Conference « Directive 98/34 – an instrument of co-operation » Brussels, 22 June 2005

Anne Rose Lambers Legal Counsellor Cefic Avenue E. van Nieuwenhuyse 4 B-1160 Brussels The business experience 2

3 1.How is the chemical industry involved? 2.Three exemplary cases 3.Conclusions / Assessment of the functioning of the notification procedure Overview

4 How is the chemical industry involved? Chemicals are highly regulated products Strengthened information requirements for notification of intention to limit the marketing or use of a chemical substance on grounds of public health or protection of consumers or environment, Art. 8 (4) Analysis of the Report from the Commission on the operation of the Directive ( ): Low number of notification cases compared to other sectors (in 2001: 19) But high number of reactions (detailed opinion & mere comments, in 2001: 27) = Good result. But increase can come! Handling of cases at Cefic

5 Example 1: SOMS (=Strategy on Management of Substances) Goal: develop ideas and instruments for implementation of new chemicals policy 2001: NL project for a joint initiative from industry, NGOs and the Government : prioritisation procedure for listing chemicals Feb 2001: EU White Paper on Future Chemicals Policy Problem: 2 conflicting systems July 2002: NL notifies intention to legislate Sept 2002: Cefic intervenes: letter - position: wait for REACH. Attempt to extend period even further Oct 2002: normal standstill period elapses July 2003: extended standstill period elapses. NL voluntarily decides to wait for REACH Oct 2003: REACH proposal = SUCCESS

6 Example 2: Danish feed phosphorus tax aim: reduce phosphorus in agriculture, curb over-enrichment of fresh waters measure was counterbalanced by a cut in the land tax of the farmers 15 June 2004: notification of the plan 24 June 2004: letter Cefic to Notification Unit of COM End of July: approval by Danish Parliament Autumn: meeting COM, exchange of letters Jan 2005: Tax enters into force = Failure Difference to SOMS example: Fiscal matter / State aid question Several DGs were competent

7 Example 3: Deca-BDE Feb 2005: Norwegian Government announces that it will propose a partial ban on Deca-BDE 15 April 2005: consultation of stakeholders in Norway 25 April 2005: notification to Efta Surveillance Authority and COM Problems: 1.EEA country: but Annex II to the Agreement on the EEA includes Directive 98/34 2.Parallel procedure: proposal from COM to exempt the Deca-BDE from an EU ban on hazardous substances in electronics manufacture (RoHS Directive)

8 Conclusion / Assessment We support: Completion of the Internal market – Directive brings a valuable mechanism for monitoring national activities = early warning system Industry has not briefed right to intervene – no judicial procedure but works very well in practice We see the following weaknesses: Protection of workers, Art. 1 last paragraph: trichloroethylene case Tax issue, but distortion of competition: Danish case Precautionary principle