PlasticsEurope Files Action Against Echa’s BPA SVHC Listing

Trade association PlasticsEurope has taken Echa to court over its decision to include bisphenol A (BPA) on the REACH candidate list of SVHCs. It says that the vast majority of uses are as an intermediate, which is excluded from REACH.

In an action brought to the European Court of Justice on 21 May, the association also argues that BPA’s inclusion on the list breaches the principles of proportionality as it "exceeds the limits of what is appropriate and necessary" to attain the objective of the Regulation.

Furthermore, it says Echa committed "a manifest error of assessment" by failing to take into consideration information about the substance’s intermediate uses.

BPA was added to the candidate list on 12 January because of its reprotoxic properties, as set out in a proposal from the French authorities last August. And at its next meeting in June, Echa’s Member State Committee (MSC) will discuss a proposal to identify the substance as an endocrine disruptor in humans.

BPA is one of the highest volume chemicals produced worldwide. BPA-based plastic is used in many common consumer goods, such as:

> water bottles;

> sports equipment; and

> CDs and DVDs.

Epoxy resins containing it are used to line water pipes and as coatings on the inside of many food and beverage cans.

In October, the European Parliament called for a complete ban on its use in food packaging. A ban in Europe on thermal paper containing the substance takes effect in 2020.

However, producers claim that its identification as an SVHC and any potential future authorisation has no direct implications for the majority of its uses. Antonello Romano, senior EU policy adviser at PlasticsEurope, says the court action aims to improve legal certainty and clarify the implementation of the proportionality principle.

Scepticism

NGOs are sceptical about the court action. ClientEarth lawyer Alice Bernard says PlasticsEurope "does not contest" Echa's assessment that led to the identification of BPA as a SVHC. The move may be "a strategy to discourage or delay" additional classification as an endocrine disruptor, Ms Bernard adds.

CHEM Trust’s Michael Warhurst said the plastic industry needs to accept the reality of the toxicity of some of the chemicals it uses and move to safer alternatives, "rather than trying to find legal loopholes which delay action and waste regulatory resources".

According to PlasticsEurope, a court hearing on the case is likely to begin next year, or at the end of this, at the earliest.