(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Turkey’s application to register the name ‘Antakya Künefesi’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Antakya Künefesi’ should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Iceland’s application to register the name ‘Íslenskt lambakjöt’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Íslenskt lambakjöt’ should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, professional users of plant protection products are to keep records of those products they use, containing the name of the product, the time and the dose of application, the area treated and the crop where the product was used.

(2)

Under Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, professional users are also to make the relevant information available to the competent authority on request. Furthermore, third parties may request the competent authorities to provide access to that information and competent authorities are to provide such access in accordance with applicable national or Union law.

(3)

The Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system (‘the Farm to Fork Strategy’) (2), adopted by the Commission in 2020, aims to reduce dependency on, and use of, chemical plant protection products. Adequate recording of the use of plant protection products, and national authorities’ monitoring and control activities based on such records, are therefore instrumental to the achievement of the Farm to Fork Strategy’s objectives.

(4)

There are differences between national regimes as regards the records kept by professional users of plant protection products under Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and whether they are kept electronically. Therefore, this Regulation establishes detailed rules on the content and format of those records.

(5)

Those rules define how the elements listed in Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 relating to the use of plant protection products (name of the product, time, dose, area and crop of application) are to be recorded, so that the adequate and uniform quality of records kept under that article is ensured throughout the Union.

(6)

As the use of plant protection products by professional users most often occurs as part of agricultural activities and in order to align with existing requirements relevant for agriculture, when possible, identification of the location of the area or facility where the plant protection product was used should be done through the unit of land within the scope of the geo-spatial aid application of the integrated administration and control system as referred to in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1173 (3). When this is not possible, Member States should provide professional users with appropriate alternative methods for the identification of the location of the area where the plant protection product was used, and, where relevant, the geospatial location.

(7)

To achieve uniformity of the records, the crop names, situations or land uses should be recorded, where applicable, in line with the codes used by the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (‘EPPO codes’) and the growth stages of plants, where applicable, in accordance with the BBCH monograph (4).

(8)

In order to avoid requiring professional users to create multiple sets of records for the same use to comply with different obligations, it is appropriate to clarify that Member States have the possibility to require the users to include other information in combination with the records required under Article 67(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

(9)

Records should be kept electronically, as electronic means of record-keeping are best suited to enable a uniform application of the record-keeping obligation. This ensures greater reliability of the records, facilitates their collection and verification by the competent authorities and ultimately supports accurate, efficient and effective monitoring and control activities by Member States. To this end, the electronic formats used should also be machine-readable as defined in Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5).

(10)

To reduce the administrative burden, professional users should have sufficient time between recording of each use of plant protection products and the transfer of the records into electronic format.

(11)

A professional user may use plant protection products under contractual arrangements for another natural or legal person. In those cases, the professional user should provide access to or a copy of the relevant records kept to that person without any undue delays or restrictions.

(12)

This Regulation is without prejudice to the use of the data contained in the records for other purposes outside of the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 in accordance with Union or national law. The availability of harmonised electronic records can facilitate the use of the information for other legitimate purposes, thereby avoiding duplication of efforts and reducing the burden on professional users and public authorities.

(13)

In order to allow professional users to prepare themselves to meet the requirements set out in this Regulation, they should be given reasonable time before its requirements become applicable.

(14)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the authorisation of additives for use in animal nutrition and for the grounds and procedures for granting such authorisation. Article 10(2) of that Regulation provides for the re-evaluation of additives authorised pursuant to Council Directive 70/524/EEC (2).

(2)

The substances ethyl heptanoate, ethyl 2-methylbutyrate, isopentyl acetate, 3-methylbutyl 3-methylbutyrate, 2-methylpropionic acid, 3-methylbutyl butyrate, 2-methylbutyl acetate, hex-2-en-1-ol, hex-2(trans)-enal, allyl hexanoate, allyl heptanoate, linalool, 2-methyl-1-phenylpropan-2-ol, alpha-ionone, beta-damascone, nootkatone, beta-ionone, alpha-irone, beta-damascenone, (E)-beta-damascone, pentadecano-1,15-lactone, 2-phenylethan-1-ol, phenethyl isovalerate, 4-(p-hydroxyphenyl)butan-2-one, 2-methoxynaphthalene, 2-isopropyl-4-methylthiazole and valencene were authorised without a time limit in accordance with Directive 70/524/EEC as feed additives for all animal species. Those substances were subsequently entered in the Register of Feed Additives as existing products belonging to the functional group of flavouring compounds, in accordance with Article 10(1), point (b), of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(3)

In accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 in conjunction with Article 7 thereof, several applications were submitted for the authorisation of the above-mentioned substances as feed additives for all animal species. The applicant requested the additives to be classified in the additive category ‘sensory additives’ and in the functional group ‘flavouring compounds’. The applications were accompanied by the particulars and documents required under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(4)

The applicant requested the additives to be authorised for use also in water for drinking. However, Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 does not allow the authorisation of ‘flavouring compounds’ for use in water for drinking. Therefore, the applicant withdrew the application for water for drinking for all the substances concerned.

(5)

The European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) concluded in its opinions of 7 March 2012 (3), 25 April 2012 (4), 17 October 2012 (5) (6), 13 November 2012 (7), 12 March 2013 (8), 10 March 2015 (9), 8 March 2016 (10), 20 April 2016 (11), 12 July 2016 (12), 28 February 2019 (13), 18 November 2020 (14) and 23 March 2022 (15) that, under the proposed conditions of use, the substances do not have adverse effects on animal health, consumer safety or the environment. The Authority concluded that for 2-methyl-1-phenylpropan-2-ol, beta-damascone, alpha-irone, (E)-beta-damascone, phenethyl isovalerate, 4-(p-hydroxyphenyl) butan-2-one, and 2-isopropyl-4-methylthiazole, the safe use level for the marine environment is estimated to be 0,05 mg/kg feed.

(6)

The Authority also concluded that all the substances should be considered as irritants to skin and eyes and as potential skin and respiratory sensitisers in susceptible individuals. In the absence of data for hex-2-en-1-ol, hex-2(trans)-enal, allyl hexanoate and allyl heptanoate, the Authority could not conclude that users can safely handle those substances. However, the applicant, as required, produced a safety data sheet where hazards for users have been identified for those substances. The hazards described in the safety data sheet were, in particular, hazards for skin, eye contact and respiratory exposure for hex-2(trans)-enal, hazards for skin and eye contact for hex-2-en-1-ol and allyl heptanoate and harmful if swallowed and toxic in contact with skin for allyl hexanoate.

(7)

The Authority finally concluded that all substances are recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food. Therefore, no further demonstration of efficacy is considered necessary. It also verified the report on the methods of analysis of the feed additives in feed submitted by the Reference Laboratory set up by Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(8)

The assessment of all the substances shows that the conditions for authorisation, as provided for in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, are satisfied. Accordingly, the use of those substances should be authorised. The Commission considers that appropriate protective measures should be taken to prevent adverse effects on human health, in particular as regards the users of the additive.

(9)

Certain conditions should be provided for to allow better control. In particular, a recommended maximum content should be indicated on the label of the feed additives. Where such content is exceeded, certain information should be indicated on the label of premixtures.

(10)

The fact that the substances are not authorised for use as flavourings in water for drinking does not preclude their use in compound feed which is administered via water.

(11)

Since safety reasons do not require the immediate application of the modifications to the conditions of authorisation of the substances concerned, it is appropriate to provide for a transitional period for the interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements resulting from the authorisation.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

(1)

Experience gained with the implementation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 (2) has shown the need for minor amendments to the implementing modalities of certain common basic standards on aviation security.

(2)

Certain detailed aviation security measures should be clarified, harmonised or simplified in order to improve legal clarity, standardise the common interpretation of the relevant provisions and further ensure the best implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security. Furthermore, certain amendments have become necessary in accordance with the evolution of the threat and risk picture as well as recent developments in terms of technology. Those amendments concern automated prohibited items detection (APID) software, explosive detection systems (EDS) for cabin baggage, explosive trace detection (ETD) equipment, security scanners as well as explosive vapour detection (EVD) equipment.

(3)

Experience gained with the implementation of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 has shown the need for some amendments to the implementing modalities of certain common basic standards in the areas of certification of instructors delivering training, to remove obsolete references in Attachment 6-E, and clarifications with regards the implementation of referral actions under the Pre-Loading Advance Cargo Information (PLACI) in the Annex to that Regulation. The related provisions in the Annex need to be adjusted in order to improve legal clarity, standardise the common interpretation of the legislation and further ensure the best implementation of the common basic standards in aviation security.

(4)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1998 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 300/2008,

(1)

The United Nations (UN) Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, as amended by the 1972 Protocol (‘the Convention on Narcotic Drugs’) entered into force on 8 August 1975.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 3 of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs may decide to add substances to the Schedules of that Convention. It can make changes in the Schedules only in accordance with the recommendations of the World Health Organisation (‘WHO’), but it can also decide not to make the changes recommended by the WHO.

(3)

The UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971 (‘the Convention on Psychotropic Substances’) entered into force on 16 August 1976.

