Activites

• 2004/04/08 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Regulation 2004/648
  • OJ L 104 08.04.2004, p. 0001-0035
• 2004/03/31 Final act signed
• 2004/03/31 End of procedure in Parliament
• #2570
• 2004/03/11 Council Meeting
• 2004/01/14 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T5-0017/2004 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on the report drafted by Mauro NOBILIA (UEN, I). Following the meeting of the Environment committee, (please see the summary of 02/12/03.), the Council and the Parliament held negotiations, which led to a "provisional compromise" adopted by the plenary: - with regard to metabolites, if further information is sought, stepwise testing strategies should be employed to ensure maximum use of in vitro and other non-animal test methods; the article headed "refusal of derogation" has been amended to "conditions for granting a derogation". Such conditions include consideration of the following criteria: use in low-dispersive applications, rather than in wide-dispersive applications; use in specific industrial and/or institutional applications only; and, the risk to the environment or to health posed by the volume of sales and the pattern of use throughout the EU is small compared to the socio-economic benefits, including food safety and hygiene standards; - the Commission may review a derogation as soon as information comes to light which would justify a significant revision of the technical file that was included in the application for derogation; - pending further harmonisation, Member States may maintain or lay down national rules concerning the use of phosphates in detergents. In committee, MEPs had asked for national standards on detergents to remain valid for as long as there is no contradictory European legislation. According to the provisional compromise, this rule would apply only to the use of phosphates in detergents; - by following the compromise, Parliament rejected an agreement from the Greens, which proposed the banning of phosphates or restrictions on their use. However, they voted to insist that the Commission should present a proposal to ban or restrict phosphates within three years. This is why the compromise is only "provisional" - the Council is proposing a five year period. Some Members expect the Council to agree to three years without recourse to conciliation, but the question remains open for the time being; - five years after the date of publication of the Regulation, the Commission will carry out a review of its application, paying particular regard to the biodegradability of surfactants, and where justified, present legislative proposals relating to anaerobic biodegradation, and the biodegradation of main nonsurfactant organic detergent ingredients; - in committee, Members had asked for an exhaustive list of all additives to be made public on the Internet, and according to the preference of the company, by telephone or in writing. The compromise proposes instead that "manufacturers shall make available on a website the ingredient datasheet mentioned above except for the following information: weight percentage ranges, constituents of perfumes and essential oils, constituents of colouring agents. This obligation shall not apply to industrial or institutional detergents containing surfactants, or to surfactants for industrial or institutional detergents, for which a technical data sheet or safety data sheet is available; - as requested by the Environment Committee, not only enzymes and disinfectants, but also perfumes and optical brighteners will be labelled. On the other hand, preservatives will not now belabelled. Three other proposals made by the Environment Committee were left out of the compromise and were therefore rejected by the plenary session: - the obligation to explain the areas of non-compliance with European ECOLabel standards when a product is labelled as 'Green' despite not meeting all the ECOLabel conditions; - the shortening and regrouping of the list of substances to be labelled; - the request to apply a sunset clause, according to which the standards adopted by a consultative committee would expire after 8 years if they were not renewed by the legislature.�

• 2004/01/13 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2003/12/02 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A5-0455/2003
• 2003/11/06 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2537
• 2003/11/04 Council Meeting
  • 10595/3/2003 summary

    The Council adopted the common position, by a qualified majority, the Portuguese delegation voting against. The Council accepted 5 amendments as they were accepted by the European Parliament and 12 were accepted in principle. All the other amendments have been rejected. The common position amends the Commission's proposal and intends to reply to the following demands: The Common Position modifies the Commission Proposal by attempting to cater for the following requirements: - better definition of the parties intervening in the authorisation or derogation process; - clarification of the scope (inter alia by defining the boundaries with respect to biocidal products); - need to inform and to protect consumers; - providing clearer guidelines for approved laboratories and for testing methods. The Council has introduced new elements in the common position compared with the Commission proposal. - Objectives and scope : this article has been modified, strengthening the importance of biodegradability for surfactants and underlining the importance of the information, contained in the technical file, that manufacturers must hold at the disposal of the Member States. It has also been stressed that, besides the environment, one of the objectives is to protect the human health. - Definitions : new definitions were added for "medical personnel" and for "industrial and institutional detergent" (as requested by the Parliament). - The placing on the market : the distinction between detergents and surfactants, on the one hand, and biocidal products, on the other hand, has been included. - Limitations on biodegradability of surfactants : the link between aerobic biodegradation of surfactants and limitations as regard placing on the market has been clarified. - Granting of derogations : Derogations are now subject to fees, a tiered approach for tests has been introduced and various deadlines have been added to this Article. - Refusal of derogation : Refusal of derogation will henceforth be decided by the Commission assisted by the Committee set up by Art. 12. Also, deadlines have been introduced together with the obligation to publish a list of surfactant not complying with this Regulation. - Testing of surfactants : Testing requirements have been clarified. - Duties of the Member States : criteria for appointing approved laboratories have been modified, by introducing a reference to the norm EN ISO/IEC 17025 and to good laboratory practices. - Information to be provided by manufacturers : this Article has been modified by slightly rewording it and by introducing the notion of a public body which, in a Member State, may circulate the information received to medical personnel. - Control measures : this Article has been slightly reworded for clarity and the obligation for the Commission to verify false positive results has been introduced. - Labelling : amendments to this Article were made to better identify the party responsible for placing on the market the detergent and to allow for national provisions forbiddingdisplaying on the package of liquid products symbols (e.g. fruits) which might lead the consumer into error as to the use of the product (essentially to protect children). - Committee procedure : the text was changed to the standard legal text for this type of legislative Articles. - Adaptation of the annexes : Minor drafting changes were made to this Article, also stressing inter alia that all amendments to rules on solvent-based detergents will be made by Committee procedure (Art. 12). - Free movement clause : a legal clarification as to when products complying with this Regulation may be prevented from being placed on the market was introduced. - Legislation to be replaced and sanctions for non-compliance : minor legal redrafting changes were made to both Articles. - Annex I : Standards for accreditation : References to good laboratory practices (GLP) and to animal protection were added. - Annex II : (Testing methods) : It was specified that in certain cases high performance liquid cromatography (HPLC) or gas cromatography (GC) should be used. - Annex III : (Biodegradability tests) : Footnotes were renumbered. - Annex IV : A tiered approach for the technical file was introduced, the relation between failing a test and refusing a derogation was reworded and the header of a section dedicated to biodegradability tests was reworded. Some footnotes were renumbered. - Annex VII : Annex VII was deleted. - Annex VIII : (Labelling and ingredient datasheet) : An amendments was made to include salts of some compounds previously already listed. The prescription to list allergenic fragrances if superior to a 0,01% concentration was introduced. Consumer information as to the expected number of loads which may be washed with a package content and the standard dose recommended for a specific type of wash was added.�

• 2003/06/05 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(2003)0306 summary

    The Commission has adopted the amended proposal adapting the original proposal for a Regulation on Detergents following Parliament's first reading of the text. The text has been adopted where appropriate in the interest of clarity. A number of detailed improvements on matters of substance, in line with the Commission's original proposal, have also been made. Five Parliamentary proposals have been accepted in their entirety. Those accepted in part or subject to reformulation relate to: - Complementary risk assessment; - The definition of industrial and institutional detergents; - Forwarding information on detergents to medical staff and the definition of medical personnel; - In cases of "specific analytical methods", the Commission has reformulated the text to include high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and/or gas chromatography (GC). This applies to surfactants methods MBAS, BiAS and DBAS. - Additional consumer information on two different categories of detergent, namely heavy-duty detergents and detergents for delicate fabrics. - The definition of a surfactant in terms of an extended list of properties instead of including the intention of the manufacturer. - The criteria for derogations remaining subject to the co-decision procedure - Clarifications concerning the implementation of the provisions. The Commission did not accept thirty-eight amendments.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/', 'title': 'Enterprise and Industry'}],
• #2510
• 2003/05/19 Council Meeting
• 2003/04/10 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
  • T5-0184/2003 summary

