USE 2, 4, 5 AND 1
The case C-144/21 according to which the Court partially annulled Commission Decision C(2020)8797 – CTACSub authorisation – for uses 2, 4 and 5 and use 1 (for preparation of formulations for uses before mentioned) implies that the Commission will need to prepare a new draft decision for discussion with Member States in the REACH Committee by 20/04/2024
Possible derived consequences and situations:
– If the Commission will present the draft decision by 20/04/2024 it will be according the Court indications (refusing CTACSub authorisation) and companies will have to stop using Cr(VI) at the publication.
– If the Commission will not present the draft decision by 20/04/2024:
- operators covered by the annulled decision would benefit from the transitional rules (CTACSub AfA was submitted by the Latest Application Date), and can continue the use of Cr(VI)
- Obligation linked to the AfA (monitoring conditions etc.) will no longer apply, but it is better to continue the monitoring campaigns as always done
This transitional period will continue until the Commission will be able to decide.
– DUs can submit their own AfA, better if presented jointly.
– Submitted and ongoing AfA are analysed to evaluate if they can be affected by the Judgement. Current AfA should present:
- a meaningful analysis of alternatives
- justify the need of the functionalities of the Annex XIV substance
- representative exposure data based on adequate measurements
– Already granted authorisation are not going to be reassessed on the base of the Judgment.
– CTACSub2 review report, after a new decision of the Commission that refuses CTACsub AfA, becomes void. The report will be treated as a new AfA. DUs shall stop the use waiting for a decision on CTACSub2 application that can probably come in 2026 since the evaluation of the application will start in February 2024.
- Commission on 27/09/2023 sent a mandate to ECHA to evaluate the restriction of Cr(VI) substances
- Timelines: best case scenario 3 years from the receipt of the mandate
- In the mandate Commission asked ECHA the restriction of at least two Cr(VI) substances: chromium trioxide and chromic acid
- Restriction could be also applicated to other substances if ECHA requires it necessary in terms of substitution to safer alternatives
- Restriction may bring derogations to already grated AfA in a number of years that may not reflect the years granted
Restriction will be applied by delisting Cr(VI) from Annex XIV and including it in Annex XVII, the two processes have to be done simultaneously. While restriction is evaluated, Authorisation remains in place.
The Commission has not taken a decision yet. Until the decision is not taken DUs can continue the use.