... 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 ...

... (9) The assessment of the operation of the four main legal instruments governing chemicals in the Community, i.e. Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances ⁽⁴⁾, Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations ⁽⁵⁾, Directive 1999/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 1999 concerning the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous preparations ⁽⁶⁾ and Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances ⁽⁷⁾, identified a number of problems in the functioning of Community legislation on chemicals, resulting in disparities between the laws, regulations and administrative provisions in Member States directly affecting the functioning of the internal market in this field, and the need to do more to protect public health and the environment in accordance with the precautionary principle. ...

... (20) The evaluation provisions should provide for follow-up to registration, by allowing for checks on whether registrations are in compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and if necessary by allowing for generation of more information on the properties of substances. If the Agency in cooperation with the Member States considers that there are grounds for considering that a substance constitutes a risk to human health or the environment, the Agency should, after having included the substance in the Community rolling action plan for substance evaluation, relying on the competent authorities of Member States, ensure that this substance is evaluated. ...

... (20) The evaluation provisions should provide for follow-up to registration, by allowing for checks on whether registrations are in compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and if necessary by allowing for generation of more information on the properties of substances. If the Agency in cooperation with the Member States considers that there are grounds for considering that a substance constitutes a risk to human health or the environment, the Agency should, after having included the substance in the Community rolling action plan for substance evaluation, relying on the competent authorities of Member States, ensure that this substance is evaluated. ...

... (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. ...

... (27) For purposes of enforcement and evaluation and for reasons of transparency, the information on these substances, as well as related information, including on risk management measures, should normally be submitted to authorities. ...

... (41) For reasons of workability and because of their special nature, specific registration requirements should be laid down for intermediates. Polymers should be exempted from registration and evaluation until those that need to be registered due to the risks posed to human health or the environment can be selected in a practicable and cost-efficient way on the basis of sound technical and valid scientific criteria. ...

... (60) For enforcement and evaluation purposes, downstream users of substances should be required to report to the Agency certain basic information if their use is outside the conditions of the exposure scenario detailed in the safety data sheet communicated by their original manufacturer or importer and to keep such reported information up-to-date. ...

... (63) It is also necessary to ensure that generation of information is tailored to real information needs. To this end evaluation should require the Agency to decide on the programmes of testing proposed by manufacturers and importers. In cooperation with Member States, the Agency should give priority to certain substances, for instance those which may be of very high concern. ...

... (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. ...

... (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. ...

... Check of information submitted and follow-up to dossier evaluation ...

... 2. Once the dossier evaluation is completed, the Agency shall notify the Commission and the competent authorities of the Member States of the information obtained and any conclusions made. The competent authorities shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 45(5), Article 59(3) and Article 69(4). The Agency shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 44. ...

... 2. Once the dossier evaluation is completed, the Agency shall notify the Commission and the competent authorities of the Member States of the information obtained and any conclusions made. The competent authorities shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 45(5), Article 59(3) and Article 69(4). The Agency shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 44. ...

... 2. Once the dossier evaluation is completed, the Agency shall notify the Commission and the competent authorities of the Member States of the information obtained and any conclusions made. The competent authorities shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 45(5), Article 59(3) and Article 69(4). The Agency shall use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 44. ...

... Criteria for substance evaluation ...

... 1. In order to ensure a harmonised approach, the Agency shall in cooperation with the Member States develop criteria for prioritising substances with a view to further evaluation. Prioritisation shall be on a risk-based approach. The criteria shall consider: ...

... 2. The Agency shall use the criteria in paragraph 1 for the purpose of compiling a draft Community rolling action plan which shall cover a period of three years and shall specify substances to be evaluated each year. Substances shall be included if there are grounds for considering (either on the basis of a dossier evaluation carried out by the Agency or on the basis of any other appropriate source, including information in the registration dossier) that a given substance constitutes a risk to human health or the environment. The Agency shall submit the first draft rolling action plan to the Member States by 1 December 2011. The Agency shall submit draft annual updates to the rolling action plan to the Member States by 28 February each year. ...

... The Agency shall adopt the final Community rolling action plan on the basis of an opinion from the Member State Committee set up under Article 76(1)(e) (hereinafter referred to as the Member State Committee) and shall publish the plan on its website, identifying the Member State who will carry out the evaluation of the substances listed therein as determined according to Article 45. ...

... 1. The Agency shall be responsible for coordinating the substance evaluation process and ensuring that substances on the Community rolling action plan are evaluated. In doing so, the Agency shall rely on the competent authorities of Member States. In carrying out an evaluation of a substance, the competent authorities may appoint another body to act on their behalf. ...

... 1. The Agency shall be responsible for coordinating the substance evaluation process and ensuring that substances on the Community rolling action plan are evaluated. In doing so, the Agency shall rely on the competent authorities of Member States. In carrying out an evaluation of a substance, the competent authorities may appoint another body to act on their behalf. ...

