Ref. Ares(2019)6338798 - 14/10/2019
COMMISSION EUROPÉENNE
SECRÉTARIAT GÉNÉRAL
Direction G
SG-G-1
Affaires horizontales et GRI (Groupe des Relations Interinstitutionnelles)
Bruxelles, le 7 juin 2018
SI(2018) 320
GRI du 8 juin 2018
point 3.1.
NOTE À L'ATTENTION DE MMES MM. LES MEMBRES DU GRI
Objet:
Proposition de règlement établissant les règles relatives à la mise sur le
marché des fertilisants porteurs du marquage CE et modifiant les
règlements (CE) n° 1069/2009 et (CE) n° 1107/2009 – 2016/0084 COD
(17.03.16) – rapport TURCANU
Mmes et MM. les membres du GRI trouveront en annexe une fiche préparée par la
DG GROW sous l'autorité du cabinet de Mme BIENKOWSKA et en accord avec le
cabinet de M. KATAINEN.
Annexe 1
SI(2018) 320
GRI MEETING OF 8 JUNE 2018
NOTE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE GRI
Subject:
Proposal for a Regulation on the making available on the
market of CE marked fertilising products and amending
Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009
The fiche is proposed to prepare the Commission's position in
view of the forthcoming political trilogues and technical
tripartite meetings
Ref.:
COM(2016) 157; 2016/0084(COD)
Procedure:
Ordinary legislative procedure
Council:
Working Party on Technical Harmonisation; COREPER I
Rapporteur(s):
Mihai ŢURCANU (EPP/RO), Elisabetta GARDINI (EPP/IT),
Jan HUITEMA (ALDE/NL)
Lead parliamentary committee:
Internal Market and Consumer Protection
(IMCO)
Associated parliamentary committees:
ENVI (contaminant limits including
cadmium)
AGRI
Former GRI fiches: SP(2017) 528, SI(2018) 15/2, SI(2018) 169/2, SI(2018) 248
PURPOSE OF THIS FICHE
The purpose of this fiche is to prepare the Commission's position in view of the
third political trilogue foreseen on 19 June and forthcoming technical tripartite
meetings.
At this stage, the Commission should (i) while defending its proposal on
cadmium limit values in phosphate fertilisers, seek to facilitate a compromise
between the two co-legislators on that issue which preserves the objectives of
the Commission’s proposal along the lines set out in this note; (ii) seek to
facilitate a compromise on contaminants other than cadmium which is as close
as possible to the Commission’s proposal; and (iii) defend its original proposal
and thus oppose the European Parliament proposal to include biodegradable
mulch films in the scope of the Fertilising Products Regulation;
It is suggested to the GRI to endorse the line as suggested in the present fiche.
1.
BACKGROUND
Please see the previous GRI fiches for this file with reference
i)
SP(2017) 528, prepared in view of the EP plenary debate and vote on
24 October 2017;
ii)
SI(2018) 15/2, prepared in view of the first political trilogue on
25 January 2018;
iii)
SI(2018) 169/2, prepared in view of the second political trilogue on
11 April 2018.
iv)
SI(2018) 248, prepared in order to prepare the Commission's position in
view of the forthcoming political trilogues and technical tripartite meetings.
2
SI(2018) 320
2.
STATE OF PLAY OF TRILOGUE NEGOTIATIONS
Between the endorsement of the latest GRI fiche and the time of preparation of the
current one, four technical tripartite meetings have taken place, which resulted in
partial agreements between the co-legislators on all the operative provisions,
Annex I which sets out the requirements applying to the final products, and
delegation of powers. The result is indicated in the 4-column document attached to
this fiche. It is proposed that the Commission should accept all the compromises
highlighted in green in the 4-column document.
3.
STATE OF PLAY IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
At the time of drafting this fiche, internal discussions are on-going in the European
Parliament on a possible compromise deal with the Council for the trilogue
meeting scheduled for 19 June on the entire Regulation, including the limit values
for cadmium in phosphate fertilisers. It is very unlikely that such a compromise
deal – if obtained – would contain a cadmium limit deviating from the Council’s
position, since the Bulgarian Presidency has not made any attempts to get a
mandate for a position closer to that of the European Parliament on that issue.
