- General information enquiries
- Call 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
- E-mail your questions
Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety
1. Welcoming address, apologies for
absence and declarations of interest
The CSTEE chairman welcomed the attendants to this last plenary meeting of the committee before its renewal. All the committee members were present.
Doctor José Tarazona renewed his declaration of involvement in the elaboration of the Risk Assessment Report (RAR) on Acetonitrile (Regulation 793/93 on existing substances) on behalf of the Spanish authorities (Spain was the rapporteur MS for this substance). He had already made a declaration on such an involvement at the occasion of the 18th plenary meeting of the CSTEE. The RAR on Acetonitrile was scheduled to be discussed under point 5A of the agenda. He, therefore, declined to take part in the discussions.
2. Adoption of the draft agenda
The agenda was adopted with no changes.
3. Adoption of the draft minutes of the 18th CSTEE plenary meeting held on the 9th of October 2000 in Brussels
Some minor comments, mainly editorial, were made to the draft minutes previously distributed to the meeting participants. The minutes thus corrected were adopted by the committee.
4. Available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risks of chemical substances on terrestrial ecosystems - for opinion
The WG chairman presented the final draft opinion on the issue, which had been distributed to the Committee members prior to the plenary meeting. He also informed that finally no chapters would be included on the risk assessment for areas of high ecological value and on the risk assessment and management of environmental catastrophes. Some recommendations would be made, in any case, on these two issues.
The CSTEE secretary commented on suggestions received by the secretariat from third parties asking for the publication of the draft opinion in Internet to get comments on it before its adoption by the committee. Such an option was not considered adequate by the CSTEE, specially bearing in mind the urgency of its adoption before the renewal of the committee and therefore during this 19th plenary meeting. The WG chairman reminded the CSTEE that the group revising the Technical Guidance Document in support of Regulation 793/93 on existing chemicals was waiting for the document to be adopted as soon as possible. He reminded also that it would be published on Internet after its adoption following the usual procedure. He therefore considered that any comment or remark on it could be included in a possible future revision of the opinion by the new CSTEE.
The CSTEE secretary informed that he had requested the publication of the opinion by the Publications Office of the Commission. That would facilitate a better distribution and use of the document within the scientific community. Both the CSTEE and the WG chairmen considered it useful to select certain parts of the document to be sent for publication in peer reviewed scientific journals as had been previously done with the CSTEE opinion on Human and Wildlife Health Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, with Emphasis on Wildlife and on Ecotoxicology Test Methods.
The committee chairman asked about the possible follow up of hypothetical recommendations of the CSTEE for further research in this area. Two ways of action were seemingly possible, i.e. JRC or DG SANCO to send proposals to DG RESEARCH. The CSTEE secretariat informed that a procedure exists whereby DG RESEARCH requests from other Commission services opinions on what research to foster. The CSTEE secretariat also suggested three actions to be taken: (i) state in the minutes this need, (ii) inform the Scientific Steering Committee of it and (iii) an official note to be sent by the Director in SANCO's Directorate C proposing further research in the area. The Head of Unit in SANCO C-2 expressed her satisfaction and congratulated both the committee and the working party for the excellent work they had made. She also proposed to release a press note on the issue as soon as the opinion would be ready for publication. The WG chairman accepted the responsibility of drafting such a note.
Some CSTEE members commented on different sections of the document, among them on the use of expressions like teratogenicity, genotoxicity and carcinogenicity, as well as on the endpoints to be considered. Another committee member provided the WG chairman with a paper copy of the opinion including some comments on it. The WG chairman promised to consider attentively all of them.
The CSTEE chairman asked both the WG chairman and the CSTEE secretary about a possible deadline for having the opinion ready for publication on the Internet. Bearing in mind the considerable size of the document, implying the need for quite a big number of editorial corrections, both considered the end of the year to be a reasonable date to aim for.
The opinion was unanimously adopted by the CSTEE, subject to the above mentioned editorial corrections.
5. Regulation 793/93 on Existing substances (ESR):
A. Status reports/opinions (Human health & Environment) on:
a) 1,4 Dioxane
The rapporteur for this substance presented the draft opinion. Some CSTEE members commented on the point of the classification of the chemical as a carcinogen Cat 3 in the EU legislation and in the group 2B by the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). One of the concerns was the possible misinterpretation of the CSTEE opinion as criticising the IARC classification. Some sentences were reworded to better reflect those comments.
Another CSTEE member requested a correction in a sentence on the ready biodegradability of the compound. The proposal was to substitute the expression "1,4-Dioxane seems not to be readily biodegradable" by the stronger one "1,4-Dioxane is not readily biodegradable". The correction was accepted.
Subject to those minor changes the opinion was unanimously adopted.
b) 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
The draft opinion on this substance presented at the 18th plenary meeting had been revised and the rapporteur explained the changes.
Some concern was expressed about the issue of the biodegradability of the compound, already raised at the occasion of the 18th CSTEE plenary. A CSTEE member explained that the conclusions on the issue of the literature mentioned in the RAR was exactly the opposite of the one expressed in it.
The committee decided to delete a sentence on the situation of the chemical in Sweden, considering it inadequate.
With some other minor editorial changes the opinion was adopted.
c) 4-Chloro-2-Methylphenol
The rapporteur presented the revised draft opinion and it was approved by the Committee.
d) Acetonitrile
A first version of a draft opinion was presented and discussed.
e) Methacrylic acid
A first version of a draft opinion was presented and discussed.
f) Acrylonitrile
The appointed rapporteur for the RAR on this substance briefly presented it. It was considered a very good report. A discussion was deemed necessary on the NOAEL and on carcinogenicity. He also demanded some information on the ecotoxicology part. The CSTEE secretary reminded the committee about the members appointed as "progress chasers" for particular endpoints in the peer review of RAR under regulation 793/93
g) Anisidine
No draft text was available at the time of the meeting for discussion and this was postponed.
B. State of play regarding other substances evaluated under the ESR
The CSTEE secretariat informed the Committee that a fourth priority list had recently been adopted by the Commission. Copies of it in the Official Journal of the EU were made available as room documents.
6. The use of exposure data in risk assessments - progress report
The chairman of the Working Group presented a draft on the subject and explained that in principle it should be ready for adoption by the CSTEE by the end of the year provided input from CSTEE members would be sent by mid December. The CSTEE chairman pointed out the obvious relations between this CSTEE opinion and the document on Harmonisation of Risk Assessment already adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee. A CSTEE member asked the WG chairman about the issue of food as an exposure source, especially in the case of fisheries, shellfisheries, etc. The reply was that this issue was being kept out of the document because food related issues are in principle the province of the Scientific Committee for Food.
7. Proposed EU Water Framework Directive - Development of a specification for the intercalibration of biological monitoring methods - Final Draft (European Commission Directorate General XI), Report No: CO 4751/1 - October 1999 - progress report/for opinion
The CSTEE secretary informed the Committee that regarding the WG meeting scheduled for the 29 November 2000, due to the unexpected unavailability of most of the members, it had to be postponed. Considering the difficulties and the absence of an urgent deadline from the requesting Commission service, the WG chairman proposed to leave the final decision to be made on this point to the new CSTEE, whose first meeting was scheduled for 5 December 2000. The Committee accepted the suggestion.
8. Margins of safety - progress report
A meeting of the working party had taken place the very same morning of the plenary, from 8h00 to 10h00, and the WG chairperson presented its outcome.
A table had been prepared that included all the opinions previously adopted by the CSTEE on the RARs of substances evaluated under Regulation 793/93. The table allowed for the conclusion that some inconsistencies existed in the approaches followed by the CSTEE for each chemical. While recognising that RARs have to be dealt with on a case by case basis, the CSTEE chairman insisted in the need of, were possible, being consistent in future Committee opinions.
It was decided to prepare a document on the acceptance of a margin of safety of 100 as a general rule, and on whether under what conditions it can be reduced or increased.
9. Evaluation of sludge treatments for pathogen reduction - progress report
Given that apparently there was no special urgency to adopt this opinion, the CSTEE decided to postpone any decision on it until the first meeting of the Committee with its new members, on 5 December 2000.
10. Strategies for dealing with possible additional opinion requests submitted by other DGs of the Commission
A representative from the European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) informed that at least two more RARs on substances evaluated under Regulation 793/93 were about to be sent to the Committee for peer review.
The CSTEE secretary informed that the Committee would shortly receive from Environment DG the terms of reference for a new opinion request on 'Nickel, Cadmium, Arsenic and PAHs in ambient air'.
11. Feedback from the relevant services of the Commission on the follow up to the opinions adopted previously by the CSTEE
The Committee asked the Environment DG representative about the strategy for future EU Chemicals Policy currently being developed by the Commission. He informed the Committee about the current draft timetable, the main milestone being the adoption of the White Paper by the Commission by the end of the year. However, due to the complexity of the subject matter under discussion there was a strong possibility of delays. The role of the CSTEE in respect of any future legislation on chemicals had been considered and was assured, although the precise detail would depend on the outcome of the strategy.
A CSTEE member asked about the revision of Regulation 793/93. The CSTEE secretary informed that changes with a view to simplifying procedures are still being discussed between Commission services and Member States.
Some CSTEE members had requested access to the original reference documents mentioned in the RARs peer reviewed by the Committee. A representative from the ECB considered that the best way to deal with that issue should be by means of a direct contact between the chairman of the respective WG and herself.
The CSTEE secretary presented the conclusions of a meeting that had taken place in Ispra the 30 October 2000 on the validation of migration test methods for phthalates. It became apparent that the whole validation exercise was already delayed by about one month. The tests with sample discs would start immediately and continue during November and December, until the Christmas break. Only in January would the tests with actual toys start, with samples already distributed to the participant laboratories. The results of the validation will be submitted for evaluation to the CSTEE.
The Committee secretary also informed about a Commission's inter-service meeting on EDCs which had taken place the day before the plenary. ON the other hand the chairman of the working party dealing with that issue within the CSTEE provided the Committee with information on a meeting that had taken place in 10-12 October 2000, where some interesting question had been discussed, such as low-dose EDCs and the question of new test methodologies being developed by the OECD.
12. Update by the CSTEE chairman on the latest meetings of the Scientific Steering Committee on matters of interest to the CSTEE
The CSTEE chairman updated the Committee on the latest meeting of the SSC. Apart from the issue of BSE two more points had been considered of interest to the Committee. The first one being the document on Emerging Issues already adopted. He asked all CSTEE members to read those sections of special interest for each one and comment on them.
The second document adopted by the SSC was the one on Harmonisation of Risk Assessment. It is the first one of a series on this subject and the CSTEE chairman encouraged Committee members to comment on it.
13. Arrangements for the next (20th) meeting of the CSTEE (5th of December 2000).
The CSTEE secretary informed that in principle the meeting scheduled for the 5 December 2000 should take place in the usual venue: the CCAB. He also informed briefly about the state of the renewal process. The final Commission Decision should be taken by the last week of November and therefore there should be no problems in organising the meeting at the scheduled date.
14. Any other business
One committee member raised the point (supported in general by the Committee) of the workload and time pressures that the CSTEE members were suffering to produce opinions, which too often have demanded brinkmanship. He was also concerned about the manner of reimbursement for attendance at meetings, meaning that minimal time can be devoted to CSTEE work by committee members unless somebody else is paying for such time (i.e. their employer). From his point of view this could compromise their independence since they are accountable to the respective employers (e.g. universities and institutes that receive funding from industry, and government agencies that may support a particular national stance on an issue). He pointed out the inconsistency of the amount of reimbursement to CSTEE members being less than what is paid to the ones co-operating with Research DG, while the CSTEE has more highly qualified experts.
DRAFT AGENDA -
1. Welcoming address, apologies for absence and declarations of interest
2. Adoption of the draft agenda
3. Adoption of the draft minutes of the 18th CSTEE plenary meeting held on the 9th of October 2000 in Brussels
4. Available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risks of chemical substances on terrestrial ecosystems - for opinion
5. Regulation 793/93 on Existing substances (ESR):
A. Status reports/opinions (Human health & Environment) on:
a) 1,4 Dioxane
b) 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
c) 4-Chloro-2-Methylphenol
d) Acetonitrile
e) Methacrylic acid
f) Acrylonitrile
g) Anisidine
B. State of play regarding other substances evaluated under the ESR
6. The use of exposure data in risk assessments - progress report
7. Proposed EU Water Framework Directive - Development of a specification for the intercalibration of biological monitoring methods - Final Draft (European Commission Directorate General XI), Report No: CO 4751/1 - October 1999 - progress report/for opinion
8. Margins of safety - progress report
9. Evaluation of sludge treatments for pathogen reduction - progress report
10. Strategies for dealing with possible additional opinion requests submitted by other DGs of the Commission
11. Feedback from the relevant services of the Commission on the follow up to the opinions adopted previously by the CSTEE
12. Update by the CSTEE chairman on the latest meetings of the Scientific Steering Committee on matters of interest to the CSTEE
13. Arrangements for the next (20th) meeting of the CSTEE (5th of December 2000); note: this will be the first meeting of the CSTEE following appointment of CSTEE members after completion of the selection process in conformity with provisions of call for expression of interest to be a member of a scientific committee (OJ series C, 2000/C, 142/17 of 20.5.2000, p. 46).
14. Any other business
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
CSTEE:
Prof. James BRIDGES, Prof. Peter CALOW, Dr. Mark J. COSTELLO, Prof. Erik DYBING, Prof. Helmut A. GREIM, Prof. Bo O. JANSSON, Prof. Soterios A. KYRTOKOPOULOS, Dr. Ole LADEFOGED, Dr. Claude LAMBRÉ, Dr. José RUEFF, Prof. Mirja S. SALKINOJA-SALONEN, Dr. José V. TARAZONA, Prof. Benedetto TERRACINI, Prof. Janneche UTNE-SKÅRE, Prof. Katarina VICTORIN, Prof. M. VIGHI, Prof. Joseph G. VOS, Prof. Robert WENNIG.
European Commission:
HEALTH AND CONSUMER PROTECTION DG:
Mrs. Silvia BERNAL-BLANCO, Mr. Jorge COSTA-DAVID, Mr. Juan B. CRESPO ARCE, Mrs. Mercedes de SOLÀ.
ENVIRONMENT DG:
Mr. Paul HAYES.
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE:
Mrs. Sharon MUNN.
The CSTEE chairman welcomed the attendants to this last plenary meeting of the committee before its renewal. All the committee members were present.
Doctor José Tarazona renewed his declaration of involvement in the elaboration of the Risk Assessment Report (RAR) on Acetonitrile (Regulation 793/93 on existing substances) on behalf of the Spanish authorities (Spain was the rapporteur MS for this substance). He had already made a declaration on such an involvement at the occasion of the 18th plenary meeting of the CSTEE. The RAR on Acetonitrile was scheduled to be discussed under point 5A of the agenda. He, therefore, declined to take part in the discussions.
2. Adoption of the draft agenda
The agenda was adopted with no changes.
3. Adoption of the draft minutes of the 18th CSTEE plenary meeting held on the 9th of October 2000 in Brussels
Some minor comments, mainly editorial, were made to the draft minutes previously distributed to the meeting participants. The minutes thus corrected were adopted by the committee.
4. Available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risks of chemical substances on terrestrial ecosystems - for opinion
The WG chairman presented the final draft opinion on the issue, which had been distributed to the Committee members prior to the plenary meeting. He also informed that finally no chapters would be included on the risk assessment for areas of high ecological value and on the risk assessment and management of environmental catastrophes. Some recommendations would be made, in any case, on these two issues.
The CSTEE secretary commented on suggestions received by the secretariat from third parties asking for the publication of the draft opinion in Internet to get comments on it before its adoption by the committee. Such an option was not considered adequate by the CSTEE, specially bearing in mind the urgency of its adoption before the renewal of the committee and therefore during this 19th plenary meeting. The WG chairman reminded the CSTEE that the group revising the Technical Guidance Document in support of Regulation 793/93 on existing chemicals was waiting for the document to be adopted as soon as possible. He reminded also that it would be published on Internet after its adoption following the usual procedure. He therefore considered that any comment or remark on it could be included in a possible future revision of the opinion by the new CSTEE.
