Land tenure
Following the collapse of communism in 1991, Romania has undergone a lengthy process of property rights restoration. The land ownership restoration process started with the first restitution law, 18/1991 (Land Resources Law), enacted one year after the fall of the communist regime.
Regarding forest areas, the law stipulates the restoration of areas up to one hectare per family. In the interest of reducing ownership fragmentation, it was decided not to restore areas according to the old forest property boundaries, but to group them at the edges of forest massifs.
The next laws dealing with land restitution (107/1996, 1/2000) allowed former owners to claim areas occupied by forests up to a limit of 10 hectares (for private owners) and 30 hectares for associative farms, public institutions or religious entities.
The principle of “restitutio in integrum” (restitution in full) was stated in Law 247/2005, 15 years into the transition period. At that point, 362,335 ha had been restored according to Law 18/1991 (5.7 % of the forest fund to that date) and 1,902,275 ha (29.9% of the forest fund) according to Law 1/2000 (Nichiforel 2005). In 2012, the distribution of property types in the forestry sector of Romania was 6.4 million ha (Report of the Romanian Court of Accounts, 2013), divided as follows:
To date (2016), the restitution process is not finished; there are still unresolved claims to forest and agricultural lands.
According to the Forest Code (Law 46/2008, art 10), the administration of forest areas or provision of forest services (especially guarding against illegal harvesting and timber theft) is mandatory, regardless of the type of ownership. Only authorized Forest districts can be administered. The authorization of Forest districts is done by the Central Authority Responsible for Silviculture (Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests) and its regional representatives (Forest Guard Offices), in accordance with Ministerial Order No. 1330/2015
The Forest district has to register each contract for administration or for services provided (services of guarding, drafting of Volume Estimation Documents, delivery documents etc.) at the local office of the Forest Guard.
Land tenure
In 2013, the Romanian Court of Accounts issued a report based on the audit of the forestry sector, stating the main concerns regarding the development of the sector after the fall of communism. The report provides a detailed overview of the restitution process, describing it as confused, hesitating and lacking vision. The repeated laws dealing with forest restitution have prolonged the restitution process, and any misinterpretations have been exploited by persons issuing illegal claims to forest areas. The report estimates that, in different stages of ownership restoration (claimed, validated, fully restored), approximately 561,168 ha of forest land have been the object of illegal restitution on the basis of unlawful claims and illegal actions, including:
Since the release of the report by the Romanian Court of Accounts (2013), other cases of disputes over land tenure and illegal forest restitution have been discovered and dealt with in the Court of Law:
All the factors described above contribute to the large area of forest land with disputed ownership, usually classified as “M” sub-compartments in the forest management plan and exempted from any management activities. Legislation prohibits any management whatsoever of areas that are subject to legal disputes. The forest management plan includes a chapter regarding ownership titles and areas identified as disputed. Also, the private owners are obligated to contract management services with the forest district and to register the contracts with the Forest Guard territorial office. Thus, in cases of valid management plans or registered contracts, the risk of illegal land tenure is considered low. Usually a forest entity will have the required forest management plan in place (See 1.3)
Concerning the private individual owners: due to the fact that the restitution process lasts for more than two decades (areas up to 10 ha can be claimed), many of the owners included in the property titles are dead and descendants did not follow the legal formalities for succession yet. A risk is identified regarding the succession forms only for private individuals that had not made the succession procedure, to obtain the inheritance certificate (i.e. the successors have the right for inheritance, but is not the legal owner until the inheritance certificate is obtained) or another legal document certifying the right to property. In practice, some forest administrations are satisfied with the presentation of an affidavit from one successors (in cases of multiple ones), requesting the forest administration /services assuming at the same time full responsibility in the name of legal heirs. Thus, a certain successor may benefit from the wood products, in possible detriment of others potential legal successors of the same inheritance. This fact may lead to Civil Code violation.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
The Forest Code of 2008, modified in 2015, states that publicly owned forest areas cannot be subject to concession, with the exception of land that is currently under buildings that were sold by the National Forest Administration or was occupied by constructions built before 1990.
Practically, no publicly owned land covered by forest vegetation can be subject to concession: concession of forest resources is not a practice in Romania.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
The Forest Code as modified in 2015 states that a Forest Management Plan is mandatory for areas of forest larger than 10 hectares (article 20, line 2). In such cases, owners are entitled to harvest no more than 3 cubic metres/ha/year, taking into account the structure of the stand, without a harvest planning order to make regeneration cuts, but a Management Plan has to be drafted. In areas smaller than 100 hectares per owner per administrative unit, the continuity of the harvesting process is organised at stand level, using adequate silviculture systems.
