Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption amending the proposal of the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty
Date: 2002-05-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, animal product, by-product, consumer protection, environmental law, food safety, health legislation, traceability, waste

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 28.5.2002
COM(2002) 268 final

2000/0259 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament’s amendments
to the Council’s common position regarding the
proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

laying down the health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human
consumption

AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION
pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament’s amendments
to the Council’s common position regarding the
proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL

laying down the health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human
consumption

1.

INTRODUCTION

Article  251(2),  third  subparagraph,  point  (c)  of  the  EC  Treaty  provides  that  the
Commission is to deliver an opinion on the amendments proposed by the European
Parliament  at  second  reading.  The  Commission  sets  out  its  opinion  on  the
8 amendments proposed by Parliament.

2.

BACKGROUND

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Adoption of the proposal by the Commission: 19 October 20001

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee: 26 April 20012

Opinion of the European Parliament at first reading:12 June 20013

Date of political agreement in Council: 19 June 2001
(unanimity without the Commission)

Date of adoption of the amended proposal: 12 December 2001

Date of adoption of the common position: 20 November 20014

Adoption  by  Parliament  of  the  Recommendation  for  a  second  reading  :
13 March 2002

1

2

3

4

COM(2000) 574 final 2000/0259(COD) of 19.10.2000.
OJ C 193, 10.07.2001 p. 32.
Opinion of the EP of 12 June 2001 (not yet published on the OJ).
OJ C 45E, 19.2.2001, p. 70.

2

                                                
3.

PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSAL

The  key  issue  of  the  proposal  is  the  prohibition  on  the  recycling  of  certain  animal
by-products  into  the  feed  chain,  namely  dead  animals  and  condemned  animal
material. The only raw material allowed to be used for the production of animal feed
would then be material derived from animals declared fit for human consumption.

Furthermore, this proposal:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

introduces  a  number  of  alternative  methods  for  the  use  or  disposal  of  animal
by-products;

strengthens rules on controls and traceability of animal by-products;

establishes a link with Environmental Community legislation;

creates a new legal framework for the animal by-products sector;

simplifies  existing  Community  legislation  creating  a  consolidated  legislative
act dealing with all animal by-products not intended for human consumption.

4.

OPINION  OF  THE  COMMISSION  ON  THE  AMENDMENTS  BY  THE  EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT

4.1.

Amendments accepted by the Commission

●

●

●

●

Amendment  12  on  marking  of  petfood  and  amendment  15  on  separation  of
plants are both acceptable as they are in line with the overall objectives of the
original Commission proposal to increase traceability and to prevent of cross-
contamination.

Amendment  21  relating  material  collected  when  treating  waste  water  is
acceptable  as  it  clarifies  that  this  material  is  a  Category  1  material  only  if
contains Specified Risk Material.

Amendments  22  and  23  on  catering  waste  excluding  this  waste  from  the
control rules of Article 7 and making reference to environmental legislation are
acceptable, as they would ensure that the goals of the Regulations are achieved
without  undermining  separate  collection  schemes.  Furthermore 
these
amendments assure that high risk catering waste originating from international
means  of  transport  should  remain  subjected  to  the  strict  control  rules  of
Article 7,  by  limiting  the  proposed  amendments  to  Article  7  to  Category 3
catering waste.

Amendment 24 aiming to extend the derogation of feeding certain animals with
Category 1 material to endangered and protected species of necrophagous birds
is  acceptable  as  it  establishes  that  rules  governing  such  derogation  shall  be
proposed by the Commission only following scientific advice.

3

4.2.

Amendments rejected by the Commission

●

●

Amendment  9  cannot  be  accepted  as  detailed  and  sufficient  requirements  of
accompanying  documents  and  records  keeping  are  already  established  in  the
Annex  of  the  Regulation  and  they  may  be  supplemented  if  needed  by
Comitology.

Amendment 25 on the use of catering waste in animal feed cannot be accepted
first  of  all  on  institutional  grounds,  as  it  would  undermine  the  Commission’s
right of initiative, as it imposes on the Commission the proposal of a legislative
act with a deadline and with the content set by the European Parliament.

Furthermore,  the  amendment  cannot  be  supported  for  the  following  more
specific issues:

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

13 Member States are against any relaxation of the ban of swill feeding,
which has already been introduced in EU legislation;

The feeding of catering waste is potentially a major threat of transmission
of serious  animal  diseases  such  as  foot-and-mouth  disease  and  classical
swine  fever.  Given  the  huge  damage  which  has  arisen  from  recent
outbreaks of these diseases, the insistence of the Member States on very
high 
the
Commission;

is  understandable  and  shared  by 

levels  of  protection 

The  continued  feeding  of  catering  waste  to  pigs  is  also  difficult  to
reconcile with the objectives of full traceability of ingredients in animal
feedingstuffs  and  a  ban  on  intra-species  re-cycling  demanded  by  the
European Parliament and fully accepted by Council and Commission;

Given  the  above,  the  Commission  has  supported  the  decision  of  the
Council  to  ban  the  practice  of  swill  feeding  under  the  swine  fever
directive  and  the  common  position  of  the  Council  on  the  animal  by-
products regulation which takes a similar position;

The disposal and recycling of catering waste is governed by existing and
future environmental legislation. The request of the European Parliament
for a separate Regulation governing would overlap with that legislation.
Furthermore, this amendment has objectives which are directly  opposed
to those of amendments 22 and 23 above. In fact, while this amendment
asks  for  a  new  set  of  strict  controls  on  collection  and  destruction  of
catering waste, amendments  22 and 23 aim,  on  the contrary, to exclude
catering waste from any additional control rules;

Finally,  the  Commission  has  already  officially  declared  to  be  ready  to
propose transitional measures to be adopted in comitology whenever this
is justified and appropriate in order to allow the affected industries time
to  adapt  to  the  new  requirements  introduced  by  this  Regulation.
However,  reasonable 
intensively
discussed with technical experts and, possibly, with scientific experts to
establish  minimal  interim  health  requirements  to  apply  during  the
transitional period.

transitional  measures  should  be 

4

5.

CONCLUSIONS

Pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the Treaty, the Commission amends its proposal as set
out above.

5