6 questions for ... Dr. Malte Zimmer

Dr. Malte Zimmer, ZVO Head of Environment and Chemicals Policy and President of the European Committee for Surface Treatment (CETS); Interview: Robert Piterek

Dr. Zimmer, a few weeks ago the European Court of Justice issued a ruling that is likely to have a major impact on the industry. What exactly happened there?

It's like this: In 2020, chemical authorizations were issued for the CTAC consortium, to which around 1500 European electroplating companies would refer. These authorizations have now been cancelled. This means that these companies will no longer have authorization for their production in the future. Applications were approved for the authorization of five chemical uses, which have now been definitively cancelled. The European Commission now has one year to reassess the authorizations.

Can the industry still influence the decision during this period?

I don't think that any further queries will be allowed. The Commission will reassess and the outcome is completely open. The result could also be that these authorizations are no longer granted. And that would mean an immediate standstill for these companies. The Hapoc consortium's application for a similar authorization is also due soon. It cannot be ruled out that this ruling will also have an impact on this. There is no alternative to hard chrome plating in the electroplating sector. How can it be made clear to the EU Commission what a negative decision would mean? That would only be possible if the effects were demonstrated beforehand.

Are you talking about a boycott with all its economic consequences?

Yes, that would be a possibility, but we know that this will not happen in case of doubt. But then it could happen after the end of the year, when the authorizations finally expire and chrome plating is no longer allowed on that basis.

What can the association do now?

Nothing, firstly because the decision is subject to the Court of Justice, but above all because the association is not involved in one of the consortia. We therefore have hardly any information. CTAC has often only written to us to ask us to lobby. Of course, we do that anyway.

What about the many individual authorizations that are still outstanding?

These companies are of course also affected. If a company does not yet have a permit and the authorizations have finally expired after a year, production has to stop until the new authorization is available. And the Commission obviously has a lot to do now due to the large number of applications. There are hundreds of decisions to be made. The processing takes place at the ECHA in Helsinki. It is questionable whether there are enough staff available to reach decisions in time.

What solution could there be?

The easiest way would be to finally recognize that chromium trioxide is an intermediate product in the chromium coating process, which would immediately eliminate the need for authorization. The ideal solution would be to make it a so-called intermediate. This is the case when one substance is completely converted into another. And this is the case with chromium trioxide. However, the Commission has been refusing to recognize this for surface technology for a very long time. If it stays that way, we would ban chromium in our country but, absurdly, we could import it at any time. I hope that the EU Commission will come up with this solution in the course of the year.