The CSTEE secretary informed that he had requested the publication of the opinion by the Publications Office of the Commission. That would facilitate a better distribution and use of the document within the scientific community. Both the CSTEE and the WG chairmen considered it useful to select certain parts of the document to be sent for publication in peer reviewed scientific journals as had been previously done with the CSTEE opinion on Human and Wildlife Health Effects of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, with Emphasis on Wildlife and on Ecotoxicology Test Methods.
The committee chairman asked about the possible follow up of hypothetical recommendations of the CSTEE for further research in this area. Two ways of action were seemingly possible, i.e. JRC or DG SANCO to send proposals to DG RESEARCH. The CSTEE secretariat informed that a procedure exists whereby DG RESEARCH requests from other Commission services opinions on what research to foster. The CSTEE secretariat also suggested three actions to be taken: (i) state in the minutes this need, (ii) inform the Scientific Steering Committee of it and (iii) an official note to be sent by the Director in SANCO's Directorate C proposing further research in the area. The Head of Unit in SANCO C-2 expressed her satisfaction and congratulated both the committee and the working party for the excellent work they had made. She also proposed to release a press note on the issue as soon as the opinion would be ready for publication. The WG chairman accepted the responsibility of drafting such a note.
Some CSTEE members commented on different sections of the document, among them on the use of expressions like teratogenicity, genotoxicity and carcinogenicity, as well as on the endpoints to be considered. Another committee member provided the WG chairman with a paper copy of the opinion including some comments on it. The WG chairman promised to consider attentively all of them.
The CSTEE chairman asked both the WG chairman and the CSTEE secretary about a possible deadline for having the opinion ready for publication on the Internet. Bearing in mind the considerable size of the document, implying the need for quite a big number of editorial corrections, both considered the end of the year to be a reasonable date to aim for.
The opinion was unanimously adopted by the CSTEE, subject to the above mentioned editorial corrections.
5. Regulation 793/93 on Existing substances (ESR):
A. Status reports/opinions (Human health & Environment) on:
a) 1,4 Dioxane
The rapporteur for this substance presented the draft opinion. Some CSTEE members commented on the point of the classification of the chemical as a carcinogen Cat 3 in the EU legislation and in the group 2B by the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). One of the concerns was the possible misinterpretation of the CSTEE opinion as criticising the IARC classification. Some sentences were reworded to better reflect those comments.
Another CSTEE member requested a correction in a sentence on the ready biodegradability of the compound. The proposal was to substitute the expression "1,4-Dioxane seems not to be readily biodegradable" by the stronger one "1,4-Dioxane is not readily biodegradable". The correction was accepted.
Subject to those minor changes the opinion was unanimously adopted.
b) 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
The draft opinion on this substance presented at the 18th plenary meeting had been revised and the rapporteur explained the changes.
Some concern was expressed about the issue of the biodegradability of the compound, already raised at the occasion of the 18th CSTEE plenary. A CSTEE member explained that the conclusions on the issue of the literature mentioned in the RAR was exactly the opposite of the one expressed in it.
The committee decided to delete a sentence on the situation of the chemical in Sweden, considering it inadequate.
With some other minor editorial changes the opinion was adopted.
c) 4-Chloro-2-Methylphenol
The rapporteur presented the revised draft opinion and it was approved by the Committee.
d) Acetonitrile
A first version of a draft opinion was presented and discussed.
e) Methacrylic acid
A first version of a draft opinion was presented and discussed.
f) Acrylonitrile
The appointed rapporteur for the RAR on this substance briefly presented it. It was considered a very good report. A discussion was deemed necessary on the NOAEL and on carcinogenicity. He also demanded some information on the ecotoxicology part. The CSTEE secretary reminded the committee about the members appointed as "progress chasers" for particular endpoints in the peer review of RAR under regulation 793/93
g) Anisidine
No draft text was available at the time of the meeting for discussion and this was postponed.
B. State of play regarding other substances evaluated under the ESR
The CSTEE secretariat informed the Committee that a fourth priority list had recently been adopted by the Commission. Copies of it in the Official Journal of the EU were made available as room documents.
6. The use of exposure data in risk assessments - progress report
The chairman of the Working Group presented a draft on the subject and explained that in principle it should be ready for adoption by the CSTEE by the end of the year provided input from CSTEE members would be sent by mid December. The CSTEE chairman pointed out the obvious relations between this CSTEE opinion and the document on Harmonisation of Risk Assessment already adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee. A CSTEE member asked the WG chairman about the issue of food as an exposure source, especially in the case of fisheries, shellfisheries, etc. The reply was that this issue was being kept out of the document because food related issues are in principle the province of the Scientific Committee for Food.
7. Proposed EU Water Framework Directive - Development of a specification for the intercalibration of biological monitoring methods - Final Draft (European Commission Directorate General XI), Report No: CO 4751/1 - October 1999 - progress report/for opinion
The CSTEE secretary informed the Committee that regarding the WG meeting scheduled for the 29 November 2000, due to the unexpected unavailability of most of the members, it had to be postponed. Considering the difficulties and the absence of an urgent deadline from the requesting Commission service, the WG chairman proposed to leave the final decision to be made on this point to the new CSTEE, whose first meeting was scheduled for 5 December 2000. The Committee accepted the suggestion.
8. Margins of safety - progress report
A meeting of the working party had taken place the very same morning of the plenary, from 8h00 to 10h00, and the WG chairperson presented its outcome.
A table had been prepared that included all the opinions previously adopted by the CSTEE on the RARs of substances evaluated under Regulation 793/93. The table allowed for the conclusion that some inconsistencies existed in the approaches followed by the CSTEE for each chemical. While recognising that RARs have to be dealt with on a case by case basis, the CSTEE chairman insisted in the need of, were possible, being consistent in future Committee opinions.
It was decided to prepare a document on the acceptance of a margin of safety of 100 as a general rule, and on whether under what conditions it can be reduced or increased.
9. Evaluation of sludge treatments for pathogen reduction - progress report
Given that apparently there was no special urgency to adopt this opinion, the CSTEE decided to postpone any decision on it until the first meeting of the Committee with its new members, on 5 December 2000.
10. Strategies for dealing with possible additional opinion requests submitted by other DGs of the Commission
A representative from the European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) informed that at least two more RARs on substances evaluated under Regulation 793/93 were about to be sent to the Committee for peer review.
The CSTEE secretary informed that the Committee would shortly receive from Environment DG the terms of reference for a new opinion request on 'Nickel, Cadmium, Arsenic and PAHs in ambient air'.
11. Feedback from the relevant services of the Commission on the follow up to the opinions adopted previously by the CSTEE
The Committee asked the Environment DG representative about the strategy for future EU Chemicals Policy currently being developed by the Commission. He informed the Committee about the current draft timetable, the main milestone being the adoption of the White Paper by the Commission by the end of the year. However, due to the complexity of the subject matter under discussion there was a strong possibility of delays. The role of the CSTEE in respect of any future legislation on chemicals had been considered and was assured, although the precise detail would depend on the outcome of the strategy.
A CSTEE member asked about the revision of Regulation 793/93. The CSTEE secretary informed that changes with a view to simplifying procedures are still being discussed between Commission services and Member States.
Some CSTEE members had requested access to the original reference documents mentioned in the RARs peer reviewed by the Committee. A representative from the ECB considered that the best way to deal with that issue should be by means of a direct contact between the chairman of the respective WG and herself.
The CSTEE secretary presented the conclusions of a meeting that had taken place in Ispra the 30 October 2000 on the validation of migration test methods for phthalates. It became apparent that the whole validation exercise was already delayed by about one month. The tests with sample discs would start immediately and continue during November and December, until the Christmas break. Only in January would the tests with actual toys start, with samples already distributed to the participant laboratories. The results of the validation will be submitted for evaluation to the CSTEE.
The Committee secretary also informed about a Commission's inter-service meeting on EDCs which had taken place the day before the plenary. ON the other hand the chairman of the working party dealing with that issue within the CSTEE provided the Committee with information on a meeting that had taken place in 10-12 October 2000, where some interesting question had been discussed, such as low-dose EDCs and the question of new test methodologies being developed by the OECD.
12. Update by the CSTEE chairman on the latest meetings of the Scientific Steering Committee on matters of interest to the CSTEE
The CSTEE chairman updated the Committee on the latest meeting of the SSC. Apart from the issue of BSE two more points had been considered of interest to the Committee. The first one being the document on Emerging Issues already adopted. He asked all CSTEE members to read those sections of special interest for each one and comment on them.
The second document adopted by the SSC was the one on Harmonisation of Risk Assessment. It is the first one of a series on this subject and the CSTEE chairman encouraged Committee members to comment on it.
13. Arrangements for the next (20th) meeting of the CSTEE (5th of December 2000).
The CSTEE secretary informed that in principle the meeting scheduled for the 5 December 2000 should take place in the usual venue: the CCAB. He also informed briefly about the state of the renewal process. The final Commission Decision should be taken by the last week of November and therefore there should be no problems in organising the meeting at the scheduled date.
14. Any other business
One committee member raised the point (supported in general by the Committee) of the workload and time pressures that the CSTEE members were suffering to produce opinions, which too often have demanded brinkmanship. He was also concerned about the manner of reimbursement for attendance at meetings, meaning that minimal time can be devoted to CSTEE work by committee members unless somebody else is paying for such time (i.e. their employer). From his point of view this could compromise their independence since they are accountable to the respective employers (e.g. universities and institutes that receive funding from industry, and government agencies that may support a particular national stance on an issue). He pointed out the inconsistency of the amount of reimbursement to CSTEE members being less than what is paid to the ones co-operating with Research DG, while the CSTEE has more highly qualified experts.
DRAFT AGENDA -
1. Welcoming address, apologies for absence and declarations of interest
2. Adoption of the draft agenda
3. Adoption of the draft minutes of the 18th CSTEE plenary meeting held on the 9th of October 2000 in Brussels
4. Available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risks of chemical substances on terrestrial ecosystems - for opinion
5. Regulation 793/93 on Existing substances (ESR):
A. Status reports/opinions (Human health & Environment) on:
a) 1,4 Dioxane
b) 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
c) 4-Chloro-2-Methylphenol
d) Acetonitrile
e) Methacrylic acid
f) Acrylonitrile
g) Anisidine
B. State of play regarding other substances evaluated under the ESR
6. The use of exposure data in risk assessments - progress report
7. Proposed EU Water Framework Directive - Development of a specification for the intercalibration of biological monitoring methods - Final Draft (European Commission Directorate General XI), Report No: CO 4751/1 - October 1999 - progress report/for opinion
8. Margins of safety - progress report
9. Evaluation of sludge treatments for pathogen reduction - progress report
10. Strategies for dealing with possible additional opinion requests submitted by other DGs of the Commission
11. Feedback from the relevant services of the Commission on the follow up to the opinions adopted previously by the CSTEE
12. Update by the CSTEE chairman on the latest meetings of the Scientific Steering Committee on matters of interest to the CSTEE
13. Arrangements for the next (20th) meeting of the CSTEE (5th of December 2000); note: this will be the first meeting of the CSTEE following appointment of CSTEE members after completion of the selection process in conformity with provisions of call for expression of interest to be a member of a scientific committee (OJ series C, 2000/C, 142/17 of 20.5.2000, p. 46).
14. Any other business
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
CSTEE:
Prof. James BRIDGES, Prof. Peter CALOW, Dr. Mark J. COSTELLO, Prof. Erik DYBING, Prof. Helmut A. GREIM, Prof. Bo O. JANSSON, Prof. Soterios A. KYRTOKOPOULOS, Dr. Ole LADEFOGED, Dr. Claude LAMBRÉ, Dr. José RUEFF, Prof. Mirja S. SALKINOJA-SALONEN, Dr. José V. TARAZONA, Prof. Benedetto TERRACINI, Prof. Janneche UTNE-SKÅRE, Prof. Katarina VICTORIN, Prof. M. VIGHI, Prof. Joseph G. VOS, Prof. Robert WENNIG.
European Commission:
HEALTH AND CONSUMER PROTECTION DG:
Mrs. Silvia BERNAL-BLANCO, Mr. Jorge COSTA-DAVID, Mr. Juan B. CRESPO ARCE, Mrs. Mercedes de SOLÀ.
ENVIRONMENT DG:
Mr. Paul HAYES.
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE:
Mrs. Sharon MUNN.
