... REACH - Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals ...

... Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC ...

... concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC ...

... (21) Although the information yielded on substances through evaluation should be used in the first place by manufacturers and importers to manage the risks related to their substances, it may also be used to initiate the authorisation or restrictions procedures under this Regulation or risk management procedures under other Community legislation. Therefore it should be ensured that this information is available to the competent authorities and may be used by them for the purpose of such procedures. ...

... (22) The authorisation provisions should ensure the good functioning of the internal market while assuring that the risks from substances of very high concern are properly controlled. Authorisations for the placing on the market and use should be granted by the Commission only if the risks arising from their use are adequately controlled, where this is possible, or the use can be justified for socio-economic reasons and no suitable alternatives are available, which are economically and technically viable. ...

... (32) A chemical safety assessment should not need to be performed for substances in preparations in certain very small concentrations which are considered as not giving rise to concern. Substances in preparations in such low concentrations should also be exempt from authorisation. These provisions should apply equally to preparations that are solid mixtures of substances until a specific shape is given to such a preparation that transforms it into an article. ...

... (66) The Agency should also be empowered to require further information from manufacturers, importers or downstream users on substances suspected of posing a risk to human health or the environment, including by reason of their presence on the internal market in high volumes, on the basis of evaluations performed. Based on the criteria for prioritising substances developed by the Agency in cooperation with the Member States a Community rolling action plan for substance evaluation should be established, relying on Member State competent authorities to evaluate substances included therein. If a risk equivalent to the level of concern arising from the use of substances subject to authorisation arises from the use of isolated intermediates on site, the competent authorities of the Member States should also be allowed to require further information, when justified. ...

... (68) Evaluation may lead to the conclusion that action should be taken under the restriction or authorisation procedures or that risk management action should be considered in the framework of other appropriate legislation. Information on the progress of evaluation proceedings should therefore be made public. ...

... (69) To ensure a sufficiently high level of protection for human health, including having regard to relevant human population groups and possibly to certain vulnerable sub-populations, and the environment, substances of very high concern should, in accordance with the precautionary principle, be subject to careful attention. Authorisation should be granted where natural or legal persons applying for an authorisation demonstrate to the granting authority that the risks to human health and the environment arising from the use of the substance are adequately controlled. Otherwise, uses may still be authorised if it can be shown that the socio-economic benefits from the use of the substance outweigh the risks connected with its use and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies that are economically and technically viable. Taking into account the good functioning of the internal market it is appropriate that the Commission should be the granting authority. ...

... (69) To ensure a sufficiently high level of protection for human health, including having regard to relevant human population groups and possibly to certain vulnerable sub-populations, and the environment, substances of very high concern should, in accordance with the precautionary principle, be subject to careful attention. Authorisation should be granted where natural or legal persons applying for an authorisation demonstrate to the granting authority that the risks to human health and the environment arising from the use of the substance are adequately controlled. Otherwise, uses may still be authorised if it can be shown that the socio-economic benefits from the use of the substance outweigh the risks connected with its use and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies that are economically and technically viable. Taking into account the good functioning of the internal market it is appropriate that the Commission should be the granting authority. ...

... (70) Adverse effects on human health and the environment from substances of very high concern should be prevented through the application of appropriate risk management measures to ensure that any risks from the uses of a substance are adequately controlled, and with a view to progressively substituting these substances with a suitable safer substance. Risk management measures should be applied to ensure, when substances are manufactured, placed on the market and used, that exposure to these substances including discharges, emissions and losses, throughout the whole life-cycle is below the threshold level beyond which adverse effects may occur. For any substance for which authorisation has been granted, and for any other substance for which it is not possible to establish a safe level of exposure, measures should always be taken to minimise, as far as technically and practically possible, exposure and emissions with a view to minimising the likelihood of adverse effects. Measures to ensure adequate control should be identified in any Chemical Safety Report. These measures should be applied and, where appropriate, recommended to other actors down the supply chain. ...

... (72) To support the aim of eventual replacement of substances of very high concern by suitable alternative substances or technologies, all applicants for authorisation should provide an analysis of alternatives considering their risks and the technical and economic feasibility of substitution, including information on any research and development the applicant is undertaking or intends to undertake. Furthermore, authorisations should be subject to time-limited review whose periods would be determined on a case-by-case basis and normally be subject to conditions, including monitoring. ...

... (77) In view of workability and practicality considerations, both as regards natural or legal persons, who have to prepare application files and take appropriate risk management measures, and as regards the authorities, who have to process authorisation applications, only a limited number of substances should be subjected to the authorisation procedure at the same time and realistic deadlines should be set for applications, while allowing certain uses to be exempted. Substances identified as meeting the criteria for authorisation should be included in a candidate list for eventual inclusion in the authorisation procedure. Within this list, substances on the Agency's work programme should be clearly identified. ...

... (77) In view of workability and practicality considerations, both as regards natural or legal persons, who have to prepare application files and take appropriate risk management measures, and as regards the authorities, who have to process authorisation applications, only a limited number of substances should be subjected to the authorisation procedure at the same time and realistic deadlines should be set for applications, while allowing certain uses to be exempted. Substances identified as meeting the criteria for authorisation should be included in a candidate list for eventual inclusion in the authorisation procedure. Within this list, substances on the Agency's work programme should be clearly identified. ...

... (77) In view of workability and practicality considerations, both as regards natural or legal persons, who have to prepare application files and take appropriate risk management measures, and as regards the authorities, who have to process authorisation applications, only a limited number of substances should be subjected to the authorisation procedure at the same time and realistic deadlines should be set for applications, while allowing certain uses to be exempted. Substances identified as meeting the criteria for authorisation should be included in a candidate list for eventual inclusion in the authorisation procedure. Within this list, substances on the Agency's work programme should be clearly identified. ...

... (77) In view of workability and practicality considerations, both as regards natural or legal persons, who have to prepare application files and take appropriate risk management measures, and as regards the authorities, who have to process authorisation applications, only a limited number of substances should be subjected to the authorisation procedure at the same time and realistic deadlines should be set for applications, while allowing certain uses to be exempted. Substances identified as meeting the criteria for authorisation should be included in a candidate list for eventual inclusion in the authorisation procedure. Within this list, substances on the Agency's work programme should be clearly identified. ...

... (78) The Agency should provide advice on the prioritisation of substances to be made subject to the authorisation procedure, to ensure that decisions reflect the needs of society as well as scientific knowledge and developments. ...

... (79) A total ban on a substance would mean that none of its uses could be authorised. It would therefore be pointless to allow the submission of applications for authorisation. In such cases the substance should be removed from the list of substances for which applications can be submitted and added to the list of restricted substances. ...

... (80) The proper interaction between the provisions on authorisation and restriction should be ensured in order to preserve the efficient functioning of the internal market and the protection of human health, safety and the environment. Restrictions that exist when the substance in question is added to the list of substances for which applications for authorisation can be submitted, should be maintained for that substance. The Agency should consider whether the risk from substances in articles is adequately controlled and, if it is not, prepare a dossier in relation to introduction of further restrictions for substances for which the use requires authorisation. ...

... (80) The proper interaction between the provisions on authorisation and restriction should be ensured in order to preserve the efficient functioning of the internal market and the protection of human health, safety and the environment. Restrictions that exist when the substance in question is added to the list of substances for which applications for authorisation can be submitted, should be maintained for that substance. The Agency should consider whether the risk from substances in articles is adequately controlled and, if it is not, prepare a dossier in relation to introduction of further restrictions for substances for which the use requires authorisation. ...

... (80) The proper interaction between the provisions on authorisation and restriction should be ensured in order to preserve the efficient functioning of the internal market and the protection of human health, safety and the environment. Restrictions that exist when the substance in question is added to the list of substances for which applications for authorisation can be submitted, should be maintained for that substance. The Agency should consider whether the risk from substances in articles is adequately controlled and, if it is not, prepare a dossier in relation to introduction of further restrictions for substances for which the use requires authorisation. ...

... (81) In order to provide a harmonised approach to the authorisation of the uses of particular substances, the Agency should issue opinions on the risks arising from those uses, including whether or not the substance is adequately controlled and on any socio-economic analysis submitted to it by third parties. These opinions should be taken into account by the Commission when considering whether or not to grant an authorisation. ...

... (81) In order to provide a harmonised approach to the authorisation of the uses of particular substances, the Agency should issue opinions on the risks arising from those uses, including whether or not the substance is adequately controlled and on any socio-economic analysis submitted to it by third parties. These opinions should be taken into account by the Commission when considering whether or not to grant an authorisation. ...

... (82) To allow effective monitoring and enforcement of the authorisation requirement, downstream users benefiting from an authorisation granted to their supplier should inform the Agency of their use of the substance. ...

... (82) To allow effective monitoring and enforcement of the authorisation requirement, downstream users benefiting from an authorisation granted to their supplier should inform the Agency of their use of the substance. ...

... (111) It is important to avoid confusion between the mission of the Agency and the respective missions of the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) established by Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency ⁽¹⁴⁾, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) established by Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety ⁽¹⁵⁾ and the Advisory Committee on Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work set up by the Council Decision of 22 July 2003 ⁽¹⁶⁾. Consequently, the Agency should establish rules of procedure where cooperation with the EFSA or the Advisory Committee on Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work is necessary. This Regulation should otherwise be without prejudice to the competence conferred on the EMEA, the EFSA and the Advisory Committee on Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work by Community legislation. ...

... (b) once an authorisation has been granted or refused; ...

... (b) if the substance is subject to authorisation and details of any authorisation granted or denied under Title VII in this supply chain; ...

... (b) if the substance is subject to authorisation and details of any authorisation granted or denied under Title VII in this supply chain; ...

... (b) once an authorisation has been granted or refused; ...

... Aim of authorisation and considerations for substitution ...

... (b) the use(s) of that substance on its own or in a preparation or the incorporation of the substance into an article for which the substance is placed on the market or for which he uses the substance himself has been exempted from the authorisation requirement in Annex XIV itself in accordance with Article 58(2); or ...

... (d) the date referred to in Article 58(1)(c)(i) has been reached and he made an application 18 months before that date but a decision on the application for authorisation has not yet been taken; or ...

... (e) in cases where the substance is placed on the market, authorisation for that use has been granted to his immediate downstream user. ...

... 2. A downstream user may use a substance meeting the criteria set out in paragraph 1 provided that the use is in accordance with the conditions of an authorisation granted to an actor up his supply chain for that use. ...

... 5. In the case of substances that are subject to authorisation only because they meet the criteria in Article 57(a), (b) or (c) or because they are identified in accordance with Article 57(f) only because of hazards to human health, paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall not apply to the following uses: ...

... (i) the date(s) from which the placing on the market and the use of the substance shall be prohibited unless an authorisation is granted (hereinafter referred to as the sunset date) which should take into account, where appropriate, the production cycle specified for that use; ...

... (ii) a date or dates at least 18 months before the sunset date(s) by which applications must be received if the applicant wishes to continue to use the substance or place it on the market for certain uses after the sunset date(s); these continued uses shall be allowed after the sunset date until a decision on the application for authorisation is taken; ...

... (e) uses or categories of uses exempted from the authorisation requirement, if any, and conditions for such exemptions, if any. ...

... 2. Uses or categories of uses may be exempted from the authorisation requirement provided that, on the basis of the existing specific Community legislation imposing minimum requirements relating to the protection of human health or the environment for the use of the substance, the risk is properly controlled. In the establishment of such exemptions, account shall be taken, in particular, of the proportionality of risk to human health and the environment related to the nature of the substance, such as where the risk is modified by the physical form. ...

... 4. Before the Agency sends its recommendation to the Commission it shall make it publicly available on its website, clearly indicating the date of publication, taking into account Articles 118 and 119 on access to information. The Agency shall invite all interested parties to submit comments within three months of the date of publication, in particular on uses which should be exempt from the authorisation requirement. ...

... 2. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, an authorisation shall be granted if the risk to human health or the environment from the use of a substance arising from the intrinsic properties specified in Annex XIV is adequately controlled in accordance with Section 6.4 of Annex I and as documented in the applicant's chemical safety report, taking into account the opinion of the Committee for Risk Assessment referred to in Article 64(4)(a). When granting the authorisation, and in any conditions imposed therein, the Commission shall take into account all discharges, emissions and losses, including risks arising from diffuse or dispersive uses, known at the time of the decision. ...

