The Globally Harmonized System for the Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (The GHS) - Implementation of the GHS in Canada

Workshop, October 15, 2003

Breakout Session - WHMIS

Identification of Issues

The brainstorming in this session was not conducted as a tour de table, as in the other sectors, but was instead accomplished by asking participants to complete a series of Post-it notes. Below are the comments from the participants, as arranged by them on a series of blank flip charts.

Sheet One

• Reclassification of all products (work load);
• Apparent lack of coordination with U.S. agencies;
• Timing: To get before regulations we written or merge it will take time. Only then can we start redoing SDSs,, labels, training, etc.. How can we do it all by 2008?
• Coordination of implementation with the USA and other countries;
• Timing: to introduce new WHMIS regulations in concert with revised WHIMS workplace training materials;
• North American implementation to be coordinated between countries (U.S., Canada, Mexico) as per Canada TDG, WHMIS etc.;
• Coordinated across countries similar time frame;
• Reasonable implementation timeframe;
• What will the phase in look like?
• How will progress on a regulatory development (and G H S issues) be communicated to all interested parties?
• How long will the draft legislation to allow for comments? The usual 30-day period may not be sufficient.
• Time of implementation between each country. Will we end up with actual and later MSDS and labels?
• How will implementation in Canada be coordinated with the U.S. and EU?
• Transborder shipments if U.S. is not on board! By the time Canada implements.
• Can WHMIS and GHS style MSDSs coexist-e.g. our European company may convert earlier. Can we use their SDSs beside our own?
• MSDS -reversal of the sections 2 and 3 - can this be implemented early? (ie policy issue sheet)
• Need to coordinate timing with the USA- product label changes- resolve border (do not keep) - Multi languages?
• Adequate timeline for implementation
• Transition planning: companies will have an extremely hard time implementing four new pieces of legislation at one time.
• How long a phase-in will be given to employers/ suppliers to convert existing labelling to GHS?
• Transition/ phase in to implementation needs to be available and realistic.
• NAFTA/EU coordination of implementation. This is critical
• Sufficient transition period.
• Two systems overlap period
• Implementation schedule must be coordinated with USA.
• Is the GHS going to be implemented as per time?
• Realistic time frame
• Timing: how can we classify a mixture if the suppliers have not yet classified their raw materials into GHS classifications? Example: irritants.
• Coordinated plans and timetables.
• Complications with U.S. being behind Canada with GHS.
• How or what criteria will be used in determining dangerous goods and or limited quantity at a "universal" level?
• Timing to reassess "product" (mixture) impacts:- cutoffs - in classifications.
• Transition time of implementing GHS - need a more definite time period. E.g. must change labelling by ?? Etc.
• When we convert to a new label, what about the stock already in the marketplace?

