REACH remains 'elephant in the room' warns EEF
16 Jan 2013
London – UK manufacturers’ awareness of the implications REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) remains “worryingly low”, believes EEF, the manufacturers’ organisation.
The warning follows a survey (details below) showing that companies are still not recognising the full scope and significance of the REACH regulations on their use of certain substances or, that they believed it was limited to chemical companies.
REACH regulations are gradually restricting the use of hazardous chemicals in certain areas or, implementing widespread bans, including substances which have been commonly used in manufacturing processes for many years under controlled conditions.
This has major implications for all companies from requirements for worker safety, to controls on how substances are used, through to the need to potentially modify processes and substitute other materials, noted the EEF. There are also, it said, major implications for companies in the supply chain who must advise customers if such substances are present in the products they sell.
Where there is a strong enough argument for continued use of a banned substance, companies can apply to the European Commission to continue to use it. The first such deadline is just a month away.
Meanwhile, companies have just six months to make themselves aware of the implications of the next major deadline for registration of chemicals in June 2013. This could see certain substances being withdrawn from the market.
Initial estimates suggest the cost of REACH is around Euro2billion, whilst the cost for large companies to apply for continued use of a substance is at least Euro50,000.
Anecdotal evidence suggests in some cases it can be as much as Euro200,000 euros, said the EEF, adding that failure to comply with the regulations is a criminal offence with the possibility of unlimited fines and, up to two years in prison.
In response, EEF is calling on government to do more to raise awareness of the implications of REACH and for clearer information about when the Commission is likely to give permission for continued use of banned substances.
REACH continues to be the ‘elephant in the room’ for many companies who are either unaware of the implications, according to Gareth Stace, EEF head of climate & environment policy. In contrast, he said, the regulations have serious requirements for all manufacturers who are facing either the restricted use or banning altogether of some substances.
“For many companies there is the very real risk of lost business if they are unable to advise their suppliers whether their products contain certain materials and, where they are, how their use is being monitored. Furthermore, if companies don’t plan for substance bans, it could prevent production entirely,” commented Stace
“When armed with the right information manufacturers are doing the right things - substituting substances that are of concern with safer alternatives,” he added. “But we need to see government and European regulators and legislators to do all they can to raise awareness and make it easier for companies to understand the implications of it on their business. “
EEF Survey
The survey shows 20% of companies still believe REACH is not applicable to them while a further 30% say it isn’t important to their business.
The figures rise for the smallest companies with just under a third of companies with turnover below £2m per annum unaware of how they will be affected. More worryingly, even where smaller companies were aware of REACH, half were not monitoring developments.
This compares to 72% of large companies and 83% medium sized who are monitoring developments.
In contrast, the survey showed that where there was awareness there was action, especially among downstream users who are working with suppliers and customers, monitoring developments and, substituting substances of very high concern.
The survey also shows that REACH is perceived as costly and complex with the cost and time companies are spending on dealing with it creeping up. 60% of companies have seen moderate increases, whilst a fifth have described the increase as ‘significant’ in the last two years with around half of companies taking on dedicated staff to deal with the issue.
EEF also found that 80% of large companies that are aware are considering substituting substances or have already done so. Of those that were aware, half were changing work practises and redesigning processes, regardless of business size.
One in five companies said managing chemicals is a key business priority.
