(1)

Following the presentation of simplification proposals to the Council in April 2009, a number of possible improvements in terms of efficiency and simplification of the rules governing the implementation of cross-compliance have been identified. It is appropriate to incorporate those improvements in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 (3).

(2)

The identification system for agricultural parcels is a key element in the process of assuring correct payments to the farmer and safeguarding the funds of the Union. In order to enhance the quality of that system, provisions should be introduced requiring a yearly assessment of the system. The quality of the system should be assessed by the Member States in accordance with a harmonised method and reporting by Member States should be made timely enough to allow effective use of the results of the assessment.

(3)

Article 64(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 provides for a derogation where a farmer concerned by the integration of coupled support does not hold any payment entitlements but declares a number of leased payment entitlements in the first year of integration of that support. Such a farmer should be allocated entitlements for which a derogation as regards activation applies. In order to ensure an efficient control, the traceability of those entitlements should be assured.

(4)

In performing the cross-compliance checks provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009, a Member State can only use the results of on-the-spot checks carried out by the competent control authorities. For efficiency reasons, a Member State should have the possibility to also use the results of on-the-spot checks carried out pursuant to the legislation applicable to the acts and standards in question in order to reach the minimum control rate. However, it should be ensured that an effective control system is maintained.

(5)

For the sampling of on-the-spot checks for cross-compliance, a Member State may take into account in the risk analysis the farmers' participation in relevant certification systems. The use of that option should be clarified.

(6)

Control reports have to be sent to the paying agency or coordinating authority within an established deadline. In order to reduce the administrative burden, where the control report does not contain any findings, it should be considered sufficient if the control reports are made directly accessible to the paying agency or coordinating authority.

(7)

At the occasion of this amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 it is appropriate to correct two erroneous references to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1121/2009 (4) respectively.

(8)

Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(9)

The amendments provided for in this Regulation concern aid applications relating to marketing years or premium periods starting as of 1 January 2010. This Regulation should therefore apply accordingly.

(10)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets and the Management Committee for Direct Payments have not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by their chairman,

1.

Article 6(2) is replaced by the following:

2.

In Article 7(1), point (f) is replaced by the following:

3.

In Article 28(1)(a), the words ‘Annexes I and IV’ are replaced by ‘Annexes I and VI’.

4.

In Article 50, the following paragraph 1a is inserted:

5.

In Article 51(1), the following subparagraphs are inserted after the second subparagraph:

‘A Member State may decide on the basis of a risk analysis to exclude farmers participating in a certification system as referred to in point (b) of the second subparagraph from the risk-based control sample. However, when the certification system only covers part of the requirements and standards to be respected under cross-compliance by the farmer, appropriate risk factors shall be applied for the requirements or standards that are not covered by the certification system.

When the analysis of control results reveals that there is a significant frequency of non-compliance with the requirements or standards included in a certification system as referred to in point (b) of the second subparagraph, the risk factors related to the requirements or standards concerned shall be re-assessed and, where appropriate, increased.’

6.

Article 54 is amended as follows:

7.

In Article 62, the words ‘Article 30(1) and (2)’ are replaced by ‘Article 29(1) and (2)’.