22. 7. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 191/19 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 76/769/EEC on the 
approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States 
relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and 
preparations i1) 
(91/C 191/08) 
On 22 February 1991, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 
17 May 1991. The Rapporteur was Mr Beltrami. 
At its 287th plenary session (meeting of 29 May 1991), the Economic and Social Committee 
unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The proposal amends for the twelfth time Direc­
tive 76/769/EEC laying down the legal framework for 
bans and restrictions on the marketing and use of 
certain dangerous substances and preparations. 
1.1.1. The proposal is intended to afford a high 
level of protection for both human health and the 
environment, and facilitate the operation of the internal 
market by imposing identical restrictions on all Member 
States. 
1.2. The proposal consists of: 
a) a ban on the marketing of 
— Nonabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 63936-56-1), 
— Heptabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 68928-80-3), 
— Hexabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 36483-60-0), 
— Tetrabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 40088-47-9), 
— Tribromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 49690-94-0), 
— Dibromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 2050-47-7), 
— Bromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 101-55-3), 
in concentrations by mass equal to or greater 
than 0,1% in substances, preparations and 
products; 
b) a five-year limit (from the adoption of the Directive) 
on the marketing of 
— Decabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 1163-19-5), 
— Octabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 32536-52-0), 
— Pentabromobiphenyl Ether (CAS 32534-81-9), 
in concentrations by mass equal to or greater 
(*) OJ No C 46, 22. 2. 1991, p. 8. than 0,1 % in substances, preparations and 
products. 
1.3. These homologues belong to a family of chemi­
cal substances known as polybromobiphenyl ethers 
(PBBE). They are employed as flame retardants in plas­
tics used to make components (e.g. electric and elec­
tronic circuit boards) and end products (e.g. televisions, 
computers). 
1.3.1. The flame retardant action of PBBE provides 
a particularly effective form of fire control. However, 
toxic chemicals known as polybromodibenzofurans are 
released into the atmosphere when plastics containing 
PBBE are exposed to heat, for example in accidental 
fires or in incinerators. 
1.4. Following a detailed study completed in August 
1990, the Commission concludes that PBBE pose a long-
term threat to human health and the environment, and 
should be phased out as soon as safer subsitutes can be 
found. 
1.5. To this end, the Commission proposes 
— an immediate ban on the marketing of the seven 
PBBE listed in 1.2(a) above. These are not currently 
produced commercially. Preparations and products 
in which the substances may be present are also to 
be banned, 
— a five-year limit (after adoption of the Directive) on 
marketing of the three PBBE listed in 1.2(b), which 
are produced commercially. Again, the ban extends 
to preparations and products in which they may be 
present. 
No C 191/20 Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 7. 91 
2. General comments 
2.1. The Committee notes the proposal to ban flame-
retardant PBBE used in sixteen types of plastics, fibres 
and synthetic resins. 
2.2. The Committee realizes that the use of these 
materials is increasing because of their superior techni­
cal qualities and the need to replace other raw materials 
now in short supply. 
2.3. Widespread use of plastics makes effective fire 
control particularly important to protect the health and 
safety of the consumer. 
2.4. For technical reasons, use of PBBE has increased 
rapidly over the last few years: 
— their fire retarding action is particularly effective as 
it operates at the optimum temperatures, 
— only small quantities are needed, so they do not 
affect the original properties of the plastics in which 
they are used. 
2.5. Possible substitutes are currently being assessed, 
but they have not yet been proved totally satisfactory 
as regards: 
— the technical requirements of the finished products 
(colour, phyisical and electrical properties, etc.), 
— flame retardancy, 
— their behaviour during processing, 
— their behaviour in the finished product, and over 
time, 
— costs, 
— their effects on human and environmental safety 
and health. 
Done at Brussels, 29 May 1991. 2.6. The US Environmental Protection Agency 
decided after an initial examination of the problem not 
to take any urgent measures. The Inter-Agency Testing 
Committee working under the Toxic Substances Con­
trol Act (TSCA) has identified a priority list of toxico-
logical and ecotoxicological studies to be carried out in 
order to fill the gaps in our knowledge of PBBE and 
provide a full risk assessemt. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. The Committee fully endorses the aim of the 
proposal. 
3.2. The Committee approves the proposed immedi­
ate ban on marketing of the seven PBBE listed in 1.2(a) 
which are not yet in common use. This preventive 
measure will improve human and environmental pro­
tection and will not—in the present status quo— 
cause any problems for user industries. 
3.3. The Committee approves the decision to allow 
use of the three PBBE listed in 1.2(b) for a provisional 
period of five years following adoption of the Directive. 
3.4. At the end of this period, the Committee asks 
the Commission to take two steps before introducing 
a definitive ban: 
— firstly, assess the findings of the studies on PBBE 
carried out by the TSCA Inter-Agency Testing Com­
mittee; 
— secondly, ascertain the effective availability of sub­
stitutes which are proven to be safe for people and 
the environment and which fully meet the require­
ments listed in 2.5 above. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN