Considerations on COM(2023)160 - Framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2023)160 - Framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2023)160  |
| date | April 11, 2024 |
| (2) | Given the complexity and the transnational character of critical raw material value chains, uncoordinated national measures to ensure a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials risk undermining the functioning of the internal market. Critical raw materials are often extracted in specific countries or regions, depending on the geographical distribution of relevant reserves, transported for further processing elsewhere and then sold across the internal market for use in relevant products. At the processing stage, critical raw materials are often imported and exported several times within the internal market before use in a final application. Similarly, the end-of-life recycling of relevant products with a view to the recovery of critical raw materials can take place in a country or a region different from that where the waste is collected, and the resulting secondary raw materials are likely to be re-exported for further processing and use. Moreover, critical raw materials are needed at the beginning of many industrial value chains and are often indispensable inputs for a wide set of strategic sectors including renewable energy, the digital industry, and the aerospace and defence sectors. They therefore play an essential role in underpinning economic activities in the internal market, and supply disruptions could have a significant cross-border impact between Member States. |
| (3) | Against this background, uncoordinated actions by Member States risk distorting competition and fragmenting the internal market, for example by imposing diverging regulation on market operators, providing different levels of access to supply risk monitoring, providing different levels of support for national projects, or creating obstacles to cross-border trade between Member States in critical raw materials or related goods thus creating obstacles to the proper functioning of the internal market. Moreover, individual actions of Member States could be insufficient to effectively prevent supply disruptions of critical raw materials from taking place or could be less efficient in achieving that aim. |
| (4) | To safeguard the functioning of the internal market, a common Union framework should therefore be created to ensure access to a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and to safeguard the Union’s economic resilience and open strategic autonomy. |
| (5) | First, that framework should define raw materials that are considered to be strategic and critical and strengthen the resilience of supply chains for those raw materials in the Union, including by identifying and supporting certain raw materials projects and recognising them as strategic projects (Strategic Projects) and by undertaking efforts to incentivise technological progress and resource efficiency in order to moderate the expected increase in Union consumption of critical raw materials. Second, it is necessary to provide for measures to reinforce the Union’s ability to monitor and mitigate existing and future supply risks. Third, the framework should contain measures to increase the circularity and sustainability of the critical raw materials consumed in the Union. |
| (6) | In order to ensure that the measures set out in this Regulation focus on the most relevant raw materials, a list of strategic raw materials and a list of critical raw materials should be established. Those lists should be based on clear methodologies, the application of which the Commission should communicate openly and transparently. Those lists should also serve to guide and coordinate Member States’ efforts to contribute to the realisation of the aims of this Regulation. The list of strategic raw materials should contain raw materials that are of high strategic importance for the functioning of the internal market, taking into account their use in strategic technologies underpinning the green and digital transitions or for defence or aerospace applications, that are characterised by a potentially significant gap between global supply and projected demand, and for which an increase in production is relatively difficult, for instance due to long lead-times for new projects increasing supply capacity. To take account of possible technological and economic changes, the list of strategic raw materials should be periodically reviewed and, if necessary, updated. In order to ensure that efforts to increase the Union capacities along the value chain, reinforce the Union’s capacity to monitor and mitigate supply risks and increase diversification of supply are focused on the raw materials for which they are most needed, certain relevant measures should apply only to the list of strategic raw materials. Member States should not be prevented from creating additional lists on the basis of their specific national needs or from taking appropriate measures at a national level. |
| (7) | The list of critical raw materials should include all strategic raw materials as well as any other raw materials of high importance for the overall Union economy and for which there is a high risk of supply disruption likely to distort competition and fragment the internal market. In addition to the strategic technologies, other sectors could also be exposed to high supply risks in the future. To take account of possible technological and economic changes, the Commission should, in continuation of current practice, periodically carry out an assessment on the basis of data for production, trade, applications, recycling, and substitution for a wide range of raw materials to update the lists of strategic and critical raw materials reflecting the evolution in the economic importance and supply risk associated with those raw materials in the internal market. The list of critical raw materials should include those raw materials which reach or exceed the thresholds for both economic importance and supply risk, without ranking the relevant raw materials in terms of criticality. That assessment should be based on an average of the latest available data over a five-year-period. The measures related to the single point of contact, planning, exploration, monitoring, circularity, and sustainability that are provided for in this Regulation should apply to all critical raw materials. |
| (8) | The strategic and critical raw materials lists should use established designations for the listed raw materials. For the strategic raw materials list, the designations should refer, where appropriate, to the grade to which a raw material has to be refined in order to be used for the manufacturing of strategic technologies. References to strategic and critical raw materials should be understood to refer to the entire value chain of those raw materials, including in their unprocessed form and at all stages of processing leading up, where applicable, to the specified grade. An exceptional clarification should be made for the aluminium value chain, mentioning bauxite, its most important ore, and alumina, its intermediate processing form, in addition to aluminium. Strategic and critical raw materials are, in many cases, extracted, processed or recycled as by-products of other main extraction, processing and recycling processes. Therefore, the by-product nature of raw materials should not affect their inclusion on the list or their coverage by the relevant provisions of this Regulation. |
| (9) | In order to support the implementation of tasks pertaining to the development of Strategic Projects and their financing, exploration programmes, monitoring capacities or strategic stocks and to advise the Commission appropriately, a European Critical Raw Materials Board (the ‘Board’) should be established. The Board should be composed of representatives of Member States and of the Commission, while being able to ensure participation of other parties as observers, in particular the European Parliament. To develop the necessary expertise for the implementation of certain tasks, the Board should establish standing subgroups on financing, public acceptance, exploration, monitoring and strategic stocks as well as one on circularity, resource efficiency and substitution, that should act as a network by gathering the relevant national authorities and, when necessary, consult industry, academia, civil society and other relevant stakeholders. The Board’s advice and opinions should be non-binding and the absence of such an advice or opinion should not prevent the Commission from carrying out its tasks pursuant to this Regulation. |
| (10) | It is necessary to put in place appropriate measures to establish a common approach to Strategic Projects in the Union active in the extraction, processing or recycling of strategic raw materials or which contribute to the production of relevant substitute materials. Those Strategic Projects should, together with Member State efforts, contribute to increasing capacities to ensure a secure supply of strategic raw materials. Other measures, in particular on exploration or circularity, are also intended to contribute to the reinforcement of different stages of the value chain. |