    The Parliament amended and tightened up the draft regulation from the Commission on detergents by including stricter conditions on derogations from biodegradability rules and clearer labelling for consumers. MEPs also took a stand on the question of phosphates by urging the Commission to table a new legislative proposal with a view to phasing out phosphates, or restricting them to specific applications, three years after the regulation takes effect. In addition, Parliament called for new proposals on testing for anaerobic biodegradation and the biodegradation of the product as a whole, these being the two elements of testing neglected by the Commission in its current proposal. On labelling, Parliament adopted an amendment which would group the list of other substances together into categories that are better known than the individual components, thus making them easier for consumers to recognise. Parliament supported the reporter's, Mauro NOBILIA's (UEN, I), view that an excess of cryptic information on labels can lead to confusion, thus negating the original point of including it. It should also be noted that an amendment was adopted stating that if a detergent product carries any claim to be 'green' and not the European Eco-label, then it must clearly indicate which of the European Eco-label criteria it does not fulfil. This must be indicated on the packaging next to and in same letter size as the 'green' claim.�

• 2003/03/25 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0105/2003
• 2002/09/05 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2002/09/04 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2002)0485 summary

    PURPOSE : to present a proposal for a Regulation on detergents. CONTENT : this proposed regulation establishes rules designed to achieve the free movement of detergents in the internal market while, at the same time, ensuring a high degree of protection for the environment. It lays down rules for: - the biodegradability of surfactants in detergents, and - the labelling of detergents. This proposal modernises the existing detergent directives, regarding the biodegradability of surfactants and the protection of the environment. The proposed new biodegradability tests ensure a higher level of environmental protection and at the same time are applicable to all types of surfactants in detergents. Furthermore, the requirements specified in Commission Recommendation 89/542, on labelling of detergents and cleaning products, and specific information to consumers related to the presence in detergents of fragrance substances are made binding for the products covered by this Regulation. The main points in the proposed legislation are: - a new definition for detergents to cover equivalent uses and be in line with developments in Member States; - the introduction of a definition for surfactants; - a clear and precise definition of the relevant types of biodegradability. The existing legislation on biodegradability of surfactants in detergents only covers primary biodegradability and it is only applicable to anionic and non-anionic surfactants. It needs to be replaced by new legislation, which lays the main emphasis on ultimate biodegradability and meets concerns related to the potential toxicity of persistent metabolites. The existing requirements regarding primary biodegradability are to be maintained on a second hierarchy level for those surfactants failing the ultimate biodegradability tests. Surfactants failing primary biodegradability tests cannot obtain marketing authorisation by way of derogation. The primary biodegradability requirements are extended to all surfactants, in particular cationic and amphoteric, whilst allowing for the possibility of applying instrumental analyses in those cases in which semi-specific analytical methods are not suitable. There are provisions to place on the market in exceptional cases surfactants failing the ultimate biodegradability test. Detergents not fulfilling requirements laid down by this Regulation will not be placed on the market. Specific labelling is introduced to inform consumers about fragrance substances and preservation agents that are present in detergents. Manufacturers of detergents remain responsible for not placing on the market detergent preparations containing non-complying surfactants and for ensuring that all the required technical documentation is available.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/', 'title': 'Enterprise and Industry'}],

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2002)0485
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0105/2003
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0184/2003
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(2003)0306
• Council position published: 10595/3/2003
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A5-0455/2003
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T5-0017/2004
• : Regulation 2004/648
• : OJ L 104 08.04.2004, p. 0001-0035

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)