Document 2qbbQbmbZvQxg2mRbE4JvyX16

FILE NAME: Eternit (ETER) DATE: 1978 DOC#: ETER002 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Extract from Minutes of 3rd Meeting of Advisory Council ~JJ AIA 8th EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE METTI 1W 1W AGENDA ITEM 6 EXTRACT FROM MINUTES OF 3t4d MEETING OF M C ADVISORY COUNCIL ok tmmmtmrn* 7. Labelling. 7 .1 . Considerable tim e was spent on discussing thsPpro** *nd contra's o flitttfU ln / tary labelling schem e differed widely from one country to the other, b u tftilSf^ lfr g e n w ^ # ||l ^ ^ jfg ffT T SiF m ^ d e r' ni MR 7.2. A s for the type of label and its wording, AlA/London would circulate a questionnaire among EA C members asking them to give their countries views on the following points : 1. Should the label refer.to the fact that the product contains asbestos ? 2. Should It wntaln th# wortfr MCA UTlOT^^Wri'WARMIM?**" 3. 'BhdUia tbribl refer to th# natur* of ibtfliger' ?^ (creation of dust - inhaling dust). 4. Should the label contain an advise to observe safety instruct > 5. Should there be e mentIon of J*HSA LTtt HAZA RDS'V? 6. Should the label contain a logo and if so, which one ? 7 .3 . 7.4. It was felt that m t A c .h m label, to WK ftirth tf in fo rfh iilM according to national requirements. Various members reported on the present situation or future act : In their country as regards labelling. Most participants were in favour of an action in various stage:;, the switching over from one stage to a further less favourable one, depending on outside pressure : IfltlSlM fe : health and safety recommendations included in a leaflet together with recommendations for handling, MtiM '19 .tacking e t c . . . of the product) sim ilar to the Eterna leaflet). 2nd_.staSe : label according to the French or U . K . model. but without the logo. * 3rd stage : idem, with logo. 7 .5 . Many of the participants were of the opinion that it was advisable to adopt the U .K . label a . such if the use of a label was unavoida- W#- th rlk Of having -to include the word "cancer" in i t ^ Y h * fact thit th i. label had bnew^fwHMKeeti* factory- to the U. K T authorities w a. . 1,, ft good argument'for .voiding the E EC to p re s, for lese favourable <o n a ^ u c h ee the skull and cross-bones usd f o r m i c " substances! It was also believed that, in ordendo stano a chance for the E E C to accept the logo put forward by the industry, the whole asbestos industry within the E E C should agree on and start ustng one and the same logo. 7 .6 . The E A C secretary was asked to keep contact with M r. KRUGER of UNICE on the m atter. 7.7. tm-i wTiere it was f l l r w i * .til voluntary labelling, la fear of pOillMe n e g a t iv o ^ h iw w .^ ^ ie .s f.pa Should be taken m order to prepare commerciai people foe, /-th. idea, making clear that in the absnce O f m im h m r f'w . -w o could run the risk of being imposed ihe bfdfr-Hones" yrobol for our products/ It should also be pointed out to them fha the feet to agree on a kind of label did not imply the agreement of starting to use It right now. 7 .8 . M r. van der R EST asked U .K . members to do their utmost to Obtain that U.K# asbestos containing goods exported to the continent should not yet ba labelled, as this would put the continental industr; In a difficult position. JH M 19730