(4)

Pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs may decide to add substances to the Schedules of that Convention or to remove them, on the basis of the recommendations of the WHO. It has broad discretionary powers to take into account economic, social, legal, administrative and other factors, but may not act arbitrarily.

(5)

Changes to the Schedules of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs and to the Convention on Psychotropic Substances have direct repercussions for the scope of application of Union law in the area of drug control. Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA (1) applies to substances listed in the Schedules of those Conventions. Thus, any change to the Schedules annexed to those Conventions is directly incorporated into common Union rules.

(6)

During its 66th session, which is scheduled for 13 to 17 March 2023 in Vienna, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs is to decide on the addition of seven new substances to the Schedules of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs and of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(7)

The Union is not a party to the Convention on Narcotic Drugs or to the Convention on Psychotropic Substances. It has an observer status with no voting rights in the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, of which 12 Member States are members with the right to vote in March 2023 (2). It is necessary for the Council to authorise those Member States to express the position of the Union on the scheduling of substances under those Conventions as such decisions fall under the competence of the Union.

(8)

The WHO has recommended the addition of four new substances to Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and the addition of three new substances to Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(9)

All substances reviewed by the WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (‘the Expert Committee’) and recommended for scheduling by the WHO are monitored by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (‘EMCDDA’) as new psychoactive substances under the terms of Regulation (EC) No 1920/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3).

(10)

According to the assessment by the Expert Committee, ADB-BUTINACA (IUPAC name: N-[1-(aminocarbonyl)-2,2-dimethylpropyl]-1-butyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide) is an indazole-derived synthetic cannabinoid, the S-enantiomer being the active compound (CAS No.: 2682867-55-4). ADB-BUTINACA has no therapeutic uses and it has not received a medicinal product marketing authorisation. There is sufficient evidence that ADB-BUTINACA is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that ADB-BUTINACA is placed in Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(11)

ADB-BUTINACA has been detected in 26 Member States and is controlled in at least five Member States. ADB-BUTINACA is subject to intensive monitoring by the EMCDDA. It has been the subject of a public-health alert issued by the Early Warning and Response System of the European Union (‘EWRS’). ADB-BUTINACA is also mentioned in two additional public health-related alerts. It has been associated with serious adverse events, including 14 deaths reported by two Member States.

(12)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add ADB-BUTINACA to Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(13)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, protonitazene (IUPAC name: N,N-diethyl-5-nitro-2-[(4-propoxyphenyl)methyl]-1-H-benzimidazole-1-ethanamine) is a benzimidazole opioid. Protonitazene was first synthetized as an alternative to morphine but there is no approved therapeutic use of protonitazene. There is sufficient evidence that protonitazene is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that protonitazene be placed in Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(14)

Protonitazene has been detected in two Member States and is controlled in at least three Member States. Protonitazene is subject to intensive monitoring by the EMCDDA. No information on serious adverse events involving protonitazene has been reported to the EMCDDA.

(15)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add protonitazene to the Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(16)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, etazene (IUPAC name: 2-[(4-ethoxyphenyl)methyl]-N,N-diethyl-1H-benzimidazole-1-ethanamine) is a benzimidazole-derived synthetic opioid with a chemical structure and pharmacological similar to drugs scheduled under Schedule I (under the Convention on Narcotic Drugs) such as clonitazene, etonitazene and isotonitazene. Etazene was studied for its analgesic properties but there is no known medical use of etazene. There is sufficient evidence that etazene is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that etazene be placed in Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(17)

Etazene has been detected in eight Member States and is controlled in at least five Member States. Etazene is subject to intensive monitoring by the EMCDDA. It has been associated with serious adverse events, including four deaths, reported by two Member States.

(18)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add etazene to the Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(19)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, etonitazepyne (IUPAC name: 2-[(4-ethoxyphenyl)methyl]-5-nitro-1-(2-pyrrolidin-1-ylethyl)-1H-benzoimidazole) is a benzimidazole-derived synthetic opioid with a chemical structure and pharmacological similar to drugs scheduled under Schedule I (under the Convention on Narcotic Drugs) such as etonitazene. Etonitazepyne was studied for its analgesic properties but there is no known medical use of etonitazepyne. There is sufficient evidence that etonitazepyne is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that etonitazepyne be placed in Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(20)

Etonitazepyne has been detected in six Member States and is controlled in at least two Member States. Similar to other new opioids, etonitazepyne may be sold as a replacement to controlled opioids, and has been the subject of a public health-related alert issued by the EWRS. Etonitazepyne is subject to intensive monitoring by the EMCDDA. A death with confirmed exposure to etonitazepyne has been reported by one country.

(21)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add etonitazepyne to the Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(22)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, 2-methyl-AP-237 (IUPAC name: 1-{2-methyl-4-[(2E)-3-phenylprop-2-en-1-yl]piperazin-1-yl}butan-1-one) is a synthetic opioid typically classed as a 1-cinnamylpiperazine. There is no known therapeutic use for 2-methyl-AP-237, nor has it received a medicinal product marketing authorisation. There is sufficient evidence that 2-methyl-AP-237 is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that 2-methyl-AP-237 be placed in Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(23)

2-Methyl-AP-237 has been detected in six Member States and is controlled in at least four Member States. It has been associated with serious adverse events, including a death.

(24)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add 2-methyl-AP-237 to the Schedule I of the Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

(25)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, alpha-PiHP (α-PiHP, IUPAC name: 4-methyl-1-phenyl-2-(pyrrolidin-1-yl)pentan-1-one) is a synthetic cathinone. There is no known therapeutic use for alpha-PiHP, nor has it received a medicinal product marketing authorisation. There is sufficient evidence that alpha-PiHP is being or is likely to be abused and that it may constitute a public health and social problem warranting the placing of the substance under international control. Thus, the WHO recommends that alpha-PiHP be placed in Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(26)

Alpha-PiHP has been detected in 18 Member States and is controlled in at least seven Member States. Alpha-PiHP is mentioned in a public health-related alert issued by the EWRS. It has been associated with serious adverse events, including four deaths, reported by one Member State and detected in biological samples linked to serious adverse events, reported by four Member States.

(27)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add alpha-PiHP to the Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(28)

According to the assessment of the Expert Committee, 3-methylmethcathinone (3-MMC, IUPAC name: 2-(methylamino)-1-(3-methylphenyl)propan-1-one) is a synthetic cathinone and a positional isomer of the internationally controlled 4-methylmethcathinone (4-MMC, mephedrone, Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances). 3-MMC was critically reviewed in 2016, but it was decided to request another critical review, to be considered at a subsequent meeting, pending the availability of more information. Some patent applications including the use of 3-MMC were found but no current clinical trials were identified on therapeutic use of 3-MMC. 3-MMC also has no recognised human or veterinary medical use in the Union.

(29)

The risks of 3-MMC have been assessed by the scientific committee of the EMCDDA and 3-MMC has already been included in the definition of ‘drug’ under Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA by Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2022/1326 (4). 3-MMC is subject to intensive monitoring by the EMCDDA. At the time of risk assessment, in November 2021, 3-MMC had been detected in 23 Member States. A total of 27 deaths with confirmed exposure to 3-MMC had been reported by five Member States and 14 acute non-fatal poisonings with confirmed exposure to 3-MMC had been reported by four Member States.

(30)

Therefore, the position of the Union should be to add 3-MMC to the Schedule II of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

(31)

It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on behalf of the Union in the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, as the decisions on scheduling as regards the seven substances will directly influence the content of Union law, namely Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA.

(32)

The position of the Union is to be expressed by the Member States that are members of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, acting jointly.

(33)

Denmark is bound by Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA and is therefore taking part in the adoption and application of this Decision.

(34)

Ireland is bound by Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA and is therefore taking part in the adoption and application of this Decision,

(1)

The Convention on International Civil Aviation (‘the Chicago Convention’), which regulates international air transport, entered into force on 4 April 1947. It established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

(2)

The Member States of the Union are Contracting States to the Chicago Convention and members of the ICAO, while the Union has observer status in certain ICAO bodies. Six Member States are currently represented in the ICAO Council.

(3)

Pursuant to Article 54 of the Chicago Convention, the ICAO Council may adopt international standards and recommended practices (‘SARPs’), and designate them as Annexes to the Chicago Convention.

(4)

The ICAO Council, at its 228th session, is to adopt Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention.

(5)

The main purpose of Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention is to support the introduction of dual-frequency, multi-constellation (DFMC) global navigation satellite system (GNSS) by adding provisions for additional frequencies of operation for the global positioning system (GPS), the global navigation satellite system (GLONASS) and the satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS), and by introducing provisions for the new BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) and the Galileo system. It is also to support ionospheric gradient mitigation for the ground-based augmentation system (GBAS).

(6)

It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on behalf of the Union within the ICAO Council, as Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention will be binding under international law and is capable of decisively influencing the content of Union law, namely Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/373 (1).

(7)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union in the 228th session of the ICAO Council or any subsequent session with regard to the adoption of Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention as outlined in State Letter 2021/41 should be to support and to fully comply with this amendment. This position should be expressed by the Member States of the Union that are members of the ICAO Council, acting jointly in the interest of the Union.

(8)

Once adopted and effective, Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention will be binding on all ICAO Member States, including all Member States of the Union, in accordance with and within the limits set out in the Chicago Convention.

(9)

Pursuant to Article 38 of the Chicago Convention, any State which finds it impracticable to comply in all respects with any international standard or procedure adopted by ICAO, or to bring its own regulations or practices into full accord with any such international standard or procedure or which deems it necessary to adopt regulations or practices differing in any particular respect from those established by an international standard, should give immediate notification to the ICAO of the differences between its own practice and that established by the international standard.

(10)

Pursuant to Article 90 of the Chicago Convention, any Annex or any amendment of an Annex adopted by the ICAO Council becomes effective within three months after its submission to the ICAO Contracting States, or at the end of such longer period of time as the ICAO Council may prescribe, unless in the meantime a majority of ICAO Contracting States register their disapproval with the ICAO Council.

(11)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union after the adoption of Amendment 93 to Annex 10, Volume I to the Chicago Convention by the ICAO Council, to be announced by the ICAO Secretary-General by means of an ICAO State-letter procedure, should be not to register disapproval and to notify compliance, provided that that amendment is adopted without any substantial changes. Where Union law would deviate from the newly adopted SARPs after an envisaged date of application of those SARPs, any difference with those particular SARPs should be notified to the ICAO. The position to be taken on behalf of the Union with respect to such a difference should be based on a written document submitted by the Commission to the Council for discussion and approval. This position should be expressed by all the Member States of the Union, acting jointly in the interest of the Union.

(12)

The ICAO Council, at its 228th session, is also to adopt an Amendment to the Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Doc 9284) to permit active tracking devices powered by small lithium batteries in checked baggage. The matter falls under Annex 18 to the Chicago Convention – The Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air.

(13)

The amendment would allow passengers and crew to carry active tracking devices powered by small lithium batteries in their checked baggage, which ICAO Doc 9284 prohibits because of a requirement to have devices containing lithium cells or batteries in checked baggage switched off.

(14)

It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on behalf of the Union within the ICAO Council as the proposed changes to ICAO Doc 9284 would have a direct impact on the rules for the transport of dangerous goods in Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 (2), which refer expressly to that ICAO document, and are therefore capable of decisively influencing the content of Union law.

(15)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union during the 228th session of the ICAO Council or any subsequent session with regards to the adoption of the Amendment to ICAO Doc 9284 should be to support this amendment. This position should be expressed by the Member States of the Union that are members of the ICAO Council, acting jointly in the interest of the Union,

(1)

The Convention on International Civil Aviation (‘the Chicago Convention’), which regulates international air transport, entered into force on 4 April 1947. It established the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

(2)

All Member States are Contracting States of the Chicago Convention and members of the ICAO, whereas the Union has observer status in certain ICAO bodies.

(3)

Pursuant to Article 54 of the Chicago Convention, the ICAO Council may adopt International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs).

(4)

The SARPs on Environmental Protection have been adopted as Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention by the ICAO Council, in Volumes I to IV.

(5)

The ICAO Council, during its 228th Session to be held on 13 to 31 March 2023, is to adopt a number of amendments to Annex 16, Volumes I to III of the Chicago Convention.

(6)

It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on behalf of the Union in the ICAO Council as the proposed amendments have legal effect, given that they are binding under international law and are capable of decisively influencing the content of Union law, namely Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) and Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 (2).

(7)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union should be to support the amendments to Volumes I to III.

(8)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union should be expressed by the Member States of the Union that are members of the ICAO Council, acting jointly in the interest of the Union.

(9)

The position to be taken on behalf of the Union after the adoption of amendments to Annex 16, Volumes I to III to the Chicago Convention by the ICAO Council, to be announced by the ICAO Secretary-General via an ICAO State Letter procedure, should be not to register disapproval and should be to notify compliance with those measures. Where Union law would deviate from the newly adopted SARPs after an envisaged date of application of those SARPs, any difference with those particular SARPs should be notified to ICAO,

(1)

In accordance with Article 4b(2) of Regulation (EC) No 138/2004, the Kingdom of Spain, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Poland and the Republic of Slovenia submitted requests for derogation by 21 August 2022.

(2)

The information that those Member States provided to the Commission indicates that the requests of the Kingdom of Spain, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Poland and the Republic of Slovenia are justified by the need for major adaptations in their national statistical systems as regards implementation of the transmission programme of data for regional economic accounts for agriculture, as referred to in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 138/2004.