ZVO: Discussion on EU chemicals strategy/REACH in Brussels

MEPs, representatives of the Commission and ECHA and industry representatives, including the German Surface Technology Association (ZVO), met under the Chatham House Rules for the expert panel on REACH revision and substance restrictions at the Bavarian EU Representation on October 25, 2023. The event was hosted by the Swabian Chamber of Industry and Commerce (IHK Schwaben) and the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKÖ). The European Union's Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (DG GROW) explained that, in its view, the regulatory processes need to be changed in order to counteract the many and increasing individual assessments. To this end, restriction and authorization should be simplified through generalization in implementation. It became clear that the Commission wants to avoid case-by-case assessments. This should facilitate enforcement in the member states. It should also be easier for SMEs - although this was not plausible. An ECHA representative pointed out that the REACH Helpdesk continues to receive thousands of inquiries about registrations, restrictions and authorizations, even for cases that are already at an advanced stage, such as chromium trioxide. Why this is the case despite ECHA's great efforts to provide information on Q&As and guidelines was not questioned. Rather, it is expected that more generic, general regulatory measures will lead to an improvement. There was clear criticism of the approach and conclusions of the Commission and ECHA from both politicians and industry. With particular reference to the PFAS restriction draft, many participants doubted that the new approaches would be effective. There are fears of a further burden on the economy. The representative of one of the largest family-owned SMEs in Europe vividly illustrated the consequences of the current approach (example PFAS and authorizations) using a specific product. He called on the Commission to set rules that can also be complied with. Another point of criticism - put forward by SMEunited - was the move away from the risk-based approach to the hazard-based approach, whereby, for example, every classification in CLP must immediately have far-reaching consequences in the supply chains.

The REACH revision is not included in the work program until the end of 2024. Nevertheless, it was noted in the discussion that concepts from it will continue to be implemented and developed (generic risk concept, combination of authorization and restriction, essential use, etc.). The admission that MEPs and the Commission want to jointly prepare for the possible requirements of the newly elected Parliament in 2024, including by shaping the REACH revision, was revealing. Overall, many came to the conclusion that neither DG GROW, DG ENV nor ECHA are aware of the consequences of their actions. They see no need to deviate from previous processes. Despite the increasing difficulties, they are apparently of the opinion that "more of the same" would lead to improvement. With regard to PFAS and possibly CrO3 restrictions, for example, it was stated that they are "now in the process", triggered by member states. Neither the DGs nor ECHA as an expert authority questioned the meaningfulness of the restriction proposal. In summary, it can be said that awareness of the problem in the EU executive is still weak. In particular, the far-reaching, indirect consequences of the regulations are not perceived and are sometimes arbitrarily negated. There is no fundamental questioning of the regulatory approaches. There is also no review of the achievement of objectives. However, parliamentarians also need constant, reliable information in order to be able to correctly assess the consequences and necessities. There are still some misunderstandings, which the ZVO will also try to clear up.