2025 Annual Report
Annual Report
ECETOC publishes a framework for the risk assessment of plastic additives
Press Release

ECETOC publishes a framework for the risk assessment of plastic additives

Part 1 sets out the fundamental elements, from problem formulation to risk characterisation.Brussels, 22 July 2026. The ECETOC Plastic Additives Task Force has published the first of two peer...
January 2026 news from the Sec Gen
News

January 2026 news from the Sec Gen

Dear colleagues and friends,As we begin a new year, I would like to thank you for your continued engagement and trust in ECETOC. 2026 promises to be an exciting and dynamic year, and I am pleased...
HSSD Tool

HSSD Tool

This software was developed by a consortium of partners to facilitate the uptake of novel approaches to estimate aquatic threshold concentrations (e.g. the concentration at which 5% of the species are exposed above their EC50, HC5).
The Human Exposure Assessment Tools Database (heatDB)

The Human Exposure Assessment Tools Database (heatDB)

heatdb is a public directory of exposure data sources as well as available tools for exposure
NanoApp

NanoApp

ECETOC’s NanoApp is a tool designed to define the boundaries of sets of similar nanoforms and to generate a justification for the REACH registration.
Targeted Risk Assessment (TRA)

Targeted Risk Assessment (TRA)

The Targeted Risk Assessment (TRA) estimates exposures to workers, consumers and the environment that arise during a series of events.
Chronic fish case studies towards an IATA

Chronic fish case studies towards an IATA

Why?Hazard and safety assessments for the pelagic compartment often rely on in vivo studies using a single fish species, raising ethical concerns and uncertainty in terms of extrapolation....
Estimating the environmental release of Synthetic Polymeric Microparticles from Products

Estimating the environmental release of Synthetic Polymeric Microparticles from Products

Why?REACH restriction: SPM use restricted; emissions reporting required by May 2027. Gap: No analytical methods available to measure SPM emissions. Solution: Draft SPERC-based approac...
Case Studies on Reliability and Relevance Considerations during Validation of NAMs

Case Studies on Reliability and Relevance Considerations during Validation of NAMs

Why?Validation of NAMs is often overlooked despite its importance for regulatory use. Traditional validation methods are less suitable for NAMs, which focus on key events rather than apical...
Task Force
02.08.2018

DNEL Derivation Guidance

The ECETOC DNEL Derivation Guidance (2010) – which provides the technical underpinnings by which many/most of industry DNELs (derived no-effect levels) were developed in 2010 and post-2010 – are using guidance factors that differ from those in ECHA REACH guidance, and Member States and ECHA generally challenge these when used. In many cases, the ECETOC guidance factors have been applied but with insufficient supporting documentation (only citation to ECETOC report, rather than substance specific data to support).

Within ECETOC, several companies have formed a Task Force aimed at updating the original guidance on assessment factors based on the latest scientific data and experience both internationally and with the REACH Regulation.

REACH is a precautionary regulation that is intended to provide a high level of protection for human health (and the environment) while maintaining cost of the competitiveness and sustainability of the EU chemicals’ market. It achieves this high level of protection in substance risk assessment by calling for the use of conservative, default Assessment Factors (AFs) when developing Derived No Effect Levels (DNELS) for non-cancer endpoints, first-tier exposure assessment tools. Individually these conservative assumptions are reasonable. However, when used in combination in the risk assessment they are multiplicative resulting in a significant over prediction of the actual risk for many substances. This significant over prediction results in the need for additional resources from industry experts and regulators in order to refine these assessments. These refinements include the development and use of chemical specific AFs and the use of higher tier exposure assessment tools to more accurately predict risk.

Experience gained during registration has demonstrated that the burden of proof necessary to justify to ECHA the use of chemical specific AFs is set so high that justification of these factors will be unachievable for all but a few data rich substances. This situation is compounded by the lack of clear and practical guidance on how to develop chemical specific AFs and a lack of such expertise within the chemical industry.

While higher tier exposure assessment tools are available and experience with these is growing it is unlikely that these alone will be sufficient to correct the conservative AFs that are recommended today, particularly for substances of the lower volume bands which attract the highest default AFs (based on e.g. study duration).

The development of guidance by a scientific body such as ECETOC would help to increase the quality and consistency of dossiers thereby leading to a reduced burden in both parties, but would also indirectly contribute to maintaining EU competitiveness.