Toelichting bij COM(2023)661 - Wijziging van Verordening 2016/2031 wat betreft meerjarige onderzoeksprogramma’s, kennisgevingen inzake de aanwezigheid van gereguleerde niet-quarantaineorganismen, tijdelijke afwijkingen van invoerverboden en bijzondere invoervoorschriften en de vaststelling van procedures voor het toekennen daarvan, tijdelijke invoervoorschriften voor planten, plantaardige producten en andere materialen met een hoog risico, de vaststelling van procedures voor het in een lijst opnemen van planten met een hoog risico, de inhoud van fytosanitaire certificaten, het gebruik van plantenpaspoorten en wat betreft bepaalde rapportageverplichtingen voor afgebakende gebieden en onderzoeken met betrekking tot plaagorganismen - Hoofdinhoud
Dit is een beperkte versie
U kijkt naar een beperkte versie van dit dossier in de EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2023)661 - Wijziging van Verordening 2016/2031 wat betreft meerjarige onderzoeksprogramma’s, kennisgevingen inzake de aanwezigheid van ... |
|---|---|
| bron | COM(2023)661  |
| datum | 17-10-2023 |
•Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
Legislation on protective measures against pests of plants or plant products has been established at Union level since the 1970s. That legislation has been of major importance for the protection of the agriculture, the landscape and the environment in the Union. The first evaluation and revision of the Union phytosanitary policy took place between 2008 and 2016 and resulted in the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament of the Council 1 (‘the Regulation’), which repealed and replaced Council Directive 2000/29/EC 2 . The Regulation is currently the basic legal framework for the Union plant health policy.
Article 50 and Article 79(6) of the Regulation prescribed that the Commission submits, by the end of 2021, to the European Parliament and the Council reports on the enforcement and effectiveness of the import measures, and the experience gained by operators from the extension of the plant passport to all plants for planting (‘the reports submitted in accordance with Article 50 and Article 79(6)’).
The Commission submitted those reports on 10 December 2021.
The report on import measures concluded that it could be considered that those import measures, as well the inclusion of the plant health controls within the scope of Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council 3 have contributed towards achieving the objectives to enhance the phytosanitary protection of the Union and to increase proactive action against pests in compliance with the rules of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) through risk-based and transparent approaches.
The report on the extension of the plant passport system to all plants for planting concluded that that extension has contributed towards achieving the objectives of the Regulation. More specifically it contributed to increased effectiveness of the protection against quarantine pests, improved preparedness for the identification of new plant pests of Union concern, improved understanding and awareness on the part of relevant stakeholders concerning the plant health importance, and increased possibility to identify pests.
The reports identified areas for further discussion to enhance the effectiveness and practical implementation of the rules for plant health but also for official controls. Those discussions took place in 2022 with the Member States’ Chief Plant Health Officers, as well as with Union associations relevant to plant health. They led to the conclusion that certain improvements of the system were needed, which were only possible by amending the Regulation. Those improvements refer to the need for (i) declarations on the phytosanitary certificate for regulated non-quarantine pests (RNQPs), (ii) reporting the non-compliances with the RNQP rules in the electronic notification notification system (Information Management System for Official Controls – IMSOC), (iii) procedural rules for the submission and examination of non-EU countries’ requests for temporary derogations from import prohibitions, (iv) procedures for identifying and listing of high-risk plants and (v) rationalising the obligation to attach a plant passport to certain plants.
Further improvements were identified through elements deriving from the experience gained by the Commission during the first 5 years of the application of the Regulation, with regard to (i) measures against pests qualifying as quarantine pests but not yet fully assessed, (ii) the need for autonomous acts for adopting temporary derogations from import prohibitions, and special import requirements, (iii) the need for setting temporary import requirements for the introduction into the Union of palnts, plant products or other objects which have been removed from the list of high risk plants but for which the phytosanitary risk has not been fully assesed, (iv) setting out requirements for third countries’ equivalence, and (v) the alternative official attestations.
Finally, certain reporting elements were identified as falling under the scope of the Commission’s commitment to rationalise the reporting obligations of Member States and professional operators on the basis of its Communication on ‘Long-term competitiveness of the EU: looking beyond 2030’ 4 .
