In the past few years, we’ve shared observations regarding several cases of enforcement at dry cleaners. The basis for enforcement is the Tetrachloroethylene Regulations, or PERC Regulations (SOR/2003-79). This is a federal (rather than provincial) regulation. It is administered under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
While there is little disputing the potential health and environmental impacts that can result from mishandling PERC or other chlorinated solvents, it’s the regulatory application that becomes more challenging and, at times, controversial.
What is getting attention now is the section of the PERC regulations specifically addressing compliance information for importers, recyclers, and sellers. In section 5, “Specific Responsibilities of Sellers,” the regulations spell out the requirements of sellers of tetrachloroethylene, or PERC.
Requirements for Sellers of PERC
The responsibilities of the sellers of PERC include ensuring that their customers, the owners and operators of dry cleaners operations, are meeting specific requirements including daily dry-cleaning practices and use of equipment to recover PERC.
Section 5 does not provide specific instructions regarding how the sellers can ensure that the dry cleaners are compliant. The regulations state, “If you are a seller, you may not sell (their emphasis) PERC to owners and/or operators of a dry cleaning machine unless…” What follows are the specific requirements of the owner/operators.
In a recent news story, it is alleged that Green for Life (GFL) supplied PERC to dry cleaning plants and failed to ensure that the dry cleaners were properly equipped to handle PERC.
According to an article on DurhamRegional.com, “The Company (GFL), along with president and CEO Patrick Dovigi, vice-president of sales and marketing John Petlichkovski, and Louie Servos, identified as a GFL employee, each face 16 charges under the Environmental Protection Act, according to the indictment.”
GFL is planning on “vigorously” defending the charges.
This case, which returns to court today, April 21st, should be interesting to watch, as it relates to the potential impact on sellers of PERC. Dry cleaning, in general, seems to be on a downward trend (according to IBIS World). This is based on changing consumer trends to more casual clothes, which reduces the need for dry-cleaning services.
Chlorinated Solvents and Legacy Sites
While dry cleaning may be trending downward, there is no shortage of legacy sites where PERC or other chlorinated chemicals may remain in the subsurface. This, combined with increased concerns about vapour intrusion, will likely mean that environmental issues at these historical sites will continue to get attention.
As we have observed over the years, regulations are rarely static. Could this case lead to changes in how Environment and Climate Change Canada regulates dry cleaners and their suppliers? Perhaps some middle-ground approach, such as a certificate of compliance held by dry cleaners that must be presented to the suppliers, could provide some equity in these scenarios.
As we said, we’ll watch to see what develops as the case moves forward.
Do you need help in understanding a soil or groundwater issue? Has an investigation or remediation lingered a bit too long? If so, ask about our peer review services. Over the past (nearly) 30 years, we have helped clients around the world get their environmental issues back on track with a fresh perspective in a peer review.
Please feel free to contact me (cpare@dragun.com) with any questions you may have at 519-979-7300, ext 114.