Both politicians and industry criticized the REACH revision. The new approaches do not appear to be expedient to the participants, particularly with regard to the PFAS restriction draft, and they fear a further burden on the economy. Another point of criticism was the move away from the risk-based approach to the hazard-based approach, whereby, for example, every classification in CLP must immediately have far-reaching consequences in the supply chains.
Overall, the participants in the discussion came to the conclusion that neither DG Grow, DG ENV nor ECHA are aware of the consequences of their approach. In particular, the far-reaching, indirect consequences of the regulations are not perceived and are sometimes arbitrarily negated. There is no fundamental questioning of the regulatory approaches. There is also no review of their own target achievement. However, parliamentarians need constant, reliable information in order to be able to correctly assess the consequences and necessities. There are still some misunderstandings, which the ZVO will also try to clear up.