WRITTEN QUESTION E-0950/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Use of Bisphenol A.
Date: 2001-03-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: chemical product, consumer protection, health risk, product safety, substitute product, toxic substance

C 340 E/130

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

Is the Commission aware of alternative products that might be used to perform the same tasks

3.
without the same side-effects?

4.

Is the Commission satisfied with the current level of restrictions on the use of alkyphenols?

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

(14 June 2001)

The Commission is currently finalising the assessment of the risks to human health and environment,
under Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of
existing substances (1), of two nonylphenols, with the United Kingdom as Rapporteur Member State: (a)
Phenol, 4-nonyl, branched (CAS Registry Number 84852-15-3); (b) Nonylphenol (CAS Registry Number
25154-52-3) and related derivatives (nonylphenol ethoxylates)

Nonylphenols and the nonylphenol ethoxylates are a family of products that constitute only a sub-group
of the larger group of alkylphenols.

Following the completion of this work, restrictions on the marketing and use of nonylphenols and
nonylphenol ethoxylates could be proposed, as appropriate.

To date, no Community measures have been adopted concerning alkylphenols in general.

The risk assessment reports indicate that the main use of these nonylphenols is as an intermediate in the
production of nonylphenol ethoxylates, which in turn are used in detergents and paints and in the
production of resins, plastics and stabilisers in the polymer industry. Other uses include the manufacture of
phenolic oximes for use outside the Community in the metal extraction industry and in some speciality
paints. The substance has a hormone disruptive ability. It also has several toxic properties, which occur at
exposures similar to those inducing hormone system disturbances.

The risk assessment reports determined that the substances pose risks to human health (workers) and the
environment (aquatic and terrestrial environment).

These conclusions were supported by the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the
Environment in its opinion of 4 February 2000.

Work is currently underway in the framework of the Regulation to identify the specific additional
measures needed to control the identified risks. In this context issues related to substitution are also taken
into account. It is expected that this work will be completed in June 2001.

(1) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993.

(2001/C 340 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0950/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Use of Bisphenol A

Is the Commission satisfied that the current use of Bisphenol A is consistent with consumer safety? Will it
confirm that there is now scientific evidence that current human exposure is at about the same level as
that which causes damage to the reproductive system of mice, and that Bisphenol A is a known hormone
disrupter? Will it list the current uses of Bisphenol A known to the Commission and confirm its use in
protective coatings for tin cans,
in white dental fillings and in polycarbonate plastic bottles? Is the
Commission aware of alternative products that could be used to perform the same tasks without the same
side effects?

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/131

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

(13 June 2001)

The possible risks to health and to the environment of Bisphenol A are being evaluated in the framework
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of
existing substances (1).

Bisphenol A is used in the production of polycarbonates and epoxy resins, which have a number of
applications in consumer goods, such as food and beverage containers, which have epoxy resin internal
coatings, and polycarbonate tableware and bottles, such a those used for infant formula milk. Another
source of consumer exposure arises from its use in dental fissure sealants.

The risk assessment has identified health concerns (eye and respiratory tract irritation, skin sensitisation,
effects on the liver and fertility)
in certain occupational exposure scenarios, and also concerns for
environmental damage in relation to specified uses. No concerns have been identified for consumer
exposures in relation to any of the above-mentioned effects. Discussions in relation to developmental
toxicity, and the significance of the findings in mice at very low dose levels are still ongoing.

The results of the risk evaluations will be summarised in a Commission Recommendation published in the
Official Journal. Where unacceptable risks are identified, the Commission will consider risk reduction
measures, as appropriate, in those areas where concerns have been indicated. In this context, issues related
to substitution will also be taken into account.

(1) OJ L 224, 3.9.1993.

(2001/C 340 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0956/01

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Coastal erosion

Coastal areas are of great economic, environmental, social and cultural significance in Europe, given their
importance in an extremely wide range of policy areas, including fisheries, transport, energy, resources
management, the protection of wildlife and habitats, employment, regional development, tourism, industry,
waste management and education. Nonetheless, and despite the urgency of the matter, very little is being
done to find solutions to the problem of coastal erosion, which is largely being ignored.

This irreversible process, which is going on in almost all the EU Member States, is the result of global
warming. Italy, which has almost 8 000 kilometres of coastline, is extremely conscious of the need to
contain this natural process. However, although it is endeavouring to take action at local and regional
level, on its own it can do very little to tackle a problem requiring action at European level which is
compatible with the environmental policies of the other countries and includes cross-border cooperation in
coastal areas.

The damage caused by melting icecaps and rising sea levels is difficult to quantify and solutions are hard to
find and often turn out to be merely stopgap measures which, were they to be upgraded to a formal
strategy at Member State level, would prove too costly.

However, the provision of funding for pilot projects would encourage experts and researchers to study the
problem more closely and would provide many young graduates and research centres with an opportunity
to work on practical projects. Such research could lead to the formulation of viable solutions, and relevant
findings and proposals could be made available to all the Member States.