Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Substance of very high concern


Substances of Very High Concern (SVHCs) are chemical substances identified under Article 57 of the Union's REACH (EC) No 1907/2006 as having the potential to cause serious and often irreversible effects on human health or the . These include substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic for reproduction (CMR) in categories 1A or 1B according to the Classification, Labelling and Packaging ; persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances; very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) substances; or other substances presenting an equivalent due to their intrinsic properties.
The identification of SVHCs is managed by the (ECHA), which maintains the Candidate List of such substances following a proposal, dossier evaluation, and public consultation process. Inclusion on the Candidate List imposes obligations on manufacturers, importers, and suppliers, such as notifying ECHA if SVHCs are present in articles above 0.1% weight by weight and providing information to recipients or consumers upon request. Prioritized SVHCs may advance to the Authorisation List (Annex XIV of REACH), where their intentional use requires explicit authorization from the after demonstrating adequate control, socio-economic benefits outweighing risks, and no suitable alternatives. This mechanism aims to ensure progressive substitution with safer alternatives while allowing continued use under strict conditions until review dates. SVHC designation under REACH, effective since 2007, reflects a precautionary approach to chemical management, prioritizing empirical hazard data over mere exposure assumptions to mitigate long-term causal risks from or . As of recent updates, the Candidate List comprises over 200 substances, spanning industrial chemicals, flame retardants, and , with ongoing additions based on from peer-reviewed studies and regulatory assessments. The process has spurred innovation in chemical but also generated debate over regulatory burdens on , though empirical evaluations confirm its role in reducing identified high-risk exposures without broad of systemic economic distortion.

Origins in REACH Regulation

The concept of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHCs) originated within the Union's REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, adopted by the and Council on 18 December 2006 and entering into force on 1 June 2007. REACH established a comprehensive framework for registering, evaluating, authorizing, and restricting chemicals to protect human health and the while promoting chemical innovation, addressing gaps in prior directives by placing the burden on industry to prove safety. The SVHC mechanism forms the core of REACH's authorization process under Title VII, targeting substances with the most severe and often irreversible risks, such as carcinogenicity or environmental persistence, to enable their phase-out or controlled use through substitution with safer alternatives. Article 57 of REACH defines SVHC criteria, encompassing substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic, or reprotoxic (CMR) in category 1A or 1B under harmonized classifications; persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances; very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) substances; or those of equivalent concern due to serious effects not adequately captured by other criteria, as determined by the European Commission. This provision empowered Member States Competent Authorities or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)—created by REACH to administer the regulation—to propose identifications via dossiers under Annex XV, subject to public consultation and review by the Member State Committee. The framework's intent was causal risk management: SVHCs on the Candidate List trigger immediate obligations like supply chain notifications under Article 33, with potential advancement to Annex XIV for mandatory authorization, requiring applicants to demonstrate adequate risk control or societal necessity outweighing hazards. Implementation began promptly after REACH's , with ECHA publishing the inaugural Candidate List on 28 October 2008, comprising 15 SVHCs such as 5-tert-butyl-2,4,6-trinitro-m-xylene (musk xylene) and , selected for properties like PBT or vPvB based on available . This list has since expanded biannually through evidence-based proposals, reflecting REACH's adaptive evolution to incorporate emerging scientific assessments, though critics from industry sectors have noted the process's reliance on precautionary identifications that may overestimate risks absent full causal . The SVHC origins thus mark a from reactive to proactive chemical regulation, prioritizing empirical hazard evidence over mere exposure assumptions.

Evolution and Key Milestones

The concept of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) evolved from the foundational framework established in the REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, which entered into force on 1 June 2007 and tasked the (ECHA) with identifying chemicals posing severe risks to human health or the environment. Initial efforts focused on substances meeting criteria under Article 57, such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, (CMR categories 1A or 1B), , , (PBT/vPvB), or equivalent concern. The first Candidate List of SVHCs was published by ECHA on 28 2008, containing 15 substances, marking the operational start of the SVHC identification process and triggering supply chain notification duties under REACH Article 33. Subsequent updates occurred approximately biannually, expanding the list through Member State proposals, public consultations, and Member State Committee consensus, with progressive inclusions reflecting growing scientific evidence on hazards like endocrine disruption. A pivotal advancement came on 21 February 2011, when the first six SVHCs—5-tert-butyl-2,4,6-trinitro-m-xylene (musk xylene), 4,4'-diaminodiphenylmethane (MDA), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD), bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), and dibutyl phthalate (DBP)—were added to REACH Annex XIV, initiating the authorisation regime requiring applicants to prove safe use or socio-economic benefits outweighing risks. In , ECHA introduced the SVHC Roadmap to , a collaborative initiative with Member States and the to systematically prioritize and identify SVHCs from high-tonnage chemicals, dispersively used substances, and those in articles, aiming to include all relevant known SVHCs in the Candidate List by . The Roadmap accelerated listings by targeting specific substance groups, such as polymers and siloxanes, and integrating options analysis, resulting in over 100 additions during its tenure and enhanced transparency via annual progress reports. Post-2020, the framework extended its scope with ongoing emphases on emerging concerns like non-threshold endocrine disruptors and , evidenced by continued biannual updates and refined requirements to address scientific uncertainties while maintaining rigorous evidence-based identification. By October 2025, the Candidate List had reached 250 substances, underscoring the iterative evolution toward comprehensive risk mitigation without halting chemical innovation.

Definition and Criteria

Intrinsic Properties Defining SVHC

Substances of very high concern (SVHC) are defined under Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 by specific intrinsic properties that indicate severe, often irreversible risks to human health or the . These properties encompass three primary categories: carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or toxicity to (CMR); persistence, , and (PBT); and very high persistence and (vPvB). These criteria focus on inherent chemical characteristics assessed through standardized testing and classification protocols, independent of exposure scenarios or use conditions. The CMR category includes substances classified as carcinogenic (causing cancer), mutagenic (damaging genetic material), or reprotoxic (impairing or fetal development) in Category 1A or 1B under the Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. Category 1A denotes known effects in humans based on epidemiological data or compelling animal evidence, while 1B relies on sufficient animal data or other strong evidence. Harmonized classifications under CLP are established by the via VI, with over 200 substances listed as CMR 1A/1B as of 2025, though self-classifications by notifiers can also trigger SVHC identification if substantiated. PBT substances meet all three criteria outlined in Annex XIII of REACH: persistence (P), indicated by slow environmental degradation (e.g., half-life exceeding 60 days in marine water, 180 days in ); bioaccumulation (B), measured by bioconcentration factor (BCF) greater than 500 in aquatic organisms or high (log Kow > 4.5); and toxicity (T), evidenced by acute or chronic aquatic toxicity thresholds (e.g., or NOEC < 0.01 mg/L) or CMR classification. These properties lead to long-term accumulation in ecosystems and food chains, amplifying risks even at low release levels; as of 2025, fewer than 20 PBT substances are on the SVHC Candidate List due to stringent assessment requirements. vPvB substances exhibit extreme persistence and bioaccumulation, with thresholds in Annex XIII stricter than PBT: degradation half-life >60 days across multiple compartments for very persistent (vP), and BCF >5,000 or equivalent for very bioaccumulative (vB). is presumed for vPvB due to their inherent potential for widespread, irreversible environmental contamination, as seen in substances like (decaBDE), listed in 2012 for these traits despite debates over degradation pathways. Identification relies on experimental data or quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) models when testing is infeasible, ensuring focus on causal mechanisms of harm rather than probabilistic modeling alone.

Equivalent Level of Concern Category

The equivalent (ELoC) category under regulation refers to substances identified pursuant to 57(f), which applies to chemicals for which there is of probable serious effects to or the , giving rise to an equivalent to those meeting the criteria in 57(a)-(e), such as carcinogens, mutagens, reprotoxics (CMRs), persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs), or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) substances. This provision enables the inclusion of substances with hazards not captured by predefined thresholds, such as endocrine-disrupting properties or other mechanisms causing widespread, non-threshold effects comparable in severity to CMRs or PBT/vPvB risks. Identification under Article 57(f) requires a case-by-case , where proposers—typically EU Member States or the (ECHA)—must submit a per XV demonstrating equivalence through weight-of-evidence , including on profiles, potential, and feasibility. Unlike CMR or PBT/vPvB categories, no fixed quantitative criteria exist; instead, equivalence is argued based on scientific plausibility of serious, irreversible effects, often drawing analogies to benchmark hazards like those of known CMRs, with considerations for persistence, , potency, and societal impacts. For instance, endocrine disruptors may qualify if evidence shows interference with hormonal systems leading to developmental or reproductive harms akin to reprotoxicants, even absent formal CMR classification. The ELoC process involves for at least 45 days, followed by review by ECHA's Member State Committee (), which seeks consensus on the substance's inclusion in the Candidate List; if no agreement, the issue may escalate to the . As of October 2025, examples of substances identified under Article 57(f) include 4-tert-octylphenol (added January 2013 for environmental endocrine disruption), (added June 2021 for probable serious human health effects), and certain perfluorinated compounds like ammonium perfluorohexanoate (added July 2022 for human health concerns), reflecting applications in areas such as , solvents, and coatings where alternatives are limited. These identifications prioritize substances with diffuse exposure risks, underscoring the category's role in addressing uncertainties in long-term, low-dose toxicities not fitting rigid REACH thresholds.

Identification and Listing Process

Role of ECHA and Member States

The (ECHA) serves as the central coordinator for the identification of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) under the REACH Regulation, managing the Candidate List and facilitating the evaluation process. ECHA publishes proposals for SVHC on its , conducts consultations to gather comments—typically lasting around 45 days—and responds to relevant feedback alongside the proposing entity. Following consultation, ECHA forwards the dossier and comments to the Committee (MSC) for review, and upon consensus agreement that a substance meets SVHC criteria under Article 57 of REACH, ECHA adds it to the Candidate List. EU Member States, through their Competent Authorities, play a primary role in initiating SVHC proposals by preparing detailed dossiers in accordance with Annex XV of REACH, which must demonstrate that the substance fulfills criteria such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, , persistence, , , or equivalent levels of concern. Member States submit these dossiers to ECHA during designated windows, such as February 1 or August 1 annually, and may respond to consultation comments to refine their case. The , comprising representatives from all Member States, evaluates proposals by , ensuring identification requires unanimous agreement among members that the SVHC properties are adequately substantiated. This collaborative framework balances national expertise in chemical with ECHA's administrative oversight, though consensus requirements can delay listings if disagreements arise over data sufficiency or . Member States may also request ECHA to prepare dossiers on their behalf under specific directives, enhancing efficiency for complex cases.

Procedure for Candidate List Updates

The procedure for updating the Candidate List under REACH is outlined in Article 59, which establishes a structured process for identifying substances meeting the criteria in Article 57 as substances of very high concern (SVHC). Proposals to add a substance originate from Competent Authorities or from the (ECHA), the latter acting at the request of the . The proposer submits an Annex XV dossier containing detailed information on the substance's identity, intrinsic properties (such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, , persistence, , , or equivalent levels of concern), and justification for SVHC classification. Upon receipt, ECHA publishes the proposed on its and opens a period, typically lasting 45 days, to solicit comments from stakeholders on the substance's chemical identity, hazardous properties, known uses, and potential risks to or the . Comments must be submitted by the specified deadline (23:59 Helsinki time, Eastern European Time), and late submissions are not considered. ECHA reviews all timely comments, responds to them, and forwards relevant ones—along with the —to the Member State Committee (), a body comprising representatives from EU Member States. The then evaluates the to determine if qualifies as an SVHC, aiming for unanimous agreement within a defined timeframe, such as 30 days following the consultation phase. If is achieved, ECHA includes in the Candidate List. In cases of disagreement among MSC members, the process escalates: ECHA may incorporate the MSC's non-unanimous opinion, or the may draft a formal for decision under the comitology procedure per 133(3) of REACH, typically within three months. ECHA's holds authority to finalize the identification in practice when MSC is absent, ensuring decisions are based on . Once a substance is identified as an SVHC, ECHA publishes the updated Candidate List on its website without delay, triggering immediate supply chain obligations such as notification requirements for articles containing the substance above 0.1% weight by weight. The process emphasizes transparency, with non-confidential comments made publicly available, though submitters may request confidentiality for business-sensitive information if justified. Updates to the list occur as proposals are processed, often resulting in additions one to two times per year, reflecting ongoing evaluations rather than a fixed schedule. In 2024, the (ECHA) conducted an unusually frequent three updates to the Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC), adding a total of seven new entries. On January 23, five substances were included due to their persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) properties, or respiratory sensitizing effects, bringing the total to 237. The update added one substance, Bis(α,α-dimethylbenzyl) , classified for its explosive properties and equivalent , increasing the list to 241. A rare third update on November 7 incorporated , a used in plastics and textiles, due to its , elevating the total to 242. Early 2025 saw continued expansion, with ECHA adding five new SVHCs on an unspecified January date, alongside one entry update, reaching 247 substances; these inclusions targeted chemicals with endocrine-disrupting or carcinogenic risks in consumer applications. The June 25 update further added three substances—1,1,1,3,5,5,5-heptamethyl-3-[(trimethylsilyl)oxy]trisiloxane and decamethyltetrasiloxane (both siloxanes with vPvB properties used in and lubricants), and Reactive Brown 51 (a textile dye with mutagenic potential)—bringing the list to 250. No further additions were recorded through October 2025, though public consultations for potential 33rd updates proposed additional candidates like n-hexane earlier in the year. Trends from 2024-2025 reflect heightened ECHA focus on persistent organosilicon compounds, flame retardants, and industrial dyes, driven by evidence of long-term environmental accumulation and human health endpoints like reproductive and genetic damage, as substantiated in Member State Committee dossiers. The accelerated update cadence in 2024, including an off-schedule addition, indicates procedural flexibility to address emerging hazard data amid notifications exceeding 25,000 for prior entries, underscoring causal links between SVHC persistence and risks over precautionary expansions without direct empirical rebuttal. This period's 13 net additions (excluding updates) represent about 5% list growth, prioritizing substances with verifiable intrinsic hazards over broader chemical classes, though critiques note potential overreach in equivalent concern designations lacking uniform quantitative thresholds.

Obligations and Consequences

Immediate Supply Chain Duties

Under the REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, inclusion of a substance on the Candidate List as a substance of very high concern (SVHC) triggers immediate communication obligations for suppliers along the , without requiring or restriction. Suppliers of articles containing an SVHC in a concentration above 0.1% weight by weight (w/w) must provide recipients—such as downstream users or distributors—with sufficient information to enable safe handling, use, and disposal of the article. This includes details on the SVHC's identity, concentration, and safe use measures, ensuring that risks to human health and the environment are adequately managed from the point of listing. For mixtures containing an SVHC above 0.1% w/w, suppliers are required to include the substance's name and classification in the () under Section 3, regardless of whether the mixture meets other notification thresholds. This duty applies immediately upon listing and persists unless the substance is removed or concentrations fall below the . Distributors must pass on this information without delay, fostering transparency across professional supply chains. Failure to comply can result in enforcement actions by national authorities, including fines, though penalties vary by ; for instance, Germany's Federal Environment Agency has issued guidance emphasizing proactive updates post-listing. Consumer-facing obligations add a layer of downstream : if an contains an SVHC above 0.1% and a requests information within 45 days of supply, the supplier must disclose the SVHC's presence, safe use instructions, and advice. This provision, effective since REACH's implementation in , aims to empower end-users but has been critiqued for administrative burdens on small suppliers, as evidenced by a 2019 ECHA compliance check revealing only 60% adherence among sampled importers. No prior ECHA approval is needed for these communications, distinguishing them from processes, though suppliers may notify ECHA voluntarily for listed SVHCs in articles exceeding one tonne per producer per year if destined for the market. These duties incentivize early substitution but do not prohibit SVHC use, allowing continued market presence pending further regulatory steps. Empirical data from ECHA's 2023 reporting indicates over 5,000 notifications of SVHCs in articles since 2011, highlighting widespread implementation, though underreporting persists due to threshold ambiguities in complex supply chains.

Pathways to Authorization or Restriction

Substances identified as SVHCs and added to the REACH Candidate List may proceed to the authorisation pathway by being recommended for inclusion in Annex XIV, where their manufacture, placing on the market, or use becomes subject to prior authorisation after a specified sunset date. This pathway targets SVHCs to ensure risks are adequately controlled or phased out, with ECHA or a Member State proposing prioritisation based on criteria such as production volume exceeding 1 tonne per year, number of uses, availability of alternatives, and substitution progress. The European Commission decides on inclusion following opinions from ECHA's Committees for Risk Assessment (RAC) and Socio-Economic Analysis (SEAC), typically setting a review period of 12 years and transitional periods of 18 months to 5 years before the sunset date. Applications for authorisation must demonstrate that risks are controlled to a level as low as reasonably achievable, that socio-economic benefits outweigh risks, and include a substitution plan if alternatives exist; approvals are granted for specific uses and durations, often conditional on monitoring or R&D commitments. Alternatively, SVHCs may enter the restriction pathway under Annex XVII if their risks cannot be adequately managed through other REACH processes, leading to prohibitions or conditions on manufacture, market placement, or use for specified applications. Member States or ECHA initiate proposals, supported by a evaluating , alternatives, and socio-economic impacts, which RAC and SEAC assess before forwarding opinions to the . The adopts restrictions via comitology, with entry into force typically 18 months later unless specified otherwise, as seen in cases like (PFOA) derivatives restricted from 4 July 2020 due to persistent bioaccumulative . Unlike authorisation, restrictions apply broadly without individual applications, aiming for outright bans or limits (e.g., concentration thresholds below 0.1% in mixtures), and have been applied to over 1,300 entries in Annex XVII as of 2023, including SVHCs like certain in consumer articles. The choice between pathways depends on use patterns: authorisation suits ongoing, controlled uses where substitution is feasible but not immediate, while restrictions target dispersive or uncontrolled exposures requiring uniform bans. For instance, , identified as an SVHC in June 2017 for endocrine disruption, has faced restriction proposals for uses since 2023, bypassing full authorisation due to widespread low-level exposure risks. Both processes encourage innovation in safer alternatives, but authorisation imposes higher compliance burdens on applicants, with only 12 substances authorised as of 2024, reflecting stringent criteria. Empirical data indicate restrictions often precede or parallel SVHC listing for urgent hazards, as with decaBDE restricted in electrical equipment from 2019 despite later SVHC status in 2023.

Compliance Costs and Enforcement

Compliance with SVHC obligations under REACH imposes direct costs on manufacturers, importers, and suppliers, primarily through requirements to identify, notify, and communicate the presence of listed substances exceeding 0.1% by weight in articles or mixtures. Verification typically involves supplier declarations, material inventories, and analytical testing, with for up to 174 SVHCs costing around $995 per sample, scaling higher for complex products requiring multiple tests. Administrative burdens include notifying the (ECHA) within six months if annual production or import exceeds one tonne and SVHC concentration surpasses 0.1%, as well as informing downstream users and consumers upon request under Article 33. These tasks demand ongoing mapping and record-keeping, with costs amplified for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) due to limited resources for compliance software or legal expertise; broader REACH implementation, encompassing SVHC duties, totals approximately €2.5 billion annually across businesses. Substitution efforts, often prompted by candidate list inclusion, add further expenses if viable alternatives require reformulation or re-testing, though empirical data on isolated SVHC-driven costs remains sparse. Enforcement of SVHC requirements falls to national competent authorities in EU Member States, coordinated via ECHA's for Exchange of Information on Enforcement, which conducts targeted projects such as inspections of imported articles for SVHC reporting. Non-compliance, including failure to disclose SVHC presence or submit notifications, triggers administrative or criminal penalties that vary by jurisdiction; for example, levies fines up to €50,000 for untimely SVHC information provision, while imposes similar maximums, and some states allow up to €375,000 for registration-related infringements or imprisonment for gross negligence endangering health. EU-wide initiatives have uncovered persistent issues, with 35% of inspected safety data sheets non-compliant in recent checks and earlier projects finding 15% of chemicals lacking proper registration. Enforcement inconsistencies across Member States—stricter in nations like and the , laxer elsewhere—can undermine uniform application, though coordinated actions have increased inspections on high-risk imports since 2023.

Composition of the Candidate List

Overview of Listed Substances

The Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) under the REACH regulation identifies chemicals that meet specific criteria for potential serious and often irreversible effects on or the , as outlined in Article 57 of REACH. These include substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic for reproduction (CMR) in Categories 1A or 1B under the ; persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) substances; very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) substances; or those giving rise to an equivalent level of , such as endocrine disruptors affecting or the . Identification relies on hazard properties rather than or assessments, prioritizing intrinsic dangers like long-term persistence in ecosystems or . As of June 2025, the Candidate List contains 250 entries, encompassing individual substances, groups of isomers, or mixtures proposed for prioritization under REACH authorization procedures. Additions occur biannually following Member State Committee consensus, with the most recent update on June 25, 2025, incorporating three new entries, including bisphenol AF (CAS 1477-55-0) for reproductive toxicity and n-hexane (CAS 110-54-3) for equivalent concern due to neurotoxicity. Earlier in 2025, five substances were added on January 21, reflecting ongoing evaluations of chemicals in widespread use, such as those in polymers, lubricants, and consumer goods. The list's growth from 235 entries in late 2023 to 250 by mid-2025 indicates accelerating inclusions, driven by data from registrations and targeted assessments. SVHCs span diverse chemical classes, including , flame retardants, compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), often integral to industrial applications like , textiles, and materials. Reproductive toxicants represent a significant portion, alongside persistent environmental hazards; for instance, approximately 20-25% qualify under CMR criteria, while PBT/vPvB account for another substantial share due to their resistance to degradation and potential. Endocrine disruptors, added via the "equivalent concern" pathway since 2010 updates, comprise about 4-5% but have increased with expanded evidence requirements under Article 57(f). Listing does not ban substances outright but triggers notifications for concentrations above 0.1% by weight in articles, emphasizing transparency over immediate prohibition.

Examples of Key SVHCs and Their Uses

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP, No. 117-81-7), added to the Candidate List on 19 December 2010 due to its toxic effects on (category 1B), functions primarily as a in (PVC) to impart flexibility. It is incorporated at concentrations up to 40% in products including electrical cables, , devices such as blood bags and tubing, and goods like and packaging. Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD, CAS No. 25637-99-4), included on 19 December 2012 for its persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) properties, serves as an additive flame retardant. Its main applications involve expanded polystyrene (EPS) and extruded polystyrene (XPS) foams for thermal insulation in construction, accounting for over 90% of its use, alongside treatments for textiles, upholstery, and electronic enclosures. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA, No. 335-67-1), listed on 19 December 2012 and its related substances on 27 June 2018 owing to PBT characteristics and equivalent concern for , acts as a and processing aid in manufacturing. Key uses encompass production of (PTFE) for non-stick coatings, aqueous film-forming foams for , and surface treatments providing water, oil, and stain repellency in textiles and paper products. Bisphenol A (BPA, CAS No. 80-05-7), designated an SVHC on 12 January 2017 and upheld by the EU Court of Justice in March 2023 for endocrine-disrupting properties affecting human health, is a fundamental building block in plastics and resins. It enables rigid, transparent materials for applications such as reusable bottles, lenses, and protective linings in food and beverage cans, as well as pipelines and automotive components, with global production exceeding 10 million tonnes annually as of recent estimates. Lead sulfochromate yellow (C.I. Pigment Yellow 34, CAS No. 1344-37-2), added on 19 December 2013 for carcinogenic, mutagenic, and reprotoxic effects, provides a bright pigmentation. It is applied in solvent-based paints, coatings, plastics, and inks, particularly for durable color in road markings and high-performance finishes where is required.
SubstanceCAS No.Primary UsesSVHC Criteria (Date Added)
DEHP117-81-7PVC in cables, medical devices, Reprotoxic (2010)
HBCDD25637-99-4 in foams, textilesPBT (2012)
PFOA335-67-1 in fluoropolymers, firefighting foamsPBT, reprotoxic (2012)
BPA80-05-7 in polycarbonates, resins for cans, pipes (2017)
Lead sulfochromate yellow1344-37-2Pigment in paints, coatings, inksCMR (2013)

Purported Benefits

Health and Environmental Risk Mitigation

The identification and listing of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) under the REACH regulation is intended to mitigate health risks by requiring suppliers to disclose the presence of SVHCs in articles exceeding 0.1% by weight, enabling downstream users and s to assess and manage exposure to hazards such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, , or endocrine disruption. This communication obligation fosters informed substitution decisions, with empirical studies showing that SVHC listing activates reputational mechanisms in supply chains, prompting firms to reduce or eliminate targeted substances even prior to formal or restriction. For instance, REACH-driven efforts have led companies to phase out SVHCs like certain (e.g., DEHP) in products and devices, correlating with decreased usage trends observed from 2000 onward. Environmental risk mitigation purportedly occurs through incentives to replace persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) SVHCs, which pose long-term threats via accumulation in chains. Case studies successful substitutions, such as alternatives to hazardous flame retardants in , facilitated by REACH's authorization process, which surveys indicate has accelerated phase-outs across European industries. The candidate list, reaching 247 entries by January 2025, amplifies these effects by signaling regulatory intent, though realization depends on responsiveness and alternative availability. Overall, while SVHC mechanisms prioritize reduction over economic factors in , peer-reviewed analyses confirm partial efficacy in lowering exposure through , particularly for high-volume uses, though comprehensive causal attribution remains challenged by confounding regulatory overlaps like .

Incentives for Safer Alternatives

The identification of substances as SVHCs under REACH creates regulatory incentives for by imposing obligations on manufacturers and importers to assess and communicate risks throughout the , thereby pressuring downstream users to seek less hazardous options. Companies face duties to provide information on SVHC content above 0.1% in articles, which can deter market acceptance and prompt innovation in alternative materials or processes to maintain competitiveness. This mechanism aligns with REACH's , aiming to phase out SVHCs progressively where technically and economically feasible alternatives exist. Economic incentives stem primarily from avoided compliance costs associated with the authorization process, where continued use of SVHCs after in the Authorisation List requires applications demonstrating socio-economic benefits outweigh risks, often involving substantial fees and data generation expenses exceeding €100,000 per substance in some cases. allows firms to bypass these hurdles, reducing long-term liabilities from potential restrictions or bans; for instance, REACH's framework has motivated phase-out of solvents like in metal degreasing, with empirical studies showing accelerated adoption of aqueous cleaning alternatives post-regulatory scrutiny. While direct financial incentives like tax reductions have been proposed by groups to enhance , the core driver remains the intrinsic cost savings from preempting regulatory timelines, such as the 12-year review periods for Authorisation List entries. Market and reputational pressures further incentivize safer alternatives, as SVHC listings enable consumer "" provisions, influencing purchasing decisions and supplier preferences toward verifiable low-hazard profiles. ECHA reports increasing corporate shifts to greener technologies, with case studies demonstrating benefits like reduced environmental releases and enhanced product , though success depends on availability of viable alternatives without performance trade-offs. As of 2023, over 240 substances on the Candidate List have spurred R&D investments, with examples including phthalate replacements in plastics via bio-based polymers, yielding cost-neutral transitions in select applications when scaled. These dynamics foster a transition to safer chemistries, though empirical evidence indicates variable efficacy, with rates higher for readily replaceable uses than for essential applications lacking equivalents.

Criticisms and Empirical Challenges

Economic and Innovation Impacts

The identification and regulation of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) under REACH has imposed significant compliance costs on industries, particularly through the authorisation process required for continued use after a sunset date. Authorisation applications carry a base of €54,100, but total expenses frequently surpass €1 million per substance-use combination due to demands for extensive toxicological , exposure assessments, and socio-economic analyses. These costs escalate for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which face disproportionate burdens from fixed administrative requirements and limited resources for dossier preparation, often leading to market withdrawal or substitution to unproven alternatives rather than authorisation pursuits. Broader economic analyses indicate that restricting SVHC uses foregoes substantial societal benefits from controlled applications, estimated at €14.9 billion annually across authorised cases, while efforts incur additional R&D and reformulation expenses that can exceed €100,000 per product line. groups report that ongoing SVHC-related obligations contribute to REACH's total annual compliance burden of approximately €2.5 billion for businesses, exacerbating pressures on chemical manufacturers and downstream sectors like automotive and . Recent revisions, such as digital reporting mandates, are projected to raise SME costs by up to 40%, prompting concerns over production to regions with laxer regulations and eroding competitiveness. On , SVHC listings introduce regulatory that discourages in chemical , as firms anticipate potential future candidate list inclusions requiring costly re-evaluations. Empirical studies on regulatory intensity show that firms approaching thresholds for heightened oversight, akin to SVHC triggers, reduce patenting activity and R&D expenditure, with propensity dropping as diverts resources from core technological advancement. Critics argue this bureaucratic framework favors large incumbents capable of absorbing authorisation timelines—often spanning years—over agile innovators, while mandating substitutions may lock industries into marginally safer but less efficient materials, impeding breakthroughs in performance-critical applications like batteries or polymers. Although some analyses claim SVHC pressures enhance novelty in low-toxicity chemicals, the net effect remains contested, with evidence of slowed overall sector growth amid global rivals unencumbered by equivalent burdens.

