News Brief
Helsinki, 26 March 2026, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) issued its latest official statement. Both of its scientific committees—the Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) and the Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC)—expressed support for the implementation of EU-wide comprehensive restrictions on Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) while explicitly stating that targeted derogations will be introduced to address the increasing and persistent risks PFAS pose to human health and the environment.
In this announcement, RAC published its final opinion, while SEAC released its draft opinion. Overall, both committees agreed on the necessity of broad restrictions on PFAS but presented differing considerations regarding the specific focus areas and the evaluation of the restriction proposal jointly submitted by five EU Member States.
Risk Assessment Committee (RAC): Prioritizing Hazard Control with Stricter Scope and Limited Derogations
Scope Definition of PFAS
The five-country proposal suggested excluding certain PFAS subgroups containing only CF3-X or X-CF2-X’ (where X = -OR or -NRR’, X’ = -CH3, -CH2-, aromatic group, -C(O)-, -OR’’, -SR’’ or -NR’’R’’’, R/R’/R’’/R’’’ = -H, -CH3, -CH2-, aromatic group, or -C(O)-) from the restriction scope on the grounds that these substances are fully degradable. RAC deemed the degradability evidence provided in the proposal insufficient and did not endorse the derogations of these purportedly "fully degradable" PFAS subgroups from the restriction scope.
Attitude Toward Specific Use Derogations
Derogations for General Use: RAC considered a total ban (RO1, with an 18-month transition period) to be the most effective emission reduction measure, achieving an estimated reduction rate of 96%. The derogations in the proposal would reduce the effectiveness to 76%, resulting in approximately 700,000 additional tons of PFAS emissions. Therefore, RAC only explicitly supported derogations for personal protective equipment (PPE) and related impregnating agents.
Active Substances (Pesticides, Biocides, Pharmaceuticals): The proposal granted indefinite derogations for these active substances governed by other specific regulations. RAC argued that if such derogations are granted, emission minimization measures must be reinforced within the applicable regulatory frameworks.
Product and Process Oriented Research and Development (PPORD): The proposal suggested granting indefinite derogations for all PPORD activities. RAC found this derogations insufficiently specific in defining industries or uses and lacking quantitative limits for the substances. RAC recommended that derogation provisions should be more clearly defined and supported by more robust evidence.
Tighter Control Measures for Exempted Uses
For the exempted uses retained in the proposal, RAC considered the existing control measures inadequate. RAC recommended that any exempted uses must be accompanied by extremely stringent control conditions, including the mandatory preparation of site-specific PFAS management plans, compulsory emission monitoring, enhanced communication of supply chain information, and the addition of clear consumer labeling and safe disposal instructions on products.
Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC): Emphasizing on Practical Implementation and Increased Flexibility in Derogation Policies
Scope Definition of PFAS
On the scientific issue of substance definition, SEAC supported RAC's view, stating that the degradability evidence provided in the original proposal was insufficient to justify exempting certain substances containing only CF3-X or X-CF2-X’ structural units (where X = -OR or -NRR’, X’ = -CH3, -CH2-, aromatic group, -C(O)-, -OR’’, -SR’’ or -NR’’R’’’, R/R’/R’’/R’’’ = -H, -CH3, -CH2-, aromatic group, or -C(O)-) from the restriction scope.
Attitude Toward Restriction Options
Rejection of RO1 (Total Ban with an 18-Month Transition Period): For many sectors currently lacking viable substitutes, a mandatory ban would result in disproportionately high social and economic costs that outweigh the environmental benefits.
Support for RO2 (Restriction with Targeted Derogations): RO2, with its lower costs, was deemed preferable to RO1 due to its inclusion of targeted derogation provisions.
Differentiated Evaluation of RO3 (Continued Use Under Strict Control): RO3 was considered proportionate for the electronics and semiconductor industry. It may also be proportionate for the energy, PFAS manufacturing, and technical textiles industries. However, it was deemed insufficiently effective for the transport, sealing applications, and mechanical applications sectors.
