Again, I think the prohibition does well. We do need to follow the path that we've decided in Canada of virtually eliminating substances that are persistent, biocumulative, and inherently toxic, and virtual elimination will allow us to move toward zero emissions in Canada.
In particular, when we're looking at the chrome-plating sector and the electroplating sector, where PFOS will still be in use, if you look at the Gazette notice, it speaks of the number of plating companies in Canada using PFOS and the number that aren't, and it is about a 50-50 split. I don't know enough about the sectors, but that may cut down on the lines of certain uses and some that need PFOS more than others. But I think the government needs to look at the fact that the nomination of PFOS to the Stockholm Convention does not include an exemption for chrome plating and electroplating.
As well, in the U.K. there is a widely available consulting report to their environmental agency that also does not recommend an exemption for chrome plating and electroplating and says that fume hoods and other technology is available to eliminate the use of PFOS or to switch over from PFOS.