Questions of Proportionality and Evidence

Critics of the SVHC framework under REACH contend that designations often prioritize intrinsic hazardous properties—such as carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, reproductive toxicity (CMR), persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity (PBT), or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) characteristics—over comprehensive risk assessments incorporating actual exposure levels, potentially leading to disproportionate regulatory burdens. This hazard-based identification process, outlined in Article 57, identifies substances warranting eventual authorization or restriction without mandating quantitative exposure data at the listing stage, raising questions about whether measures like supply chain notifications or phase-outs align with the principle of proportionality embedded in EU law, which requires actions to be suitable, necessary, and no more burdensome than needed to achieve objectives. For instance, the 0.1% concentration threshold in articles triggers obligations regardless of end-use exposure, which some analyses argue overlooks safe handling practices or low-release applications, such as in industrial seals or legacy equipment where substitution could compromise functionality without clear health gains. Empirical evidence on realized risks from SVHCs frequently reveals gaps between profiles and population-level harms. Tiered assessments for persistent mobile toxic chemicals in , for example, concluded that consumption levels of listed substances were unlikely to pose health risks, as modeled exposures fell below toxicological reference values. Similarly, evaluations of —common SVHCs like DEHP— in and estimated aggregate exposures as low, with margins of exceeding thresholds for developmental or reproductive effects in s. These findings underscore challenges in linking SVHC status to causal harm, particularly where derive from high-dose extrapolated to low-dose scenarios, often without accounting for metabolic differences or real-world . Proponents of the system invoke the to justify listings amid uncertainties, arguing that irreversible effects like endocrine disruption warrant preemptive action even absent definitive . Yet, independent reviews highlight that REACH's mixed -risk can amplify perceived threats from unproven associations, as seen in delays or dilutions of restrictions influenced by socio-economic analyses during , where industry-submitted models sometimes prevail over conservative assumptions. The evidentiary threshold for SVHC identification demands "sufficient" demonstration of properties via case-by-case evaluations by committees and ECHA, but lacks standardized metrics for quality, leading to variability. For non-threshold hazards like CMR Category 1A/B, classifications under CLP suffice, relying on mechanistic or observational data that may not quantify dose-response below occupational levels. Criticisms from regulatory analyses note that while peer-reviewed underpins many listings, advocacy-driven proposals can incorporate weaker or epidemiological signals, potentially biasing toward inclusion without robust . Quantitative retrospectives on pre-REACH exposures to SVHCs like lead or show historical risks tied to high exposures now curtailed by unrelated controls, questioning the additive value of SVHC-specific measures for legacy or trace presences. Overall, while SVHC processes have prompted safer alternatives in high-exposure sectors, the paucity of longitudinal studies tracking post-listing outcomes—beyond rates—fuels debates on whether justifies the framework's expansive scope, with calls for greater emphasis on modeling to enhance .

Influence of Advocacy vs. Causal Evidence

The identification of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) under the EU's REACH regulation has been substantially influenced by from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which prioritize precautionary classifications over rigorous assessments of causal incorporating data and mechanistic . Groups such as the International Chemical Secretariat (ChemSec) maintain the Substitute It Now (SIN) List, an independent compilation of over 1,000 chemicals flagged as fulfilling REACH SVHC criteria under Article 57, including carcinogens, mutagens, reprotoxicants, persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs), and endocrine disruptors. This list, updated independently of the (ECHA), aims to accelerate regulatory action by pressuring member states, ECHA, and industry to propose candidates for the official list, often citing classifications from systems like the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) or International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that emphasize intrinsic properties without mandatory thresholds for real-world or human causality. In contrast, causal evidence for SVHC designation requires demonstration of serious effects through toxicological or epidemiological data, yet the process frequently relies on high-dose or assays extrapolated to low- human scenarios, sidelining factors like dose-response curves, biological plausibility, and consistency across studies as outlined in frameworks. REACH's hazard-focused approach under Article 57 identifies SVHCs based on potential for harm—such as CMR categories classified under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008—without initial integration of assessments, which are deferred to or restriction stages. This has drawn criticism for enabling listings where advocacy amplifies precautionary concerns, even when population-level data indicate negligible risk; for example, certain like DEHP were proposed amid NGO campaigns despite debates over endocrine effects at trace environmental levels, with human studies showing inconsistent causal links beyond occupational exposures exceeding 1 mg/kg body weight daily. NGO lobbying, including submissions to ECHA's public consultations and campaigns by entities like and ChemSec, has expedited inclusions on the Candidate List, which grew to 247 entries by August 2025, by framing data as sufficient proxies for risk despite limited verification of causal pathways in relevant contexts. Such efforts align with the invoked when scientific uncertainty persists, but empirical analyses reveal that SVHC decisions often overlook quantitative risk modeling, leading to regulatory actions where benefits—measured in avoided incidence—are not verifiably tied to the interventions, as seen in cases where listed substances pose risks below endogenous levels or background exposures. While NGO-driven aids consumer awareness, their -centric advocacy can outpace causal validation, potentially driven by institutional incentives favoring restriction over balanced evaluation, as opposed to risk-based paradigms that weigh probabilistic harm against socioeconomic costs.

Broader Implications

Effects on EU Industry and Competitiveness

The identification of substances as of very high concern (SVHCs) under the 's REACH regulation imposes significant compliance obligations on industries reliant on them, including supply chain notifications, safety data sheets, and eventual or requirements, which elevate production costs and administrative burdens. These measures contribute to the broader regulatory pressures on the chemical sector, where annual compliance expenses from environmental rules, encompassing REACH and SVHC processes, surpass €20 billion for companies operating in the , eroding profit margins and pricing power against global competitors unbound by equivalent standards. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which constitute a substantial portion of downstream users in sectors like and plastics, bear a disproportionate share of these costs due to limited resources for testing, legal expertise, and reformulation, often resulting in market withdrawals or reduced innovation capacity. Empirical assessments highlight how SVHC listings incentivize substance phase-outs, yet the absence of viable alternatives frequently leads to higher input prices and supply disruptions, with SMEs facing unit compliance costs that can deter participation in the . The cumulative effect has manifested in a contraction of chemical , down 6-8% in recent years, amid heightened from low-regulation regions like and the , where producers avoid similar authorization hurdles and benefit from lower energy expenses. analyses attribute part of this competitiveness erosion to REACH's SVHC framework, which, while intended to spur safer innovations, has correlated with a diminished global market share for EU chemicals—from around 30% in the early to approximately 14% by 2023—exacerbated by regulatory delays in assessments influenced by economic . In turn, this has prompted plant closures and considerations of relocation to jurisdictions with laxer chemical controls, though direct causal attribution to SVHCs remains entangled with factors like energy prices. To mitigate these impacts, the outlined REACH revisions in 2025, targeting a 35% cut in administrative burdens for SMEs through streamlined processes and digitalization, acknowledging that unchecked SVHC expansions risk further undermining the sector's €564 billion annual contribution and 1.17 million direct jobs. Despite purported long-term gains in from incentives, short-term evidence underscores concerns, as regulatory costs often outpace verifiable risk reductions without equivalent global .

Global Regulatory Harmonization and Trade

The Union's REACH regulation extends obligations for substances of very high concern (SVHCs) to imported articles, mandating notification to the (ECHA) when SVHC concentrations exceed 0.1% by weight, and requiring authorization for listed SVHC uses under Annex XIV, regardless of origin. This extraterritorial reach imposes compliance costs on non-EU exporters, including testing, mapping, and potential reformulation, effectively functioning as a non-tariff that restricts without explicit tariffs. Empirical analyses have quantified these burdens, with REACH-related compliance estimated to add significant administrative and testing expenses for global suppliers, particularly in sectors like electronics and textiles where SVHCs such as or are prevalent. These measures influence global flows, as evidenced by shifts in patterns where downstream users favor EU-based suppliers to avoid non-compliance risks, potentially disadvantaging efficient foreign producers. The U.S. Trade Representative has highlighted REACH, including SVHC provisions, in annual reports on foreign barriers, noting duplicated regulatory efforts and lack of that exacerbate costs for U.S. exporters. While intended to mitigate health and environmental risks, critics argue that such prioritizes precautionary approaches over of actual hazards, with limited causal data linking specific SVHC import restrictions to measurable risk reductions in the . International remains limited for SVHC and , as the process is embedded in REACH's EU-specific framework, contrasting with broader global efforts like the UN's Globally Harmonized System (GHS) for hazard classification and initiatives for mutual acceptance of test data. The promotes data sharing and standardized testing through tools like Harmonised Templates and the Mutual Acceptance of Data () principle, adopted by over 40 countries since 1981, but these do not cover SVHC prioritization or authorization decisions, leading to regulatory divergence. Some non-EU jurisdictions, such as and , have adopted analogous high-concern lists inspired by REACH, yet without reciprocal recognition, resulting in redundant compliance for multinational firms and ongoing trade frictions. Proposals for enhanced coordination on persistent risks exist, but progress is slowed by differing national priorities between precautionary EU policies and more exposure-based assessments elsewhere.

References

  1. [1]
    Substances of very high concern identification - ECHA
    Substances that may have serious and often irreversible effects on human health and the environment can be identified as substances of very high concern (SVHCs ...
  2. [2]
    What Are REACH Substances of Very High Concern? | Assent
    Substances of Very High Concern (SVHCs) are chemicals that have serious effects on human health or the environment.
  3. [3]
    Authorisation - ECHA - European Union
    The SVHC identification process includes a 45-day consultation. Once a substance is identified as an SVHC, it is included in the Candidate List. The inclusion ...
  4. [4]
    Candidate List substances in articles - ECHA - European Union
    The identification of a substance as a Substance of Very High Concern (SVHC) and its inclusion in the Candidate List can trigger certain legal obligations.
  5. [5]
    Understanding REACH Authorisations - Assent
    REACH authorization allows use of SVHCs for specific purposes, added from the Candidate List, and allows continued use until a safer alternative is found.
  6. [6]
    Understanding REACH - ECHA - European Union
    REACH stands for Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals. It entered into force on 1 June 2007.REACH Legislation · A REACH-rendelet megértése · Substance Identification
  7. [7]
    Candidate List of substances of very high concern for Authorisation
    The REACH Candidate list will be available in our new chemicals database, ECHA CHEM, since 16 September 2025.
  8. [8]
    The “essential criteria” for SVHC substances uses under REACH
    Nov 28, 2024 · SVHCs are substances that are added to Annex XIV of the REACH regulation only when they are deemed a priority by ECHA. They are covered by the ...
  9. [9]
    REACH Regulation - Environment - European Commission
    The REACH Regulation (EC 1907/2006) entered into force in 2007 and has since evolved to reflect the advancement of knowledge regarding various chemicals and ...
  10. [10]
    Factsheet - 32006R1907 | European Free Trade Association
    Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council ... 18.12.2006 Adoption date in the EU. Legal act in EU languages: EUR-LEX ...
  11. [11]
    Proposals to identify Substances of Very High Concern previous ...
    SVHC are defined in Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 ("the REACH Regulation") and include substances which are: Carcinogenic, ...
  12. [12]
    [article57] REACH - Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and ...
    (a) substances meeting the criteria for classification as carcinogenic category 1 or 2 in accordance with Directive 67/548/EEC;. (b) substances meeting the ...
  13. [13]
    ECHA Publishes 15 Substances on the Candidate SVHC List - Intertek
    Oct 29, 2008 · ECHA Publishes 15 Substances on the Candidate SVHC List. 29 Oct 2008. Substances, Preparations and articles with these candidate SVHCs have ...
  14. [14]
    EU REACH: The Continued March of Candidate SVHC Lists and the ...
    Mar 1, 2010 · In October 2008 the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) produced the first candidate list of 15 substances of very high concern (SVHCs). Last ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Authorisation of Substances of Very High Concern listed in Annex ...
    The first six substances were included in Annex XIV REACH in February. 2011 (Regulation (EU) 143/2011 and its. Corrigendum). Authorisation application can be ...
  16. [16]
    SVHC Roadmap to 2020 - ECHA - European Union
    Implemented since 2013, the Roadmap for SVHC identification and implementation of REACH risk management measures from now to 2020 (SVHC Roadmap) states an ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] SVHC Roadmap 2020 – achievements and extended aims
    Since 2013, ECHA, Member State authorities and the. European Commission have worked together under the SVHC Roadmap 2020 to identify substances of very high ...
  18. [18]
    ECHA adds three hazardous chemicals to the Candidate List
    ECHA adds three hazardous chemicals to the Candidate List. ECHA/NR/25/20. The Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC) now contains 250 ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Identification of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) under the ...
    According to Article 57 of the REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, substances of very high concern are substances that meet the criteria for classification as ...
  20. [20]
    REACH Substances of Very High Concern - H S E N I
    Substances giving rise to an equivalent level of concern to substances meeting the above criteria. Such substances may have endocrine disrupting properties or ...
  21. [21]
    Substances of very high concern identification - ECHA
    ### Summary of SVHC Identification Process
  22. [22]
    [article59] REACH - Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and ...
    10. The Agency shall publish and update the list referred to in paragraph 1 on its website without delay after a decision on inclusion of a substance has been ...
  23. [23]
    ECHA Adds Five SVHC to the Candidate List - SGS
    On January 23, 2024, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) announced the addition of five substances to the Candidate List of substances of very high concern ( ...
  24. [24]
    ECHA adds one hazardous chemical to the Candidate List
    Helsinki, 7 November 2024 - ECHA's Member State Committee confirmed the addition of triphenyl phosphate to the list in its October meeting. The substance has ...
  25. [25]
    ECHA Weekly - 7 November 2024
    Nov 7, 2024 · The list now contains 242 entries for chemicals that can harm people or the environment.<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    ECHA Expands SVHC Candidate List: Key Changes for 2025
    Mar 10, 2025 · On January 21, 2025, five hazardous chemicals were officially added to the list, while an existing entry was updated to reflect its endocrine-disrupting ...<|separator|>
  27. [27]
    ECHA Adds Three SVHCs to the Candidate List - SGS
    Jul 1, 2025 · On June 25, 2025, the ECHA announced the addition of three substances to the Candidate list of substances of very high concern (SVHC) for authorization.<|control11|><|separator|>
  28. [28]
    ECHA Proposes Adding 3 New Substances to SVHC List
    Sep 3, 2025 · ECHA Considers Adding n-Hexane to SVHC Candidate List. Feb 28, 2025. Five Substances Added to the SVHC Candidate List, Bringing the Total to 247.
  29. [29]
    Rare Third Update to REACH's SVHC List - Z2Data
    Nov 7, 2024 · In 2024, ECHA added five new substances in January and one in June. With this third update, a total of seven new substances have been added to ...
  30. [30]
    New update to Candidate List of SVHCs - Eurofins
    On the 25th of June 2025, the ECHA (European Chemicals Agency) released the new Candidate List of SVHCs with the addition of three new substances.
  31. [31]
    SVHC Candidate List Update 2025 - SiliconExpert
    Aug 1, 2025 · The ECHA had previously added 5 hazardous chemicals to the SVHC Candidate List on January, 21st 2025. The ECHA also updated a previous substance ...
  32. [32]
    Authorisation - Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs
    Title VII of REACH establishes an authorisation requirement to ensure that the risks from substances of very high concern (SVHC) are properly controlled.
  33. [33]
    Restriction procedure - ECHA - European Union
    Within three months of receiving two committees' opinions, the Commission will provide a draft amendment to the list of restrictions in Annex XVII to REACH. ...
  34. [34]
    Substances restricted under REACH - ECHA - European Union
    The list of substances restricted under REACH will be available in our new chemicals database, ECHA CHEM, since 16 September 2025.
  35. [35]
    Authorisation List - ECHA - European Union
    The REACH Authorisation list will be available in our new chemicals database, ECHA CHEM, since 16 September 2025.
  36. [36]
    Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) - Yordas Group
    SVHC stands for 'Substance of Very High Concern'. In general terms, an SVHC is a substance meeting one or more of the following criteria.
  37. [37]
    Di-(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) - DCCEEW
    Jun 30, 2022 · DEHP is a manufactured chemical that makes plastic more flexible. Its primary use is as one of several plasticisers in polyvinyl chloride resins.
  38. [38]
    hbcdd - Substance Information - ECHA - European Union
    Jun 5, 2022 · Substance of very high concern (SVHC) and included in the candidate list for authorisation. Substance of very high concern requiring ...
  39. [39]
    Hexabromocyclododecane - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    HBCDD is a brominated flame retardant and is used in insulators in polystyrene plastics, textiles and electronic devices as well as in insulation board in house ...
  40. [40]
    PFOA - Substance Information - ECHA - European Union
    Authorisation of use of SVHC · (RAC and SEAC) · SVHC identification (MSC) · Draft ... perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts and PFOA-related substances ...
  41. [41]
    Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts and PFOA-related substances
    Jun 19, 2017 · They are used in a wide variety of applications such as in the fluoropolymer and fluoroelastomer production, as surfactants in fire-fighting ...<|separator|>
  42. [42]
    Bisphenols - ECHA - European Union
    The Candidate List of substances of very high concern (SVHC) contains three bisphenols. BPA and BPB have been identified as endocrine disruptors for the ...
  43. [43]
    Risk Management for Bisphenol A (BPA) | US EPA
    BPA is a high production volume (HPV) chemical widely used in manufacturing polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins used in nearly every industry.
  44. [44]
  45. [45]
    Lead and chromium in European road paints - ScienceDirect.com
    Jan 1, 2023 · Lead chromate was commonly employed as a pigment in coloured road markings until restrictions led to the development of safer alternatives.
  46. [46]
    Summary of obligations resulting from inclusion of SVHCS in the ...
    EU or EEA suppliers of articles which contain substances on the Candidate List in a concentration above 0.1% w/w have to provide sufficient information to allow ...
  47. [47]
    Impacts of the REACH candidate list of substances subject to ...
    This research paper analyzes the reputational mechanism of the candidate list showing a potential to stigmatize not only the substances as such but also ...
  48. [48]
    Impact of European chemicals regulation on the industrial use of ...
    This paper investigates the impact of chemicals regulation on substitution of chemicals by analyzing time trends in the industrial use of chemicals from 2000 ...
  49. [49]
    REACH authorisation and the substitution of hazardous chemicals
    Sep 1, 2022 · Through a survey with European companies and expert interviews we study how REACH authorisation affects the phase-out of hazardous chemicals ...
  50. [50]
    Real-life cases - ECHA - European Union
    The alternatives to hazardous substances are presented in a database of case studies (languages: German and English). The case studies are meant to serve as ...Missing: success | Show results with:success
  51. [51]
  52. [52]
    The implementation of the substitution principle in European ...
    Dec 5, 2023 · However, several studies indicate that substitution of SVHCs has taken place and that the REACH authorisation process has been an important ...
  53. [53]
    Economic interests cloud hazard reductions in the European ... - NIH
    Nov 5, 2022 · Here we investigate how the conflicts between hazard reduction and economic interests have shaped the regulation of substances of very high concern (SVHCs)
  54. [54]