Inhoudsopgave
As regards the rationalisiation of reporting obligations, the Commission has taken a horizontal initiative. In its Communication on ‘Long-term competitiveness of the EU: looking beyond 2030’, it stressed the importance of a regulatory system that ensures that objectives are reached at minimum costs. It has committed therefore to a fresh push to rationalise and simplify reporting requirements, with the ultimate aim to reduce such burdens by 25%, without undermining the related policy objectives.
Its overall objectives are summarised as follows:
(a)to improve legal certainty and clarity for competent authorities and professional operators, both in the Union and in third countries;
(b)to increase transparency, flexibility and consistency of the Union regulatory procedures;
(c)to contribute through digitalisation, to the rationalisation of reporting obligations and the administrative tasks linked to them.
Reporting requirements play a key role in ensuring correct enforcement and proper monitoring of legislation. Their costs are overall largely offset by the benefit they bring, in particular in monitoring and ensuring compliance with key policy measures. Reporting requirements can however also impose disproportionate burden on stakeholders, particularly affecting SMEs and micro-companies. Their cumulation over time can result in redundant, duplicating or obsolete obligations, inefficient frequency and timing, or inadequate methods of collection.
The proposal thus aims also at rationalising reporting obligations by a combination of measures:
–removal of reports which are not necessary any longer;
–digitalisation of transmission of information;
–reduction of frequency of reporting requirements
The reporting requirements concern public authorities and, in certain cases, indirectly, professional operators. According to the proposed amendments, certain reporting obligations are removed, while others are digitalised or are requested with reduced frequency.
•Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area
The proposal introduces amendments that concern the implementation of provisions which constitue the Union’s plant health policy. They do not change the Union’s plant health policy itself. Therefore, the proposed amendments are highly consistent with the existing plant health policy of the Union, and aim at contributing to the improvement of its application.
The proposals on reporting obligations are part of a first package of Commission initatives to rationalise reporting requirements. This is a step in a continuous process looking comprehensively at existing reporting requirements, with a view to assess their continued relevance and to make them more efficient.
The proposal will only positively affect the achievement of objectives in the policy area, as it will increase transparency and decrease administrative burden for the competent authorities, the professional operators and the Commission.
•Consistency with other Union policies
The consistency of the Regulation with other Union policies related to agriculture, and the environment, such as biodiversity and climate change, is ensured by its existing provisions and their implementation. Since the proposed technical amendments do not change the policy direction of the Regulation, the consistency with those policies remains unchanged.
The Commission ensures that its legislation is fit for purpose and targeted to the needs of stakeholders. It minimizes administrative burdens, while achieving its objectives under the Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT). The proposed amendments concerning the rationalisation of reporting obligations, by reducing the complexity of reporting burdens arising from the Union legal framework.
•Legal basis
The proposal amends the technical implementation of rules necessary for the pursuit of the objectives of the common agricultural policy, in the sector of production and marketing of plants, plant products and other objects in the Union.
In this respect, Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which provides the legal basis for adopting provisions necessary for the pursuit of the objectives of the common agricultural policy, has been selected.
•Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
According to Article 4(2), point (d), of the TFEU a shared competence between the Union and Member States applies in the area of agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources.
Since the adoption of Directive 2000/29/EC and also under the Regulation, all fields of plant health have been regulated at Union level to a very large extent. Those rules have proven to be a major contributor to the protection of the Union territory from pests and diseases. Similarly, the objectives of the proposed amendments can be better achieved by exclusively regulating the issues concerned at Union level.
As regards the reporting obligations, the requirements concerned are already established by the Union law. Similarly, their rationalisation should be done at Union level.
•Proportionality
The measures proposed are limited to actions that need to be taken at Union level in order to be effective and efficient. To achieve the effectiveness and efficiency of these actions, the amendment of the Regulation is considered most appropriate, considering that a key element of the proposal is to reinforce the implementation of harmonised measures for Member States. The uniform requirements through the Regulation are the only way to ensure a high level of quality for those applying the Regulation, the functioning of internal market and a level playing field for the operators as well as sustainable agricultural and food production.
The rationalisation of reporting requirements simplifies the legal framework by introducing minimum changes to existing requirements that do not affect the substance of the wider policy objective. The proposal is therefore limited to those changes that are necessary to ensure efficient reporting without changing any of the substantive elements of the legislation concerned.
•Choice of the instrument
The proposal takes the form of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council. Other means would not be appropriate because the proposal amends basic provisions of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council for which the Commission does not have the empowerment to achieve through implementing acts.
•Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
The reports submitted in accordance with Article 50 and Article 79(6) of the Regulation were supported by a stakeholder consultation which included, where necessary, gathering of the available data concerning imports.
As regards the reporting obligations, an ex-post evaluation or fitness check is not applicable.
•Stakeholder consultations
For the preparation of the reports submitted in accordance with Article 50 and Article 79 of the Regulation, an extensive consultation took place addressing all relevant stakeholders. At a first stage the Expert Group on Plant Health, consisting of Member States’ competent authorities for plant health, and for the certification of plant and forest propagating material, the European Parliament, and the relevant professional associations at Union level, were invited to participate in the process of developing fit-for-purpose questionnaires. A total of 5 detailed questionnaires were developed regarding import procedures, import prohibitions, phytosanitary certificates for imports, official controls, and plant passports, comprising a total of 234 questions and covering the main changes introduced with the Regulation.
The competent authorities of the Union and the professional associations at Union level, were invited to participate in the consultation process by a dedicated invitation, while the national associations and individual Union operators were informed by those competent authorities and professional associations at Union level about the possibility to participate in the consultation through an open-access link. Due to the highly technical nature of the changes very few questions were addressed to the public which was approached through social media.
A total of 563 responses were received, a detailed analysis of which was presented in the 5 technical reports 5 produced by the Commission’s DG SANTE and the Joint Research Centre (JRC).
As regards import related provisions, Member States’ views were positive on provisions and proposals that provided clarity in plant health controls and further enhanced protection of the Union against pests. Union- and Member State- level associations considered certain provisions, such as the temporary prohibitions of high-risk plants, to have caused difficulties in already established trade, thus requested more legal clarity, transparency. The associations requested more legal clarity and transparency also for other procedures that can positively contribute to trade, such as the derogations from permanent prohibitions. This is being addressed with the current proposal. As regards plant passports, stakeholders considered that attaching them to each trade unit poses additional administrative burden and associated costs that outweigh their perceived additional benefits. This is also addressed in this proposal.
•Collection and use of expertise
Besides the proposed amendments deriving from the reports submitted in accordance with Article 50 and Article 79(6) of the Regulation the proposal includes amendments deriving from the experience gained by the Commission during the first 5 years of application of the Regulation. While no stakeholder consultation was carried out for these proposals, the specific proposed amendments refer to procedures that were considered problematic in their implementation and they aim at providing legal clarity and certainty for the competent authorities, the operators and the third countries.
As regards the reporting obligations, these proposals have been identified following a process of internal scrutiny of existing reporting obligations and based on the experience from the application of the related legislation. Since this is a step in the process of continuous assessment of reporting requirements arising from Union legislation, the scrutiny of such burdens and of their impact on stakeholders will continue.
•Impact assessment
According to the analysis carried out by the Commission, the proposed amendments do not bare significant economic, environmental, or social impacts. The Commission hence decided not to carry out an impact assessment for the targeted technical amendments included in the proposal.
The proposal is partly the result of the reports submitted by the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council pursuant to Articles 50 and 79 of Regulation 2016/2031. It is also based on experience gained from the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031. For the preparation of the report an extensive consultation took place with all relevant stakeholders. Following the submission of those reports to the European Parliament and the Council on 10 December 2021, areas which merited further discussion were identified. Therefore, discussions took place in 2022 with the Chief Plant Health Officers and EU associations relevant to plant health and plant and forest reproductive material, which led to the conclusion that certain improvements were needed and were only possible by amending the Regulation. As regards the reporting obligations, the proposed amendments concern limited and targeted changes of the legislation in view of rationalising the reporting requirements. They are based on experience from implementing the respective legislation. Those amendments do not have significant impacts on the policy, but only ensure a more efficient and effective implementation. Their targeted nature and the lack of relevant policy options make an impact assessment not necessary.
Overall, any impacts of the proposed amendments are expected to be minimal and positive both for the competent authorities and the professional operators. They will reduce administrative burden, increase legal clarity and facilitate the trade of the respective commodities.
•Regulatory fitness and simplification
The proposal introduces targeted provisions that improve an already functioning system through a simpler, clearer and less burdensome regulatory regime for EU operators and competent authorities and through increased transparency for third countries.
