In 2013, the comitology committees were therefore operating under the procedures set out in the Comitology Regulation, i.e. advisory (Article 4) and examination (Article 5), as well as under the RPS set out in Article 5a of the Comitology Decision.

As described in the 2012 report[2], all comitology procedures provided for in the ‘old’ Comitology Decision[3], with the exception of the regulatory procedure with scrutiny (RPS), were automatically adapted to the new comitology procedures provided for in the Comitology Regulation.

These are measures typical of the committee procedure, regulated by Council Decision 1999/468/EC, as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC, which oblige the Commission to submit draft implementing measures to a committee made up of Member State officials, in accordance with the five committee procedures: consultation, management, regulation, regulation with scrutiny and safeguard.

It is intended to supplement the Regulation with a set of implementing regulations laying down the procedures for its application. They will be adopted via a comitology procedure.

Calls on the Council and the Commission, in the case of grey areas where it may be unclear whether the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny, or another comitology procedure, is to apply, to apply the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny;

whereas the procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC were highly unsatisfactory and, with the exception of the procedures for the new regulatory procedure with scrutiny, still are, due inter alia to the way in which the comitology database has operated; whereas documents are often sent in bits and pieces and without a clear explanation of their status, and sometimes under misleading headings, e.g. draft implementing measures that have not yet been voted on in committee are sent under the heading ‘right to scrutiny’, when they should be sent under the heading ‘right to information’, which makes it unclear which deadlines ...[+++]apply,