<< Back to page 1

The approval should also ensure that the exposure of workers and the environment is minimized. The measurements required in this context include sampling of workers and the environment, including an analysis to quantify chromium(VI) exposure associated with specific activities. The CTACSub consortium explicitly points out to its members that it is unlikely that existing occupational and environmental monitoring programs within companies will meet the new approval requirements. But this is not the only reason for the acute need for action. The timeline is also tight.

For example, the measurements must be carried out within six months of the authorization being issued and must therefore be completed by June 18, 2021. The submission of the measurement results to ECHA has to take place by December 18, 2021. All measurements must be repeated annually and, by definition, must be performed with a high probability by appropriately certified testing laboratories. Since a four-digit number of users is to be assumed, it is to be expected that, due to the manageable number of suitable measuring institutes, only a fraction of these can have carried out the required measurements at all by the set date. So far, no concrete statements are known on how ECHA will deal with exceeding the deadline - or, put the other way around, whether it might be sufficient to submit the measurements by December 18, 2021.

As if all this were not enough, the countdown for reauthorization is already underway again. Anyone who wants to use chromium(VI) beyond September 21, 2024, should take the necessary steps to do so. Without a successful reauthorization, a hard production stop is imminent on September 21, 2024! For those for whom a single authorization is not an option, the successor organization to CTACSub, CETACSub2, for example, offers a solution.However, the consortium has set a deadline here of March 31, 2021, by which interested parties must join. In contrast to the first authorization round, this time it is to be a closed group and each participating company must pay a certain contribution. Vecco, which expects its chromium(VI) approval in summer 2021, is not setting a fixed date for reauthorization. While the core of the requirements are not expected to differ, Vecco has already built up extensive databases on exposure levels and developed tools to make it easier for members to comply with reporting obligations to ECHA.

Shortly before going to press, news reached the newsroom that there is a request from the EU Parliament to withdraw the CTACSub approval decision. Apparently, the President of ENVI is considering the possibility of taking legal action against the Commission on the grounds that the authorization of chromium(VI) does not comply with the REACH Directive. Experts believe that while this will not affect the authorization process for the time being. However, if a judge should actually find that the Commission has violated the REACH regulation, consequences are to be feared.

The mission of the JURI Legal Committee within the European Parliament is to drive initiatives in a variety of areas, including corporate due diligence, liability for environmental damage, the challenges of organizing sports organizers in the digital environment, and family issues such as domestic violence and custody. The JURI committee is designed to help Parliament develop a well-informed position on legal issues.

This committee has now voted on February 22 on what should follow from a request by the EU Parliament to withdraw the CTAC sub-registration decision on the grounds of "violation of REACH legislation." This request is based on a 2019 court ruling that found that it had not been proven that there were no alternatives to chromium trioxide and therefore no authorization should be granted for its continued use as defined in the authorization request. The CTAC subfile was found to contain "serious deficiencies" in the Application of Authorization (AoA). Accordingly, authorization would violate the legislation, according to the European Parliament.

The motion to withdraw the CTAC sub- authorization decision was passed with 13 votes in favor, 11 against and one abstention. This means that it will now be up to a court case to decide what impact and consequences this will have on our industry. Nevertheless, it is important to continue to pursue and implement all the conditions of the authorization because until a judge overrules the authorization - it can only be hoped that this will not happen - this is the legal basis on which the affected companies must rely.

Thus, the European Parliament creates a dramatic uncertainty for the electroplating industry and makes it extremely difficult for the company to plan its own future.