(1)

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 (2) introduced a number of derogations from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, inter alia, in the wine sector, aimed at providing relief to wine operators and to help them cope with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, despite the usefulness of those measures, the wine market has not managed to regain its balance between supply and demand.

(2)

The COVID-19 pandemic is not under control. Vaccination campaigns in some regions of the Union and across the world are insufficient and movement restrictions and social distancing measure are still applied in most countries. Those measures continue to include restrictions related to travel, size of social gatherings, private parties, public events and to the possibility to eat and drink outside the home. Those restrictions result in a further decrease in the consumption of wine in the Union, larger stocks and more generally in market disturbance. In some Member States, one third of wine consumption is related to tourism. Therefore, wine consumption has continued to decline and stocks remain high. Those effects of the pandemic coupled with the tariffs imposed by the United States and the frost snap in Europe in April 2021 have had a severe negative impact on the income of wine producers in the Union. It is estimated that the combination of all those factors has had the effect of reducing on average by 15 to 20 % the turnover of the Union wine sector, with some companies having reported losses of up to 40 %.

(3)

In addition, the uncertainty as to the duration of the crisis, which remains difficult to predict due to the rapid mutability of the virus, further deepens the existing significant disturbance of the Union wine market. This means that the recovery of the sector will take longer than could be foreseen at the beginning of 2021. Consequently, it is appropriate to continue to offer temporary and exceptional support to the Union wine sector to avoid the increase in bankruptcies that has been reported.

(4)

Given that harvest insurance is an important instrument to manage risks, including risks linked to adverse climatic events such as the late and particularly long spells of severe frost in April 2021 and risks linked to market disturbances such as those resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to provide a stronger incentive for wine growers to contract harvest insurance by increasing the Union support for that measure. It is also appropriate for this incentive to cover more than one marketing year, because experience has shown that the uptake of support for harvest insurance has been very limited in the past. Thus, it is essential to have enough time to inform and encourage Member States and operators in the wine sector to make use of this exceptional rate of support. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the Union financial contribution to the support for harvest insurance as referred to in Article 8 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 as of 16 October 2021 until the end of the programming period 2019-2023.

(5)

Furthermore, as the Union wine market is not expected to regain its balance between supply and demand in the short term, it is necessary to extend the application of the measures laid down in Articles 5a and 6, Article 7(2) and Article 9 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 until 15 October 2022.

(6)

Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(7)

In order to ensure continuity between financial years 2021 and 2022, this Regulation should enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and apply from 16 October 2021,

(1)

Article 8 is amended as follows:

(2)

in Article 10, the date ‘15 October 2021’ is replaced by ‘15 October 2022’.

(1)

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/884 (3) introduced a number of temporary derogations from existing rules, inter alia, from Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1149 (4) in the wine sector, aimed at providing relief to operators to help them cope with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, despite the usefulness of those measures, the wine market has not managed to regain its balance between supply and demand.

(2)

The COVID-19 pandemic is not under control. Vaccination campaigns in some regions of the Union and across the world are insufficient and movement restrictions and social distancing measure are still applied in most countries. Those measures continue to include restrictions related to travel, size of social gatherings, private parties, public events and to the possibility to eat and drink outside the home. Those restrictions result in a further decrease in the consumption of wine in the Union, larger stocks and more generally in market disturbance. In some Member States, one third of wine consumption is related to tourism. Therefore, wine consumption has continued to decline and stocks remain high. Those effects of the pandemic coupled with the tariffs imposed by the United States and the frost snap in Europe in April 2021 have had a severe negative impact on the income of wine producers in the Union. It is estimated that the combination of all those factors has had the effect of reducing on average by 15 to 20 % the turnover of the Union wine sector, with some companies having reported losses of up to 40 %.

(3)

In addition, the uncertainty as to the duration of the crisis, which remains difficult to predict due to the rapid mutability of the virus, further deepens the existing significant disturbance of the Union wine market. This means that the recovery of the sector will take longer than could be foreseen at the beginning of 2021. Consequently, it is appropriate to continue to offer temporary and exceptional support to the Union wine sector to avoid the increase in bankruptcies that has been reported.

(4)

As the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on the wine market are expected to continue beyond the year 2021 and thus during a considerable part of the financial year 2022, it is necessary to extend the application of the measures laid down in Article 2(1), (3), (4) and (6) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/884 for the duration of the financial year 2022.

(5)

Article 25(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1149 provides that the support for mutual funds referred to in Article 48 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 are to be limited to 10 %, 8 % and 4 % of the contribution of the producers to the mutual fund respectively in the first, second and third year of its implementation. However, experience to date has shown that such support rates do not encourage Member States to include that measure in their support programmes in the wine sector and operators to apply for support thereunder. Given that mutual funds are an important instrument to manage risks, including risks linked to adverse climatic events such as the late and particularly long spells of severe frost that occurred in April 2021 and those linked to market disturbances such as those resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is appropriate to double the support rates provided for in Article 25(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1149 to increase the incentive for operators in the wine sector to set up mutual funds and provide the tool and support for them to protect themselves against future risks.

(6)

It is also appropriate for that increased incentive to cover more than one marketing year, because experience has shown that the uptake of support for the setting up of mutual funds has been very limited in the past. Thus, it is essential to have enough time to inform and encourage Member States and operators in the wine sector to make use of that exceptional rate of support. Furthermore, setting up mutual funds can take more than one year. Therefore the increased support should cover at least two years. For all these reasons, it is necessary to increase the Union financial contribution to the support for mutual funds until the end of the programming period 2019-2023.

(7)

Delegated Regulations (EU) 2020/884 and (EU) No 2016/1149 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

In order to ensure continuity between financial years 2021 and 2022, this Regulation should enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and apply from 16 October 2021,

(1)

paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

(2)

in paragraphs 3, 4 and 6, the date ‘15 October 2021’ is replaced by ‘15 October 2022’.

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Spain’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Cerezas de la Montaña de Alicante’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2), as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 106/2011 (3) and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/123 (4). These amendments include changing the name ‘Cerezas de la Montaña de Alicante’ to ‘Cerezas de la Montaña de Alicante’/‘Cireres de la Muntanya d’Alacant’.

(2)

Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (5) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.

(3)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,

(1)

Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 provides that only novel foods authorised and included in the Union list may be placed on the market within the Union.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 (2) establishing a Union list of authorised novel foods, was adopted.

(3)

On 1 October 2019, the company DuPont Nutrition & Biosciences ApS (‘the applicant’) submitted an application to the Commission in accordance with Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 to place 3-Fucosyllactose (3-FL), obtained by microbial fermentation with a genetically modified strain of Escherichia coli, strain K12 MG1655, on the Union market as a novel food. The applicant requested for 3-FL to be used as a novel food in unflavoured pasteurised and unflavoured sterilised (including Ultra High Temperature, ‘UHT’) milk products, flavoured and unflavoured fermented milk based products including heat-treated products, cereal bars, dairy analogues and non-dairy yoghurts, beverages (flavoured drinks, energy drinks, sports drinks), infant formula and follow-on formula as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), processed cereal-based food and baby food for infants and young children as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, total diet replacement foods for weight control as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, foods for special medical purposes as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, milk based drinks and similar products intended for young children, and in food supplements as defined in Directive 2002/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) intended for the general population, excluding infants. During the application process, the applicant agreed to also exclude young children (under 3 years of age) from the scope of the request for authorisation of the novel food in food supplements. The applicant also proposed that food supplements containing 3-FL should not be used if other foods with added 3-FL are consumed on the same day.

(4)

On 1 October 2019, the applicant also made a request to the Commission for the protection of proprietary data for a number of studies submitted in support of the application, namely, the detailed characterisation data on the production bacterial strain (5); the novel food production process (6); the analyses of the various 3-FL batches (7); the analytical reports on the characterisation via nuclear magnetic resonance (‘NMR’) of 3-FL and of the 3-FL naturally present in human milk (8); the 3-FL stability reports (9); the 3-FL intake assessment reports (10); a bacterial reverse mutation test (11); an in vitro mouse micronucleus test (12); an in vitro micronucleus test with Chinese hamster ovary cells (13); an in vitro mammalian cell chromosomal aberration test in human lymphocytes (14); an acute oral toxicity test in rats (15); a 90-day oral toxicity study in the rat including serum and urine analysis (16); a 6-day oral toxicity study in piglets (17); and a 3-week oral toxicity study in neonatal piglets (18).

(5)

On 29 January 2020, the Commission, in accordance with Article 10(3) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 requested the European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) to carry out an assessment of 3-FL as a novel food.

(6)

On 25 May 2021, the Authority adopted its scientific opinion on the safety of 3-FL as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 (19).

(7)

In its scientific opinion, the Authority concluded that 3-FL is safe under the proposed conditions of use for the proposed target populations. Therefore, that scientific opinion gives sufficient grounds to establish that 3-FL, when used in unflavoured pasteurised and unflavoured sterilised (including UHT) milk products, flavoured and unflavoured fermented milk based products including heat-treated products, cereal bars, dairy analogues and non-dairy yoghurts, beverages (flavoured drinks, energy drinks, sports drinks), infant formula and follow-on formula as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, processed cereal-based food and baby food for infants and young children as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, total diet replacement foods for weight control as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, foods for special medical purposes as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013, milk based drinks and similar products intended for young children, and in food supplements as defined in Directive 2002/46/EC intended for the general population, with limitations for infants and young children complies with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283.

(8)

In its scientific opinion, the Authority considered that it could not have reached its conclusions on the safety of the 3-FL without the data from the detailed characterisation data on the production bacterial strain; the novel food production process; the analyses of the various 3-FL batches; the analytical reports on the characterisation via NMR of 3-FL and of the 3-FL naturally present in human milk; the 3-FL stability reports; the 3-FL intake assessment reports; a bacterial reverse mutation test; an in vitro mouse micronucleus test; an in vitro micronucleus test with Chinese hamster ovary cells; an in vitro mammalian cell chromosomal aberration test in human lymphocytes; an acute oral toxicity test in rats; a 90-day oral toxicity study in the rat including serum and urine analysis; a 6-day oral toxicity study in piglets; and a 3-week oral toxicity study in neonatal piglets.

(9)

Following the receipt of the Authority’s scientific opinion, the Commission requested the applicant to further clarify the justification provided with regard to their proprietary claim over the data from the detailed characterisation data on the production bacterial strain; the novel food production process; the analyses of the various 3-FL batches; the analytical reports on the characterisation via NMR of 3-FL and of the 3-FL naturally present in human milk; the 3-FL stability reports; the 3-FL intake assessment reports; a bacterial reverse mutation test; an in vitro mouse micronucleus test; an in vitro micronucleus test with Chinese hamster ovary cells; an in vitro mammalian cell chromosomal aberration test in human lymphocytes; an acute oral toxicity test in rats; a 90-day oral toxicity study in the rat including serum and urine analysis; a 6-day oral toxicity study in piglets; and a 3-week oral toxicity study in neonatal piglets.

(10)

The applicant declared that, at the time the application was made, they held proprietary and exclusive rights of reference to the studies under national law and that therefore third parties could not lawfully access or use those studies.

(11)

The Commission assessed all the information provided by the applicant and considered that the applicant has sufficiently substantiated the fulfilment of the requirements laid down in Article 26(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. Therefore, the data contained in the applicant’s file which served as a basis for the Authority to establish the safety of the novel food and to reach its conclusions on the safety of 3-FL, and without which the novel food could not have been assessed by the Authority, should not be used by the Authority for the benefit of any subsequent applicant for a period of 5 years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Accordingly, the placing on the market within the Union of 3-FL should be restricted to the applicant for that period.

(12)

However, restricting the authorisation of 3-FL and of the reference to the data contained in the applicant’s file for the sole use by the applicant, does not prevent other applicants from applying for an authorisation to place on the market the same novel food provided that their application is based on legally obtained information supporting such authorisation under Regulation (EU) 2015/2283.

(13)

In line with the conditions of use of food supplements containing 3-FL as proposed by the applicant and assessed by the Authority, it is necessary to inform consumers through the use of an appropriate label that food supplements containing 3-FL should not be consumed on the same day with other foods containing added 3-FL.

(14)

The Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(15)

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

(1)

N,N–dimethylformamide is an aprotic medium polar organic solvent classified as toxic to reproduction 1B, acute toxicant 4 (inhalation and dermal route) and as an eye irritant 2 in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2). N,N–dimethylformamide is a high production volume substance used in many industrial settings and professional activities across Europe.

(2)

On 5 October 2018, Italy (hereinafter ‘the dossier submitter’) submitted to the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Agency’) a dossier (3) pursuant to Article 69(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (‘the Annex XV dossier’), in order to initiate the restriction process set out in Articles 69 to 73 of that Regulation. The Annex XV dossier demonstrated that action on a Union-wide basis was necessary and proposed to restrict the industrial and professional use, as well as the placing on the market of N,N–dimethylformamide on its own or in mixtures.

(3)

The dossier submitter based its hazard assessment of N,N–dimethylformamide on the systemic effects of the substance on several endpoints. This resulted in a long-term inhalation derived no-effect level (‘DNEL’) and a long-term dermal DNEL based on animal data on decreased body weights, clinical chemistry changes and liver injury.

(4)

On 20 September 2019, the Agency’s Committee for Risk Assessment (‘RAC’) adopted its opinion (4) concluding that the proposed restriction, as modified by RAC, is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address the identified risks arising from exposure to N,N–dimethylformamide in terms of its effectiveness in reducing the risk, its practicality and monitorability.

(5)

As the dossier submitter’s assessment considered several contributing scenarios for N,N–dimethylformamide containing substances at low concentrations, RAC proposed to clarify the wording of the scope by including the presence of the substance, regardless of whether N,N–dimethylformamide is a constituent, a main constituent, an impurity or a stabiliser.

(6)

The dossier submitter proposed a long-term inhalation DNEL of 3,2 mg/m3 based on hepatic effects in animals. However, RAC recommended a long-term inhalation DNEL of 6 mg/m3 based on a combination of human data and animal data, taking into account liver toxicity and developmental toxicity, respectively.

(7)

For the long-term dermal DNEL, RAC recommended a DNEL based on a dermal study rather than making a route-to-route extrapolation from an oral 28-day study as proposed by the dossier submitter. Therefore, RAC proposed to use the value of 1,1 mg/kg/day as the long-term dermal DNEL.

(8)

On 5 December 2019, the Agency’s Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis (‘SEAC’) adopted its opinion (5), concluding that the proposed restriction, as modified by RAC, is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to reduce the risk to the health of workers arising from N,N–dimethylformamide, taking into account its socioeconomic benefits and costs. SEAC recommended a 24-month deferral of application of the restriction for all sectors, in line with the Annex XV dossier, to provide sufficient time to stakeholders to fully implement the restriction requirements.

(9)

The Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement was consulted on the proposed restriction and its recommendations have been taken into account.

(10)

On 1 April 2020, the Agency submitted the opinions of RAC and SEAC to the Commission. The said opinions confirmed that the risk to the health of workers in all occupational settings during the manufacture and use of N,N–dimethylformamide is not adequately controlled.

(11)

Taking into account the Annex XV dossier and the RAC and SEAC opinions, the Commission considers that there is an unacceptable risk to workers arising from exposure to N,N–dimethylformamide above specific DNEL values and that the proposed restriction establishing a DNEL for exposure of workers to N,N–dimethylformamide via both the inhalation and the dermal routes is the most appropriate Union-wide measure to address that risk.

(12)

The Commission considers that the proposed restriction, as modified by RAC and SEAC, is appropriate for the following reasons: the overall risk characterisation ratio is based on quantified DNELs for inhalation and dermal exposure to N,N–dimethylformamide; harmonisation of chemical safety reports in the registration dossiers via harmonised DNELs can only be achieved under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006; the safety data sheets will include those DNELs in the appropriate specific sections.

(13)

Stakeholders should be allowed sufficient time to comply with the proposed restriction, and downstream users, in particular, should have the same time period as manufacturers and importers to implement the appropriate risk management measures and operational conditions in order to ensure that exposure of workers to N,N–dimethylformamide is below the DNELs. The Commission therefore considers, in line with the Annex XV dossier and the opinion of SEAC, that the application of the restriction should be deferred for 24 months.

(14)

It is expected that, to comply with the DNELs for exposure of workers to N,N–dimethylformamide, the polyurethane coatings and membranes and the synthetic fibre manufacturing sectors will require more time. Therefore, longer transitional periods are suggested for the polyurethane coatings and membranes sector, where N,N–dimethylformamide is used as a solvent in direct or transfer polyurethane coating processes on textiles and paper material or in the production of polyurethane membranes (36 months) and, for the synthetic fibre manufacturing, where N,N–dimethylformamide is used as a solvent in the dry and wet spinning processes of synthetic fibres (48 months).

(15)

Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(16)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 133(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006,

(1)

Regulation (EU) 2016/429 requires that consignments of animals, germinal products and products of animal origin must come from a third country or territory, or zone or compartment thereof, listed in accordance with Article 230(1) of that Regulation in order to enter the Union.

(2)

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/692 (2) lays down the animal health requirements with which consignments of certain species and categories of animals, germinal products and products of animal origin from third countries or territories, or zones thereof, or compartments thereof, in the case of aquaculture animals, must comply with in order to enter the Union.

(3)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 (3) establishes the lists of third countries, or territories, or zones or compartments thereof, from which the entry into the Union of the species and categories of animals, germinal products and products of animal origin falling within the scope of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/692 is permitted.

(4)

More particularly, Annexes V and XIV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 set out the lists of third countries, or territories, or zones thereof authorised for the entry into the Union, respectively, of consignments of poultry, germinal products of poultry, and of fresh meat from poultry and game birds.

(5)

On 12 November 2021, the United Kingdom notified the Commission of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza in poultry. The outbreak is located near Frinton-on-Sea, Tendring, Essex in England and was confirmed on 12 November 2021 by laboratory analysis (RT-PCR).

(6)

On 14 November 2021, the United Kingdom notified the Commission of outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza in poultry. The outbreaks are located near Leeming Bar, Hambleton, North Yorkshire in England and near Salwick, Fylde, Lancashire in England and were confirmed on 14 November 2021 by laboratory analysis (RT-PCR).

(7)

The veterinary authorities of the United Kingdom established a 10 km control zone around the affected establishments and implemented a stamping-out policy in order to control the presence of highly pathogenic avian influenza and limit the spread of that disease.

(8)

The United Kingdom has submitted information to the Commission on the epidemiological situation on its territory and the measures it has taken to prevent the further spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza. That information has been evaluated by the Commission. On the basis of that evaluation, the entry into the Union of consigments of poultry, germinal products of poultry, and fresh meat from poultry and game birds from the areas under restrictions established by the veterinary authorities of the United Kingdom due to the recent outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza. should no longer be authorised.

(9)

Annexes V and XIV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 should be therefore amended accordingly.

(10)

Taking into account the current epidemiological situation in the United Kingdom as regards highly pathogenic avian influenza, the amendments to be made to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/404 by this Regulation should take effect as a matter of urgency.

(11)

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

(1)

In accordance with Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/509 (1), a European Peace Facility (EPF) was established for the financing by Member States of Union actions under the Common Foreign and Security Policy to preserve peace, prevent conflicts and strengthen international security in accordance with Article 21(2), point (c), of the Treaty. In particular, pursuant to Article 1(2), point (b)(i), of Decision (CFSP) 2021/509, the EPF may finance actions to strengthen the capacities of third States and regional and international organisations relating to military and defence matters.

(2)

The current crisis in Mozambique’s northern Cabo Delgado province is multidimensional, with a severe risk of spillover to other provinces of the country and to neighbouring countries. The Mozambican government has welcomed the deployment of a non-executive military European Union Training Mission as part of the EU Integrated Approach to the crisis in Cabo Delgado.

(3)

On 12 July 2021, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2021/1143 (2), establishing a European Union military training mission in Mozambique (EUTM Mozambique). The strategic objective of EUTM Mozambique is to support capacity building for the units of the Mozambican armed forces selected to compose a future Quick Reaction Force, in order for those units to develop the necessary sustainable capacities to restore safety and security in Cabo Delgado.

(4)

On 30 July 2021, the Council approved a concept note for an assistance measure under the EPF to support military units trained by EUTM Mozambique, including an urgent measure to provide the most urgently required equipment and supplies needed to properly train the two Mozambican companies scheduled to be the first to benefit from training by EUTM Mozambique.

(5)

In her letter of 27 August 2021 addressed to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’), the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Mozambique requested the Union to provide equipment not designed to deliver lethal force and supplies to all Mozambican companies to be trained by EUTM Mozambique.

(6)

This assistance measure is to be implemented taking into account the principles and requirements set out in Decision (CFSP) 2021/509, and in particular compliance with Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (3), and in accordance with the rules for the implementation of revenue and expenditure financed under the EPF.

(7)

The Council reaffirms its determination to protect, promote and fulfil human rights, fundamental freedoms and democratic principles and to strengthen the rule of law and good governance, in compliance with the United Nations Charter, with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and with international law, in particular international human rights and international humanitarian law,

(1)

On 21 January 2019, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2019/97 (1), which provides for a 36-month implementation period from the date of the conclusion of the financing agreement referred to in Article 3(3) of that Decision, for the projects referred to in Article 1 thereof.

(2)

The implementation period of the financing agreement ends on 4 February 2022.

(3)

On 8 July 2021, the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), which is responsible for the technical implementation of the projects referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2019/97, requested a 12-month no-cost extension of the implementation period of that Decision. This extension allows UNODA to carry out the implementation of several of the projects referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2019/97 the implementation of which was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

(4)

The extension of the implementation period of the projects referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2019/97 until 4 February 2023 does not have any implication as regards financial resources.

(5)

Decision (CFSP) 2019/97 should therefore be amended accordingly,