The validity of a Forest Management Plan is usually 10 years (for high forest) and 5 years for coppices with high growth rates. Forest Management Plans are developed by authorised firms and approved by a representative of the Central Authority for Silviculture (Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests) and by environmental protection agencies.
Forest Management Plans are based on a stand-level inventory of forest resources within the Forest Management Unit (FMU) in question.
The cost of Forest Management Plan development for areas less than 10 hectares is to be paid by the state from a special fund for improvement of forest lands (Forest Code, art 21, line 4).
The annual cut allowance is computed using several methods that take into account the annual growth and yield rates, modelled according to a national yield table (Giurgiu, 2001).
Each Forest Management Plan contains wood harvest plans for regeneration cuts (within the decennial and annual allowable cut) as well as a plan for forest tending operations (pre-commercial and commercial thinning, sanitary cuts). In the case of the wood harvest plans, a detailed table is provided, including areas, volumes, and types of silvicultural systems). In the case of thinning, only areas to be affected are referred to, as the volume will be computed after the marking of trees, according to the stand structure at the time the operation is done. The tending operations established in the harvest plan are the minimum compulsory interventions to be done by the FME Wood affected by pests, wind thrown or snow damage is removed from the forest through sanitary cuts (less than 1m3/ha) or accidental cuts (cuts that exceed 1m3/ha).
The Forest Management Plan is usually paid from the resources of the forest owner, which can be a burden for owners of small areas. In such cases, reducing the quality of the harvesting work could be used as a way to reduce costs. The forest harvesting plans can be evaded by overestimating the impact of biotic and abiotic factors and marking healthy trees as a way to harvest wood from forests that are not subject to thinning or regeneration harvests. The stand-level inventory of forest resources within the Forest Management Unit (FMU) could be underestimated. However, there are no source of information indicating the potential risks described as been relevant at national level. This has been corroborated by expert review and consultation.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
Forest harvesting permits are issued based on the inventory of the trees to be harvested and an estimation of the volume within the Volume Estimation Document (VED). Any wood harvest from forests or forest vegetation areas (forested pastures, trees outside forests etc.), regardless of ownership, is subject to individual inventory of trees to be harvested and the drafting of the VED by authorised forest management firms (state or private Forest districts).
The classification of species, quantities and qualities is done along with the drafting of inventory papers (VED). Each tree that is marked for cutting (with a circular mark on the trunk) and the diameter at chest height, the species and quality class (I-IV) are recorded. The threshold for diameter measurements is 6 cm. The height is modelled using a regression equation, defined on the basis of a 20-30 tree sample. The measurements are introduced in the SUMAL application and the Harvesting Permit Volume Estimation Document (APV) is drafted. The application computes the overall volume and the volume per type (industrial wood, fuel wood, types of logs etc.). In pre-commercial thinning, the harvested wood is measured in stere (Unit of volume equal to one cubic meter) and converted into cubic metres using conversion factors. Estimates of volume from diameter and modelled height are based on regression equations with coefficients determined at a national level (Giurgiu, 2004). Each VED is verified by the forest fund representative at the forest district, approved by the forest district chief and posted on the site of the Forest Guard. The Ministerial Order 1507/2016 states that the Forest Guard will verify at least 20% of the VEDs registered on its website.
The volume estimated through the APV is considered to be the threshold for the actual harvested volume, measured as logs and recorded in the delivery documents.
The volume given in the Volume Estimation Document (VED) is the basis of the auction process for publicly owned forest, or other types of selling for privately owned forest. The volume is calculated in SUMAL (Integrated Information System for Timber Tracking) and is controlled throughout the chain of custody using the Wood Tracking System, which is the contractor component of SUMAL.
The harvesting of wood from publicly owned forests (state or municipality) is contracted by auction, either as standing stock or as harvesting services. An exception: wood for local communities’ needs can be sold without auction using favourable prices set by the National Forest Administration or municipal councils.
Contractors are allowed to take part in the auction after a previous attestation process done by a commission of the Romanian Foresters Association (ASFOR) (see also 1.1). The attestation is issued for a maximum volume of wood to be harvested over a period of time, according to the personnel and the machinery available to the firm. The contractor can participate in auctions that have listed less or equal the volume of wood it is authorised for.
In private forests, the owners can choose the method by which to sell their wood, either by auction or by negotiation. Individual private forest owners are also allowed to harvest up to 20m3 with his or her own equipment. The harvested wood is also subject to harvesting permit and delivery document issued by the nearest Forest district office.
After the adjudication and the harvest permit is issued by the Forest district chief, the firm (both private and state forests) must apply for authorisation from the Environmental Protection Agency. The APV contains the total volume to be harvested, on species and assortments and the harvesting technics to be applied, in concordance with the silviculture system used. The estimated volume cannot be exceeded during the harvest – the contractor is not permitted to issue delivery documents for more than the volume given in the Volume Estimation Document (VED).
The timber harvesting contractors that will perform harvesting activities in any forest in Romania (with the exception of private owners that harvest up to 20 cubic metres from their own forest) have to be certified for a certain amount of timber per year by the Commission for Certification of Forest Harvesting Contractors, within the Association of Foresters in Romania (ASFOR) (OM 1330/2015). The certification is based on the number of employees with a technical forestry background (technical school or faculty) and the presence of harvesting equipment (tractors, chainsaws, tower yarders etc.). The existence of harvesting certificate is condition to obtain the harvesting permit.
The risks related to harvesting permits originate in the issuing procedures and in the difficulty of controlling the decision system behind establishing the types of cuts, the drafting of APVs and the monitoring of the chain of custody through the wood tracking application. The results of the National Forest Inventory show a difference between the volume harvested (computed through inventory) and the volume recorded in legal documents (annual reports of each FME to the National Statistical Institute, containing a centralisation of the volumes harvested by types of cuts – regeneration, thinning, conservation, and sanitary or accidental cuts) of about 8.8 million cubic metres each year. This volume is considered to be illegally harvested (without a permit or on the basis of underestimated inventories) (Government decision regarding the establishment of the Forest Guards). This amount is not categorised by region or ownership types.
The Audit Report of the Romanian Court of Accounts (2014) states several causes and means by which the illegally logged volume is introduced into the chain of custody:
According to NGOs active in recent years (Greenpeace, WWF, Agent Green, Environmental Investigation Agency, Ecopolis, Nostra Silva) all of these situations can arise in a climate of a lack of proper enforcement of justice. The case study presented by Ecopolis in 2012 showed that of 7,168 initiated cases (concerning damage exceeding 5m3), only 723 dossiers had been filed in Court, the rest having been dismissed by the prosecution. Out of these 723, only 4% (34 cases) led to a custodial sentence being imposed, while 60% received suspended sentences and 36% received pecuniary penalties.
However, in the years since, measures to control illegal logging have increased, and as a result, in 2015, about 35,000 cases of illegal logging were recorded (compared to about 10,000 in 2011) (Greenpeace, 2015) and in 2016, 9444 cases of illegal logging (Greenpeace, 2015). Decreasing the number of cases of illegal cuts is the result of the new Legislative provisions that increased the number and amount of sanctions, of a Greater involvement of civil society in the process of reporting illegal logging and increasing the role of county police in the process of controlling and sanctioning.
Also, the Forest RADAR (mobile application to check the legality of timber transport) resulted in 16,214 calls in 2016 and 19,946 calls in 2015 for verification of the legality of wood transports, out of which 20% in 2016 and 17% in 2015 were discovered to be illegal. This does not necessarily mean that illegal cuts had proliferated in 2015, just that a more detailed approach by the authorities had uncovered wrongdoing more effectively.
Following legal requirements for the harvesting validation, the timber volumes harvested in the field must be accurately similar with the VED, even though the VED is an estimative document (error margin of 5 % with a 68 % of probability, or error of 8-10 % with 95 % of probability). This legal requirement does not correspond with the real situation in the field.
The correction situations of the VED that are mentioned by MO 1507/2016 refer only to verifications of the VED prior to timber harvesting and no further corrections can be made using the more accurately measured volume of logs after harvesting.
In practice, a majority of timber harvesting result which corresponds to the initial estimation with differences below 1 m3 raise concerns, considering that the 10% accuracy for 500 m3 on VED means 50 m3 . In the last year, the modifications of the law 171/2010 regarding the penalties for contraventions related to the forestry sector includes severe punishments including for violations related to VEDs drafting, approval and verification. As the modification of the law is only active since 20th of October 2016, its results in practice as a risk mitigation have yet to be evaluated.
In order to be registered, timber harvesting contractors must present a list of equipment and technical personnel that should cover the volume of timber which can be harvested by the contractor in a one-year period. The persons have to be employed full time and only in one firm. Controls were made of firms that have a valid contract for verification of continuous employment of technical personnel. The risk related to the issue of harvesting certificate is concerning the state of the machinery used in forest, usually, with several years of use, representing a hazard for health and safety and environment. The harvesting permit is issued based on a valid harvesting certificate.
Thus, the wood selling procedure regarding standing stock is based on the volume estimation document which does not represent the real quantity of wood obtained by harvesting. The harvesting certification issued for logging companies does not represent in practice the technical capacity of the company.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
Overview of Legal Requirements Volume-based taxes and fees are specifically defined for each single agreement/license, and therefore no general requirements can be outlined. Surety bond is requested by the forest district to ensure that the licensed activities are executed correctly. The deposit is returned once operations have been properly carried out.
The environmental Fund consists of 2% of the value of wood (excepting fuel wood and ornamental trees).
The Accessibility Forest Fund consists of 10% of the value of wood sold from accidental and regeneration cuts.
According to the (2) Law no. 227/2015- Fiscal Code, art. 486, line 2, can be set by Local Councils or Forest Administrators a local road tax or road tolling payment for entities that have equipment and machinery and use them on public local infrastructure, as well as taxes for activities which have an environmental impact.
After the harvesting agreement and the harvesting permit are registered, it is practically not possible to avoid payment of taxes due to the cross checking methods between documents: Invoice, VED, harvesting permit, SUMAL, Delivery notes, harvesting result conducted by the forest guard and Finance guard. Thus, timber harvested under a legal harvesting permit is considered to be of low risk of tax avoidance.
The risk on avoiding the road tolling payment appears due to forest ownership and management fragmentation, respectively of forest roads distribution. The timber owner and road owner/manager is not the same entity and thus cannot charge this road toll. In such situations, some of the operators avoid paying this tax by not informing the rightful owner/administrator of the road.
This indicator has been evaluated as specified risk due to the risk for road avoiding tolling payment
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
The following products are not subject to value added taxes: logs or rough wood, planks, boards, strips, beams, sawn wood, processed wood (assortments from cutting operations).
After the invoice is registered, there is practically not possible to avoid payment of taxes. All taxes based on invoices are calculated by special programmes (electronic accounting records, online statements, etc.) and their collection is mainly based on an electronic system. The system is considered to be well implemented. For standing stock and wood materials VAT are not applicable.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
Income and profits are taxed as follows: 16% is paid on profits, and an additional 0.5% on income from harvesting activities.
The Romanian state had made substantial investments in recent years in the modernization of its tax collection regime. Today, almost all taxes are calculated by special programs (electronic accounting records, online statements, etc.) and their collection is mainly based on electronic systems. All economic activities are taxed under the Fiscal Code. In 2015 a special Agency was founded to check financial records, statements and other documents required for tax calculation before issuing permits. This measure forced companies to legally register all activities. After activities are legally registered, there is a strong check between payment of taxes and activities performed by companies.
All companies’ or employed persons’ activities, like updating personal documents, participation in tenders, loans, etc., depend upon their due payment of taxes and fees.
By checking the publicly available FM audit reports for 24 certificates for the period 2013 – 2017, 621 nonconformities were issued, from these 621 not one refers to the payment of taxes and fees.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
After authorisation, the harvesting site is officially presented for harvest to the harvesting contractor, and training is provided regarding the type of felling, the size of the area, the skidding trails (marked in the field on surrounding trees), the admissible damage to regeneration and to remaining trees etc. Only in cases of private forest owners that harvest up to 20 cubic metres with their own equipment from their own forest are these requirements waived.
The harvesting process is controlled by the Forest district or Forest Guard while underway and at completion, to mitigate any damage and illegalities occurring at the harvest site or at the primary deposit site.
The Harvesting Instruction Ministerial Order (1540/2011) clearly forbids the hauling of trees with crowns in any harvest site, whether clear cut, shelterwood or thinning. It also forbids skidding through water courses, unless authorised by the Forest district chief in cases where there are no alternative routes. Any stream or river crossing must be undertaken with the use of mobile bridges or logs. The silviculture system limits the type of harvest: in clearcuts, the maximum harvesting site is limited to 3 ha in Norway spruce stands and 5 ha in hybrid poplar stands; in shelterwood systems, the harvesting process can be undertaken only outside the vegetation season and only in periods when the soil is not moist from rain or snow melt.
