Digital Omnibus tracker

Digital Omnibus proposal

Recital 39

Compare the available Commission, Council and Parliament texts and amendments affecting this recital.

Recital total: 1 part · 4 Council drafts · 14 Parliament amendments

Removed wording is struck through; added or replacement wording is highlighted.

Institutional text

European Commission proposal

The wording proposed by the Commission at the start of this legislative file.

Commission source wording and instructions

Recital 39

Commission proposal

In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.

Institutional text

Council Presidency texts

Successive Presidency compromise texts. Their inclusion does not imply agreement or adoption.

Recital 39

May Presidency compromise

In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should establish and make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person , and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach does not result in such a high risk. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The Commission may adopt, by means of an implementing act, the common template as established by the Board, as well as its updates where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. The alignment of notification thresholds should not affect the controller’s obligation to carry out an individual risk assessment and to maintain complete documentation of personal data breaches in accordance with Article 33(5) and Article 30 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedom of a natural person should also apply in order to determine when communicating the data breaches to the data subject, in accordance with Article 34.

Competing proposals

European Parliament amendments

These are alternative tabled amendments. An amendment affecting several tracked parts appears once here, with each target identified.

More filters

Political group at the amendment date where available; otherwise the current Parliament affiliation.

Alternative wording Amendment 7 ITRE–LIBE draft report · Aura Salla and Marina Kaljurand (rapporteurs)
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of theRegulation Regulation(EU) 2016/679, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the European Data Protection Board should prepareestablish and make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The Commission may adopt, by means of an implementing act, the common template as established by the Board, as well as its updates where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.
Alternative wording Amendment 130 · Victor Negrescu JURI
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. This simplification of reporting obligations should not weaken cybersecurity standards or the overall level of protection of data subjects, and should be accompanied by clear guidance and, where appropriate, standard templates that facilitate timely, high-quality reporting by controllers of all sizes, including SMEs.
Alternative wording Amendment 131 · Emil Radev JURI
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepareestablish and make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The Commission may adopt, by means of an implementing act, the common template as established by the Board as well as its updates where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.
Alternative wording Amendment 174 · David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group IMCO
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. Adapting the threshold for notifications should not have an affect on the controller’s obligations under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 to carry out an individual risk assessment and to maintain complete documentation of personal data breaches in accordance with Article 33(5) and Article 30 of that Regulation. The common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedom of a natural person remains valid in order to determine when communicating the data breaches to the data subject, in accordance with Article 34.
Alternative wording Amendment 175 · Sophia Kircher IMCO
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board shouldestablish prepareand make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The Commission may adopt, by means of an implementing act, the common template as established by the Board as well as its updates, where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.
Alternative wording Amendment 378 · Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. Controllers should continue to carry out, on a case-by-case basis, an assessment of the risks posed by each personal data breach, taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, as well as the likelihood and severity of the impact on the data subjects’ rights and freedoms. If this assessment indicates a high risk to individuals’ rights and freedoms, controllers should inform data subjects and, where appropriate, the competent supervisory authority, as provided in Regulation (EU) 2016/679, without undue delay.
Alternative wording Amendment 379 · Alex Agius Saliba ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare and publish a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common listlists of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely and not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take dueutmost account of the proposalproposals prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the listlists should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely or not to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. The alignment of notification thresholds should not affect the controller’s obligation to carry out an individual risk assessment and to maintain complete documentation of personal data breaches in accordance with Articles 30 and 33(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The common lists of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result or not in a risk to the rights and freedom of a natural person should also apply in order to determine when communicating the data breaches to the data subject, in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Alternative wording Amendment 380 · Julie Rechagneux, Mélanie Disdier, Aleksandar Nikolic, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Alexandre Varaut, Fabrice Leggeri, Marion Maréchal, Christophe Bay ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. The raising of the notification threshold does not affect the obligation of the controller to document any personal data breach, including breaches which are not notified to the supervisory authority. That documentation shall comprise the facts relating to the breach, its effects and the remedial action taken, and shall enable the supervisory authority to verify compliance. The absence of a notification obligation is not an absence of an accountability obligation.
Justification

Aligning the notification threshold with that of communication to the data subject is acceptable only if the documentation obligation is expressly preserved. Otherwise, non-notified breaches would become invisible to the authority even in the course of an inspection.

Alternative wording Amendment 381 · Marina Kaljurand, Elena Sancho Murillo, Brando Benifei, Birgit Sippel, Alex Agius Saliba, Francisco Assis, Elisabeth Grossmann, Kristian Vigenin, Matjaž Nemec ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepareestablish and make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person., Thea Commissioncommon should take due accountlist of thecircumstances proposalin preparedwhich bya thepersonal Boarddata andbreach reviewdoes themnot result in such a high risk, as necessary,well prioras a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach does not result in a risk to adoptionthe rights and freedoms of a natural person. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the listlists should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The Commission may adopt, by means of an implementing act, the common template as established by the Board, as well as its updates where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. The common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should apply in order to determine when communicating the data breaches to the data subject, in accordance with Article 34.
Alternative wording Amendment 382 · Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission shouldis takeempowered dueto accountdecide ofthat the proposallists preparedand the template as established by the Board andhave reviewgeneral them,validity aswithin necessary,the priorUnion toby adoptionway of an implementing act. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. If processing operations do not appear in any of the lists, the controller is still required to assess whether the personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons.
Alternative wording Amendment 383 · Pernando Barrena Arza ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be alignedincreased withto thatsituations ofin communication ofwhich a personal data breach is likely to result in an increased risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. Since all processing of personal data is connected with some inherent risk, an increased threshold is necessary in order to avoid that every single personal data breach leads to a notification obligation. In order to assess the impact of the data breach to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the controller shall compare the level of risk prior to the data subjectbreach underwith Articlethe 34respective ofrisk thatafter Regulationthe data breach. The risk should be considered increased if an existing risk is more likely to materialise or if a new risk emerged by the personal data breach. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in aan highincreased risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higherthreshold for a notification of the supervisory authority about a personal data breach should be lower than the threshold for notifyingthe aobligation to communicate the personal data breach to the affected data subject. Therefore, not all personal data breaches notified to the supervisory authority doesalso not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breachresult in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or itsan obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach incommunicate the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personalaffected data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breachessubject.
Alternative wording Amendment 384 · Francesco Torselli ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches. Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1182/71 applies to the calculation of periods and time limits under Article 32 and 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Alternative wording Amendment 385 · Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communication of a personal data breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulation. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepareestablish and make public a common template for notifying data breaches to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessary. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.
Alternative wording Amendment 386 · Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier ITRE · LIBE
(39) In order to reduce the burden on controllers while ensuring that supervisory authorities have access to the relevant information and can act on violations of the Regulation, the threshold for notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 should be aligned with that of communicationother ofUnion alegislation personalgoverning datacybersecurity breach to the data subject under Article 34 of that Regulationincidents. In the case of a data breach that is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should not be required to notify the competent supervisory authority. The higher threshold for notifying a data breach to the supervisory authority does not affect the obligation of the controller to document the breach in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, or its obligation to be able to demonstrate its compliance with that Regulation, in accordance with Article 5(2) of that Regulation. In order to facilitate compliance by controllers and a harmonised approach in the Union, the Board should prepare a common template for notifying datacybersecurity breachesincidents to the competent supervisory authority and a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person. The Commission should take due account of the proposal prepared by the Board and review them, as necessary, prior to adoption after consulting the European Parliament and Member States. In order to take account of new information security threats, the common template and the list should be reviewed at least every three years and updated where necessarytechnological developments so require. The lack of a common list of circumstances in which a personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of a natural person should not affect the obligations of controllers to notify those breaches.