| (11) | To decrease the Union’s growing risk of supply disruptions likely to distort competition and fragment the internal market, the Commission and Member States should strengthen the capacity at the different stages of the value chain of strategic raw materials, in order to contribute to meeting benchmarks related to Union’s capacities and diversification of supply. Such benchmarks should help to guide efforts to strengthen Union capacities along all stages of the strategic raw materials value chain, including extraction, processing and recycling, and to increase the diversification of external supplies of strategic raw materials. The aim should be to increase capacities for each strategic raw material at each stage of the value chain, while aiming to achieve overall capacity benchmarks at Union level for extraction, processing and recycling of strategic raw materials. First, the Union should increase the use of its own geological resources of strategic raw materials and build up capacity to allow it to extract the raw materials needed to produce at least 10 % of the Union’s consumption of strategic raw materials. Taking into account the fact that extraction capacity is highly dependent on the availability of Union geological resources, meeting that benchmark is dependent on such availability. Second, in order to build a full value chain and prevent any bottlenecks at intermediate stages, the Union processing capacity should also be increased and the Union should be able to produce at least 40 % of its annual consumption of strategic raw materials. Third, it is expected that in the coming decades a growing share of the Union’s consumption of strategic raw materials can be covered by secondary raw materials, which would improve both the security and the sustainability of the Union’s raw materials supply. Union recycling capacity should therefore be able to produce at least 25 % of the Union’s annual consumption of strategic raw materials and the Union should be able to recycle significantly increasing amounts of each strategic raw material from waste. For waste streams and strategic raw materials for which sufficient information is available to estimate the Union recycling capacity as a share of the strategic raw materials contained in those waste streams, an additional waste-based benchmark should be set. Accompanying efforts to improve resource efficiency through research and innovation, substitution, awareness-raising and other relevant measures will also facilitate meeting those benchmarks. Those benchmarks refer to the 2030 time horizon, in alignment with the Union’s climate and energy targets set in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) and the digital targets set in Decision (EU) 2022/2481 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), which they underpin. Furthermore, quality jobs, including skills development and job-to-job transitions, will address risks in the sectoral labour market and help ensure the Union’s competitiveness. The Commission and Member States should also incentivise technological progress and resource efficiency in order to moderate the expected increase in Union consumption of critical raw materials below appropriate reference projections. In the context of preparing implementing measures pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5), the Commission should consider the possible contribution of ecodesign requirements to the achievement of the Union priorities set out in this Regulation. |
| (12) | For some raw materials, the Union is almost fully dependent on a single country for its supply. Such dependencies create a high risk of supply disruptions that are likely to distort competition and fragment the internal market. To limit such potential risk and increase the Union’s economic resilience, efforts should be undertaken to ensure that, by 2030, the Union is not dependent on a single third country for more than 65 % of its supply of any strategic raw material, unprocessed and at any stage of processing, giving however special consideration to countries with which the Union has established a strategic partnership (Strategic Partnership), a free trade agreement or other forms of cooperation covering raw materials, as they provide greater assurances regarding supply risks. |
| (13) | To ensure that the benchmarks are met on time, the Commission, with the help of the Board, should track and report progress towards the benchmarks and towards the demand moderation. Where the reported progress towards the benchmarks and towards the demand moderation is generally insufficient, the Commission should assess the feasibility and proportionality of additional measures. A lack of progress only on a single or small set of strategic raw material should in principle not trigger the need for additional Union efforts. |
| (14) | The Commission should, with the support of the Board, identify projects in the Union that are intended to start or expand the extraction, processing or recycling of strategic raw materials, or the production and scale-up of materials that can substitute strategic raw materials in strategic technologies, with the aim of recognising such projects as Strategic Projects. Effective support for Strategic Projects has the potential to improve access to strategic raw materials for downstream sectors, to create economic opportunities along the value chain, including for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and to contribute to the creation of employment. Therefore, to ensure the development of Strategic Projects across the Union, such projects should benefit from streamlined and predictable permitting procedures and support in gaining access to finance. Such measures could also inspire improvements in other permitting procedures and in access to finance for projects related to critical or other raw materials. In order to focus support and ensure their added value, projects should, before receiving such support, be assessed against a set of criteria. Raw material projects where strategic raw materials are a by-product, including from ferrous scrap, should also be eligible for such support, if they meet all relevant criteria. In order to be recognised as Strategic Projects in the Union, projects should strengthen the Union’s security of supply for strategic raw materials. Projects should also show sufficient technical feasibility, including the expected volume of strategic raw materials or substitute materials by which they increase Union capacity, excluding materials produced for research purposes; be implemented in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner; and provide cross-border benefits beyond the Member State concerned, including spill-over effects further down the value chain. Where the Commission assesses those criteria to be fulfilled, it should publish the recognition as a Strategic Project by means of a decision. As a speedy recognition is key to effectively supporting the Union’s security of supply, the assessment process should remain light and not overly burdensome. |
| (15) | When assessing whether a project in a third country or in an overseas country or territory (OCTs) contributes to the Union’s security of supply, the status of OCTs under Union law should in particular be taken into account. OCTs can contribute to the Union’s safe access to a sustainable supply of strategic and critical raw materials, particularly within the framework of strategic partnerships. |
| (16) | The Commission should, with the support of the Board, identify Strategic Projects in third countries or in OCTs that are intended to start or expand the extraction, processing or recycling of strategic raw materials, or the production of materials that can substitute strategic raw materials in strategic technologies. To ensure that such Strategic Projects are effectively implemented, they should benefit from improved access to finance, for instance through access to de-risking mechanisms for investment. In order to ensure their added value, projects should be assessed against a set of criteria. Like Strategic Projects in the Union, Strategic Projects in third countries should strengthen the Union’s security of supply for strategic raw materials and should show sufficient technical feasibility. Both Strategic Projects in the Union and Strategic Projects in third countries or in OCTs should comply with the same level of social and environmental sustainability. To become a Strategic Project in an emerging market or developing economy, a project should be mutually beneficial for the Union and the third country involved and add value in that country, taking into account also its consistency with the Union’s common commercial policy. Such value may be derived from a project’s contribution to more than one stage of the value chain as well as from creating through the project wider economic and social benefits, including the creation of employment in line with international standards. Where the Commission assesses those criteria to be fulfilled, it should publish the recognition as a Strategic Project by means of a decision. |
| (17) | In order to ensure the sustainability of increased critical raw material production, new critical raw materials projects should be planned and implemented sustainably covering all aspects of sustainability highlighted in the Commission’s publication of 11 September 2021, entitled ‘EU principles for sustainable raw materials’, including ensuring environmental protection, the prevention and minimisation of socially adverse impacts through the use of socially sustainable practices, including respect for human rights such as the rights of women, and transparent business practices. Projects should also ensure engagement in good faith as well as comprehensive and equitable consultations of relevant stakeholders such as local communities and indigenous peoples. Special attention should be paid to the respect for human rights where a project involves potential resettlement. To provide project promoters with a clear and efficient way of complying with this criterion, compliance with relevant Union or national law, international standards, guidelines and principles, as relevant, or participation in a certification scheme recognised under this Regulation should be considered to be sufficient. |
| (18) | In line with the precautionary principle, the Commission should not recognise deep sea mining projects as Strategic Projects before the effects of deep-sea mining on the marine environment, biodiversity and human activities are sufficiently researched, the risks are understood and technologies and operational practices are capable of demonstrating that the environment is not seriously harmed. |
| (19) | Any project promoter of a strategic raw materials project should be able to apply to the Commission for the recognition of their project as a Strategic Project. The application should include relevant documents and evidence related to the criteria. To better assess the social, environmental and economic viability, the feasibility of the project as well as the level of confidence in the estimates, the project promoter should also provide a classification of the project according to the United Nations Framework Classification for Resources. To allow for objective validation of that classification, the project promoter should support it with relevant evidence. A timetable for the project should also be attached to an application, in order to estimate when the project would be able to contribute towards the benchmarks for domestic capacity or for diversification. As public acceptance of mining projects is crucial for their effective implementation, the project promoter should also provide a plan containing measures to facilitate public acceptance. Special attention should be paid to social partners, civil society and oversight bodies. The project promoter should also provide a business plan providing information regarding the project’s financial viability and giving an overview of funding, the ownership structure and offtake agreements already secured as well as estimates for potential job creation and for the project’s needs in terms of skilled workforce, including upskilling and reskilling. In order to harmonise the application process, the Commission should provide a single template for applications. |
| (20) | Applications relating to projects with the potential to affect indigenous peoples should include a plan containing measures dedicated to a meaningful consultation of the indigenous peoples affected, the prevention and minimisation of adverse impacts on those indigenous peoples, and, where appropriate, fair compensation. If those concepts are addressed by the national law applicable to the project, the plan could, instead, describe those measures. For projects in third countries involving extraction which are not covered by Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (6), the project promoter should also provide a plan to improve the environmental state of the affected sites after the end of extraction. If the project is located in a protected area, the project promoter should assess technically appropriate alternative locations and describe them in a plan, including why they are not considered to be appropriate for the location of the project. |
| (21) | To structure the process, the Commission should organise an open call with regular cut-off dates, corresponding to meeting dates of the Board, for project promoters to apply for recognition of their projects as Strategic Projects. To provide clarity for project promoters regarding their applications for Strategic Projects, the Commission should comply with a deadline for its decision on whether to recognise a project as strategic. To accommodate particularly complex cases or a high number of applications at one cut-off date, the Commission should be able to extend that deadline once. It should share its assessment with the Board before its meeting and should take the Board’s opinion into account in its decision on whether to recognise a Strategic Project. |
| (22) | As the cooperation of the Member State on whose territory a Strategic Project will be implemented is necessary to ensure its effective implementation, that Member State should have the right to object to and thereby prevent that a project is recognised as a Strategic Project against that Member State’s will. If it does so, the relevant Member State should provide reasons for its refusal, referring to the criteria provided for in this Regulation. Similarly, the Union should not recognise a project as a Strategic Project where it is to be implemented by a third country, against the will of its government and should therefore refrain from doing so where a third-country government objects. |
| (23) | To prevent the misuse of the Strategic Project status, the Commission should be entitled to withdraw its recognition of a Strategic Project providing reasons for so doing after consulting the Board and the project promoter responsible if the Strategic Project no longer fulfils the conditions or if the recognition was based on an application containing incorrect information relevant to the assessment of the selection criteria. In order to attract long-term investments and ensure legal predictability, in the case of updates of the strategic raw materials list in an annex, a Strategic Project should maintain its status for a reasonable period following the withdrawal. |
| (24) | In light of their importance for ensuring the security of supply of strategic raw materials and safeguard the functioning of the internal market, Strategic Projects should be considered to be in the public interest. Ensuring the security of supply of strategic raw materials is of crucial importance for the success of the green and digital transitions as well as the resilience of the defence and aerospace sectors. To contribute towards the security of supply of strategic raw materials in the Union, Member States should be able to provide for support in national permit-granting processes to speed up the realisation of Strategic Projects in accordance with Union law. |
| (25) | The national permit-granting process ensures that critical raw materials projects are safe, secure and comply with environmental, social and safety requirements. Union environmental law sets common conditions for the content of the national permit-granting process, thereby ensuring a high level of environmental protection and allowing for the sustainable exploitation of the Union’s potential along the raw materials value chain. Being recognised as a Strategic Project should therefore be without prejudice to any applicable permitting conditions for the relevant projects, including those set out in Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (7), Council Directive 92/43/EEC (8), Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (9), Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (10), Directive 2004/35/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council (11), Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (12), and Directive 2006/21/EC. |
| (26) | At the same time, the unpredictability, complexity and, at times, excessive length of national permit-granting processes undermine the investment security needed for the effective development of strategic raw material projects. The structure and length of a permit-granting process for relevant projects can also differ greatly between Member States. Therefore, in order to ensure and speed up their effective implementation, Member States should apply streamlined and predictable permit-granting processes to Strategic Projects. To that end, Strategic Projects should be given priority status at national level to ensure rapid administrative handling and urgent handling in all judicial and dispute resolution procedures relating to them. This Regulation should not prevent competent authorities from streamlining permitting for projects on the critical raw materials value chain that are not Strategic Projects. |
| (27) | Given their role in ensuring the Union’s security of supply for strategic raw materials, and their contribution to the Union’s open strategic autonomy and the green and digital transition, Strategic Projects should be considered, by the permitting authority responsible, to be in the public interest. It should be possible to authorise Strategic Projects which have an adverse impact on the environment, to the extent they fall within the scope of Directives 2000/60/EC, 92/43/EEC or 2009/147/EC or Union legislative acts regarding the restoration of terrestrial, coastal and freshwater ecosystems where the permitting authority responsible concludes, on the basis of a case-by-case assessment, that the public interest served by the project overrides those impacts, provided that all relevant conditions set out in those legal acts are met. The case-by-case assessment should duly take into account the geological specificity of extraction sites, which constrains decisions on location due to the absence of alternative locations for such sites. |
| (28) | In order to reduce complexity and increase efficiency and transparency in the permit-granting process, project promoters of critical raw materials projects should be able to interact with a single point of contact, which is responsible for facilitating and coordinating the entire permit-granting process. To that end, Member States should establish or designate one or more points of contact, while ensuring that project promoters have to interact with only a single point of contact. It should be for Member States to decide whether a single point of contact is also an authority taking permitting decisions. To ensure the effective implementation of their responsibilities, Member States should provide their single points of contact with sufficient personnel and resources. In addition, the project promoter should have the possibility to contact a relevant administrative unit within the single point of contact to ensure it has an accessible contact. |
| (29) | Member States should be able, in light of their internal organisation, to choose whether to establish or designate their single points of contact at local, regional or national level, or at any other relevant administrative level. In addition, Member States should be able, at the administrative level they have chosen, to establish or designate different single points of contact that focus only on critical raw materials projects related to a specific stage of the value chain, namely extraction, processing or recycling. At the same time, project promoters should be able easily to identify the single point of contact that is responsible for their project. To that end, Member States should ensure that, within the geographical area corresponding to the administrative level at which they have chosen to establish or designate their single point of contact, there is not more than one such single point of contact responsible per relevant value chain stage. As many critical raw material projects cover more than one value chain stage, Member States should, in order to prevent confusion, ensure that a single point of contact is designated for such projects in a timely manner. |
| (30) | In order to ensure clarity about the permitting status of Strategic Projects and to limit the effectiveness of potential abusive litigation, while not undermining effective judicial review, Member States should ensure that any dispute concerning the permit-granting process for Strategic Projects is resolved in a timely manner. To that end, Member States should ensure that applicants and project promoters have access to simple dispute settlement procedures and that Strategic Projects are subject to urgent handling in all judicial and dispute resolution procedures relating to the projects where and to the extent that national law provides for such urgency procedures. |
| (31) | In order to allow citizens and businesses to directly enjoy the benefits of the internal market without incurring an unnecessary additional administrative burden, Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13), which established the Single Digital Gateway, provides for general rules for the online provision of information, procedures and assistance services relevant for the functioning of the internal market. The information requirements and procedures covered by this Regulation should comply with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2018/1724. In particular, it should be ensured that project promoters of Strategic Project can access and complete any procedure related to the permit-granting process fully online, in accordance with Article 6(1) of and Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/1724. |
| (32) | In order to provide project promoters and other investors with the security and clarity needed to increase development of Strategic Projects, Member States should ensure that the permit-granting process related to such projects does not exceed set time limits. For Strategic Projects involving only processing or recycling, the length of the permit-granting process should not exceed 15 months. For Strategic Projects that involve extraction, the length of the permit-granting process should, considering the complexity and extent of the potential impacts involved, not exceed 27 months. However, the preparation of the environmental impact assessment report pursuant to Directive 2011/92/EU is the responsibility of the project promoter and should not be part of timelines to which Member States are bound. To that end, the single point of contact should notify the date by which the project promoter needs to submit the environmental impact assessment report, and any period between that notified date and the actual submission of the report should not be counted towards the timeline. The same principle should apply where, after the required consultations, the single point of contact notifies the project promoter of the opportunity to submit additional information to complete the environmental impact assessment report. In exceptional cases related to the nature, complexity, location or size of the proposed project, Member States should be able to extend the time limits. Such exceptional cases could include unforeseen circumstances giving rise to the need to add to or complete environmental assessments related to the project. |
| (33) | Member States should ensure that the authorities responsible have sufficient resources and personnel to allow those authorities to effectively achieve the time limits imposed on them. Through the Technical Support Instrument established by Regulation (EU) 2021/240 of the European Parliament and of the Council (14), the Commission should support Member States, upon their request, in designing, developing and implementing reforms including the strengthening the administrative capacity related to the national permit-granting process, such as the single point of contact. |
| (34) | The environmental assessments and authorisations required under Union law, including in relation to water, soil, habitats and birds, are an integral part of the permit-granting process for a raw material project and an essential safeguard to ensure that negative environmental impacts are prevented or minimised. However, in order to ensure that the permit-granting process for Strategic Projects is predictable and timely, any potential to streamline the required assessments and authorisations while not lowering the level of environmental protection or the quality of the assessments should be realised. To that end, the necessary assessments should be bundled through a joint or coordinated procedure to prevent unnecessary overlaps. In addition, project promoters and authorities responsible should explicitly agree on the scope of the bundled assessment before it is implemented to prevent the need for unnecessary follow-up action. Last, project promoters should be able to interact with a single authority for the purposes of that joint or coordinated procedure. |
| (35) | Land use conflicts can create barriers to the deployment of critical raw material projects. Well-designed plans, including spatial plans and zoning, that take into account the potential for implementing critical raw material projects and whose potential environmental impacts are assessed, have the potential to help balance public goods and interests, decreasing the risk of conflict and accelerating the sustainable deployment of critical raw materials projects in the Union. National, regional and local authorities responsible should therefore consider including provisions for critical raw materials projects when developing relevant plans. This is without prejudice to existing requirements to assess the potential environmental impacts of such plans and to the required quality of such assessments. |
| (36) | Within the Union, critical raw materials projects often face difficulties with access to finance. Critical raw materials markets are often characterised by high volatility of prices, long lead times, high concentration and opacity. Additionally, financing for the sector requires a high level of expert knowledge that is often lacking among financial institutions. To overcome those factors and contribute towards ensuring a stable and reliable supply of strategic raw materials, Member States and the Commission should assist in access to finance and administrative support. |
| (37) | A strong European value chain is necessary to ensure security of supply to safeguard the functioning of the internal market and increasing capacities can be achieved only with adequate financial means, part of which could come from existing Union funds. Critical raw materials projects, including Strategic Projects, could be eligible for support from such funds if the requirements of the relevant programmes are met, for example related to geographical location, the environment or their contribution to innovation. The relevant funds comprise cohesion policy programmes, such as the European Regional Development fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1058 of the European Parliament and of the Council (15), whose allocation of grants to promote regional cohesion may enable SMEs to develop innovative projects, for instance linked to the reduction of energy consumption in the processing of raw materials. The Just Transition Fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1056 of the European Parliament and of the Council (16) could also be used to support such type of projects to the extent that they contribute to reducing the social and economic costs brought by the green transition. In addition, the Recovery and Resilience Facility established by Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17) , particularly its RePowerEU Chapter, which focuses on energy security and diversification of energy supply, could be mobilised to support projects involved, for instance, in the recycling or recovery of raw materials. The Innovation Fund established by Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (18), the objective of which is, in particular, to drive clean and innovative technologies towards the market, could provide grants, inter alia, to enable the development of recycling capacity of raw materials related to low carbon technologies. Furthermore, InvestEU established by Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council (19) is the Union’s flagship programme for boosting investment, especially in the green and digital transition, by providing financing and technical assistance. Through the use of blending mechanisms, InvestEU contributes to the crowding-in of additional public and private capital. The Commission will work with InvestEU implementing partners to scale up support to and investment in relevant projects, in line with the common objectives set out in Regulation (EU) 2021/523 and this Regulation. Last, projects in third countries contributing to the diversification of Union’s supply could be supported through relevant funds, such as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument and the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus established by Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council (20). |
| (38) | In order to overcome the limitations of the currently often fragmented public and private investments efforts, facilitate integration and return on investment, the Commission, Member States and promotional banks should better coordinate and create synergies between the existing funding programmes at Union and national level as well as ensure better coordination and collaboration with industry and key private sector stakeholders. To that end, a dedicated subgroup of the Board bringing together experts from the Member States and the Commission as well as relevant public financial institutions should be set up. This subgroup should discuss the individual financing needs of Strategic Projects and their existing funding possibilities in order to provide project promoters with a suggestion on how to best access existing financing possibilities. When discussing and making recommendations for the financing of Strategic Projects in third countries, the Board should in particular take into account the Global Gateway strategy, set out in the Joint communication of the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 1 December 2021, entitled ‘The Global Gateway’. |
| (39) | Private investment by companies, financial investors and off-takers is essential. Where private investment alone is not sufficient, the effective roll-out of projects along the critical raw material value chain may require public support, for example in the form of guarantees, loans or equity and quasi-equity investments. That public support may constitute State aid. Such State aid should have an incentive effect and be necessary, appropriate and proportionate. The existing State aid guidelines, which have recently undergone an in-depth revision in line with twin transition objectives, provide ample possibilities to support investments along the critical raw materials value chain subject to certain conditions. |
| (40) | Public support is used to address specific identified market failures or suboptimal investment situations in a proportionate manner, and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions should have a clear added value for the Union. |
| (41) | The volatile prices of several strategic raw materials, exacerbated by limited means to hedge them on forward markets, create an obstacle both for project promoters to secure financing for strategic raw material projects as well as for downstream consumers looking to secure stable and predictable prices for key inputs. In an effort to reduce uncertainty over future prices for strategic raw materials and thereby limit supply risk to safeguard the functioning of the internal market, it is necessary to provide for the setting up of a system that enables both interested offtakers and promoters of Strategic Projects to indicate their buying or selling bids and to bring them in contact if their respective bids are potentially compatible. |
| (42) | The existing knowledge and mapping of the Union’s raw materials occurrences were developed at a time when ensuring the supply of critical raw materials for the development of strategic technologies was not a priority. A lack of up-to-date geological information on critical raw materials in the Union could undermine the development of extraction projects, thereby weakening efforts to decrease supply risk and safeguard the functioning of the internal market. To acquire and update information on the critical raw material occurrences, Member States should, where relevant given the geological conditions, draw up national mapping programmes for the general exploration of critical raw materials and the main minerals that they are extracted together with. This should include measures such as geological mapping, geochemical campaigns, geoscientific surveys as well as the reprocessing of existing geoscientific datasets. This increases the probability of locating new deposits, which in turn should stimulate investments in exploration. The exploration programmes should also consider making use of novel exploration techniques that allow the identification of occurrences at greater depth than conventional techniques. To facilitate the development of extraction projects, Member States should make publicly available certain basic information acquired during their respective national exploration programme, where appropriate using the framework of the Infrastructure for Spatial Information established by Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (21), while providing more detailed information upon request. The Commission should be able to issue guidelines to promote a harmonised format of the exploration programmes. |
| (43) | Space data and services derived from earth observation can support the efforts towards sustainable critical raw materials value chains by providing a continuous flow of information, which could be useful for activities such as monitoring and management of mining areas, the environmental and socioeconomic impact assessment, or mineral resource exploration. As earth observation is also able to provide data about remote and inaccessible areas, it should be taken into account by Member States when drawing up and implementing their national exploration programmes to the extent possible. |
| (44) | Although the reinforcement of the Union’s critical raw materials value chain is necessary to ensure increased security of supply, the supply chains of critical raw materials will remain global and exposed to external factors. Recent or ongoing events ranging from the COVID-19 crisis to the unprovoked and unjustified military aggression against Ukraine underlined the vulnerability of some of the Union’s supply chains to disruptions. In order to ensure that Union and Member State industries are able to anticipate supply disruption and prepared to withstand their consequences, measures should be developed to strengthen monitoring capacity, coordinate strategic stocks and reinforce the preparedness of companies. |
| (45) | Member States do not have the same capacity when it comes to risk-awareness and anticipation, and not all Member States have developed dedicated structures that monitor the supply chains of critical raw materials and could inform companies about potential risks of supply disruptions. Similarly, although some companies have invested in the monitoring of their supply chains, others lack the capacity to do so. Therefore, in light of the global dimension of critical raw materials supply chains as well as their complexity, the Commission should develop a dedicated monitoring dashboard assessing critical raw materials’ supply risks and ensure the availability of the information gathered for public authorities and private actors, thereby increasing synergies among Member States. In order to ensure that Union value chains are sufficiently prepared against potential supply disruptions likely to distort competition and fragment the internal market, such as those caused by geopolitical conflicts, the Commission should conduct stress tests assessing the vulnerability of the strategic raw materials supply chains and their exposure to supply risks. Member States should contribute to this exercise by, when possible, conducting such stress tests through their national supply and information bodies covering critical raw materials. The Board should ensure the coordination of the implementation of the stress tests by the Commission and Member States. When no Member State has the capacity to carry out a required stress test on a given strategic raw material, the Commission itself should conduct it. The Commission should also suggest potential strategies that can be adopted by the public authorities and private actors to mitigate supply risks, such as building strategic stocks or further diversifying their supply. For the purpose of gathering the information necessary to conduct the monitoring and stress tests measures, the Commission should coordinate with the relevant standing subgroup of the Board and Member States should identify and monitor key market operators. |
| (46) | Strategic stocks are an important tool to mitigate supply disruptions, in particular for critical raw materials. Although the proposed single market emergency instrument as proposed by the Commission would allow for the possible development of such strategic stocks in the event of the activation of the single market vigilance mode, Member States and companies do not have obligations to build up their strategic stocks ahead of a supply disruption. In addition, there is no coordination mechanism across the Union that allows for the development of a common assessment and of an analysis of potential overlaps and synergies. Therefore, as a first step, and taking account of the present lack of relevant information, Member States should provide to the Commission information about potential strategic stocks, and if any, whether they are operated by public authorities or by economic operators on the behalf of the Member States. Such information should include the strategic stock levels available per strategic raw material on an aggregated level, the outlook of strategic stock levels, and the rules and procedures applicable to that strategic stock. Any request should be proportionate, have regard for the cost and effort required to make the data available as well as for its impact on national security, and should set out appropriate time limits for providing the requested information. The Member States should be able to add information on the strategic stocks of economic operators to the analysis, although not subject to a request for information. The Commission should handle the data in a secure manner, and only publish information on an aggregate level. As a second step, on the basis of the information acquired, the Commission should develop a draft benchmark for what should be considered to be a safe level of Union strategic stocks, taking into account the total annual Union consumption of the concerned strategic raw materials. On the basis of a comparison between existing strategic stocks and the overall levels of strategic stocks of strategic raw materials across the Union, the Board, acting in agreement with the Commission, should then be able to issue non-binding opinions to Member States on how to increase convergences, and to encourage them in building up their strategic stocks. In doing so, the Board should consider the need to maintain incentives for the development of strategic stocks by private or public operators using strategic raw materials. |
| (47) | So as to foster further coordination, the Commission should ensure necessary consultation of Member States in advance of their participation in international fora where such strategic stocks may be discussed, in particular via the dedicated standing subgroup of the Board. Similarly, in order to increase complementarity between this Regulation and other horizontal or subject-specific instruments, the Commission should ensure that the gathered and aggregated information are passed to vigilance or crisis governance mechanisms, such as the proposed single market emergency instrument’s advisory group, the European Semiconductor Board established by Regulation (EU) 2023/1781 of the European Parliament and of the Council (22), the HERA Board established by Commission Decision 2021/C 393 I/02 (23) or the Health Crisis Board established under Council Regulation (EU) 2022/2372 (24). |
| (48) | In order to ensure that they are sufficiently prepared to face supply disruptions, large companies manufacturing strategic technologies in the Union using strategic raw materials should carry out a risk assessment of their supply chains. This will ensure that they take into account the supply risks of strategic raw materials and, where necessary, develop appropriate mitigation strategies to be better prepared in the event of a supply disruption. Such large companies should, as part of that risk assessment, map the origins of their strategic raw materials, analyse the factors that could affect their supply and assess their vulnerabilities to supply disruptions. In the event of vulnerabilities being detected, the identified large companies should take efforts to mitigate them. That risk assessment should be based on data acquired by companies from their suppliers and, if such data is unavailable, should be based, to the extent possible, on data that is publicly available or is published by the Commission. Member States should be able to require that a report on that risk assessment is transmitted to the companies’ board of directors. To take into account the need to protect trade and business secrets and to limit the exposure of companies’ vulnerabilities, that report should not be made public. Those measures should lead to additional consideration being given to the costs of potential supply disruptions, without prescribing defined mitigation strategies. |
| (49) | Many markets for strategic raw materials are not fully transparent and are concentrated on the supply side, which increases the negotiating power of sellers and increases prices for buyers. To help lower prices for undertakings established in the Union, the Commission should set up a system that is able to aggregate the demand of interested buyers. In order to avoid a disproportionate impact on competition in the internal market, the Commission, in consultation with the Board, should carry out an assessment on the impact of the system on the market for each strategic raw material added to the system. In developing such a system, the Commission should take into account experience gained in similar endeavours, in particular regarding the joint purchasing of gas as established under Council Regulation (EU) 2022/2576 (25). All measures under that mechanism should be compatible with Union competition law. |
| (50) | The provisions on monitoring and strategic stocks included in this Regulation do not entail the harmonisation of national laws and regulations and do not replace existing mechanisms. Monitoring and risk preparedness incentives should be in line with Union law. Union legislative acts such as the proposed single market emergency instrument, which aims to anticipate, mitigate and respond to crises affecting the functioning of the internal market or Regulation (EU) 2022/2372 could apply to strategic and critical raw materials in the event of a crisis or a threat to the extent that those raw materials fall within the scope of such legislative acts. Complementarity and coherence between this Regulation and Union crisis instruments should be ensured by the Commission through the exchange of information between the relevant advisory and governance bodies established by those legislative acts. |
| (51) | Most critical raw materials are metals, which can be in principle endlessly recycled, albeit sometimes subject to deteriorating quality. This offers the potential to move to a truly circular economy in the context of the green transition while increasing the availability of critical raw materials and thereby contributing to ensure security of supply. After an initial phase of rapid growth of demand for critical raw materials for new technologies, where primary extraction and processing will still constitute the predominant source, recycling should increasingly reduce the need for primary extraction and its associated impacts. This should be done while maintaining a high level of Union recycling capacity via a strong market for secondary critical raw materials. Today, however, recycling rates of most critical raw materials are low, with waste streams such as batteries, electrical and electronic equipment and vehicles being shipped to third countries for recycling. Recycling systems and technologies are often not adapted to the specificities of those raw materials. Innovation plays an important role in reducing the need for critical raw materials, reducing the risks of shortage of supply and for the development of recycling technologies to properly and safely extract critical raw materials from waste. Prompt action addressing the different factors holding back the circularity potential is thus required. |
| (52) | Member States retain important competences in the field of circularity, for example in the area of waste collection and treatment systems. Those competences should be used to increase collection and recycling rates for waste streams with a high potential for recovery of critical raw materials, including electronic waste, making use for example of financial incentives such as discounts, monetary rewards or deposit-refund systems while preserving the integrity of the internal market. With a view to increasing the use of secondary critical raw materials, this could also include differentiated producer responsibility fees, provided such fees exist in national law, to benefit products containing a larger share of secondary critical raw materials recovered from waste recycled in accordance with environmental standards established in Union law. Such secondary critical raw materials recovered from waste should include recovery carried out in accordance with third-country standards that offer an equivalent protection to Union standards. Member State authorities should also make a difference as buyers of critical raw materials and of products containing them, and national research and innovation programmes provide significant resources to increase the state of knowledge and technology for critical raw materials circularity as well as material efficiency. Finally, Member States should promote the recovery of critical raw materials from extractive waste by improving the availability of information and by addressing legal, economic and technical barriers. A possible solution that Member States should look into are risk-sharing mechanisms between operators and the Member State to promote recovery from closed waste facilities. The Board should also facilitate the exchange of best practices between Member States, on the design and implementation of their national programmes. |
| (53) | The Union has, in many of its regions, a legacy of raw materials extraction and thus substantial amounts of extractive waste on closed facilities which, due to their only recent rise in economic importance, have generally not been analysed for critical raw materials potential. The recovery of critical raw materials from extractive waste facilities has the potential to increase Union capacity while creating economic value and employment in historical mining regions, which are often affected by deindustrialisation and decline. The lack of attention to, and information on critical raw materials content, especially on closed waste facilities, constitutes a key barrier to greater use of the critical raw materials potential of extractive waste. |
| (54) | The recovery of critical raw materials from extractive waste facilities should be part of the valorisation of relevant waste facilities. Directive 2006/21/EC sets out high requirements of environmental and human health protection for the waste management of the extractive industry. While those high requirements should be maintained, it is appropriate to establish additional measures to maximise the recovery of critical raw materials from extractive waste. |
| (55) | Operators of extractive waste facilities, both existing and new, should carry out a preliminary economic assessment study regarding the recovery of critical raw materials from extractive waste present on the site and from such waste being generated. In accordance with the waste hierarchy established in Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (26), priority should be given to preventing the generation of waste containing critical raw materials, by extracting critical raw materials from the extracted volume prior to it becoming waste. In elaborating this study, operators should gather the necessary information, including concentrations and quantities of critical raw materials in the extractive waste, and carry out an assessment of multiple options regarding processes, operations or business arrangements that could enable an economically viable recovery of critical raw materials. This obligation comes in addition to obligations laid down in Directive 2006/21/EC and the national measures transposing that Directive and is directly applicable. In its implementation, operators and competent authorities should seek to minimise administrative burden and integrate procedures to the extent possible. |
| (56) | To address the current lack of information on the critical raw materials potential of closed extractive waste facilities, Member States should draw up a database containing all information relevant to promote the recovery, in particular the quantities and concentrations of critical raw materials in the extractive waste facility, in accordance with Union competition rules. The information should be made publicly available and in a user-friendly and digital form, enabling access to more detailed, technical information. To facilitate user-friendly access to the information, Member States should, for instance, provide a point of contact to enable more in-depth exchanges with potential developers of critical raw materials recovery projects. The database should be designed to allow potential project promoters to easily identify facilities with a high potential for economically viable recovery. To focus limited resources, Member States should follow a staged approach in the gathering of information and carry out the more demanding information gathering steps only for the most promising facilities. The information gathering activities should aim to provide accurate and representative information on the extractive waste facilities and gaining the best possible indication of the critical raw materials recovery potential. |
| (57) | Permanent magnets are incorporated in a wide variety of products, with wind turbines and electric vehicles being the most important and fastest-growing applications but also other products, including magnetic resonance imaging devices, industrial robots, light means of transport, cooling generators, heat pumps, electric motors, industrial electric pumps, automatic washing machines, tumble driers, microwaves, vacuum cleaners and dishwashers containing significant amounts worth recovering. Electric motors should also be covered when included in other products. Most permanent magnets, in particular the most performant types, contain critical raw materials, such as neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium and terbium, boron, samarium, nickel or cobalt. Their recycling is possible but today only performed in the Union at a small scale or in the context of research projects. Permanent magnets should therefore be a priority product for increasing circularity, thereby fostering a secondary market for permanent magnets and ensuring security of supply of critical raw materials. |
| (58) | A precondition for the effective recycling of permanent magnets is for recyclers to have access to the necessary information on the amount, type and chemical composition of permanent magnets in a product, their location and the coating, glues and additives used, as well as information on how to safely remove the permanent magnets from the product. In addition, to ensure a business case for permanent magnet recycling, permanent magnets incorporated in products placed on the Union market should, over time, contain an increasing amount of recycled raw materials. While providing transparency on the recycled content in a first stage, a minimum recycled content should be set after a dedicated assessment of the appropriate level and likely impacts. |
| (59) | Critical raw materials sold on the Union market are often certified regarding the sustainability of their production and supply chain. Certification can be obtained in the context of a broad range of public and private certification schemes available with varying scopes and stringency, creating the potential for confusion regarding the nature and veracity of claims made about the relative sustainability of critical raw materials placed on the Union market on the basis of such certification. The Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts recognising certification schemes that should be considered to be trustworthy, providing a common basis for relevant authorities and market participants for assessing the sustainability of critical raw materials. Recognition should be given only to certification schemes which contain provisions for independent third-party verification and monitoring of compliance. As regards environmental protection, certifications schemes should cover risks related to, for example, air, water, soil, biodiversity and waste management. The requirements on all sustainability dimensions should ensure a high level of social and environmental protection and should be consistent with Union law or the international instruments listed in an annex. To ensure efficient procedures, project promoters of projects applying to be recognised as Strategic Projects should be allowed to rely on participation in a recognised certification scheme as relevant evidence to show that their project is implemented sustainably, thereby contributing to a safe and sustainable supply of critical raw materials. When making use of that option, recognised certification schemes should cover all sustainability dimensions. In recognising such certification schemes, the Commission should take into account experience gained in assessing certification schemes in the context of other Union legislative acts, in particular regarding the assessment of similar schemes in the context of Regulations (EU) 2017/821 (27) and (EU) 2023/1542 (28) of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| (60) | The production of critical raw materials at different stages of the value chain causes environmental impacts, whether on climate, water, soil, fauna or flora. In order to limit such damage and incentivise the production of more sustainable critical raw materials, the Commission should be empowered to develop a system for the calculation of the environmental footprint of critical raw materials, including a verification process, to ensure that critical raw materials placed on the Union market publicly display information on such footprint and facilitating circularity of critical raw materials. The system should be based on taking into account scientifically sound assessment methods and relevant international standards in the area of life-cycle assessment. The requirement to declare the environmental footprint of a critical raw material should only apply where it has been concluded, on the basis of a dedicated assessment, that it would contribute to the Union’s climate and environmental objectives by facilitating the procurement of critical raw materials with lower environmental footprint and would not disproportionately affect trade flows and economic costs. When the relevant calculation rules have been adopted, the Commission should develop performance classes for critical raw materials, thereby allowing potential buyers to easily compare the relative environmental footprint of available critical raw materials and driving the market towards more sustainable raw materials. Sellers of critical raw materials should ensure that the environmental footprint declaration is available to their customers. Transparency on the relative footprint of critical raw materials placed on the Union market could also enable other policies at Union and national level, such as incentives or green public procurement criteria, fostering the production of critical raw materials with lower environmental impacts. |
