Environment committee  The general timelines still apply. The requirement is to have a proposed instrument within 24 months and a finalized instrument in place in 18 months, and that's to bring it to what is determined to be the level of quantification--in other words, the lowest detectable level possi

Environment committee  Very briefly, it is different from banning because some substances combine with other substances. The original concept was meant to get at those things that were not released intentionally into the environment but were created by a mixing of other things. It's focused on eliminat

Environment committee  It's fairly significant, because it's a problem with the U.S. information, and that's where a lot of the manufacturing and assessment is. With smaller jurisdictions, like Australia, we already have a complementary assessment approach. But it is a problem with the U.S. legislation

Environment committee  I'll make it fast because peer review was already handled. Risk management, proportional risk versus actual risk is a question under consideration. It involves determining what the actual risk is and what the best tool is. So we consider a range of tools that we can use to contr

Environment committee  Precisely, that information is needed as a tool to control risk management in an appropriate way.

Environment committee  That is why assessments require more time. In fact, we must look at how the chemical product is used and what impact it will have on health or the ecosystem. So, it is not just a matter of scientific knowledge; it is also a question of use or the lack of control, in other words,