Enforcement 7/26: Enforcement of Wood Preservatives 2025

This report describes an enforcement project in which the Swedish Chemicals Agency has inspected the labeling and conditions for wood preservatives that are approved under either the EU Biocidal Products Regulation or Swedish legislation. Some of the products were also analyzed.

In 2025, a project was carried out to inspect wood preservatives. The main focus of the project was to verify that product labelling was consistent with the information provided in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) or the national authorisation decision. In addition, it was assessed whether labels were misleading and whether the active substances in the products were supplied from suppliers included on the so-called Article 95 list. Also, for 12 products from 9 different the active substance concentration was analysed. In total, 33 products from 17 authorisation holders were inspected.

The results of the project showed that:
• No deficiencies were identified with regard to Article 95, all active substances were supplied by companies listed on the Article 95 list.
• No misleading information was identified on the labels.
• No deviations were found in the chemical analyses, the analysed products contained active substances in concentrations consistent with their authorisation decisions.
• The majority of the inspected products (88 percent) had at least one deficiency in the specific biocidal labelling. For 27 percent of these products, the deficiencies were considered serious.
• The most common deficiencies in the specific biocidal labelling concerned instructions for use and user directions.
• For a significant proportion of the products, batch numbers and expiry dates were unclear or missing, which may hinder traceability and correct use.
• Deficiencies in CLP labelling were identified for 21 percent of the products, a smaller proportion of which were considered serious, such as incorrect hazard pictograms or missing hazard statements.
• It was assessed that 33 percent of the products (11 products) had deficiencies of such severity that a report to the Swedish Police or Prosecution Authority would have been applicable if the authorisation holders had been located in Sweden.