No C 83/10 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 2. 4. 80 
3. Technical  specifications 
3.1. In  the  absence  of European  standards  with 
regard  to simple  pressure  vessels  the  Commission 
has had  to prepare  a Technical  Annex  to the Direc-
tive.  In some  cases,  however,  the Commission  has 
drawn  upon  existing  international  standards  (ISO, 
CEN,  Euronorm,  etc.)  or their  national  equivalents 
(BSI,  DIN,  AFNOR,  etc.). 
3.2. The  Commission  has  set out minute  technical 
provisions  in the Annex.  It has also  laid  down  rules 
covering  many  aspects  of the  design  of the  vessels and their  dimensions.  The  question  arises  as to 
whether  it would  not  have  been  preferable  to have 
laid down  the objectives,  rather  than  to have  set out 
detailed  specifications. 
3.3. At  all events,  the Committee  earnestly  requests 
the Commission  to make  provision  in the Directive 
for the recognition  of qualitiy  controls  carried  out 
ipso facto  by the  manufacturer  during  the  produc-
tion process,  subject,  of course,  to certain  criteria 
being  met.  Such  recognition  would  certainly  make  it 
possible  to simplify  the EEC  inspection  procedure, 
thereby  reducing  inspection  costs. 
Done  at Brussels,  12 December  1979. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Raffaele  VANNI 
Opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on the harmonization  of procedures  for 
the exportation  of goods 
The text  referred  to the Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the Euro-
pean  Communities,  No  C 201  of 10 August  1979,  page  6. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 3 August  1979  the Council  referred  the abovementioned  proposal  to the Economic 
and Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  198  of the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community. 
B. OPINION  OFTHE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 
174th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 12 and 13 December  1979. 
The full  text  of the opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the Treaty  establishing  the  Euro-
pean  Economic  Community,  and  in particular  Arti-
cle 198  thereof, 
Having  regard  to the request  made  by the  Council 
of the European  Communities  on 3 August  1979  for 
an opinion, 
Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by its Bureau 
on 25 September  1979  instructing  the  Section  for Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services  to draw  up 
an opinion  on the matter, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services  at its 
meeting  held  on 28 November  1979, 
Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by the  rap-
porteur,  Mr Marvier, 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 174th  plenary 
session  held  on 12 December  1979, 
2. 4. 80 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 83/11 
H AS ADOPTED  THF  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
unanimously: 
1. General  comments 
1.1. The  Committee  welcomes  the  Commission's 
proposal  to lay down  common  procedural  rules  for 
the export  of goods.  Clearly  the  introduction  of 
identical  procedures  would  be of immense  benefit 
to exporters.  Reiterating  views  it has  already 
expressed  several  times,  the Committee  would,  how-
ever,  point  out  that  the  Directive,  which  obliges  the 
Member  States  to achieve  certain  results  rather  than 
employ  certain  means,  is ill-suited  for the harmoni-
zation  of procedures,  i.e. means.  Whilst  recognizing 
that a precise  and  detailed  Directive  can  be a more 
rapid  way  of achieving  the desired  result,  the Com-
mittee  would  ultimately  like  to see  a Community 
Regulation  and  a single  procedure.  Guidelines  are 
not satisfactory  because,  however  good  they  may  be, 
they  often  leave  the Member  States  free  to use  dif-
ferent  documents  according  to different  procedures 
and to require  different  guarantees  or formalities. 
The Committee  will  return  to these  points  in its spe-
cific  comments. 
1.2. Nevertheless,  the  Committee  is pleased  to 
note  that  the  Directive,  if followed  closely,  should 
permit  considerable  progress  to be made. 
Having  said  this,  it feels  that  the  proposals  could 
have  been  presented  in such  a way  as to facilitate 
more  rapid  progress,  while  retaining  their  essential 
content. 
1.3. In  fact  the text  comprises  two  parts.  One  deals 
with  general  export  procedures,  the other  with  spe-
cial procedures.  The  latter  somewhat  obscure  term 
refers  to the so-called  simplified  export  procedures. 
The Committee  recognizes  that  it is necessary  to 
maintain  a general  export  procedure  that  can  be 
used  without  preliminary  formalities  by firms  or per-
sons  exporting  sporadically  or  relatively  infre-
quently. 
1.4. The  Committee  would  nevertheless  have  been 
happier  if the  simplified  procedures  had  been  pre-
sented  not  in the form  of special  cases  but as normal 
Community  procedures. 
The Committee  notes  that  procedures  of this  kind 
have  become  widespread  and  commonly  used  in 
some  of the  Member  States.  It would  therefore  be 
advantageous  to bring  them  in in the other  Member 
States. 1.5. Aware  that  the  Commission  shares  these 
views,  the  Committee  considers  that  it would  be 
clearer  if the  present  heading  of Title  II 'Special 
Procedures'  was  changed  to read  'Simplified  Pro-
cedures'. 
1.6. Generally  speaking,  the  Committee  considers 
that it would  undoubtedly  have  been  easier  to draw 
up a Directive  on  exports  not  requiring  special 
checks  (e.g.  subject  to VAT  exemptions  alone)  and 
to consign  to a special  text  the  formalities  on pro-
ducts  requiring  special  checks  (common  agricultural 
policy  for example). 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. Fourth  whereas  clause 
The wording  of this  clause  is too  restrictive.  The 
Member  States  have  reached  different  stages  with 
their  procedures.  The  following  wording  is pro-
posed: 
'Whereas  the procedural  rules  laid  down  by laws, 
regulation  or administrative  action  in the  Mem-
ber States  in respect  of the exportation  of goods 
are often  exclusively  in the national  interest  and 
to this  extent  take  no account  of the  require-
ments  of the  customs  union  on which  the  Com-
munity  is founded.' 
2.2. Article  1 (2) (a) 
It would  be advisable  to make  reference  in the 
Implementing  Regulations  to the  definitions  of the 
geographical  territory  and  the  customs  territory  of 
the Community. 
2.3. Article  6, last paragraph 
In the  view  of the  Committee,  cases  when  the  cus-
toms  authority  can  demand  a new  declaration 
should  be defined  more  carefully. 
2.4. Article  7 
The Committee  agrees  with  the  principle  laid  down 
in paragraph  1, namely  that  a declaration  may  be 
cancelled  'as long  as the goods  have  not  left  the ter-
ritory  of the Community'. 
No C 83/12 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 2. 4. 80 
Given  this  principle,  the  Committee  would  like  to 
see the following  paragraphs  simplified. 
In connection  with  paragraph  4, the  Committee 
would  like  to see the time  which  is allowed  to elapse 
between  the  customs  declaration  and  the  actual 
exportation  fixed  in a uniform,  rational  way  and  not 
left to the discretion  of the competent  authorities  as 
happens  at present. 
The Committee  hopes  that,  in the  final  version  of 
the provisions  of Article  7 and  in the Implementing 
Regulations,  accont  is taken  of the  fact  that  com-
mercial  necessities  frequently  cause  consignments  to 
be changed  or cancelled,  even  if the consigments  are 
perfectly  in order  from  a customs  point  of view. 2.8. Article  16(3) 
'The  lodging  of a security,  the amount  and  nature  of 
which  they  (the  competent  authorities)  shall  deter-
mine'  might  appear  astonishing  as a general  rule  for 
exports.  It is designed  for  such  cases  as goods 
involving  a refund;  but for  straightforward  exports 
of industrial  products,  for  instance,  it would  be 
abnormal  to require  that  a guarantee  or deposit  be 
lodged.  The  Committee  realizes  that  where  exports 
are effected  using  commercial  documents,  the 
exporter  must  undertake  in writing  to supply  any 
necessary  additional  information  later,  but  his sig-
nature  then  constitutes  the security.  This  paragraph 
should  be re-examined,  especially  as it is open  to 
different  interpretations  in the  various  Community 
languages. 
These  comments  also  apply  to Article  19 (9). 
2.5. Title  11 — 'Special  procedures' 
As already  pointed  out  in its general  comments,  the 
Committee  would  like  to see the above  title  changed 
to 'Simplified  procedures'. 
2.6. Article  14(1) 
Under  this  paragraph  Member  States  are required  to 
apply  the simplified  procedures  of Title  II 'as far as 
is administratively  possible'. 
The Committee  is aware  of the Commission's  inten-
tion that  this  provision  should  be binding  and  that 
vigorous  efforts  should  be made  to ensure  that  it is 
enforced.  The  Committee  is afraid,  however,  that 
the provision  will  not  be interpreted  in this  light. 
