Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Council Directive 67/548/EEC as regards the labelling of certain dangerous substances in Austria and Sweden'
15. 2. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 40/43 Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Council Directive 67/548/EEC as regards the labelling of certain dangerous substances in Austria and Sweden’ (1999/C 40/13) On 23 November 1998 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, in accordance with Article 100 A of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. At its 359th plenary session (meeting of 2 December 1998), the Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Stöllnberger as Rapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion by 94 votes with 2 abstentions. 1. Introduction as 67/548/EEC (1), Council Directive last 1. 1. amended by Commission Directive 98/73/EC (2), was introduced as a measure to eliminate barriers to the trade with dangerous (chemical) substances and to protect human health, in particular the health of workers. As a result, Member States started to use common rules to classify, package and label dangerous substances when marketed. Since 1981, they also have a common notification system for ‘new’ substances placed on the market. These common requirements aim to achieve the high level of protection of human health and the environment in the territory of the Community as required by the Treaty. Annex I to Directive 67/548/EEC contains a list 1. 2. of dangerous substances for which classification and labelling have been agreed at Community level. The other annexes lay down the necessary details on the system of classification, packaging and the labelling, and Article 23 contains the specific labelling provisions. The label on the packaging of a dangerous substance must indicate clearly and indelibly inter alia a danger symbol indicating the danger from the substance; stan- dard phrases indicating the special risks attributed to the substance (R-phrases); and standard phrases relating to the safe use of the substance (S-phrases). In the light of existing measures in the new 1. 3. Member States, the EU Accession Treaty granted inter alia exemptions from these labelling provisions to Austria (it may require additional danger symbols, and S-phrases not included in the Annexes of the Directive) and to Sweden (it may require additional R-phrases not listed in the Annexes to the Directive) in order to take account of the level of their standards for the protection of human health and the environment, and provided for the revision of these provisions ‘in accordance with EC procedures’ before 31 December 1998. 1. 4. The large majority of Accession Treaty exemp- tions with regard to Directive 67/548/EEC have been reviewed to the satisfaction of all Member States during the four year review period (1 January 1995 — 31 December 1998), and will lead to important changes in the existing Community legislation. However, it was not possible to complete the review of certain labelling issues concerning Austria and Sweden in the time allotted. 1. 5. These outstanding labelling issues are as follows: 1. 5. 1. T h e A u s t r i a n a d d i t i o n a l p i c t o - g r a m f o r s a f e d i s p o s a l The need for a ‘crossed-out dustbin’ pictogram concern- ing waste disposal of certain dangerous substances and their packaging remains under consideration. However, similar labelling requirements are likely to be included in a future Commission proposal for a Directive on ‘dangerous household waste’, although it is very unlikely that such a proposal will be adopted before the end of 1998. 1. 5. 2. T h e A u s t r i a n a d d i t i o n a l S - p h r a s e regarding Information Centre’ The phrase ‘Antidote exists, medical staff contact Poisons counter- measures in the case of accident, has (so far) not found the support of a majority of national experts (3), mainly because the organisation of poison information centres in the Member States is very different. However, Council Resolution 90/C329/03 (4) on ‘improving the prevention and treatment of acute human poisoning’ calls for a Community system of information and collaboration concerning the availability of antidotes. (1) OJ L 196, 16. 8. 1967, p. 1. (2) The 24rd Adaptation to Technical Progress (ATP) of the directive, OJ L 305, 16. 11. 1998. (3) The Commission Working Group ‘Classification and Labelling of Dangerous Substances – Health Effects’ which includes experts from the Member States, Norway, industry and the European Trade Unions. (4) OJ C 329, 31. 12. 1990; ESC Opinion OJ C 124, 21. 5. 1990. C 40/44 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 2. 1999 1. 5. 3. T h e S w e d i s h a d d i t i o n a l R - p h r a s e R - 3 2 2 The phrase ‘May be harmful if swallowed’ informs about ‘moderately harmful’ acute oral effects. For such effects ongoing OECD discussions on classification and labelling of dangerous substances will soon provide an internationally harmonised scheme which, once adopted, may lead to a revision of Directive 67/548/EEC. 1. 5. 4. T h e S w e d i s h a d d i t i o n a l R - p h r a s e R - 3 4 0 This is applied to certain carcinogenic substances, which in the Community are covered by the R-phrase R-40. Sweden suggested to change the wording of R-40. This requires an in-depth review because categories of danger other than ‘carcinogenic’ are concerned, which experts have agreed to carry out as an immediate priority. 2. The Commission proposal 2. 1. This proposal for a Directive, which is based on Article 100a of the Treaty, aims to amend Direc- tive 67/548/EEC in order to provide a supplementary two years time period for the completion of the review on outstanding labelling issues regarding dangerous substances in Austria and Sweden. In addition the proposal ensures coherence of marketing conditions between dangerous substances and preparations, since the Council has recently agreed to include certain unresolved Accession Treaty exemptions for Austria and Sweden in the Common Position on the current proposal for a Directive on ‘the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous preparations’(1) for a limited period of two years from 1. 1. 1999 to 31. 12. 2000. The 2. 2. 67/548/EEC includes: proposed amendment of Directive — the addition of paragraph 5 to Article 23, allowing Austria to request the labelling elements described above; (1) Proposals: OJ C 283, 26. 9. 1996; C 337, 7. 11. 97 — ESC Opinion: OJ C 158, 26. 5. 1997. Brussels, 2 December 1998. — the addition of paragraph 6 to Article 23, allowing Sweden to request the use of the additional R-phrases described above. 2. 2. 1. 1999 to 31 December 2000. These exemptions are limited from 1 January 3. Comments The Economic and Social Committee endorses 3. 1. the Commission proposal to amend Article 23 of Directive 67/548/EEC so that Austria and Sweden can labelling continue to require the use of additional elements for dangerous substances from 1 January 1999 to 31 December 2000, bearing in mind the level of their standards for the protection of human health and the environment. 3. 2. In this context, the Committee would like to point to the new future public health requirements of the (Amsterdam) Treaty, where Article 152 states that ‘A high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Community policies and activities’, and this includes rules related to internal market harmonisation. The Committee urges the Commission to pursue 3. 3. the further work which is planned regarding the revision of existing categories of danger and the taking up of internationally harmonised standards for the classifi- cation of dangerous substances. Furthermore, the Committee would like in par- 3. 4. ticular to emphasise the following: 3. 4. 1. This work should be concluded in time for a revision of the directive on the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances to be drawn up by 31 December 2000. 3. 4. 2. Relevant conclusions should also be drawn within the same time-frame on all other ‘associated initiatives’, as required in order to revise this and/or other relevant Community legislation in a properly informed manner. Such ‘associated initiatives’ would include those on ‘dangerous household waste’ and those concerning the availability of antidotes as considered in Council Resolution 90/C329/03. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI