Transition to SEA Regulation in Türkiye's Industry

Transition to CLP Regulation  

As of 1 June 2016, a new era began in hazard communication for chemical products.

Both Regulation No. 28848, published on 11 December 2013, "Regulation on the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)" and Regulation No. 29204, published on 13 December 2014, "Regulation on Safety Data Sheets for Hazardous Substances and Mixtures," came into full effect as of 1 June 2016, and the previous regulations they replaced were entirely repealed. As with all other regulatory changes, it is undeniable that these changes will bring both convenience and advantages to the industry, as well as certain additional obligations and difficulties. Being part of the GHS project conducted under the umbrella of the United Nations, and on the other hand part of the EU harmonization process, transitioning to the Globally Harmonized System in chemical hazard communication is one of the requirements for easier circulation of our products in global markets. In periods before the transition to the GHS system, both imported materials and exported products were subject to a classification and labelling system different from that in our country. Of course, applying one system for export/import products and another for the domestic market meant additional burden and loss for the industry. As of 1 June 2016, this situation was ended.

During the transition process we have undergone, major markets such as China, Canada and the USA, as well as supply sources, have been transitioning to GHS, meaning that we as the Turkish Chemical Industry continue to compete on the same level as these countries and with the EU, which has already completed its transition, as well as Malaysia, Japan and other countries.

However, insufficient qualified personnel in the classification and labelling field in the sector, the transition period being short relative to the country's size, and bureaucratic delays in updating other regulations that reference and cite the aforementioned regulations as standards can be counted as difficulties and obstacles to carrying out the sector's transition properly. From time to time, complaints are expressed that some chemical products in the industry have long shelf lives and remain on the market, and that the transition period is short given our country's geographical structure. Yet immediately following the publication of the regulation, a mixture product with a 5-year shelf life placed on the market in January 2014 is allowed until May 2018 to transition to the new system on its label. In other words, for an institution that made plans following the publication of the regulation, a legal period of 4.5 years is granted for a mixture it produced on the publication date to remain on the market with the old SAE (Orange symbol) label. Unfortunately, the problems experienced in this area are generally caused by companies not immediately moving to an action plan regarding the published regulation. For although the regulation was published in December 2013, most companies only carried out the transition in spring 2016, at the end of the given period.

This of course results in significant loss of time and failure to comply with regulatory obligation deadlines. Our experience at CRAD shows that foreign suppliers comply with regulations published in our country more dynamically than domestic industry, move to action earlier in terms of compliance and make greater effort.

Underlying this situation is undoubtedly the accumulation of previous legislation and the economic and technical infrastructure to support it. However, it is impossible to become competitive in the international arena without providing equivalent conditions. However, there is one issue in which the industry is justified: the difficulty, even impossibility, of product recovery. Products you have sold can still be found on shelves even after the periods given in the regulation have expired, beyond the control and knowledge of the manufacturing company. Between the complex supply chains of commerce, it is unfortunately not possible to conduct this communication in a healthy and results-oriented manner. In this sense, the planned market surveillance and control activities (MSA) should take these situations into account and bind not only the manufacturer but also the final seller who fails to take the necessary action regarding the product despite the manufacturer's request with various responsibilities. Otherwise, manufacturers will unfortunately be unable to maintain control over the entire distribution network and will unjustly be left in a disadvantaged position. Safety Data Sheet is another factor—the old regulation has been entirely repealed and replaced as of 1 June 2016 by the new Regulation No. 29204. Given that labels circulate on the product, compliance with the SDS regulation has an easier process than compliance with the labelling regulation. However, one must not overlook the regulation's requirement to transmit the modified SDS to all professional users to whom the product was supplied in the past 12 months. That is, when you revise your product's SDS in accordance with Regulation No. 29204, you must transmit the updated SDS to all customers to whom we supplied the product during the 12-month period going back from the SDS update. Melih Babayiğit / General Manager / CRAD