No C 60/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 8. 3. 91 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 89/396/EEC on indi­
cations or marks identifying the lot to which a foodstuff belongs (*) 
(91/C 60/02) 
On 18 October 1990 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 
4 December 1990. The Rapporteur was Mr Gardner. Co-Rapporteurs were Mr Dunkel and 
Mr Jaschick. 
At its 282nd plenary session (meeting of 18 December 1990) the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. Introduction 
Lot marking enables defective products to be traced 
and withdrawn from the market. It is therefore of 
considerable benefit both to the consumer in prodiving 
better safety and to the producer and his employees in 
limiting withdrawal to that product which is actually 
concerned. The Lot Marking Directive requires mark­
ing for most prepacked goods but exempts goods that 
are not prepacked as well as most products from agri­
cultural producers. The Commission now proposes also 
to exempt individual packs of ice-cream provided that 
the lot is marked on the outer package in bold because 
'the product will usually be consumed immediately and 
the consumer will not keep the package'. 
2. The difficulties 
2.1. For lot marking, the product has to be coded at 
the time of production. The lot mark cannot be pre­
printed as can the 'best before' date which may be the 
same for, say, a week. 
2.2. Small individual ice-creams are either wrapped 
very fast individually or at up to 24 at a time on multiple 
machines. 
For the first of these, coding machines are very expens­ive (up to ECU 17 000 each). For the second, no viable 
coder exists at present. 
There is no problem in marking the outer combined 
package. 
2.3. The same problems also apply to small confec­
tionery items. 
2.4. It is likely that these problems can be solved in 
some years. 
3. General comments 
3.1. The Committee considers individual lot marking 
to be very important and would prefer to see no exemp­
tions including the many items noted under paragraph 
1 above. 
3.2. It agrees that for small ice-creams the wrapper 
is often thrown away immediately and cannot, there­
fore, be used for tracing. The safeguard then is lot 
marking on the outer. The same argument applies to 
small confectionery items. 
3.3. It realises that, at present, there are severe cost 
and technical problems for the products mentioned in 
paragraph 3.2. 
(!) OJ No C 267, 23. 10. 1990, p. 15. 3.4. Taking the totality of the situation, it accepts 
the principle proposed by the Commission but would 
want to limit exemption to a few years only. 
8. 3. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 60/5 
4. Detailed comments 
4.1. Article 1 should be changed to: 
'(d) to small individual portions of ice-cream and 
confectionery, provided that the lot is indicated on 
the combined packages.' 4.2. Article 2 (new): 
'This exemption is limited to four years from the 
date of publication of this Directive.' 
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
Opinion on: 
— the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) establishing a Community Customs Code, 
and 
— the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) determining the cases and the special 
conditions under which the temporary importation arrangements may be used with total 
relief from import duties (*) 
(91/C 60/03) 
On 2 April 1990 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 28, 100A and 113 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on 
the abovementioned proposals. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 5 December 1990. The 
Rapporteur was Mr Petersen. 
At its 282nd plenary session (meeting of 18 December 1990), the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. General comments 
1.1. In past years the Economic and social Commit­
tee has repeatedly and insistently called upon the Com­
mission to introduce uniform customs legislation in 
the Community. The present proposal establishing a 
Community Customs Code meets this request. Com­
munity customs legislation ousts and largerly nullifies 
national customs legislation. Consolidation could also 
be used as a'model for areas other than customs law. 
(J) OJ No C 128 , 23. 5. 1990, p. 1. 1.2. The consolidation in one single text of pro­
visions from many different legal acts, the revision of 
the underlying concepts and content of such provisions, 
and the harminization of legislation not yet enacted at 
Community level, make the Code a legal cornerstone 
of the Customs Union. The Code also demonstrates the 
importance of the Customs Union for the Community's 
foreign trade within the context of the Single European 
Market. 
1.3. We should not, however, forget that the creation 
of such a comprehensive and unique body of laws is 
fraught with difficulties. The comprehensibility of the 
document's language and the clear, methodical expo­
sition of the concepts used are therefore to be wel-