BETA

Activities of Enrico GASBARRA related to 2018/0088(COD)

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and sustainability of the EU risk assessment in the food chain amending Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 [on general food law], Directive 2001/18/EC [on the deliberate release into the environment of GMOs], Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 [on GM food and feed], Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 [on feed additives], Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003 [on smoke flavourings], Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 [on food contact materials], Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 [on the common authorisation procedure for food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings], Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 [on plant protection products] and Regulation (EU) No 2015/2283 [on novel foods]
2016/11/22
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2018/0088(COD)
Documents: PDF(420 KB) DOC(259 KB)

Amendments (49)

Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 6, 43, 114, and 168(4)(b), 169 and 191 thereof,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, (“Fitness Check of the General Food Law”)21, found that risk communication is overall, not considered to be effective enough, which has an negative impact on consumers’ confidence on the outcome of the risk analysis process. _________________ 21 Commission Staff Working Document, “The REFIT evaluation of the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002)”, SWD(2018)38 final, dated 15.1.2018.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) It is therefore necessary to ensure a comprehensive, transparent, independent and continuous risk communication process throughout risk analysis, involving Union and national risk assessors and risk managers. That process should be combined withapable of contributing to a participatory and open dialogue between all interested parties to ensure the coherence, comprehensiveness and consistency withinof the risk analysis process.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The general plan should identify the key factors to be taken into account when risk communications’ activities are considered, such as the different levels of risk, the nature of the risk and its potential environmental and public health impact, who and what are directly or indirectly affected by the risk, the levels of risk exposure, the ability to control risk, the ways of managing it and other factors that influence risk perception including the level of urgency as well as the applicable legislative framework and relevant market context. The general plan should also identify the tools and channels to be used and should establish appropriate mechanisms to ensure coherent risk communication. which is constantly updated, clear and easy to access, and which also includes specifically dedicated instruments in order more easily to highlight alert information and to provide responses to the public concerning public health risks.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) Experience shows that the role of the Management Board of the Authority is focussed on administrative and financial aspects and does not impact on the independence of the scientific work performed by the Authority. It is thus appropriate to include representatives of all Member States in the Management Board of the Authority, while providing that those representatives should have experience in particular on risk assessment. ing and managing risks and problems.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The Fitness Check of the General Food Law identified certain shortcomings in the long-term capability of the Authority to maintain its high-level expertise. In particular, there has been a decrease in the number of candidates applying to be members of the Scientific Panels. TIn order to tackle this phenomenon more effectively, the system has thus to be strengthened and promoted, and Member States should take a more active role to ensure that a sufficient pool of experts is available by undertaking support actions and using incentives and rewards to increase the level of participation and the degree of interest in seeking to engage in it, to meet the needs of the Union risk assessment system in terms of high level of scientific expertise, independence and multidisciplinary expertise.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) Provisions exist on the content of applications for authorisations. It is essential that the application for authorisation submitted to the Authority for its risk assessment meets the applicable specifications to ensure the best quality scientific assessment by the Authority. Applicants and in particular small- and medium-sized enterprises do not always have a clear understanding of these specifications. It should be thus appropriate that the Authority provides advice to a potential applicant, upon request, on the applicable rules and the required content of an application for authorisation, before an application is formally submitted, while not entering into the design of the studies to be submitted that remain the applicant’s responsibility. To ensure the transparency of this process and provide wide and non- discriminatory access to information, the advice of the Authority should be made public.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) The Fitness Check of the General Food Law demonstrated that the EU has promoted many measures to protect the quality and safety of food and products (Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005; Regulation (EC) No 853/2004; Regulation (EC) No 854/2004; and in particular Recital 12 of Directive 2009/128/EC) and, although the Authority has made considerable progress in terms of transparency, the risk assessment process, especially in the context of authorisation procedures covering the agri-food chain, is not alwaysyet perceived as fully transparent. This is also partly due to the different transparency and confidentiality rules that are laid down not only in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 but also in other Union legislative acts covering the agri-food chain. Their interplay can impact on the acceptability of the risk assessment by the general public.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) To determine what level of disclosure strikes the appropriate balance, the relevant rights of the public to transparency of information in the risk assessment process, should be weighted up against the rights of commercial applicants, taking into account the objectives of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) Accordingly and with respect to the procedures governing requests for authorisation procedures provided in Union food law, experience gained so far has shown that certain information items are generally considered sensitive and should remain confidential across the different sectoral authorisation procedures. It is appropriate to lay down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 an exhaustive horizontal list of information items whose disclosure may be considered to significantly harm the commercial interests concerned and should not therefore be disclosed to the public, (“general horizontal list of confidential items”). Only in very limited and exceptional circumstances relating to foreseeable health effectsIn all circumstances that could give rise to an alert about potential risks to public health and/or clearly established problems which are indicative of and urgent needs to protect human health, animal health or the environment, such information should be disclosed, as the interests of public health should always prevail over commercial interests.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) It is also necessary to set out specific requirements with respect to the protection of personal data for the purposes of the transparency of the risk assessment process taking into account Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council24 and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council25. Accordingly, no personal data should be made publicly available under this Regulation, unless it is necessary and proportionate for the purposes of ensuring the transparency, independence, suitability and the reliability of the risk assessment process, while preventing conflicts of interests. _________________ 24 Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1). 25 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) For the purposes of increased transparency and in order to ensure that requests for scientific outputs received by the Authority are processed in an effective manner, standard data formats and software packages should be developed. In order to ensure uniform, harmonised conditions for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 with regard to the adoption of standard data formats and software packages, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council26. _________________ 26 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 (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) Having regard to the fact that the Authority would be required to store scientific data, including confidential and personal data, it is necessary to ensure that such storage is carried out in accordance with a high level ofsuch a way as to ensure complete security.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) Furthermore, in order to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the different provisions applying to the Authority, it is also appropriate to provide for a Commission evaluation of the Authority, in accordance with the Common Approach on Decentralised Agencies. The evaluation should, in particular, review the procedures for selecting the members of Scientific Committee and Panels, for their degree of transparency, cost-effectiveness, and suitability to ensure independence, vigilance and competence, and to prevent conflicts of interests.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) To ensure that sectoral specificities with respect to confidential information are taken into account, it is necessary to weigh up the relevant rights of the public to transparency in the risk assessment process, including those flowing from the Aarhus Convention35, against the rights of commercial applicants, taking into account the specific objectives of sectoral Union legislation as well as experienced gained, always, however, bearing in mind that, where there are specific grounds for concern about public welfare and public health, the public interest must prevail over commercial interests. Accordingly, it is necessary to amend Directive 2001/18/EC, Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 to provide for additional confidential items to those set out in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002. _________________ 35 Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ L 264, 25.9.2006, p.13).
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) In order to further strengthen the link between risk assessors and risk managers at Union and national levels as well as the coherence, comprehensiveness, reliability and consistency of risk communication, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to adopt a general plan on risk communication on matters covering the agri-food chain. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8a – point b
b) promote consistency, maximum reliability and transparency in formulating risk management recommendations;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
c) provide a sound basis for understandingidentifying the best decisions on risk management decisions;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8a – point d
d) foster public understanding of the risk analysis process so as to enhance confidence in its outcome and restore consumers’ trust in the EU and its institutions;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8b – point b
b) provideconstantly provide up-to-date and transparent information at each stage of the risk analysis process from the framing of requests for scientific advice to the provision of risk assessment and the adoption of risk management decisions;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8b – point c
c) take into account the level of risk, its possible consequences and risk perceptions;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8b – point d
d) facilitate understanding and dialogue amongst all interested parties, such as consumers and consumer associations, environmental groups, animal welfare organisations, health organisations, citizens’ associations, scientific research centres, trade unions and also cooperatives, associations of producers and farmers, representatives of small and medium-sized enterprises, and the research and innovation sectors; and,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8c – point b
b) identify the appropriate main tools and channels (clear, effective and accessible website) to be used for risk communication purposes, taking into account the specific needs of relevant target audience groups and in particular arranging for specific communication for situations in which any emergencies are managed that might arise in the field of food or the environment, which presupposes an increase in dedicated communication tools and measures (helplines, a suitably identified section of the EFSA website, apps and specific information campaigns); and,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Chapter II, SECTION 1a – Article 8c – point b
c) establish appropriate mechanisms in order to strengthen coherence of risk communication amongst risk assessors and risk managers and ensure an open dialogue and constant interaction amongst all interested parties.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 25 – paragraph 1a – point b
b) onetwo members appointed by the European Parliament, with the right to vote.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 25 – paragraph 1a – point c
c) fourfive members with the right to vote representing civil society and food chain interests namely, one from consumers organisations, one from environmental non-governmental organisations, one from farmers organisations, one from medical/health organisations and one from industry organisations. Those members shall be appointed by the Council in consultation with the European Parliament on the basis of a list drawn up by the Commission which includes more names than there are posts to be filled. The list drawn up by the Commission shall be forwarded to the European Parliament, together with the relevant background documents. As quickly as possible and within three months of notification, the European Parliament may submit its views for consideration to the Council, which shall then appoint those members.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 25 – paragraph 1a – point c
2. The term of office of members and alternate members shall be four years. However, the term of office of the members referred to in paragraph 1a(a) and (b) shall not be limited in du (2012 revision of the rules governing the decentralised agencies of the Union - Joint Declaration). The term of office of the members referred to in paragraph 1a(c) may be renewable only once.,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 28 – paragraph 5a – point e
e) The Management Board shall ensure that the broadest, most comprehensive and most participatory possible geographical distribution is achieved in the final appointments.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 28 – paragraph 5b
5b. When the Authority identifies that specific expertise is missing in a Panel or several Panels, the Executive Director shall propose additionalsubstitute members of the Panel(s) for appointment to the Management Board in accordance with the procedure laid down in paragraph 5.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 28 – paragraph 5d
