Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
04THEHAGUE791
2004-03-26 15:45:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy The Hague
Cable title:  

REACH: Latest Dutch Views

Tags:  ETRD SENV NL EUN 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 000791 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE PASS USTR/SANFORD

USDOC FOR 4212/USFCS/MAC/EUR/OWE/DDEFALCO

E.O. 12958 N/A
TAGS: ETRD SENV NL EUN
SUBJECT: REACH: Latest Dutch Views

REF: State 57073

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 000791

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE PASS USTR/SANFORD

USDOC FOR 4212/USFCS/MAC/EUR/OWE/DDEFALCO

E.O. 12958 N/A
TAGS: ETRD SENV NL EUN
SUBJECT: REACH: Latest Dutch Views

REF: State 57073


1. (U) Summary: The Dutch are pushing for EU REACH
proposals so that registration and evaluation requirements
are targeted to substances posing the most significant
potential risks. They are concerned with the potential
impact of existing proposals on SME's and are interested in
further information regarding USG views on the consistency
between REACH proposals and TBT, TRIPS, and OECD provisions.
The Dutch foresee consideration of REACH to be a long-term
process likely not completed until at least 2006. End
Summary.

General Approach
--------------

2. (U) The Dutch generally agree with the approach taken by
the Commission in drafting REACH believing that the
consolidated legislation will largely be better for business
and environmental concerns than the current hodgepoge of
multiple EU directives and member state legislation. They
are strong advocates of minimizing unnecessary burdens on
business by targeting registration and evaluation
requirements to substances that are likely to pose the most
significant risks and subjecting other substances and
articles to a more general duty of care.


Timing and Process
--------------

3. (SBU) Dutch officials foresee REACH undergoing a long
period of consideration and debate with a political
agreement on major issues possible during the UK presidency
of the EU (latter half of 2005) and with detailed agreement
to follow. Since the end of the public comment period, the
council's ad hoc REACH working group has been meeting every
three weeks for a day and a half. The Dutch send capital-
based representatives to these meetings but have appointed
their Brussels mission to head their delegation in order to
avoid a bureaucratic fight between the Economics and
Environment ministries as to which ministry is in charge.


4. (SBU) The European Commission has used the meetings so
far held to go through the proposal's text article by
article to explain their reasoning and rationale behind the
chosen options. Very few member states have used this
discussion to present written positions or alternative
options. Only the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and France
have submitted position papers (we have e-mailed the Dutch
paper to Commerce (Naas),USTR (Sanford/Molnar),and USEU

(Kvien)) and none of them have so far been discussed. The
Dutch believe that the Commission is reluctant to change the
current proposal because they believe the one currently
presented in well balanced: changing one aspect could cause
the entire structure to collapse.


5. (SBU) With the entire text now completed, the Irish
presidency plans a thematic discussion of major issues
beginning with registration. During their upcoming
presidency, the Dutch plan to continue discussing the issues
thematically and hope to reach political agreement on any
issues where there appears to be consensus. More
contentious issues would be passed on the presidency
successors.

Impact Assessments
--------------

6. (SBU) According to the Dutch, many EU Member States
have initiated impact assessments or case studies to
obtain more detailed understanding of the likely impact
of REACH on their economies and/or business sectors.
Most of the national studies are expected to be
finalized this year. This month the European Commission
has also initiated case studies for exploring certain
aspects for which the business impact study underlining
the REACH proposal did not provide a clear picture.
These topics are the potential impacts of REACH on (a)
business throughout the supply chain (availability of
substances),(b) innovation, and (c) accession
countries becoming full members of the EU at the first
of May. The results of the Commission studies are not
expected before the end of this year. All EU Member
States support, in general, the concept of the REACH
proposal, but most of the Member States will await for
the results of these studies before taking a clear
position on the details.
Registration
--------------

7. (SBU) The Dutch believe this is a key issue and one
of the first scheduled to be discussed thoroughly by
the ad hoc committee. Dutch officials believe that
large chemical companies will have little problem
complying with proposed registration requirements
because these companies work with relatively few
chemicals and have already compiled most of the data
they would need for registration. The Netherlands is
more concerned with the possible burden on small
companies that may be forced - should REACH be
implemented in its current form - to actually withdraw
some chemicals from production. The Dutch are studying
proposals from the UK to provide one registration per
substance with chemical consortia organizing to submit
single substance applications: at face value single
substance registration would be less burdensome but the
cost to a company of forming and joining consortia has
not been assessed. The Dutch also note that
registration requirements will impact more
significantly on substances in long-term existence than
"new" one: a good percentage of "new" substances have
already had to undergo testing.
WTO and OECD Issues

8. (U) The Netherlands wants to hold REACH to strict
WTO conformity and is anxious to know if we have
concerns as to its WTO consistency. They will
carefully review U.S. comments made as part of the TBT
submission. They have some concerns internally that
registration requirements might infringe on firms'
intellectual property (if firms must make detailed
information publicly available in the registration
process, the substances are vulnerable to copying by
competitors) and ask whether the U.S. has TRIPS
concerns as well. Our Dutch contacts are also
unfamiliar with the particulars of the OECD High
Production Volume Chemicals program and asked for more
information on how that program and REACH might come
into conflict.
Sobel