Tronox Holdings plc
Tronox
A vertically integrated producer of titanium dioxide and inorganic chemicals.
ID: 486055841845-59
Lobbying Activity
Response to Proposal for a basic regulation of the European Chemicals Agency
10 Oct 2022
Tronox employs some 6,500 employees globally. Our diversity, unmatched vertical integration model, unparalleled operational and technical expertise across the value chain places Tronox as the global, leading titanium dioxide (TiO2) manufacturer.
Tronox’s facilities in the Netherlands and France employ more than 10% of the global professional cohort and contribute significantly to the €3 billion annually in gross value added by the sector to the EU economy. The speciality chemicals division is instrumental in achieving the EU Green Deal and maintaining quality of modern life.
Being REACH registered, Tronox is an ECHA stakeholder. We are also a prominent member of the Titanium Dioxide Industry Consortium (TDIC), the manufacturers group for the joint REACH registration of titanium dioxide and the Titanium Dioxide Manufacturers Association (TDMA).
Tronox welcomes the European Commission’s aim to clarify ECHA’s mandate so that it can be more effective, efficient and coherent. A consolidated mandate and structure for ECHA can ensure a sound science-based approach to regulation. Establishing greater legal clarity and providing ECHA with appropriate resources is crucial in the backdrop of the ongoing review of REACH and the plethora of legislative initiatives ongoing in the EU’s chemical policy field.
Tronox is encouraged to see that the Commission seeks to clarify the relationship between ECHA, other Agencies / EU bodies involved in chemical safety assessments. If defined adequately, this reform can improve trust in the decision-making process, by contributing to the safety and added value of well-regulated chemicals. To this end, we note the importance of:
• The growing EU regulatory remit. We support ECHA’s role increasing in implementing this body of legislation. Science is the key and should drive decision-making pertaining to its regulation. ECHA has strong scientific expertise and the right structures and processes to implement the legislation regulating the chemical industry. This approach will contribute to the EU’s wealth, innovation and sustainability targets.
• A clear demarcation of responsibilities between relevant EU agencies and regulations. Overlaps create uncertainty and impede chemical assessments and decision-making. Tronox cautions against automatic ‘read-across’ from the work of one Agency to another without consideration of the precise risk or use of the substance being assessed. For example, the risk to, and risk mitigation for, professional users handling a substance will be very different to that of untrained consumers. It is vital that this distinction is not lost to ensure the One Substance One Assessment regulatory approach is fit-for-purpose and proportionate.
• The transparency of ECHA processes and those of ECHA’s Committees should be enhanced. This should also be extended to all other agencies involved in the assessment of chemicals. Increased opportunities for stakeholders to provide scientific and technical support to regulators should be encouraged. EFSA relative to ECHA has less developed mechanisms in place. It is also critical when considering policy initiatives such as the generic risk management approach (GRA). ECHA’s well-developed scientific committees allow for appropriate scrutiny of proposed measures. Greater transparency behind opinions and processes that inform policy-making is key to fostering trust between policy-makers, society, and industry.
• Ensuring the Commission robustly oversees, ensures consistency and coordinates scientific approaches and opinions across agencies. Safeguards are needed so that one Agency’s interpretation is not always automatically accepted particularly regarding exposure to chemicals and their impacts on humans and the environment. Such a safeguard could be similar to the legal safeguard present in Article 95 of the REACH Regulation.
We look forward to collaborating on this matter.
Read full responseResponse to Streamlining EU scientific and technical work on chemicals through the EU agencies
12 Apr 2022
Tronox supports the European Commission’s Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability and its overarching Chemicals Strategy with constructive input drawing on our expertise as a chemical manufacturer and market participant.
The approach of ‘one substance, one assessment’ (OSOA) can help build trust between society and industry, whilst improving efficiency, and sound science-based regulatory and political decision-making. If designed adequately, a step that allows for an improvement of trust by society in the safety and added value of well-regulated chemicals will benefit society, economic welfare, and innovation.
Tronox opposes the premise of assessing a whole basket of diverse chemical substances against one ‘one-size-fits-all’ assessment and drawing risk and/or hazard conclusions on that basis. Deploying a more tailored ‘OSOA’ approach could help avert this.
In fact, titanium dioxide (TiO¬¬2) can serve as an example that illustrates the need for such a tailored approach. Therefore, Tronox supports the exploration of a ‘OSOA’ approach when conducting risk and hazard assessments and are willing to provide TiO2-specific input and case-studies if helpful to the Commission.
More generally, we believe the following considerations must be taken on board by the European Commission for the ‘OSOA’ concept to be put into practice effectively:
• The ‘OSOA’ approach must be designed carefully as clarity will be needed on which EU agency and / or body will take the lead for assessment. Other EU agencies and / or bodies will rely upon the lead authority’s assessment/conclusions to inform their own decision-making, to the extent that this is fit-for-purpose, bearing in mind the need for industry to have regulatory certainty and consistency.
• Similarly, Tronox cautions against any automatic ‘read-across’ of an assessment by one agency / body that is then applied without further consideration by other agencies / bodies at the EU or Member State levels. The approach to risk assessment and risk management will vary according to the uses and users of a substance. In turn each EU body has differing competencies which may not be well suited to all elements of use and user of the substance.
Our proposal:
1. A clear demarcation of responsibilities between relevant EU agencies and regulations;
2. An overarching authority such as the European Commission oversees the process to ensure consistency. Safeguards will ensure one authority’s interpretation is not automatically taken on board by any other EU agency or Member State authority without conducting a risk assessment, due diligence and information gathering particularly regarding exposure to hazardous chemicals and their impacts on humans and the environment. Legal safeguards similar to that which is present in Article 95 of the REACH Regulation, may apply.
Exposure information for hazardous chemicals is necessary to develop relevant exposure scenarios with respect to the intended, reasonable and/or foreseeable use of a product under foreseeable /predictable conditions, and therefore the appropriate risk management measures to be identified. Indeed as part of the ‘Fitness check of all chemicals legislation (except REACH)’, it has been identified that authorities may not always be aware of the potentially relevant or the latest information and data necessary for decision making, this includes for example, all the uses of chemicals that have a broad range of applications across a variety of consumer products. Industry can continue to play a vital role in providing this information to support and strengthen the decision-making process.
In conclusion, if the ‘OSOA’ approach considers the above factors, a robust and consistent approach to chemical regulation can be achieved. This would also help avoid inconsistent conclusions being reached on the same substance by differing authorities with respect to hazard and risk assessment and thereby ensure the approach is fit-for-purpose.
Read full response