26 States to Consider Toxic Chemicals Legislation in 2013

As TSCA reform enters another year without any resolution, at least 26 states are considering action to enhance protection of public health and the environment from exposure to chemicals. According to the advocacy coalition, Safer States:

In 2013, we expect at least 26 states to consider legislation and policy changes that will:

• Restrict or label the use of bisphenol A (BPA) in receipts, children's products and food packaging.
• Require removal of certain toxic flame retardants from children's products, home furniture or building materials.
• Change disclosure rules so that concerned consumers will have a way to identify toxic chemicals in products.
• Encourage manufacturers to remove identified toxic chemicals in favor of safer alternatives.
• Ban cadmium, a dangerous, persistent metal that is often found in inexpensive children's jewelry.
• Ban formaldehyde from cosmetics and children's products.
• Promote green cleaning products in schools.

Safer States states that "We believe families, communities, and the environment should be protected from the devastating impacts of our society’s heavy use of chemicals. We believe that new state and national chemical policies will contribute to the formation of a cleaner, greener economy." They have also been highly critical of industry, reporting on what it sees as misplaced priorities "inside the toxic chemical industry."

So state efforts continue. At the federal level, Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg has indicated that he will reintroduce his Safer Chemicals Act. The SCA was passed out of committee last year but never came to the Senate floor for debate or vote. The committee-passed version includes substantial changes from the original bill, including many adjustments to take into consideration concerns expressed by industry. Still, industry widely denounced the bill as unworkable, a position that Richard Denison of the Environmental Defense Fund and Andy Igrejas of Safer Chemicals Healthy Families have asserted is disingenuous at best. Industry is, however, reportedly working with Republican Senator David Vitter on what is effectively an industry-sponsored bill. It is unclear when or if Vitter's bill will be introduced, but any such bill would at least provide a counter-position to that of Lautenberg and offer opportunity for substantive debate.

ECHA Lists 54 Substances of Very High Concern

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) plans to add another set of substances of very high concern (SVHC) to the candidate list under the REACH Regulation. The 54 new substances brings the total on the candidate list to 138. Most of the substances listed are CMRs, i.e., carcinogenic, mutagenic or reproductive toxicants, or PBTs, i.e., persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic. Three of the new substances are listed because they exhibit "equivalent concern," a more nebulous characteristic that covers any toxicity or other concern that does not fit neatly into one of the other categories, e.g., endocrine disruption, or in this case, strong respiratory sensitizers.

All of the substances on the candidate list are evaluated for inclusion on the Annex XIV Authorization list.

The full list of candidate list substances can be found in the table here.

ECHA Publishes Practical Guide for Reporting Toxicity Data for REACH

ECHA has announced that it has made available a new "practical guide" to assist REACH registrants in "How to prepare toxicological summaries in IUCLID and how to derive DNELs." The guide "supports registrants in correctly summarising the toxicological information for substances in section 7 of IUCLID 5.4."

The most critical part of the guide explains how to undertake the take of "Derivation of No Effect Levels" (DNELs), which are used to compare toxicity to exposure in the assessment of risk. DNELs must be derived for all relevant toxicological endpoints (e.g., oral and dermal exposures) and represent the effects side of the equation for human health concerns. For environmental concerns there is a similar derivation of "Predicted No Effect Levels" (PNECs) for aquatic and terrestrial organisms. PNEC derivation is not discussed in the new practical guide.

More information on the Practical Guide can be found on the ECHA web site.

The Practical Guide in PDF format can be downloaded directly here.

Senator Durbin Holds Hearing on Brominated Flame Retardants

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) held a hearing on Tuesday, July 17, 2012 regarding the question:

AreConsumers Adequately Protected from Flammability of Upholstered Furniture?  Hearing on the Effectiveness of FurnitureFlammability Standards and Flame Retardant Chemicals.

Durbin's concern stems from a recent Chicago Tribune investigative series that suggested the flame retardant industry had misled regulators on both the effectiveness and safety of a class of brominated flame retardants called PBDEs. The Senator is a strong supporter of overhauling the 26-year old TSCA law and is a co-sponsor of the Safe Chemicals Act introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ).