The main risks associated with forest harvesting are related to harvesting firms being authorised without their claims regarding equipment, machinery and sufficiently trained staff being verified. This leads to violation of the harvesting requirements.
The procedure to apply for harvesting authorisation from the Environmental Protection Agency is, in many cases, time consuming and delays the start of the forest harvesting process. In some cases, these delays can prolong harvesting beyond the permitted period and force firms to resume the harvest in the next winter (in cases of shelterwood systems).
By checking the publicly available FM audit reports for 24 certificates for the period 2013 – 2017, 621 nonconformities were issued, 33% refers to timber harvesting regulations.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities).
The nature protection system includes one biosphere reserve, 12 National Parks, 13 Natural Parks, 383 Sites of Community Importance (SCI) and 148 Special Protection Areas (SPA).
All forest areas have to be under the administration of state or private Forest Management Enterprises (FME), regardless of the fact that certain areas are included in a protection site. The custody of protected areas focuses on the management of the objectives that led to their establishment (protection of species, landscapes etc.) and not to the administration of the resources (forests, pastures etc.).
The national and natural parks have a separate administration, while the custody of other reservations, SCI or SPA is subject to auctioning. Auctions are organised by the Environmental Protection Agency and custody can be assigned to private or state Forest Management Enterprises, environmental NGOs, research or educational institutions or existing park administrations.
The protected area data base of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests lists 691 protected sites, some of them overlapping with the aforementioned protected areas (http://www.mmediu.ro/categorie/arii-naturale-protejate/16 ).
There is an on-going effort to draft management plans for the national parks and other Natura 2000 sites. The drafted plans are in different stages of approval by different institutions of the state, Database on Protected Natural Areas and their management plans approvals(http://www.mmediu.ro/articol/baza-de-date-privind-ariile-naturale-protejate-si-aprobarea-planurilor-de-management-ale-acestora/1664). The parks and Natura 2000 sites overlap with and contain, in most cases, strictly protected natural reserves, which can be located both in forests and in other types of land ecosystems.
Timber sourcing is permitted in areas of the sites that are not included in the strict reserve. However, any harvest in the parks or Natura 2000 sites must be pre-approved by the local environmental agencies or park administrations. Identified buffer zones, protected habitats and species are to be protected as set-aside areas specified in the forest management plan.
Risk of:
This indicator has been evaluated as specified risk. Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or are not enforced by relevant authorities.
At the moment, compliance with these measures are not systematically checked.
Each harvesting contractor or FME with a forest harvesting division has to obtain an environmental permit from the Regional Environmental Protection Agency (REPA), for the entire activity and for each harvesting site for the coming year. The conditions for the authorisation include legislative conditions (a valid Forest Management Plan, VED, harvest authorisation from the Forest district etc.), harvesting technologies and conditions (mostly according to OM 1540/2011), biodiversity requirements (harvest of protected species, disturbance of nesting areas etc.) and requirements related to forest harvesting in protected areas (obligation to obtain a permit from the park administration or Natura 2000 custodian).
The FSC audit analysis of the nonconformities identified in Romanian FMEs showed that 41.8% of non-conformances were related to forest harvesting (Halalisan, 2014); the most frequent were referring to skidding trails, damage to remaining trees, and water protection.
As an example, a Report by the Ministry of Environment showed that the following illegalities were encountered: forest harvests done according to a Forest Management Plan without an environmental permit or without a ministerial decision; timber harvesting done by contractors without an environmental permit; violations of environmental legislation on the authorisation of harvesting sites (by REPA); authorisation of harvest documents without the approval of the corresponding custodian of the Natura 2000 site, and; authorisation of harvesting activities after their completion (Hotnews, 2014).
Legislative requirements were changed two years ago, without application rules having been issued or capacity assured. This leads to a risk of the Regional Environmental Protection Agency to issue environmental permits without visiting the forest, as a result, the environmental regulations are seen just as a formality.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
At the moment, compliance with these measures are not systematically checked
Health and safety in forestry activities is monitored by the Labour Inspectorate. The Occupational Health and Safety Act sets out the requirements for work performed by employees and officials (hereinafter “employees”), the rights and obligations of employers and employees in creating and ensuring a working environment which is safe for health, the organisation of occupational health and safety in enterprises and at state level, the procedure for challenge proceedings, and the liability for violation of the occupational health and safety requirements.
