BASF Sets Out Challenges of K-REACH Registration

Even the South Korea offices of BASF, with the backing and experience of its parent company – itself a veteran of EU-REACH – has struggled with K-REACH, delegates at a major chemicals conference in Beijing heard this week.

Speaking at ChemCon Asia, Ms EunKyong Ryu the K-REACH coordinator of BASF Korea, said agreement on the formation of a substance information exchange forum (Sief) can easily take a year – although some other elements of the process, such as assessing data gaps, can carry on as these discussions proceed.

This is often the first time that many companies have worked with other companies – which are often competitors – on such a joint project.

Although the Korean government has been slow getting started, it is increasingly helpful, says Ms Ryu. However, she says the changes to K-REACH announced last December have caused some concern, and of the 510 priority existing chemicals (Pecs) that must be registered by next June, 150 still have no lead registrant – and many do not have K-Siefs.

There have been difficulties, she said, in getting responses from other members of Siefs and differing opinions on elements of the joint registration, for example, on the case for usage to be made as part of the chemical safety report (CSR). Sometimes the joint agreement may not specify all the test cases and so individual registration, albeit largely based on joint data, may be necessary.

Negotiations with EU data consortia have also been protracted, she said, because of disagreements about the amount of data to buy and different approaches to price.

While the consortia want to sell entire data packages, K-REACH registrant groups may only need certain parts for their registrations.

Different sensitivity to cost, which has been a factor in Sief negotiations, also plays a role in those with the EU data consortia. Because K-REACH registration has not been staggered by volume, Siefs sometimes include major corporations and SMEs with very different abilities to absorb costs. This has been a factor when firms in Korea discuss whether to commission new testing, which may be less expensive than buying existing data from EU consortia.

Another factor, said Ms Ryu, is how long discussions take with suppliers and customers. This is necessary to establish volumes and uses for the CSRs.