As regards the reporting obligations, this proposal aims to simplify legislation and cut burdens for stakeholders, in particular administrative authorities. It aims at minimizing compliance costs by reducing the administrative burden and workload of national authorities through removal of certain reporting obligations. As regards the removal of the obligation for annual reporting of the locations of the demarcated areas, that information can be retrieved from the Commission information system (EUROPHYT) on reporting of outbreaks.
The proposal also aims at rationalising the reporting obligation regarding the multi-annual survey programmes through extending the current frequency of performing those surveys from 5-7 years to 10 years. This will provide national authorities with additional time to carry out the respective surveys. Finally, the proposal aims at digitalising certain reporting obligations, taking into account the information systems developed and currently applicable for the purposes of Regulation (EU) 2017/625 as well as an IT system for plant health surveys. Such digitalisation would make the application of the respective reporting provisions more suitable to the digital environment.
•Fundamental rights
The proposed amendments do not have any effect on the fundamental rights protected by the Chapter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
There are no budgetary implications.
•Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
Reporting arrangements are rationalised. No amendment is introduced concerning implementation plans and monitoring obligations. A 6-month transition period will be granted to the third countries as regards the obligation to indicate on the additional declaration of the phytosanitary certificate the measures applied by them, concerning the RNQPs rules.
•Explanatory documents (for Directives)
•Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal
(i)Clarification concerning the measures against pests which are provisionally qualifying as quarantine pests but have not been fully assessed yet.
Article 30 of the Regulation empowers the Commission to adopt, through implementing acts, temporary measures concerning the risk of pests which are not yet fully assessed and not yet regulated as Union quarantine pests. It offers the possibility to treat those pests as listed Union quarantine pests. That provision does not clearly state whether those measures also cover special import requirements for plants and other commodities.
Therefore, and for reasons of enhanced clarity, the proposal amends Article 30(1) of the Regulation to specify that the temporary measures to be adopted may cover both the internal movement of plants and other commodities within the Union and their imports into the Union.
(ii)Amendment of the requirements regarding the declarations on the phytosanitary certificate for regulated non-quarantine pests (RNQPs)
Article 71(1) of the Regulation requires that the third country certifies the absence of Union quarantine pests and the absence of (or compliance with the relevant tolerance levels for) regulated non-quarantine pests (RNQPs) on the respective plants and commodities. This is done by a standard statement on the phytosanitary certificate regarding the compliance of the consignment with the import rules for quarantine pests as well as for RNQPs.
In line with the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) No 12, Article 71(2) of the Regulation requires that, where several options are possible under the applicable special import requirements, the third country declares on the phytosanitary certificate which option it applied, in order to ensure freedom from quarantine pests. However, this provision applies only to quarantine pests and not RNQPs.
The proposal therefore amends Article 71(2) of the Regulation, in order for the third countries to declare on the phytosanitary certificate how compliance with the RNQP rules has been ensured, if different options are available in the Union legislation. This amendment would also be in line with the relevant International Standard.
(iii)The reporting of non-compliances with the RNQP rules in the electronic notification system (Information Management System for Official Controls – IMSOC).
Under the Regulation there is an obligation to report to IMSOC non-compliances with the rules on Union quarantine pests (e.g. presence of Union quarantine pests on imported plants). That obligation does not exist in the Regulation for the rules on RNQPs.
The absence of this requirement for RNQPs has led to non-harmonised, non-digitalised approaches among Member States regarding the means of reporting to the Union and the third country about non-compliances with the rules on RNQPs.
The proposal therefore amends Articles 37 and 104 of the Regulation to ensure that non-compliances with the rules on RNQPs and the follow-up actions are notified in a harmonised way within the Union. This will also ensure consistency with the respective rules on quarantine pests and will overall increase the level of the EU phytosanitary protection.
(iv)The introduction of an empowerment for a Commission act to adopt with autonomous acts, temporary derogations from import prohibitions and special import requirements and temporary special import requirements for commodities that have been removed from the list of high-risk plants, plant products and other objects but for which the pest risk has not been fully assessed. .
Article 40 of the Regulation on prohibitions of imports of plants, plant products or other objects from third countries, sets out the obligation for the Commission to establish a single list containing those prohibitions. Those prohibitions are related to one or more specific quarantine pests, they do not have an expiration date, and they usually apply to all or many third countries.
However, according to SPS rules, a third country should be allowed to request a derogation from those import prohibitions if it considers that it has a system in place that could guarantee the level of phytosanitary protection required by the Union. For such cases there is a need to grant temporary derogations from the relevant prohibitions.
Similarly to the case of derogating from the import prohibitions, there are cases where the need arises to grant temporary derogations from the special and equivalent requirements described under the list of Article 41(2). As an example, a third country might request that the Union accepts alternative measures that it considers efficient to reduce the risk to an acceptable level the risk of introducing into the Union of plants, plant products or other objects with pests.. The proposal introduces the possibility to adopt a derogation from the special requirements of Article 41(2) based on a provisional assessment.
Such temporary derogations, usually concern one third country, or a part of it. They should be granted, only if very detailed special import requirements are complied with. Those requirements could cover all steps from production to export to the Union, such as production methods, treatments and other methods to mitigate the risk of the relevant pests, as well as visual inspections, sampling, testing and other phytosanitary measures for achieving the level of protection required by the Union. Those derogations should be provided for in autonomous acts for a temporary period of time to allow for a full assessment of the effectiveness of the measures and for a flexible modification of the conditions or the derogation itself, if so needed. Once the temporarymeasures have been estabilised and audited, and a full assessment becomes available, the temporary status of the derogation can be dropped. As regards commodities suject to derogations from the import prohibitions, at that point the respective commodity from the third country concerned will be as a result included in the list of special import requirements adopted under Article 41(2) of the Regulation. Equally, if in the period of application of a temporary derogation it becomes evident that the risk is not reduced to an acceptable level, that derogation will be immediately dropped and the respective commodity from the third country concerned will be moved in the list of prohibited commodities under Article 40 of the Regulation.
Besides the derogations from import prohibitions and special import requirements, experience with the removal of commodities from the high-rik plants, plant products and other objects has shown that there are cases where while the overall risk of the commodity has been assessed, certain identified pests have not been assessed. Therefore, a need arises to adopt temporary special import requirements in order to allow for those pests risks to be fully assessed. Once that risk has been fully addressed, respective commodity from the third country concernconcerned will be included in the list adopted under rticle 41(2) of the Regulation or be granted equivalence.
To bring more clarity and transparency to the process of granting temporary derogations from import prohibitions and special import requirements, and to the process of imposing special import requirements and temporary special import requirements for commodities that have been removed from the list of high-risk plants, as well as for plant products and other objects for which the pest risk has not been fully assessed, the proposal introduces a new Article 42a in the Regulation, providing for a separate empowerment for the Commission to adopt autonomous implementing acts, addressing those temporary derogations from of the established prohibitions, or special import requirements.
(v)The introduction of an empowerment for a Commission act to adopt procedural rules for the submission and examination of third countries’ requests for temporary derogations from import prohibitions or from import requirements.
Article 40 of the Regulation introduces the rules concerning prohibitions of imports for certain plants of certain origins, while Article 41 introduces the rules concerning import and movement requirements for certain plants of certain origin. As explained regarding the previous proposed amendment, upon request from a third country, the Commission grants in certain cases temporary derogations to third countries from those prohibitions, to allow the import of some of their plants or other commodities or from import and movement requirements, to allow the import and further movement into the Union [of some of their plants or other commodities.
However, no standardised procedures for assessing those third countries’ requests exist. Currently, when receiving a request for such a temporary derogation from a third country, the procedure for granting the derogation is based on an ad-hoc request for information and an ad-hoc decision to involve or not the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in that assessment. A standardised procedure would provide rules for the decision-making process and consequently the currently lacking transparency.
The proposal therefore introduces in the new Article 42a of the Regulation an empowerment for the Commission to adopt rules on a standardised procedure on how to submit and examine a request for granting temporary derogations from the import prohibitions or import requirements. Those rules could include instructions on the submission of the respective dossiers and the elements for the assessment.
(vi)The introduction of an empowerment for a Delegated act to adopt procedures for identifying and listing of high-risk plants.
According to Article 42 of the Regulation, the provisional listing of the plants as high-risk plants should be based on a preliminary assessment. However, no further details are set out on how to carry out this assessment. To date, there has been only one listing of several plant species as high-risk plants with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 6 . Member States experts took part in the process of drawing up the list of high-risk plants by submiting proposals which were thoroughly assessed and that assessment took into consideration scientific and technical evidence.