According to the Labour Inspectorate’s report for 2013, the total number of work-related fatalities in that year was eleven (5.5% of all fatal accidents in Romania).
Notwithstanding the presence of a robust normative framework that, in theory, should safeguard workers, casual labour is a common phenomenon in Romania. By checking the publicly available FM audit reports for 24 certificates for the period 2013 – 2017, 621 nonconformities were issued, from these 77 regarding H&S issues (28 for lack of the H&S equipment, 22 for procedures and trainings, 19 for trees cutting, 8 for first aid kit). During consultations with stakeholders and members of the working group there is a common perception that most of the H&S procedures are essentially theoretical and are not properly implemented in the field. Companies’ employees are skeptical of using protective equipment and are still not in the habit of using it. Machinery used in the forest sector is old, particularly forest tractors. Available data from the Labour Inspectorate for the forestry sector are scarce and their quality is low, but during consultation with stakeholders and the CW Working Group there was a common perception that forestry in Romania is moving towards better implementation of the law. Currently, however, the risk should be considered ‘specified’.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.).
Notwithstanding the presence of a robust normative framework that, in theory, should safeguard workers, casual labour is a common phenomenon in Romania. As a result of various factors, including a short harvesting period, small harvesting areas, employees’ dissatisfaction, taxes and fees, the length of employment is very short in the forestry sector. To avoid complications, many employees prefer not to contract workers with employment contract.
The finding is based on the authors experience from the field. It has not been possible to identify written sources to provide evidence on the magnitude of the problem, which is why a specified risk is concluded based on a precautionary approach.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
The classification of quantities by species and quality is done first in the inventory of marked tress, and then in the drafting of the VED and the registration of the harvesting site in the SUMAL application.
In the case of stumpage sale, the whole volume of the marked trees becomes a maximum threshold for all the delivery documents issued for that site. In the case of timber sold from the primary platform, the logs are sorted and sold (by auction or by negotiation) in lots or firewood stere.
After harvest, the timber collected at the landing site (primary platform) is transported to log yards or processing facilities accompanied by a delivery document which states the origin of the timber (FME, FMU, compartment), the assortments (roundwood, firewood) and the volume. Logs with a diameter at the small end of less than 20 cm are marked with rectangular stamps and recorded piece-by-piece in the delivery document (length, diameter at half length, species, volume). Logs less than 20 cm at the small end are recorded by the number of similar pieces and by their dimensions. Firewood that is split and arranged in stere is recorded only as stere and its equivalent in cubic metres (using a conversion factor of approximately 0.6).
Certain risks can arise, in the case of stumpage sale, from the differences between the estimated volume and the more accurate measurements at the primary platforms. Any underestimates in the diameter or heights measured in the field can be transmitted in terms of volumes throughout the chain of custody, especially if the WOOD Tracking system is not applied properly. Also, there is no cross-check of assortments in the SUMAL system, which can lead to overestimated volumes of industrial wood, which is also affected by the overestimation of conversion factors. As there is no cross-checking between the volumes of assortments in the VED and the volumes from the harvesting results, there is a certain risk that firewood harvested from a certain harvesting site is sold on the local market (with very short transportation distances and low risk of being identified by transport control) and instead of it, the extra volume harvested would be introduced in the custody chain as industrial wood. This wood is most likely to originate in underestimates of the timber measurements, both in the stand or in the primary platform.
This possibility can be sustained also by the estimations of the National Institute for Statistics, which evaluated that the wood volume needed for heating in Romania is around 13 mil. m3, out of which approx. 5 mil. m3 is considered to be harvested illegally. This correlates also with the results of the National Forest Inventory that states that 8.8 million cubic meters have been cut illegally each year between 2010 and 2013 (cited as justification for Gov. decision no. 51/2016). This Government decision should improve (due to very high penalties involved) the situation forest harvesting correctitude. However, given the very recent application date of this decision, its effects have to be evaluated in future.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
Any shipment of wood from the forest or from any other place of trading has to be included in SUMAL (System for Wood Tracing) and its mobile component, WOOD Tracking. Further, any log larger than 20 cm in diameter at the small end must be marked for transport with a rectangular stamp and with a unique identification code. The shipment documents, completed both on paper and online, must include the total volume of wood, assortments, origin, destination, vehicle registration number, date and time of loading and duration of validity, the online code from the WOOD Tracking application. In case of a lack of mobile internet reception, an offline code is generated and this must be replaced by the online version as soon as the vehicle arrives in an area with reception. Shipment documents can only be issued for volumes within the estimate by the APV.
After processing, the resultant products (i.e. lumber) are reintroduced into the system using conversion factors for volume that are declared by the wood processing firm.
On the road, the vehicles transporting wood can be verified by others using the “Forest Radar”, which also provides the option of calling the emergency number in order to report a vehicle’s registration number and location if necessary.
Over the last year (2016), there have been efforts to provide for confiscation of all equipment used in illegal harvesting activities and transport in legislation.
In addition, in July 2016, the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests launched the “Forest Inspector” application, downloadable on any Android device, which allows the onsite verification of wood transports by any person (Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests press release).
The main risk associated with transportation is related to the weaknesses of the WOOD Tracking system, which allows for delivery documents to be filled in during a period of 12 hours from the loading of the truck. There are cases of truck drivers generating the online code only when they encounter a traffic control vehicle. In response to a complaint made online after the verification of a transport of wood, the prime minister agreed that the online WOOD Tracking system still has problems such as the ability to transport several similar loads with the same delivery documents and online code (Agerpres). In other cases, there have been short distance transports of firewood from the forest to the beneficiary which are never recorded in the system. This type of wood is very unlikely to be inserted into the custody chain, but could represent a way that the quantities of industrial wood that is sold with papers, within the limits set by SUMAL, could be illicitly increased (see also 1.16).
Another risk associated with the illegal transport of wood is related to the overloading of trucks, above the thresholds imposed by the national road regime (Emergency Ordinance 43/1997).
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
Romania is not a member of the OECD, but has implemented legislation covering transfer-pricing that has adopted the OECD guidelines and Arm’s Length Principle. Transactions between related parties shall be carried out at market prices. Related parties are defines as:
From non-government sources, it seems that the amount of tax for the first half of 2015 are approximately 130% higher than the additional tax obligations set in 2012, which demonstrates the viability of reorganisation and the effective business performance of NAFA, including transfer pricing issues, that have occurred in the year 2013. Thus, the risk is considered low.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
Overview of Legal Requirements Required custom transport documentation must indicate:
(i) shipping date;
(ii) information on the sender, the recipient and the carrier;
(iii) description of shipped goods (type and quality); and
(iv) quantity
Two copies of each transport document shall be issued; one is to be kept by the sender, the other by the recipient. Retention time shall be no less than 10 years.
From the Annual Report of the General Customs Directorate (Annex 13) no wood-based product was involved in violation of law or withholding of goods. As there is no export tax to be paid or log export bans, the incentives for violation of custom regulations are low, and there are no other indications timber going through customs illegally.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
Romania has ratified the CITES Convention through Law no. 69/1994. The Management Authority in charge of implementing the Convention is the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests/National Agency for Environmental Protection.
According to UNEP-WCMC and the CITES Species + data base, no tree species included in the CITES Appendices is found in Romania.
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Identified laws are upheld. Cases where law/regulations are violated are efficiently followed up by the authorities and/or by the relevant entities taking preventive actions.)
The competent authority designated is the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forests. According to the Governmental Decision (HG) n°688/2012, within the ministry there are two responsible bodies for EUTR implementation: The Environmental Guard and Forest Guard – entitled to exercises the control of operators and traders for the following timber products codes: 4401, 4403, 4406 and 4407. At forest level (logging companies, forest managers), the DDS is checked by the Forest Guard and the traders are checked by the Environmental Guard.
The EUTR implementation is regulated by: (i) Governmental Decisions that are establishing the responsibilities of the CA and the penalties regime: HG n°470/2014 – HG n°787/2014, OUG 51/2016 and HG n°170/2015; (ii) Ministerial decision (OM) n°819/2015 for establishing the rules, procedures and methodologies for checking operators, traders and for organizations monitoring.
Operators required to implement DDS requirements are: logging companies, if the timber is sold as standing stock; the forest owner/manager, if the timber is sold as an assortment by the forest owner/manager, and traders that import from outside the EU market. For logging companies, the DDS is precondition to participate in auction. Placing on the market of illegally harvested timber is sanctioned with 15.000-20.000 RON, and confiscation of wood and vehicles involved; Administrative fines apply to operators who do not implement and/or use a due diligence system (DDS) or refuse to cooperate with the competent authority. The fines range from 8,000 to 15,000 RON. Documents needed for trading can be suspended for up to 12 months in this case. A grace-period of 45 days applies to operators when first checked; Administrative fines also apply to operators who do not properly use a DDS (including not maintaining and regularly evaluating a DDS) and range from 5,000 to 8,000 lei. Documents needed to trade can be suspended for up to 90 days in case of repeat offence; Criminal fines, much stricter than the fines for breaches of the EUTR, exist for illegal logging in domestic forests under Romanian forestry and environmental law and penalties include imprisonment up to 7 years in aggravated cases.
Administrative fines also apply to monitoring organizations that are not fulfilling their obligation according to article 8, align (1) of the Regulation and a range from 8,000 to 15,000 lei;
Romania has approved the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2016 in which sanctions are imposed for the failure to observe the DDS. It has taken effect on the 20st of October 2016. This Ordinance imposed very high fines for Romania for the failure to observe the DDS system.
As the legislation has only recently been introduced it is not possible to evaluate whether this is properly implemented and enforced, why the indicator is considered as specified risk.
Although Romania has made progress on the transparency of the forestry system (see the online Forest inspector – http://rt1.forestier.ro), as the legislation has only recently been introduced it is not possible to evaluate whether this is properly implemented and enforced, which is why the indicator is considered as specified risk based on a precautionary approach.
Specified risk
(Threshold (2) is met: Identified laws are not upheld consistently by all entities and/or are often ignored, and/or not enforced by relevant authorities.)
Low risk
Justification:
All ‘low risk thresholds’ are met (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) and there is no other evidence of ‘specified’ risk. None of the ‘specified risk thresholds’ are met.
Low risk
Justification:
‘Low risk’ thresholds (10 and 12) apply. None of the ‘specified risk’ thresholds are met.
Low risk
Justification:
Low risk
(Threshold (1) is met: Data available are sufficient for determination HCV presence within the area under assessment; AND (2) Data available are sufficient for assessing threats to HCVs caused by forest management activities.)
(Threshold (8) is met: HCV 1 is identified and/or its occurrence is likely in the area under assessment, and it is threatened by management activities)
I. In case of forest based species:
The applied forestry work will meet the ecological requirements of the species that need to be preserved (especially humidity and light) and will be determined after consultations with biologists.
In addition, they will ensure the habitat continuity in that location, either in the same or in the neighbouring forest stand, given that the forest ecosystem has a cyclic evolution, the young stages of development are caracterized by the natural lack of grass because of the shadowing effect – i.e. the exaggerate density of sapling/young trees produces an excessive competition for all resources – light, water, nutrients.
Logging shall be carried out outside the growing season of species in order to ensure their reproduction and perpetuation
Wood extraction will be made with the minimum negative impact on the ground in order to avoid damaging roots and underground reproductive organs (rhizomes, bulbs).
II. In case of species from ecosystems that are bordering the forest:
No works will be carried out that would radically change the species habitat (i.e. drainages, plantations, substitutions etc.).
In order to ensure species reproduction and perpetuation, logging activities in the forest areas neighbouring these ecosystems shall take place outside the growing season of the species.
In particular, wood felling and extraction shall avoid areas (ecosystems) where populations of the species to protect are found.
For areas of critical seasonal use:
For areas that are part of protected areas, the conservation of species will be done according to their management plan.
It is important to remember that the appropriate way to maintain or enhance each value will depend on the value itself. There are a variety of possible options to maintain or enhance various HCVs, which include:
(Threshold (9) is met: There is no HCV 2 identified and its occurrence is unlikely in the area under assessment.)
For Old Growth Forest:
For RTE forest habitats:
It is important to remember that the appropriate way to maintain or enhance each value will depend on the value itself. There are a variety of possible options to maintain or enhance various HCVs, which include:
(Threshold (21) is met: HCV 4 is identified and/or its occurrence is likely in the area under assessment, but it is effectively protected from threats caused by management activities.)
It is important to remember that the appropriate way to maintain or enhance each value will depend on the value itself. There are a variety of possible options to maintain or enhance various HCVs, which include:
