Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 251 (2) (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendment to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterways, amending the proposal of the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 29. 02. 2000 COM(2000) 112 final 1998/0106 (COD) OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 251 (2) (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendment to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterways AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty 1998/0106 (COD) OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 251 (2) (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendment to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterways 1. BACKGROUND On 19 March 1998, the Commission submitted to the Council a proposal for a Directive on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the inland waterways (COM(1998)174 final – SYN 1998/0106)1. of dangerous transport goods road, rail by or On 9 September 1998, the Economic and Social Committee gave a favourable opinion2. On 20 October 1998, the European Parliament gave an opinion on the proposal at first reading3. On 23 December 1998, the Commission submitted an amended proposal to the Council (COM(1998)803 final - SYN 1998/0106)4. On 29 March 1999, the Council adopted a common position5. On 15 July 1999, the Committee of the Regions decided not to draw up an opinion on the proposal6. On 18 January 2000, position at second reading7. the European Parliament decided to amend the common 2. AIM OF THE COMMISSION'S PROPOSAL The aim of this proposal is to harmonise the laws of the Member States on examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterways. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 OJ C 148, 14. 5. 1998, p. 21. OJ C 407, 28. 12. 1998, p. 118. OJ C 341, 9. 11. 1998, p. 32. OJ C 52, 23. 2. 1999, p. 16. OJ C Letter No 1295 of 22. 7. 1999, adressed to the Council's General Secretariat. OJ C 2 Under Directive 96/35/EC, undertakings involved in the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterways, including loading or unloading connected with such transport, must appoint one or more safety advisers to reduce the risks for persons, goods and the environment. The professional competence of safety advisers is to be ensured by special training and approved by a certificate, after passing of an examination. The training certification is to be recognized by all Member States. Directive 96/35/EC does not contain any detailed provisions on the harmonization of examination requirements; consequently, the aim of this proposal is to lay down minimum safety requirements for examinations for safety advisers. 3. COMMENTS ON PARLIAMENT'S AMENDMENT AT SECOND READING 3. 1 General The Commission takes the view that the only amendment made by Parliament to the Council's common position is in line with the aims of its proposal. 3. 2 Comments on the amendment Amendment 1 Article 6(1) 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 31 December 1999 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. laws, regulations 1. Member States shall bring into force the and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive within three months from its entry into force. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. The Commission can accept this amendment, given that the date specified in the common position is no longer applicable and the solution proposed by Parliament is realistic. 4. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS The Commission considers that Parliament's amendment at second reading, is in line with the aims of its proposal. the Council's common position, together with Consequently, common position by Parliament's amendment. the Commission accepts the modification made to the Council's 3