the use of outdated bioaccumulation criteria. The authors call for the fast-tracking of PFAS listing on Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and a more ambitious risk management scope that prioritizes prohibitions over technical feasibility studies.

The briefing note calls for further reform of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) following Bill S-5, highlighting the need for enforceable national air quality standards, the removal of barriers to citizen lawsuits against polluters, improved labelling of hazardous substances in consumer products, and enhanced environmental protections on First Nations reserve lands to address systemic inequities and health risks.

The submission argues that PFAS should be regulated as a class to prevent 'regrettable substitution' and protect vulnerable populations, including Indigenous peoples and firefighters. The authors contend that the current Draft state of PFAS report underestimates the class size and that the proposed Risk Management Scope (RMS) is insufficient because it lacks a commitment to prohibiting non-essential uses. They recommend fast-tracking the listing of PFAS as toxic substances under CEPA Part 1 of Schedule 1, citing widespread contamination in the Canadian Arctic, the Great Lakes, and human blood.

Bill S-5 introduces the first federal recognition of the right to a healthy environment in Canada and strengthens the framework for managing toxic substances by prioritizing CMRs and PBiT substances. It introduces accountability mechanisms for substance assessments, such as a 'watch list' and mandatory publication of reasons for delays. However, the document argues that further updates are needed regarding citizen lawsuits, national air quality standards, consumer product labelling, genetically modified animals, ocean dumping, First Nations reserve land protections, and plastic waste exports.

The document argues that while Bill S-5 is a positive step toward modernizing CEPA, it requires further amendments to ensure the right to a healthy environment is robustly implemented and that toxic substance assessments and risk management are transparent and timely. Key recommendations include establishing mandatory labelling for hazardous consumer products, setting strict timelines for substance assessments, and shifting the burden of proof for confidentiality claims to the requesting party.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment and other groups propose eight priority amendments to Bill S-5 to modernize CEPA. Key recommendations include establishing the right to a healthy environment as a duty, mandating public disclosure of toxic substances in consumer products, setting strict timelines for chemical risk assessments, and limiting the use of Confidential Business Information (CBI) exceptions to increase transparency regarding environmental and health risks.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment and the Canadian Association of Nurses for the Environment call for the modernization of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), arguing that the 1999 framework is inadequate for current climate and pollution crises. While acknowledging improvements in Bill S-5, the authors demand further amendments to prioritize the prohibition of toxic substances, recognize the right to a healthy environment, and address cumulative risks to human health.

The document argues that while Bill S-5 is a 'workable starting point' for modernizing the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), it requires amendments to ensure the right to a healthy environment is not undermined by 'balancing' clauses and that the regime for prohibiting toxic substances is more certain and transparent.

Environmental and health groups are calling for the urgent passage of Bill S-5 to modernize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), arguing that the current law is over 20 years old and fails to address 21st-century risks. The groups recommend specific amendments to ensure the legal recognition of the right to a healthy environment, stricter controls on toxic substances, and improved public access to risk data.

The CAPE Strategic Plan 2022–2024 establishes a framework to mobilize health professionals to advocate for planetary health in Canada. The plan is organized around six priorities: transitioning to a wellbeing economy, eliminating toxics, addressing the climate crisis, protecting nature, advancing equity and justice, and increasing organizational capacity. Key objectives include advocating for a legal right to a healthy environment, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, and implementing a Quality of Life Framework in government decision-making.

The document argues that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), 1999, is outdated and fails to address current environmental and health threats, such as the climate emergency and plastic pollution. It highlights the disproportionate impact of toxics on marginalized groups, including Indigenous people and lower-income Canadians, and calls for the implementation of 87 recommendations made by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development in 2017. The authors advocate for specific amendments to Bill C-28, including the recognition of a human right to a healthy environment, the prohibition of carcinogenic and mutagenic substances, and the establishment of a presumption of non-confidentiality regarding chemical substances.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) calls for the next Canadian government to prioritize environmental health by reforming the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and reintroducing an improved version of Bill C-28. The organization highlights that air pollution causes nearly 15,000 premature deaths annually in Canada, with lower-income populations and marginalized groups disproportionately affected by toxic exposures. CAPE advocates for an unqualified right to a healthy environment, the prioritization of toxic substances of concern, and the cessation of all fiscal supports to the oil and gas sector by 2022.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment and partner organizations advocate for the listing of talc under Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and a comprehensive ban on its use in personal care products. They argue that current industry-led changes are inadequate and that risk management must account for the racialized and gendered contexts of talc exposure, particularly the targeting of Black, Hispanic, Indigenous, and Filipino communities by companies like Johnson & Johnson. The authors emphasize that a precautionary approach is necessary to protect vulnerable populations, including athletes and gendered occupations such as makeup artists and estheticians, from inhalation and perineal risks.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment and other organizations urge the passage of Bill C-28 with specific amendments to better protect human health and the environment. Key recommendations include establishing a non-qualified right to a healthy environment, prioritizing the prohibition of carcinogenic and mutagenic substances, and requiring assessments of aggregate and cumulative exposures. The authors also call for legally binding air quality standards, GMO food labelling, and alignment with the Basel Convention on plastic waste.

Civil society organizations are calling on the Canadian government to advance Bill C-28, the Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act, to committee before World Environment Day on June 5, 2021. The signatories argue that the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) requires modernization to address evolved scientific understanding of risks and current toxic threats, noting that it has been over two decades since the act entered into force. The letter highlights a lack of progress on recommendations from a 2017 committee report and cites three separate public petitions—collectively gathering over 23,000 signatures—demanding action on CEPA modernization.

A coalition is suing the U.S. EPA to invalidate regulatory loopholes that allow continued exposure to DecaBDE, a highly toxic flame retardant used in consumer products and recycled plastics. The chemical is linked to cancer, neurological harm, and developmental damage, posing particular risks to infants, children, workers, and Indigenous subsistence practitioners.

The document advocates for strengthening the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) by incorporating prevention, precaution, and intersectionality to address the disproportionate impact of toxic exposures on women. It highlights how gendered social roles and sex-specific biological differences increase vulnerability to chemicals in consumer products, workplaces, and the environment, particularly for racialized, Indigenous, and low-income women.