Countdown to Reach

The long-running saga of REACH-the regime for registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals first proposed by the European Commission in 2002-may be nearing a conclusion. And that possibility, or the possibility that the saga will continue, once again has put the issue at the center of industry debate.

Both a series of votes by committees in the European Parliament and a massive compromise paper drafted by the British government, which currently presides over the European Union, were high on the list of considerations in Nice, France, earlier this month at what was dubbed the European convention of the global chemical industry.

The five-day program included back-to-back meetings of the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC), the London-based Society of Chemical Industry, and the International Council of Chemical Associations. And all of the meetings touched on chemical regulation and the looming REACH program. European companies are worrying how they will comply with whatever compromise results, and chemical producers elsewhere are wondering how REACH will fit in with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and affect them.

The industry was particularly on alert because, the week before the meetings, three parliament committees-10 have the right to weigh in on REACH formulation-had voted on various amendments to the EC's proposals. The day after the chemical industry meetings wrapped up, the last committee to weigh in-the environment committee-was scheduled to vote on amendments.

But by the end of the voting process, the only thing clear was that the situation was still unclear. There was no agreement among the committees, which means that at the parliament's plenary session, which runs Nov. 1417, members will have to thrash out its final version of REACH to send back to the EC for consideration.

Meanwhile, the British government has proposed an amended text of the regulations that tries to take into account the plethora of risk assessments, comments, and protests from industry and environmental activists alike.

David Lord Sainsbury, Britain's minister of science and innovation, told the CEFIC delegates that the British proposal will not completely please anyone. He warned, for example, that the final draft will have aspects of regulating both by volume-a criterion fiercely contested by industry-and by risk, dismissed as inadequate by environmental activists.

He reflected a growing impatience on the part of European ministers with the lengthy process. The amended text does not reflect our preferred option on every issue, he said. But holding the EU presidency, our job is now to get agreement, to get this moving. We have debated REACH for long enough. Now is the time for decision. In fact, the U.K. government intends to have approval from the EU's Council of Ministers by the end of the year, when the U.K.'s term expires.

Up to the final voting, however, lobbyists from industry and the environmental community are continuing efforts to modify REACH to their separate satisfaction.

For example, the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) will continue seeking a reduction in the animal testing required for substances produced in amounts of 1–100 metric tons per year-more than 20,000 of the approximately 30,000 chemicals REACH potentially could affect. BUAV was particularly pleased that the parliament's environment committee indicated support for its stand.

Meanwhile, Mathieu Vrijsen, president of DuPont Europe, Middle East, and Africa, and chairman of CEFIC's product stewardship efforts, said: We see encouraging signs in the parliament that there is a growing understanding and acceptance of including a prioritized risk-based approach. We think this is essential.

As to the U.K. compromise proposal, Vrijsen added: What we fear is that, if the U.K. tries to include everything, down to the lowest common denominator, then everyone will be unhappy. We hope that what we see in the parliament votes will influence the council.

Some countries consider REACH to be contrary to WTO rules, Vrijsen conceded. Our legal people have been looking into this, and at CEFIC we have worked with the American Chemistry Council and the Japanese Chemical Industry Association regarding their input. But in Europe, we see REACH as a reality. We don't want to fight it. We want to get a system that works. Only then, he said, would be the right time to look at WTO legality.

Not every party is so conciliatory. Following the environment committee vote, the European Action Alliance (EAA) of small to medium-sized companies, known as SMEs, called on its members to further mobilize their Europe-wide Objection! campaign.

EAA was established early this year by German companies that believed that major industry lobbying groups such as CEFIC and UNICE, the European employers' federation, were failing to argue their needs. The goal of REACH to register and gain authorization for smaller volume specialty chemicals-one of the mainstays for SMEs-will be hard on SMEs.

The alliance took its protest-dubbed Einspruch, the German word for objection-to Berlin's Brandenburg Gate in April to highlight the impact that REACH would have on the German chemical industry. Some protesters at the event insisted that REACH would cost 1 million jobs in Germany alone.

Since then, the alliance has broadened into a Europe-wide group, with members from the U.K., the Czech Republic, Belgium, Austria, and Spain. The politicians in Brussels are no longer in any position to ignore the fact that SMEs in the whole of Europe are vehemently defending themselves against the threat to their existence posed by REACH, said Erhardt Fiebiger, spokesman for the alliance.

Meanwhile, in the other corner, the European Environmental Bureau is continuing its campaign for mandatory phaseout of high-concern chemicals, and for full responsibility for testing and registration assigned to producers of chemicals. Such responsibility should not rest on downstream users, public authorities, and the public, the group argues.

While the parliament is discussing REACH, the Council of Ministers has a working group coordinating the discussions and efforts from the EU's various national governments. There have been some very controversial discussions, says Thomas Jostmann, CEFIC executive director with responsibility for REACH.

Now being discussed is the amended proposal submitted by the British government. They are the first to put a piece of paper on the table summarizing all the discussion and bringing it all together, Jostmann says. At CEFIC, we fear that the British government's compromise doesn't consider all the different aspects.

The target date everyone seems to be shooting for is the end of the year, although it's difficult to tell whether the council and the parliament can come to a common position by then. We don't think it's likely, Jostmann says. We think there will be more discussion, probably with a second reading, in the beginning of next year. If so, then talks can be wrapped up and REACH finalized in the spring of 2007. But as with everything about REACH so far, Jostmann and others involved aren't holding their breath.