    Substitution of hazardous chemicals - ECHA - European Union
    Companies in the EU are increasingly substituting away from hazardous chemicals and manufacturing processes to safer chemicals and greener technologies.Missing: incentives | Show results with:incentives
  55. [55]
    REACH SVHC Candidate List: Promoting Safety & Sustainability
    Dec 28, 2023 · A distinctive feature of the authorization process is that it doesn't provide indefinite permission. Instead, it grants authorization for a ...
  56. [56]
    [PDF] Economic incentives for alternatives to hazardous chemicals
    This report explores the nature of economic incentives present within different types of chemicals regulations and policy measures. A key measure for regulating ...
  57. [57]
    Greater EU SVHC substitution incentives needed – industry
    Nov 22, 2018 · EU authorities should "motivate" companies to actively look for alternatives to SVHCs by providing "positive incentives", such as tax cuts ...Missing: economic replacement
  58. [58]
    Where are the SVHCs? 10 years consumer's 'right to know ... - NIH
    Jul 20, 2017 · The European chemicals regulation REACH 1907/2006/EC [1] introduced a new communication duty concerning substances of very high concern ...
  59. [59]
    Regulatory Risk Management of EU REACH: CLH, SVHC ...
    Jul 31, 2025 · Substances of very high concern (SVHC) are a critical risk management category in the REACH regulation, specifically referring to chemicals ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  60. [60]
    Comprehensive Guide to REACH Authorisation Costs - EcoMundo
    Navigate the complexities of REACH Authorisation with our expert guide. Learn about costs, timelines, and strategies for a successful application process.
  61. [61]
    Commission adjusts SVHC authorisation fees - ENDS Europe
    Jun 26, 2018 · The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) will continue to charge an unchanged base fee of €54,100 which covers the application for an authorisation ...
  62. [62]
    Does regulation hinder or help innovation? - LinkedIn
    Feb 27, 2025 · For example, the EU's REACH chemical regulations have been criticized for placing a heavy administrative and testing burden on companies, ...
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Socio-economic impacts of REACH authorisations
    Benefits of authorisation to SVHC users relate to the continued use of substances where technically feasible and economically viable alternatives are not ...
  64. [64]
    REACH Authorisation: Balancing Costs with Health Benefits
    According to ECHA's latest study on the socio-economic impact of REACH, the cost to business is estimated at around 2.5 billion per year since REACH came into ...
  65. [65]
    Major Reform to EU REACH Regulation Impacts the Cosmetics ...
    Apr 22, 2025 · The European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) pointed out that the digital transformation is expected to increase costs for SMEs by 40%, and ...<|separator|>
  66. [66]
    Revision of the REACH regulation - a BusinessEurope position paper
    Jul 17, 2025 · The revision of the REACH Regulation must be in line with the Commission's general objective of making Europe more competitive, more resilient ...
  67. [67]
    Does regulation hurt innovation? This study says yes - MIT Sloan
    Jun 7, 2023 · Firms are less likely to innovate if increasing their head count leads to additional regulation, a new study from MIT Sloan finds.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Monitoring the Impacts of REACH on Innovation, Competitiveness ...
    The overarching objective of this study on the impacts of REACH on innovation, competitiveness and SMEs is to evaluate changes to the operational conditions and ...
  69. [69]
    Steering responsible innovation: the impact of EU REACH ...
    Jul 24, 2024 · EU REACH legislation, specifically the SVHC list, increased chemical patent novelty and decreased their toxicity.
  70. [70]
    EU chemical regulation REACH faces obstacles despite successes
    Nov 14, 2024 · The EU's REACH regulation, designed to manage chemical substances and protect public health, faces criticism for slow processes and heavy industry reliance.
  71. [71]
    Regulating Chemical Substances under REACH: The Choice ...
    Aug 13, 2014 · The two key REACH programmes for direct 'command and control' regulation of chemical risk are 'restriction' and 'authorization'. In the case of ...<|separator|>
  72. [72]
    A structured analysis of the selection of risk management options in ...
    A REACH restriction process can be initiated by regulatory authorities of EU member states, by the European CHemicals Agency (ECHA) either on its own initiative ...Missing: criticisms evidence
  73. [73]
    REACH Authorisation for Low Volumes/ Legacy Spare Parts
    Proportionality – authorisation requirements should be 'proportionate' against the ability to comply due to certification restrictions, and against the volume ...
  74. [74]
    A tiered assessment of human health risks associated with exposure ...
    Jan 1, 2025 · Overall, these results suggest that the consumption of all the compounds considered via drinking water is unlikely to pose a health risk.
  75. [75]
    Assessing Human Exposure to Chemicals in Materials, Products ...
    Jul 25, 2022 · The study concluded that the overall exposure to phthalates from use of cosmetic and personal care products is low and is unlikely to pose a ...
  76. [76]
    Risk and the Precautionary Principle in the Implementation of REACH
    Jun 27, 2006 · Candidate List, and also SVHC lists compiled by. NGOs, is regarded as black lists by companies.50 In some cases the inclusion of substances ...
  77. [77]
    Hazard v. Risk in EU Chemicals Regulation - ResearchGate
    Aug 10, 2025 · Under EU chemicals legislation, hazard assessment is regulated by CLP, while risk assessment is regulated in REACH (Registration, Evaluation, ...
  78. [78]
    Policy Monitor—The Economics of Toxic Substance Control and the ...
    Finally, the impact of economic instruments can be further increased through the use of disclosure mechanisms such as the TRI or the candidate list under REACH ...
  79. [79]
    The SIN List is based on the EU REACH criteria
    The SIN List consists of chemicals that have been identified by ChemSec as being SVHCs, based on the criteria defined within REACH.
  80. [80]
    BAuA - SUBSPORTplus - Substances - ChemSec: SIN list
    The ChemSec SIN List is an NGO driven project intended to identify Substances of Very High Concern ( SVHC ) based on REACH criteria. The aim is to push the ...
  81. [81]
    REACH and SVHCs
    At the heart of the authorisation process is a Candidate List of chemicals that meet the criteria for Substances of Very High Concern as defined in the ...Missing: regulation | Show results with:regulation
  82. [82]
    [PDF] navigating REACH - Panda.org
    The candidate list of SVHC will be drawn up by the newly created European Chemicals. Agency in Helsinki. Campaigns and product testing by the NGOs have focused ...
  83. [83]
    [PDF] using REACH - ChemSec
    Candidate list, an NGO can identify substan- ces that are not permitted or are restricted in the EU. Additionally, NGOs have created a list of substances of ...
  84. [84]
    Risk Assessment and Alternatives Assessment: Comparing Two ...
    Risk assessment is designed to answer the question: “Is this chemical or product safe enough for the intended use?” in contrast to an alternatives assessment, ...Missing: debate | Show results with:debate
  85. [85]
    Hazard, Exposure, and Risk Assessment - The Acta Group
    Some regulatory schemes place the burden of hazard, exposure, and risk assessments on the registrant; in other cases, governments perform these assessments.
  86. [86]
    EU's green push costs chemical firms more than $20 billion annually ...
    Apr 17, 2025 · The European Union's increasingly stringent environmental regulations are saddling global chemical companies with more than $20 billion in annual costs.
  87. [87]
    Making REACH work for SMEs: SMEunited calls for a more ...
    Feb 20, 2025 · While REACH has significantly improved chemical safety and data quality, its bureaucratic burden disproportionately affects SMEs, limiting their ...
  88. [88]
    [PDF] The Consequences of REACH for SMEs - EESC
    Oct 12, 2013 · 58 The greatest incentives for withdrawals are the unit costs of registration and the listing of substances as SVHC on the candidate list.59.Missing: offshoring | Show results with:offshoring
  89. [89]
    Chemical Sovereignty or Decline? Why Europe's Chemical Future ...
    Jul 31, 2025 · All these elevated expenses, compounded by expensive import regulations, have minimised output: overall EU chemical production is down by 6–8 %, ...
  90. [90]
    [PDF] THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE EUROPEAN CHEMICAL ... - Cefic
    Jan 1, 2025 · Increased competition from regions like the USA and. China, lack of demand, rising energy costs, and stringent regulations, among other factors,.
  91. [91]
    Tipping point: Threats to jobs and growth in Europe's chemical sector
    Oct 9, 2025 · Our report for INEOS explains why the European chemical industry is undergoing a severe and sustained contraction.Missing: loss SVHC
  92. [92]
    EU Plans Chemicals Regulation Overhaul in 2025 to Reduce ...
    Feb 13, 2025 · The planned regulatory simplifications aim to reduce administrative burdens by 35% for SMEs, making compliance less costly and time-consuming.
  93. [93]
    EU Chemical Industry Groups Question REACH Revision Proposal
    Apr 25, 2025 · The organization highlights that the chemical sector generates €564 billion annually for the EU and directly employs 1.17 million workers. It ...
  94. [94]
    SVHC in imported articles: REACH authorisation requirement ...
    Aug 8, 2016 · The extended authorisation requirement prevents SVHC from entering the EEA market as part of imported articles except where this is justified.
  95. [95]
    (PDF) SVHC in imported articles: REACH authorisation requirement ...
    Aug 1, 2016 · The authorisation scheme does, however, only apply to SVHC used in the EEA. As a consequence, REACH does not regulate SVHC entering the European ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] REACH REVISITED - Trung tâm WTO
    EU REACH REGULATION IS A NON-TARIFF. BARRIER TO TRADE ... non-tariff trade barrier because they have served to restrict international ...
  97. [97]
    [PDF] Is REACH a trade barrier?
    Mar 11, 2017 · Some EU downstream users have begun to shift chemical substance procurement to EU sources to reduce REACH registration non compliance risks.Missing: SVHC | Show results with:SVHC
  98. [98]
    [PDF] FOREIGN TRADE BARRIERS - USTR
    Mar 31, 2021 · The TPSC is composed of the following Executive Branch entities: the Departments of Agriculture,. Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human ...
  99. [99]
    Chemical safety and biosafety - OECD
    The OECD helps countries develop and implement policies for safeguarding human health and the environment, and in making their systems for managing chemicals ...
  100. [100]
    Harmonised Templates - OECD
    The OECD Harmonised Templates (OHTs) are standard data formats for reporting information on chemicals to determine their properties or effects on human health ...Missing: SVHC | Show results with:SVHC
  101. [101]
    [PDF] keeping-up-with-global-chemical-regulatory-changes---an-eu ... - ERM
    Within the European Union (EU), regulation adds value in areas such as competition, trade, and the internal market to build an equal playing field.
  102. [102]
    [PDF] Government Risk Management Approaches Used for Chemicals ...
    This document provides a synthesis of the various risk management approaches and options that are used by OECD member country government chemical regulatory ...Missing: SVHC | Show results with:SVHC