STANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE - Esteri · Web viewSTANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE. 1. Basic...

STANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE

1. Basic Information

1.1 Programme: ENP National Action Programme 2008

1.2 Twinning Number:

1.3 Title: Support to Moldova in the field of norms and standards in food safety for plant

origin products

1.4 Sector: Agriculture and Food Industry – Sanitary and Phytosanitary

1.5 Beneficiary country: Republic of Moldova

2. Objectives2.1 Overall Objective:The overall objective is to support the development of agricultural and food sectors related to products of plant origin of Moldova in compliance with EU and international rules and to support the ability of these sectors to participate in international trade.

2.2 Project purpose:To improve the capacity of the General Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and Seeds Control (GIPSSC) to define, plan organise and achieve their strategic and operational objectives by using EU compliant approaches which are risk-based and targeted at prevention.

2.3 Contribution to National Development Plan/Cooperation agreement/Association Agreement/Action Plan

The EU - Moldova Action Plan

The EU-Moldova Action Plan is a political document, among others laying out the strategic objectives of the cooperation between Moldova and the EU. Its implementation will help fulfil the provisions in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) and will encourage and support the further integration of Moldova into European economic and social structures. The EU Action Plan identifies priority action areas. To increase trade and movement of goods the Action Plan sets out in Chapter 2.4, among others, the following requirement (30) to develop sanitary and phytosanitary systems to provide for increased food safety for Moldovan consumers and to facilitate trade through reforms and modernisation of the sanitary and phytosanitary sectors:

i) Fully implement the requirements of the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT).

ii) Accede to the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation and increase its active participation in the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), International Plant Protection Convention and Codex Alimentarius.

1

iii) Assess the sanitary and phytosanitary control systems, in particular, at the state border, to compare with EU and international requirements.

iv) Draw up a comprehensive list of measures for gradual convergence towards EU principles of hygiene in food processing, accompanied by timetables for the transposition of EU legislation and a financing plan. Start approximation to EU legislation on the hygiene in food processing.

viii) Identify national reference laboratories in the phytosanitary sectors with a special attention given to the necessary equipment and appropriate methods of analysis (residues of pesticides/contaminants) and their accreditation.

3. Description

3.1 Background and justification:

The EU is Moldova's most important trading partner with a 50% share of its external trade. Further market opening is expected to support the development of Moldova’s economy through increased export performance while not creating negative effects for the Community.

In 2009 Moldova exported over 100 million USD worth of agri-food products of non-animal origin to the EU including fruit vegetables and cereals. (Source: national office of statistics website)

A new Council Regulation (EC) No 55/2008 of 21 January 2008 introducing autonomous trade preferences for Moldova offers unlimited and duty free access to the EU market to all products originating in Moldova, except for certain specific agricultural products which are admitted for import into the Community with exemption of customs duties within the limits of tariff quotas.

Through offering Moldova an improved access to the EU market, the European Commission intends to support the development of Moldova's economy by means of increased export performance and diversification. This Regulation allows Moldova to produce and export more to the EU. In order to benefit from the new regulation, Moldova should meet EU import requirements for its products especially in the agro-food sector where it is considered to have a larger potential.

Failure by countries exporting to the EU to provide adequate controls that leads to the subsequent detection of pests, weeds, diseases, pesticides or other banned items can result in products being detained, disinfected, returned, or destroyed. It can lead to notifications being sent to the exporting government and in the case of the European Union it leads to the notification to all EU-27 countries through the Rapid Alert System (RASSF). In 2008 Moldova had two Rapid Alert Notifications including one for the exportation of sunflower seeds contaminated with the insecticide Lindane.

Therefore as Moldova seeks to expand the high value agriculture export market a critical success factor is the ability of the Government of Moldova to establish a Phytosanitary system compliant with trading partner and IPPC requirements.

Data on the level of pesticide residues on food produced and consumed in Moldova is not adequately collected and systematically analysed. The users of pesticides are insufficiently aware of their primary responsibility for proper and safe use and of ways in which to improve their utilisation in accordance with this responsibility.

2

Neither the quality and safety systems of production nor the systems of their respective enforcement have the full faith of domestic consumers or of current and potential importers. This results in a tendency of domestic consumers to rely on imports and on difficulties in accessing high value export markets. Where there is access there is more often than not a requirement for double testing (on export from Moldova and entry into the importing country) reducing the competitiveness of exports.

The horticultural sector has not been covered so far by FVO inspections, however besides honey all other exported agricultural products to the EU are of plant origin.

Assessment of the sector

The conclusions of the final report of framework project “Development of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Systems Regarding Non-animal original food Exports-September 2009” indicate poor conditions which require attention and action.

According to the report produced by the above project the phytosanitary control and surveillance system in Moldova is barely functioning. The implementation of actions and measures, as set out in the Action Plan, will take years to come into force, subject to the state financial resources and supporting actions by donors and international institutions being made available. Primary observations are that:

The Government of Moldova is not meeting most required phytosanitary measures, especially regarding:

Border control procedures

The lack of a functioning phytosanitary laboratory

The lack of training, information and facilities available to phytosanitary inspectors

The need to approximate key legislative acts, regulations and decisions

There is no current monitoring or surveillance of Maximum Residue Levels (MRL)s. The only testing is related to export certification and only for active substances declared as used by producers. The main observations are that:

o There is no collaboration between the institutions involved in the control, monitoring and surveillance of pesticides residues, mycotoxins, nitrite, nitrate and heavy metals in vegetal products;

o Laboratories involved in testing are inappropriately equipped for pesticides analysis with determination limits lower than 0.01 mg/kg

o Laboratory accreditation is in accordance with ISO 17025 by the National Accreditation Body, which does not have international recognition;

o There is no sampling method for pesticide residues control for vegetal products and other contaminants.

o Moldovan national legislation regarding MRL’s for pesticides was published in 2003 and must be reviewed and updated.

o There is no national Monitoring Program for pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables. The MRL monitoring and surveillance plan proposed in the Action Plan, which initially includes 150 samples, 9 crops and 51 active substances, needs to adopted, financed and implemented.