Scheduled witnesses at the July 17th hearing were:

 

Panel I

·        The Honorable Inez Tenenbaum, Chairman, Consumer Product Safety Commission.

·        James J. Jones, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Environmental Protection Agency.

Panel II

·        August (Gus) Schaefer, Sr., Vice President and Chief Safety Officer, Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

·        Andy Counts, CEO, American Home Furnishings Alliance.

·        Peter Van Dorpe, Chief of the Training Division for Chicago Fire Department.

More information on the hearing can be found here.

ECHA Adds Thirteen Substances to Candidate List

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has added thirteen new substances of very high concern (SVHCs) to the REACH candidate list.  This list serves as a staging area for substances to be added to Annex XIV of REACH, which puts them on a track to be banned pending authorization for limited uses for limited time periods.

According to ECHA:

"Four have been identified as SVHCs under the precondition that they contain certain carcinogenic constituents above the concentration limit for classifying these substances as carcinogenic. Five of the new SVHCs have been included in the Candidate List following a scrutiny of the comments received during the public consultation and the unanimous agreement of the Member State Committee (MSC). The further eight substances, which did not receive comments challenging the identification as SVHCs during public consultation, were directly added to the Candidate List."

More information and the full candidate list of substances can be found on the ECHA site.

House Republicans Disagree with Endocrine Society on Need for EDSP

This week the Endocrine Society issued a series of recommendations "that will strengthen the ability of the current screening programs to identify EDCs." And now comes word that House Republicans are circulating language for the pending fiscal year budget that tries to limit the scope of EPA's endocrine-disruptor screening program (EDSP).

The Republican language is couched as an effort to "avoid unnecessary chemicals testing." It also tries to limit budgetary spending in an effort to restrict EPA's ability to formulate and implement policies on hydraulic fracturing, mountaintop mining, and other environmental issues that EPA is mandated to oversee. 

It's unclear on what basis the House Republicans believe that endocrine testing is "unnecessary" given that the lead scientific organization in that field is recommending greater attention to the issue. Endocrine testing was mandated by the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act, and EPA is a decade behind development of the testing regime required by that law passed unanimously by Congress.

More information on EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program can be found here.

Endocrine Society issues Statement of Principles on endocrine-disrupting chemicals and public health protection

The Endocrine Society, whose mission is "to advance excellence in endocrinology and promote its essential and integrative role in scientific discovery, medical practice, and human health," has issued a "statement of principles" regarding endocrine-disrupting chemicals and public health protection.  They propose "a streamlined definition for endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs)" and offer recommendations "that will strengthen the ability of the current screening programs to identify EDCs."

The position statement is published in the September 2012 issue of the Society's journal, Endocrinology, in a paper authored by R. Thomas Zoeller and seven others.

Recommendations in the statement include:

• Basic scientists actively engaged in the development of new knowledge in relevant disciplines
should be involved in evaluating the weight-of-evidence of EDC studies, as well as in the design and
interpretation of studies that inform the regulation of EDCs;

• State-of-the-art molecular and cellular techniques, and highly sensitive model systems, need to be
built into current testing, in consultation with the appropriate system experts;

• Testing needs to include models of developmental exposure during critical life periods when
organisms may be most vulnerable to even very low-dose exposures;

• The design and interpretation of tests must incorporate the biological principle that EDCs act
through multiple mechanisms in physiological systems; and

• Endocrine principles, such as those outlined in this document, should be incorporated into
programs by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other agencies charged with
evaluating chemicals for endocrine-disrupting potential.

The statement also provides a list of principles intended to enhance the ability of current screening
programs to identify EDCs. Principles in the statement include:

• Environmental chemicals that interfere with any aspect of hormone action should be presumed to
produce adverse effects;

• EDC exposures during development can have effects on hormone action that cannot be corrected,
leaving permanent adverse impacts on cognitive function and other health parameters;

• People are exposed to multiple EDCs at the same time, and these mixtures can have a greater effect
on the hormone system than any single EDC alone; and

• The weight-of-evidence guidance developed by the EPA must be strengthened by adhering to
principles of endocrinology outlined here, including low-dose effects and nonlinear or nonmonotonic
dose-response curves.

