REACH

New proposals to identify substances of very high concern 

We have published three proposals to identify substances of very high concern. The substances and examples of their uses are:

• 1,1,1,3,5,5,5-heptamethyl-3-[(trimethylsilyl)oxy]trisiloxane (EC 241-867-7, CAS 17928-28-8). Used as a laboratory reagent and in cosmetics/personal care products.
  
  
• decamethyltetrasiloxane (EC 205-491-7, CAS 141-62-8). Used in lubricants and greases and in automotive care products.
  
  
• tetra(sodium/potassium) 7-[(E)-{2-acetamido-4-[(E)-(4-{[4-chloro-6-({2-[(4-fluoro-6-{[4-(vinylsulfonyl)phenyl]amino}-1,3,5-triazine-2-yl)amino]propyl}amino)-1,3,5-triazine-2-yl]amino}-5-sulfonato-1-naphthyl)diazenyl]-5-methoxyphenyl}diazenyl]-1,3,6-naphthalenetrisulfonate; Reactive Brown 51 (EC 466-490-7, CAS -). Used in textile treatment products and dyes.

Have your say until 14 April 2025.

Substance evaluation decisions soon sent to registrants

Member States will finalise the 2024 substance evaluation for ten substances on 19 March 2025.
 
We will send the finalised draft decisions to registrants as they arrive, and wherever possible, within two weeks of receiving them from the evaluating Member States. Registrants will then have 30 days to submit their comments.
 
The draft decisions address the following seven substances, for which further information is needed to clarify identified concerns:

• Tetradecamethylhexasiloxane (EC 203-499-5, CAS 107-52-8) by Spain;
• 2,4,6-tribromophenol (EC 204-278-6, CAS 118-79-6) by France;
• 4,4'-isopropylidenebis[2-allylphenol] (EC 217-121-1, CAS 1745-89-7) by Denmark;
• 2,2'-[(1-methylethylidene)bis(4,1-phenyleneoxy)]bisethyl diacetate (EC 242-895-2, CAS 19224-29-4) by Denmark;
• (1-methylethylidene)bis(4,1-phenyleneoxy-3,1-propanediyl) bismethacrylate (EC 248-607-1, CAS 27689-12-9) by Denmark;
• 3,3'-[methylenebis(oxymethylene)]bisheptane (EC 244-815-1, CAS 22174-70-5) by Ireland; and
• 4-(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)-N-[4-(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)phenyl]aniline (EC 233-215-5, CAS 10081-67-1) by Sweden.

Substance evaluation does not require further information for:

• dioctyltin oxide (EC 212-791-1, CAS 870-08-6) by Austria;
• Tetrasodium N,N-bis(carboxylatomethyl)-L-glutamate (EC 257-573-7, CAS 51981-21-6) by France; and
• 4,4'-isopropylidenedi-2,6-xylol (EC 227-033-5, CAS 5613-46-7) by Denmark.

CLP

Consultations on harmonised classification and labelling

We are looking for comments on the harmonised classification and labelling proposal for:

• trimagnesium diphosphide; magnesium phosphide (EC 235-023-7, CAS 12057-74-8); and
• aluminium phosphide (EC 244-088-0, CAS 20859-73-8).

Have your say until 2 May 2025.

ECHA

Report available: New approach methodologies user forum kick-off workshop

The report of the New approach methodologies user forum kick-off workshop is now available. We organised the event together with the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing on 7-8 December 2023.

ECHA Board of Appeal to transition to new model

Our Management Board decided in its meeting on 13 December 2024 that ECHA Board of Appeal (BoA) will transition to a new operating model. This was driven by several factors, including resourcing, workload (actual and projected) and the need to streamline governance processes.

The future BoA will be composed of members appointed by the Board, based on a list of candidates proposed by the European Commission, who will not be engaged as staff of the Agency. 

Enforcement

Workshop to discuss results of enforcement project on safety data sheets

We will host a stakeholder workshop on 2 April 2025 to present the results and recommendations of the REF-11 enforcement project on safety data sheets.

You can follow the live stream from the event on our website or through our YouTube channel. No registration needed.

Career opportunities

Reminder: Regulatory officer and IT solution engineer

Last chance to apply for joining us in Helsinki:

• IT solution engineer - call closes on 11 March 2025 noon.
• Regulatory officer - call closes on 18 March 2025 noon.

Check the vacancy notices for more details.

ECHA career event

Join us on 2 April 2025 when we open our virtual doors and invite university students and young professionals from all study fields to discover job opportunities at ECHA.

During the event, we will tell you about our traineeships and other career opportunities, and explain, for example, how the job application process works.

The event is live streamed on our website. No registration needed.

Court judgments

Appeal against General Court judgment on a compliance check decision dismissed

The Court of Justice dismissed an appeal in Case C-353/23 P as inadmissible. The Court considered that the appellant could not bring the appeal as it was not an applicant in the first instance.

As a result, the General Court judgment in Case T-868/19 is now final and the contested Commission decision requesting a pre-natal developmental toxicity study and an extended one generation reproductive toxicity study is final.

EU Observatory for Nanomaterials

EUON website update: new content and translations

The content on the nanomaterials in cosmetics page has been updated with the latest information.

In addition, the following pages are now available in all 23 official EU languages:

• Nanomaterials in cosmetics;
• Reports; and
• Standards.

Explore the updates now and stay up to date with the latest news on nanomaterials.

Board of Appeal

Appeal concerning a tonnage downgrade upheld

In Case A-001-2024, the appellant contested a compliance check decision requesting information corresponding to the tonnage band at which the substance was registered prior to a tonnage downgrade made during the compliance check process.
 
The Board of Appeal reiterated that tonnage downgrades made after receipt of a draft compliance check decision must be taken into account, unless they amount to an abuse of procedure.

In the present case, in considering only the volume data from the calendar year preceding the registrant’s tonnage downgrade, the Agency did not perform the necessary individual assessment of whether there had been such an abuse. 

As a result, the Agency breached the appellant’s right to good administration. The contested decision was therefore annulled.