Brussels, April 2, 2008

Parliament votes on Classification and Labelling

The Environment Committee of the European Parliament today voted on the CLP-regulation, on the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of substances and mixtures. The proposed regulation will at an EU-level implement the so-called Globally Harmonised System for classification and labelling of chemical substances and mixtures, developed in a UN-context.

ChemSec has in the run-up to the vote advocated an introduction of PBT-labelling and the re-introduction of Category 5, for acute oral toxicity in the proposal.

PBT labelling would ensure that the high priority PBT-substances, i.e. chemicals that are persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic, would be labelled in a consistent and adequate manner.

Further, category 5 is intended to protect the most vulnerable groups, such as children. Category 5 covers a range of household products, such as window cleaners and hard surface cleaners, that can potentially cause harm if swallowed.

The ChemSec position was supported by a number of deputies from across the political divide, resulting in ambitious amendments tabled by MEPs in e.g. the conservative, the liberal, the socialist and the green groups.

However, the Environment Committee rejected the inclusion of PBT-labelling in the CLP regulation. The deputies also rejected amendments to include a category 5 for acute oral toxicity in the EU implementation of the UN developed GHS-system.(i.e. the Globally Harmonised System for Classification and Labelling of Chemical Substances and Mixtures, to be implemented in the EU as the CLP regulation).

This was a weak show by the European Parliament Environment Committee when it comes to leading the way in international chemicals regulation and information to consumers, says Anne-Sofie Anderson, Director of the International Chemical Secretariat. The deputies had an excellent opportunity to raise the international bar in terms of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals. Instead, the committee chose the line heavily promoted by industry and the Commissions DG Enterprise.

While giving PBTs (i.e. chemical substances and mixtures that are persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic) the highest priority in REACH, PBT-labelling was rejected on the grounds that most of these will probably be labelled in the system proposed by the European Commission. Some will e.g. get the signal word Danger, while others will have the word Warning. The foreseen labelling will thus in many cases be indicating a less severe hazard. Hereby no uniform and harmonised labelling at the highest, adequate level of danger is foreseen for PBTs.

In response to the call for PBT-labelling, draftswoman Amalia Sartori presented an oral consolidated amendment which was approved by the Environment Committee. Hereby a provision was introduced for future recommendations to be developed by the European Chemicals Agency and the European Commission on any additional labelling requirements considered necessary in order to take into account products containing mixtures with PBT properties.

In general, the European Union has taken the lead internationally in terms of Environmental protection and chemicals regulation, says Nardono Nimpuno, senior policy advisor at the International Chemical Secretariat. In these instances more often than not it is the European Parliament Environment Committee that has paved the way for the other institutions. However now, we are in this case in the unusual, and unfortunate, situation where the Environment Committee opts for the lowest common denominator, with the main driving force being an early deal rather than a convincing result.

For an analysis of the main issues of the vote, please see below.

For more information on the CLP/GHS proposal, please contact Nardono Nimpuno by mail,
or mobile: +46 736 93 96 17.

Analysis of the Environment Committee vote

PBT-labelling

Amendments 156-160 - Rejected
The Environment Committee rejected the inclusion of labelling of substances and mixtures with PBT (persistent, bio-accumulative and toxic) and vPvB (very persistent and very bioaccumulative) properties.

An oral consolidated amendment on PBTs was adopted (Sartori).
Accordingly, the Agency shall, in consultation with Commission and stakeholders, develop recommendations on supplemental information to be included on the label, if considered necessary for the protection of human health or the environment, when a mixture contains substances with PBT properties.
Comment: Does not specifically mention PBT-labelling. Only recommendation or guidelines. Only measures considered necessary.
This high concern group will not be labelled in a harmonised way at the adequate level of danger.

The amendment, full text:

Article 27
3a.The Agency shall, in accordance with Article 123 of Regulation 1907/2006, provide as a matter of high priority, and in consultation with the Commission, competent authorities and stakeholders, guidance [and/or recommendations] for any supplemental information on the label that is considered necessary for the protection of human health or the environment when a mixture contains substances with persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) properties [in excess of [0.1%]].

Article 53 1a (new)
The Commission shall promote the harmonisation of the labelling of PBT and vPvB at the level of the United Nations and shall, as appropriate, subsequently adjust and adapt, sections 1.1 and 1.2 of Annex II and part 2 of Annex III referred to in paragraph 1 [mixtures classified as hazardous] and/or part 2 of Annex II and part 3 of Annex III referred to in Article 24 [mixtures not classified as hazardous].

Category 5, Acute oral toxicity

Amendments 66-67, 145-152 - Rejected
Comment: In spite of cross-party support, category 5 was not included. This category, covering substances that can cause harm if swallowed, is intended to protect vulnerable groups, such as children. According to estimates from the Swedish Chemicals Agency, some 20.000 products, many of them household products such as window cleaners and hard surface cleaners, will lose their labelling through the new regulation.

Endocrince disruptor substances

Amendment 44 Inclusion of EDCs in regulation - Rejected
Comment: This group of hormone disrupting chemicals is a group of increasing concern and attention. There is still great uncertainty as regards to whether these substances will be adequately handled in REACH, the EU chemicals regulation.

Thresholds

Amendment 13 - Adopted
Derogation from inclusion in the regulation for chemicals used for research and development (PPORDs) placed on the market below 1 tonne per year.
Comment: Research substances under 1 tpa will not have to be labelled in spite of properties of concern, such as being carcinogenic or toxic to reproduction.

Amendment 9, 127 - Adopted
Dangerous substance placed on the market below 1 tonne per year will not have to be notified to the European Chemicals Agency ECHA.
Comment: The Agency notification creates a registry giving authorities an overview of what substances are present on the market and where. The derogation limits this overview of the Agency of substances classified as dangerous.

Formera | Dennisign