The paper by Zimmermann et al. (1976) is reviewed. The stratigraphic value of Nannofossils - known from the Molasse for nearly fourty years - is questioned, in view of their scarcity, of reworking, and of possible contamination from the glacial deposits rich in such organisms. It is shown that indexes S and C are identical, though differently expressed, with quartz/feldspar and dolomite/calcite ratios long since investigated by numerous authors. The D units do not agree with paleontological data, nor with data provided by other mineralogical methods. The relationship between Index D and tectonism is questioned. Various problems, such as the extension of the marine Lower-Middle Oligocene, the Chattian/Rupelian and Aquitanian/Chattian boundaries, and the transgression of the Upper Marine Molasse are discussed.