Revision of EU rules on FCM

ClientEarth argues that current EU Food Contact Materials (FCM) regulations fail because they treat symptoms rather than root causes, specifically citing a mismatch between regulatory tools and goals, a lack of clear accountability in the supply chain, and an over-reliance on self-regulation. The organization advocates for 'Option 2' from the Commission's Roadmap—a full regulatory overhaul—which would shift responsibility to the manufacturer or importer of the final product, align FCM rules with food contaminant and chemical laws (REACH/CLP), and introduce a more holistic approach incorporating life-cycle sustainability and stricter enforcement mechanisms, including NGO access to documentation and GDPR-inspired sanctions.

• The current FCM Regulation fails because it attempts to address materials using a combination of product and chemical regulation tools that are not fit for purpose, resulting in a system that does not effectively ensure the safety of food-contact articles or chemicals.
• A primary structural weakness is the absence of a single entity designated as responsible for safety; ClientEarth proposes that the manufacturer or importer placing the final product on the market should hold ultimate responsibility, mirroring the Blue Guide on EU product rules.
• ClientEarth recommends that the Commission adopt 'Option 2' of the Roadmap, which involves a full overhaul of the regulatory framework to refocus on materials and articles and integrate sustainability and life-cycle analysis into safety assessments.
• To reduce food contamination, the regulation should automatically exclude substances classified as CMRs under CLP, as well as PBT, vPvB, and EDCs, and phase out problematic materials such as PVC, polystyrene, polyurethane, and polycarbonate.
• The document asserts that self-regulation has failed and proposes a multi-actor enforcement system including internal quality audits, an obligation for suppliers to provide Safety Data Sheets (SDS) and Chemical Safety Reports (CSR), and an enforceable right for NGOs to access documentation and report violations.
• ClientEarth suggests implementing a clear taxonomy of EU-wide sanctions for non-compliance, drawing inspiration from the GDPR regime.

APA

ClientEarth (2021). Revision of EU rules on FCM. https://www.clientearth.org/media/354nejpl/clientearth-s-contribution-to-commission-s-iia-on-fcm.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Revision of EU rules on FCM. 2021. https://www.clientearth.org/media/354nejpl/clientearth-s-contribution-to-commission-s-iia-on-fcm.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=ClientEarth |title=Revision of EU rules on FCM |date=January 2021 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/354nejpl/clientearth-s-contribution-to-commission-s-iia-on-fcm.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{clientearth2021revision, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Revision of EU rules on FCM}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2021}, month = jan, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/354nejpl/clientearth-s-contribution-to-commission-s-iia-on-fcm.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }