Michelin appeals against Echa Decision on tyre substance
French tyre manufacturer, Michelin, has asked Echa's Board of Appeal (BoA) to overturn the agency's Decision, requiring registrants of a substance used in tyres to provide information to assist with its evaluation.
The case is unusual because the company lodging the appeal is not an addressee of the contested Decision, but rather a downstream user of the substance – in this case, n,n-dicyclohexylbenzothiazole-2-sulphenamide.
Echa asked for information on the environmental exposure, generated by the substance's use in the production and use of tyres and general rubber products, and the environmental releases from tyres.
Michelin claims the agency did not take into account information provided by the registrants, showing that the substance is almost exclusively used in the inner parts of tyres and entirely consumed, during the vulcanisation process.
Thus, claims Michelin, the agency was wrong to conclude that the substance could potentially be released into the environment, through abrasion.
Michelin also claims Echa should have conducted a compliance check, before the substance evaluation was carried out by the German authorities.
The substance evaluation Decision said there was concern that it is highly persistent in soil and sediment and seems to be very bioaccumulative. If found to be very persistent, it would qualify for SVHC status as very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB).
Meanwhile, five companies have appealed against an agency Decision in relation to tert-butyl perbenzoate. The firms say they should not be required to conduct the requested prenatal developmental toxicity study or in vivo alkaline single-cell gel electrophoresis assay for DNA strand breaks (Comet assay). If the BoA decides the tests must be conducted, they want 24 months instead of 15 to submit the information.
The companies are: AkzoNobel Chemicals, Arkema, Pergan, Reach Compliance Services (trading as REACH24H Consulting Group) and United Initiators.