| (61) | The environmental footprint methods set out in Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279 (29) constitute a relevant basis for the development of the relevant calculation rules. They rely on scientifically sound assessment methods which take into account developments on international level and cover environmental impacts, including climate change and impacts related to water, air, soil, resources, land use and toxicity. |
| (62) | The conformity of products or critical raw materials with requirements to improve the circularity of permanent magnets and on the declaration of the environmental footprint of critical raw materials should be assessed by the manufacturer responsible before they are placed on the market and those requirements should be effectively enforced by competent national authorities. The conformity and market surveillance provisions established pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council (30) and Directive 2009/125/EC are designed to address that challenge and should therefore apply also to those requirements. The Commission should therefore be empowered to adopt delegated acts to supplement this Regulation to ensure that those provisions apply where relevant in the context of this Regulation. To further ensure that optimal use is made of existing regulatory frameworks, the compliance of products that are subject to type approval pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council (31) or Regulation (EU) No 168/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (32) should be enforced through the existing type-approval system. |
| (63) | The Commission should, in accordance with Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (33), request one or more European standardisation organisations to draft European standards in support of the objectives of this Regulation. |
| (64) | The Union has concluded Strategic Partnerships covering raw materials with third countries in order to implement the 2020 Action Plan on Critical Raw Materials. In order to diversify supply, those efforts should continue. To develop and ensure a coherent framework for the conclusion of future Strategic Partnerships, the Member States and the Commission should, as part of their interaction on the Board, discuss, inter alia, whether existing partnerships achieve the intended aims, the prioritisation of third countries for new partnerships, the content of such partnerships and their consistency and potential synergies with Member States’ bilateral cooperation with relevant third countries. This should be done without prejudice to the prerogatives of the Council in accordance with the Treaties. The Union should seek mutually beneficial partnerships with emerging markets and developing economies, in coherence with its Global Gateway strategy, which contribute to the diversification of its raw materials supply chain as well as add value in the production in those countries. |
| (65) | Strategic Projects in third countries, particularly where no Strategic Partnership exists, can be particularly risky for investors and often highly dependent on political support in the third country. This issue can be alleviated by increased risk-sharing between interested undertakings, acting in the strategic interest of the Union. Therefore, support should also be provided to enable businesses, including where they act as consortia, without prejudice to the application of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), to access markets in third countries that are not covered by a Strategic Partnership or a free trade agreement. Such support could include providing a support network to help them with establishing contact in the relevant third country and gathering information on local and regional circumstances. |
| (66) | The absence of progress towards the objectives and the capacity and diversification benchmarks set out in this Regulation could indicate the need for adopting additional measures. The Commission should therefore monitor the progress towards those objectives and benchmarks. |
| (67) | To keep the administrative burden on Member States to a minimum, the different reporting obligations should be streamlined, and the Commission should develop a template allowing Member States to fulfil their reporting obligations on projects, exploration, monitoring or strategic stocks within a regularly published single document, that may be confidential or restricted. |
| (68) | In order to ensure trustful and constructive cooperation of competent authorities at Union and national levels, all parties involved in the application of this Regulation should respect the confidentiality of information and data obtained in carrying out their tasks. The Commission and the national competent authorities, their officials, employees and other persons working under the supervision of those authorities as well as officials and employees of other authorities of the Member States should not disclose information acquired or exchanged by them pursuant to this Regulation where such information is covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. This should also apply to the Board. The data collated pursuant to this Regulation should be handled and stored in a secure environment. |
| (69) | The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in order to update the lists of strategic and critical raw materials, provide for Union recycling capacity benchmarks based on strategic raw materials available in waste, adapt the elements and evidence to be taken into account when assessing the fulfilment of the recognition criteria for Strategic Projects, lay down minimum shares for neodymium, dysprosium, praseodymium, terbium, boron, samarium, nickel and cobalt recovered from post-consumer waste that must be present in the permanent magnet incorporated in certain products, establish rules for the calculation and verification of the environmental footprint of different critical raw materials and establish environmental footprint performance classes for different critical raw materials. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making (34). In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. |
| (70) | In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission as regards: (a) specifying the templates to be used for applications for recognition of Strategic Projects, progress reports related to Strategic Projects, the national exploration programmes, and the reporting of Member States pertaining to exploration, monitoring, strategic stocks and circularity; (b) specifying which products, components and waste streams are to be considered to have a relevant critical raw materials recovery potential; and (c) determining the criteria and their application for the recognition of schemes related to the sustainability of critical raw materials. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (35). |
| (71) | To ensure that the obligations laid down in this Regulation are complied with, Member States should provide for penalties to be imposed on undertakings that do not comply with their obligations, including on risk preparedness, project reporting and recyclability information. It is therefore necessary that Member States lay down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in national law for failure to comply with this Regulation. It is also necessary for Member States to ensure that project promoters have access, where relevant, to administrative or judicial review in accordance with national law. |
| (72) | The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Regulation. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making, that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and Union value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures. The Commission should submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee, a report on the implementation of this Regulation and progress towards achieving its objectives, including the capacity and diversification benchmarks. The report should also, on the basis of the implementation of the measures related the transparency of the environmental footprint of critical raw materials, assess the appropriateness of establishing maximum thresholds related to the environmental footprint. The Commission should also evaluate the need for benchmarks targeting 2040 and 2050 and for individual strategic raw materials, the consistency between this Regulation and Union environmental law, in particular in relation to the priority status of the strategic projects, the impact of the joint purchasing system set up pursuant to this Regulation on competition in the internal market and the appropriateness of establishing further measures to increase the collection, sorting and processing of waste, in particular with a view to metal scraps. |
| (73) | To the extent that any of the measures envisaged by this Regulation constitute State aid, the provisions concerning such measures are without prejudice to the application of Articles 107 and 108 TFEU. |
| (74) | Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely to improve the functioning of the internal market by establishing a framework to ensure the Union’s access to a secure, resilient and sustainable supply of critical raw materials, including by fostering efficiency and circularity throughout the value chain, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather, by reason of their scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives, |