International AWARE Workshop June 9, 2006 The Hague, Netherlands

Introduction Association FME-CWM FME’s stance on Health & Safety FME’s stance on Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC’s); facts and figures FME’s view of AWARE Grounds for success Conclusion

Association FME-CWM Trade organisation for the technical – industrial sector; Activities in the sector cover engineering, manufacturing, trade, industrial maintenance and industrial automation; ± direct company members, employing people; Turnover of 50 billion Euros of which 60% is generated abroad; Key issues are internationalisation and competitiveness.

FME’s stance on H&S Mission statement:’It is healthy to work and work should be healthy’; Employers and employees have their own responsibilities; Employers pro-active in improving working conditions, bearing in mind the competitive market in which they operate and the diversity of the sector; Target legislation, together with sector-specific and practical tools; A level European playing field is essential, no additional national regulation.

FME’s stance on VOC’s; ‘facts and figures’ - I Developed digital tool ‘Stoffenmanager’ (= Substance manager) together with unions. Tool is based on MSDS data, the application method used, the duration and the exposure control methods. Used to check whether the exposure is less than the threshold values for VOC that apply in The Netherlands. Purpose: select the necessary exposure control methods.

FME’s stance on VOC’s; ‘facts and figures’ - II

FME’s stance on VOC’s; ‘facts and figures’ - III 61% of all companies (61%) in the metal industry work with VOCs. This range of applications is extremely wide. Approx. 10% of employees have a reasonable chance of direct exposure (source: Labour Inspectorate). N.B. frequency of contact was not included. KWS project in 2000, an environmental based program, reduction of more than 50% of the emissions of VOC’s in the industrial sector in 2000 relative to Present estimates are that approx. 50% of the companies concerned are looking for alternatives. Goal is to achieve a further 30% reduction in VOC’s in 2010 relative to It is expected that this target will also be met.

FME’s stance on VOC’s; ‘facts and figures’ - IV As a result: The technical, economical and operational limits of reducing VOC will have been reached. Exposure in those cases which remain, such as spray painting, mixing and drying, is largely unavoidable. No forced replacement, but use of VOC with fewer potential health hazards.

FME’s view of AWARE AWARE reveals what the health risk may be and makes it possible to rank products based on potential health risks. AWARE will lead to fewer health problems. AWARE facilitates a source-based approach. AWARE also gives the user plenty of freedom because a distinction is made between individual coatings containing VOC, as well as between VOC-containing and low-VOC or VOC-free coatings.

Grounds for success I The customers must be involved in the pilot. There is great diversity within the sector, custom-work is the rule. The quality, durability and cost of the product must not be adversely affected. There must be no adverse impact on the environment, the VOC issue is an integral one and therefore must be tackled as a whole. The measure must be easy to apply, and suitable for smaller businesses, too.

Grounds for success II AWARE does not make it necessary to switch to different painting methods. AWARE means that it is not necessary to take a leap in the dark by using water-based paints with unknown health risks, for example. AWARE fits perfectly within the framework of the new Dutch Working Conditions Act, which centres on target regulations giving the company management the freedom to determine how it will meet the targets. FME will raise the topic of AWARE with its European counterpart organisations. Whatever we do, it will never be entirely risk free (or lemonade, come to that!), but it also should not lead to false safety standards.

Conclusion: AWARE has to sell itself. Conditions: 1) AWARE fulfils the grounds named before 2) There is sufficient consensus for the use of the product, which implies that there is agreement among the industry and other extern parties for one harmonised European instrument. 3) The operational costs for using the code must not be adversely affected. This is only possible if there is conformity about one European code.

Thank you for your attention G.Meijer Association FME-CWM