REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals (recast)

16.1.2012 - (COM(2011)0245 – C7‑0107/2011 – 2011/0105(COD)) - ***I

Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
Rapporteur: Dan Jørgensen
(Recast – Rule 87 of the Rules of Procedure)

Amendments

• 001-015 (PDF - 143 KB)
• 001-015 (DOC - 88 KB)
• 016-016 (PDF - 551 KB)
• 016-016 (DOC - 846 KB)

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals (recast)

(COM(2011)0245 – C7‑0107/2011 – 2011/0105(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure – recast)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2011)0245),

–   having regard to Article 294(2) and Articles 192(1) and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7‑0107/2011),

–   having regard to Article 294(3) of the TFEU,

–   having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 13 July 2011[1],

–   after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–   having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts[2],

–   having regard to the letter of 25 November 2011 from the Committee on Legal Affairs to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety in accordance with Rule 87(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to Rules 87 and 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0015/2012),

A. whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question does not include any substantive amendments other than those identified as such in the proposal and whereas, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts together with those amendments, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance,

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out, taking into account the recommendations of the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment  1 Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph - 1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	-1. The participation of the Union in the Convention shall be a joint responsibility of the Commission and the Member States, in particular as regards technical assistance, the exchange of information and matters relating to dispute settlement, participation in subsidiary bodies and voting.
(reinstates the original wording of Article 5(1) of the PIC-regulation)
Justification
The Commission deletes text saying that it is the Commission and the member states that represents the EU in the Rotterdam Convention. With this deletion it is only the Commission and not the member states that can represent the EU in the Convention. This is not justified as the PIC-regulation is based on both an environmental legal basis and a commercial legal basis. As it is an environmental legal basis the member states have the right to represent themselves and also to implement the Convention in a stricter way than is required by the EU-legislation.
Amendment  2 Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall act as a common designated authority for the administrative functions of the Convention with reference to the PIC procedure on behalf of and in close cooperation and consultation with all the designated national authorities of the Member States.	1. With regard to the Union's participation in the Convention, for the administrative functions of the Convention with reference to the PIC procedure and the export notification, the Commission shall act as a common designated authority on behalf of and in close cooperation and consultation with all the designated national authorities of the Member States.
(reinstates the original wording of Article 5(2) of the PIC-regulation)
Justification
In line with Amendment 1, the Commission's responsibilities need to be clarified.
Amendment  3 Proposal for a regulation Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point - a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(-a) the transmission of Union export notifications to Parties and other countries pursuant to Article 8;
Justification
In line with Amendment 1, the Commission's responsibilities need to be clarified.
Amendment  4 Proposal for a regulation Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) Information exchange, shared responsibility and cooperative efforts between the Union and the Member States and third countries should be promoted with a view to ensuring sound management of chemicals, whether or not those third countries are Parties to the Convention. In particular, technical assistance to developing countries and countries with economies in transition should be provided directly by the Commission and the Member States, or indirectly via support for projects by non-governmental organisations, especially assistance seeking to enable those countries to implement the Convention.	(20) As a preventive measure, information exchange, shared responsibility and cooperative efforts between the Union and the Member States and third countries should be promoted with a view to ensuring sound management of chemicals, whether or not those third countries are Parties to the Convention. In particular, technical assistance to developing countries and countries with economies in transition should be provided directly by the Commission and the Member States, or indirectly via support for projects by non-governmental organisations, especially assistance seeking to enable those countries to implement the Convention and prevent chemicals having any harmful effects on human health and the environment.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a regulation Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 21 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	21a. 'The Agency' means the European Chemicals Agency established by Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
Amendment  6 Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) where appropriate, provide, with the agreement of the Commission, assistance and technical and scientific guidance and tools for the industry in order to ensure the effective application of this Regulation;	(c) where appropriate, provide assistance and technical and scientific guidance and tools for the industry in order to ensure the effective application of this Regulation;
Justification
As in REACH, ECHA should be responsible for providing assistance and technical guidance and tools for industry and authorities without a legally binding obligation to have a formal agreement of the Commission. Such an obligation would be an excessive burden to ECHA, leading most probably to unnecessary delays in providing these tools and services.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a regulation Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) provide the designated national authorities, with the agreement of the Commission, with assistance and technical and scientific guidance in order to ensure the effective application of this Regulation;	(d) provide the designated national authorities with assistance and technical and scientific guidance in order to ensure the effective application of this Regulation;
Justification
As in REACH, ECHA should be responsible for providing assistance and technical guidance and tools for industry and authorities without a legally binding obligation to have a formal agreement of the Commission. Such an obligation would be an excessive burden to ECHA, leading most probably to unnecessary delays in providing these tools and services.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a regulation Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
When an exporter is due to export a chemical referred to in paragraph 1 from the Union to a Party or other country for the first time on or after the date on which it becomes subject to this Regulation, the exporter shall notify the designated national authority of the Member State in which he is established, no later than 20 working days before the export of the chemical is due to take place. Thereafter the exporter shall notify the designated national authority of the first export of such chemical each calendar year no later than 20 working days before the export takes place. The notifications shall comply with the requirements set out in Annex II and shall be made available by means of the Agency's Database on its website.	When an exporter is due to export a chemical referred to in paragraph 1 from the Union to a Party or other country for the first time on or after the date on which it becomes subject to this Regulation, the exporter shall notify the designated national authority of the Member State in which he is established, no later than 30 days before the export of the chemical is due to take place, unless the exporter has previously given such notification in accordance with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008. Thereafter the exporter shall notify the designated national authority of the first export of such chemical each calendar year no later than 15 days before the export takes place, unless the exporter has previously given such notification in accordance with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008. The notifications shall comply with the requirements set out in Annex II and shall be made available by means of the Agency's Database on its website.
Justification
It is better to use ‘days’, as opposed ‘working days' as public holidays can vary across EU Member States, and importing countries. Under the PIC Regulation, new notifications for export of each chemical have to be made every calendar year. The proposed changes would avoid the need for re-notification during the remainder of the calendar year in which the recast Regulation was applied, preventing unnecessary work both for exporters, and for exporting and importing authorities.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a regulation Article 14 - paragraph 7 - subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
In the case of chemicals listed in Parts 2 or 3 of Annex I, the designated national authority of the exporter may, in consultation with the Commission assisted by the Agency and on a case-by-case basis, decide that the export may proceed if, after all reasonable efforts, no response to a request for explicit consent pursuant to paragraph 6(a) has been received within 60 days and there is evidence from official sources in the importing Party or other country that the chemical has been licensed, registered or authorised or that it has in the last 5 years been used in, or imported into the importing Party or importing other country and no regulatory action has been taken to prohibit its use.	In the case of chemicals listed in Parts 2 or 3 of Annex I, the designated national authority of the exporter may, in consultation with the Commission assisted by the Agency and on a case-by-case basis, decide that the export may proceed if, after all reasonable efforts, no response to a request for explicit consent pursuant to paragraph 6(a) has been received within 60 days and one of the two following conditions is met:
	(a) there is evidence from official sources in the importing Party or other country that the chemical is licensed, registered or authorised; or
	b) for the chemical concerned:
	(i) there is evidence from official sources that it has in the last 5 years been used in or imported into the importing Party or importing other country;
	(ii) there is no evidence from official sources of the importing Party or other country having taken regulatory action to ban or severely restrict the chemical in the category for which it is intended to be used; and
	(iii) the intended use declared in the export notification is not in a category for which the chemical is listed in Part 2 or 3 of Annex I.
Amendment  10 Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
When deciding on the export of chemicals listed in Part 3 of Annex I, the designated national authority in consultation with the Commission assisted by the Agency shall consider the possible impact on human health or the environment of the use of the chemical in the importing Party or other country.	When deciding on the export of chemicals listed in Part 3 of Annex I, the designated national authority in consultation with the Commission assisted by the Agency shall document that it considered the possible impact on human health or the environment of the use of the chemical in the importing Party or other country.
(Linked to the amendment by the same author to Art. 14(9))
Justification
This clause was introduced upon the request of the European Parliament as part of the compromise found between the co-legislators in 2007 so as to create an additional safeguard in the context of the waiver foreseen in this paragraph. However, due to its vague formulation, it is de facto not applied. This should be rectified by establishing an obligation to document this consideration, which should then also be included in the database referred to in Art. 14(9).
Amendment  11 Proposal for a regulation Article 14 – paragraph 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
9. The Agency shall register all requests for explicit consent, responses obtained and waivers granted in its Database. Each explicit consent obtained or waived shall be assigned a reference identification number and shall be listed with all relevant information concerning any conditions attached, such as validity dates. The non-confidential information shall be made publicly available on the Agency's Database.	9. The Agency shall register all requests for explicit consent, responses obtained and waivers granted, including the documentation referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 7, in its Database. Each explicit consent obtained or waived shall be assigned a reference identification number and shall be listed with all relevant information concerning any conditions attached, such as validity dates. The non-confidential information shall be made publicly available on the Agency's Database.
(Linked to the amendment to Article 14(7) by the same author.)
Justification
To ensure that Art. 14(7) second subparagraph is effectively complied with, the corresponding documentation should be included in the database.
Amendment  12 Proposal for a regulation Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
By way of derogation from point (b) of Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, chemicals that are intended for export and subject to customs supervision which do not undergo any treatment or processing and are in temporary storage or in a free zone or free warehouse with a view to re-exportation, shall be subject to the measures on packaging and labelling established in, or pursuant to, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008.	By way of derogation from point (b) of Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, chemicals that are intended for export and subject to customs supervision which do not undergo any treatment or processing and are in temporary storage or in a free zone or free warehouse with a view to re-exportation, shall be subject to the measures on classification, packaging and labelling established in, or pursuant to, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008.
Justification
Packaging and labelling under the CLP regulation depend on classification. As such, all relevant provisions of the CLP regulation have to apply to the export of chemicals, and not just those on packaging and labelling.
Amendment  13 Proposal for a regulation Article 24 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission shall examine whether it is appropriate for the Agency to charge a fee for the services provided to exporters within five years of the date referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 33 and, if necessary, submit a relevant proposal.	3. The Commission shall examine whether it is appropriate for the Agency to charge a fee for the services provided to exporters within three years of the date referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 33 and, if necessary, submit a relevant proposal.
Justification
Three years are sufficient for a review and for preparing a possible proposal for introducing the fees.
Amendment  14 Proposal for a regulation Article 31 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 31a
	For the purposes of Articles 8(1), 10(1), 14(6) and 15(1), measures on classification, packaging and labelling established in, or pursuant to, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 shall apply where appropriate. Obligations under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 shall be subject to the transitional provisions set out in Article 61 of that Regulation.
Justification
In CLP there are transitional arrangements that permit labelling and packaging of mixtures under the old EU system until 1 June 2015. These arrangements should also apply to exports. As CLP itself applies only to chemicals placed on the EU market, and not to chemicals for export, clarification is needed that all references to CLP in PIC should be read as if CLP applied to the exports concerned.
Amendment  15 Proposal for a regulation Article 33 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Regulation shall apply as from 1 April 2013.	This Regulation shall apply as from 1 October 2013.
Justification
Additional time is needed to give Member States sufficient opportunity to adapt their national enforcement regulations in order to take account of the recast PIC Regulation. There is little value in applying the recast Regulation before the necessary enforcement provisions are in place.

• [1]  Not yet published in the Official Journal.
• [2]  OJ C 77, 28.3.2002, p. 1.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Background

The Regulation 689/2008/EC (PIC-regulation) implements the Rotterdam Convention in the European Union. The aim of the Rotterdam Convention is to promote information exchange about chemicals being traded between the Parties of the convention and also to implement the prior informed consent procedure when a Party of the Convention exports chemicals subject to the Convention to another Party of the Convention.

The prior informed consent procedure is a mechanism that ensures that exporting countries of chemicals formally obtain consent from the importing countries before the export can take place. This procedure applies to the chemicals listed in the Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention, which covers pesticides and industrial chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted for health or environmental reasons by Parties and which have been notified by Parties for inclusion in the PIC procedure.

The Regulation 689/2008/EC the EU goes beyond the Rotterdam convention in the sense that the regulation includes more chemicals than the ones listed in the Rotterdam convention. Furthermore the regulation applies the PIC-procedure for all countries that import the listed chemicals from the EU and not just countries that are Parties to the convention.

The Commission proposal

The Commissions has proposed a recast of the PIC-regulation in order to 1) clarify certain definitions and align the regulation with recent chemical legislation adopted recently, 2) involve the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) in the implementation of the regulation, 3) change the provisions related to external representation of the Union so that it is only the Commission and not the member states who represents the Union in the Rotterdam Convention, and 4) change the rules of prior informed consent in order to make easier for exporters of chemicals regulated by the PIC-regulation to export in the cases where no response is forthcoming.

With regards to the changes to the PIC-procedure the Commission makes a change to article 14 point 7 which specifies the possibility for derogations from the PIC-procedure for the chemicals listed in Annex 1 part 2 and 3 of the regulation. The current text allows for exporters that have not received a response within 60 days to export the chemical if there is prove that it is licensed, authorized or registered in the importing country. In the recast the Commission proposes to add text allowing exporters to export if the chemical has been used in or imported into the importing country within the last five years.

The Commission argues that this change is necessary as 30 % of the exports of the chemicals listed in Annex I part 2 and 3 cannot proceed because it has not been possible to obtain an answer from the importing country. The Commission is of the opinion that this is often due to the fact that the EU has included more chemicals in the PIC-regulation than the ones listed in the Rotterdam Convention and thus importing countries do not react or respond to chemicals that are not listed in the Convention.

Rapporteur’s comments

Your rapporteur can support the Commissions proposal in so far that it clarifies certain definitions in the regulation and involves the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) in the implementation of the regulation. When we have a European Agency we should make use of it and therefore it is only logical that ECHA takes over much of the responsibility for implementing the regulation.

Your rapporteur does not agree with the Commissions proposal in so far that it widens the possibility for derogations from the PIC-procedure when exporting chemicals to third countries. The chemicals listed in Annex I part 2 or 3 in the PIC-regulation are either banned or very restricted in the European Union. There is a reason for that. Most often these chemicals involve risks in relations to the environment and/or human health. Therefore we should be very careful when exporting these chemicals to third countries that we are not doing so against the will of these countries.

The Commission argues that if a country does not respond to an export request it might be because the authorities in that country do not feel the need to respond to requests regarding chemicals that are not listed in the Rotterdam Convention but only in the EU-legislation. This might sometimes be the case. But it might also be the case that the country has a very weak administration and is therefore not capable to respond in time or does not know how to deal with the request. If this is the case it seems very problematic to allow the export of dangerous chemicals to these countries. If their administration is not able to react to an export request it is not likely that the same administration is able to protect the citizens or the environment from dangerous chemicals.

Producers of chemicals that are banned or restricted in the EU will find it hard to sell these chemicals in the EU. An option can therefore be to export the chemicals to other countries that have a weaker legislation on chemicals. But it is not our role to facilitate this export of dangerous chemicals in order to secure revenue for these producers. The objective of the Rotterdam Convention is to protect "human health and the environment" (article 1). We are not securing this objective by adding derogations to the regulation which implements the Convention.

The EU is a leader when it comes to environmental legislation. And the EU should continue to be so. Therefore your rapporteur suggests that we limit the derogations from the PIC-procedure, as it is the responsibility of the EU to ensure that the chemicals we export do not cause unnecessary harm to humans or the environment.

ANNEX: LETTER FROM THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS

COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRES

THE CHAIRMAN

Ref.: D(2011)58377

Mr Jo LEINEN

Chair of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

ASP 12G205

Brussels

Subject:     Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals (recast)

                  (COM(2011)0245 – C7‑0107/2011 – 2011/0105(COD))

Dear Chairman,

The Committee on Legal Affairs, which I am honoured to chair, has examined the proposal referred to above, pursuant to Rule 87 on Recasting, as introduced into the Parliament's Rules of Procedure.

Paragraph 3 of that Rule reads as follows:

"If the committee responsible for legal affairs considers that the proposal does not entail any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal, it shall inform the committee responsible.

In such a case, over and above the conditions laid down in Rules 156 and 157, amendments shall be admissible within the committee responsible only if they concern those parts of the proposal which contain changes.

However, if in accordance with point 8 of the Interinstitutional Agreement, the committee responsible intends also to submit amendments to the codified parts of the proposal, it shall immediately notify its intention to the Council and to the Commission, and the latter should inform the committee, prior to the vote pursuant to Rule 54, of its position on the amendments and whether or not it intends to withdraw the recast proposal."

Following the opinion of the Legal Service, whose representatives participated in the meetings of the Consultative Working Party examining the recast proposal, and in keeping with the recommendations of the draftsperson, the Committee on Legal Affairs considers that the proposal in question does not include any substantive changes other than those identified as such in the proposal and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts with those changes, the proposal contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance.

In conclusion, after discussing it at its meeting of 22 November 2011, the Committee on Legal Affairs, by 19 votes in favour and no abstention[1], recommends that your Committee, as the committee responsible, proceed to examine the above proposal in accordance with Rule 87.

Yours faithfully,

Klaus-Heiner LEHNE

Encl.: Opinion of the Consultative Working Party.

• [1]  The following Members were present : Klaus-Heiner Lehne (Chair), Luigi Berlinguer (Vice-Chair), Raffaele Baldassarre (Vice-Chair), Evelyn Regner (Vice-Chair), Sebastian Valentin Bodu (Vice-Chair), Philippe Boulland, Christian Engström, Marielle Gallo, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Kurt Lechner, Toine Manders, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Jiří Maštálka, Gabriel Mato Adrover, Alajos Mészáros, Bernhard Rapkay, Alexandra Thein, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland.

ANNEX: OPINION OF THE CONSULTATIVE WORKING PARTY OF THE LEGAL SERVICES OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION

	CONSULTATIVE WORKING PARTY OF THE LEGAL SERVICES

Brussels, 18 July 2011

OPINION

             FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

                                                              THE COUNCIL

                                                              THE COMMISSION

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals

COM(2011)0245 of 5.5.2011 – 2011/0105(COD)

Having regard to the Inter-institutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts, and in particular to point 9 thereof, the Consultative Working Party consisting of the respective legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission met on 23 May and 23 June 2011 for the purpose of examining, among others, the aforementioned proposal submitted by the Commission.

At those meetings[1], an examination of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council recasting Regulation (EC) No 689/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals resulted in the Consultative Working Party’s establishing, by common accord, as follows.

1) As regards the explanatory memorandum, in order to be drafted in full compliance with the relevant requirements laid down by the Inter-institutional Agreement such a document should have stated the reasons for each proposed substantive amendment, as is provided for under point 6(a)(ii) of that agreement, and should have specified which provisions of the earlier act remain unchanged in the proposal, as is provided for under point 6(a)(iii).

2) The following changes proposed in the recast text should have been identified by using the grey-shaded type generally used for marking substantive changes:

- in Article 1(2), the deletion of the words "of Council Directive 67/548/EEC";

- in point (1) of Article 3, the deletion of the words "as defined in Directive 67/548/EEC";

- in Article 4, second paragraph, the replacement of the date of 1 November 2008, appearing in the currently applicable text of Article 4, second paragraph, of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008, with a new date following the publication of the recast act;

- in Article 5(1), first subparagraph, the deletion of the words "and the export notification" currently appearing in Article 5(2), first subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008;

- in Article 8(2), first subparagraph, the replacement of the existing deadline of 30 days appearing in Article 7(2), first subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008, with a different deadline consisting of 20 working days;

- in Article 8(2), third subparagraph, the replacement of the existing deadline of 15 days appearing in Article 7(2), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008, with a different deadline consisting of 10 working days;

- in Article 8(3), the replacement of the existing deadline of 30 days appearing in Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008, with a different deadline consisting of 20 working days;

- in Article 31, first paragraph, the replacement of the date of 1 August 2009, appearing in Article 18, first paragraph, of Regulation (EC) No 689/2008, with a new date following the publication of the recast act.

3) In Annexes I and V, the latest amendments originating from two regulations recently adopted by the Commission were not reproduced. Those recent amendments should be introduced into the draft recast text. The two amending acts concerned are Commission Regulation (EU) No 186/2011 of 25 February 2011 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 689/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals and Commission Regulation (EU) No 214/2011 of 3 March 2011 amending Annexes I and V to Regulation (EC) No 689/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the export and import of dangerous chemicals.

In consequence, examination of the proposal has enabled the Consultative Working Party to conclude, without dissent, that the proposal does not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such therein or in the present opinion. As regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier act with those substantive amendments, the Working Party concluded that the said codification is incomplete in so far as it does not incorporate the amendments referred to in point 3. Consequently, the European Parliament's and the Council's Legal Services recommend that the Commission submit an amended recast proposal incorporating those amendments.

C. PENNERA                                  H. LEGAL                            L. ROMERO REQUENA

Jurisconsult                                       Jurisconsult                            Director General

• [1]  The Consultative Working Party had at its disposal the English, French and German language versions of the proposal and worked on the basis of the English version, being the master-copy language version of the text under discussion.

PROCEDURE

Title	Export and import of dangerous chemicals (recast)
References	COM(2011)0245 – C7-0107/2011 – 2011/0105(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament	5.5.2011
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	ENVI 10.5.2011
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)        Date announced in plenary	INTA 10.5.2011	ITRE 10.5.2011	JURI 10.5.2011
Not delivering opinions        Date of decision	INTA 24.5.2011	ITRE 25.5.2011
Rapporteur(s)        Date appointed	Dan Jørgensen 8.6.2011
Discussed in committee	7.11.2011
Date adopted	20.12.2011
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	57 0 1
Members present for the final vote	János Áder, Elena Oana Antonescu, Kriton Arsenis, Sophie Auconie, Pilar Ayuso, Paolo Bartolozzi, Sandrine Bélier, Sergio Berlato, Chris Davies, Esther de Lange, Bas Eickhout, Edite Estrela, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Elisabetta Gardini, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Julie Girling, Françoise Grossetête, Satu Hassi, Jolanta Emilia Hibner, Dan Jørgensen, Karin Kadenbach, Christa Klaß, Holger Krahmer, Jo Leinen, Peter Liese, Linda McAvan, Radvilė Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Miroslav Ouzký, Vladko Todorov Panayotov, Antonyia Parvanova, Andres Perello Rodriguez, Pavel Poc, Vittorio Prodi, Frédérique Ries, Anna Rosbach, Oreste Rossi, Kārlis Šadurskis, Carl Schlyter, Horst Schnellhardt, Richard Seeber, Theodoros Skylakakis, Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu, Salvatore Tatarella, Anja Weisgerber, Åsa Westlund, Sabine Wils, Marina Yannakoudakis
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	João Ferreira, Matthias Groote, Jutta Haug, Mairead McGuinness, Alojz Peterle, Christel Schaldemose, Michail Tremopoulos, Peter van Dalen, Andrea Zanoni
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote	Phil Prendergast, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska
Date tabled	16.1.2012