9 Amendments of Judith A. MERKIES related to 2009/0076(COD)
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) there are reasons for concern linked to the nature of the critical effects, in particular developmental neurotoxic or immunotoxic effects, which, in combination with the use patterns, amount to use that could still cause concern, e.g. high potential of risk to groundwater, even with very restrictive risk management measures;
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where the concerns of a Member State relating to human or animal health or the environment cannot be dispelled by the establishment of the risk mitigation measures referred to in paragraph 1, a Member State may refuse authorisation of a biocide in its territory if, due to specific environmental or use-related circumstances, it has substantiated reasons to assume that the biocide in question still poses an unacceptable risk to human or animal health or the environment.
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Subject to Community law, appropriate conditions may be imposed with respect to the requirements referred to in Article 15 and other risk mitigation measures deriving from specific conditions of use.
Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
If the concern felt by a Member State on grounds of human or animal health or the environment cannot be overcome by the risk mitigation measures referred to in the third paragraph, a Member State may refuse to authorise a biocidal product within its territory if that Member State, due to specific circumstances relating to the environment or use, has well-founded reasons to assume that the biocidal product in question still presents an unacceptable risk to human or animal health or the environment.
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Appropriate conditions may be laid down by Community law regarding compliance with the requirements referred to in Article 15 and other risk mitigation measures based on specific circumstances of use.
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) there are indications that the objectives of Article 4(1)(a)(iv) and (b)(i) and Article 7(2) and (3) of Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy may not be achieved.
Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 56 – paragraph 1 – point h
h) analytical methods if requested in accordance with Annex II or III to this Regulation which make it possible to detect a dangerous substance when discharged into the environment (including water resources and drinking waters) as well as to determine the direct exposure of humans.