Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing of certain measuring devices containing mercury COM(2006) 69 final — 2006/0018 (COD)
Date: 2006-09-13
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: consumer protection, dangerous substance, environmental protection, marketing restriction, mercury

23.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/115

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restric-
tions on the marketing of certain measuring devices containing mercury

COM(2006) 69 final — 2006/0018 (COD)

(2006/C 318/20)

On 8 March 2006 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 Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 11 July 2006. The rapporteur was Ms Cassina.

At its 429th plenary session, held on 13 and 14 September 2006 (meeting of 13 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 181 votes to 5 with 8 abstentions.

1. Conclusions

2. Introduction and gist of the proposal

On the basis of the comments made in points 2 and 3,

1.1
the EESC:

a) supports the Commission's proposal and its choice of legal
basis (Article 95 of the Treaty) and endorses the strategic
goal of removing all mercury from the measuring devices
referred to in point 2.2 below,

The proposal

follows the approach laid down in the
2.1
Communication of 28 January 2005 on a Community strategy
concerning mercury (1). Taking as its starting point
the now
that mercury is toxic and
universally — acknowledged fact
highly dangerous to humans, ecosystems and wildlife,
the
Communication proposes a series of measures to protect public
health and the environment, based on eliminating the use of
mercury from all activities where it is now possible to substitute
alternative substances or products which would not have the
current harmful effects on the nervous and immune systems
and the reproductive organs.

b) believes that the proposal

is consistent with other Com-
munity standards and policies concerning the environment
and public health,

c) calls for replacement with alternative, mercury-free products
to be speeded up (maybe with incentives and information
and awareness-raising campaigns
to prevent potentially
dangerous devices containing mercury continuing to remain
in circulation) and for the cost to the consumer of this repla-
cement to be considered too,

In this context, the Commission sees the amendment (2)
2.2
of Directive 76/769 as a stage in the implementation of the
general strategy.
the following devices
containing mercury:

It bans marketing of

a) fever thermometers;

d) calls for differentiated collection to be provided for and for
to be made responsible for collecting discarded

sellers
devices (as in the case of electric and electronic devices),

b) other measuring devices for sale to the public (such as

manometers, barometers, blood-pressure gauges).

e) calls upon the Commission to specify the safeguards that
have been put in place to ensure that the sectors excluded
(devices for professional and industrial use) are required to
comply with the objective of not releasing mercury into the
environment,

2.3
However, on the basis of the bans and/or restrictions
already in place in a number of Member States and, therefore, in
the light of experience gained, devices and equipment used in
science and industry are to be excluded from the ban on the
grounds that they are relatively few in number and are used in
highly specialised environments which are already subject to
control standards and procedures concerning safety in the work
place and management of dangerous waste or are covered by
REACH.

f) calls upon Community and Member States' authorities to
check carefully that imported products comply with EU legis-
lation.

(1) COM(2005) 20 final.
(2) The addition of a specific point 19 a) in Annex I of Directive 76/769/

EEC.

C 318/116

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.12.2006

3. General comments

4. Specific comments

3.1
Although some Member States have already started
phasing out mercury and substituting alternative products, an
estimated (3) 33 tonnes of mercury is currently still being used
in Europe each year for measuring and control devices, approxi-
mately 25-30 tonnes of which are placed on the market in ther-
mometers.

3.2
Thus, mercury and its most toxic derivatives are present
in the domestic waste stream because thermometers and other
measuring devices are, for the most part, thrown away with
household rubbish when they are discarded or break. Landfilling
and other inadequate forms of disposal allow waste mercury to
enter waste water and be released into the environment. Conse-
and is particularly
quently, mercury infiltrates
dangerous for the aquatic food chain, making consumers of fish
and seafood especially vulnerable (particularly in Mediterranean
areas).

foodstuffs

The EESC notes that devices exist and are already on sale
3.3
which perform the same function as those referred to in the
proposal and contain substances which are alternatives to
mercury.
It would therefore be possible to substitute them
without delay, apparently at no additional cost (although cf.
point 4.1(b), (c) and (e) below). However, the impact assessment
gives no indication at all of the cost to the consumer of substi-
tuting these devices: the EESC calls for this cost to be quantified
and for
incorporated into the
support measures
mechanism for implementing the directive.

to be

3.4
The EESC firmly supports the Commission's objective of
banning marketing of the devices containing mercury listed in
the proposal: no further proof
the hazardous
effects and persistence of mercury, and banning devices
containing mercury would help to achieve a high level of
protection of the environment and human health, as specified
in the measure's legal basis (Article 95 of the Treaty), which the
EESC believes to be absolutely right and proper.

is needed of

Brussels, 13 September 2006.

4.1

However, the EESC points out that:

a) if devices containing mercury used in professional environ-
ments or industry are to be excluded from the ban, there
must be a guarantee that disposal and recycling of these
devices, once they have been discarded, will include proces-
sing of mercury which will prevent it being released into the
environment and causing environmental and public health
hazards; it is important for proper controls, training support
and advice to be in place, particularly in the craft and small-
scale jewellery sector, where mercury is still widely used for
specific processes;

b) both the impact assessment and the proposal seem to under-
estimate the problem posed by devices containing mercury
which are still currently in use being thrown into urban
waste: Member States' attention should be drawn to the need
for/potential benefits of a system of ‘end-of-life’ incentives to
ensure that these devices are phased out as fast as possible;

c) withdrawal of devices containing mercury which are still in
circulation could be facilitated by financial support measures
and, above all, by proper information campaigns targeting
users to make them aware of the danger and urge them to
act responsibly, asking them not to throw mercury away
with urban waste or — even more importantly — to let chil-
dren handle it; at the same time, suitable incentives should
be provided for consumers who fast-track replacement;

d) differentiated collection managed by sellers of devices
containing mercury should be the method used to withdraw
these devices, along the lines of the arrangements laid down
in the WEEE Directive;

e) particular attention should also be paid to imported products
so that the benefits gained from restrictive European legisla-
tion are not cancelled out by products from third countries
which do not give any consideration to the dangers of
misusing mercury.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(3) On the basis of the information available from the Commission.