Derogation Recommendations for Specific Uses and Eight Newly Identified Sectors
Fluorinated Gases: The specific derogations for fluorinated gases across various applications, as proposed in the original proposal, were largely deemed unreasonable, as they would conflict or overlap with the existing EU F-Gas Regulation.
Active Substances (Pesticides, Biocides, Pharmaceuticals): The original proposal did not provide adequate justification for the indefinite derogations of these application areas.
Eight Newly Identified Sectors: For the eight sectors added in August 2025 (printing applications, sealing applications, mechanical applications, other medical applications, military applications, explosives, technical textiles, and broader industrial uses), SEAC was unable to perform a comprehensive and thorough assessment within the given timeframe. It recommended granting time-limited derogations, pending further evaluations.
SEAC Draft Opinion Public Consultation
With the release of SEAC's draft opinion, ECHA has officially launched a 60-day public consultation, open to all stakeholders, including industry representatives, NGOs, substitute manufacturers and developers, researchers, and the general public.
1. Consultation Period: March 26, 2026 – May 25, 2026.
2. Participation Method: Submissions via the European Commission's EUSurvey online tool. The consultation includes 15 sector-specific questionnaires (for industries already assessed by SEAC) and one general questionnaire.
3. Key Areas for Stakeholder Feedback: This consultation focuses solely on SEAC's socio-economic assessment and will not revisit RAC's scientific risk assessment. Companies are encouraged to provide input on the following:
Availability of Substitutes: Technical and economic feasibility, supply adequacy, safety for humans and the environment, and the time required to develop viable substitutes.
Economic Impact: Direct impacts on businesses, such as anticipated profit losses, potential workforce reductions, and risks of temporary or permanent business closures.
Social Impact: Adverse societal impacts, including reduced access to certain products or a decline in product quality.
Usage Volumes: The specific tonnage of non-polymeric PFAS, polymeric PFAS, or fluorinated gases used or imported annually within the European Economic Area (EEA).
Eight Newly Identified Sectors: The submission of socio-economic data and information on substitutes for these sectors through the general questionnaire.
What Happens Next: Timeline Toward Final EU PFAS Restriction Decision
May 25, 2026: Public consultation closes.
End of 2026: SEAC will finalize its opinion based on feedback received, signifying the completion of ECHA's scientific evaluation phase.
Subsequent Decisions: RAC and SEAC's final opinions will be submitted to the European Commission, which will draft the final restriction regulation and submit it for a vote by EU Member States.
REACH24H's Recommendations for Enterprises
The overarching framework for comprehensive PFAS restrictions has been established, but targeted derogations provide critical survival and transition opportunities for industries.
REACH24H advises relevant enterprises to capitalize on this critical opportunity during SEAC's public consultation to present their concerns. The key evidence provided during the consultation could directly influence decision-makers' final rulings on derogation periods for specific uses.
For the eight newly identified sectors, this input could encourage the scientific committees to undertake comprehensive socio-economic and substitute evaluations, leading to the development of specific and reasonable control or derogation provisions in the final decision.
To assist enterprises in addressing the PFAS restriction proposal, REACH24H offers the following professional support:
Preparation and Submission of Stakeholder Feedback: Assisting enterprises in organizing key arguments on substitute technical barriers, economic costs, etc., drafting persuasive opinions, and submitting them to ECHA on behalf of the enterprise.
In-Depth Regulatory Interpretation: Providing customized reports based on the PFAS restriction proposal and the latest opinions from the two scientific committees to help enterprises precisely identify compliance obligations and potential gaps.
Substitute Development and Hazard Assessment: Assisting enterprises in using professional hazard assessment tools to identify safer PFAS substitute chemicals and accelerate the development of fluorine-free alternatives.
PFAS-Free Certification: Offering professional guidance on PFAS-free certification compliance to strengthen enterprises' regulatory preparedness, operational effectiveness, and market competitiveness.
If your business is impacted by the proposed PFAS restrictions, now is the time to act. Please feel free to contact our experts for your tailored PFAS compliance strategy.
浙公网安备 33011002014301号