Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the placing on the market of pyrotechnic articles (COM(2005) 457 final — 2005/0194 (COD))
Date: 2006-05-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: accident prevention, explosive, free movement of goods, harmonisation of standards, marketing standard, safety standard, single market

18.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/7

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council on the placing on the market of pyrotechnic articles

(COM(2005) 457 final — 2005/0194 (COD))

(2006/C 195/02)

On 25 November 2005, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 25 April 2006. The rapporteur was Mr Cassidy.

At its 427th plenary session, held on 17 and 18 May 2006 (meeting of 17 May), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 117 votes to 1 with 2 abstentions.

1. Executive summary of EESC conclusions and recom-

mendations

this. The Committee urges all Member States to improve their
monitoring of consumer accidents.

1.1

The draft directive is intended:

— to ensure the free movement of pyrotechnic products

within the EU,

— to improve safety of consumers and professionals,

— to harmonise safety requirements in all Member States.

The EESC in general supports the Commission draft

1.2
directive but makes the following recommendations.

The Commission should consider a longer period for
1.2.1
transposition than that allowed for in the current Article 20.
The period allowed for fireworks is only 24 months after publi-
cation of the directive, whereas for other pyrotechnic devices it
is five years. Given the long lead time for importers of fire-
works from China and other sources, estimated by distributors
in the EU to be at least three years, the EESC recommends that
the same length of time should be allowed for fireworks as for
other pyrotechnic devices, i.e. five years.

1.2.2
The Committee points out that the arrangements for
testing fireworks and for meeting the CEN specification impose
responsibilities on importers and distributors. It recommends
therefore that it should be made clear in the directive that
importers must specify the standards to be obtained for the CE
marking when placing their orders with manufacturers
throughout the world. The responsibility for testing and for CE
marking should rest with the manufacturer, with the importer
having a secondary responsibility for ensuring that products
bearing the CE mark are genuinely able to meet the CEN stan-
dards to avoid counterfeit products being put on the market.

1.2.5
Article 14 sets up arrangements for rapid information
on products presenting serious risks. The RAPEX system could
also be used as an interim measure until the directive comes
into force.

1.2.6
For pyrotechnic products used in the automotive
industry, Article 12 (1) requires manufacturers to ensure that
they ‘are properly labelled in the official
language(s) of the
country in which the article is sold to the consumer’. The
Committee beliefs the reference to the consumer is misleading
as most pyrotechnic articles are fitted to motor vehicles at the
manufacturing stage. The information for Original Equipment
can therefore continue to be used in the current language
this equipment are
(English). However, manufacturers of
concerned about the obligation to print instructions in all the
official
languages of the 25 countries because they have no
control over which country the device will be used in. The
Committee believes that the manufacturers' Safety Data Sheets
should be sufficient as the information they contain is mainly
diagrammatic and statistical.

— The requirement of labelling ‘in the official language(s) of
the country in which the article is sold to the consumer’ is
contrary to the basic principles of the single market as
language labelling would be an obstacle to trade. The
Committee also believes
replacement airbags, etc.
that
would only rarely be sold to the final consumer but rather
installed by garage technicians.

1.2.3
The Committee believes that customs and other autho-
rities in the Member States should also be involved in moni-
toring that products bearing the CE mark are genuinely
meeting the standard.

1.2.4
Accident data supplied by Member States to the Euro-
pean Commission are incomplete. The Commission is aware of

1.2.7
Article 8.4 of the draft directive obliges Member States
to inform the Commission if they believe that products do not
fully satisfy the essential safety requirements referred to in
Article 4 (1) which will provide a legal base. In the meantime,
however, the Committee recommends that the RAPEX system
might be used to convey accident and hazard data to the
Commission so that the information will flow to other Member
States.

C 195/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

18.8.2006

The Committee has learned that

1.2.8
in some Member
States there are a number of micro enterprises involved in the
manufacture of fireworks for special local occasions. Member
States must ensure that these enterprises also respect the safety
requirements of the directive.

1.2.9
Automotive pyrotechnical devices should be covered
by a UN/ECE regulation under the 1958 Agreement (WP 29 in
Geneva) rather than in a standard.

1.2.10
technical devices,
accept some form of type approval.

The Committee believes that for automotive pyro-
the Commission should be prepared to

2. Summary of the Commission proposal

2.1
‘Fireworks’ are commonly used for entertainment or to
mark a special event such as a religious festival. They form part
of the cultural history of many EU Member States. The directive
deals with these separately from ‘pyrotechnic articles’ which,
for the purposes of the directive, cover explosive devices used
to trigger airbags and seat restraints in motor vehicles.

2.2 Categories

Article 3 of the draft directive establishes four categories of fire-
works:

a) Fireworks

— Category 1: presenting a very low hazard and intended

for use in a domestic or confined environment,

— Category 2: presenting a low hazard and intended for

use in outdoor confined areas,

— Category 3: presenting a medium hazard and intended

for outdoor use in large open areas,

— Category 4: presenting a high hazard and intended for

professional use only.

b) Other pyrotechnic articles

— Category 1: pyrotechnic articles other than fireworks

which present low hazard,

— Category 2: pyrotechnic articles other than fireworks
which are intended for handling or use by persons with
specialist knowledge only.