The Commission  is therefore  urged  to find  a word-
ing that  will  achieve  concrete  results  within  a rea-
sonable  period  of time.  Member  States  should  be 
obliged  to take  the necessary  steps  to ensure  appli-
cation  of the simplified  procedures. 2.9. Article  17 (2) 
The Committee  would  point  out  that  it is rather 
inconvenient  to have  to indicate  tariff  headings  in 
both  Arabic  and  Roman  numerals,  as well  as in cap-
itals and  small  letters  (84.25)  A.l.b.i.  for example). 
This  is not rational  and  makes  it difficult  to use  the 
computer.  The  Committee  would  prefer  a statistical 
nomenclature  based  solely  on numerals. 
In this  connection  it would  point  to the advantages 
of widely  using  the Community's  Statistical  Nomen-
clature  (NIMEXE)  which  should,  in all  cases, 
replace  any  national  and  even  Community  (com-
mon  agricultural  policy)  developments  of the basic 
nomenclature. 
This  comment  also  applies  to Articles  19(2)  and 
20(2)(b). 
The Committee  also  notes  that  in certain  cases  it 
may be difficult  to satisfy  the  requirement  that 
quantities  should  be given  in the initial  declaration. 
The Committee  hopes  that  the implementing  Regu-
lations  will  contain  a provision  to the effect  that  net 
quantities  only  need  to be given,  at the  very  latest, 
before  the  goods  leave  the  customs  office  where 
they have  been  declared. 
2.7. Article  15 
In other  opinions  the  Committee  has  already 
remarked  on the  extreme  vagueness  of the  idea  of 
the 'immediate  vicinity  of the frontier'.  It would  be 
better  to speak  of the  'exploitation  of land  which, 
although  situated  on both  sides  of the same  frontier, 
nevertheless  forms  a single  economic  unit'. 2.10.  Article  19 (2) — first  and  following  paragraphs 
The procedure  whereby  authorization  to export  is 
conditional  upon  the  presentation  of a commercial 
document  making  it possible  to identify  the goods, 
is a good  one. 
2. 4. 80 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 83/13 
Nevertheless,  maximum  flexibility  must  be main-
tained.  The  documents  available  at the  time  of 
export  may  be very  different,  depending  on the type 
of goods  or the organization  of the exporting  firm. 
In certain  cases  it would  be an administrative  but 
not a customs  document,  e.g.  a certificate  of quality, a dangerous  goods  declaration,  etc.  The  main  thing 
is that  this  document  should  contain  the  informa-
tion needed  to identify  the goods  and  the  consign-
ment.  The  reference  should  therefore  be to 'any 
commercial  or other  document'. 
Done  at Brussels,  12 December  1979. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Raffaele  VANNI 
Opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Regulation  amending  for the second  time  Regul-
ation  (EEC)  No 222/77  on Community  transit 
The text  referred  to the Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the Euro-
pean  Communities  No  C 241  of 26 September  1979,  page  6. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 24 September  1979  the Council  referred  the abovementioned  proposal  to the Eco-
nomic  and  Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  198  of the Treaty  establishing 
the European  Economic  Community. 
B. OPINION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 
174th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 12 and  13 December  1979. 
The full  text  of the opinion  is as follows  : 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the  Treaty  establishing  the  Euro-
pean  Economic  Treaty,  and  in particular  .Article  198 
thereof, 
Having  regard  to the  request  made  by the  Council 
of the  European  Communities  on 24 September 
1979  for an opinion, 
Having  regard  to the  decision  taken  by its Bureau 
on 25 September  1979  instructing  the  Section  for 
Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services  to prepare 
an opinion  on the matter, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Industry,  Commerce,  Crafts  and  Services  at its 
meeting  held  on 28 November  1979, Having  regard  to the  oral  report  submitted  by the 
rapporteur,  Mr Marvier, 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 174th  plenary 
session  held  on 12 and  13 December  1979  (meeting 
of 12 December  1979), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
unanimously: 
1. General  comments 
1.1. The  Committee  approves  the  Commission's 
determination  to simplify  the  Community  transit 
system,  since  it constitutes  the mainstay  of Commu-