Development and implementation of Guidance Documents – the role of the European Commission

Karin Nienstedt - DG SANTE / E3 ECCA-ECPA Conference, 11-12 March 2015, Brussels

Outline

• • • •

- why guidance documents (GDs)?

- what kinds of guidance documents - process (how?) - update on on-going work (COM-GDs)

Why guidance documents?

• •

- GDs are not legally binding, but… - GDs are important because they …

• • • •

organise our work and… harmonise our approaches, therefore … …avoid discussions on particular issues coming up again and again (efficiency!) …give clarity and predictability to all involved parties (risk assessors, risk managers, notifiers, stakeholders, …)

How to draft and agree a GD?

Complex situations Ressources needed (e.g. time) Many players: MS + EFSA + stakeholders

GDs are published / referred to in…

•

- Commission Communications 2013/C 95/01 and 2013/C 95/02 - (linked to Regulations (EU) No 283/2013 and 284/2013 on data requirements for AS and PPPs)

•

- Commission GDs on SANTE's website: http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/approval _active_substances/guidance_documents/active_su bstances_en.htm

Different kinds of GD

1. procedural guidance 2. technical guidance (… on risk assessment) 3. … on interpretation of legislation (decision making at risk manager level) or requested by legislation



… but also some "mixed" GD…

1 - Procedural GDs

• •

- aim to agree on a way of working (process) - examples:

• • • • •

GDs on confirmatory information, … on comparative assessment, … on draft registration report (mutual recognition / Zonal authorisation) … on parallel trade …

•

(meanwhile more than 25 GDs)

1 - Procedural GDs

Proposal COM or MS Taking note at PAFF

Consultation of stakeholders Consultation of stakeholders

Discussion at PAFF (MS, EFSA)

2 - Technical guidance documents

• • • •

- mainly on risk assessment or related technical issues - aim to give clarity on how to do RA in a given regulatory context - different pre / post 2002 process (creation of EFSA) - recent examples:

•

Bee GD

• •

Aquatic GD Exposure GD

•

…

2 - Technical GDs (EFSA involvement) Mandate to EFSA (selftask or COM) Endorsement by PSN PAFF taking note EFSA Scientific Opinion (PPR / SC) PAFF discussion EFSA Guidance document RM consultation (e.g. prot. goals)

2 - Technical GDs (EFSA involvement) Mandate to EFSA (selftask or COM) Endorsement by PSN PAFF taking note EFSA Scientific Opinion (PPR / SC) PAFF discussion EFSA Guidance document RM consultation (e.g. prot. goals)

3 - GD on interpretation of / requested by Legislation

• •

- process chaired by COM - recent examples:

• • •

strategic GD on monitoring (Art. 7.3 Directive 2009/128/EC) Interpretation of "negligible exposure" (Annex II Regulation 1107/2009) Seed Treatments

3 - GD on interpretation of / requested

by Legislation (new procedures (!)) Stakeholder consultation MS experts (WG + PAFF) Inter Service Consultation (COM)

?

GD adopted by COM (College)

Interpretation of / requested by Legislation – on-going work

•

strategic GD on monitoring (Art. 7.3 Directive 2009/128/EC)

•

Draft GD discussed with MS and within COM

•

Stakeholder consultation soon

•

Interpretation of "negligible exposure" (Annex II Regulation 1107/2009)

•

Advanced draft developed at MS WG – difficult discussions because of different MS-positions

•

Next steps: Stakeholder consultation + ISC

Conclusions

• • •

- Guidance documents are efficient non legislative tools which increase harmonisation.

- Discussions are sometime not easy – but just the fact of having a discussion is helping to agree on a GD between the parties - drafting / agreeing on GD need resources from all parties

Thanks to all parties for the useful discussions so far and the commitment shown to agree on Guidance Documents!