This section offers guidance on conducting assessments against the essential use criteria, emphasizing the need for clarity in procedures and decision-making processes within relevant legislation. While the two criteria for essential use should be evaluated separately, they may influence each other in the assessment process. Filtering out non-essential uses based on the cumulative criteria allows for efficient decision-making and simplification. If a use fails to meet one criterion, it can be considered non-essential without further assessment of the remaining criterion, enhancing efficiency. However, to establish a use as essential, both criteria must be met, underscoring the rigorous nature of the assessment process.
ASSESSMENT OF THE USE
The structured assessment involves two key steps:
1. evaluating the necessity of the substance for health, safety;
2. societal functioning, and assessing the availability of alternatives.
Starting with step 2 may sometimes be more efficient. In Step 1, questions focus on whether the substance’s technical function is crucial for the final product and if it meets specified criteria for health, safety, or societal importance. Step 2 involves examining the availability of acceptable alternatives. Depending on the answers, the use may be deemed non-essential, requiring no further assessment, or essential, necessitating the setting of conditions.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
► I. OVERVIEW OF THE ESSENTIAL USE CONCEPT IN THE MONTREAL
► II. WHAT IS THE PARTICULAR USE TO BE ASSESSED?
► IV. CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DECISION ON AN ESSENTIAL USE