3

Reform process in the sector

The implementation of food chain safety required a new institutional structure of bodies involved in SPS aspects of non animal origin.. To achieve greater effectiveness and coordination in the phytosanitary sector the MAFI created GIPPSC, which took over the responsibility of following inspectorates:

State Commission for Testing Plant Varieties;

State Inspectorate for Seeds;

State Inspectorate for Plant Protection;

Main State Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Quarantine;

State Inspectorate for Cereal and Bakery Products;

Agro Industrial Agency “Moldova-Tutun”;

3.2 Linked activities:

National programmes

There is a very little direct support being provided to improve exports and production of non-animal origin products in Moldova. Support is provided by the Government of Moldova in the form of subsidies for the establishment of stone fruits and walnut plantations; nurseries and greenhouses, and irrigation systems. The subsidy system typically covers 10 to 20% of investment costs, to be set against the Value Added Tax (VAT) of 20%.

The role of the advisory services, including the National Rural Development Agency, ACSA, a budget organisation also supported by the World Bank RISP project and other donors is also an important consideration regarding the importance of the small scale and fragmented nature of fresh produce production.

Donor activity

Currently the EU is financing the Project “Support to the implementation of Moldova EU agreements” provides policy and legal advice particularly on food safety and harmonisation of agri-food legislation with the EU standards and norms. It is expected that by the end of the project in December 2010 the key phytosanitary and pesticide primary legislation will be in place but that much work will be required in implementation and with drafting and implementation of subordinate legislation and normative documents.

EU Project: „Development of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Systems Regarding Non-Animal Origin Food Exports Republic of Moldova” The main goal of the project was to support the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry (MAFI) in the development of a programme of measures, including estimation of financial requirements, regarding SPS measures required to maintain and to increase non animal origin agricultural exports from Moldova to the EU (Framework Contract, 0,13 MEUR, October 2008- September 2009).

Other donor projects and programmes providing assistance to the non-animal sector are: Competitiveness Enhancement and Enterprise Development (CEED) funded by USAID; Competitiveness Enhancement Project (CEP) funded by the World Bank and the Japanese Government; the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) of the USA.

The CEED Project will be active till September 2010, the total life period of the project being 5-years. The budget of the project has been extended recently and is about 4.3mln USD. CEED

4

is working at both industry and company level and is targeting three sectors, one of which is wine industry. The Competitive Enhancement Project financed by the WB, February 2005 – 2009, has four components: a) regulatory reform (improving the business environment); b) modernization of metrology and standards; c) matching grants for ISO implementation; and, d) improving access to finance.

Millennium Challenge Corporation of the USA is focused on the development of high value agriculture. The project is now in the preparatory phase to clarify the needs for interventions in the sector, though it will be primarily focused upon infrastructure development including the rehabilitation of the irrigation system and roads. If financing is approved implementation would likely commence in 2011.

Different to the non-animal sector, the veterinary sector of the Republic of Moldova has received considerable support during the last several years. The most important support measures provided to the veterinary sector are:

EU Food Security Programme (2005-2007)

Implementation of the Animal Identification System in Moldova financed through the Budget Support Mechanism (2.3 MEUR).

Construction and equipment supply of the Food Safety Department of the Republican Centre for Veterinary Diagnosis (RCVD) financed through the Budget Support Mechanism in (1,5 MEUR).

Reconstruction and equipment supply of the Virusology Section of the Republican Centre for Veterinary Diagnosis financed through the Budget Support Mechanism (0,3 MEUR);

Support in finalization of the Residue Monitoring Plan for honey (TA Project)

Joint EC/FAO Food Security Programme - Phase II, Food Security Information for Action

Establishment of Rapid Alert System for infectious diseases and system of traceability of samples – registration and tracking system of samples from subdivisions of the veterinary authority as well on-line notification of the results from the laboratories.

EU Project „Enhancing the capacity of MAFI for export”

Endowment with laboratory equipment for 3 main laboratories involved in food safety of animal origin products. Total value of this project is 2 MEUR.

EU Project: “Support to export promotion and investments attraction for Republic of Moldova”, Component II – support to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry in consolidation of the laboratory testing system. The project provides support in the process of accreditation of laboratories involved in food safety of animal origin products under the standard ISO 17025:2005.

3.3 Results:

1. The precise role and remit and on that basis the strategic objectives of the GIPSSC in the food safety and plant health systems are defined and approved

2. The legislative framework updated and institutional structure of the GIPSSC (including the channels of communication) is optimised for efficient and effective functioning.

3. The effectiveness of the national pesticide MRL monitoring programme is improved

5

through an appropriately prioritised and fact - (data) and-risk based regulatory and enforcement approach and staff has the technical knowledge to implement the enforcement approach.

4. Responsible and safe pesticide use is improved through a proactive and preventative regulatory and enforcement approach

3.4 Activities:

Note: The listed activities and the proposed means for achieving the activities and results are indicative can be revised in the framework of the preparation of the contract between twinned institutions.

Component 0 - General (indicative) In addition to the activities related to the five components (mandatory results), the project will also carry out the following:

0.1 Kick off meeting An opening conference (kick off meeting) will be held in the first two months of the project. The conference will bring together the key stakeholders in Agriculture and Food safety and present the agreed work plan and planned outputs.

0.2 Monthly MeetingsMonthly meetings will be held to discuss project progress and to solve any emerging problems.

0.3 Steering Committee MeetingsRegular steering Committee meetings to promote effective management and monitoring of project activities the Steering Committee (composition detailed under 6.3) will meet at least once every three months (first in month 3). Progress in the areas of the project’s interventions will be discussed with the beneficiary and the members of the Steering Committee.

0.4 Wrap up MeetingA closing conference (wrap up meeting) will be held during the last two months of the project at which the results and impact of the project will be presented. The Conference will present recommendations for possible follow-up and lessons learned for similar projects.

Component 1: Institutional Assessment and Strategy Development of GIPSSC

1.1. Assessment of the General Inspectorate and recommendations for improvementAssess the strengths and weaknesses of the current institutional arrangements in the food safety and plant health sphere (including the border inspection and laboratory systems)

Assistance is required to support the GIPSSC in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the current institutional arrangements in the food safety and plant health sphere. The experts will be required to analyze the current institutional structure of the GIPSSC and taking into consideration the experience from the MS country to make an assessment and provide with recommendations regarding the appropriate structure of the phytosanitary system in Moldova. The analysis should look at the entire cycle, starting from the structure of the central

6

authority, internal and border inspections, and finishing with the laboratories that are involved in testing procedures. The experts should also look also at interaction between different institutions involved (such as Ministry of Health (MH), Ministry of Economy and Trade (MET), etc) and assist in the process of definition and delimitation their role within the system of food safety and plant health. The assessment should have a wide approach, and shall include also the legal and regulatory framework at the level of central institutions, defining the role of different institutions involved in the process. Two round tables shall be organised for discussions of this topic shall be organized at inter-institutional level to discuss the recommendations and the restructuring plan.Benchmark: The outcome of this activity should result in a report containing conclusions, recommendations and a tentative restructuring plan for plant health and food safety sector.

1.2 Define and formalise medium and long terms objectives for the GIPSSC.It is expected that the experts will assist in defining and formulation of medium and long terms objectives for the GIPSSC, helping the beneficiary agency to establish a realistic medium and long term activity plan. One seminar should be organized with the staff of the GIPSSC to explain the formulation and the objectives of the activity plan.

Benchmark: A document describing the agreed medium and long term objectives of the GIPSSC within the context of its operational environment.

1.3 Study tour for BC specialistsFollowing the establishment of the restructuring plan it will be appropriate to organize two study tours for each 5 specialists for maximum 5 days from GIPSSC (medium and high level management) to enable them to observe the functioning of food safety and plant health system in a MS country. The study tour shall be covering all aspects, including institutional arrangement, operations, logistics and other aspects that may be important for the activity of the GIPSSC. The study tour may include a mixture of methods, including seminars, site visits and other possible useful methods. Benchmark: As a result of the study tour and placements, the BC staff shall have a clear vision and understanding of the system in general and of their fields of activity in particular, and to be able to implement it in Moldova.

Component 2 Operational Review and Reform of GPSSC

2.1 Assessment of operational arrangements and resourcesCheck that the anticipated1 newly introduced and drafted regulatory framework enables appropriate risk based and preventative approaches to be pursued and support the addressing of outstanding gaps and weaknesses.

While the activities under the Component I are focused on inter-institutional arrangements and legal framework of the system, activities under this component shall orient to the internal structure of the GIPSSC and its resources to ensure its proper functioning, in accordance with 1 It is expected that by the end of the project in December 2010 the key phytosanitary and pesticide primary legislation will be in place but that much work will be required in drafting and implementing subordinate legislation and normative documents.

7

the EU requirements. The team of experts should assess the institutional structure of the GIPSSC and its vertical integration, bringing the experience from MS country and apply it as appropriate to the Moldovan conditions. The assessment shall focus on the structure of the central authority, internal inspection, border inspection and residue testing bodies. An assessment of personnel will also be required. Technical experts should look also at the testing procedures, active substances tested, testing methods and other aspects that cover the MRLs. Benchmark: The assessment shall result in a report, containing recommendations on operational arrangements within the GIPSSC and necessary human resources with clear instructions on the structure, territorial units, and inspections and staffing.

2.2 Assessment of the regulatory framework

Along with the operational arrangements and human resources, an analysis of the regulatory framework will be also required. The team of experts should analyse the newly introduced and drafted regulatory framework to ensure that the relevant subordinate legislation and normative acts are in place and that the appropriate risk based and preventive approaches are implemented. Benchmark: The experts shall provide an analysis and recommendations regarding gaps and weaknesses of the regulatory framework.

2.3 Assessment of the technical and infrastructure needsTo assess and cost (prepare cost estimate) the technical and infrastructure needs including laboratory equipment to enable the GIPSSC to achieve their operational objectives using approaches which are risk based and targeted at prevention.

Following the assessment of operational structure and regulatory framework, an assessment of the needs in terms of equipment and infrastructure will be required. The team of experts shall assess the needs of the GIPSSC in equipment for its central administration body, including office equipment and software to enable the General Inspectorate to operate properly and efficiently, with the possibility to integrate its informational system with other relevant institutions that have direct or indirect attribution to the process. The team should assess the needs in equipment for regional and border inspections, required for daily operation, taking into account risk based and preventative approach. A separate assessment of the laboratory equipment should be performed, taking into account the current capacities of the existing laboratories and increasing requirement for quality test on MRLs. Attention is to be given especially to the requirements and MRL set by Russian Federation, some of which are currently undetectable with the equipment currently existing in the laboratories. Benchmarks: The experts should provide a clear set of recommendations regarding necessary equipment, including technical specifications and an estimative budget for procurement of equipment. The experts should additionally provide with a set of recommendations regarding necessary infrastructure for internal inspection and border inspection to ensure their proper operation.

Component 3: Establishment of risk based procedures

3.1 National pesticide MRL monitoring programme

8

Drafting of guidelines for the annual preparation of the national pesticide MRL monitoring programme.

The principle of risk analysis is a key element of an effective pesticide MRLs monitoring programme and is currently absent from the system in the Republic of Moldova. To assist the GIPSSC establish the MRL monitoring programme, the team of experts will be required to support the conceptualisation and drafting of guidelines for the design and planning of the annual MRL monitoring plan using the latest EU risk-based best practice. In addition the team will support the analytical work for the GIPSSC including a) to perform an analysis of the list of approved pesticides and the mechanism and methodology of approval ; b) to perform an analysis of the list of authorised active substances and the mechanism and methodology of authorisation ; c) analyze and assess the methodologies used by the laboratories for testing MRLs (monoresidual, multiresidual method, etc) and make suggestions regarding improvements; and d) based on statistics and data gathered from monitoring activities to make an analysis of the consumption of non-animal origin products and provide with recommendations regarding establishment of the MRL monitoring programme based on current conditions of Moldova. Benchmark: Guidelines for the preparation of the annual MRL monitoring programme.

3.2 Informational support on use of pesticides and MRLsDesign of an effective method of gathering analysing storing, distributing and utilising data on pesticide use and MRLs.

This activity is required in order to support the design of an effective system for gathering, analysis, storage and distribution and utilization of data on pesticide use and MRL monitoring. Establishment of such a database is crucial for risk assessment and evaluation as well as for planning of the annual monitoring programme as well as inspection activities. Expertise is required in this field in order to establish an efficient mechanism that would be in accordance with current EU requirements and will ensure a proper and efficient operation of the system. It is important that the informational system adopted would be further integrated into similar EU informational systems if required and would be compatible to the other relevant informational systems used in Moldova. For this specific activity an STE in database informational system would be required as well as an expert in data gatheringBenchmark: Functional and Technical Specifications of the MRL monitoring database established and methods of data gathering established

3.3 Sampling procedures for MRLsAssessment and revision of guidelines and regulations on sampling methodology and procedures for MRL monitoring.

Sampling procedure is one of the basic operations that should be performed for both internal control procedures and export control procedures. Currently rudimental, sampling procedures make the whole process of testing for MRLs less credible and sometimes non-relevant. Therefore, the team of experts should assist the GIPSSC in assessment and revision of guidelines and regulations on sampling procedures The experts should bring the expertise from MS country on sampling methodology and basic principles on design of the monitoring programme. Sampling methodology should be elaborated in details, including for different types of products, different types of consignments as well as different sources.Benchmark: The activity should result in a well defined set of regulations and guidelines regarding sampling procedures.

9

3.4 Curricula development for risk based guidelinesDesign of a modern curriculum and to assist to train inspectors at central and regional level to conduct inspections (including sampling) on the basis of the new risk based guidelines.

Taking into account that all procedures and activities under this component are new, the development of a modern curriculum, based on external experience in the field, will be crucial for further development and proper operation of the GIPSSC. Furthermore, sampling methodology, MRL monitoring programme and software used within the system are subject of use and knowledge of all technical staff of the inspection (field inspectors, border inspectors and central administration). Another argument in favor of development of a curriculum is that the average age of the current staff of GIPSSC is over 56 years, and there is a strong need for the inspectorate to renew its staff in a very short period of time. Therefore, this activity is aimed at support in the design of a modern curriculum to assist to train inspectors at central and regional level to inspect on the basis of the new risk based guidelines. Benchmark: This activity should result in a complete set of training materials and well developed curricula to ensure proper training techniques.

Component 4: Capacity building in implementation of preventative approach

4.1 Guidelines for use and storage of pesticidesDrafting of guidelines and codes of practice for use and storage of pesticides. This activity aims at establishment of guidelines and codes of practice for use and storage of pesticides. Misuse of pesticides is one of the main problems that lead to excess of MRLs in plant origin products. The codes of practice used presently by the Moldovan authorities are mainly outdated and mostly do not correspond to current requirements. The experts involved in this activity shall assist the GIPSSC, using their best knowledge, in establishment of codes of practices and share their experience on application of those rules in MS country. It is desirable that the guidelines would be established taking into account the MRL levels for both EU and Russian Federation, which are in some cases different. Benchmark: Manuals and and codes of practice for use and storage of pesticides.

4.2 Development of curriculum for preventative approachDesign of a modern curriculum and training materials for inspectors at central and regional level to operate using a preventative approach introducing Good Agricultural Practice where appropriate and to make producers aware of their primary responsibility for the safety of their produce.One of the important components in the activity of the GIPSSC is to move from a control approach to a preventative approach, taking the role of a consultative body in order to prevent misuse of chemical products. This process will need considerable efforts in terms of time and personnel. The use of a preventative approach in application and storage of pesticides requires introduction of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) where appropriate to make producers aware of their responsibility for the safety of their produce. EU standards on GAP for pesticides should also be taken into account. Benchmark: Curriculum and training materials for a training of inspectors in a preventative approach prepared.

10

3.5 Means/ Input from the MS Partner Administration:

3.5.1 Profile and tasks of the Project Leader

The Project Leader (PL) from the EU MS should be a senior civil servant or equivalent staff of a MS institution who works in the field relevant to this project and have been at least three years in a management position within the institution.The PL will be responsible for achievement of project results, ensuring the activities for the co-operation and information exchange between EU MS side and Beneficiary side and ensuring that all the required support of the management and staff of the EU side are available. He will coordinate the Project Steering Committee (PSC) meetings on the EU MS side.The PL shall devote a minimum of three working days per month in his home administration, with an on-site visit to the Republic of Moldova at least every 3 months to participate in the PSC meetings.

ProfileQualification and skills

University level education in agronomy or related field Fluency in English. Command of Romanian and/or Russian is an asset Good inter-personal skills Good management skills

General professional experience At least 10 years experience in working with EU legislation concerning official

controls applied to the enforcement of food legislation Experience in project management Strong initiative, analytical and team working skills

Specific professional experience Specific experience in the implementation of official control systems applied to

phytosanitary control Knowledge of the EU agri-food legislation and specific requirements applicable to

phytosanitary control Experience in preparation of major strategic documents

3.5.2 Profile and tasks of the RTA

The RTA will be in charge of the day-to-day implementation of the Twinning project in the Republic of Moldova. S\he will coordinate the implementation of activities according to a predetermined work plan and liaise with the RTA counterpart in the Republic of Moldova.The RTA will bring in a significant professional input, especially at the beginning of the Twinning project.

ProfileQualification and skills University degree in agronomy or equivalent relevant discipline Fluency in English, good command of Russian and/or Romanian is an asset

11

Good PC literacy (Word, Excel, PowerPoint) Good inter-personal and diplomatic skills Good management skills

General professional experience At least 7 years experience in working with EU legislation concerning official controls

applied to the enforcement of food legislation Recent experience in a senior position in a state institution\mandated body responsible

for food safety issues Experience in transition economies of the CIS will be an asset Strong initiative, analytical and team working skills

Specific professional experience Sound knowledge of phytosanitary services Recent experience in the implementation of official control systems at a phytosanitary

inspectorate or equivalent of a MS Knowledge of the EU agri-food legislation and specific requirements applicable to

phytosanitary sector and food safety Knowledge on the international food standardisation framework and role of key

international institutions (OIE etc.) and links with the application of SPS and TBT agreements

Experience in preparation of major strategic documents

Duration of RTA secondment: 18 months

3.5.3 Profile and tasks of the short-term experts

A pool of short term experts is required to implement the activities as outlined above covering the following indicative subjects as identified in the indicative activities:

Institutional Development Strategic Planning Pesticide residue monitoring laboratories development (including equipment) agri-food safety risk-based management legal drafting sampling methodology and guidelines data gathering and management related to pesticide use and MRLs Information Technology (IT) and databases. training and curriculum development

Indicative General Profile of the Short Term expertsQualifications and skills: - University education the appropriate field (as indicated above)- Working knowledge of English.- Knowledge of Romanian / Russian can be considered an asset

12

- Good inter-personal and communication skills.

General professional experience:- At least 3 years of professional experience in the relevant field, 8 years experience is

considered to be an asset

3.5.4. Profile and Tasks of the RTA AssistantThe profile and tasks of the RTA assistant will be specified by the RTA and RTA counterpart. The recruitment procedure will follow the provisions of the EC manual section 5.9. RTA assistant.

4. Institutional Framework

The beneficiary institution is the General Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and Seeds Control (GIPSSC). It was established on 9 December 2008, by the Government Decision no. 1402, which defines the roles, responsibilities, and activities of the inspectorate. The main goal of this action was to join all services linked to the phytosanitary field and bring the new structure in conformity with international requirements.

Physically, the Inspectorate has begun its activity in February 2009. The inspectorate has four main divisions, acting in specific fields: a) phytosanitary division with border control units; b) plant protection division; c) division for seed control; and d) division for cereals and tobacco. The structure of the Inspectorate has not been physically changed, in fact being a process of joining the former inspections into one bigger structure.

The Inspectorate has been formed as a result of joining the 5 former inspections into one General Inspectorate, cumulating the role of the former inspections. The structure was designed to respond to the new requirements regarding export procedures for fruits and vegetable products, import procedures for fruits and vegetables, seed quality control on production and import-export operations, official surveillance and control of imports and use of chemical products. The general structure includes a total staff of 341 employees, of which 29 in central apparatus, 72 border inspectors and 240 field inspectors placed in raions. See organizational chart in Annex 3.

The inspectorate has recently established and approved the internal regulations setting up the responsibilities and duties of each division, including at central and regional level as well as the activity of border inspection points. Nevertheless, the actual content of the regulations do not contain some of the activities that should be carried out by the phytosanitary inspector in the field, according to the EU requirements, such as clear specifications of responsibilities on sampling procedures on import-export operations, and the implementation of the MRL residues plan.

Food safety assurance system, in its current operational structure, is being implemented in an old manner, inherited from the former Soviet Union (FSU) system. There are three official bodies involved directly or indirectly in the process of food safety control: the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Economy and Trade and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry acting in the field through the General Inspectorate. Existing regulations are not clearly defining the role of each body in the process of food safety and quality assurance for fresh

13

products. Once for imported and exported products it can be defined, then for in country product sold on the market the situation is absolutely unclear.

Presently, there is no clear delimitation of responsibilities of the staff of the inspection at the central and regional level. It implies the need for completion of the regulations of the inspection with special requirements resulted from the transposition of the EU regulations in the field of plant health. Specifically, the regulations should set up the responsibilities of the phytosanitary inspectors regarding sampling procedures on import and export procedures as well as sampling procedures for MRL’s monitoring and surveillance plan.

There is also no delimitation of competences between the official authorities involved in official control of the products that are subject to food safety risks. Specifically, it relates to clarifications on implementation of EU requirements regarding product traceability system, Rapid Alert System for food and forage (RASFF), sampling procedures and MRLs for monotoxins, nitrates, heavy metals, dioxins, etc. in fruits and vegetables. The structure of the Inspection cannot be revised or changed at the moment as long as there is no clear delimitation of functions within the Inspection and between the official bodies involved in food safety control system. Currently, the certification process for fruits and vegetables destined for export is based on SANPIN norms, which are established on the basis of old soviet STAS norms. These norms have been approved by several FSU countries and are not known or recognized in the EU countries. The MRLs are also not compliant with EU norms, in some cases being at a very different level.

In general terms, the import and use of plant protection products is regulated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry through the inspection. The official handbook for use of plant protection products is “State Register for Phytosanitary chemical products, allowed for use in the Republic of Moldova” The last edition of the Register has been published and disseminated in May 2009. The legislation of the Republic of Moldova is very mild in terms of introduction on Moldovan market of PPPs and does not make a clear difference between primary producers of PPPs and generic producers of PPPs that work under license. The Register in its current form is not compliant with the EU requirements and shall be revised. The current list of PPPs published in the Register contains a number of chemicals that are restricted for use in the European Union.

5. Budget

EUR 1,146,000 (one million four hundred six thousand Euro).

14

6. Implementation Arrangements6.1. The Implementing Agency responsible for tendering, contracting and accounting is

the Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Moldova.

The person in charge of this project is:

Ms Speranta OLARU

Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Moldova

12 Kogalniceanu Street

MD-2001 Chisinau

Tel: + 373 22 505 210

Fax: + 373 22 272 622

E-mail: [email protected]

The Programme Administration Office (PAO) will support the twinning project implementation process together with the Delegation of the European Union to Moldova:

Government of the Republic of Moldova|

Division for Policy and foreign assistance coordination

Piata Marii Adunari Nationale, 1

MD-2033 Chisinau

Responsible person:

Ms. Oxana DRAGUTA

Tel: +373 22 250 465

Fax: +373 22 250 259

E-mail: [email protected]

6.2. Main counterpart in the BC

BC Project leader:

Ministry of Agriculture and Food IndustryResponsible person: Mr. Vasile Bumacov Position: Deputy MinisterAddress: Republic of MoldovaMD-2012, Chisinau, Stefan cel Mare 162Tel./Fax: +373 22 232384e-mail: [email protected]

RTA counterpart:

15

Ministry of Agriculture and Food IndustryGeneral Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and Seeds ControlResponsible person: Iurie MALANCIUCPosition: Deputy Chief of Inspectorate (Acting Chief) Address: Republic of MoldovaMD-2012, Chisinau, Stefan cel Mare 162, of. 602Tel./Fax. +373 22 21 00 09 e-mail: [email protected]

6.3. Contracts

6.3.1 There will be one twinning contract with a selected Member State or consortium of Member States.

7. Implementation Schedule (indicative)

7.1 Launching of the call for proposals: September 2010

7.2 Start of project activities: July 2011

7.3 Project completion: April 2013

7.4 Duration of the implementation period: 18 months (+ 3 months for opening and closing)

8. Sustainability

The project has a high propensity for sustainability since the training modules will become curriculum for the training of inspectors. The demand created among the stakeholders for advisory support to the better application of pesticides will ensure that the function of the GIPSSC will modify to address the current and future sectoral needs.

The GIPSSC will become an important pillar of the agricultural extension service which will strengthen the sector to support rural economic development and increased trade of non-animal products compliant with EU requirements and providing the evidence to other export partners that an adequate system is in place.

9. Crosscutting issues

EnvironmentThere are no anticipated negative environment issues. To the contrary, the project has considerable positive environmental effects in particular to safeguard the ground- and surface water quality by reducing and finally eradicating the excessive and faulty application of pesticides. These measures will positively influence bio-diversity objectives since pesticides use will be restricted and focussed where economically reasonable and ecologically acceptable. Non- harmful insects will be less affected and habitats for dependent predators such as birds remain viable and improve. The implicit focus on cause and effects and the

16

mailto:[email protected]

increased and more cautious application of chemicals in general supports environmental objectives.

Poverty Reduction The project supports the diversification of the economy and increases the opportunity for exports by pursuing efforts to comply to international standards for sanitary and phyosanitary control. It decreases the likelihood of confiscation and destruction of harmful plant products and penalties. The consumers will develop greater trust in the food safety of domestic products and increase their demands. Higher domestic demands will have positive impact on production through higher returns and further increase of the marketable quantities. The objective of moving greater production quantities towards ecologically safe production is also positively induced. Female headed and hence poorer households among the smallholders can specialize for higher labour intensive and higher value produce. Equal opportunityParticipation will be open to both female and male personnel. Records of staff participating in training and other project activities will reflect this statement. The gender structure within the public authorities, entities and bodies on state and local level where are the majority of procurement purchases is well balanced. This enables fair male/female deployment in the execution of the project itself.

Good Governance and Human rightsThe project supports good governance and aims to improve intergovernmental consultation and coordination. The project will facilitate the improvement of the administrative capacity and the introduction of EU-compliant procedures, which will raise the democratic standards of governance by implying wider and systematic consultation of civil society and business.

MinoritiesParticipation in the project activities will be guaranteed on the basis of equal access regardless of racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, sex or sexual orientation.

10. Conditionality and sequencing

No conditionalities.

17

ANNEXES TO PROJECT FICHE1. Logical Framework Matrix in standard format2. Indicative Implementation Chart 3. Organisational chart of the General Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and

Seeds Control 4. Interaction of Competent Authorities5. Legal provisions of the plant health and food safety system in Moldova6. Reference to relevant Government plans and studies

18

ANNEX I Logical framework matrix in standard formatProject Name: Support to Moldova in the fields of norms and standards in food safety for plant origin products Project Number:

Programme Name and Number: ENPI Annual Programme

Total budget: € 1.146.000Overall Objective Objectively verifiable Indicators Sources of VerificationTo support the development of agricultural and food sectors of Moldova in compliance with EU and international rules and to support the ability of these sectors to participate in international trade

The export value of horticultural products is significantly increased by 2015 compared to 2010 (by 50%)Level of RASFF notifications related to pesticides / insecticides has not increased.

Moldova Trade Statistics Country Progress ReportsRASFF notification website

No trade bans imposed on Moldovan products2.

Project Purpose Objectively verifiable Indicators Sources of Verification Assumptions To improve the capacity of the General Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and Seeds Control (GIPSSC) to define, plan, organise and achieve strategic and operational objectives by using EU compliant approaches which are risk based and targeted at prevention.

The legislation, guidelines and codes of practice as well as the national monitoring programme implementation and enforcement activity is explicitly guided by risk based and preventive principles;Reorganised staff structures, revised procedures, guidelines and practices in management of the GIPSSC staff;GIPSSC staff and other stakeholders informed about and trained in risk based methods and prevention;

FVO reports of DG SANCOMAFI ReportsOfficial Journal

GIPSSC Staff available and ready to apply new methods and approaches Support and commitment from relevant public and private authorities to apply EU compliant standardsContinued political support for the process of approximation to EU norms and standards

No major national & international policy change affecting the implemented management toolsAdoption of the amendments of the secondary legislation related to the

2 It is understood that there should be no assumptions on the higher level. However, there is the material risk of trade bans, political inspired or else that have the potential to wreck the indicators. Tell tale is the current Russian wine ban, which though the timing is political, from technical point of view the allegation of poor safety may have merit.

19

newly adopted laws.

Results Objectively verifiable Indicators Sources of Verification Assumptions 1. The precise role and remit and on that basis the strategic objectives of the GIPSSC in the food safety and plant health are defined and approved.

2. The legislative framework and institutional structure of the GIPSSC ( including the channels of communication) is optimised for efficient and effective functioning.

3. The effectiveness of the national pesticide MRL monitoring programme is improved through an appropriate prioritised and fact-(data) and risk based regulatory and enforcement programme.

4. Responsible and safe pesticide use is improved through a proactive and preventive regulatory and enforcement approach.

-Formalised institutional vision and policy amendments

Changes in legislation and institutional structures

Improvements in gathering and use of data Methodological changes to a proactive preventative approach advocated and used by inspectors and practical use by pesticide users

Government DecisionMAFI Policy documentsGIPSSC Data BaseProgress ReportsFinal ReportExpert ReportsFVO Assessment Report and other independent analysesGuidelines and policy documentsRecommendationsCopy of AgendasPrograms and materials of seminars, workshops and trainingsTraining evaluation questionnairesRegular coordination meetings of all stakeholders reportedMonitoring ReportsOfficial Journal

Sufficient political will and support for the reorganisation of structures and services

Openness of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry for the introduction of new regulations, policies and guidelines related to products protected as geographical indications

Facilities for seminars, workshops and trainings available

There is a technical expertise and capacity within GIPSSC to maintain the Information System

Activities Means Assumptions

Component 1 Institutional Assessment and Strategy Development of GPSSSC

20

1.1 Assessment of the General Inspectorate and recommendations for improvement

To support the GIPSSC in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the current institutional arrangements in the food safety and plant health sphere (including the border inspection and laboratory systems) and in defining and formalising medium and long terms objectives for the GIPSSC

1.2 Define and formalise medium and long terms objectives for the GIPSSC.

To define and formulate medium and long terms objectives for the GIPSSC, helping the beneficiary agency to establish a realistic medium and long term activity plan.

1.3 Study tour for BC specialistsStudy tours to selected countries and targeted institutions for appropriate beneficiary staff to enable them to observe and understand the functioning of the systems involved with the national pesticide residue monitoring programme and proactive preventative pesticide use programmes

Short term experts 75 man daysTranslation


Per Diems, TravelTranslation

Working Group engaged and assuring full access to information;Agreement reached among stakeholder institutions on restructuring plan;Restructuring plan implemented;There is political wish to restructure the phytosanitary and food safety sector;

21

Component 2 Operational Review and Reform of GPSSC

2.1 Assessment of operational arrangements and resources

Ensuring that the institutional arrangements and resources including laboratories enable appropriate risk based and preventative approaches to be implemented effectively and efficiently

2.2 Assessment of the regulatory framework

Checking that the newly introduced and drafted regulatory framework enables appropriate risk based and preventative approaches to be pursued and support the addressing of outstanding gaps and weaknesses

2.3 Assessment of the technical and infrastructure needs

To assess and cost the technical and infrastructure needs including laboratory equipment to enable the GIPSSC to achieve their operational objectives using approaches which are risk based and targeted at prevention




Working Group provides platform for discussions with experts;There is political wish to restructure the system; The need for change is acknowledged;

Component 3 Establishment of Risk- Based Procedures

22

3.1 Development of the National pesticide MRL monitoring programme

Supporting the drafting of guidelines for the annual preparation of the national pesticide MRL monitoring programme

3.2 The development of Informational analysis on use of pesticides and MRLs

To support the design of an effective method of gathering analysing storing and distributing and utilising data on pesticide use and MRLs

3.3 Sampling procedures for MRLs

Supporting the assessment and revision of guidelines and regulations on sampling procedures for the annual MRL monitoring programme

3.4 Curricula development for risk based guidelines

To support the design of a modern curriculum and to assist to train inspectors at central and regional level to inspect on the basis of the





- Access to information provided to the experts team; - There is interest of inspectors to be trained;

23

new risk based guidelines Component 4 Capacity Building in the implementation. of preventative approach

4.1 Guidelines for use and storage of pesticides

Supporting the drafting of guidelines and codes of practice for use and storage of pesticides

4.2 Development of curriculum for preventative approach

To support the design of a modern curriculum for inspectors at central and regional level to operate using a preventative approach introducing Good Agricultural Practice where appropriate and to make producers aware of their primary responsibility for the safety of their produce.



Willingness of GIPSSC to cooperate in the curriculum development and readiness of inspectors to acquire advisory role;

24

ANNEX 2: Indicative Implementation Chart Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Component 0 0.1 Kick off Meeting x0.2 Steering Committee meetings x x x x x x

0.3 Monthly Meetings x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

0.4 Wrap up meeting x

Final Payment x

Component 1 - Institutional Assessment and Strategy Development of GPSSC1.1. Assessment of the General Inspectorate and

recommendations for improvementx

1.2. Defining and Formalising the long term objectives of the GIPSSC

x

1.3. Studytour for BC Specialists xComponent 2 - Operational Review and Reform of GPSSC2.1 Assessment of operational arrangements and resources x2.2 Assessment of the regulatory framework x x2.3 Assessment of the technical and infrastructure needs x xComponent 3 - Establishment of risk based procedures3.1 National pesticide MRL monitoring programme x x3.2 Informational support on use of pesticides and MRLs x x3.3 Sampling procedures for MRLs x x3.4 Curricula development for risk based guidelines xComponent 4 - Capacity building in implementation of preventative approach4.1 Guidelines for use and storage of pesticides x x4.2 Development of curriculum for preventative approach x

25

Annex 3: Organization Chart for General Inspectorate for Phytosanitary Supervision and Seeds Control

Chief of General Inspectorate

Deputy Chief for Phytosanitary Surveillance

Human Resources Service

Department of Finance & Administration

Legal, Secretariat and IR Department

Deputy Chief for Seed Control

Phytosanitary quarantine Direction

Direction for Plant Protection

Direction for Seed Control

Section for Cereals, Bakery Products &Tobacco

Internal Quarantine

External Quarantine

Pest Control Section

PPP Control Section

Finance and Accounting Section

Administrative Service

Border Phytosanitary Control Point

Regional Directions for Phytosanitary Surveillance and Seeds Control

Annex 4: Interaction of Competent Authorities

Ministry Agriculture and Food Industry

Direction Veterinary Medicine

Direction Agrochemicals,

Ecology and Plant Protection

Ministry Health

Government of Moldova

Ministry Economy and Trade

Veterinary Agency for Animal Health and Food Safety

Centre for quarantine, identification, arbitrage

expertise and disinfection of

products

General Phytosanitary and Seed Control Inspectorate

Centre for Soil Science+ Balti branch

Centre for testing and approval of

phytosanitary products

State Centre for certification of seed

materials

State Enterprise for Plant Protection

National Centre for Preventative Medicine

Municipal Centre for Preventative Medicine

I.S. MoldResurse

I.S. Accreditation Centre for Conformity

Evaluation

Direction of Internal Commerce and

Consumer Protection Services

General Department for Trade Policy

Annex 5:Legal provisions of the plant health and food safety system in Moldova

National Legislation: Law 506 of 22 June 1995 on Phytosanitary Quarantine, which incorporates the provisions of the Council Directive 2000/29 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community;Law 612 of 1 October 1999 on Plant Protection;Government Resolution 1073 of 19 September 2008 on the procedures for collaboration among the Sanitary Veterinary Agency for Safety of animal origin foodstuffs, Customs Service and customs offices and Phytosanitary Agency in charge of control over imports, exports and transit of the goods subject to sanitary veterinary control and phytosanitary quarantine.

Council Directives transposed to the national law:Commission Directive 94/3/EC of 21 January 1994 establishing a procedure for the notification of interception of a consignment or a harmful organism from third countries and presenting an imminent phytosanitary danger;Commission Directive 98/22/EC of 15 April 1998 laying down the minimum conditions for carrying out plant health checks in the Community, at inspection posts other than those at the place of destination, of plants, plant products or other objects coming from third countries;Commission Directive 2004/105/EC of 15 October 2004 determining the models of official phytosanitary certificates or phytosanitary certificates for re-export accompanying plants, plant products or other objects from third countries and listed in Council Directive 2000/29/EC;Commission Directive 92/90/EEC of 3 November 1992 establishing obligations to which producers and importers of plants, plant products or other objects are subject and establishing details for their registration;Commission Directive 95/44/EC of 26 July 1995 establishing the conditions under which certain harmful organisms, plants, plant products and other objects listed in Annexes I to V to Council Directive 2000/29/EC may be introduced into or moved within the Community or certain protected zones thereof, for trial or scientific purposes and for work on varietal selections.Commission Directive 2002/63/EC of 11 July 2002 establishing Community methods of sampling for the official control of pesticide residues in and on products of plant and animal origin and repealing Directive 79/700/EEC.Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 February 2005 on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC.

Annex 6 Reference to relevant Government plans and studies

The National Strategy for Republic of Moldova Agro-industrial Complex Sustainable Development (2008-2015) under a SWOT analysis identifies the following opportunities for the agricultural complex:

Upgrading the local system for quality management, food products’ inoffensiveness and plants’ and animals’ health are absolutely necessary for maintaining the access to CIS markets and obtaining access to new markets, especially the EU one.

Improvement of business and investment climate would allow increasing local and foreign investments in the sector, which would increase competitiveness and innovation through know-how transfer, set up of new qualifications in demand on the market, upgrade of irrigation and market infrastructure as well as implement quality standards.

At the present moment, the legislative framework regulating the development of agro-food sector for the time being is not adjusted to the European Union’s requirements. Harmonization of legislative framework in agricultural activity in particular and development of agro-food sector in general with that of European Union represent a vital need.

The fulfilment of the given goal provides for: revision of legislative-normative framework with abrogation, modification and

adoption of respective acts that are not harmonized with the European ones (Guillotine II);

development of technical regulations in agro-food field; concluding and approval of phytosanitary norms; setting up, equipping, appointing test laboratories for assessing the conformity of food

products meant for internal market and export to the European community, as well as their readjustment to European standards and norms;

development of national standards for agro-food field based on Codex Alimentarius Commission standards.

The present Strategy provides for the following essential directions for assuring ecologic harmlessness of the agro-industrial sector: - legislation improvement so as to be in line with European norms regarding phytosanitary control and residual pesticide control, and namely:- development of the phytosanitary strategy on protection of plants, prevention of noxious organic structures’ entry and dissemination on country’s territory in line with communitarian legislation and its implementation;- development and application of norms regarding quarantine principles for plants as related to international trade (requirements of World Trade Organization Agreement on Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures);- development and application of instructions for phytosanitary risk analysis, norms on programs for pests’ eradication, norms regarding analysis of risks undertaken in case of quarantined pests, including analysis of ecological risks, norms regarding the usage of measures integrated within a systemic approach for administration of phytosanitary risk, of the regulation on import phytosanitary rule system;- improvement and implementation of legislative framework regarding regulation of market circulation of phytosanitary usage products and vegetal plants and products.- consolidation of state administrative structures accountable for ensuring the fulfilment of state’s policy in the field of plants’ protection and phytosanitary quarantine;

- assurance with necessary equipment and adequate analysis methods (pest residual / contaminated substances) for national laboratories, as well as their accrediting in accordance with the requirements of the European Union.Special attention shall be granted to the regulation of residual, pesticides and other toxic elements’ contents in agro-food products, including the animal origin products, this being the last (before final consumption) stage of consumable products’ quality control.The wide ranging administrative and regulatory reform requires considerable institution building measures to achieve a coherent implementation of the sector strategy. Twinning is the preferred instrument in this case since the reform addresses the sovereign function of regulation and the specification of official administrative duties of the implementing agencies. Access to the experience of the EU Member States through the good practice advice of MS high official advisory services and planning and implementation of training addressing all major stakeholders are indispensable to achieve the desired system change. The twinning project is highly relevant for the sector reform and the beneficiary institution.

STANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE - Esteri · Web viewSTANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE. 1. Basic...

Documents

Transcript of STANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE - Esteri · Web viewSTANDARD TWINNING PROJECT FICHE. 1. Basic...