2.3 Age limits

2.3.1

Article 7 of the directive forbids the sale of:

— Category 1 fireworks to anyone under 12;

— Category 2 to anyone under 16;

— Category 3 to anyone under 18.

2.4
The rules for placing pyrotechnic articles on the market
differ widely across the present 25 Member States as do the
statistics on accidents
compilation. Currently,
and their
Member States' data refer only to fireworks and not to other
products such as those used in the automotive industry,
in
stage effects or in distress flares.

2.5
The market for automotive articles is the more impor-
tant of the two branches with a value of EUR 5.5 billion
annually (EUR 3.5 billion airbag systems and EUR 2 billion seat
belt pre-tensioners).
in 2004 was
EUR 223 438 297 and the import value of EUR 16 090 411.)

export

value

(The

2.6
The vast majority of fireworks on the EU market are
imported from China so that the main employment in the EU
is estimated at around
is in SMEs. The consumer market
EUR 700 million per year and the ‘professional’ market about
the same. The Commission's impact assessment reckons that
employment is around 3 000 mainly involved with purchasing,
storage, distribution and professional firework displays. Malta is
an exception in having a large number of religious festivals
involving displays of hand-made fireworks, which are not sold
to consumers.

2.7
Accident levels vary according to the accuracy of the
national statistics and vary from 1.36 per million population in
Estonia to 60.1 per million in the United Kingdom. The
Commission extrapolates these statistics to arrive at a total
number of firework accidents of between 7 000 and 45 000
for an EU population of 455 million.

2.8
There appear to be no separate statistics for automotive
pyrotechnic accidents compared with those for traffic accidents
in general.

2.9 CE marking

2.9.1
There is no current requirement for fireworks to carry
a CE mark though a CEN standard was published in May 2003.
Articles 9 and 10 propose that they shall not be placed on the
market unless they conform to the procedures laid down in
these articles.

2.9.2 Member States will be required to inform the Commis-
sion of who has been appointed in their territory to carry out
the procedure.

2.9.3
has satisfied the assessment procedure.

No fireworks will be permitted unless the manufacture

2.10 Automotive pyrotechnic articles

Other pyrotechnic articles may not be sold or made available
to anyone under 18 unless they have the necessary vocational
training.

2.10.1
the market
devices.

There is no uniform approval process for placing on
inflators, modules and other automotive safety

18.8.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/9

2.11 Impact assessment

The Commission estimates that their harmonisation
2.11.1
lead to considerable cost saving for both fireworks and
will
automotive pyrotechnic articles. Currently, there are believed to
be as many as 50 000 different types of approved fireworks in
use in the EU and approval for one firework can cost between
EUR 500 and EUR 3 000 per firework per country. It calculates
that the cost of a new system with one procedure covering all
25 States will be cheaper.

For automotive products,

2.11.2
the cost of one airbag
approval can be EUR 25 000 in one country (Germany) and
the Commission hopes that competition among testing authori-
ties will bring down the price.

3. General comments

The Committee while welcoming the objectives of the
3.1
directive — free movement of pyrotechnic articles, a high
degree of consumer protection and essential safety require-
ments — has some reservations in particular about fireworks.

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of them are made
3.2
in China and that the manufacturers there may well not have
the resources to comply with an EU standard, who will assume
responsibility for testing — the importer, the manufacturer's
agent or the retailer?

reassurance will

3.3 What
the CE mark
attached to an imported firework is genuine and that the device
to which it is attached is not counterfeit?

there be that

3.4 What degree of cooperation is achievable between
consumer-protection bodies in the EU and the authorities in
the country of origin?

3.5
The EESC is somewhat sceptical about the statistics in
the Commission impact assessments, especially the wide range
of accident figures — between 7 000 and 45 000. It shares the

Brussels, 17 May 2006.

Commission opinion that ‘… any attempt to estimate a figure
for the total number of accidents across the EU must be treated
very cautiously’.

3.6
The same reservations apply to the economic impact
assessment and the rather optimistic reliance in the case of
automotive pyrotechnic articles on ‘… increased competition of
testing authorities’
to bring down the cost of appliance
approval.

The EESC notes that the Social

3.7
impact assessment is
positive in aiming to reduce the number of firework-related
accidents and neutral for employment in both firework and
automotive sectors.

The Environmental

3.8
impact assessment draws attention
to the influence of Council Directive 96/82/EC (Seveso II) of 9
December 1996 and its extension in Parliament and Council
Directive 2003/105/EC of 16 December 2003 to establish-
ments where pyrotechnics are present.

In spite of its reservations, the EESC welcomes these

3.9
impact assessments.

4. Specific comments

4.1
The automotive sector is far more important economic-
ally than that for fireworks. It is a major exporter and employs
large numbers. The EESC welcomes any step which will assist
EU manufacturers in holding their own in a sector in which
competition from ‘off shore’ is becoming more intense.

4.2
The Committee would hope that the introduction of
uniform standards for putting on the market safe fireworks
may lead to a revival of manufacture in the EU by offering
scale in a market worth EUR 1.4 billion
economies of
(consumer
sales also
sales EUR 700 million; professional
EUR 700 million) currently prevented by the existence of too
many national standards often in conflict with each other.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND