WRITTEN QUESTION P-3788/00 by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission. Scientific Committee's evaluation of proposals conderning Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs).
Date: 2000-11-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: chemical industry, consultation procedure, endocrine disease, non-governmental organisation, report, scientific committee (EU), toxic substance

C 187 E/48

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

The enforcement of the Community regulations governing the formulation of animal feedstuffs and testing
for the absence of prohibited substances is the responsibility of the Member States. This enforcement is
monitored by the Food and Veterinary Office, whose programme of inspections has recently been stepped
up. The reports on these inspections are circulated to the Parliament and are published on the internet.

The temporary extension of the list of proteins banned from animal feeds to include substances such as
poultry offal meal will greatly facilitate the use of microscopic testing to detect infringements of the
legislation. However no currently available test is capable of detecting all prohibited animal protein. For
that reason very stringent Community control provisions on labelling, separation and treatment applicable
to the production, transport, storage and on-farm utilization of animal protein in animal feed are in force.

Since 1 January 2001 the importation from third countries of processed animal proteins intended for the
feeding of farmed animals has been prohibited by Council Decision 2000/766/EC of 4 December 2000
concerning certain protection measures with regard to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and the
feeding of animal protein (1). This Decision will apply until 30 June 2001. On 1 April the Community
rules on the absence of specified risk material from products imported from non-BSE free third countries
will enter into force. Until that moment comparable national rules may remain in force. Finally, it is hoped
that on 1 July 2001 the proposal for a Parliament and Council Regulation laying down rules for the
prevention and control of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (2), as amended (3), on the
prevention and control of this group of diseases will enter into force. It lays down a wide range of rules
including those on the importation of bovine animals and products from third countries.

(1) OJ L 306, 7.12.2000.
(2) OJ C 45, 19.2.1999.
(3) COM(2000) 824 final.

(2001/C 187 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3788/00

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Subject: Scientific Committee(cid:146)s evaluation of proposals conderning Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs)

In September this year, the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Eco-toxicity (CSTEE) and the Environment
published its opinion on the BKH report which proposed a priority list of substances to be assessed as
potential EDCs: (cid:145)Towards the establishment of a priority list of substances for further evaluation of their
role in endocrine disruption (cid:129) preparation of a candidate list of substances as a basis for priority setting(cid:146)
(BKH report MO355008/1786Q).

Is the Commission aware that this CSTEE opinion relies heavily on the views of the chemical industry (cid:129)
CEFIC (cid:129) and that these appear to be the only outside comments to have been used, apart from other EU
scientific bodies? Does the Commission agree that this gives the Scientific Committee(cid:146)s opinion the
appearance of a biased consultation procedure in which views of only certain parties have been taken
into account?

In these circumstances, does the Commission intend to rely heavily on the CSTEE opinion when assessing
actions to be taken on the basis of the BKH report, and how does it intend to balance its final conclusions
so that it takes account of submissions from other stakeholders (cid:129) including Member State authorities and
an international environmental NGO?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2001)

Regarding the opinion of the Commission scientific committee for toxicity, ecotoxicity and the environ-
ment (SCTEE) on the BKH report (cid:145)Towards the establishment of a priority list of substances for further

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/49

evaluation of their role in endocrine disruption (cid:129) preparation of a candidate list of substances as a basis
for priority-setting(cid:146) (5 September 2000), it must be stated at the outset that this report does not identify
a priority list of substances but, as the report name indicates, a candidate list of substances as a basis for
priority-setting.

Concerning the process of consultation of the SCTEE, the committee was, on this occasion, requested by
the Commission to comment on the BKH report only. While the outside comments considered by the
committee, relative to the BKH report, came only from the European chemical industry council (CEFIC)
and the European crop protection association (ECPA) (cid:129) (the SCTEE commented specifically on this
additional information at the end of its opinion) other sources of specific Endocrine disrupting chemicals
(EDC) information were considered, as stated by the SCTEE in its opinion on the BKH report (see below
a transcription of the relevant bit of the SCTEE opinion), some of which were also received from the
outside:

(cid:133) the SCTEE has also made use of the Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Plants (SCP) on
Endocrine Disruption relevance in the context of Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the
placing of plant protection products on the market (Opinion expressed by the SCP on 2 December
1999). Further, reference is given to the previous SCTEE Opinion on Human and Wildlife Health
Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, with Emphasis on Wildlife and on Ecotoxicology Test
Methods, expressed on 4 March 1999. The SCTEE has also received information on the classification
and labelling on 66 prioritised substances from the EC Joint Research Centre (SCTEE/2000/12 (cid:129) Add.
5A) (cid:133) and Cantox Health Sciences International has provided the SCTEE with documentation on the
thyroidal effects of resorcinol (SCTEE /2000/12 (cid:129) Add. 3).

It must be noted that some of those individual submissions do include several other references made
available to the committee. The SCTEE secretariat alone provided the SCTEE with well over 120 different
ones received from several different sources,
including Industry and non-governmental organisations
(NGO(cid:146)s), and one must also consider the extremely large list included in the SCTEE opinion on Human
and Wildlife Health Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, with Emphasis on Wildlife and on
Ecotoxicology Test Methods; this publication alone has 438 different scientific references.

Concerning the question of how the SCTEE opinion will be taken into account, the Commission has
clearly indicated that there are two steps in the process of establishing a priority list of substances for
further evaluation of their role in endocrine disruption (cid:129) first the preparation of the candidate list
contained in the BKH report and second a priority -setting exercise involving consultation of the SCTEE
and the stakeholders. While the SCTEE as well as industry have been critical of the BKH report, the
majority view of Member States and NGOs is that the BKH approach is a pragmatic one which is
reasonable for a first cut of the data and that it can be used as a first step in developing the priority list.

On 8/9 November 2000, the Commission hosted a stakeholder consultation meeting in Brussels at which
there was broad support for a priority list of actions aimed at addressing different segments of the
candidate list. Examples of priority actions include (i) the further evaluation of substances for which there
is evidence of endocrine disruption or potential endocrine disruption in the BKH report and which are not
currently addressed in existing legislation, and (ii) the gathering of basic data on the many substances in
the BKH report which were deemed to have insufficient data to decide on endocrine disrupting potential.

The Commission is now preparing a progress report on the implementation of the Community strategy for
endocrine disrupters (1) in which it will set out in detail the actions to be taken in specific timeframes.
These actions comprise a balance between the need for immediate action and the need for further
evaluation of individual substances, taking into account the specific comments of the SCTEE on the
scientific shortcomings of the BKH report.

(1) COM(1999) 706 final.