More information can be found in the journal article.

ECHA Calls for Comment on 10 Chemicals to be Banned

ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency based in Helsinki, issued a request for comment yesterday on proposals to ban ten additional chemicals under the Authorization phase of REACH.  All of the chemicals have been on the "candidate list" of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC).  Currently there are 84 substances on the candidate list, of which 14 have already been placed in Annex XIV for eventual removal from the marketplace.  The first sunset date is in early 2013, pending applications for authorization from manufacturers who want to keep the chemical on the market while they develop alternatives.

The ten chemicals out for public comment are:

• Pentazinc chromate octahydroxide 
• Arsenic acid
• Formaldehyde, oligometric reaction products with aniline (technical MDA)
• Potassium hyroxyoctaoxodizincated dichromate
• Strontium chromate
• 1,2-Dichloroethane (EDC)
• Dichromium tris(chromate)
• 2,2'-dichloro-4,4'-methylenedianiline (MOCA)
• N,N-Dimethylacetamide (DMAC)
• Bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether (Diglyme)

According to ECHA, interested parties may submit comments on the draft recommendation by September 19, 2012.


More information can be found on the ECHA site.

ECHA Proposes to List 13 Chemicals as Substances of Very High Concern Under REACH

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has proposed to add 13 additional chemicals to their candidate list of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC).  Each of the chemicals "is classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction."  Stakeholders and other interested parties are urged to comment on the proposed listings.  Besides toxicity, "information on the uses of the substances is invited."

The public consultation "will be open for 45 days and will end on 12 April 2012."  After the consultation period, ECHA will consider all comments and then make final decisions on including the substances on the candidate list.  Eventually these substances could be included on the REACH Annex XIV Authorisation List. If that happens then companies will have to apply for authorisation, that is, apply to have their substance remain on the market, usually only for specific controllable uses, limited volumes, and for a limited period of time while substitutes are developed.


More information and the list of chemicals can be found on the ECHA web site.

ECHA Identifies 2300 Chemical Substances for REACH Registration by 2013

A survey of potential registrants by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has resulted in a list of 2,300 chemical substances that are intended to be registered by the 2013 deadline under REACH.  Substances that are manufactured or imported into Europe at levels above 100 tonnes per year must be registered by May 31, 2013.  This is in addition to the previous deadline of November 30, 2010 for registration of chemicals at volumes greater than 1000 tonnes per year or were substances of very high concern (SVHC).

ECHA will update the list monthly and invites those potential registrants who have not informed ECHA of their intent to do so as soon as possible.

Registrants must prepare an IUCLID dossier containing data requirements as specified in the REACH regulation.  The dossier is filed electronically through ECHA's REACH-IT system and must be done prior to the deadline in order to continue to manufacture or import those substances.  New substances not on the preregistered phase-in list must submit completed dossiers prior to manufacture or import.

More information can be found in the ECHA press release.

ECHA Says "Only Representatives" Can Apply for Chemical Authorization

According to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA):

"In December 2011, the European Commission services informed ECHA that, in their view, an Only Representative (OR) of a non-EU manufacturer can also apply for authorisation. Following this, ECHA updated the webforms to allow ORs to send their applications while developing long term functionalities in REACH-IT. The relevant Data Submission Manual Part 22 - How to Prepare and Submit an Application for Authorisation using IUCLID 5 is also being updated and will be published once the new version of IUCLID is released, which is currently expected to be during summer 2012."

Previously it was assumed that only a European registrant could apply for authorization under REACH.  Authorization is the process by which companies can apply to keep certain uses of their Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) that have been targeted for banning on the market for a limited period of time while alternatives are developed.

More information on applying for authorization can be found on the ECHA site.

ECHA Recommends 13 Substances of Very High Concern be Banned

According to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA):

"The European Chemicals Agency has submitted to the European Commission a recommendation that thirteen Substances of Very High Concern should in future not be used without authorisation. These substances are all classified because of their carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction (or a combination thereof) properties. They are used in applications where there is potential for worker exposure.

The thirteen substances and their main uses within the scope of authorisation are:

• Trichloroethylene (carcinogen). A substance mainly used in surface cleaning, in textile scouring, in adhesives and as a heat transfer fluid.
• Chromium trioxide (carcinogen, mutagen). A substance mainly used for metal finishing and as a catalyst.
• Acids generated from chromium trioxide and their oligomers (group containing: chromic acid, dichromic acid, oligomers of chromic acid and dichromic acid) (carcinogen). A substance that could be used to replace chromium trioxide in many of its uses.
• Sodium dichromate (carcinogen, mutagen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in metal surface treatment.
• Potassium dichromate (carcinogen, mutagen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in metal surface treatment and as a processing aid.
• Ammonium dichromate (carcinogen, mutagen, toxic for reproduction). A substance with currently no uses in the scope of authorisation. It could however be used to replace other chromium(VI) substances.
• Potassium chromate (carcinogen, mutagen). A substance mainly used in metal surface treatment.
• Sodium chromate (carcinogen, mutagen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in metal surface treatment.
• Cobalt(II) sulphate (carcinogen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in surface treatment processes and as a water treatment chemical, oxygen scavenger and corrosion inhibitor.
• Cobalt dichloride (carcinogen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in surface treatment processes and as a water treatment chemical, oxygen scavenger and corrosion inhibitor.
• Cobalt(II) dinitrate (carcinogen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in surface treatment processes and as a water treatment chemical, oxygen scavenger and corrosion inhibitor.
• Cobalt(II) carbonate (carcinogen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used in fertilisers and in surface treatment processes.
• Cobalt(II) diacetate  (carcinogen, toxic for reproduction). A substance mainly used as a catalyst and in surface treatment processes."

More information can be found on the ECHA site.

ECHA Adds 20 More Chemicals to Substances of Very High Concern List

The European Chemical Agency (ECHA) has added twenty additional substances to the Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC).  This brings the list up to a total of 73 chemicals.  Eight of the newly added chemicals were automatically added since no comments challenging their inclusion were received from the public.  The other 12 received unanimous agreement of the Member State Committee.

Of the 20, all but one were added because they have been identified as carcinogenic and/or toxic for reproduction. For the first time, however, one chemical was added to the Candidate List on the basis of "equivalent concern."  Specifically, the substance 4-tert-octyl phenol was "identified as an SVHC because of its endocrine disrupting properties" and "probable serious effects to the environment."  The use of endocrine disrupting properties to list a chemical is somewhat controversial as there is still significant uncertainty surrounding the methodologies used to make the determination.  Validation of a suite of endocrine disruption tests is ongoing, with mixed results.

The Candidate List serves as a launching point for ECHA to add chemicals to the Annex XIV of the REACH regulation, also known as the Authorization List.  Chemicals that are put on Annex XIV are slated for replacement and manufacturers are required to apply for "authorization" for continued use, which is limited to specific uses, volumes and risk management measures, all while working against a deadline for substitution of less hazardous substances.


More information and the list of substances is available on ECHA's recently revamped web site.

EU Member States Want REACH Revised to Better Address Small Company Concerns

Small and medium-sized businesses are disproportionately impacted by the high costs of compliance with the EU REACH chemical regulation, according to several Member State representatives at a recent forum. With the European Commission working on a review of the REACH regulation - a report is due to be published in 2012 - Member States are hoping that come changes can be made to assess the impacts on the smaller registrants that have less financial and technical resources.

The large production volume substances (greater than 1000 metric tonnes per year) were registered by November 30, 2010.  The mid-range production volume substances (greater than 100 metric tonnes per year) are due to be registered by May 31, 2013.  The smallest tonnages covered by REACH (greater than 1 tpy) must be registered by 2018. 

As production tonnages go down the amount and cost of data required for registration goes down. Registration fees also decrease, and there are additional discounts for small and micro companies.  Still, many small and medium sized companies feel that the cost of registration is prohibitive.  Besides the data requirements for REACH, companies that make or use hazardous substances are required to notify ECHA.

All of the concerns raised by Member States and other stakeholders will be considered by the Commission and included in their review.  It remains to be seen whether there are substantive changes made to the REACH regulation, or merely tweaks to make the system work more efficiently for the companies that will be registering by the 2013 and 2018 deadlines.

More information on the 2013 deadline and other aspects of REACH can be found on the ECHA web site.

ECHA to Set Up Expert PBT Group

One of the main set of criteria for identifying and classifying substances of very high concern (SVHC) in Europe under the REACH regulation are whether the substance exhibits Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) properties or Very Persistent/Very Bioaccummulative (vPvB) properties.  Now the European Chemicals Agency in Helsinki is putting together a PBT expert group.  The group would address scientific issues related to PBT, both those already identified and those yet to arise.

ECHA has already in place at least two guidance documents related to identification of PBTs - Part C and Chapter R.11.  Criteria are also discussed in Annex XIII of the REACH regulation.

The new group would be staffed by experts nominated by each EU Member State, as well as three representatives each from both industry and NGOs.

ECHA Issues 2012 Work Program - Sees Challenges Ahead

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) approved its 2012 work program last week and highlighted both its activities and its challenges ahead of the next REACH deadline.  Besides the mid 2013 REACH registration deadline, ECHA will take on an expanding role in the new Biocidal Products Regulation (which will replace the current Directive in 2013). In addition, ECHA will have ramped up activities related to other parts of the expansive REACH regulation, including the Evaluation (the "E") and Authorization (the "A") components, as well as Restrictions (the "missing R").  And of course there is still the continuing evaluation of substance dossiers for high productive volume chemicals submitted in the first registration period that ended on November 30, 2010.

All of this leaves ECHA worried that there may not be enough resources to meet obligations efficiently, both within ECHA and in the Member States.  The current economic situation in most of Europe, which has caused such severe spending cuts (austerity), has led ECHA Executive Director Geert Dancet to openly state his concerns that Member States may not have enough resources to fully conduct their role in chemical evaluation.

The developing Biocidal Products Regulation (BPR) also offers challenges to ECHA as the agency is expected to take on responsibility for authorizing biocides.  Under the current biocides directive this responsibility lies with each Member State.  ECHA would also take on new responsibilities related to the Prior Informed Consent Regulation, which involves identifying hazardous chemicals that could not be exported from Europe unless the country of destination is given sufficient information to assess risk.

During the September 29-30, 2011 meeting of the management board, the mandate of the Executive Director was extended.  According to the chairman, Dr. Thomas Jakl:

"After the first REACH registration deadline was impressively managed by ECHA in 2010, there is no time to rest on our laurels. Challenging further steps of the REACH and CLP implementation lie ahead and the legislator is in the process of entrusting important new regulatory tasks to the Agency. The continuation decision with regard to a selection process for the Executive Director reflects the high satisfaction of the Board with his achievements since 2007."

More information and a link to the work program can be found on the ECHA web site.

Denmark Proposes Restriction of Four Phthalates under REACH Chemical Regulation

Denmark has proposed to restrict "the placing on the market and use of certain articles containing four classified phthalates (DEHP, BBP, DBP and DIBP)."  These common phthalates are found in a variety of professional and consumer products, including PVC and in dispersions, paints and varnishes.  The primary rationale for these restrictions is that these "phthalates are all reported to affect reproductivity."

The Danish proposal is part of the REACH chemical regulation process, in which substances of very high concern can be proposed by Member States to be restricted from further use.  All interested parties (e.g., manufacturers and formulators, as well as other Competent Authorities) can comment on the proposal.  All comments will be "reviewed and taken into account by ECHA’s Committees for Risk Assessment (RAC) and Socio-economic Analysis (SEAC)."  By September 2012 these Committees would provide their opinions, which will be the basis for final decisions on whether to restrict the substances from use in commerce

Comments are requested by December 16, 2011, though officially the 6-month public consultation being announced today ends in March 2012.

According to the ECHA news release:

The widespread use of phthalates is raising concern, regarding human exposure from consumer articles. The dossier addresses the combined exposure based on common effects seen with exposure to these phthalates.
In the report, Denmark suggests a ban for the placing on the market of articles intended for indoor use and articles that may come into direct contact with the skin or mucous membranes, containing one or more of these four phthalates in a concentration greater than 0.1 % by weight of any plasticised material.

More information can be found on the ECHA site.

