Zibb

Paul RakoGary Nevison, director of legislation and environmental affairs at Newark and Farnell, contributes his views on the electronics supply chain and environmental compliance's most critical topics -- ROHS (all variations around the world), REACH, EUP, WEEE directives, and on whatever else comes up in this ever evolving business channel.



   Advertisement

Friday, June 26, 2009

The China REACH surprise

Jun 26 2009 2:45PM | Permalink |Comments (5) |


On May 21, 2009, the Ministry of Environment Protection of China launched the closed inter-ministries consultation on the proposed amendments to the Measures on the Environmental Control of New Chemical Substances … China REACH.

The most significant changes in the proposed measures are as follows:
- A risk management concept for new chemicals in the Chinese chemical control system covering hazard and exposure;
- Chemicals would be classified into three categories: general chemicals, hazardous chemicals, and chemicals of environmental concern;
- Basics of notification and the registration process for new chemicals would remain the same as it was. However, detailed "general notification" would be required for new chemicals depending on tonnage (1, 10, 100, and 1,000 tons) of the chemicals imported or produced. The principle of notification information would be the "higher the volume, the more information would be required";
- Simplified notification would be available for new chemicals imported or produced at levels of less than 1 ton per year. Separate research and development notification would be available when producing or importing a new chemical substance at a level less than 0.1 ton per year;
- Notification of new chemicals would only be done by a registered Chinese entity;
- "Joint notification" would also be possible under the concept of "Easy Notification"; and
- In the case of a producer or an importer who has registered hazardous chemicals or chemicals of environmental concern, they would have to prepare and submit an annual production or import report and an annual production or import plan to the Chemical Registration Center.

The most potentially problematic issue for foreign chemical manufacturers or exporters is that only China generated ecotoxicological data would be acceptable for registration.

Some observers find this surprising, with one industry expert commenting:
“China has no expertise or infrastructure in this area and so this will not be possible at present. Furthermore, why not accept data published by reputable research institutions worldwide as does EU REACH and the US and Korean equivalents. This would mean duplication of effort (and costs) and more unnecessary animal testing. This could, of course, be in effect a trade barrier to prevent import of foreign chemicals.”


Reader Comments



at 6/30/2009 1:08:15 PM, Jack at Kappalloy.com said:
This is simply a trade barrier dressed in a regulartory wrapper. This is classic Chinese protectionism. However, US credibility in this arena is faltering. The US Congress recently empowered and required the FDA to inspect food ingredient suppliers in other countries. So much for the duplication and waste argument.



at 7/2/2009 12:16:06 PM, Component manufacturer said:
Are these regulations only going to affect the raw chemical materials to be imported into China or will it also spill into the composite of imported finished goods into China.



at 7/2/2009 12:25:39 PM, Andrew said:
No need to politicize the move. The impact is not just on international investment, also domestic, which in fact is the major trouble maker. If you had got a chance to look at the environmental problems there, you'd understand what I meant. Have you seen deposit of dye residues on a beach over 1 meter thick? I have seen it in the industrial area by the bay in a famous tourist city(!) Or have you seen green colored discharge into a lake through a tube of over 2 meters in diameter? That was in a city in the southwest. It was so shocking to see and smell it.



at 7/2/2009 3:26:26 PM, John L. said:
Andrew, I think the comments defining this part of the REACH program as a trade barrier are correct... Not that US and much of the world isn't polluting (big time)........ Just noting this specific detail in the REACH program (accepting only test data created by the Chinese) has no environmental value.. other than waste time and resources duplicating tests already performed elsewhere.... Basically,contrary to REACH's open intentions, this is hurtful to environment (wasting resources)..... Of course, when it comes to creating laws with names contrary to actual value or intent, hard to beat the good old US Congress....



at 7/28/2009 2:10:45 PM, June Bolstridge said:
To Component Manufacturer,
Neither the original "new chemicals" legislation, nor these proposed amendments would apply to articles that are imported into China. This legislation only affects "new chemicals" which are not part of the database of 45,290 chemicals that make up the "Inventory of Existing Chemical Substances in China". However, the effect on other forms of chemicals -- such as nanomaterials -- is unclear, since no lower limit of 1 tonne (that was in EU REACH) exists and it is unclear whether they will consider nanomaterials to be new substances or just another physical form of an existing chemical.

Post a comment



Display Name

Change Image
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above.
Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.


ADVERTISEMENT

©1997-2009 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Please visit these other Reed Business sites