... If, within 60 days of the referral, the Member State Committee reaches unanimous agreement, the Member States concerned shall adopt substances for evaluation accordingly. ...

... If the Member State Committee fails to reach a unanimous agreement, the Agency shall submit the conflicting opinions to the Commission, which shall decide which authority shall be the competent authority, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 133(3), and the Member States concerned shall adopt substances for evaluation accordingly. ...

... 5. A Member State may notify the Agency at any time of a substance not on the Community rolling action plan, whenever it is in possession of information which suggests that the substance is a priority for evaluation. The Agency shall decide whether to add this substance to the Community rolling action plan on the basis of an opinion from the Member State Committee. If the substance is added to the Community rolling action plan, the proposing Member State, or another Member State who agrees, shall evaluate that substance. ...

... 4. The competent authority shall finish its evaluation activities within 12 months of the start of the evaluation of the substance or within 12 months of the information being submitted under paragraph 2, and notify the Agency accordingly. If this deadline is exceeded, the evaluation shall be deemed to be finished. ...

... 4. The competent authority shall finish its evaluation activities within 12 months of the start of the evaluation of the substance or within 12 months of the information being submitted under paragraph 2, and notify the Agency accordingly. If this deadline is exceeded, the evaluation shall be deemed to be finished. ...

... 4. The competent authority shall finish its evaluation activities within 12 months of the start of the evaluation of the substance or within 12 months of the information being submitted under paragraph 2, and notify the Agency accordingly. If this deadline is exceeded, the evaluation shall be deemed to be finished. ...

... 1. An evaluation of a substance shall be based on all relevant information submitted on that particular substance and on any previous evaluation under this Title. Where information on intrinsic properties of a substance has been generated by reference to structurally related substance(s), the evaluation may also cover these related substances. In cases where a decision on an evaluation has been previously taken in accordance with Article 51 or Article 52, any draft decision requiring further information under Article 46 may be justified only by a change of circumstances or acquired knowledge. ...

... 1. An evaluation of a substance shall be based on all relevant information submitted on that particular substance and on any previous evaluation under this Title. Where information on intrinsic properties of a substance has been generated by reference to structurally related substance(s), the evaluation may also cover these related substances. In cases where a decision on an evaluation has been previously taken in accordance with Article 51 or Article 52, any draft decision requiring further information under Article 46 may be justified only by a change of circumstances or acquired knowledge. ...

... 1. An evaluation of a substance shall be based on all relevant information submitted on that particular substance and on any previous evaluation under this Title. Where information on intrinsic properties of a substance has been generated by reference to structurally related substance(s), the evaluation may also cover these related substances. In cases where a decision on an evaluation has been previously taken in accordance with Article 51 or Article 52, any draft decision requiring further information under Article 46 may be justified only by a change of circumstances or acquired knowledge. ...

... 1. An evaluation of a substance shall be based on all relevant information submitted on that particular substance and on any previous evaluation under this Title. Where information on intrinsic properties of a substance has been generated by reference to structurally related substance(s), the evaluation may also cover these related substances. In cases where a decision on an evaluation has been previously taken in accordance with Article 51 or Article 52, any draft decision requiring further information under Article 46 may be justified only by a change of circumstances or acquired knowledge. ...

... Follow-up to substance evaluation ...

... Once the substance evaluation has been completed, the competent authority shall consider how to use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 59(3), Article 69(4) and Article 115(1). The competent authority shall inform the Agency of its conclusions as to whether or how to use the information obtained. The Agency shall in turn inform the Commission, the registrant and the competent authorities of the other Member States. ...

... Once the substance evaluation has been completed, the competent authority shall consider how to use the information obtained from this evaluation for the purposes of Article 59(3), Article 69(4) and Article 115(1). The competent authority shall inform the Agency of its conclusions as to whether or how to use the information obtained. The Agency shall in turn inform the Commission, the registrant and the competent authorities of the other Member States. ...

... For on-site isolated intermediates that are used in strictly controlled conditions, neither dossier nor substance evaluation shall apply. However, where the competent authority of the Member State in whose territory the site is located considers that a risk to human health or the environment, equivalent to the level of concern arising from the use of substances meeting the criteria in Article 57, arises from the use of an on-site isolated intermediate and that risk is not properly controlled, it may: ...

... The procedure provided for in the first paragraph may be undertaken only by the competent authority referred to therein. The competent authority shall inform the Agency of the results of such an evaluation, which shall then inform the competent authorities of the other Member States and make the results available to them. ...

... Adoption of decisions under dossier evaluation ...

... Adoption of decisions under substance evaluation ...

... Publication of information on evaluation ...

... By 28 February of each year, the Agency shall publish on its website a report on the progress made over the previous calendar year towards discharging the obligations incumbent upon it in relation to evaluation. This report shall include, in particular, recommendations to potential registrants in order to improve the quality of future registrations. ...

... (g) a Secretariat, which shall work under the leadership of the Executive Director and provide technical, scientific and administrative support for the Committees and the Forum and ensure appropriate coordination between them. It shall also undertake the work required of the Agency under the procedures for pre-registration, registration and evaluation as well as preparation of guidance, database maintenance and information provision; ...

... It shall forward annually any information relevant to the outcome of the evaluation procedures in accordance with Article 96(6). ...

... 1. Every five years, Member States shall submit to the Commission a report on the operation of this Regulation in their respective territories, including sections on evaluation and enforcement as described in Article 127. ...

... (b) the amount and distribution of funding made available by the Commission for the development and evaluation of alternative test methods. ...

... 3. A Member State whose rapporteur has not forwarded by 1 June 2008 the risk evaluation and, where appropriate, the strategy for limiting the risks, in accordance with Article 10(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93, shall: ...

... (a) any risk evaluation and recommended strategy for limiting risks that has been adopted at Community level in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 as far as it includes proposals for restrictions in accordance with Title VIII of this Regulation but for which a decision under Directive 76/769/EEC has not yet been taken; ...

... Step 1 : Evaluation of non-human information. ...

... Step 2 : Evaluation of human information. ...

... 1.1. Step 1 : Evaluation of non-human information ...

... 1.1.1. The evaluation of non-human information shall comprise: ...

... 1.2. Step 2 : Evaluation of human information ...

... 2.4. For every physicochemical property, the assessment shall entail an evaluation of the inherent capacity of the substance to cause the effect resulting from the manufacture and identified uses. ...

... Step 1 : Evaluation of information. ...

... 3.1. Step 1 : Evaluation of information ...

... 3.1.1. The evaluation of all available information shall comprise: ...

... Annexes VI to XI specify the information that shall be submitted for registration and evaluation purposes according to Articles 10, 12, 13, 40, 41 and 46. For the lowest tonnage level, the standard requirements are in Annex VII, and every time a new tonnage level is reached, the requirements of the corresponding Annex have to be added. For each registration the precise information requirements will differ, according to tonnage, use and exposure. The Annexes shall thus be considered as a whole, and in conjunction with the overall requirements of registration, evaluation and the duty of care. ...

... Annexes VI to XI specify the information that shall be submitted for registration and evaluation purposes according to Articles 10, 12, 13, 40, 41 and 46. For the lowest tonnage level, the standard requirements are in Annex VII, and every time a new tonnage level is reached, the requirements of the corresponding Annex have to be added. For each registration the precise information requirements will differ, according to tonnage, use and exposure. The Annexes shall thus be considered as a whole, and in conjunction with the overall requirements of registration, evaluation and the duty of care. ...

... 7.13.Oxidising properties | 7.13.The study does not need to be conducted if:the substance is explosive, orthe substance is highly flammable, orthe substance is an organic peroxide, orthe substance is incapable of reacting exothermically with combustible materials, for example on the basis of the chemical structure (e.g. organic substances not containing oxygen or halogen atoms and these elements are not chemically bonded to nitrogen or oxygen, or inorganic substances not containing oxygen or halogen atoms).The full test does not need to be conducted for solids if the preliminary test clearly indicates that the test substance has oxidising properties.Note that as there is no test method to determine the oxidising properties of gaseous mixtures, the evaluation of these properties must be realised by an estimation method based on the comparison of the oxidising potential of gases in a mixture with that of the oxidising potential of oxygen in air. | ...

... | 8.6.3.A long-term repeated toxicity study (≥ 12 months) may be proposed by the registrant or required by the Agency in accordance with Articles 40 or 41 if the frequency and duration of human exposure indicates that a longer term study is appropriate and one of the following conditions is met:serious or severe toxicity effects of particular concern were observed in the 28-day or 90-day study for which the available evidence is inadequate for toxicological evaluation or risk characterisation, oreffects shown in substances with a clear relationship in molecular structure with the substance being studied were not detected in the 28-day or 90-day study, orthe substance may have a dangerous property that cannot be detected in a 90-day study. | ...

... | 8.6.4.Further studies shall be proposed by the registrant or may be required by the Agency in accordance with Articles 40 or 41 in case of:toxicity of particular concern (e.g. serious/severe effects), orindications of an effect for which the available evidence is inadequate for toxicological evaluation and/or risk characterisation. In such cases it may also be more appropriate to perform specific toxicological studies that are designed to investigate these effects (e.g. immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity), orparticular concern regarding exposure (e.g. use in consumer products leading to exposure levels which are close to the dose levels at which toxicity is observed). | ...

... In addition to the specific rules set out in column 2 of Annexes VII to X, a registrant may adapt the standard testing regime in accordance with the general rules set out in Section 1 of this Annex. Under dossier evaluation the Agency may assess these adaptations to the standard testing regime. ...