Article 30 GDPR
Legal Text
1. Each controller and, where applicable, the controller's representative, shall maintain a record of processing activities under its responsibility. That record shall contain all of the following information:
- (a) the name and contact details of the controller and, where applicable, the joint controller, the controller's representative and the data protection officer;
- (b) the purposes of the processing;
- (c) a description of the categories of data subjects and of the categories of personal data;
- (d) the categories of recipients to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed including recipients in third countries or international organisations;
- (e) where applicable, transfers of personal data to a third country or an international organisation, including the identification of that third country or international organisation and, in the case of transfers referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 49(1), the documentation of suitable safeguards;
- (f) where possible, the envisaged time limits for erasure of the different categories of data;
- (g) where possible, a general description of the technical and organisational security measures referred to in Article 32(1).
2. Each processor and, where applicable, the processor's representative shall maintain a record of all categories of processing activities carried out on behalf of a controller, containing:
- (a) the name and contact details of the processor or processors and of each controller on behalf of which the processor is acting, and, where applicable, of the controller's or the processor's representative, and the data protection officer;
- (b) the categories of processing carried out on behalf of each controller;
- (c) where applicable, transfers of personal data to a third country or an international organisation, including the identification of that third country or international organisation and, in the case of transfers referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 49(1), the documentation of suitable safeguards;
- (d) where possible, a general description of the technical and organisational security measures referred to in Article 32(1).
3. The records referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be in writing, including in electronic form.
4. The controller or the processor and, where applicable, the controller's or the processor's representative, shall make the record available to the supervisory authority on request.
5. The obligations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to an enterprise or an organisation employing fewer than 250 persons unless the processing it carries out is likely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the processing is not occasional, or the processing includes special categories of data as referred to in Article 9(1) or personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences referred to in Article 10.
Relevant Recitals
Commentary
Article 30 GDPR requires controllers and processors to maintain a "record of processing activities" (Article 4(2) GDPR).[1] Paragraph 1 specifies the information that the controller must include in the record. Paragraph 2 serves the same purpose, but it is addressed to the processor. Paragraph 3 clarifies that the record must be in written form, possibly also in electronic form. The following paragraph, paragraph 4, states that the record must be provided to supervisory authorities when they request it. Finally, the last paragraph establishes exceptions to the obligation to keep the record for controllers and processors with fewer than 250 employees, unless additional conditions are met.
(1) Record of processing activities by the controller
Article 30(1) GDPR provides a list of the elements that must be contained in the record of processing activities carried out by the controller. If the controller is located outside the EU, then its representative in the EU under Article 27 GDPR is subject to this obligation.
(a) Names and contact details
Article 30(1)(a) states it should contain the name and contact details of the controller and, where applicable, the joint controller(s),[2] the controller's representative and the data protection officer. This information is intended to enable an unambiguous identification of the controller(s) and whoever else is responsible under the GDPR. The notion of 'contact details' is not limited to a simple email address. It must contain all the elements (physical address, telephone number, contact person) that make it possible to contact a particular person or, where appropriate, reach them for an inspection.[3]
(b) Purposes of the processing
Article 30(1)(b) requires the controller to provide a description of the purposes of the processing. In accordance with Article 5(2)(b), purposes must be determined prior to the data collection and, in principle, subsequent processing is only allowed for such pre-specified purposes, which must be clear and transparent to enable the supervisory authority to assess the adequacy of safeguards implemented and the lawfulness of the processing during potential audits.[4]
Speaking of lawfulness, the provision does not require to mention the legal basis upon which a certain purpose relies. This gap should be filled by interpreting the text in line with the principle of accountability. If a controller must demonstrate compliance with the GDPR, then it must have a "firm and reasoned notion about the legal basis of processing before it starts any operation, and this notion should be verifiable by means of its records. Thus, in order for the keeping of records to be meaningful, it will be necessary for the controller to be able to demonstrate on which legal basis it relies in its processing".[5]
(c) Categories of data subjects and of personal data
Article 30(1)(c) GDPR establishes that the record of processing activities shall describe the categories of data subjects and the categories of personal data. Examples of categories of data subjects are "website visitors", "clinic patients", "employees". Categories of personal data may be "website clicks", "diagnosis", "holiday leave", as well as "union affiliations". Scholars have highlighted that each category of personal data should be tied to the category of data subject it belongs to. For example, the record of processing activities should clearly show that the two categories "holiday leave" and "union affiliations" are processed with regard to the "employees" category.[6]
(d) Categories of recipients
Article 30(1)(d) prescribes that controllers should describe the categories of recipients to whom personal data have been or will be disclosed. The wording of the provision suggests that only the categories of addressees have to be indicated, such as "suppliers", "accountants", "marketing consultants", or "legal advisors". However, this ambiguity does not seem advisable, as other provisions of the GDPR require the controller to keep track of individual recipients. For example, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR and Article 19 GDPR require the disclosure of “recipients or categories of recipients” and specific recipients “if the data subject requests it” respectively. Based on the same logical and legal premises, the European Court of Justice has recently clarified that, if requested by the data subject, the controller is obliged to provide a specific list of recipients.[7] As such, it would go against its aim of increasing accountability to not specify the recipients in the record of processing activities.[8]
(e) International transfers
In accordance with Article 30(1)(e), the controller shall provide information regarding the transfers of personal data to a third country or an international organisation and, in the case of the applicability of Article 49(1) GDPR, the documentation of suitable safeguards. There is no obligation to name the means by which the controller intends to ensure an adequate level of protection on the part of the foreign recipient of the data. Additional information "is needed only if a data transfer shall, exceptionally, be based on Article 49(1), second subparagraph, which pertains to occasional ('non-repetitive') transfers of data about a limited number of data subjects and for compelling legitimate interests".[9]
(f) Envisaged time limits for erasure
Article 30(1)(f) GDPR requires controllers to clarify the envisaged time limits for erasure of different categories of data. If the controller knows when certain data will be deleted, it is necessary to indicate this period. However, it may not be feasible to specify an exact deletion period for every processing, especially if the permissible storage duration is contingent upon the indefinite duration of a contract. In such cases, it is advisable to provide a general deadline for deletion. Specifying the deletion period also helps the supervisory authority ensure compliance with the requirements of data minimization (Article 5(1)(c) GDPR) and storage limitation (Article 5(1)(e) GDPR).[10]
(g) Description of security measures
Under Article 30(1)(f) GDPR, where possible, the controller provides a "general description" of the technical and organisational security measures referred to in Article 32(1) GDPR. In most cases, it is rare to encounter situations where a general description is impossible. Controller will likely use categories of measures such as "use of anti-virus programs," "restriction of external access", "security guards at the facility" or similar. However, if the controller engages in numerous processing activities, it can result in a significant documentation effort.[11]
(2) Record of processing activities by the processor
Article 30(2) GDPR regulates the minimum requirements of the processor's records of processing activities (or, where available, its representative's under Article 27 GDPR). These rules, which partly overlap with those established by Article 30(1) GDPR, notably provide for an obligation on the processor to record the following elements.
(a) Names and contact details
Under Article 30(2)(a) GDPR, the processor must provide information in two separate directions. In their Record of Processing Activities (ROPA), on one hand, they should indicate the name as well as the contact details of all the controllers (or their representatives) on whose behalf they operate.[12] On the other hand, they should mention all the processors or their representatives the processor has, in turn, engaged.[13] If available, data protection officers should also be mentioned.
(b) Categories of processing carried out on behalf of the controller
Article 30(2)(b) GDPR requires the processor to list the categories of processing carried out on behalf of each controller. The processor is only required to document the categories of processing activities. The notion of categories implies that individual processing steps are not described in detail. It is likely sufficient for the processor to provide a general description of their service in the documentation (such as cloud computing or software-as-a-service).[14]
(c) International transfers
Where applicable, information on the transfers of personal data to a third country or an international organisation and, in the case of the applicability of Article 49(1) GDPR, the documentation of suitable safeguards (Article 30(2)(c) GDPR). See commentary under Article 30(1)(e) GDPR.
(d) Description of security measures
The processor's ROPA must contain a general description of the technical and organisational security measures referred to in Article 32(1) GDPR. See commentary under Article 30(1)(g) GDPR.
(3) Written form
The records of processing activities shall be in writing, including in electronic form.[15] This enables controllers to provide DPAs with the records when requested under Article 30(4) GDPR and to comply with, inter alia, the principles of accountability and transparency.[16] Any changes to the processing operation have to be transparent and traceable (e.g. who has been the controller, processor or data protection officer – and when). The ROPA must be kept up to date, “in order to be able to track changes to the entries in the directory (e.g. who was responsible when, data protection officer, etc.), the changes should be documented with a storage period of one year.”[17]
(4) Provision of the ROPA to supervisory authority
Under Article 30(4) GDPR, the controller or the processor and, where applicable, the controller's or the processor's representative, shall make the record available to the supervisory authority on request. Supervisory authorities can investigate controllers and processor as general control measure, but also where data breaches have occurred and data subjects have filed complaints. Records of processing activities therefore have to be available at any time to be provided to DPAs upon request.
Although not explicitly stated in Article 30(4), the Record of Processing Activities (ROPA) should be made available to the Data Protection Officer (DPO). Conversely, the DPO may not have the necessary resources to carry out their duties, as provided for in Article 38(2) of the GDPR.
There is no obligation to provide the ROPA directly to third parties, including data subjects.[18] However, a significant portion of the information contained in the ROPA is already available in privacy policies (Articles 13 and 14) or in response to access requests (Article 15).
(5) Exceptions
An enterprise or an organisation employing less than 250 persons is not obliged to maintain records of processing. However, this exception does not apply if an organisation carries out processing that is likely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the processing is not occasional, or the processing includes special categories of data (Article 9(1) GDPR) or personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences referred to in Article 10 GDPR.[19]
Decisions
→ You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 30 GDPR
References
- ↑ This obligation, which replaces the old notification obligation where data processing activities had to be notified to DPAs (Articles 18-19 Directive 95/46/EC), represents the expression of several data processing principles. On the one hand, it promotes accountability by allowing the controller to keep track of its processing and amend it where necessary. On the other hand, it increases the overall transparency of the processing and makes it easier for data subjects to exercise their rights. In practice, the record of processing activities is an updated written account of the main elements of the processing.
- ↑ In case of joint controllership, it is necessary to list the names and contact details of all joint controllers (Article 26(1) GDPR). Petri, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker gen. Döhmann, Datenschutzrecht, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 14 (C.H. Beck 2019).
- ↑ Hartung, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 30, margin number 17 (C.H.Beck 2020, 3rd Edition).
- ↑ Bertermann, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 10 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition).
- ↑ Kotschy, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 30 GDPR, p. 620 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ Hartung, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 30, margin number 19 (C.H.Beck 2020, 3rd Edition).
- ↑ CJEU, C-154/21, RW v Österreichische Post, 12 January 2023, among the others, margin number 24 (available here).
- ↑ In a broadly similar sense, Kotschy, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 30 GDPR, p. 620 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ Kotschy, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 30 GDPR, p. 622 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ Bertermann, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 14 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition).
- ↑ Petri, in Simitis, Hornung, Spiecker gen. Döhmann, Datenschutzrecht, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 33 (C.H. Beck 2019).
- ↑ Scholars note that the requirement to specify the responsible person presents significant challenges, particularly for processors engaged in large-scale businesses such as cloud service providers, hosting providers, or software-as-a-service platforms, as they frequently work with thousands or even hundreds of thousands of controllers. In most cases, the disclosure of these extensive lists of controllers holds little relevance for the supervisory authority. Therefore, a safeguard clause such as "if possible" would have been welcomed in this case. See, Bertermann, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 17 (C.H. Beck 2018, 2nd Edition).
- ↑ "Which kind of processors should be included is not explained: they could be involved either by having delegated processing tasks to the documenting processor or by being sub-processors of the documenting processor. In both cases there would have to exist a contract between the documenting processor and the orher processor or processors, in which case their identity must be known and recorded anyway by the documenting processor, which is also the case with regard to the names of the representative (Article 27) and data protection officer (Article 37) both of which are also required under Article 30(2)(a)." See Kotschy, in Kuner, Bygrave, Docksey, The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary, Article 30 GDPR, p. 623 (Oxford University Press 2020).
- ↑ Bogendorfer, in Knyrim, DatKomm, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 42 (Manz 2021).
- ↑ An example of a ROPA is provided by the French data protection authority in electronic format. The document, in the form of an Excel file, includes all the fields required by Article 30 GDPR for both the controller and the processor. It also offers numerous examples to aid in understanding the meaning of the various elements mentioned in the provision (accessed on 5.6.2023, available here).
- ↑ Hartung, in Kühling, Buchner, DS-GVO BDSG, Article 30, margin number 31 (C.H.Beck 2020, 3rd Edition).
- ↑ DSK, Datenschutzkonferenz, ‘Hinweise zum Verzeichnis von Verarbeitungstätigkeiten’, Art. 30 DS-GVO, February 2018, p. 3 (available here).
- ↑ The record of processing activities may contain additional information or be voluntarily documented in greater detail (particularly if it serves as a compliance tool), and it might also include trade secrets (such as technical and organizational measures implemented). Bogendorfer, in Knyrim, DatKomm, Article 30 GDPR, margin number 50 (Manz 2021).
- ↑ The WP29 underlines that the wording of Article 30(5) is clear in providing that the three types of processing to which the derogation does not apply are alternative (“or”) and the occurrence of any one of them alone triggers the obligation to maintain the record of processing activities. See, WP29, Position Paper on the derogations from the obligation to maintain records of processing activities pursuant to Article 30(5) GDPR, p. 2 (available here).