... 2. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, an authorisation shall be granted if the risk to human health or the environment from the use of a substance arising from the intrinsic properties specified in Annex XIV is adequately controlled in accordance with Section 6.4 of Annex I and as documented in the applicant's chemical safety report, taking into account the opinion of the Committee for Risk Assessment referred to in Article 64(4)(a). When granting the authorisation, and in any conditions imposed therein, the Commission shall take into account all discharges, emissions and losses, including risks arising from diffuse or dispersive uses, known at the time of the decision. ...

... 4. If an authorisation cannot be granted under paragraph 2 or for substances listed in paragraph 3, an authorisation may only be granted if it is shown that socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health or the environment arising from the use of the substance and if there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies. This decision shall be taken after consideration of all of the following elements and taking into account the opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment and the Committee for Socio-economic Analysis referred to in Article 64(4)(a) and (b): ...

... 4. If an authorisation cannot be granted under paragraph 2 or for substances listed in paragraph 3, an authorisation may only be granted if it is shown that socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health or the environment arising from the use of the substance and if there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies. This decision shall be taken after consideration of all of the following elements and taking into account the opinions of the Committee for Risk Assessment and the Committee for Socio-economic Analysis referred to in Article 64(4)(a) and (b): ...

... 7. An authorisation shall be granted only if the application is made in conformity with the requirements of Article 62. ...

... 8. Authorisations shall be subject to a time-limited review without prejudice to any decision on a future review period and shall normally be subject to conditions, including monitoring. The duration of the time-limited review for any authorisation shall be determined on a case-by-case basis taking into account all relevant information including the elements listed in paragraph 4(a) to (d), as appropriate. ...

... 9. The authorisation shall specify: ...

... (a) the person(s) to whom the authorisation is granted; ...

... (c) the use(s) for which the authorisation is granted; ...

... (d) any conditions under which the authorisation is granted; ...

... 10. Notwithstanding any conditions of an authorisation, the holder shall ensure that the exposure is reduced to as low a level as is technically and practically possible. ...

... 1. Authorisations granted in accordance with Article 60 shall be regarded as valid until the Commission decides to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of a review, provided that the holder of the authorisation submits a review report at least 18 months before the expiry of the time-limited review period. Rather than re-submitting all elements of the original application for the current authorisation, the holder of an authorisation may submit only the number of the current authorisation, subject to the second, third and fourth subparagraphs. ...

... 1. Authorisations granted in accordance with Article 60 shall be regarded as valid until the Commission decides to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of a review, provided that the holder of the authorisation submits a review report at least 18 months before the expiry of the time-limited review period. Rather than re-submitting all elements of the original application for the current authorisation, the holder of an authorisation may submit only the number of the current authorisation, subject to the second, third and fourth subparagraphs. ...

... 1. Authorisations granted in accordance with Article 60 shall be regarded as valid until the Commission decides to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of a review, provided that the holder of the authorisation submits a review report at least 18 months before the expiry of the time-limited review period. Rather than re-submitting all elements of the original application for the current authorisation, the holder of an authorisation may submit only the number of the current authorisation, subject to the second, third and fourth subparagraphs. ...

... 1. Authorisations granted in accordance with Article 60 shall be regarded as valid until the Commission decides to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of a review, provided that the holder of the authorisation submits a review report at least 18 months before the expiry of the time-limited review period. Rather than re-submitting all elements of the original application for the current authorisation, the holder of an authorisation may submit only the number of the current authorisation, subject to the second, third and fourth subparagraphs. ...

... 1. Authorisations granted in accordance with Article 60 shall be regarded as valid until the Commission decides to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of a review, provided that the holder of the authorisation submits a review report at least 18 months before the expiry of the time-limited review period. Rather than re-submitting all elements of the original application for the current authorisation, the holder of an authorisation may submit only the number of the current authorisation, subject to the second, third and fourth subparagraphs. ...

