European Plasticisers contributes to the public consultation on the Danish CLH dossier on DINP

31 May 2017

31 May 2017, Brussels – Further to the publication by ECHA of the CLH dossier submitted by Denmark proposing the classification as toxic to reproduction Category 1B, a public consultation was held during one and a half months, ending on 19 May 2017.

European Plasticisers contributed to the public consultation by submitting substantial comments which, based on a thorough analysis of the available toxicological data, conclude that a classification of DINP is not warranted. This conclusion is validated by in-depth quantitative weight of evidence evaluation conducted by Professor W. Dekant and Professor J.W. Bridges and published in a renowned peer reviewed journal[1]. Furthermore, the comments from European Plasticisers conclude that the evidence and rationale brought forward by Danish EPA does not justify classification according to the criteria in the CLP regulation.

The dossier submitter (Danish EPA) will prepare a response to the public comments for review by ECHA Risk Assessment Committee (RAC), and an opinion on the proposal will be prepared by the nominated RAC rapporteur/s addressing the contributions of all stakeholders. This draft opinion will then be discussed by the RAC experts in meetings which will also include industry observers and experts. A final opinion will then be issued with the process likely to take a further 9 – 12 months. The European Commission is then responsible for any required regulatory action under the CLP.

 

To read the full set of comments submitted by European Plasticisers into the public consultation, please click here.

For more information about the RAC process, please click here

For further information on the comments submitted by European Plasticisers, please contact:

Dr Jean-Luc Wietor
European Plasticisers Manager
+32 02676 7304
jlw@cefic.be

[1]     W. Dekant, J. Bridges “Assessment of reproductive and developmental effects of DINP, DnHP and DCHP using quantitative weight of evidence”, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Volume 81, November 2016 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027323001630280X