Presentation on theme: "Summary of status of the GHS regional implementation"— Presentation transcript:
1 Summary of status of the GHS regional implementation Regional Project “Evaluating and Strengthening National and Sub-regional Capacities for Implementing the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) and Supporting SAICM Implementation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE)”Dr. Suzana AndonovaRegional GHS CEE Project Consultant
2 IntroductionThis report presents the results of a survey conducted to assess the status of implementation of Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) in the CEE countries and the needs of each country in the Region for prompt introduction and better implementation of GHS. The results of the assessment will serve as a basis for drafting the strategy for GHS implementation in the CEE Region.
3 Material and methodsA questionnaire comprised of 28 questions was prepared.All the questions were relevant to the issues related to GHS implementation in the countries.All the National Focal points were contacted and were invited to respond to the questions.A cross tabulation and data results dispersion methods were used to analyse and summarise the responded questionnaires.Personal communication and desk research for other countries.
4 General FeedbackAmong 24 countries invited to fill in the questionnaires, in total 12 responses were received:Invited countriesResponding CountriesAlbaniaArmeniaAzerbaijanBelarusBosnia and HerzegovinaBulgariaCroatiaCzech RepublicEstoniaGeorgiaInvited countriesResponding countriesHungaryKosovoLatviaLithuaniaRepublic of MacedoniaMontenegroRepublic of MoldovaPolandRomaniaRussiaSerbiaSlovakiaSloveniaUkraine
5 List of the contact points in the respondent countries CountryContact PointNameTitle/ Responsible InstitutionKosovoVioleta Lajqi-MakolleSenior Officer for chemical management/ Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning-MESPMoldovaLiudmila MarduhaevaMain Advisory Officer /Ministry of EnvironmentSerbiaAleksandra ZujicInternational Cooperation and Projects Coordinator/ Serbian Chemicals AgencyCroatiaBiserka Bastijančić-Kokić/ Nenad LamerMinistry of Health, Directorate for Sanitary InspectionAlbaniaLindita TafajSAICM Focal Point/ Institute of Public HealthMacedonia Marin KocovSAICM National Focal Point/POPs&Ozone Unit/MoEPPBelarusIrina IlyukovaLiliya NajaranRepublican Scientific Practical Centre of HygieneRussiaMakarova Anna SergeevnaInstitute of Chemistry and Sustainable development( РХТУ им.Д.И.Менделеева)BulgariaHristina FilipovaChief Expert/Ministry of environment and waterPolandMariusz GodalaSzymon DomagalskiBureau for Chemical SubstancesHungaryGabriella FüleMinistry of Rural DevelopmentRomaniaLiliana Luminita TirchilaSAICM National Focal Point/MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT and FORESTS
6 Survey findings Q1 Level of development of chemical industry Q1.Status of development of chemical industry in CEE countriesQ2.Source of chemical productsCountryQ1 Level of development of chemical industryQ2 Source of chemical productsdevelopedLeastNeeds additionaldevelopmentWellHighly advanced levelDomestic productionImported productsManufacture /processing of imported bulk/raw chemicalsKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
7 Q3. Current legal and policy frameworks assessment Among 12 countries, 4 Countries assessed the current legal and policy frameworks 4 did not do so and the remaining 4 are in process of assessment of the legal policy framework.
8 Q4. Status of implementation of the MEAs Stockholm ConventionYes -Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,, Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia and Serbia /Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, EU member states in CEE RegionNo – Kosovo,Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina (at initial phase)Basel ConventionYes-Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,, Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia and Serbia/Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, EU member states in CEE Region, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina (at initial phase)No- Kosovo, Albania (not implemented)Rotterdam ConventionYes-Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,, Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia and Serbia/Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, EU member states in CEE RegionNo-Kosovo, Azerbaijan,SAICMYes-Albania (initial phase), Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,, Republic of Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia and Serbia/Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, EU member states in CEE RegionNo-Kosovo, Azerbaijan,Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina
9 Q5. Integrated SAICM objectives in relevant programs, plans and/or strategies at various levels Out of total 12 countries, only Kosovo and Belarus have not integrated the SAICM objectives into a country relevant strategic program, plan or strategy.SAICM objectives are integrated into the EU Regulations REACH and CLP and are acting into all EU Countries.
10 Q6. Status of GHS implementation in CEE countries
11 Inter-ministerial or inter-institutional coordination body Q7a. Inter-ministerial or inter-institutional coordination arrangements to facilitate the sound management of chemicals / GHS implementation in CEE RegionCountryInter-ministerial or inter-institutional coordination bodyAlbaniaCommittee for pesticide registration, committee for biocides. ToR have been prepared for an Inter-sectorial Committee for Chemicals Management (Safety)BelarusYesBulgariaCroatiaHungaryKosovoNoMacedoniaNational Inter-ministerial Working Group for chemical management comprised by therepresentatives from the Ministry of Environment, Finance-Customs Administration, Health,Agriculture, Crisis management Centre, Poisoning CentreMoldovaNational Inter-ministerial Working Group, mandated to implement theChemical MEAs, SAICM and National Programme on Sound Management ofChemicalsPolandRomaniaRussiaYes/CISSerbiaSerbian Chemicals Agency, Ministry of infrastructure and energy and Ministry of Agriculture, Trade, Forestry and Water Management *
12 Q7b,c&dNational Governmental authority/agency responsible for the GHS implementationGovernment agencies that should be involved for GHS implementation in the countryMinistries/agencies in the country ready to implement and maintain the GHSAll listed in the Annex 1 of the report.
13 Q8.Level of awareness on GHS Level of awareness on GHS in CEE RegionCountryVery lowMediumHighKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
14 Q9. What are the obstacles to implement the GHS in countries? No sufficient human resources/capacities and expertise.Lack of financial resources to properly implement GHS.Lack of system for integrated chemicals and hazardous substances information was very common for the twelve surveyed CEE countries.
15 Q10. GHS Implementation in the transportation sector All the CEE countries have relevant Law on transportation for dangerous goods that are in accordance with the based on the UN Recommendations for the Transport of Dangerous Goods(Model Regulations which is in accordance with GHS).Some of the countries stated some additional regulation concerning the transportation (Albania)
16 Q11. Has your country already conducted any basic/initial training course for GHS introduction/ implementation
17 Q12. How will stakeholder cooperation and support for implementing the GHS be managed Many different views and approaches as well as understandings. …To be discussed during the workshop/working groups…
18 Q13A. Current status of GHS implementation- Sector transportation CountryCurrent status of GHS implementation- Sector transportNo action takenSituation analysis prepared or under preparationPreparing for revising related legislation/ administrative proceduresPreparing for establishing new legislation/ administrative proceduresAlready implementing GHSOtherKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
19 Q13B/C Current status of GHS implementation- Sector Industry & Consumer products CountryCurrent status of GHS implementation- Sector Industry & Consumer productsNo action takenSituation analysis prepared or under preparationPreparing for revising related legislation/ administrative proceduresPreparing for establishing new legislation/ administrative proceduresAlready implementing GHSOtherKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
20 Q13D Current status of GHS implementation- Sector Agriculture/Pesticides CountryCurrent status of GHS implementation- Sector Agriculture/PesticidesNo action takenSituation analysis prepared or under preparationPreparing for revising related legislation/ administrative proceduresPreparing for establishing new legislation/ administrative proceduresAlready implementing GHSOtherKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
21 Q14. Is there a mandatory requirement to translate GHS into the national language(s)?
22 Q 15 a. Interesting topics to be discussed during the Regional workshop, according to the country needsCountryInteresting topics to be discussed during the Regional workshopOrganizational structure needed for implementation of GHS/CLPNeeds for Capacity building to be prepared for GHS introductionFull introduction of GHS or by sectors (Building Block Approach)Introduction of GHS Versus CLP in some countriesKosovoMoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
23 Additional topics of interests: Information on related activities under Agreements on Association with EU(Moldova);Cooperation among countries in the Region for proper implementation of GHS/CLP (Macedonia);Training of population and other relevant stakeholders (Russia);Small and medium-sized enterprise involvement and difficulties by introducing GHS (Hungary).
24 Q16. Availability of financial resources for national/regional capacity building activities towards GHS implementation
25 Q17. Activities completed or planned for GHS implementation Situation/ Gap AnalysisComprehensibility TestingImpact Study and/or Cost Benefit AnalysisFirst Draft of the Implementation InstrumentConsultation with StakeholdersDevelopment of a GHS National Implementation strategyFinal Adoption of the Implementation InstrumentTraining courses for GHS implementationKosovo/MoldovaSerbiaYesNoCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusYes/ 2008Yes/2011Yes/Yes/RussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
26 Industrial / Workplace Agriculture / pesticides Q18. Sectors covered by the National regulation regarding GHS, Edition used (Rev, 2, 3,4)TransportIndustrial / WorkplaceConsumer productsAgriculture / pesticidesOtherKosovo/MoldovaSerbiaYes/Rev 3CroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaYesNoBelarusYes/ SMGSYes/ GOSTYes/GOSTRussiaBulgariaYes/Rev2Yes/Rev 2PolandADRHungaryRomania
27 Q20. Transitional period in place for GHS implementation
28 Q21. Are all GHS hazard classes implemented for the sectors that are covered Only Serbia, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary and Romania answered to this question.“According to CLP only hazard categories that are not part of CLP are :•“flammable liquids category 4”,•“acute toxicity category 5”,•“skin corrosion/irritation category 3”,•“aspiration hazard category 2”• “acute aquatic toxicity category 2 and 3”
29 Q22. Are GHS safety data sheets (SDS) accepted in your country today? Safety Data Sheets acceptedYesNoIn processKosovo/MoldovaSerbiaCroatiaAlbaniaMacedoniaBelarusRussiaBulgariaPolandHungaryRomania
30 Q23. Difficulties encountered in preparing the SDS due to lack of facilities and capabilities Belarus: Lack of trained specialists, Absence of GLP laboratories, Legislation gaps.Russia: Lack of data. Different interpretation of existing data, Problems of reliability and Data inconsistencies.Serbia: One of the biggest problems is lack of data for classification of substances which are not in theList of classified substances or are not classified for all hazard classes.Very important problem for the downstream users (formulators) is the bad quality of SDS of imported substances.Also, there is a lack of capabilities for preparing SDS, especially in small and medium enterprises.
31 Q24. Support the cooperation and information exchange among the countries in the region for better implementation of GHSAll countries support the cooperation and exchange of information in the frames of the CEE Region. Hungary: HelpNet Steering Group Bulgaria: The country is open to provide expertise and take part in CLP training seminars Poland: In 2011 Inspector for Chemical Substances implements three projects co-financed by the Polish aid program of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Armenia, Georgia and Moldova). Russia: Through TAIEX instruments
32 Accredited GLP laboratories Q25. Existing accredited laboratories on GLP and cooperation with any relevant (Q26)Accredited GLP laboratoriesCooperation with GLPCroatiaDeveloping such practiceMacedonia1. Public health Institute-State owned2. Tehnolab-Private/PolandHungaryNational Institute of Chemical Safety, state ownedEvery GLP laboratory develops collaboration with other laboratories on their ownRomaniaPrivate institutionIt is not necessary, proposals for testing are controlled by ECHA and tests methods are governed by Regulation 440/2008 under REACH, indirectly OECD methods
33 Q27. Regional institution that coordinates the GHS implementation at regional level Slovenian Chemicals BureauSwedish Chemical AgencyGOST StandardEuropean Chemical Agency(ECHA)
34 Q28. Specific problems indicated in implementing the GHS CountryIndicated specific problemsBelarusLack of political will, Legislation gaps,No Register of chemicals, No Law on chemicalsCroatiaLack of staff and timeGeorgia:Inconsistent approach to classification of chemicals and distribution of the information on hazards; Necessity of introduction of GHS (Ref. National Chemical profile, 2009)HungaryLack of human resource, quantitative and in expertise; Financial needs;Particularly small and medium-sized enterprises have the above mentioned difficultiesPolandIn European Union GHS is implemented by CLP Regulation. According to the CLP Regulation each country has to establish: Competent Authority, Enforcement authority, National Helpdesk to provide advice to manufacturers, distributors, downstream users and other interested parties, Body responsible for receiving information relating to emergency health response.The main problem usually is concerning with division of responsibilities and preparing some changes in national law (very long process in Poland)SerbiaIn certain cases where there is no other way to have access to data necessary for classification, and when it will be necessary to perform experimental testing in compliance with GLP principles, the problem for our industry will be where to perform those tests and the cost of these testing
35 Thank you for participating to this survey Dr. Suzana AndonovaRegional GHS CEE Project Consultant
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.