- General information enquiries
- Call 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
- E-mail your questions
Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety
Background
On 25 January 2001, the Commission has received a request from the Netherlands according to Art. 95 (5) of the EC-Treaty in order to introduce new national legislation on the use of creosote being more restrictive than the provisions of the relevant Community legislation (Directive 76/769/EEC, as amended by Directive 94/60/EC). According to the provisions of Art. 95 (6), the Commission has to approve or reject the request within 6 months. In the absence of a decision by the Commission the national provisions are deemed approved. When justified by the complexity of the matter and in the absence of danger for human health, the period for taking a decision can be extended for a further period of up to six months.
The Netherlands already obtained derogation from the Commission to apply national legislation that existed before the Community Directive was adopted. The relevant request under Article 95 (4) (ex. Art. 100a (4)) received confirmation in Commission Decision 1999/833/EC (OJ L 329, 22.12.1999, p. 25).
Questions to the CSTEE
1. Is the CSTEE of the opinion that the justification of the request from the Netherlands for derogation from the provisions of Directive 94/60/EC in order to prohibit the use of wood treated with creosote in contact with (ground)water is a complex issue?
2. Is the CSTEE of the opinion that the justification of the request from the Netherlands for derogation from the provisions of Directive 94/60/EC in order to prohibit the use of wood treated with creosote in contact with (ground) water does not directly involve a danger to human health?
Answer to question 1:
The justification of the request from the Netherlands is indeed a complex issue. It requires a thorough review of the documentation of the Netherlands, which so far is not fully available in its English translation. It also requires an evaluation of the alternative materials, which will be used as creosote substitutes.
Answer to question 2:
In its opinion of March 4th 1999 (Opinion on Cancer risk to consumers from Creosote containing less than 50 ppm benzo-[a]-pyrene and/or from wood treated with such Creosote and estimation of respective magnitude), the CSTEE has evaluated the risks from creosote and creosote treated wood to human health, and has specifically evaluated dermal exposure of children from the use of creosote. The calculated exposure of 1 ng BaP/kg bw/day would result in a lifetime cancer risk of 10-4, which gave clear reason for concern. However, the estimated exposure of 0.85 - 2 ng BaP/kg bw is some 6-30 times lower than the oral exposure of the adult population to BaP in food (12 - 63 ng/kg bw).
In the documents made available to the CSTEE the Dutch authorities do exclusively refer to ecotoxicological concerns. In particular, they claim that model calculations in a study (which still has to be translated) on the leaching of PAHs from creosoted wood, have led to concentrations of PAHs in surface water, soil, and groundwater resulting from leaching from creosote wood, which greatly exceed the quality standards defined by the Dutch authorities (e.g. 0.1 µg PAH/l for groundwater). It is estimated, however, that even a tenfold higher concentration would have only a small contribution of BaP to the daily uptake via food. The CSTEE concludes therefore that the PAH exposure as a result of leaching into the groundwater is of no such threat to human health that immediate measures have to be taken.
On 25 January 2001, the Commission has received a request from the Netherlands according to Art. 95 (5) of the EC-Treaty in order to introduce new national legislation on the use of creosote being more restrictive than the provisions of the relevant Community legislation (Directive 76/769/EEC, as amended by Directive 94/60/EC). According to the provisions of Art. 95 (6), the Commission has to approve or reject the request within 6 months. In the absence of a decision by the Commission the national provisions are deemed approved. When justified by the complexity of the matter and in the absence of danger for human health, the period for taking a decision can be extended for a further period of up to six months.
The Netherlands already obtained derogation from the Commission to apply national legislation that existed before the Community Directive was adopted. The relevant request under Article 95 (4) (ex. Art. 100a (4)) received confirmation in Commission Decision 1999/833/EC (OJ L 329, 22.12.1999, p. 25).
Questions to the CSTEE
1. Is the CSTEE of the opinion that the justification of the request from the Netherlands for derogation from the provisions of Directive 94/60/EC in order to prohibit the use of wood treated with creosote in contact with (ground)water is a complex issue?
2. Is the CSTEE of the opinion that the justification of the request from the Netherlands for derogation from the provisions of Directive 94/60/EC in order to prohibit the use of wood treated with creosote in contact with (ground) water does not directly involve a danger to human health?
Answer to question 1:
The justification of the request from the Netherlands is indeed a complex issue. It requires a thorough review of the documentation of the Netherlands, which so far is not fully available in its English translation. It also requires an evaluation of the alternative materials, which will be used as creosote substitutes.
Answer to question 2:
In its opinion of March 4th 1999 (Opinion on Cancer risk to consumers from Creosote containing less than 50 ppm benzo-[a]-pyrene and/or from wood treated with such Creosote and estimation of respective magnitude), the CSTEE has evaluated the risks from creosote and creosote treated wood to human health, and has specifically evaluated dermal exposure of children from the use of creosote. The calculated exposure of 1 ng BaP/kg bw/day would result in a lifetime cancer risk of 10-4, which gave clear reason for concern. However, the estimated exposure of 0.85 - 2 ng BaP/kg bw is some 6-30 times lower than the oral exposure of the adult population to BaP in food (12 - 63 ng/kg bw).
In the documents made available to the CSTEE the Dutch authorities do exclusively refer to ecotoxicological concerns. In particular, they claim that model calculations in a study (which still has to be translated) on the leaching of PAHs from creosoted wood, have led to concentrations of PAHs in surface water, soil, and groundwater resulting from leaching from creosote wood, which greatly exceed the quality standards defined by the Dutch authorities (e.g. 0.1 µg PAH/l for groundwater). It is estimated, however, that even a tenfold higher concentration would have only a small contribution of BaP to the daily uptake via food. The CSTEE concludes therefore that the PAH exposure as a result of leaching into the groundwater is of no such threat to human health that immediate measures have to be taken.