Sheet Two

• Trade secrets: If Canada retains HMIRC and the EU (or other jurisdiction) moves to full disclosure, how will the issue be resolved, since you will no longer have a trade secret?
• CBI considerations: harmonization of classification and disclosure will undoubtedly be negatively impacted if trade secrecy is not harmonized. (mutual acceptance of trade-secrecy allowances?)
• Review of HMRIC (CBI) process.
• CBI: HMIRC is a time consuming and costly way to address/manage CBI. Serious problems when introducing a product into Canada that has CBI on label on MSDS. If the CBI is not harmonized, it jeopardizes the whole concept of GHS.
• One of the benefits of the GHS is international harmonization - MSDS can be croated [sic] and one version used for all jurisdictions. However, the lack of harmonization of CBI will derail this goal.
• If countries are allowed to design their own CBI system (or retain existing system), as per a document I recall- would cause major difference.
• Country-specific differences in ingredient disclosure- Canada currently shows less than others. Will that be acceptable to them?
• Different countries will have different issues and to implement all together, it is a lot of work and to implement will be a difficult task. How to do that?
• Terminology and implementation must be consistent for all sectors.
• If Pesticides have a risk-based element to communications, why doesn't WHMIS?
• Communication channels.
• What about other environmental information such as VOC content. VOC's are a precursor to smog and as such are a health hazard. Why separate indoor air quality issues from ambient air quality issues?
• My concern is how you put all the country in the same track. We are all in different stages and different systems.
• My concern- small companies in Canada are not very knowledgeable about WHMIS as yet. How they can go to a different system. What about cost?
• Since non-binding, and some areas not standardized, How will we prevent countries diverging, thus "not harmonized"
• Labelling format needs to be standardized across sectors.
• What will be a role of ANSI MSDS (1b section) standard have on GHS MSDSs?
• National leadership and directions
• Regulatory workplace chemicals
• Standardized MSDS.
• Reluctance by sectors to "let go" of current components.
• How harmonized will be the new system within the Canadian agencies (CCCR with WHMIS with PCP products)?
• How harmonized is the Canadian system with the U.S. and EU systems?
• Do Canada have to follow both languages? I guess yes: so it will be double the work that the U.S. will be doing.
• Concerned that there will not be enough time between GHS regulation finalization and implementation deadline
• Cost of converting all MSDSs to new format.
• Cost incurred to make changes: will companies be expected to carry the cost, Ie, for changes to software, training programs, etc.?
• Cost of relabelling thousands of products.
• Cost of transition.
• The formation of mixtures is common. To redo MSDS is easy. To redo a label involves relabelling of inventory, difficult costly how will we deal!
• Cost of redesign of labels, computer programs, etc. to meet new label and MSDS requirements.
• Resources (people and money) needed to recreate thousands of MSDSs and labels
• Label-red verses black border and four diamonds - global companies will require red resulting in increased costs. Why not use just black?
• What is being done to enable small and medium-sized companies to cope with GHS transition?
• WHMIS was designed for workers. Adding hazardous ingredients on labels under GHS, who will it serve only chemist, toxicologist.
• GHS should allow us to do one set of "hazard assignments" suitable for workers, consumers, transport. It doesn't sound like this is happening.
• Harmonization among Canadian (non-TDG) sectors (ie WHMIS-exempt)
• Federal grants for education/training initiatives?
• Comprehensive business impact analysis with full opportunity for industry input.
• What will be the cost of upgrading computer systems for labels, MSDSs, etc.?
• Timing and content of training key.
• What will be the cost of retraining workers who already have WHMIS training?

Sheet 3

• Will the exemption for laboratory supply house still be applicable after GHS is implemented?
• GHS rates 1 (High) to 4 (low), while HMIS and NFPA rates the other way around. How will this be reconciled?
• Why would First Aid be removed from label (GHS) if label is to be used for the workers protection?
• Ingredient disclosure list: can this be eliminated or at least exclude "non hazardous " substances? Format question: Will GHS adopt WHMIS weight averages?
• Options or solutions: standard language. Standard classification.
• Will in plant piping require labelling as is the case with WHMIS controlled substance being piped in automotive assembly plants?
• Competency - keep it simple even at the cost of costing some precision.
• With the new system, there appears to be there will be an increase in the number of pictograms.
• Standardized approach to documentation on MSDS. ie- waste disposal- "discard in accordance to local, federal regs " ... will this be left generic?
• Decision on what GHS will be.
• If the ingredient disclosure list is abandoned, how can we be sure all suppliers are going to classify hazards in the same way?
• Is there an international body which will help with answering questions on classifications to ensure consistent applications?
• Synchronized criteria between regulations. Eg flammability between TDG and WHMIS.
• Exemptions? Will they still exist for small sizes? E.g. 100 ml or less there are less requirements on the label.
• Why is biohazardous exposure not a pictogram? ie- live bacteria.
• How will ingredient disclosure be harmonized across jurisdictions?
• Standard classification for same substance. ie list CAS number/ GHS classification.
• Some of classifications, e.g. carcinogenicity are wide open as to what data is used to assign the class.
• What about wastes? Are they still exempt?
• Will electronic SDS (MSDSs) be acceptable?
• How will four sectors associated with GHS be linked? One regulation/four regulations?
• Impact on related provincial regulation and timing.
• How do we make sure we eliminate the elements specific to WHMIS (IDL, label border, three year review, etc.)
• Prescribed concentration ranges- will they remain or been replaced?
• Three-year review of MSDS. Will it remain a requirement?
• Transition period will be a problem?
• Will classification criteria be harmonized between sectors?
• Multiple hazard classes/categories for same product.
• Consistency of identical product classifications. Process for reconciliation?
• Carcinogenicity: CRR source is ACGIHP IARC. GHS does not list specific sources. Which source is adequate?
• For real harmonization, drop hached border.
• MSDS- requirement to issue every three years-not conducive to "global " MSDS- can this be eliminated?
• Dump the IDC.

Sheet 4

• Classification of mixtures hazard vs risk-based.
• How different are the "bridging principles" from currently applied "professional judgment " practices?
• Where do we get data for classifications, particularly for endpoints which we didn't have in WHMIS?
• Where multiple health effects are applicable, example, acutely toxic and a sensitize our or carcinogen, will multiple symbols be required?
• Putting hazard in context of risk?
• What about language requirements?
• Coordination with provinces/territories
• Concerned: ingredient disclosure list: how would it encompass chemicals/hazards from around the globe?
• Labels: will HMIS [?] NFPA labelling be discontinued? Some still used on [?????]
• Oxidizing liquids and solids now require testing to classify.
• Will extra classification categories simplify or complicate worker understanding?
• Will adding a class for environmental hazards make for less concentration on direct physical/health hazards?
• Symbols vs phrases
• Regional information
• Formulated products need to have raw materials GHS-ized first.
• What mechanism will be used to ensure compliance (i.e. level playing field)?
• Implementation within the proposed timeframe.
• Feedback from industry.
• Use of/modifications to IDL.
• Acute toxicity: remove Category 5.
• What role will the current regulatory agencies play after implementation of GHS?
• GHS requirements are clearly articulated so stakeholders understand impacts and changes.
• Delay in implementation .
• Lack of government focus to complete the system on time.
• Has GHS been discussed in consultation not just with industry but the major labor unions?
• Adequate time for consultation
• Involve SMEs from beginning.
• What about workplace labels and decanting?
• Consistency between systems: labels, etc..
• Harmonization of the review, actually every three years in Canada, of MSDS.
• Biohazardous infectious material: There is no GHS equivalent. How are we to transition for this?

Sheet 5

• Are some of the basic WHMIS guidelines going to remain:1 MSDS or SDS must be readily available. 2. Is hard copy of SDS mandatory if you use CPU copy? 3. Training is it compulsory on a yearly basis?
• Successful training and use of symbols. How to avoid confusion?
• Education of Industry
• Retraining workers.
• Training package.
• What is the best way to deliver worker education in a uniform way:- Internet based computer training? - Prepackaged training delivered by pre-approved resources? And how often? Bi-annually [or] -every three years.
• Timely and purposeful training for workers and consumers.
• Training issues re: WHMIS/MSDS changes. Nine sections to 16 Sections.
• Need to train employees and clients, and to train the trainers.
• Complexity of symbols and signal words as it relates to training of employees.

Sheet 6

• U.S. participation.
• Harmonization with U.S. within the same time frame.
• What will USA/EU GHS/WHMIS training look like?
• Hazard communications:-will there be a criteria for refresher training? Certification process for trainers- credentials?
• Consistency of GHS programs, regulatory implementation with NAFTA partners.
• Timing/buy-in of the U.S.
• Since 50 percent of MSDSs are "imported" with chemical products, need a more flexible three year renewal/revision requirement <chasing this down is non productive>.
• Harmonized CBI for hazardous ingredients within the USA.
• Will there be an advisory board established to keep industry and labour aware of status, progress, and timing on a regular basis?
• Concern: having common GHS symbols across the four sectors involves retraining people in the workplace as well as at home. How?
• Transitioning in harmonization with other countries participating in GHS, particularly U.S. and EU to distribute workload.
• There needs to be a general consensus on implementation of GHS by stakeholders (e.g. government/regulators, industry, labour, and business).
• Synchronization with implementation by U.S..
• Standardized format for NAFTA countries.
• Harmonize Canada and U.S..
• North American harmonization.
• Adoption of GHS by USA.
• USA manufacturer <> Canadian user: coordination.
• Canada implements quicker than USA.
• Will there be additional "Canadian" requirements in addition to GHS?
• Since it is non-binding, we may have numerous variations from country to country- minor variations = big costs for manufacturers.
• I am "confused " with WHMIS DIA and DIB changes: a, cutoffs b, new criteria c, GHS categories. Help.
• Language requirement
• Variations in GHS implementation by different countries. (eg if Canada decides to keep the hatched border on workplace labels, harmonization isn't really achieved with other countries)
• During transition labels might confuse employees/inspectors?
• What are the costs involved with changing to GHS?
• Basic GHS requirements applied by all. Accountable companies.
• Since non-binding will have differences (significant) between countries.
• How does GHS affect the complete and successful launch of WHMIS II or does it encompass it?
• Potential for differences in GHS implementation between USA and Canada. For example, since GHS did not address label formats U.S. could have red border around label content. Canada retains hatched border
• Harmonization of labels/pictograms between sectors?
• How do we make sure if label or MSDS from a foreign country is in compliance?
• Too much information on labels: (" noise" not immediately useful by "workers" ).
• The GHS strategy is clearly communicated to all stakeholders.
• Other sectors not present today which use classification systems, are brought to the discussion: ensure harmonization.

Themes

Participants were asked to suggest themes that could include many of the different issues addressed in the above noted brainstorming session.

1. Training
2. Timing
3. Classification
4. Cost
5. Label Text
6. CBI
7. Harmonization

Group 1's Options and Solutions:

Participants were asked to suggest solutions or options that would address the issues identified during the brainstorming process.

Training

Providers of training:

• Consistency;
• Correct;
• Decisions must be made;
• Needs to be out there before regulations are in force;
• Who needs what and when: relevance;
• Same core training - Harmonized in different countries;
• BUT, details could change by country;
• Need to be knowledgeable;
• Qualifications for trainers - certification/accreditation;

Receptors of training (including end users and employees):

• Regular verses refresher training;
• Documented;
• Competency testing afterwards? (required in Ontario and other provinces)
• A tiered system-- for example, supplier training his people to train the end-user.
• Consistency with OSHA;
• Have a "what's changed" training verses from scratch training.
• For different WHMIS Requirements:
  • Training
  • MSDS
  • Labeling MSDS
  • Emergency response training.
• [harmonization amongst sectors, for example: WHMIS, Consumer chemicals, PMRA, etc.] : This also relates to training - different levels of training based on need.
• Try to catch the people in the colleges, schools, etc before they enter the workforce - need to engage the schools.

Harmonization

• Between NAFTA countries: one MSDS for North America (ideal, in our dreams. Fairly simple); one label - label is even more important to harmonize.
• Or reciprocity agreements as a backup, but as for example with TDG;
• Simplification- consistency across the three countries;
• Reciprocity: U.S. to allow GHS as an alternative;
• Same issues with EU - but start with North America.
• Different regulations between the states - RTK acts in approximately 20 states: can RTK be blended with GHS?

CBI

• Abolish HMIRC;
• A solution would be an international agreement on disclosure limits;
• DSL studies - how to address receiving confidential information from another country;
• Need to look at the health and safety value of the information to be disclosed;
• Consistency between nations - example parts of U.S. say it's confidential, and case closed;
• What is CBI- When is it?

Label text

• Standardized;
• Format same for NAFTA - e.g. Hatch border, order of information;
• Language- one or three?
• True standardized phrases. Example of 50 different ways to say it "irritates your skin"
• Standardized library of terms, etc
• Multiple labels under GHS- issue of size of the label;
• NFPA Canadian first responders (an audience under training) need to be aware of the label text;

Cost

• Who is going to pay?
• A major software upgrade in order to handle MSDS;
• Transition costs; it is not going to be cheap. In the short term:
  • Changes to every product label;
  • Internal training;
  • Changes to MSDS;
  • Label stock;
  • Labor;
• In the long term there should be benefits. BUT there can't be a benefit if Canada is not harmonized with the United States, because different jurisdictions will start putting other specialty Requirements on.
• Big concern about deviation from the norm.
• Little is harmonized at the moment;
• Need to do a cost-benefit up front: this would include impact analysis looking at the level of complexity and how you phase it in. This analysis would help to develop the implementation plan. Requires adequate industry consultation. Need to know exactly what will happen.

Classification

• CAS numbers (whether CAS or something else) - be nice to see those classified in one way. - no standardization from one company to another or across governments;
• Lower cutoffs will impact some products;
• [concentration ranges- how will these be addressed in the future?]
• classification of biological hazards not under GHS- What do we do with those?
• Need a table of precedents - what label/symbol you need if more than one symbol is needed?
• Formulated products after the pure substances- need a phase in of classification;

Timing

• Synchronization with the United States;
• Communicate government's hard timelines;
• Sooner for draft regulations the better, then we can assess our impacts;
• Transition period;
• How will provincial laws be synchronized with federal?
• Does the current time frame allow for adequate consultation? Should be realistic;
• (TDG had an overlap of 18 months between the new and the old regulations): flexible time lines;
• Maybe MSDS with a six month phase in; but labels with a 12 month phase in;
• Inspectors must be coordinated

Group 2's Options and Solutions:

Training

• Industry Association;
• Health Canada;
• Who is the audience?
• BC manual;
• Many different audiences;
• Was labor approached;
• Labor initiated;
• Labor training as well;
• Train the trainers;
• Training not part of GHS;
• Change content;
• Details;
• Federal grants to develop training programs;
• On-line training;
• Cost/timing;
• The certification process;
• Targeted audiences: SMEs? Give special attention to employers and labor;
• Harmonize training between sectors in Canada;
• Media awareness-opportunity;
• CCOHS developed training.

Timing

• Regulation + WHMIS- needs milestones provided by Health Canada;
• Phase in 18 to 24 months;
• Paint (sic) of organization or 18 to 24 months;
• CCCR model;
• Build in transition period to use up current stock;
• Harmonizing phase in;
• Staggered schedule- WHMIS first;
• Don't want to do it all four times;
• Drop dead date;
• Adequate time. ;
• Harmonization across countries within companies;
• Health Canada has to coordinate;
• If U.S. wants to sell, then they will have to do that!

Classification

• Include need to adopt specific classification;
• Need internationally accepted standards or methods;
• Should use OECD;
• Reclassification?
• Options to address limitations;
• CCOHS - doing classifications for now would be like international forum;
• Should there be forced testing;
• End points determination;
• Model data?
• What completely revamped DZA to new system;
• Why number/alpha reference?
• Signal word;
• Words a mess/numbers easier;
• Symbols best;
• classification has to be Harmonized;
• No IDL, no border; No DRA/etc
• harmonize on use of professional or scientific judgment.

Cost

• Reprogramming for MSDS and Labeling;
• Timing/harmonization within Canada;
• Three year period- costly;
• How important to Canada?
• Benefits have to be sold;
• Cost/benefits- why/what is going to be better?
• Prove it to me!!
• For need and point to start process - for budget;
• Can we opt out of certain conditions to reduce cost - for example two colors on labels?
• Must be Harmonized;
• Cost review PCP;
• Data base for MSDSs;
• Want to use GHS for MSDSs now!!

Label Text

• Label language in label of country;
• Standardized phrases translated -library;
• Across NAFTA?
• Global common languages of trade;
• Free government library;
• No Hatched border;
• All GHS tax together?
• Hatched border remaining would be confusing- no recommendation;
• You " may " verses you " must ";
• Remove Hatched border before GHS;

CBI

• Not the U.S. No pre approval;
• HMIRC not to supersede GHS;
• Universal registration;
• Eliminating HMIRC is a benefit;
• If EU full disclosure, how in Canada?;
• If eliminate three year review, then HMIRC have to adjust;
• Five do we need CBI?
• Marketing advantage;
• Three year review of costs;
• Leave just as new information;
• Date critical?
• Have to update non-CPR products because of customer;
• Three year rule doesn't do anything;
• Three year rule administered if only;
• Maybe longer?
• Forces employers to update MSDSs;
• Uniform treatment of CBI and non-CBI.

Harmonization

• Between provinces and federal government;
• Will MOUs change?
• Should MOUs Change?
• Harmonization interprovincial for PCP as well;
• Education interprovincial as well;
• Must have 100% between a major trade partners;
• Sectors?
• More compliance enforcement;
• Continue multi sector groups after GHS implementation ;
• GHS will change over time- need a group to ensure sectors remain Harmonized