9. 8. 82 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 205/13 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive concerning airborne noise emitted by 
household appliances 
The text referred to the Committee has not yet been published in the Official Journal of the 
European Communities. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 1 February 1982 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and 
Social Committee in accordance with Article 100 of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 198th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 26 and 27 May 1982. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 
thereof, 
Having regard to the, request made by the Council of the 
European Communities on 1 February 1982 for an 
opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive 
concerning airborne noise emitted by household 
appliances, 
Having regard to the decision taken by the Bureau of the 
Committee on 26 January 1982, instructing the Section 
for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and 
Consumer Affairs to draw up an opinion and report on 
the matter, 
Having regard to the Section's discussions at its 68th 
meeting held on 30 March 1982, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the rapporteur, 
Mr Hilkens, 
Having regard to the discussions during the 198th plenary 
session held on 26 and 27 May 1982, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 68 votes to 2 with 8 abstentions: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee welcomes the Commission's 
decision to propose a Directive dealing with the noise 
emitted by household appliances. This proposal 
implements part of the EEC's action programme on the 
environment dealing with noise nuisance. It is also 
important from the point of view of EEC consumer 
policy, which is aimed at protecting and informing the 
consumer. The objective referred to in the Directive's 
introduction, namely the elimination of all technical barriers to trade, will undoubtedly also be furthered by 
the proposed uniform labelling. 
In view of the aims of this Directive, the Committee 
wonders why the Commission did not also base its 
proposals on Article 235 of the Treaty. 
1.2. This first Directive on noise labelling must be 
seen as a first step towards a real reduction in noise 
levels. 
In this initial phase such labelling will still be largely 
voluntary, although Member States can make it 
mandatory. This phase will have to be followed as soon as 
possible by a second, mandatory phase, leading finally to 
a third phase in which limits are laid down for the noise 
emitted by household appliances. These limits must then 
be gradually lowered. This is particularly important in 
view of the cumulative effect of noise from different 
household appliances. 
1.3. The Committee notes that this is an outline 
Directive, pursuant to which implementing Directives 
will be drawn up for each family of appliances setting out 
which of the obligatory measuring methods, types of 
information and checking methods referred to in the 
Directive must be used. 
In view of the importance which it attaches to these 
implementing Directives, the Committee considers that it 
must be able to state its views on them too. 
The Committee notes that there is no provision for a 
simple form of recognition of noise level; the average user 
has no knowledge of technical noise level readings. 
The Committee would therefore ask the Commission to 
work out an understandable method for indicating noise 
levels. 
1.4. The Committee notes that implementing 
Directives can be expected first for vacuum cleaners, 
dishwashers and washing machines. It calls on the 
No C 205/14 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 8. 82 
Commission to draw up a priorities list for other 
appliances, taking into account such factors as frequency 
and time of use. 
1.5. When it comes to giving concrete form to the 
Directive, two important points - besides the measuring 
and labelling methods - will be the checking 
arrangements and possible penalties for 
non-compliance. 
The Committee therefore regrets that this Directive does 
not describe the checking procedure; as a result it has only 
been able to form a general opinion on this point. The 
Committee also regrets that the Member States have been 
given too much freedom with regard to the imposing of 
penalties. 
Furthermore, any alterations or modifications to 
machines prior to sale or on offer as an extra, should also 
be subjected to the measuring check and the effects of 
these modifications or extra fitments mentioned on the 
label, in so far as the noise level may be affected. 
1.6. The Committee notes that the checking 
procedure will be based on ISO draft standard DP 7574. 
If this standard is to be used in connection with this 
Directive the Committee would like to be asked for its 
opinion beforehand. 
1.7. The preparation of standards, and certainly those 
on which the Commission bases its Directives, must 
always be carried out on a tripartite basis. Proper 
consultations must be held between all those concerned, 
i.e. government, manufacturers and consumers. 
1.8. As far as the formulation of standards is 
concerned, the Committee thinks that the Commission 
itself must be able to take the initiative and must stimulate 
discussion so as to facilitate their preparation. The 
implementation of Directives must not be impeded 
because standards are drawn up in a very one-sided way 
or even fail to be produced. 
Where standards are to be applied, the Committee takes 
the view that it is not enough to refer to this OF that 
standard (e.g. an ISO standard) but that the standard 
must be regarded as an integral part of the Directive and 
appended thereto. 
1.9. The Committee considers that the information 
must be affixed in such a place that it is clearly visible to 
the consumer when he needs it. The information must be 
clear and unambigious, as regards both the form it takes 
and the manner in which it is presented. It will have to be 
backed up by proper explanations aimed at increasing the 
value of the information provided. 
1.10. All the relevant parties (government, 
manufacturers and consumers) must be involved in the 
preliminary consultations on the drawing up of 
implementing Directives. The Committee regrets that the Consumers' Consultative 
Committee was not given the opportunity to comment on 
this Commission proposal. 
1.11. The Committee is anxious that attention also be 
paid to the cost angle when implementing Directives for 
the various appliances come to be drawn up. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. In the Italian text of point 3.2 on page 3 of the 
Commission document the correct term for 'random 
sampling' is 'campione' and not 'per sandaggio'. 
3. Discussion of the individual Articles 
Article 1 - paragraph 2 
The Committee notes the Commission's statement that 
built-in appliances are covered by the Directive. 
To avoid misunderstandings the Committee would ask 
the Commission to clarify the text of paragraph 2 of 
Article 1. 
Article 3 ~ paragraph 1 
The Committee understands this paragraph to mean that 
the manufacturer or Community-based importer of an 
appliance establishes and certifies the noise level of that 
appliance. This means that the checks will have to be very 
effective. 
Paragraph 2 
The Committee assumes that the measuring methods 
stipulated in the implementing Directives will always be 
one of the measuring methods specified in Annex I to this 
Directive. 
Paragraph 3 
Since the effectiveness of this Directive is very much 
dependent on, among other things, the checks on the 
published noise levels, the Committee would like to have 
more information on this aspect before it gives its 
endorsement. The information provided in Annex II to 
the draft Directive is quite inadequate. 
Article S — paragraph 2 
The Committee first of all notes that the optional nature 
of the Directive is made clear in this paragraph. 
Paragraph S 
The Committee considers paragraph 5 to be confusing. It 
must be made clear - as in paragraph 4 - that the label's 
correct position is on the appliance. All information given 
elsewhere - the subject of paragraph 5 - must be 
regarded as being additional to that given on the 
appliance label. The exact position of the appliance label 
will be indicated in the relevant implementing 
Directive. 
9. 8. 82 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 205/15 
Article 6 - paragraph 2 
The Committee would like to see the wording changed 
from 'checks which may be carried out' to 'checks which 
are to be carried out'. It is certainly not the Commission's 
intention that checks should take place on a voluntary 
basis. 
Article 7 - paragraph 1 
In the Dutch text word 'eventueel' is confusing. It would 
be better to align on the 'where appropriate' of the English 
text, in the sense of 'if applicable'. 
Paragraph 2 
Since the effectiveness of the Directive is largely 
dependent on not only the system of checks employed but 
also the penalties for infringing the rules, the Committee 
Done at Brussels, 26 May 1982. regards the penalties stipulated in paragraph 2 as 
completely inadequate. It would ask the Commission to 
include in the Directive a provision calling upon the 
Member States to lay down penalties and inform the 
Commisssion thereof. 
The Committee would ask the Commission to specify in 
the Directive that if a check should prove that the noise 
emitted is higher than the published level, the Member 
States must request marketing to be suspended until the 
manufacturer or importer has published accurate 
information. This will also prevent possible distortions of 
competition. 
Article 12 - paragraph 1 
The Committee wonders whether it will be possible for 
the Member States to introduce the laws, regulations and 
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this 
Directive-before 1 January 1983. 
The Chairman 
of the 
Economic and Social Committee 
Tomas ROSE INGRAVE 
APPENDIX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following passages from the opinion were deleted during the discussion as a result of amendments 
being adopted: 
Page 6 - paragraphs 4 and 5 
Paragraph 4 
'The Section considers that, from the point of view of consumer information, the positioning of the 
label is so important that it cannot be left to the implementing Directive unless clearer guidelines are 
given in this outline Directive.' 
Paragraph 5 
'In the Section's view paragraph 5 is not precise enough as regards the positioning of the label. 
These provisions do not adequately convey the Commission's intensions. The Section would therefore 
urge the Commission to revise this paragraph, making it clearer that the correct place for the label is on 
the appliance.' 
Voting: 
Unanimously. 
Page 7 - paragraph 2, second subparagraph 
'In the Section's opinion the marketing of the appliance in question should be suspended until the 
manufacturer or importer issues the correct information.' 
Voting: 
Unanimously.