News from ECHA
| Highlights from November Forum meeting In its November meeting, our Enforcement Forum adopted the revised work programme, outlining enforcement priorities for 2025, and started new enforcement projects.
The focus will be on control of imports, online sales as well as on classification and labelling requirements for mixtures, including biocides. The revised work programme will soon be published on our website. |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
REACH
Endocrine disruption for the environment recommended for DBP authorisation entry Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) (EC 201-557-4, CAS 84-74-2) has been additionally identified as a substance of very high concern due to its endocrine disrupting properties for the environment.
The Candidate List entry for DBP has already been amended and we have now sent a recommendation to the European Commission for amending the corresponding REACH authorisation list entry (Annex XIV). |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
EU Observatory for Nanomaterials (EUON)
Nanopinion: Next generation of DNA origami nanostructures Read the latest Nanopinion with Dr Gregor Posnjak and Prof Dr Tim Liedl. They explain how the next generation of DNA origami nanostructures is unlocking new possibilities in nanotechnology, offering potential applications in various areas, such as diagnostic, virus treatment and advanced photonics. |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
|
Board of Appeal
Appeal concerning technical equivalence dismissed In this case, the Appellant challenged the rejection of its application for technical equivalence between its active substance, which is the active substance of the reference source, and another active substance, produced from an alternative source.
The Board of Appeal held that the Agency did not err in considering that the Appellant’s request was not necessary within the meaning of Article 54 of the Biocidal Products Regulation, as its active substance did not need to be assessed under that provision.
Moreover, the Agency did not err in stating that the technical equivalence between the two active substances, already assessed by the French Competent Authority, remained valid pending the outcome of an ongoing litigation in France. |
|---|
|
|---|
|
|---|