EU Proposes to Ban 20 Chemical Substances

ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency based in Helsinki, has proposed a list of 20 chemical substances for eventual banning under the EU REACH program.  The August 29, 2011 proposal would label these chemicals as "substances of very high concern" (SVHC), which would make them eligible for placement on the "candidate list."  Once on the candidate list the substances may then be placed on Annex XIV of REACH, which requires manufacturers to apply for authorization for continued use.  Any authorization would be limited to specific uses that can control for the hazardous properties of each substance, and authorization is for a limited time period - just long enough for companies to find substitutes.

Nineteen of the 20 substances are proposed because of their "potentially serious effects on human health." These are classified as carcinogenic and/or toxic for reproduction.  One substance is proposed to be identified as a "substance of equivalent concern...because of its endocrine disrupting properties and potential for serious effects to the environment."

The substances are listed in the table of the ECHA press release here.

Interested parties have until October 13, 2011 to comment on any of the proposed SVHCs. ECHA notes that comments "should focus primarily on the hazardous properties that qualify the chemicals as SVHCs and on the substance identity."  They also ask for "further information on the uses, exposures and availability of safer alternative substances or techniques."

Unless dropped from the list based on comments received, these 20 will join the 53 substances already on the Candidate List. Some of these have already been added to Annex XIV.

More information on the REACH authorization process can be found on ECHA's web site.

US Senators Propose Banning Chemicals of High Concern Due to Endocrine Disruption

Senators John Kerry and Jim Moran, both Democrats, have introduced legislation that would effectively ban certain uses of chemicals found to pose a high concern for endocrine disruption.  The bill, called the Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Exposure Elimination Act, would establish a research program to determine if candidate chemicals are endocrine disruptors, then ask an expert panel to rank them as either "high," "substantial," "minimal," or "no" concern.  The bill would require this panel to assess up to ten chemicals per year.  It would also require an exposure reduction strategy for those deemed to be of high concern.

The bill comes as Congress has seemingly reached a stalemate on how to proceed with reform of the 35-year old Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  Senator Frank Lautenberg introduced the latest version of his Safe Chemicals Act earlier this year, and while at least one in a series of non-public stakeholder meetings have been held to fine-tune the bill, no obvious path forward on passage appears to be in the works.  Likewise, it is unclear what chances the Kerry/Moran bill will have in passage given the clear lack of any action being taken by the Republican-controlled House.


According to Kerry's press release:

Today, there are approximately 80,000 known chemicals in our environment that are potentially harmful, yet many of these chemicals are not tested to determine their effects on human health. This includes common products Americans use every day such as household cleaners, cosmetics or personal care products.  There is an increased rate of disorders affecting the human endocrine system, which children developing in the womb are particularly vulnerable to.

In introducing the bill, Senator Kerry noted that:

“We have a responsibility not just to inform Americans of the dangers, but to protect them from chemicals with the potential to cause serious illnesses from birth defects to cancer. It’s just common sense.”

ECHA Recommends 13 Chemicals for REACH Authorization (i.e., for the EU "to be banned" chemicals list)

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has recommended thirteen additional chemicals for inclusion on its Annex XIV Authorization list.  These chemicals had been listed on ECHA's "candidate list" of Substances of Very High Concern" (SVHC).  Following consultation and comment, the 13 chemicals could be added to the list of chemicals that will be phased out from continued use, unless the manufacturer/importer applies for an "authorization" for an extended phase out period.  This is the third time ECHA has recommended a set of chemicals for inclusion on Annex XIV.


The following substances are on the third recommendation list:

1. Chromium trioxide;
2. Chromic acid, Oligomers of chromic acid and dichromic acid;
3. Sodium dichromate;
4. Potassium dichromate;
5. Ammonium dichromate;
6. Potassium chromate;
7. Sodium chromate;
8. Trichloroethylene;
9. Cobalt(II) sulphate;
10. Cobalt dichloride;
11. Cobalt(II) dinitrate;
12. Cobalt(II) carbonate;
13. Cobalt(II) diacetate.

According to ECHA's press release:

Using the web forms available on ECHA’s website, interested parties are invited to comment, in particular on the uses that should be exempted from the authorisation requirement.

More information about how to comment and the authorization process can be found here.