Table 7.

The Panel's conclusions on the pest categorisation criteria defined in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 on protective measures against pests of plants (the number of the relevant sections of the pest categorisation is shown in brackets in the first column)

Criterion of pest categorisation	Panel's conclusions against criterion in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 regarding Union quarantine pest	Criterion in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 regarding Union regulated non‐quarantine pest	Key uncertainties
Identity of the pest (Section  3.1 )	The identity of the pest is clearly defined and there are reliable methods for its detection and identification	The identity of the pest is clearly defined and there are reliable methods for its detection and identification	None
Absence/presence of the pest in the EU territory (Section  3.2 )	The pest is not known to occur in the EU	The pest is not known to occur in the EU. Therefore, it does not meet this criterion to qualify as a Union RNQP	None
Regulatory status (Section  3.3 )	The pest is not known to occur in the EU and is currently officially regulated on Citrus L., Fortunella Swingle, Poncirus Raf. plants and their hybrids other than seeds (Directive 2000/29/EC)	The criteria on pest presence, to be considered as potential regulated non‐quarantine pest, is not met, therefore other criteria for consideration as RNQP do not need to be assessed.	None
Pest potential for entry, establishment and spread in the EU territory (Section  3.4 )	The pest could potentially enter, establish and spread in the EU. Pathways of entry: Host plants for planting, excluding seeds, and Citrus fruit (with or without leaves)	The pest is not present in the EU. Therefore, other criteria for consideration as an RNQP do not need to be assessed	See uncertainties 1 to 5
Potential for consequences in the EU territory (Section  3.5 )	The introduction and spread of the pest in the EU could cause yield and quality losses in citrus production as well as environmental impacts	The pest is not present in the EU. Therefore, other criteria for consideration as an RNQP do not need to be assessed	See uncertainty 6
Available measures (Section  3.6 )	Phytosanitary measures are available to prevent the entry of the pathogen into the EU, e.g. sourcing host plants for planting and fruit from pest‐free areas or pest‐free places of production, inspection at the place of origin and the EU entry point. There are no fully effective measures to prevent establishment and spread.	The pest is not present in the EU. Therefore, other criteria for consideration as an RNQP do not need to be assessed.	See uncertainties 1 to 5
Conclusion on pest categorisation (Section  4 )	P. angolensis meets all the criteria assessed by EFSA above for consideration as a potential Union quarantine pest	P. angolensis is not known to occur in the EU. Therefore, it does not meet at least one of the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a Union regulated non‐quarantine pest	None
Aspects of assessment to focus on/scenarios to address in future if appropriate	The most important knowledge gap concerns the biology and epidemiology of P. angolensis with regard to the climate suitability in the EU citrus‐growing areas. Given that all the data available in the literature have been explored, the Panel considers that a full PRA is unlikely to reduce the uncertainties related to this gap in knowledge. Uncertainties can only be reduced by additional research