Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP) and diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) (‘the four phthalates’) are listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 as substances toxic for reproduction, category 1B, with a sunset date of 21 February 2015, specified in accordance with Article 58(1)(c)(i) of that Regulation.

After the sunset date referred to in Article 58(1)(c)(i) for a substance listed in Annex XIV, Article 69(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 requires the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Agency’) to consider whether the use in articles of substances listed in Annex XIV to that Regulation poses a risk to human health or the environment that is not adequately controlled and, if the Agency considers that it does, to prepare a dossier for a restriction proposal which conforms to the requirements of Annex XV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (‘the Annex XV dossier’).

The four phthalates are found in a wide variety of articles as they are commonly present in plasticised materials. Exposure may occur through the ingestion of food and dust, the placing of articles in the mouth, the inhalation of air and dust in indoor environments, and contact of dust and articles with human mucous membranes and skin.

The Annex XV dossier proposed to restrict the placing on the market of articles containing the four phthalates in a concentration equal to or greater than 0,1 % by weight individually or in any combination in such plasticised materials. This concentration limit would effectively discourage the use of the four phthalates in articles within the scope of the restriction. The dossier suggested exemptions for articles exclusively for open air use without prolonged contact with skin or contact with mucous membranes, certain articles exclusively for industrial and agricultural use, measuring devices, articles covered by existing Union legislation and articles already placed on the market in the Union.

On 10 March 2017, RAC adopted its opinion concluding that the proposed restriction is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks arising from these substances in terms of effectiveness in reducing those risks.

RAC considered that a combined concentration of the four phthalates of 0,1 % or less in plasticised materials in articles is required to address the risk to human health.

On 15 June 2017, SEAC adopted its opinion, indicating that the proposed restriction, as modified by RAC and SEAC, is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks in terms of its socioeconomic benefits and socioeconomic costs.

SEAC concurred with the conclusions in the Annex XV dossier that a deferral of 36 months of the application of the restriction seems reasonable and sufficient in order to enable actors involved in the supply chains to comply with it. SEAC also concurred with the exemptions suggested in the Annex XV dossier. In addition, due to socioeconomic considerations based on additional information provided by the automotive and aircraft sectors during the public consultation, SEAC suggested certain derogations for these sectors.

The Agency's Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement (‘Forum’), referred to in Article 76(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, was consulted on the proposed restriction and its recommendations have been taken into account.

Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 already bans the placing on the market of toys and childcare articles containing DEHP, DBP and BBP under certain conditions which fall within the scope of the proposed restriction. In addition, in view of both the opinion of RAC that DIBP has a hazard profile similar to that of DEHP, DBP and BBP, that toys and childcare articles can contribute considerably to risks for infants from phthalates and that DIBP can replace DBP in toys and childcare articles, and the recommendation of the Forum, the Commission takes the view that the placing on the market of toys and childcare articles containing DIBP should also be restricted. In addition, the placing on the market of the four phthalates in toys and childcare articles should be subject to updated conditions.

In the case of articles exclusively for industrial and agricultural use, or for open air use, the proposed restriction should only apply to those articles containing plasticised material that comes into contact with human mucous membranes or into prolonged contact with the skin, because such contacts lead to exposure which poses risk to human health.

The proposed restriction should also not apply to measuring devices for laboratory use or articles that form part of such devices and to articles placed on the market prior to the date of entry into application of the restriction, for practicality and enforceability reasons. Moreover, certain derogations should apply for motor vehicles and aircraft. First, a longer deferral of application of the restriction for motor vehicles and an indefinite exemption for articles used in the maintenance or repair of those vehicles, where the vehicles cannot function as intended without those articles, are justified in consideration of the specific economic implications of this sector. A longer deferral of application of the restriction for certain aircraft and an indefinite exemption for articles used in the maintenance or repair of those aircraft where these are essential for safety and airworthiness, are justified on the basis that aircrafts have a very long useful life, their airworthiness may be jeopardised if parts meeting the design specifications are not available and the timelines needed for requalification are very long.

Taking into account the Annex XV dossier as well as the opinions of RAC and SEAC, the Commission considers that the proposed restriction would address the identified risks without imposing significant burden on industry, supply chain or consumers and concludes that the restriction proposed, is an appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risk.

Stakeholders should be allowed sufficient time to take appropriate measures to comply with the proposed restriction and 18 months is sufficient to this end. Therefore there should be a general deferral of its application by 18 months. A longer specific deferral of 60 months should apply to address the particular cases of certain motor vehicles and aircraft.

Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established under Article 133 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006,