Please note: Timings are in CET (Central European Time)
- Session 4: Sustainability and the BPR
Updates on the high-level round table discussions and the likely impacts of the Reach/CLP reviews on the biocides sector
Paul KrajnikDeputy Director Chemicals and Biocides, Ministry for Climate Action, Environment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and Technology, Austria
- Recent developments in the REACH/CLP review
- Links between Reach and biocides regulation
- New hazard classes
- Possible implications for active substance approval and product authorisation
The EU Chemical Strategy for Sustainability (CSS): What does it mean for biocides?
Marcel HulsmanPartner Product Stewardship, Biocides, ERM, the Netherlands
- The Green Deal and CSS: compliance of biocides?
- Impact assessment and socio-economic analysis (SEA)
- A strategy for biocides
The Blue Angel ecolabel approach to antifouling
Bernd DaehneDirector of Antifouling Research Station, Dr. Brill + Partner - Institute for Antifouling and Biocorrosion
- 100 non-biocidal antifouling systems identified for the German market
- 14 different mechanisms of action
- Proofs of concept and banned substances
- Session 4: Sustainability and the BPR, continued
Legal perspective: Implications of sustainability regulations for companies in the biocides sector
Koen Van MaldegemPartner, Competition Regulatory and Trade, Fieldfisher LLP, BelgiumGerard McElweePartner, Fieldfisher, Belgium
- Context and drivers for sustainability
- Current successes, difficulties and opportunities
Biocides and sustainable useCamelia MihaiTeam Lead Biocides, Biocides For Europe, Cefic, Belgium
Panel discussion on biocides and sustainable use
Chemical Watch demoLauren TrueMarketing Manager, Chemical Watch
- Session 5: The assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals under the BPR
Scientific criteria to identify endocrine chemicals
Gregory LemkineCEO, Watchfrog Laboratory
- What are the new methods and their implementation within regulatory assessment?
- How to build the weight of evidence?
- Why is mechanistic toxicology required for ED assessment?
- Endocrine activity versus adverse outcome?
The latest developments and significant legal issues arising on ED assessments
Darren AbrahamsPartner - Chemical and Life Sciences, Steptoe & Johnson LLPHannah WidemannSenior Associate, Chemical and Life Sciences, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
- Are the BPR’s ED criteria implementable?
- Data rights issues
- Impact of chemicals strategy for sustainability
- ED as a new hazard class under the Regulation on the classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (CLP)
- One substance, one assessment
- Session 6: Efficacy updates
Efficacy evaluation of disinfectants PT 1 to 5, PT 21 and treated articles PT 10 based on current development and Echa efficacy guidance including biofilm-activity testing
Florian H. H. BrillOwner and Managing Director, Dr. Brill + Partner GmbH, Institut für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie
- Overview of current activity test methods for PT 1 – 5, PT 10 and PT 21
- Update on latest resistance developments
- Biofilm activity methods – quo vadis?
Efficacy – beyond the guidance
David AshworthManaging Director, Klarus Consulting Ltd, UK
- The applicant
- The assessor
- The efficacy method provider
Simulated use test and field trial for PT5 claims and applications
Michele CavalleriBiomed & GLP Facility Manager, Eurofins Biolab
- PT 5 claim matrix and Echa test requirements
- Simulated use test – validation requirements (case study: UBA test)
- Robust field trial experimental design (case study: animal drinking water facility)
End of conference
View previous day / next day