Within our group we use a sealant product called X, this product is referenced in our technical data information as the product customers are reccomended to use within our system.

Product X is actually sourced from an external manufacturer who calls it product Y. We instruct the manufacturer to re-package the product with our X name and labelling for use within our facilities and for re-sale to customers.

The issue i have is the MSDS from the supplier only has reference to product Y within the text, no mention to product X anywhere, not even as an alternative trade name etc. The manufacturers name is still the same for both X & Y. We are 100% confident its the exact same product, it just has a different label.

From a compliance standpoint, i believe im correct in saying that i should have a specific mention of product X on the MSDS, alternatively a completely new MSDS for X if im to take this as the appropriate document for the product?

Can anyone confirm this is the correct thinking?

Are there ways of getting around this? for example requesting a document from the supplier confirming they are the same product?

Any advice on this would be appreciated

Originally Posted by: Holliday42333

As the manufacturer are supplying it to you as Product X, I would have thought they should be giving you an SDS for Product X (you both may not want Product X mentioning as an alternative trade name on the Product Y SDS for commercial reasons).  

If they were supplying it to you as Product Y and you re-package it as Product X, then you would have to produce an SDS for Product X.

Not technicaly certain of this but it would make sense to me.

thanks

This is how i understand it to work as well. I've just not found anything specifically confirming this as the case from what i've read on the regs yet

The market supplier is responsible for the Safety Data Sheet and labelling - Article 1 of the Classification, Labelling and Packaging Regulations EC 1272/2008

The market supplier is not neceassrily the manufacturer/formulator but could also be the importer to the EU or a distributor (think B&Q or similar who have own brand paint but no paint production factilities).

As the market supplier you are responsible to derive the correct Safety Data Sheet even where you rely on information form others (manufacturer SDS) and from this apply the correct label elements.

The current guidance pubished by ECHA for labelling:

https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23036412/clp_labelling_en.pdf/89628d94-573a-4024-86cc-0b4052a74d65

The current guidance published by ECHA for generating SDS:

https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23036412/sds_en.pdf/01c29e23-2cbe-49c0-aca7-72f22e101e20

You are not only changing the product name but also the contact details of the supplier - these should appear on the product labelling. It would be no use someone telephoning the manufacturer to talk about X given it is not a name they use in house.

You can use editing software on supplied documents but if the input data is incorrect it is the market supplier who gets prosecuted not the manufacturer.

https://press.hse.gov.uk/2019/01/03/company-director-sentenced-for-sales-of-illegal-chemicals/​​​​​​​

Don’t forget that under REACH you may also need to attach an Exposure Scenario to the SDS. Actually, this is not new. Way back in 1974 the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act required this. Section 6(4) states:

It shall be the duty of any person who designs, manufactures, imports or supplies any substance for use at work:-

(c) to take such steps as are necessary to secure that there will be available in connection with the use of the substance at work adequate information about the results of any relevant tests which have been carried out on or in connection with the substance and about any conditions necessary to ensure that it will be safe and without risks to health when properly used.

This is not the same as the requirement for the safety data sheet which only provides information on the product itself as supplied, and then only includes those constituents that have been assigned a Hazard Statement.

Whilst this part of the Act has been largely overlooked (ignored?), this year there was a prosecution of a supplier who had not complied with this. I believe the fine was £300,000!