Document 3JYgaQBV9ndQQjpXwnqNjxxNJ

--"Jfcl fi^fcaSa*. - k\ -. ^jya&w. U^..ar..^-^,."i.^;.>ya . ,,: fray,.^;.^, v-Ai'. AIA *ch EXECUTIVE WMNlTTIf MISTING 7 JULY 1978 ACSKOA ITEM 6 EXTRACT FROM MINUTES OF 3rd MEETING OF EEC ADVISORY COUNCIL ON 20th MAY 1.9 78 7. Labelling. ' 7.1. Considerable time was'spent on discussing the pro's and contra's of labelling. K[mJfckfr ;hc- v Opinions on the desirability of starring ai iliis moment; a volun-. tary labelling scheme differed widely from one country to the other*, but there was general agreement on the necessity to prepare a label in order not to be taken by surprise later on,*. 7.2, Ao for tha type of label and its wording. AlA/London would is#? circulate 3 questionnaire among EAC members asking them to give their countries views on the following points : 1. Should the label refer .to the fact that the product contains ' 2. 3. asbestos ? ' Should it contain the words "CAUTION" or "V/ARNINC" ? Should the label refer to the nature of the danger ? K . (creation of dust - inhaling- dust). 4. Should the label contain an advise to observe safety instruct ior^ 5. Should there be a mention of "HEALTH HAZARDS" 7 S. Should the label contain a logo and if so, which one ? 7,3, It was felt that the EAC should agree on and propose a "minimum vt Statement for the label, to which individual countries eo-uld add further information according to nation^ requirements. 1.4. Various members reported on the present situation or future actioijj^fyY. in their country as regards labelling. . Moat participants were in favour of an action in various stages, the switching oyer from one stage to a further less favourable one, depending on outside pressure : ' 1 st * stage,: health and safety recommendations included in a leaflet together with recommendations for handling. UtiM ' I9?29 rr ...... ....... jKf ' i . ^;agdfrttfifeaa& stacking etc. . . of the product) similar to the Eternit leaflet). 2nd st3g^ ; 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 as such if the use of & label was unavoida ble. Rediscussing Us wording could bring along the risk of having to include the word "cancer'' in it. The fact that this Uoel had been found satisfactory to the" U.K, authorities was also seen as a good argument for avoiding the EEC to press for a less favourable one (such as the skull and cross-bones used for "toxic" substances. It was also believed that, in order'to stanu a chance for the EEC , % . to accept the logo put forward by the industry, the whole asbestos industry within the EEC should agree on and start using one and the same logo, . T.6. The EAC secretary was asked to keep contact with Mr. KRUGER of UNICE on the matter, 7.7. In those countries where it was felt it was still too early to swrt voluntary labelling, in fear of a-possible negative influence on aaletjpj^ steps should be taken in order to prepar.e. commercial people for the idea, making clear that in the absence of an industry's initiativ we could run. the risk of being imposed the "skull and cross-bones' , symbol for our products-. It should also be pointed out to them~tEs the fact to agree on-a kind of label did not imply the agreement. of starting to use it right now. lg 7,-8, Mr, van der REST asked U.K. members to do-their utmost to obtain that U.K. asbestos containing goods exported to the contineni^^^j should not yet be labelled, as this would put the continental industr^.'^^ in a difficult position. 'aHM 19730 *!.f * rtr _ wys . 2T. Hi.r^TWjT1 iJWWBraSBi SgJggJ1