|
02/06/2008
The European Commission announced on 29 May that the Advisory Committee for Safety and Health at Work (Luxembourg Advisory Committee - ACSHW) had approved its proposal for a Directive establishing a third list of indicative occupational exposure limit values (IOELVs).
After a written procedure that the representatives of the ACSHW’s three stakeholder groups - trade unions, employers, governments - were invited to take part in, the Commission’s proposal for a directive received 39 votes for and 8 votes against. 34 Committee members did not vote.
The new list establishes IOELVs for 20 hazardous chemicals used in work places. The IOELVs proposed by the Commission for formaldehyde, carbon disulfide and mercury also got the ACSHW’s green light. The government, employer and trade union representatives on the ACSHW had been at odds over all three chemicals in recent months. The unions were for Commission’s three proposed exposure limits, the employers against. The German and British governments actively supported the formaldehyde industry’s campaign, while the other governments were divided. Formaldehyde is a carcinogen that causes nose and throat cancers and leukaemia, amongst other things, and is used in many industries (wood, textile, chemicals, food processing, etc.) and in hospitals. Carbon disulfide and mercury are toxicants that are particularly hazardous to reproduction.
The Directive on protecting workers' health and safety against chemical hazards (98/24/EC, article 3) requires IOELVs to be adopted by Commission directives.
These exposure limits are established by a European committee of toxicological experts (SCOEL) on the basis of health criteria, disregarding any economic or technical considerations. The quality of SCOEL’s expertise and the independence of its members have sparked antagonism from industry which would like to privatize exposure limits by having them drawn up by its own experts.
While the Commission normally accepts the exposure limits proposed by SCOEL “as is”, experience teaches that political pressure can lead it to violate the ground rules. For example, two exposure limits proposed by SCOEL - for NO and NO2, two chemicals that trigger breathing difficulties - were taken off the second list adopted in 2006 at the last minute. So a close watch needs to be kept on what ultimately happens to this third list, which still has to go for scrutiny by the Member States’ representatives (through what is known as the “comitology” procedure). The British and German governments are quite likely to try and lean on the Commission again.
When an indicative OELV is set for a chemical at Community level, the Member States must draw up a national exposure limit, but it does not have to be the same as the Community exposure limit.
The adoption of this third list, added to the two lists of substances previously adopted, should bring the number of chemicals with a Community level IOELV to 116.
|
