What topic are you interested in?

Subscribe | About | Help

< All Topics
Print

Chemicals Coffee Time Monthly, January 2025

Posted10/02/2025
Updated09/02/2025
Byghsclassif1stg

Dear Reader,

Happy New Year! and Happy Chinese New Year of the Snake!

I hope you had a good break over Christmas and things are going well for you.

Stormont Brake for CLP denied

The story so far… the Stormont Brake is part of the Windsor Framework which allows Northern Ireland’s government to ignore certain aspects of EU law, with the agreement of the UK and EU, see https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/assembly-business/brexit-and-beyond/the-windsor-framework/the-stormont-brake/. This was invoked for the first time on the 19th December 2024 over the font size changes in CLP, see https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/northern-ireland-unionists-trigger-stormont-brake-first-time-2024-12-19/

The first challenge in this process is to get agreement from the Northern Ireland Secretary of State. However, on Monday 20th January (in the middle of all of the publicity around the US Presidential Inauguration), one of our eagle-eyed readers spotted that this claim had been denied.

BBC and Sky News reporting on the NI Secretary of State’s decision not to pull the Stormont Brake over the CLP amendment. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1m553xv7lyo.amp https://news.sky.com/story/unionists-attack-governments-decision-not-to-active-stormont-brake-13293109

Of course this means that Northern Ireland should use the EU CLP labelling rules in full.

However, the full letter from Mr. Benn (NI Secretary of State) is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/letter-from-the-secretary-of-state-for-northern-ireland-regarding-stormont-brake-decision

This notes the government’s intention to launch a consultation on CLP as soon as possible, may be worth looking out for and highlighting when this is available in case your readers want to contribute.

“We recognise the important issues that were raised in the notification concerning the protection of the UK internal market. That is why, as we develop that future approach, the Government will take the steps necessary to avoid new barriers arising from the Amending Regulation within our classification, labelling and packaging regimes for chemicals. As part of this, the Government will explicitly consult on applying a consistent regime across the United Kingdom, should this be required to safeguard the UK internal market.

The Government intends to launch this consultation as soon as possible and industry and members of the public will be entitled to contribute.”

Many thanks to our reader for spotting this, especially news of a consultation.

While I was speculating about what the consultation might look like, another anonymous reader found a second article on the BBC Website on Monday 20th January, “Stormont Brake move may indicate Westminster approach to EU rules”https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgmy8jve2zvo,.

This second article is even more interesting:

“One way to prevent complication is simply for the UK as a whole to align with the EU rules that apply in Northern Ireland.

The government’s statement on Monday, suggests that is what will happen, either in practice or in law.

Part of the government’s response was effectively to say: “The Brussels Effect means most Great Britain companies will just adopt the EU labelling standard so they can continue to sell into that market. So in practice GB-NI issues won’t arise.“”

Definitely a straw in the wind – but where CLP and labelling might lead, a lot of other regulations like REACH, biocides pharma etc might also be affected. For example, if we’re aligning with labels, that implies classification but does it also also the REACH designations like SVHC status or restrictions? We are living in interesting times.

Thank you very much to both of our correspondents, we really appreciate you bringing this to everyone’s attention.

Is the UK Government’s decision on NI CLP a sign of something wider?

There’s also an article by Baroness Hoey (Kate Hoey, former NI MP), who claims that the government are seeking to use the Northern Ireland situation to keep GB within EU rules: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/29/labour-eu-remain-northern-ireland-referendum-protocol/ .

There have certainly been other hints about a much closer relationship between GB and the EU ever since the Starmer government was elected, including

If GB chemical legislation is going to be aligned more closely with that of the EU, I wonder if the politicians realise just how much divergence there is, mainly due to an enormous number of changes in the EU since Brexit. We are definitely living in “interesting times”!

Hearing from the HSE, DEFRA and the UK

UK PFAS call for information

Martyn Shenton of Blue Frog Scientific writes:

The UK Parliament is gathering evidence on PFAS sources, dispersal pathways, impacts on humans and wildlife exposure, and remediation – stakeholder contributions accepted until 17th February 2025, see https://post.parliament.uk/approved-work-regulation-and-remediation-of-forever-chemicals/

Many thanks to Martyn for sending this through, it’s really important to feed back to the UK Government if you are using PFAS compounds in a beneficial way.

By the way, if you’re following the PFAS situation, you may be aware that different jurisdictions have different definitions of hazardous PFAS substances, so it was interesting to find a diagram on the overlap between the OECD, TSCA and CEPA (Canada PFAS) lists: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/stephen-smith-clemson-mse_id-been-curious-about-the-various-pfas-lists-activity-7283584973264105472-66bl.

Keeping an Eye on ECHA and the EU

ECHA is well and truly back up and running after the holidays, there’s been a lot happening.

PIC list update

Alison Potts of WSP writes: A fairly significant update to the EU PIC list (649/2012) by way of delegated regulation 2024/3199. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/3199/oj/eng .

There are 40 additional chemicals, and you need to start notifying these from 1st March 2025, see https://echa.europa.eu/-/40-hazardous-chemicals-added-to-pic-exporters-can-start-notifying-authorities-now .

The UK PIC list has not been updated, to the best of our knowledge: https://www.hse.gov.uk/pic/pic-list.htm , so creating even more divergence.

Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

The EU have set out the policy for the permanent CBAM registration database (the current IT tool was transitional/trial version only), via implementing regulation 2024/3210. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L_202403210

Packaging and Packaging Waste regulation published

This new EU regulation has been published see https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/40/oj/eng .

This includes (amongst other requirements) the need for packaging to be recyclable; targets for plastic packaging to contain a minimum percentage of recycled material by 2030; limits on PFAS in packaging; encouraging reuse and refill of packaging; minimising packaging; investigating “bio-based” feedstock in plastic packaging etc.

Martin Engelmann of the German Plastic Packaging Regulation has pointed out that “some of the rules will never apply as they stand. This applies in particular to the re-use quotas for transport packaging, which have been completely mismanaged in the hectic legislative process.” It seems that the European Commission is already looking at exemptions for pallet wrapping and straps, and there are comments from several trade associations on this: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/martin-engelmann-615312a8_joint-customer-information-on-pallet-wrapping-activity-7289996388849876992-IgOh .

One of our lovely readers, Grahame Wilson, also points out that plastics are not infinitely recyclable (unlike metals). I suspect we may see quite a few changes to this regulation in the near future.

SVHC news

Phil Rowley spotted that 5 new substances now have SVHC status, and one existing SVHC has been updated, see https://www.echa.europa.eu/-/echa-adds-five-hazardous-chemicals-to-the-candidate-list-and-updates-one-entry .

The substances are:

  • 6-[(C10-C13)-alkyl-(branched, unsaturated)-2,5-dioxopyrrolidin-1-yl]hexanoic acid (2156592-54-8)
  • O,O,O-triphenyl phosphorothioate (597-82-0)
  • Octamethyltrisiloxane (107-51-7
  • Perfluamine (338-83-0)
  • Reaction mass of: triphenylthiophosphate and tertiary butylated phenyl derivatives (192268-65-8)

And the updated substance is:

  • Tris(4-nonylphenyl, branched and linear) phosphite (no CAS number given) – endocrine disrupting properties in the environment has been included as a reason why it is an SVHC

I’m sure you’re well aware that SVHC status triggers several legal duties, including mandatory disclosure on the SDS at 0.1% w/w and above, and notifying articles containing SVHCs, so you may need to check your obligations if you have products containing these substances.

Phil also notes that intentions to identify a couple of substances as SVHCs have been withdrawn for:

  • Barium chromate (EC 233-660-5, CAS 10294-40-3) and
  • 1,1,1,3,5,5,5-heptamethyltrisiloxane (EC 217-496-1, CAS 1873-88-7).

This is an unusual situation, as often once a substance starts on the SVHC path, it’s a one-way ticket to the Candidate List. So it’s good to see a change of heart early in the process, although there is no evidence as to why they have been withdrawn, just the dates of withdrawal.

Speaking of the SVHC intention list, which you can find here: https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-svhc-intentions , Steven Brennan of Foresight has spotted that Formaldehyde is being proposed as an SVHC by The Netherlands, and has a good summary here: https://www.useforesight.io/news/formaldehyde-proposed-as-svhc-implications-and-next-steps.

In case you missed it – EU Industrial Emissions update last year

This is a bit embarrassing to admit for someone who provides Environmental Permit consultancy, but I completely missed an update to the Industrial Emissions Directive in the summer: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1785/oj/eng .

In my defence, we only provide this service in mainland GB, so it doesn’t affect any of our existing clients, but it may affect our newsletter readers in the EU and (I think) Northern Ireland if they hold Environmental/ IPPC permits.

Amongst other changes, odour has now been included in the definition of pollution, so we can expect more focus on reducing or preventing odour emissions. It will be interesting to see whether the UK follows the EU’s lead on this.

Many thanks for the information to Laurence Dowson of Air Water Treatments Ltd.

Around the World

Isoeugenol, IARC and Prop 65

Adam Batting of Contract Candles & Diffusers Ltd writes:

“I have had information that Isoeugenol (97-54-1) has been added to the IARC list as a category 2B carcinogen, see List of Classifications – IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans

This fulfils one of the criteria in The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (1986) – prop 65.

It has not yet been added to the prop 65 list and they don’t really have a specified timeline for doing it but once it is there, users have 12 months to ensure products are labelled correctly.

As with Prop 65 the naturally occurring exemption would still apply but anyone supplying fragrances or fragrance products into California may want to talk to their fragrance houses for advice/knowledge regarding whether the IsoEugenol is from a natural source or deliberately added.

I don’t think this is super urgent but the fragrance houses will be able to help.”

Many thanks to Adam for spotting this and keeping us all up to date.

Latin America news

There is so much going on with various chemical regulations in Latin America that Melissa Owen is running a calendar with information as part of her newsletter https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/around-latin-america-6869063471439458304/ – highly recommended if you are trading with any of these countries.

Chemical snippets

Infographic of the Month

To commemorate James Reason’s passing, I’m sharing Rachael Cowin’s excellent sketchnote of Reason’s categories of human failures, which is very useful: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rachaelcowin_when-i-logged-on-this-morning-i-quickly-activity-7293217010996445186-d_c1

The Weekend Read

An interesting take on ISO versus quality https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dr-tony-burns-b040541_iso-standards-vs-quality-activity-7265098380337385472-kkHk/ .

I think that ISO standards can be considered to be consistency standards (which is hardly surprising given that, IIRC, ISO 9000 was developed from procedures for making nuclear warheads, where consistency is supremely important). The problem is that once we write down procedures, they become difficult to change, even where we want to improve them. There is clearly a balance to be had between operating safely and not making adverse changes; and improving inefficient processes.

The Weekend Recipe

Have you heard of Epiphany Tart? It’s something that’s only crossed my radar in the last couple of years, a traditional pastry in the shape of a 6-pointed star, filled with (home made) jams and jellies – a bit like a jam tart on steroids, and celebrates the visit of the Magi to the infant Christ.

Make an enriched shortcrust pastry, or use ordinary or even bought shortcrust pastry (I’m not judging you!):

  • 4 oz plain flour
  • 2 oz butter
  • 1 large egg yolk plus cold water if required

Rub the butter into the flour until it forms breadcrumbs, then add the egg yolk (and a little cold water if necessary) and draw into a ball. Chill for at least 1 hour, or overnight if you can.

Grease a 9 inch tart tin, and line with some of the pastry. Then roll out the rest into straight lines, and form a 6 pointed star shape inside the pastry case (made from two triangles – you should end up with 13 spaces within your diagram). Fill the spaces in the pastry with an assortment of jams and jellies (ideally home made!), and bake at Gas Mark 6 for around 25 to 30 minutes until cooked.

Safety note – like any jam tart, the jam will be very hot straight out of the oven, so allow to cool down in a safe place before serving this.

Findings: I used bought strawberry jam, bought apricot jam, home made marmalade from our next door neighbour, and Mike’s apple and rowan jelly. Do NOT use marmalade, it is far too bitter in this dish, although I would think lemon curd would be acceptable. Don’t put too much jam into this tart, or make the pastry sides too high – you want a layer of jam about the same thickness as the pastry base, no more (just like an individual jam tart should be fairly shallow). Be careful about where you have the pastry in your oven, I had it towards the top but didn’t check and some of the star pastry burnt slightly. Overall, a bit of a “show-off” dish, but worth doing once year for Epiphany.

Reasons to be Cheerful

Continuing our Owlkitty (yes, the stage name of an actual cat) movie clips:

And you may also like this Advice for Bad Toxicologists: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/thomas-hartung-27a36516_advice-for-bad-toxicologists-activity-7279476703037382656-Mex4 .

Many thanks for reading this LinkedIn newsletter, and many thanks to everyone who has contributed, through sending in links, queries, comments etc. If you have anything you’d like to share, please email me or send a DM, and I’ll do my best to include it in the next Chemicals Coffee Time Monthly.

It would be great if you’d like to subscribe to this newsletter on LinkedIn if you haven’t already, and if you want to get the news early, and much, much more (because we can’t include everything in this monthly round-up), you can sign up to our weekly email newsletter here: https://chemicalscoffeetime.co.uk/. (This website includes the email archive, with both open-access and subscriber-only content).

Chemicals Coffee Time Monthly and Weekly have grown over time to support the chemical industry, and are free to read and free from adverts. If you’d like to support our work, why not treat yourself to one of our new Chemicals Coffee Time mugs? https://chemicalscoffeetime.co.uk/product-range-mug/ .

Look forward to chatting to you in early March.

Kind regards,

Janet

Janet Greenwood, TT Environmental Ltd

PS We’re happy for you to use this content in your own social media or newsletters, as long as you credit Chemicals Coffee Time. Please note that this newsletter highlights issues which may be of interest to your business, but is not intended as specific advice. We always recommend that you should do your own research. If you need consultancy help, please book a Quick Consultancy Call here: (https://chemicalscoffeetime.co.uk/quick-consultancy-calls/), or Quick Consultancy Email here: https://chemicalscoffeetime.co.uk/quick-consultancy-emails/

Table of Contents