The Member States shall put in place measures ensuring that the members of the Scientific Panels act independently and remain free from conflict of interests as provided for in Article 37(2) and the Authority’s internal measures. Member States shall ensure that the members of the Scientific Panels have the means to dedicate the necessarymaximum time and effort which is necessary in order to contribute to the work of the Authority. Member States shall ensure that the members of the Scientific Panels do not receive any instruction and are not subject to pressure and influence at any national level and that their independent scientific contribution to the risk assessment system at Union level is recognisconceived as a priority task for the protection of the safety of the food chain.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32a
At the request of a potential applicant for a food law authorisation, the staff of the Authority shall advise on the relevant provisions and the required content of the application for authorisation. For the purpose of avoiding any conflict of interest among the parties concerned, it is desirable and recommended that the staff assigned this task of assistance during the preparatory stage of applications for authorisation should not be the same who subsequently take part in assessing them. The advice provided by the staff of the Authority shall above all be without prejudice, influence or discrimination and non-committal as to the subsequent assessment of applications for authorisation by the Scientific Panels.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32b – paragraph 3
3. The notified information shall be made public only in caseif a corresponding application for authorisation has been received and after the Authority has decided on the disclosure of the accompanying studies in accordance with Article 38 and Articles 39 to 39f.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32d
The Commission experts shall perform controls, including audits, to obtain assurance that testing facilities are independent, transparent and staffed by highly skilled persons and comply with relevant standards for carrying out tests and studies submitted to the Authority as part of an application for an authorisation under Union food law. These controls shall be organised in cooperation with the competent authorities of the Member States.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regolamento (CE) n. 178/2002
Article 32e
Without prejudice to the obligation of applicants for authorisations under food law to demonstrate the safety of a subject matter submitted to a system of authorisation, the Commission, in exceptional circumstances, may request the Authority to commission scientific studies with the objective of verifying evidence used in its risk assessment process, with the aim of obtaining greater assurance about food or feed safety. The studies commissioned may have a wider scope than the evidence subject to verification.;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – 1
The Authority shallmust carry out its activities with a high level ofthe maximum transparency. It shall in particular make public without delay:
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 38 – paragraph 1a – point b
The disclosure of the information mentioned in paragraph (1)(c) to the public shallmust be without prejudice:
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 38, the Authority shall not make public information for which confidential treatment has been requested under the conditions laid down in this Article (without prejudice to the principle that the interests of public health must always prevail over private interests).
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – point 2 (between 2 and 3)
(3a) innovative commercial elements and models, formulae and products covered by patents whose protection might be threatened by any failure to maintain confidentiality during the initial study request procedure, thus exposing the requester to damage and risks of market distortion and unfair competition
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – point 4
4. Notwithstanding paragraphs 2 and 3, the following information shallmust nevertheless be made public:
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – point 4 – subpoint a
(b) information which forms part of conclusions of scientific outputs, including scientific opinions, delivered by the Authority and which relate to foreseeable health effectsindicate risks of possible effects on and threats to public and animal health or the environment.;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39b – point 1 – subpoint d
(d) adopt a reasoned decision on the confidentiality request taking into account the observations of the applicant within ten weeks from the date of receipt of the confidentiality request with respect to applications for authorisation and without undue delay in the case of supplementary data and information and notify the applicant and inform the Commission and the Member States, as appropriatin every case, of its decision; and,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39b – point 1 – subpoint d
(d) adopt a reasoned decision on the confidentiality request taking into account the observations of the applicant within teneight weeks from the date of receipt of the confidentiality request with respect to applications for authorisation and without undue delay in the case of supplementary data and information and notify the applicant and inform the Commission and the Member States, as appropriate, of its decision; and,
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39e
(a) the name and address of the applicant;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – point 1– subpoint b
(b) the names of authors of studies published, conducted by research and analysis firms or publicly available, studies supporting such requests; and
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39e – point 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, disclosure of names and addresses of natural persons involved in testing on vertebrate animals or in obtaining toxicological information shall be deemed to significantly harm the privacy and the integrity of those natural persons, constituting a threat to their independence and autonomous judgement, and shall not be made publicly available, unless there is an overriding public interest.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39g
The information systems operated by the Authority to store its data, including confidential and personal data shall be designed to a high levelin such a way as to provide guarantees that the highest standards of security appropriate to the security risks at stake will be attained, taking into account Articles 39 to 39f of this Regulation. Access shall be based at the minimum on a system requiring two factor authentication or providing an equivalent level of security. The system shall ensure that any access to it is fully auditable.;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 57a – point 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 8(c) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shallmay be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.;
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 61 – point 2
2. Not later than five years after the date referred to in Article [entry into force of the Regulation amending the GFL], and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall assess the Authority’s performance in relation to its objectives, mandate, tasks, procedures and location, in accordance with Commission guidelines. The evaluation shall address the possible need to modify the mandate of the Authority, and the financial implications of any such modification. Conversely, if the evaluation shows that the set objectives are being attained and the tasks assigned are being performed, it would be desirable to increase investment in order to secure more ambitious results.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 15 – point b
(b) and, the Authority shall assess the confidentiality request submitted by the applicant and shall be required to respond - and provide the necessary justification - within two months of receipt of the application.
2018/09/07
Committee: JURI