The Interface between REACH and CAD/CMD

Transcription

1 Health and and Safety Executive The Interface between REACH and CAD/CMD Robin Foster International Chemicals Unit Health & Safety Executive

2 Presentation outline Two worlds in regulation of chemicals at the workplace REACH OSH, and in particular CAD/CMD Both impose duties on employers Making the requirements fit together Not always easy, but we have tried! Three specific issues

3 Two worlds REACH: Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 CAD/CMD: Occupational Health and Safety (OSH) requirements under the Framework Directive (89/391/EC), including the Chemicals Agents Directive (CAD, 98/24/EC) and the Carcinogens and Mutagens Directive (CMD, 2004/37/EC) [also the Personal Protective Equipment Directive (89/686/EC) and the Use of Work Equipment Directive (2009/104/EC)]

4 Independent co-existence REACH: Article 2(4)(a) This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to: (a) Community workplace and environmental legislation, including Council Directive 89/391/EC Directive 98/24/EC and Directive 2004/37/EC;

5 Two worlds high level differences REACH Direct-acting EU Regulation Single market standards that apply Broad framework: workers, consumers, environment Duties on manufacturers, importers, downstream users in relation to specific substances (manufactured or marketed) Duties to communicate information down (and up) the supply chain CAD/CMD Directives transposed by Member States Social policy minimum (though high) standards Protection of workers Duties on employers in relation to hazardous chemical agents (includes in-situ generated fumes, dusts, etc) Includes: exposure to hazardous chemical agents in combination Information/training for workers, health surveillance

6 Two worlds continued REACH Risk assessment by registrants starting at top of the supply chain Exceptionally duties transfer to downstream users Progressive replacement SVHCs from supply and use Authorisation CAD/CMD Workplace specific risk assessment by employers Elimination or minimisation of risk, preferably by substitution by non-hazardous or less hazardous process or chemical agent Under CMD substitution mandatory if technically feasible

7 Two worlds continued REACH Workplace control by compliance with risk management measures identified by registrant DNELs, DMELs Indirectly applied Used to determine risk management measures CAD/CMD Workplace control by providing and maintaining control measures identified in employers risk assessment IOELVs, BOELVs, BLVs Directly applied (via national implementing law) Health surveillance in line with national laws and practices

8 Tension? REACH architects view: Existing system not delivered New approach Onus on suppliers Supply chain communication OSH practitioners view: Wary of REACH and prescriptive solutions Distrust industry Concerned that industry setting limits What happens if?

9 or synergy? Together REACH and CAD/CMD should mean: Employers and workers are better informed about hazards and risks from the chemicals used Better protection However, avoid duplicating requirements on employers Guidance for employers on controlling risks from chemicals: Interface between Chemical Agents Directive and REACH at the Workplace

10 Step-by-step approach for employers 1. Identify the presence of substances in the workplace that are hazardous to workers health or the environment 2. Study any REACH risk management measures in the SDS and the associated exposure scenarios 3. If appropriate tell your supplier of the use made of the substance and help them prepare an exposure scenario

11 Step-by-step approach for employers 4. Assess whether the use of a hazardous substance can be eliminated or if a less hazardous alternative can be found as a substitute 5. Where exposure is unavoidable, continue to follow CAD requirements Assess risks to the health and safety of workers Prevent and control exposure

12 Step-by-step approach for employers 6. Compare the CAD risk assessment / control measures with the corresponding REACH RMMs Demonstrate adequate CAD assessment taking into account all information from the supplier Demonstrate control measures from CAD assessment achieve DNELs from supplier (RMMs don t have to be the same if equivalent level of protection) If disagree with suppliers risk assessment provide feedback up the supply chain 7. Check controls in place meet CAD, including substitution, hierarchy of control measures and use of PPE

13 Some specific issues Restrict to 3!

14 Exposure reduction Under REACH for an authorised SVHC Notwithstanding any conditions of an authorisation, the holder shall ensure that the exposure is reduced to as low a level as is technically and practically possible (Article 60(10)) Under CMD for a carcinogen or mutagen... The employer shall ensure that the level of exposure of workers is reduced to as low a level as is technically possible (Article 5(3)) Helpful to have the same words, and so the same duty for exposure reduction, in both REACH and CMD

15 Exemption from authorisation REACH allows exemption from authorisation for certain uses provided that, on the basis of existing specific Community legislation relating to the protection of human health for the use of the substance the risk is properly controlled. (Article 58(2)) Has been interpreted: where a substance has a BOELV [IOELV] under CAD / CMD, then workplace use of that substance outside authorisation. Undermines REACH authorisation Presence or absence of BOELV for a substance haphazard (and even if present may not be protective if set many years ago)

16 Selecting substances for authorisation Why trichloroethylene? Priorities: Hazard vs risk Industry charter: no supply unless used in closed systems meeting European Standard EN Threshold carcinogen, so health-based limit can be set (SCOEL Group C) Already national exposure limits in many MS (typically around 50ppm) Alternatives have comparable hazards? Message from early authorisation?

17 Conclusions REACH should improve worker health and safety by: Gathering new data Establishing new channels of communication between employers and suppliers Removing from the market substances of concern REACH and CAD / CMD exist in parallel REACH should not duplicate employers obligations Ideally risk assessment by suppliers under REACH and by employers under CAD / CMD should lead to the same controls Although reality will not always match the ideal, improved communication (up and down) will help Synergy, not tension Work still needed to smooth the interface.

18