Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2013)943 - Maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of food and feed following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2013)943 - Maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of food and feed following a nuclear accident or any other case of ... |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2013)943  |
| date | 10-01-2014 |
2. The codification of Council Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87 of 22 December 1987 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of foodstuffs and of feedingstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency, Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 944/89 of 12 April 1989 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination in minor foodstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency and Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 770/90 of 29 March 1990 laying down maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination of feedingstuffs following a nuclear accident or any other case of radiological emergency was initiated by the Commission, and a relevant proposal was submitted to the legislative authority i. The new Regulation was to supersede the various acts incorporated in it i.
3. In its opinion of 27.9.2007 the Consultative Working Party of the legal services set up under the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 on an accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts[5] stated that the proposal referred to in point 2 confined itself to straightforward codification, without any substantive changes to the acts covered by it.
4. In the course of the legislative procedure relating to that initial codification proposal, it was acknowledged that a provision appearing in the draft codified text provided for a reservation of implementing powers by the Council which was not justified in the recitals of Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87. In the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 May 2008 in Case C-133/06, it was considered necessary to insert a new recital in the new act replacing and repealing that Regulation in order to justify that reservation of implementing powers. Since the insertion of such a recital would have implied a substantive change, and would have therefore gone beyond straightforward codification, it was considered necessary that point 8[6] of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts - be applied, in the light of the Joint Declaration on that point[7].
5. In the light thereof, codification of Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87, Regulation (Euratom) No 944/89 and Regulation (Euratom) No 770/90 was transformed into a recast in order to incorporate the said amendment, and a relevant proposal was submitted to the legislative authority[8].
6. In its opinion of 4.6.2010 the Consultative Working Party of the legal services, acting in accordance with point 9 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 28 November 2001 on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts[9], stated that the proposal referred to in point 5 did not comprise any substantive amendments other than those identified as such, and that, as regards the codification of the unchanged provisions of the earlier acts with those substantive amendments, the proposal contained a straightforward codification of the existing texts, without any change in their substance.
7. In the course of the legislative procedure relating to that recast proposal, it became apparent that certain existing provisions contained in Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87 have now become incompatible with the new 'Comitology' system laid down in Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers. It has therefore been decided to withdraw the recast proposal and to draft a revised proposal of Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87, which includes its consolidation and the implementation of the new 'Comitology' system.
8. On the basis of the experience gained from the nuclear accidents in Chernobyl and in particular in Fukushima, the revised proposal provides that the Commission is assisted by a section of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health - Toxicological Safety of the Food Chain dealing with radioactive contamination of food and feed referred to in Article 58 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety[10].
9. Taking into consideration the evolution of the primary and secondary law during the last decades, in particular with regard to food safety under the TFEU, and in order to ensure legal certainty and coherence of all EU legislative measures with regard to the conditions governing imports of food and feed from third countries affected by a nuclear accident or a radiological emergency, the measures that were established in the post-Chernobyl context[11] will need to be aligned with the regime of implementing powers and procedures defined in the present regulation. This might also imply, where necessary, a change of the legal basis.
10. It should be noted that the Group of Experts referred to in Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty, confirmed in their Opinion dated 21 November 2012 their conclusion in 1998 (Publication Radiation Protection 105), that the maximum permitted levels pre-established for future accidents in Regulation 3954/87 are still valid. However, as soon as new scientific knowledge on doses and risks would be published by ICRP, they considered that it should be checked whether there is a need for a review of these levels. Therefore, the Commission has not changed these maximum permitted levels in its revised proposal[12].