ECHA warns 46 firms over REACH dossiers
Forty-six companies have one month to correct inconsistencies in their registration dossiers or face legal action for failing to comply with the EU REACH Regulation (1907/2007)The European Chemicals Agency originally identified more than 2,000 dossiers that required updating and says the 46 firms that received the legally binding letters are responsible for 118 dossiers tha
Continue reading this with an IEMA membership
Already a Member?
Join now & unlock access to
- News, analysis & innovation from our sector
- IEMA webinars, podcasts and publications
- Training and career opportunities
- Unprecedented industry networking
Start your IEMA journey today!
The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has today published its first monitoring report on the UK government’s 25 Year Environment Plan, warning that progress so far has been “slow”.
US companies registered with the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) could be forced to report the climate-related impacts of their business under plans announced by the regulator this week.
In R. (on the application of Finch) v Surrey County Council, the appellant appealed against the dismissal of her judicial review claim. She sought review of the council planning authority’s decision to grant permission to expand an oil well site and drill four new oil wells.
Nearly 10,400 companies worldwide – worth $105trn (£80.4trn) in market capitalisation – will be asked to disclose environmental data by more than 680 financial institutions this year through CDP.
In R. (on the application of RSPB) v Natural England, the RSPB and a nature conservation scientist appealed a Natural England decision to grant a licence to “take and disturb” hen harriers for scientific, research or educational purposes under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
Thames Water Utilities Limited has been fined £4m for discharging half a million litres of sewage into Seacourt Stream and Hinksey Stream in Oxford over two days in July 2016.
In R. (on the application of Richards) v Environment Agency, the claimant applied for judicial review of the Agency’s approach to regulating hydrogen sulphide (H2S) emissions from a landfill site operated by the interested party, pursuant to an environmental permit issued by the Agency.