Traduction de «Groupe de l'analyse socio-économique » (Français → Anglais) :

AA. whereas the SEAC finds that it cannot conclude that there would be net societal costs, based on the information provided by the applicant, if authorisation was not granted; whereas, therefore, the applicants have not demonstrated the socio-economic benefits arising from the use of the substance and the socio-economic implications of a refusal to authorise as provided for in Article 60(4)(c) of the REACH Regulation;

W. whereas the SEAC finds that it cannot conclude that there would be net societal costs, based on the information provided by the applicant, if authorisation was not granted; whereas, therefore, the applicants have not demonstrated the socio-economic benefits arising from the use of the substance and the socio-economic implications of a refusal to authorise as provided for in Article 60(4)(c) of the REACH Regulation;

U. whereas the SEAC noted that it was possible to use post-industrial waste with low DEHP content as an alternative feedstock material, which would also increase the quality of the recyclates produced, but that it would be unlikely that the recycler would be able to pass on a price increase for better-quality recyclates to the downstream user, as they tend to produce articles that are at the lower end of the value spectrum; whereas the SEAC stated that the alternative for plastic converters of using virgin PVC with other non-SVHC plasticisers as feedstock rather than recycled material was not considered, as the applicants indicated tha ...[+++]t the plastic converters might not remain competitive after incurring the additional cost of using virgin PVC;

On 6 March 2013 the Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis (hereinafter ‘SEAC’) adopted by consensus the opinion on the restriction proposed in the Annex XV dossier. According to the SEAC opinion, the restriction, as modified by RAC, is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks in terms of the proportionality of its socioeconomic benefits to its socioeconomic costs.

On 15 September 2011 the Committee for Socioeconomic Analysis of the Agency adopted its opinion on the proposed restriction, which it considered as the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks in terms of the proportionality of its socioeconomic benefits to its socioeconomic costs.

In its opinion of 14 June 2011, the Committee for Socioeconomic Analysis considers that the proposed measure regarding DMF is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks in terms of the proportionality of its socioeconomic benefits to its socioeconomic costs.