2454 final report.pdf - Agra CEAS Consulting

Evaluation of the Community Plant Health Regime: Final Report
DG SANCO Evaluation Framework Contract Lot 3 (Food Chain)
In terms of the effectiveness of the controls under the reduced frequency checks system, it is
noted from our interviews at Commission and MS level that in some cases the actual number of
controls increased with the introduction of reduced frequency checks. This may suggest that MS
were not previously prioritising sufficiently on risk.
In conclusion, MS that have applied the system (8 MS) are satisfied with the reduced-frequency
checks system, whereas the others (20 MS) do not consider the approach suitable, based on their
national specificities, and do not intend to use this option in the future. Controls should be
adjusted more rapidly to the level of risk. Certain product categories such as fresh produce and
some types of cut flowers may be less risky, reduced frequency can apply, and it may also be
possible to apply the system in trade of higher risk material if the pathways of introduction and
movement to final destination of the products are established (e.g. in the case of conifer wood
destined for the paper and pulp industry).
3.4.5 Functioning of the system of derogations
Directive 2000/29/EC includes provisions for derogations in certain cases and for certain types
of plants and plant products, provided that there is no risk of introducing or spreading HOs. The
derogations, which include exemptions from certain import and documentation requirements or
certain prohibitions, are generally limited and concern specific cases, including the following: for
trials and scientific purposes and for work on varietal selection of plants and plant products;
products produced and traded in a MS‘s immediate frontier zone with a third country; small
quantities intended for use by the owner or recipient for non-industrial and non-commercial
purposes; some goods in transit. The full list of the derogations is provided in Annex 1 (Theme
2).
Based on the results of the general survey, these possible derogations are widely used, although
over half of MS CAs and stakeholders consider the implementation of the derogations could
present a potential phytosanitary risk:
Table 3-11: MS using derogations from import requirements or prohibitions
Derogation
Commission Derogation Decisions (Directive
2000/29/EC Article 15(1) with alternative imports
requirements (including system approach))
Imports from TCs for which a specific status for
HOs is recognised at Community level
Scientific and breeding material (Directive
2008/61/EC)
Small quantities for non-commercial purposes
(including passenger transport)
Number of MS using this derogation (% of
the answers collected via the survey)
13 (50%)
12 (46%)
26 (100%)
22 (85%)
Source: FCEC based on general survey results
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 98