4.
STATE OF PLAY IN THE COUNCIL
A Council Working Party meeting at attaché level was held on 4 June to discuss
possible compromises on a number of technical points, biodegradable mulch films,
and delegated acts. On the inclusion of biodegradable mulch films, some Member
States objected (CZ, NL, ES, DE, BE, FR, SK, IE), some indicated flexibility (FI,
PL, EL, RO, MT), and only three indicated explicit support (IT, UK, DK). On
delegated acts, the discussion was very inconclusive, and delegations were asked to
react in written by 8 June. Limit values for cadmium in phosphate fertilisers were
not on the agenda of the meeting, but many Member States nevertheless took the
floor to reiterate their positions on that issue.
5.
CADMIUM LIMIT VALUES IN PHOSPHATE FERTILISERS
The latest political trilogue of 19 April 2018 reaffirmed the important divergences
between the positions of the co-legislators on cadmium limit values for phosphate
fertilisers: Whereas the Parliament is closely aligned with the Commission's
proposal to progressively reduce cadmium limits from 60-40-20 ppm, the Council
has proposed a single limit value of 60 ppm without further reductions.
The co-legislators continue to show very little flexibility on the matter, and the
institution showing the least flexibility is the Council, which has the position
farthest from the Commission. There exists therefore a tangible risk that the file
will reach stalemate. This would furthermore imply that harmonised phosphate
fertilisers would be allowed to continue moving freely on the single market subject
to current EU rules, which means allowing those fertilisers to contain unlimited
amounts of cadmium despite the on-going cadmium accumulation in European
agricultural soils.
In order to avoid being overtaken by events, the Commission should therefore –
while defending the justifications of its own proposal, which remain valid and have
been reinforced by new scientific evidence – remain true to its role as facilitator in
the trilogue negotiations and aim at facilitating a constructive dialogue between the
European Parliament and the Council in order to achieve a compromise which is as
close as possible to the Commission’s own position, and which at the very least
contains a legally binding limit value, with flexibility on the application time, that
3
SI(2018) 320
can be expected to meaningfully reduce the current pace of cadmium pollution of
European soils by phosphate fertilisers. Several elements could be explored in
order to satisfy both sides. Examples to be considered, jointly or in isolation, are
the following:
In order to address the concerns related to costs
o Flexibility as regards the timing of the application of 60, 40 and 20
mg Cd limit value could be considered to allow the industry to
adapt.
o The application of 20 mg Cd limit value could be conditioned by a
mandatory feasibility reporting by the Commission, and an
obligation for the Commission to postpone the reduction if
appropriate for reasons of feasibility.
o The intention at Union level to support decadmiation technologies
and innovation could be announced in a recital or in a joint
Declaration or Commission declaration.
In order to address the concerns related to protection of health and the
environment
o the legal limit value could be complemented by a labelling threshold
at
e.g. 20 ppm;
o Member States which on the date of application of the initial
harmonised limit already apply a cadmium limit on
non-CE marked phosphate fertilisers which is below the harmonised limit could be
allowed to apply those limits to
CE marked phosphate fertilisers
until the harmonised limits are equal or lower (as already proposed
by the European Parliament).
6.
LIMIT VALUES FOR CONTAMINANTS OTHER THAN CADMIUM
The Commission’s proposed limit values other than for cadmium in phosphate
fertilisers are largely based on existing limit values in Member States. Those, in
turn, reflect best industrial practice, in combination with the general objective of
keeping soil contamination with toxic substances to a minimum. The limit values
are thus generally
not based on any proven excessive exposure from fertilisers to
man or the environment (as opposed to cadmium from phosphate fertilisers, where
an exposure near or above tolerable limits has been established).
The European Parliament and the Council propose to make a number of those limit
values for heavy metals (e.g. Arsenic, Copper, Zinc, Mercury, Lead) more
stringent, and to add some new. While some of the proposed stricter limit values
for heavy metals in fertilizers might fall within the range of some national limit
values already in place today, the amendments are not however supported by either
economic impact assessments or scientific evidence.
Furthermore, the main representatives of the European industries for both
conventional and organic fertilisers have adopted a joint statement expressing their
concerns that this would “pose significant obstacles to nutrient recycling or to the
use of certain natural feedstocks as raw materials”. If true (which can only be
verified if a new impact assessment is performed), and in the absence of scientific
evidence for a need for lower limits than those proposed by the Commission, that
would highly contradict not only the objectives of the Circular Economy but also
that of this Regulation which aims at opening the internal market to innovative
organic and waste-based fertilisers and assuring a level playing field with the
traditional ones.
4
SI(2018) 320
The Commission should therefore seek to facilitate a compromise
which contains contaminant limits as close as possible to those
proposed by the Commission based on its impact assessment and
expert consultations, since those limit values support the aim to reduce
the contamination of agricultural soils while opening the single market
for recovered nutrients. The Commission should also insist on a
delegation of powers which will allow the Commission to make the limit
values more stringent at a later stage, if justified by technical progress or
new scientific evidence and supported by an impact assessment.
7.
PLASTIC MULCHES
The European Parliament proposes to allow biodegradable plastic mulches to be
CE marked. The minimum biodegradability performance proposed by the
Parliament is conversion into carbon dioxide of 90% of the organic carbon within
maximum 24 months. A number of Member States are opposed to the Parliament’s
amendment because they do not believe that plastic mulches (biodegradable or not)
should belong to the category of fertilising products (FR, NL, CZ, ES, BE), and
only Italy, Denmark and the United Kingdom have expressed support for it.
Conventional plastic mulches are currently extensively used in crop production as a
soil improver, to protect the soil's structure, reduce loss of humidity, and accelerate
the vegetation status of crops. They also help supressing weed growth, which
allows farmers to reduce the use of chemical herbicides in line with the objective of
using herbicides and other pesticides more sustainably. Most plastic mulches on the
market today would however
not comply with the biodegradability criteria
proposed by the European Parliament. Consequently, non-biodegradable plastic
mulches currently contribute quite significantly to plastic leakage and accumulation
in the environment, since it is often not recycled.
The Commission’s proposal does not include biodegradable (or other) plastic
mulches in the portfolio of products eligible for CE marking under the Fertilising
Products Regulation. The decision was based on a precautionary approach and in
line with the Circular Economy Action plan that envisaged work on the Plastics
Strategy to develop a coherent approach on plastics biodegradability. At the time of
adoption of the Commission’s proposal, the Plastics Strategy had not yet been
adopted, and there was not yet any standard recognised at EU level which could
guarantee that compliant plastic mulches are biodegradable enough to prevent
accumulation of plastics in the environment, in particular the aquatic environment.
In its recently adopted Plastics Strategy Communication, the Commission
recalls that the increasing market shares of plastics with biodegradable
properties, which have been designed in response to the high level of plastic
leakage into our environment, bring new opportunities as well as risks. The
Commission commits in the communication to establishing a clear
regulatory framework for biodegradable plastics. It commits to proposing
harmonised rules for defining biodegradable plastics, to developing
lifecycle assessment to identify the conditions under which the use of
biodegradable plastics is beneficial, and to considering measures for
stimulating innovation and drive market developments in the right direction
after identification of applications with clear environmental benefits.
5
SI(2018) 320
Since the Commission adopted its Fertilising Products Regulation proposal,
the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) has adopted the
European standard EN 2018:17033 (ratified on 13 November 2017 and
made available on 24 January 2018) on “Plastic- Biodegradable mulch
films for use in agriculture and horticulture”, which specifies the
requirements for biodegradable plastic films to be used for mulch
applications in agriculture and horticulture, which can serve to demonstrate
biodegradability of plastics mulches. The CEN standard specification
considers a polymer to be completely biodegradable if at least 90%
(absolute or relative to cellulose) of the organic carbon present in the
polymer is converted to carbon dioxide within a period of maximum 2 years
in lab conditions. The remaining 10% is metabolised in the body of
microorganisms, so that actually 100% of the biodegradable plastic is
transformed in carbon dioxide, water and biomass.
Several recent scientific studies including two financed by EU funds
overseen by DG RTD, performing experiments both in laboratory
conditions, in some real-life soil conditions, and in conditions close to the
natural aquatic environment have demonstrated the actual biodegradability
performance of certain, mainly bio-based, polymers used as plastic
mulches, with transformation of 90% of their carbon into carbon dioxide.
While the tests in natural aquatic environment show that some
biodegradation processes continue in some aquatic environments, the
scientific studies have concluded that “the biodegradation is still difficult to
predict in the marine environment” and that “a solid testing scheme for the
biodegradation of plastics in the marine environment does not exist”. The
standard itself does not provide specific criteria for marine biodegradability.
According to the experiments performed, depending on natural conditions
and the abundance of microorganisms in the different tested ecosystems, the
time for complete biodegradation may vary between 2 and 24 months. The
biodegradation process is similar to that of naturally occurring substances,
such as cellulose. Furthermore, due to the nature of the polymers and the
respective biodegradation process they follow, the remaining 10% is
metabolised in the body of microorganisms, so that actually 100% of the
biodegradable plastic is transformed in carbon dioxide, water and biomass.
If full biodegradation is achieved in sufficient timespans it could address
concern of leaving microplastics in the soil environment. However, this
standard does not reflect "real-life natural environmental conditions",
because the ideal conditions (constant 25°C over 24 months) that the mulch
is tested against do not exist across the EU's geographical areas.
Furthermore, this standard does not sufficiently address concerns on other
adverse impacts on the environment, e.g. earthworms, as a result of plastic
mulch use in soil as it absorbs contaminants.
The standard EN 2018:17033 has been recognised by France, which has just
announced a national ban on non-biodegradable fragmentable plastic mulches, and
stated that the mulches complying with the standard are considered as
biodegradable and hence allowed on the French market.
By opening the single market for such biodegradable plastic mulches, the
Fertilising Products Regulation would boost investment in biodegradable
6
SI(2018) 320
mulches, and therefore promote the substitution of the conventional, non-
biodegradable plastic mulches which currently have some 95 % of the market
(and which none of the Institutions have suggested to include in the scope of the
Regulation). However inclusion of plastic mulches in the Regulation should be
done only after the scientific and technical progress allows the development of
criteria across the Union, including the marine environment. This would be
consistent with the Commission’s Plastics Strategy commitment to proposing
harmonised rules for defining biodegradable plastics and to stimulating
innovation and drive market developments in the right direction after
identification of applications with clear environmental benefits It would also
imply the Commission taking leadership of the development of biodegradability
requirements for plastic mulches, rather than merely observing various
developments in individual Member States which lead to fragmentation of the
internal market, alteration of the playing field between national farmers, and
different levels of environmental protection in different Member States.
The Commission should therefore defend its original proposal and oppose the
European Parliament proposal to include biodegradable mulch in the scope of the
Regulation.
8.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION
It is suggested that the GRI recommends to the Commission to adopt the position
reflected in this fiche, namely (i) on cadmium limit values in phosphate fertilisers,
while defending its proposal seek to facilitate a compromise between the two co-
legislators which contains a legally binding limit value that can be expected to
meaningfully reduce the current pace of cadmium pollution of European soils by
phosphate fertilisers;(ii) seek to facilitate a compromise on limit values for
contaminants other than cadmium which is as close as possible to the
Commission’s proposal; and (iii) defend its original proposal and oppose the
European Parliament's proposal to include biodegradable mulch films in the scope
of the Regulation.
9.
OFFICIALS RESPONSIBLE
Johanna
BERNSEL
(phone:
86699),
Ioanna
VASILAKI
(phone:
63976),
Theodora NIKOLAKOPOULOU (PHONE: 82031), GROW D.2
Annex: 4-column document
7