... A holder of an authorisation granted in accordance with Article 60 shall submit an update of the analysis of alternatives referred to in Article 62(4)(e), including information about any relevant research and development activities by the applicant, if appropriate, and any substitution plan submitted under Article 62(4)(f). If the update of the analysis of alternatives shows that there is a suitable alternative available taking into account the elements in Article 60(5), he shall submit a substitution plan, including a timetable for proposed actions by the applicant. If the holder cannot demonstrate that the risk is adequately controlled, he shall also submit an update of the socio-economic analysis contained in the original application. ...

... When any updated information is submitted in accordance with this paragraph, any decision to amend or withdraw the authorisation in the context of the review shall be taken in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 64 applied mutatis mutandis. ...

... (a) the circumstances of the original authorisation have changed so as to affect the risk to human health or the environment, or the socio-economic impact; or ...

... The Commission shall set a reasonable deadline by which the holder(s) of the authorisation may submit further information necessary for the review and indicate by when it will take a decision in accordance with Article 64. ...

... 3. In its review decision the Commission may, if circumstances have changed and taking into account the principle of proportionality, amend or withdraw the authorisation, if under the changed circumstances it would not have been granted or if suitable alternatives in accordance with Article 60(5) become available. In the latter case the Commission shall require the holder of the authorisation to present a substitution plan if he has not already done so as part of his application or update. ...

... 3. In its review decision the Commission may, if circumstances have changed and taking into account the principle of proportionality, amend or withdraw the authorisation, if under the changed circumstances it would not have been granted or if suitable alternatives in accordance with Article 60(5) become available. In the latter case the Commission shall require the holder of the authorisation to present a substitution plan if he has not already done so as part of his application or update. ...

... In cases where there is a serious and immediate risk for human health or the environment, the Commission may suspend the authorisation pending the review, taking into account the principle of proportionality. ...

... 6. If a use of a substance is subsequently prohibited or otherwise restricted in Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on persistent organic pollutants ⁽⁵¹⁾, the Commission shall withdraw the authorisation for that use. ...

... 1. An application for an authorisation shall be made to the Agency. ...

... 2. Applications for authorisation may be made by the manufacturer(s), importer(s) and/or downstream user(s) of the substance. Applications may be made by one or several persons. ...

... 4. An application for authorisation shall include the following information: ...

... (c) a request for authorisation, specifying for which use(s) the authorisation is sought and covering the use of the substance in preparations and/or the incorporation of the substance in articles, where this is relevant; ...

... (c) a request for authorisation, specifying for which use(s) the authorisation is sought and covering the use of the substance in preparations and/or the incorporation of the substance in articles, where this is relevant; ...

... 7. An application for an authorisation shall be accompanied by the fee required in accordance with Title IX. ...

... Subsequent applications for authorisation ...

... 2. If an authorisation has been granted for a use of a substance, a subsequent applicant may refer to the appropriate parts of the previous application submitted in accordance with Article 62(4)(d), (e) and (f) and (5)(a), provided that the subsequent applicant has permission from the holder of the authorisation to refer to these parts of the application. ...

... 2. If an authorisation has been granted for a use of a substance, a subsequent applicant may refer to the appropriate parts of the previous application submitted in accordance with Article 62(4)(d), (e) and (f) and (5)(a), provided that the subsequent applicant has permission from the holder of the authorisation to refer to these parts of the application. ...

... Procedure for authorisation decisions ...

... 8. The Commission shall prepare a draft authorisation decision within three months of receipt of the opinions from the Agency. A final decision granting or refusing the authorisation shall be taken in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 133(3). ...

... 8. The Commission shall prepare a draft authorisation decision within three months of receipt of the opinions from the Agency. A final decision granting or refusing the authorisation shall be taken in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 133(3). ...

... 9. Summaries of the Commission decisions, including the authorisation number and the reasons for the decision, in particular where suitable alternatives exist, shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union and shall be made publicly available in a database established and kept up to date by the Agency. ...

... Holders of an authorisation, as well as downstream users referred to in Article 56(2) including the substances in a preparation, shall include the authorisation number on the label before they place the substance or a preparation containing the substance on the market for an authorised use without prejudice to Directive 67/548/EEC and Directive 1999/45/EC. This shall be done without delay once the authorisation number has been made publicly available in accordance with Article 64(9). ...

... Holders of an authorisation, as well as downstream users referred to in Article 56(2) including the substances in a preparation, shall include the authorisation number on the label before they place the substance or a preparation containing the substance on the market for an authorised use without prejudice to Directive 67/548/EEC and Directive 1999/45/EC. This shall be done without delay once the authorisation number has been made publicly available in accordance with Article 64(9). ...

... Holders of an authorisation, as well as downstream users referred to in Article 56(2) including the substances in a preparation, shall include the authorisation number on the label before they place the substance or a preparation containing the substance on the market for an authorised use without prejudice to Directive 67/548/EEC and Directive 1999/45/EC. This shall be done without delay once the authorisation number has been made publicly available in accordance with Article 64(9). ...

... (c) a Committee for Risk Assessment, which shall be responsible for preparing the opinion of the Agency on evaluations, applications for authorisation, proposals for restrictions and proposals for classification and labelling under Title XI and any other questions that arise from the operation of this Regulation relating to risks to human health or the environment; ...

... (d) a Committee for Socio-economic Analysis, which shall be responsible for preparing the opinion of the Agency on applications for authorisation, proposals for restrictions, and any other questions that arise from the operation of this Regulation relating to the socio-economic impact of possible legislative action on substances; ...

... (e) a Member State Committee, which shall be responsible for resolving potential divergences of opinions on draft decisions proposed by the Agency or the Member States under Title VI and proposals for identification of substances of very high concern to be subjected to the authorisation procedure under Title VII; ...

... (a) a draft report covering the activities of the Agency in the previous year, including information about the number of registration dossiers received, the number of substances evaluated, the number of applications for authorisation received, the number of proposals for restriction received by the Agency and opined upon, the time taken for completion of the associated procedures, and the substances authorised, dossiers rejected, substances restricted; complaints received and the action taken; an overview of the activities of the Forum; ...

... 5.1.2. Where a manufacturer, importer or downstream user applies for an application for an authorisation for a specific use, exposure scenarios need only be developed for that use and the subsequent life-cycle steps. ...

... LIST OF SUBSTANCES SUBJECT TO AUTHORISATION ...

... This Annex outlines the information that may be addressed by those submitting a socio-economic analysis (SEA) with an application for authorisation, as specified in Article 62(5)(a), or in connection with a proposed restriction, as specified in Article 69(6)(b). ...

... However, the level of detail and scope of the SEA, or contributions to them, shall be the responsibility of the applicant for authorisation, or, in the case of a proposed restriction, the interested party. The information provided can address the socio-economic impacts at any level. ...

... - impact of a granted or refused authorisation on the applicant(s), or, in the case of a proposed restriction, the impact on industry (e.g. manufacturers and importers). The impact on all other actors in the supply chain, downstream users and associated businesses in terms of commercial consequences such as impact on investment, research and development, innovation, one-off and operating costs (e.g. compliance, transitional arrangements, changes to existing processes, reporting and monitoring systems, installation of new technology, etc.) taking into account general trends in the market and technology, ...

... - impacts of a granted or refused authorisation, or a proposed restriction, on consumers. For example, product prices, changes in composition or quality or performance of products, availability of products, consumer choice, as well as effects on human health and the environment to the extent that these affect consumers, ...

... - social implications of a granted or refused authorisation, or a proposed restriction. For example job security and employment, ...

... - availability, suitability, and technical feasibility of alternative substances and/or technologies, and economic consequences thereof, and information on the rates of, and potential for, technological change in the sector(s) concerned. In the case of an application for authorisation, the social and/or economic impacts of using any available alternatives, ...

... - wider implications on trade, competition and economic development (in particular for SMEs and in relation to third countries) of a granted or refused authorisation, or a proposed restriction. This may include consideration of local, regional, national or international aspects, ...

... - in the case of a proposed restriction or refused authorisation, the benefits for human health and the environment as well as the social and economic benefits of the proposed restriction. For example, worker health, environmental performance and the distribution of these benefits, for example, geographically, population groups, ...