However, the procedure has been characterised by several actors as not transparent enough, especially in view of the fact that this process led to a provisional prohibition of an already existing trade.
Therefore, and for reasons of transparency, that procedure and the elements needed for the assessment should be described. In this respect, the proposal amends Article 42 of the Regulation by introducing an empowerment to allow the Commission to adopt a delegated act describing the procedure for identifying and listing those high-risk plants, and the specific elements needed to carry out the assessment.
(vii)The clarification of the legal basis for setting out requirements for third countries’ equivalence, in order to refer not only to internal movement requirements but also to existing import requirements, in line with the relevant International Standard.
In accordance with Article 44 of the Regulation, the Commission is empowered, through implementing acts, to set out equivalent requirements for third countries’ systems, when such countries provide a level of phytosanitary protection which is equivalent to the special requirements applicable to the movement of plants and other goods within the Union territory. In such cases, the third country’s phytosanitary system is assessed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), followed by a Union decision to consider the respective requirements as equivalent or not.
The possibility to set out equivalent requirements for third countries’ systems only when requirements for internal movement of plants, plant products or other objects are in place is restrictive, because it does not cover the cases where no such requirements for movement within the Union exist, as the respective pest is not known to be present in the Union territory, nevertheless, special import requirements are in place. For this reason, and according to the proposed amendment, the third country concerned will be required to ensure a level of phytosanitary protection which is equivalent not only to the requirements for internal movement of the respective plants and commodities, but also to the special import requirements from other third countries for the same plants and other commodities, if such special import requirements are in place.
The proposal therefore amends Article 44(1) of the Regulation to expand the scope of such requirements.
(viii)The introduction of an empowerment for a Commission act, to rationalise the obligation to attach a plant passport to certain plants.
Article 88 of the Regulation sets out an obligation of attaching the plant passport to all respective plants, plant products or other objects, without allowing for any exception. However, in certain cases, such as that of wood logs or grass sods (turf), the nature of certain commodities, or the speed of the their trade between professional operators, is such that compliance with that obligation is rendered impractical, if not impossible.
The proposal therefore amends Article 88 of the Regulation by introducing an empowerment for the Commission to list specific commodities to be exempted from the obligation to attach the plant passport on them, and to determine the modalities for the application of such an exemption.
(ix)The alignment of the possibility to accept alternative official attestations issued by third countries with the international state of play.
According to Article 99 of the Regulation, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts setting out the elements to be contained in official attestations issued by third countries for specific imported plants, plant products and other objects, other than wood packaging material, which are required by the applicable international standards. However, no international standards so far exist for such attestations. This is because such official attestations usually refer to very specific types of commodities and countries of origin, while the international standards usually are of a more general nature. This restricted possibility to accept official attestations, only when they are drawn up in accordance with relevant international standards, also affects Commission Implementing Decisions applicable since many years ago.
The proposal therefore amends Article 99 of the Regulation to broaden the requirement concerning ‘the applicable international standards’, by including other criteria as an alternative to the existence of international standards, and to empower the Commission to adopt delegated acts setting out the elements of those attestations without the need for international standards to be adopted.
(x)Rationalisation of reporting obligations
The proposal amends the relevant Articles of the Regulation regarding the following reporting obligations:
(a)removal of annual reporting of the number and locations of the demarcated areas established, the pests concerned, and the respective measures taken during the preceding calendar year (Article 18);
(b)rationalisation of reporting by decreasing its frequency and prolonging the duration of the multiannual survey programmes (i.e., period during which Member States have to survey all quarantine pests) from 5-7 years to 10 years (Article 23).
(c)digitalisation of the following reporting measures:
(i)ad-hoc reporting of demarcated areas (Article 18);
(ii)annual reporting of results of surveys for quarantine pests (Article 22);
(iii)reporting of the multiannual survey programmes (Article 23);
(iv)annual reporting of results of surveys for priority pests (Article 24);
(v)annual reporting of results of surveys for protected-zone quarantine pests (Article 34);
This initiative also includes the establishment of an electronic system for the submission of reports (Article 103).
(xi)Relevant amendments in other Union acts and final provisions
Not applicable.