Although Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 has contributed to reducing the threat posed by explosives precursors in the Union, it is necessary to strengthen the system of controls on precursors that can be used for manufacturing homemade explosives. Given the number of changes needed, it is appropriate to replace Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 for the sake of clarity.

Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 restricted access to, and the use of explosives precursors by, members of the general public. Notwithstanding that restriction, Member States were, however, able to decide to grant members of the general public access to those substances through a system of licences and registration. Restrictions and controls on explosives precursors in the Member States have therefore been divergent and liable to cause barriers to trade within the Union, thus impeding the functioning of the internal market. Furthermore, the existing restrictions and controls have not ensured sufficient levels of public security, as they have not adequately prevented criminals from acquiring explosives precursors. The threat posed by homemade explosives has remained high and continues to evolve.

The system for preventing the illicit manufacture of explosives should therefore be further strengthened and harmonised in view of the evolving threat to public security caused by terrorism and other serious criminal activities. Such strengthening and harmonisation should also ensure the free movement of explosives precursors in the internal market and should promote competition between economic operators and encourage innovation, for example, by facilitating the development of safer chemicals to replace explosives precursors.

The criteria for determining which measures should apply to which explosives precursors include the level of threat associated with the explosives precursor concerned, the volume of trade in the explosives precursor concerned, and whether it is possible to establish a concentration level below which the explosives precursor could still be used for the legitimate purposes for which it is made available while making it significantly less likely for that precursor to be used for the illicit manufacture of explosives.

Members of the general public should not be permitted to acquire, introduce, possess or use certain explosives precursors at concentrations above certain limit values, expressed as a percentage by weight (w/w). However, members of the general public should be permitted to acquire, introduce, possess or use some explosives precursors at concentrations above those limit values for legitimate purposes, provided that they hold a licence to do so. Where the applicant is a legal person, the competent authority of the Member State should take into account the background of the legal person and of any person acting either individually or as part of an organ of the legal person and having a leading position within the legal person, based on a power of representation of the legal person, an authority to take decisions on behalf of the legal person or an authority to exercise control within the legal person.

For some restricted explosives precursors at concentrations above the limit values provided for in this Regulation, there exists no legitimate use by members of the general public. Therefore, licensing should be discontinued for potassium chlorate, potassium perchlorate, sodium chlorate and sodium perchlorate. Licensing should only be permitted for a limited number of restricted explosives precursors for which there exists a legitimate use by members of the general public. Such licensing should be limited to concentrations that do not exceed the upper limit value provided for in this Regulation. Above that upper limit value the risk of the illicit manufacture of explosives outweighs the negligible legitimate use of those explosives precursors by members of the general public, given that alternatives to, or lower concentrations of, those precursors can achieve the same effect. This Regulation should also determine the circumstances which the competent authorities should, as a minimum, take into account when considering whether to issue a licence. Together with the format of a licence set out in Annex III, this should facilitate the recognition of licences issued by other Member States.

It should be possible for the mutual recognition of licences issued by other Member States to be done bilaterally or multilaterally, in order to achieve the objectives of the single market.

The difference between an economic operator and a professional user is that the economic operators make an explosives precursor available to another person, whereas professional users acquire or introduce an explosives precursor only for their own use. Economic operators selling to professional users, other economic operators or members of the general public who hold a licence should ensure that their personnel involved in the sale of the explosives precursors are aware of which of the products they make available contain explosives precursors, for instance by including information that a product contains an explosives precursor in the barcode of the product.

The distinction between professional users, to whom it should be possible to make restricted explosives precursors available, and members of the general public, to whom they should not be made available, depends on whether the person intends to use the explosives precursor concerned for purposes connected with that person’s specific trade, business, or profession, including forestry, horticultural and agricultural activity, conducted either on a full-time or part-time basis and not necessarily related to the size of the area of land on which that activity is conducted. Economic operators should therefore not make restricted explosives precursors available either to natural or legal persons who are professionally active in areas in which the specific restricted explosives precursors tend not to be used for professional purposes or to natural or legal persons who are engaged in activities that are not connected to any professional purpose.

Personnel of economic operators who are involved in the making available of explosives precursors should be subject to the same rules under this Regulation as apply to members of the general public when using such explosives precursors in their personal capacity.

Economic operators should retain transaction data to substantially assist the authorities in preventing, detecting, investigating and prosecuting serious crime committed with homemade explosive devices and in verifying compliance with this Regulation. The identification of all actors in the supply chain and all customers is essential for this purpose, be it members of the general public, professional users or economic operators. As the illicit manufacture and use of homemade explosives might occur only a significant amount of time after the sale of the explosives precursor, the transaction data should be retained for as long as is necessary, proportionate and appropriate to facilitate investigations, taking average inspection periods into account.

Online marketplaces act as mere intermediaries between economic operators on the one side, and members of the general public, professional users or other economic operators, on the other side. Therefore, online marketplaces should not fall under the definition of an economic operator and should not be required to instruct their personnel involved in the sale of restricted explosives precursors regarding the obligations under this Regulation or to verify the identity and, where appropriate, the licence of the prospective customer, or to request other information from the prospective customer. However, given the central role which online marketplaces play in online transactions, including as regards the sales of regulated explosives precursors, they should inform their users who aim to make regulated explosives precursors available through the use of their services of the obligations under this Regulation in a clear and effective manner. In addition, online marketplaces should take measures to help ensure that their users comply with their own obligations regarding verification, for instance by offering tools to facilitate the verification of licences. Given the increasing significance of online marketplaces for all kinds of supply and the importance of this procurement channel, including for terrorist purposes, online marketplaces should be subject to the same detection and reporting obligations as economic operators, although procedures to detect suspicious transactions should be properly adapted to the specific online environment.

The obligations on online marketplaces under this Regulation should not amount to a general monitoring obligation. This Regulation should lay down only specific obligations for online marketplaces with respect to the detection and reporting of suspicious transactions that take place on their websites or that use their computing services. Online marketplaces should not be held liable, on the basis of this Regulation, for transactions that were not detected despite the online marketplace having in place appropriate, reasonable and proportionate procedures to detect such suspicious transactions.

This Regulation requires economic operators to report suspicious transactions, regardless of whether the prospective customer is a member of the general public, a professional user or an economic operator. The obligations that relate to regulated explosives precursors, including the obligation to report suspicious transactions, should apply to all substances listed in Annexes I and II, irrespective of their concentration. However, products that contain explosives precursors only to such a small extent and in such complex mixtures that the extraction of the explosives precursors is technically extremely difficult should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation.

To improve the application of this Regulation, both economic operators and public authorities should provide for adequate training with respect to the obligations under this Regulation. Member States should have inspection authorities in place, should organise regular awareness-raising actions that are adapted to the specificities of each of the different sectors, and should maintain a permanent dialogue with economic operators at all levels of the supply chain, including economic operators that operate online.

In order to deal with substances not already listed in Annex I or II, but in respect of which a Member State discovers reasonable grounds for believing that they could be used for the illicit manufacture of explosives, a safeguard clause for an adequate Union procedure should be provided. Moreover, in view of the specific risks to be addressed in this Regulation, it is appropriate to allow Member States, in certain circumstances, to adopt safeguard measures, including in respect of substances already subject to measures under this Regulation. Furthermore, Member States should be allowed to maintain national measures of which they have already informed or notified the Commission in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EU) No 98/2013.

The regulatory framework would be simplified by integrating the relevant security-oriented restrictions on the making available of ammonium nitrate from Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 into this Regulation. For that reason, Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 should be amended accordingly.

The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Regulation based on the criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and EU added value. That evaluation should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures. Information should be collected regularly for the purpose of evaluating this Regulation.

Since the objective of this Regulation, namely limiting access by the members of the general public to explosives precursors, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the limitation, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 should be repealed,