Commission Communication on Essential Use

The briefing analyzes the European Commission's 'essential use' criteria for most harmful substances (MHS), which define a use as essential if it is necessary for health, safety, or critical for society and lacks acceptable alternatives. ClientEarth argues that while the Communication fulfills Chemical Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) commitments, it lacks direct legal effect and may be undermined by existing technical and economic feasibility assessments. The document proposes a three-stage approach to implement essential use in REACH: immediate adoption in restriction and authorisation procedures, the creation of implementing legislation for legal clarity, and a full REACH reform where essential use replaces socio-economic analysis (SEA).

• The European Commission defines a use of a most harmful substance as essential if it meets two criteria: the use is 'necessary for health or safety or is critical for the functioning of society', and 'there are no acceptable alternatives'.
• An 'acceptable alternative' is defined as a substance, material, technology, process, or product that can provide a sufficient level of performance for the expected service and is 'safer' in terms of overall chemical risks to human and animal health and the environment throughout its life cycle.
• The Communication does not have direct legal effect under Article 288 TFEU and explicitly states it 'does not have the purpose or effect of interpreting any legal act currently in force'.
• The Commission's approach to alternatives deviates from the Montreal Protocol by not explicitly requiring alternatives to be 'acceptable from the standpoint of environment and health', though it does require them to be safer.
• The essential use concept could be integrated into the REACH authorisation process to prevent decisions based solely on economic factors during socio-economic analysis (SEA) and to force the assessment of alternatives with lower performance levels.
• ClientEarth demands a three-stage implementation: first, immediate use in REACH restriction and authorisation; second, the adoption of implementing legislation for legal clarity; and third, a full REACH reform where essential use 'fully replace SEA'.

APA

ClientEarth (2024). Commission Communication on Essential Use. https://www.clientearth.org/media/sb5kiel5/clientearth_essential-use_briefing_2024-07-04.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. Commission Communication on Essential Use. 2024. https://www.clientearth.org/media/sb5kiel5/clientearth_essential-use_briefing_2024-07-04.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=ClientEarth |title=Commission Communication on Essential Use |date=July 2024 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/sb5kiel5/clientearth_essential-use_briefing_2024-07-04.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{clientearth2024commission, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{Commission Communication on Essential Use}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2024}, month = jul, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/sb5kiel5/clientearth_essential-use_briefing_2024-07-04.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }