FAQs Explained: EUDR Traceability & Geolocation (4th edition)

1.16. Should polygons be provided by means of circumference?

It is not possible to provide geolocation of a circumference. Operators must provide polygons describing accurately the perimeter of the land plots.

1.17. How should the place of production of mixed goods be declared?

Mixed goods must be treated as a combination of the relevant commodities, each requiring a risk assessment over their supply chain. In particular, the operator must clarify where each component has been produced.

It all gets more complicated when compliant goods from multiple production sites are gathered together into the same containers – e.g. silo, stack, pile, tank, etc. – and then packed and placed on the EU market.

What to do in such cases?

1. The operator must ensure traceability by identifying the origin of all goods collected in the same container since it was last emptied, as these goods could potentially be included in the shipment.
2. In the case that silos are not emptied on a regular basis, the operator must determine and disclose the production sites of all goods that entered the silo over a period of time. The timeframe must be sufficiently long to ensure that relevant components with an unknown origin are not mixed in. For example, when removing a portion of the goods stored in the silo, this can be done safely by providing the geolocation of all previously stored goods amounting to at least 200% of the silo’s capacity, assuming the silo operates on a first-in, first-out basis. This method is also applicable to other types of storage and continuous processing systems, such as stacked goods, tanks, and similar facilities.
3. Forget the shortcuts! Under the Regulation, it is not permitted to declare the production location of a quantity of goods equivalent to the amount being placed on the EU market, because it is easily deducible that those goods entered the silo at an earlier time. Doing so would violate the Regulation’s prohibition against placing products of unknown origin on the Union market.

1.18. Under which circumstances can operators declare more plots of land in a due diligence statement than those actually concerned by the production of the specific commodity placed on the market? What are the implications of a “declaration in excess”?

We have already discussed how EUDR applies strict traceability criteria, requiring the tracking of the land plots for each and every relevant component of the final product.

In special cases, the operator can provide geolocation data for more land plots than those where the commodities were produced. This is referred to as declaring “in excess” and it is only applicable when it is possible to entirely trace a bulk commodity to the land plot, and this has not been mixed with other untraceable or non-compliant commodities.

In case the bulk commodity is mixed, for instance, if it was gathered with other relevant commodities in containers along the value chain, the land plot can be declared in excess if only a part of the whole land plot produce is placed on the market. However, the approach is strongly discouraged, as it would make it difficult, if not impossible, to comply with EUDR both for operators and competent authorities due to the extreme level of complexity.

In particular, you should be aware that this practice carries several risks, explained below.

• Increased Compliance Liability: By listing extra land plots in a due diligence statement, the operator takes on full responsibility for ensuring that every declared plot meets compliance standards. Even if only a portion of these plots is actually used in production, the operator remains liable for all of them.
• Higher Risk of Non-Compliance: If any single plot within the declared geolocation data is found to be non-compliant, the entire set is classified the same way.  the risk of non-compliance, requiring the operator to guarantee that every declared plot meets regulatory requirements.
• Expanded Due Diligence Obligations: operators must conduct due diligence on all declared land plots, including those declared “in excess”, multiplying the efforts. This involves collecting the necessary information as explained in Article 9, “Information requirements”, conducting a risk assessment as reported in Article 10, “Risk assessment”, and coming up with risk mitigation measures as required in Article 11, “Risk mitigation”.

Moreover, the operator must also consider how difficult it would be to maintain control over the due diligence process in such situations. There would be a high probability that the relevant products cannot be easily traced back to the declared land plots, and that the risk of circumvention of EUDR and of mixing with relevant products that are untraceable and non-compliant is extremely high.

1.19. How will geolocation allow claims to be checked in practice? (UPDATED)

How will geolocation allow for checking the validity of a no-deforestation claim in practice? Is it aligning satellite navigation positioning and deforestation maps? Will there be baseline maps that forest areas or areas that have undergone deforestation and forest degradation? How will it work if geolocation of farms, plantations or concessions are not available?

Without geolocation data, no deforestation analysis is possible. As there is no way to prove that relevant commodities and products are compliant, these cannot be imported into, made available in or exported from the EU market.

Update: Focus on operators. Non-SME traders are disregarded.

1.20. Operators (and traders which are not SMEs) and enforcing authorities may cross check the geolocation coordinates against satellite images or forest cover maps to assess if the products meet the deforestation-free requirement of the Regulation. How will the EU check the validity of a no-deforestation claim?

The checks will focus on verifying the validity of the due diligence statements and the overall compliance with EUDR. More information can be found in Articles 18 and 19 of the official legal text.

1.21. What type of checks may EU Member States Competent Authorities carry out in third countries in case a product is deemed potentially non-compliant with the EUDR?

Competent authorities cannot carry out checks in third countries unless they agree to collaborate beforehand.

The authorities can determine the need to carry out field audits in third countries as dictated in Article 18, para. 2e, but the EUDR does not mandate these aspects and does not explicitly demand that competent authorities directly consult third countries in their activities, not even when a product results to be ‘non-compliant’ or ‘potentially non-compliant’.

1.22. Will Competent Authorities use the definitions in the Regulation?

Yes, they will do so to ensure harmonisation and comprehension.

1.23. What is supply chain traceability? (UPDATED)

The set of information and documentation that operators and non-SME traders, where applicable, gather and store for 5 years in compliance with EUDR. Traceability data are collected and organised with the due diligence system, which must be maintained and updated according to Article 12 of EUDR. Security measures must also apply to guarantee data integrity and confidentiality.

Update: Clear explanations on the requirements of non-SME traders and downstream operators are found in FAQ 3.4..

1.24. How will traceability work for products from multiple countries?

In this case, traceability data from the different countries will need to be added up and compiled together, giving a complete overview of the supply chain, despite its complexity.

1.25. What is the ‘date or time range of production’? (UPDATED)

Previously, this was question number 1.22 in the FAQ second edition.

Article 9, related to the information requirements, instructs operators and large traders to share the date and time range during which the commodity has been produced. This point in time is the driver to determine whether deforestation occurred because it allows a before-and-after land plot analysis.

That is why EUDR applies both to the relevant raw materials directly placed in the EU market and to the goods produced with those relevant raw materials.

But how do you identify the correct time range?

Except for cattle, the ‘date of production’ corresponds to the harvest date, while the ‘time range of production’ corresponds to the duration of the production activities. For instance, in the case of timber, the ‘time range of production’ would be the period during which all harvesting activities have been carried out.

Of course, the timings should refer to the exact land plots where the commodities have been produced. In some cases where precise data are missing, operators can also share the crop year and/or harvesting season.

In the case of cattle and beef, the ‘time range of production’ corresponds to the lifetime of the animal, from the date of birth to the date of death. To know how to manage the information gathering with such commodity, please refer to the “Focus Point: Geolocation for cattle” you can find above.

Update: no relevant updates.

1.26. How does traceability work for cattle? (UPDATED)

Would it be enough to provide the geolocation of the land where the calf was born? Some cattle may be moved to one or more locations before slaughter.

Operators must collect all geolocation coordinates expressed in single points of the places where the cattle were born, raised and kept before slaughter. Non-SME traders must refer to a DDS that contains the geolocation data for all the relevant places, or eventually add the necessary coordinates.

1.26.1 How should operators fulfil obligations related to “feed used for livestock”? (NEW)

Operators must prove that the feed is deforestation-free if it is one of the relevant commodities or products under EUDR (e.g. soy bean flour). They need to produce a due diligence statement, while downstream operators and non-SME traders can reference the existing DDS without including additional geolocation coordinates, as it is required for cattle.