No C 102/46 Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 4. 91 
A number of important uses are omitted, with the 
result that many products will come under 'other uses'. 
Further important uses, such as 'fuel', should be added. 
3.11. The Regulation is unclear about two cases: 
i) substances with only one EINECS number which may 
Done at Brussels, 28 February 1991. 
1. General comments 
The Committee welcomes the general thrust of the 
Commission proposal, but calls upon the Council to 
take account of the following comments in taking its 
decision. 
1.1. The draft Directive in question is coordinated 
with and subordinated to the draft Council Decision 
on the promotion of energy efficiency in the Community 
(SAVE programme) (2), because the latter lays down 
general standards and specific actions covering the 
problems which this draft Directive seeks to regulate. present varying data, such as those which may be sold 
in differing physical forms and with differing physical 
properties and ii) where a substance is both imported 
and manufactured. In such circumstances, it should be 
made clear whether one or two data sets have to be 
submitted. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francis STAEDELIN 
1.2. This is the best of introducing a general 
approach to simplify the procedures on action to be 
taken, which would provide certainty for producers, 
safety for consumers, and guarantees for the workers 
who install and maintain the appliances. Another Direc­
tive for liquid fuel appliances, not yet issued, must be 
coordinated with the Directive on gas-fired appliances, 
within the general framework of the Directive on energy 
efficiency. 
1.3. The draft Directive adds to the recent Directive 
90/396/EEC on gas appliances (3), adopted on 29 June 
1990. This directive regulates the performance of gas 
appliances in terms of both safety and the rational use 
of energy (efficiency). The Commission has instructed 
the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive (EEC) concerning the efficiency requirements 
for new, hot water boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels (*) 
(91/C 102/13) 
On 13 November 1990, 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 Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 5 February 1991. The Rappor­
teur was Mr Frandi. 
At its 284th plenary session (meeting of 28 February 1991), the Economic and Social Commit­
tee unanimously adopted the following Opinion by a large majority, with 8 votes against 
and 12 abstentions. 
(!) OJ No C 292, 22. 11. 1990, p. 8. 
(2) OJ No C 301, 30. 11. 1990, p. 11. (3) OJ No L 196, 26. 7. 1990, p. 15. 
18. 4. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 102/47 
to draw up standards based on the provisions of the 
Directive. The CEN has already prepared a draft stan­
dard prEN297 for gas boilers of up to 70 kW and is 
pressing ahead with work on higher-output boilers: 
these standards cover both safety and efficiency aspects. 
1.4. Official approval procedures are under way in 
all the EEC countries, with a view to granting the 
EC quality label to gas appliances with effect from 
1 January 1992: the addition of a further certificate or 
efficiency label would complicate procedures, to the 
detriment of the simplified free movement aimed at by 
Directive 90/396/EEC. Nevertheless, the requirements 
and procedures contained in the two Directives must 
be harmonized, particularly with regard to Articles 1, 
4, 7, 8 and 9. 
1.5. The CEN is also close to completing two stan-
ders, prEN303 and prEN304, on liquid-fuel hot water 
boilers, following years of work with all the parties 
concerned. The values laid down in the CEN drafts 
differ from those in the draft Directive. The Economic 
and Social Committee, like the Commission, hopes that 
the values established by the latter, reflecting the current 
state of technical progress are adopted at the earliest 
opportunity by the CEN. The Committee believes that 
these values provide for more rational and economic 
energy use. 
1.6. In laying down the basic requirement of rational 
use of energy, the Directive on gas appliances states 
that account shall be taken of safety needs: conse­
quently, when fixing efficiency levels, the effect of 
installation conditions and of the constraints of overall 
systems already existing in the various countries must 
receive special attention (e.g. excessively low flue input 
temperatures, flue condensation, local situations, etc.). 
The Committee also proposes that the rated or theoreti­
cal efficiency of boilers, as laid down in the manufac­
turers' specifications, should be checked after instal­
lation and under operating conditions; this should be a 
compulsory part of the test procedure, certifying that 
the rated efficiency quoted is maintained throughout 
service life. 
1.7. The Committee notes that the Commission is 
preparing a Directive within the framework of the 
SAVE programme which takes account of the rec­
ommendations in EEC Directive 76/493/EEC of 4 May 
1976 (*) on maintenance and annual inspection obli­
gations. 
1.8. The Committee suggests that funds should be 
made available from the THERMIE programme to 
promote new technologies for energy efficiency in 
boilers. 1.9. The draft Directive is in line with the EEC's 'new 
approach' concerning the approximation of technical 
legislation, under which actual figures and formulae 
should appear exclusively in standards, while EEC 
documents should be restricted to basic requirements 
only. 
1.10. The draft Directive should be coordinated with 
the Directive on building materials (2) which is to be 
incorporated into national laws by July 1991. It contains 
a section on heating and air-conditioning, which should 
subsequently be brought into line with the higher stan­
dards laid down by the most recent directives on energy 
saving. 
1.11. The Committee urges the Commission to 
ensure that uniform test values are applied throughout 
the Community; it also recommends that the Com­
mission provide for regular checks on test centres, as 
another means of ensuring uniformity of test procedures 
and equipment. 
1.12. The Committee is aware that the above must 
lead to a greater commitment on the part of manufac­
turers: the new quality and safety levels planned in the 
interests of the consumer will require suitable techno­
logical innovation. 
2. Specific comments on individual Articles 
These largely follow from the points made in point 1.9 
above. Considering that the draft deals with a subject 
involving a specific standard, it is defective in a number 
of respects, some of them important: 
2.1. Article 1 — The upper limit of 400 kW seems 
too low: mass-produced burners and boilers also exist 
for higher outputs. 
2.2. Article 5 — The differentiation regarding gas in 
relation to small natural draught burner appliances is 
unacceptable, for safety reasons, efficiency values for 
all low-output gas appliances should be specified in 
detail. 
2.3. Article 5 — Efficiency values to be achieved in 
tests at 30% part load are indicated, whereas it has 
not yet been decided at the European standards level 
whether this test should be retained or replaced. 
2.4. Article 6 — The decision to award stars * for 
each extra percentage point of efficiency fails to recogn­
ize that, quite apart from repeating the usual errors 
encountered in measuring efficiency, a single point does 
(J) OJ No L 140, 28. 5. 1976, p. 12. (2) OJ No L 40, 11. 2. 1989, p. 12. 
No C 102/48 Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 4. 91 
not represent a sufficiently clear difference to convey 
much meaning to consumers. It would be preferable to 
attribute a single value to a more substantial increase 
(at least 2 percentage points), above which appliances 
could display a title acknowledging their excellence in 
terms of efficiency. 2.5. The Directive contains one serious failing: 
efficiency levels must not be established without har­
monized testing methods being specified for both fuel 
types. No reference to this is made in the draft Directive: 
consequently the efficiency values set cannot be regard­
ed as exact. 
Done at Brussels, 28 February 1991. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
APPENDIX 
to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following amendments to the Section Opinion, tabled under the Rules of Procedure, were rejected during 
the course of the discussion: 
Point 1.5 
Add to paragraph 1.5: 
'The efficiency levels set out in this Directive do not, however, take account of the different market conditions 
in the Member States which affect the overall energy efficiency of a central heating system, of which a boiler 
forms an integral part.' 
Reason 
The proposal places undue reliance on a single measure of boiler efficiency. Paragraph 1.5 points out that 
there are clearly different views on this subject and a reconciliation of those views is required. 
Votes 
For: 24, against: 53, abstentions: 5. 
Point 1.11 
Add paragraph 1.11 as follows: 
'While, of course ,welcoming boilers with improved efficiency as specified in the proposed Directive, the 
Committee, nevertheless, recognizes that achieving higher efficiencies may well involve increased costs of 
such more efficient boilers and the change to the manufacture of more efficient boilers may well cause serious 
problems to firms engaged in such manufacture in certain parts of the Community. The Committee is, 
therefore, disappointed that no indication is given of these important factors in the Economic Impact Note 
in the proposed Directive which would enable the Committee better to formulate its opinion.' 
Reason 
Because of the lack of information on the economic impact of improving the efficiency of the boilers, it was 
not possible to estimate a Cost/Benefit balance of the proposal. The desirability of higher efficiency boilers 
could, therefore, not be considered in a socio-economic perspective, nor the response of the consumers. Nor 
was it possible to ascertain, for example, whether the exclusion of the more efficient condensing boilers was 
because they are too expensive. 
Votes 
For: 31, against: 56, abstentions: 4.