stumuz1 wrote:Spent the day at the HSE EU Exit Event for chemicals, held at Chester racecourse, yesterday.
We spent the day discussing;
No deal or deal.
90% of the discussions was about no-deal.
To precis, most legislation in place. HSE giving a grace period of 180 days from any leave date to get basic information to them, with two years for full data sets.
From around the room, most EU facing companies have OR's in place and some have caused a bit of a stir (always knew they would! by appointing the importer/frieght-forwarder in the EU country as an OR.Simples)
UK facing companies- No change, fee free grandfather rights on registrations.
Safety data sheets- no change
Speaking off the record to the Downing street policy head for chemicals.
Me. " We're going to set up a parallel system with ECHA diverting when it suits us, aren't we.
Policy wonk. " Cannot comment.
Me. " It makes sense, we let ECHA do all the structure planning, monitoring, and organisation development with all the costs, and we simply mirror and diverge in exceptional cases"
Policy wonk. "I cannot confirm or deny" he said with a smile.
So there we have it in a nutshell.
Deal = Nothing changes.
No deal= Nothing changes except OR's appointed in an EU country, which is mostly done.
10 things you need to know about DEFRA’s post-Brexit REACH chemical regulations:
https://www.endsreport.com/article/6226 ... egulations
The government claims that its replacement for the EU’s REACH system entails no change in policy. Others beg to differ.
ENDS has put together a list of everything you need to know about the government’s plans for chemicals regulations after the UK leaves the EU.
1 The new registration database may not be ready in time
During the contentious debate last week that saw the draft REACH etc (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 approved by the Commons, environment minister Thérèse Coffey said that the database of REACH registration data may not be ready to accept uploads from users in the event of a no-deal Brexit on 29 March. If so, contingency arrangements will be put in place, she said. “A functioning REACH IT system will be critical given the extremely short time-frames introduced to submit information on chemicals to the Health and Safety Executive� said the Chemical Industry Association (CIA).
2 Deadlines will be tough to meet
Parties wishing to place chemicals on the UK market after Brexit will need to provide all the data they have given to ECHA within two years of exit. Around a quarter of REACH registrants cannot do so immediately as their ownership lies with others, with access arranged via a substance information exchange forum. Negotiating access and amending contracts over this period will both a challenging and expensive task, according to both the association and shadow environment minister Sue Hayman. It is conceivable that animal tests may need to be conducted again, despite being a last resort.
3 Coffey’s ‘copy and paste’ approach has been abandoned
Last summer, Coffey proposed that the government could simply download the database maintained by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). This would avoid the burden of having to replicate its content manually. But legal concerns about the ownership of intellectual property and the agency’s own insistence that such a move would be unlawful have led it to be quietly ditched. Hopes that the UK could obtain a form of associate membership of ECHA, which has no basis in law, have also faded.
4 Grandfathering will apply to some registrants
Around 12,000 REACH registrations for 5,700 chemicals registered by UK firms will be registered automatically. A third of them are in the lowest tonnage band, which entered regulation under REACH last May. Between 50 and 100 new registrations expected to be made each year.
5 There may be import problems
Foreign exporters will have to register with the HSE manually. The draft REACH statutory instrument (SI) does not make transitional arrangements for chemicals currently imported into the UK via non-UK suppliers registered via an only representative firm. This could constrain manufacturers’ access to vital substances, says the CIA.
6 Advice and oversight could be degraded
The statutory instrument strips away layers of oversight and advisory mechanisms. A reference to ECHA’s management board has been removed, with the HSE’s exiting board presumably taking on the same role. Its last meeting in December did not even mention chemical regulation, as the HSE has far broader duties. There is no equivalent to the Committee for Risk Assessment, which prepares regulatory opinions on risks relating to human health or the environment. References to the Committee for Socio-economic Analysis, which weighs up social pros and cons, have been removed from the bill, as has the Member State Committee which resolves differences of opinion on new measures. In their place, the regulation states that “When forming opinions the [HSE] must take relevant scientific knowledge and advice into account (including any relevant knowledge and advice relating to socioeconomic matters).� The HSE will determine what this means in practice. CHEM Trust Brexit campaigner Kate Young described the amendment as offering “completely insufficient stakeholder participation.� Environmental Audit Committee chair Mary Creagh said there would be “no committees of experts, or other committees, to take these registrations into account and help the agency to form its opinions�. This may not be entirely the case in practice, however. Though unnamed in the SI, DEFRA’s Hazardous Substances Advisory Committee would be expected to provide informal oversight.
7 A ministerial power grab could be on the cards
The current REACH Regulation requires the European Commission to take account of the Member State Committee’s view when making decisions on authorisations – that is, permission to use an otherwise banned substance. The SI offers no such duty on government to have regard to the HSE’s view. Instead, the final decision will be taken by the secretary of state. Michael Gove “may have gone too far in asking us to grant him powers to override recommendations from the HSE,� said Hayman.
8 How the UK system will be funded is unclear
UK-REACH will cost around £13m to operate each year, to be spent largely on staffing at DEFRA, the HSE and the Environment Agency. The estimate, agreed between the three, is much smaller than ECHA’s average budget of £80m or so since 2011. DEFRA said that the difference can partly be attributed to one covering the UK and the other the entire EU. But the SI makes no reference to this budget or guarantee of appropriate funding, earning criticism from Green MP Caroline Lucas. She highlighted that the HSE had seen a 40% budget cut over 2010-17.
9 Separate systems may lead to regulatory divergence
The SI does not commit to ensuring that UK-REACH follows decisions made under EU-REACH, so rules on chemicals may deviate over time and complicate cross-border compliance. Dave Bench, the HSE director responsible for chemicals regulation, said that EU decisions would have to be considered in terms of their appropriateness for the UK. “Having the same framework doesn’t mean that there won’t be different decisions,� he explained. “Some of these dossiers are enormously complex, it’s almost unimaginable that two sets of very competent experts would come to the same conclusion, it’s just not likely. So there will be divergence if we are in a no-deal scenario and that divergence will happen almost straight away,� he said.
10 Rolls-Royce is worried about downstream authorisations
Last week’s debate revealed that Rolls-Royce has concerns about the SI. “What is of particular interest is the continued downstream use in the UK of substances where an upstream applicant in the EU is awaiting an authorization decision,� said a spokesman. “We believe that improvements to the 2019 statutory instrument are needed to ensure that an appropriate use of chemicals can continue,� he told ENDS. These have not been forthcoming. The company’s concerns relate to the use of certain paints containing chromium (VI), a carcinogen. Since 22 January, dichromium tris(chromate), pentazinc chromate octahydroxide, potassium hydroxyoctaoxodizincatedichromate and strontium chromate have all required authorisation from the commission. A week before the deadline, the commission’s REACH Committee agreed to grant 36 authorisations to firms in the automotive, aerospace and other sectors, giving them up to seven years to find alternatives. The committee also took the unprecedented decision to reject a proposed authorisation for sodium dichromate for the treatment of surgical instruments. However, another 36 remain to be resolved – including one for Rolls Royce. If it is not resolved before Brexit, the firm will have to repeat the application process with the HSE, a lengthy and disruptive prospect. The SI has not yet become law. It will need to be passed by the House of Lords before it enters the statute book.
Make your own minds up folks....
