Blog

GibbardJ2
Jon Gibbard

EU poison centres and the current CLP debate

10/02/2014

In Europe, there is a requirement under REACH to include emergency telephone numbers on SDS and, where a Member State has appointed an official advisory body (as defined under CLP Article 45), the telephone number for this body must also be included to cover medical advice. Please see the latest guidance from ECHA here (P42)

Although this may appear to be a relatively straightforward requirement, it’s not as simple as it sounds in reality. There are a number of factors that can cause confusion. For example, an emergency telephone number is required to cover each country where a company supplies a product for sale. However, some countries do not have telephone numbers available for a national centre, so an alternative number is required.

If a country’s poison centre(s) is not an official advisory body, suppliers can provide their own emergency telephone number as long as certain conditions are met. For example, in Germany, qualified medical advice in emergency cases must be provided in German. It is also acceptable for suppliers to include their own emergency telephone number to cover countries where an official advisory body has been appointed. This means that an effective response to all types of emergency incident can be provided.

The following diagram is designed to help you make the right decision for your organisation.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Having access to a poison centre for medical advice alone does not negate the need to provide an emergency number for a chemical incident where other information might be required or where a company’s emergency procedure needs to be enacted. The checklist above highlights what you should consider when implementing your own system.

A list of national advisory bodies and telephone numbers has been made available by ECHA to try to clarify the appropriate number to use. However, not all Member States have provided a number though. Some countries (e.g. Cyprus, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Poland and Slovenia) do not have telephone numbers for official national advisory bodies or poison centres listed. In addition, the poison centres in some countries – including Ireland and the Netherlands – are only open to medical professionals, so members of the public and professional users cannot call these centres. Your SDS will need to state this.

So, an SDS could end up with a long list of numbers on it (for each country where the product is supplied) – including the company’s own number or the number of a third-party organisation that provides advice on the company’s behalf in case of a chemical emergency. This does not make it easy for the correct number to be identified in an emergency. It is also a considerable challenge to ensure that SDSs are registered with all organisations that may be called on when an incident occurs to ensure that they have up-to-date product information. To comply with CLP article 45, the only alternative would be to have a national centre for Europe or numbers that routed to national centres based on a caller’s origin.

Discussions are taking place about the burden this places on organisations. Moves have been suggested (consultation stage at the moment) to streamline the process by submitting data through one central system as opposed to individual poison centres. At present individual Member States is that they have different registration requirements and some require a fee for this registration before their number can be used. In a recent article by NCEC for Chemical Watch, the UK’s Chemical Industries Association highlighted the need to carefully review the administrative burden on companies and poison centres, and the need to ensure confidentiality of data going forward. The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and Consumers (DG SANCO) and a number of key stakeholder are looking at how to harmonise the process for registration with poison centres, so that individual country-by-country registration is not required. Draft legislative text is expected during 2014.  

The contractual landscape is also unclear. It appears that none of the poison centres asks ‘customers’ to sign a contract. This raises some far-reaching questions. What is the service that the poison centres/national advisory bodies provide? Can they guarantee 24/7 coverage and how do they do this? Do they have contingency plans to ensure this? How do they ensure the confidentiality of products and product data sheets? These are questions you would ask of an outsourced solution provider, but are not taken into account with current legislation or the lack of any commercial/contract arrangement between company and poison centre.

In light of these issues, Chemical Watch and NCEC are conducting a survey of poison centres and people’s experience of using them. Click here to take part in the survey. The results will be used to inform a workshop on ‘EU Poison Centres’ that will be held at Chemical Watch’s ‘Global Supply Chain Network’ event in Brussels in March. If you would like to attend please contact Chemical Watch or NCEC directly.

Past Blogs

RaineCaroline BW2
Caroline Raine, Principle Consultant

Final Annex VIII to CLP published

23/03/2017
RaineCaroline BW2
Caroline Raine, Principle Consultant

Final Annex VIII to CLP imminent

02/02/2017
WalkerStephen BW2
Stephen Walker, Senior Consultant

ADR 2017 - key changes

01/01/2017
shutterstock25
Pierre Noël, Safety Manager and Chief Elf at North Pole

A Compliance Christmas Carol

19/12/2016
SilverLarissa
Larissa Silver, Emergency Responder Supervisor and Chemical Regulatory Consulant

Tool for poison centres launched by EU Commission

17/11/2016
RaineCaroline
Caroline Raine, Principle Consultant

Lithium batteries - changes to IATA regulations

17/11/2016
RaineCaroline BW
Caroline Raine, Principle Consultant

Update to poison centre regulations

22/09/2016
LangJonathan BW
Jon Lang, Emergency Responder and Chemical Regulatory Consultant

Keeping your SDS updated and compliant

14/09/2016
HaggartyDBW
Dan Haggarty, Head of Emergency Response

What does best practice mean to industry?

22/05/2016
LangJonathan BW
Jon Lang, Emergency Responder and Chemical Regulatory Consultant

SDS Section 1.4 – what numbers are needed?

17/05/2016
WalkerStephen BW
Stephen Walker, Senior Consultant DGSA

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution

23/02/2016
paddedimage110161 SilverLarissa BW
Larissa Silver, Emergency Responder

European Commission’s new draft amendments review

15/02/2016
StearnMBW
Maria Stearn, Chemdata Manager

The value of proportionate advice

15/02/2016
shutterstock118893988
Pierre Noel, Safety Manager and Chief Elf at North Pole Inc.

NCEC Christmas Guest Blog

16/12/2015
paddedimage110161 SilverLarissa BW
Larissa Silver, Emergency Responder

Selling chemical products into France or Spain?

14/12/2015
DaveyR
Rich Davey, International Business Development Manager

Overcoming regulatory barriers: challenges in Asia

19/11/2015
VuTuan
Tuan Vu, Chemical Emergency Responder

The Tianjin Explosion

16/11/2015
GibbardJ
Jonathan Gibbard, NCEC Practice Director

10 days, 3 countries - NCEC tours South East Asia

25/09/2015
BakerTom
Tom Baker, Senior Emergency Responder

Update for Spanish poison centre

13/07/2015
BakerTom
Tom Baker, Senior Emergency Responder

The importance of emergency telephone response

22/03/2015
SetSize110140 Matthew Hawes National Chemical Emergency Centre
Matthew Hawes

On-scene emergency response

25/11/2014
Matthew Hawes National Chemical Emergency Centre
Matthew Hawes - Emergency Response Specialist

Don’t cry over spilled milk.....

04/09/2014
Matthew Hawes National Chemical Emergency Centre
Matthew Hawes - Emergency Response Specialist

Too small to matter.....

14/04/2014
SetSize110140 GibbardJ
Jon Gibbard

Problems with poison centres

20/12/2013
HaggartyD
Daniel Haggarty

Feature chemical – hydrogen sulfide

13/12/2013
GibbardJ
Jonathan Gibbard

NCEC - Celebrating Its Heritage...

15/11/2013
SetSize110140 HaggartyD
Daniel Haggarty

NCEC in action

25/10/2013
HawesM4
Matthew Hawes

The effect of fertilisers...

16/09/2013
HaggartyD7
Daniel Haggarty

Fee For Intervention (FFI)

06/08/2013
HawesM
Matthew Hawes

Multilateral Agreements and free trade

29/07/2013
HawesM2
Matthew Hawes

GHS and emergency response

12/07/2013
HaggartyD4
Daniel Haggarty

Lithium battery regulations

16/04/2013
HaggartyD3
Daniel Haggarty

Typical emergency calls

19/03/2013
HaggartyD2
Daniel Haggarty

Chemical incidents…then and now

12/02/2013
SetSize110140 HaggartyD
Daniel Haggarty

Has anyone seen MAIAT?

25/10/2012
HaggartyD
Daniel Haggarty

Emergency Responder Candidates

17/09/2012
HaggartyD6
Daniel Haggarty

Implications of OCRS

30/05/2012

Post your comment

Comments for this page have been disabled

Comments

No one has commented on this page yet.

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments