# Official Journal C 37/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.037.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 37 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5510 February 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.037.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 37

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5510 February 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | European Data Protection Supervisor |
| 2012/C 037/01 | Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy | 1 |
| 2012/C 037/02 | Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council | 6 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Data Protection Supervisor

2012/C 037/01

Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy

1

2012/C 037/02

Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council

6

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 037/03 | Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission | 14 |
| 2012/C 037/04 | Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission | 16 |

III   Preparatory acts

European Commission

2012/C 037/03

Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

14

2012/C 037/04

Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

16

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 037/05 | Euro exchange rates | 20 |
| 2012/C 037/06 | Latest publication of COM documents other than legislative proposals and legislative proposals adopted by the CommissionOJ C 335, 16.11.2011 | 21 |
| 2012/C 037/07 | COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission | 22 |
| 2012/C 037/08 | COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission | 23 |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2012/C 037/09 | Special Report No 16/2011 EU Financial assistance for the decommissioning of nuclear plants in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia: Achievements and Future Challenges | 26 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2012/C 037/05

Euro exchange rates

20

2012/C 037/06

Latest publication of COM documents other than legislative proposals and legislative proposals adopted by the CommissionOJ C 335, 16.11.2011

21

2012/C 037/07

COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

22

2012/C 037/08

COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

23

Court of Auditors

2012/C 037/09

Special Report No 16/2011 EU Financial assistance for the decommissioning of nuclear plants in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia: Achievements and Future Challenges

26

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 037/10 | Call for proposals — EACEA/11/12 — INTRA-ACP academic mobility scheme — Africa (Mwalimu Nyerere) and the Caribbean and Pacific | 27 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 037/11 | State aid — Italy — State aid SA.33726 (11/C) (ex SA.33726 (11/NN)) — Deferral of payment of the milk levy in Italy — Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union | 30 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2012/C 037/10

Call for proposals — EACEA/11/12 — INTRA-ACP academic mobility scheme — Africa (Mwalimu Nyerere) and the Caribbean and Pacific

27

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2012/C 037/11

State aid — Italy — State aid SA.33726 (11/C) (ex SA.33726 (11/NN)) — Deferral of payment of the milk levy in Italy — Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

30

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Data Protection Supervisor

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/1

---

Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy

2012/C 37/01

THE EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION SUPERVISOR,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 16 thereof,

Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof,

Having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1),

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (2), and in particular Article 41(2) thereof,

HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION:

1.   INTRODUCTION

1.1.   Background

| 1. | On 8 April 2011, the Commission adopted Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (the Implementing Regulation) (3). |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 8 April 2011, the Commission adopted Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (the Implementing Regulation) (3).

| 2. | The EDPS was not consulted under Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, despite the fact that the legislative initiative was included in the EDPS Inventory of priorities for legislative consultation (4). The present Opinion is therefore based on Article 41(2) of the same Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The EDPS was not consulted under Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, despite the fact that the legislative initiative was included in the EDPS Inventory of priorities for legislative consultation (4). The present Opinion is therefore based on Article 41(2) of the same Regulation.

1.2.   Objectives of the Implementing Regulation

| 3. | The objective of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (the Control Regulation) (5), is to put in place a European system for control, inspection, and enforcement so as to ensure compliance with all the rules of the common fisheries policy. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The objective of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (the Control Regulation) (5), is to put in place a European system for control, inspection, and enforcement so as to ensure compliance with all the rules of the common fisheries policy.

| 4. | The Control Regulation obliged the Commission to adopt detailed rules and measures necessary to implement certain of its provisions. The Implementing Regulation establishes such detailed rules with regard to the following areas: general conditions for access to waters and resources (Title II), control of fisheries (Title III), control of marketing (Title IV), surveillance (Title V), inspection (Title VI), enforcement (Title VII), measures to ensure compliance by Member States (Title VIII), data and information (Title IX) and implementation (Title X). |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Control Regulation obliged the Commission to adopt detailed rules and measures necessary to implement certain of its provisions. The Implementing Regulation establishes such detailed rules with regard to the following areas: general conditions for access to waters and resources (Title II), control of fisheries (Title III), control of marketing (Title IV), surveillance (Title V), inspection (Title VI), enforcement (Title VII), measures to ensure compliance by Member States (Title VIII), data and information (Title IX) and implementation (Title X).

1.3.   Aim of the present Opinion

| 5. | In March 2009, the EDPS issued an Opinion on the Control Regulation (6). The Opinion highlighted that the proposal involved the processing of various categories of data, which in some cases could be considered personal data. Personal data would normally be processed in all cases where the master or the owner of the vessel or any fisherman or member of the crew is identified or identifiable. On this ground, the EDPS made some recommendations on a few provisions of the proposal. |
| --- | --- |

5.

In March 2009, the EDPS issued an Opinion on the Control Regulation (6). The Opinion highlighted that the proposal involved the processing of various categories of data, which in some cases could be considered personal data. Personal data would normally be processed in all cases where the master or the owner of the vessel or any fisherman or member of the crew is identified or identifiable. On this ground, the EDPS made some recommendations on a few provisions of the proposal.

| 6. | The EDPS further stressed that several articles of the proposed Regulation referred to a comitology procedure for the adoption of implementing rules and that some of these rules also involved data protection aspects (7). Given the impact that these rules may have on data protection, the EDPS thus recommended the Commission to consult him before these detailed rules were adopted. The Implementing Regulation was adopted last 8 April 2011, but the EDPS was not consulted before the adoption. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The EDPS further stressed that several articles of the proposed Regulation referred to a comitology procedure for the adoption of implementing rules and that some of these rules also involved data protection aspects (7). Given the impact that these rules may have on data protection, the EDPS thus recommended the Commission to consult him before these detailed rules were adopted. The Implementing Regulation was adopted last 8 April 2011, but the EDPS was not consulted before the adoption.

| 7. | The EDPS regrets that the Implementing Regulation was not submitted to him for prior consultation as recommended in the 2009 Opinion. He would like to nonetheless draw the attention of the Commission to a few aspects of the Implementing Regulation liable to raise concerns from a data protection point of view. For this reason, the EDPS has decided to submit this brief Opinion. The EDPS’ comments will focus mainly on the following aspects: (i) monitoring of the activities of the fishing vessels and data protection; (ii) vessels remote monitoring systems; (iii) retention of personal data by the Commission and the competent authorities; and (iv) applicability of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The EDPS regrets that the Implementing Regulation was not submitted to him for prior consultation as recommended in the 2009 Opinion. He would like to nonetheless draw the attention of the Commission to a few aspects of the Implementing Regulation liable to raise concerns from a data protection point of view. For this reason, the EDPS has decided to submit this brief Opinion. The EDPS’ comments will focus mainly on the following aspects: (i) monitoring of the activities of the fishing vessels and data protection; (ii) vessels remote monitoring systems; (iii) retention of personal data by the Commission and the competent authorities; and (iv) applicability of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

2.   ANALYSIS OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATION

2.1.   Monitoring of the activities of the fishing vessels and data protection

| 8. | Recital 31 provides that the processing of personal data under the Implementing Regulation is governed by Directive 95/46/EC and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, ‘in particular as regards the requirements of confidentiality and security of processing, the transfer of personal data from the national systems of Member States to the Commission, the lawfulness of processing, and the rights of data subjects to information, access and rectification of their personal data’. The EDPS welcomes this reference to the applicable data protection legislation. |
| --- | --- |

8.

Recital 31 provides that the processing of personal data under the Implementing Regulation is governed by Directive 95/46/EC and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, ‘in particular as regards the requirements of confidentiality and security of processing, the transfer of personal data from the national systems of Member States to the Commission, the lawfulness of processing, and the rights of data subjects to information, access and rectification of their personal data’. The EDPS welcomes this reference to the applicable data protection legislation.

| 9. | The activities of the fishing vessels are subject to systematic and detailed monitoring through advanced technological means, including satellite tracking devices and computerised databases (8). The geographical position, course and speed of fishing vessels is regularly monitored by the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) (9) and, where applicable, the Automatic Identification System (AIS) (10) or the Vessel Detection System (VDS) (11). All these data are systematically cross-checked, analysed and verified through computerised algorithms and automated mechanisms in order to spot inconsistencies or suspected infringements. As Article 145(3) of the Implementing Regulation shows, this processing may resort, as appropriate, in data mining and profiling activities (12). |
| --- | --- |

9.

The activities of the fishing vessels are subject to systematic and detailed monitoring through advanced technological means, including satellite tracking devices and computerised databases (8). The geographical position, course and speed of fishing vessels is regularly monitored by the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) (9) and, where applicable, the Automatic Identification System (AIS) (10) or the Vessel Detection System (VDS) (11). All these data are systematically cross-checked, analysed and verified through computerised algorithms and automated mechanisms in order to spot inconsistencies or suspected infringements. As Article 145(3) of the Implementing Regulation shows, this processing may resort, as appropriate, in data mining and profiling activities (12).

| 10. | As long as these data can be linked to identified or identifiable individuals (e.g. the master of the vessel, the owner of the vessel, or the members of the crew), such monitoring involves the processing of personal data. It is therefore important that the control system is well-balanced and that adequate safeguards are put in place and implemented in order to avoid that the rights of the persons involved are unduly restricted. This implies for instance a clear delimitation of the purposes for which the relevant data can be processed, the minimisation of the (personal) data being processed and the establishment of maximum retention periods for the same data. This is especially important in the present case where the processing operations potentially involve data concerning offences or suspected offences, which are likely to be linked to the personal data of the owner and/or the master of the vessel. |
| --- | --- |

10.

As long as these data can be linked to identified or identifiable individuals (e.g. the master of the vessel, the owner of the vessel, or the members of the crew), such monitoring involves the processing of personal data. It is therefore important that the control system is well-balanced and that adequate safeguards are put in place and implemented in order to avoid that the rights of the persons involved are unduly restricted. This implies for instance a clear delimitation of the purposes for which the relevant data can be processed, the minimisation of the (personal) data being processed and the establishment of maximum retention periods for the same data. This is especially important in the present case where the processing operations potentially involve data concerning offences or suspected offences, which are likely to be linked to the personal data of the owner and/or the master of the vessel.

| 11. | Having regard to the scope and scale of the monitoring activities, it appears that the Implementing Regulation does not always successfully strike a balance between the objective of ensuring compliance and the respect for privacy and data protection of the individuals concerned. As the Implementing Regulation has already been adopted, the EDPS considers it important for the Commission to clarify ex post, where possible, the scope and limits of the processing activities and provide for specific safeguards where necessary. This could be achieved, for instance, by adopting general or specific guidance or internal rules aimed at clarifying certain aspects of the processing activities with regard to the protection of personal data or in the framework of prior checks with the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. |
| --- | --- |

11.

Having regard to the scope and scale of the monitoring activities, it appears that the Implementing Regulation does not always successfully strike a balance between the objective of ensuring compliance and the respect for privacy and data protection of the individuals concerned. As the Implementing Regulation has already been adopted, the EDPS considers it important for the Commission to clarify ex post, where possible, the scope and limits of the processing activities and provide for specific safeguards where necessary. This could be achieved, for instance, by adopting general or specific guidance or internal rules aimed at clarifying certain aspects of the processing activities with regard to the protection of personal data or in the framework of prior checks with the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

| 12. | The main aspects which in the EDPS’ view require further specification are discussed below. |
| --- | --- |

12.

The main aspects which in the EDPS’ view require further specification are discussed below.

2.2.   Use of VMS, AIS and VDS data and purpose limitation principle

| 13. | One of the basic principles of the fundamental right to data protection is that personal data shall be processed only for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes (13). The purpose limitation principle establishes a special responsibility for data controllers but also sets out a requirement for the legislator, by demanding that legislative provisions must not be framed in such a general way as to justify the use of personal data for purposes which are not sufficiently defined. Derogations of the purpose limitation principle are possible, provided that they are necessary and proportionate and that the other requirements set out in Article 52 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union are complied with. |
| --- | --- |

13.

One of the basic principles of the fundamental right to data protection is that personal data shall be processed only for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes (13). The purpose limitation principle establishes a special responsibility for data controllers but also sets out a requirement for the legislator, by demanding that legislative provisions must not be framed in such a general way as to justify the use of personal data for purposes which are not sufficiently defined. Derogations of the purpose limitation principle are possible, provided that they are necessary and proportionate and that the other requirements set out in Article 52 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union are complied with.

| 14. | As mentioned, the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation provide for the systematic and detailed monitoring of fishing activities by means of VMS, AIS and VDS. Pursuant to Article 12 of the Control Regulation, data from the VMS, AIS and VDS may be transmitted to EU agencies and competent authorities of the Member State engaged in surveillance operations for the purpose of ‘maritime safety and security, border control, protection of the maritime environment and general law enforcement’. Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation further specifies that Member States shall use VMS data ‘for the effective monitoring of the activities of fishing vessels’ and that Member States shall ‘take all necessary measures to ensure that they are used only for official purposes’. |
| --- | --- |

14.

As mentioned, the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation provide for the systematic and detailed monitoring of fishing activities by means of VMS, AIS and VDS. Pursuant to Article 12 of the Control Regulation, data from the VMS, AIS and VDS may be transmitted to EU agencies and competent authorities of the Member State engaged in surveillance operations for the purpose of ‘maritime safety and security, border control, protection of the maritime environment and general law enforcement’. Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation further specifies that Member States shall use VMS data ‘for the effective monitoring of the activities of fishing vessels’ and that Member States shall ‘take all necessary measures to ensure that they are used only for official purposes’.

| 15. | Having regard to the purpose limitation principle, the EDPS considers that Article 12 of the Control Regulation and Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation are too broadly formulated. If not interpreted restrictively, the expressions ‘general law enforcement’, ‘monitoring of the activities of the fishing vessels’ and ‘official purposes’ are likely to cover an overly broad range of processing activities, not even remotely connected with the purposes of the Control Regulation. This open-ended approach raises concerns in connection with the purpose limitation principle. |
| --- | --- |

15.

Having regard to the purpose limitation principle, the EDPS considers that Article 12 of the Control Regulation and Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation are too broadly formulated. If not interpreted restrictively, the expressions ‘general law enforcement’, ‘monitoring of the activities of the fishing vessels’ and ‘official purposes’ are likely to cover an overly broad range of processing activities, not even remotely connected with the purposes of the Control Regulation. This open-ended approach raises concerns in connection with the purpose limitation principle.

| 16. | In light of the above considerations, the EDPS advises the Commission to provide concrete guidance on the interpretation of Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation. The Commission should in particular clarify the meaning, and limit the scope, of VMS, AIS and VDS data processing for ‘general law enforcement’ or other purposes unconnected with the common fisheries policy. |
| --- | --- |

16.

In light of the above considerations, the EDPS advises the Commission to provide concrete guidance on the interpretation of Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation. The Commission should in particular clarify the meaning, and limit the scope, of VMS, AIS and VDS data processing for ‘general law enforcement’ or other purposes unconnected with the common fisheries policy.

2.3.   Retention periods

| 17. | Another fundamental principle of the data protection legislation is that personal data should be kept in a form which permits the identification of data subjects for no longer than necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected (14). This principle is also directly connected with purpose limitation. If personal data are no longer necessary for the initial purpose, the retention of those data is no longer admissible as it would constitute a processing incompatible with the original purpose. |
| --- | --- |

17.

Another fundamental principle of the data protection legislation is that personal data should be kept in a form which permits the identification of data subjects for no longer than necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected (14). This principle is also directly connected with purpose limitation. If personal data are no longer necessary for the initial purpose, the retention of those data is no longer admissible as it would constitute a processing incompatible with the original purpose.

| 18. | The Implementing Regulation sets a minimum retention period of three years in relation to a number of data. With regard to VMS data, for example, Article 27(2)(a) provides that Member States shall ensure that the relevant data are recorded in a computer readable form and safely stored in computerised databases ‘for at least three years’. Similarly, Article 92(3) provides that data related to the surveillance reports shall be kept available in the database for ‘at least three years’. Moreover, Article 118 establishes that the data from the inspection reports shall be kept available in the database ‘for at least three years’. |
| --- | --- |

18.

The Implementing Regulation sets a minimum retention period of three years in relation to a number of data. With regard to VMS data, for example, Article 27(2)(a) provides that Member States shall ensure that the relevant data are recorded in a computer readable form and safely stored in computerised databases ‘for at least three years’. Similarly, Article 92(3) provides that data related to the surveillance reports shall be kept available in the database for ‘at least three years’. Moreover, Article 118 establishes that the data from the inspection reports shall be kept available in the database ‘for at least three years’.

| 19. | In general, the EDPS considers that the storage period should have been established more precisely by setting a maximum period of retention (instead of only a minimum retention period). In any event, he takes the view that the above provisions should be interpreted consistently with Article 6(1)(e) of Directive 95/46/EC and Article 4(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. This implies that the period of retention of three years should be interpreted in principle as a maximum retention period, unless the necessity to retain the data for a longer period can be adequately demonstrated on the basis of convincing evidence. |
| --- | --- |

19.

In general, the EDPS considers that the storage period should have been established more precisely by setting a maximum period of retention (instead of only a minimum retention period). In any event, he takes the view that the above provisions should be interpreted consistently with Article 6(1)(e) of Directive 95/46/EC and Article 4(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. This implies that the period of retention of three years should be interpreted in principle as a maximum retention period, unless the necessity to retain the data for a longer period can be adequately demonstrated on the basis of convincing evidence.

2.4.   Administrative cooperation and transfers of data to third countries

| 20. | Article 164 of the Implementing Regulation governs information exchanges with third countries. Article 164, paragraph 2, in particular deals with information exchanges from a Member State to a third country or a Regional Fisheries Management Organisation under a bilateral agreement with that country or in accordance with the rules of a that Organisation. Article 164, paragraph 3, deals with exchanges of information concerning non-compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy, from the Commission, or the body designated by it, in the framework of fisheries agreements concluded between the Union and third countries or in the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisation or similar arrangements. |
| --- | --- |

20.

Article 164 of the Implementing Regulation governs information exchanges with third countries. Article 164, paragraph 2, in particular deals with information exchanges from a Member State to a third country or a Regional Fisheries Management Organisation under a bilateral agreement with that country or in accordance with the rules of a that Organisation. Article 164, paragraph 3, deals with exchanges of information concerning non-compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy, from the Commission, or the body designated by it, in the framework of fisheries agreements concluded between the Union and third countries or in the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisation or similar arrangements.

| 21. | While Article 164, paragraph 2, specifies that the information exchange from Member States to third countries shall take place ‘in accordance with EU and national legislation regarding the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data’, paragraph 3 does not contain a similar reference with regard to information exchanges originating from the Commission. Under paragraph 3, the information exchange is made subject only to the consent of the Member State that supplied the information. |
| --- | --- |

21.

While Article 164, paragraph 2, specifies that the information exchange from Member States to third countries shall take place ‘in accordance with EU and national legislation regarding the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data’, paragraph 3 does not contain a similar reference with regard to information exchanges originating from the Commission. Under paragraph 3, the information exchange is made subject only to the consent of the Member State that supplied the information.

| 22. | In this respect, the EDPS highlights that the communication of personal data from the Commission or other European Institutions or bodies to third countries under Article 164 may take place only if the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and in particular Articles 9 thereof, are complied with. |
| --- | --- |

22.

In this respect, the EDPS highlights that the communication of personal data from the Commission or other European Institutions or bodies to third countries under Article 164 may take place only if the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and in particular Articles 9 thereof, are complied with.

2.5.   The Commission should consider the need for prior-checking

| 23. | The Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation may involve the processing of personal data by the Commission or other EU bodies, thereby triggering the applicability in these cases of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 to such processing operations. To the extent that these processing operations are likely to present specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, they shall be subject to prior checking of the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. |
| --- | --- |

23.

The Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation may involve the processing of personal data by the Commission or other EU bodies, thereby triggering the applicability in these cases of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 to such processing operations. To the extent that these processing operations are likely to present specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, they shall be subject to prior checking of the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

| 24. | In particular, it appears that the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation may involve the processing of data related to offences or suspected offences committed by a vessel. These data are likely to be linked with the personal data of the owner or the master of the vessel (or a member of the crew) in connection with the breaches of the applicable rules. |
| --- | --- |

24.

In particular, it appears that the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation may involve the processing of data related to offences or suspected offences committed by a vessel. These data are likely to be linked with the personal data of the owner or the master of the vessel (or a member of the crew) in connection with the breaches of the applicable rules.

| 25. | Consequently, the EDPS invites the Commission (and other European bodies concerned) to consider the need for prior checking of the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation and submit the necessary notifications further to this assessment (15). |
| --- | --- |

25.

Consequently, the EDPS invites the Commission (and other European bodies concerned) to consider the need for prior checking of the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation and submit the necessary notifications further to this assessment (15).

CONCLUSIONS

| 26. | The EDPS regrets that the text of the Implementing Regulation was not notified to him for legislative consultation under Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, as recommended in the 2009 Opinion. Although the EDPS welcomes the reference to the applicable data protection legislation in recital 31 of the Implementing Regulation, he finds that certain provisions of this Regulation are liable to raise data protection concerns. |
| --- | --- |

26.

The EDPS regrets that the text of the Implementing Regulation was not notified to him for legislative consultation under Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, as recommended in the 2009 Opinion. Although the EDPS welcomes the reference to the applicable data protection legislation in recital 31 of the Implementing Regulation, he finds that certain provisions of this Regulation are liable to raise data protection concerns.

| 27. | Given that the Implementing Regulation has already been adopted, the EDPS advises the Commission to clarify ex post, where possible, the scope and the limits of the processing activities and provide specific safeguards where necessary. This could be done by adopting general or specific guidance or internal rules or in the framework of prior checks with the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. |
| --- | --- |

27.

Given that the Implementing Regulation has already been adopted, the EDPS advises the Commission to clarify ex post, where possible, the scope and the limits of the processing activities and provide specific safeguards where necessary. This could be done by adopting general or specific guidance or internal rules or in the framework of prior checks with the EDPS under Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

| 28. | In particular, the EDPS advises the Commission and other EU bodies concerned to:






  — | provide concrete guidance on the interpretation of Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation; the Commission should in particular clarify the meaning, and limit the scope, of VMS, AIS and VDS data processing for ‘general law enforcement’ or for other purposes unconnected with the common fisheries policy, |
| --- | --- | --- |

28.

In particular, the EDPS advises the Commission and other EU bodies concerned to:

—

provide concrete guidance on the interpretation of Article 27 of the Implementing Regulation; the Commission should in particular clarify the meaning, and limit the scope, of VMS, AIS and VDS data processing for ‘general law enforcement’ or for other purposes unconnected with the common fisheries policy,

| — | whenever the Implementing Regulation sets a minimum retention period in relation to specific categories of data (see the examples provided in paragraph 19), only retain personal data for longer periods if the necessity to do so can be adequately demonstrated, |
| --- | --- |

—

whenever the Implementing Regulation sets a minimum retention period in relation to specific categories of data (see the examples provided in paragraph 19), only retain personal data for longer periods if the necessity to do so can be adequately demonstrated,

| — | ensure that the transfer of personal data from the Commission or other European Institutions or bodies to third countries under Article 164 of the Implementing Regulation complies with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and in particular Article 9 thereof, |
| --- | --- |

—

ensure that the transfer of personal data from the Commission or other European Institutions or bodies to third countries under Article 164 of the Implementing Regulation complies with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and in particular Article 9 thereof,

| — | consider the need for prior checking with the EDPS of the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation and submit the necessary notifications further to this assessment. |
| --- | --- |

—

consider the need for prior checking with the EDPS of the processing operations carried out under the Control Regulation and the Implementing Regulation and submit the necessary notifications further to this assessment.

Done at Brussels, 28 October 2011.

Giovanni BUTTARELLI

Assistant European Data Protection Supervisor

---

(1)  OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

1

(2)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

2

(3)  OJ L 112, 30.4.2011, p. 1.

3

(4)  Available on the EDPS website (http://www.edps.europa.eu) in the section: Consultation/Priorities.

4

(5)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

5

(6)  Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (OJ C 151, 3.7.2009, p. 11).

6

(7)  See EDPS Opinion on the Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, cited above, paragraphs 29-30.

7

(8)  See, in this regard, Commission memorandum of 12.4.2011, MEMO/11/234.

8

(9)  VMS consists in a satellite tracking device installed on board fishing vessels which collects data on the fishing vessel identification, geographical position, date, time, course and speed and transmits these data to the fisheries monitoring centre of the flag Member State (see Article 4, point 12 of the Control Regulation).

9

(10)  AIS means an autonomous and continuous vessel identification and monitoring system which provides means for ships to electronically exchange with other nearby ships and authorities ashore ship data including identification, position, course and speed (see Article 4, point 11 of the Control Regulation).

10

(11)  VDS means a satellite based remote sensing technology which can identify vessels and detect their positions at sea (see Article 4, point 13 of the Control Regulation).

11

(12)  Pursuant to Article 145(3) ‘All results of the computerised validation system, both positive and negative, shall be stored in a database. It shall be possible to identify immediately any inconsistency and non-compliance issue detected by the validation procedures, as well as the follow-up of these inconsistencies. It shall also be possible to retrieve the identification of fishing vessels, vessel masters or operators for which inconsistencies and possible non-compliance issues were detected repeatedly in the course of the past three years’.

12

(13)  Article 8 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 6(1)(b) of Directive 95/46/EC and Article 4(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

13

(14)  Article 6(1)(e) of Directive 95/46/EC and Article 4(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

14

(15)  As already recommended in the 2009 Opinion, see paragraph 22.

15

---

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/6

---

Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council

2012/C 37/02

THE EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION SUPERVISOR,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 16 thereof,

Having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof,

Having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1),

Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (2), and in particular Article 28(2) thereof,

HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION:

I.   INTRODUCTION

I.1.   Consultation of the EDPS

| 1. | On 19 July 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council (the Proposal) (3). The Proposal is accompanied by a communication entitled ‘Digital Tachograph: Roadmap for future activities’ (the Communication) (4). The Proposal and the Communication were sent to the EDPS for consultation on the same day. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 19 July 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council (the Proposal) (3). The Proposal is accompanied by a communication entitled ‘Digital Tachograph: Roadmap for future activities’ (the Communication) (4). The Proposal and the Communication were sent to the EDPS for consultation on the same day.

| 2. | The EDPS had already been consulted informally in the course of April 2011 on an earlier version of the Proposal, on which he provided informal comments on 13 May 2011. The EDPS welcomes the informal consultation which has helped to improve the text from a data protection point of view at an early stage of the drafting process. Some of those comments have been taken into account in the Proposal. The EDPS would welcome reference to this Opinion in the preamble of the Proposal. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The EDPS had already been consulted informally in the course of April 2011 on an earlier version of the Proposal, on which he provided informal comments on 13 May 2011. The EDPS welcomes the informal consultation which has helped to improve the text from a data protection point of view at an early stage of the drafting process. Some of those comments have been taken into account in the Proposal. The EDPS would welcome reference to this Opinion in the preamble of the Proposal.

I.2.   General background

| 3. | The Proposal deals with the installation and use of recording equipment in vehicles used for the carriage of passengers or goods by road to check compliance of professional road transport drivers with social legislation on driving times and rest periods (5). |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Proposal deals with the installation and use of recording equipment in vehicles used for the carriage of passengers or goods by road to check compliance of professional road transport drivers with social legislation on driving times and rest periods (5).

| 4. | Since 1985, a tachograph system has been set up for this purpose, based on recording equipment together with tachograph cards (6). The recording equipment records, stores, displays, prints, and provides data output related to driver activities. A tachograph card is a smart card intended for use with the recording equipment; tachograph cards enable the cardholder to be identified by the recording equipment and data to be transferred and stored. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Since 1985, a tachograph system has been set up for this purpose, based on recording equipment together with tachograph cards (6). The recording equipment records, stores, displays, prints, and provides data output related to driver activities. A tachograph card is a smart card intended for use with the recording equipment; tachograph cards enable the cardholder to be identified by the recording equipment and data to be transferred and stored.

| 5. | The draft proposal amends the current Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on the use of recording equipment in road transport (the Regulation) and updates it in line with current technological developments with a view to improving the use of the digital tachograph compared to analogue versions, and to widening its functionalities so as to create a new type of digital tachograph. The new digital tachograph will be enhanced with the following technological features: (i) it will make use of geolocation equipment to collect certain drivers’ location data automatically; (ii) it will use remote communication facilities to perform remote checks; and (iii) it will have a standardised interface with other Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) allowing it to become an essential component of a vehicle’s ITS platform (7). |
| --- | --- |

5.

The draft proposal amends the current Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on the use of recording equipment in road transport (the Regulation) and updates it in line with current technological developments with a view to improving the use of the digital tachograph compared to analogue versions, and to widening its functionalities so as to create a new type of digital tachograph. The new digital tachograph will be enhanced with the following technological features: (i) it will make use of geolocation equipment to collect certain drivers’ location data automatically; (ii) it will use remote communication facilities to perform remote checks; and (iii) it will have a standardised interface with other Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) allowing it to become an essential component of a vehicle’s ITS platform (7).

| 6. | Many issues raised in the Proposal will require further complementary actions which are described in the Communication. The Communication identifies several measures to be initiated by the Commission, notably including updating, by means of delegated acts, the technical specifications of the digital tachograph laid down in Annex IB of the Regulation and upgrading security mechanisms, as well as amending Directive 2006/126/EC on driving licences to merge the professional drivers’ cards used in tachographs with their driving licences. |
| --- | --- |

6.

Many issues raised in the Proposal will require further complementary actions which are described in the Communication. The Communication identifies several measures to be initiated by the Commission, notably including updating, by means of delegated acts, the technical specifications of the digital tachograph laid down in Annex IB of the Regulation and upgrading security mechanisms, as well as amending Directive 2006/126/EC on driving licences to merge the professional drivers’ cards used in tachographs with their driving licences.

I.3.   Data protection issues raised by the Proposal

| 7. | The use of recording equipment in road transport involves the processing of personal data relating to professional drivers. A large part of the processing relies upon the use of geolocation equipment and remote communication facilities, which are technologies that have considerable impact on individuals’ privacy and data protection. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The use of recording equipment in road transport involves the processing of personal data relating to professional drivers. A large part of the processing relies upon the use of geolocation equipment and remote communication facilities, which are technologies that have considerable impact on individuals’ privacy and data protection.

| 8. | The Proposal thereby impinges on the privacy of professional drivers in a very visible way, in particular since it allows the constant monitoring of drivers’ whereabouts and introduces the possibility of remote controls by control authorities, who will have constant direct access to the data stored in tachographs. Furthermore, the envisaged merging of the driver card with the driving licence might also affect the current protection afforded to drivers’ data. |
| --- | --- |

8.

The Proposal thereby impinges on the privacy of professional drivers in a very visible way, in particular since it allows the constant monitoring of drivers’ whereabouts and introduces the possibility of remote controls by control authorities, who will have constant direct access to the data stored in tachographs. Furthermore, the envisaged merging of the driver card with the driving licence might also affect the current protection afforded to drivers’ data.

| 9. | It is therefore essential that the processing of data through tachographs within the European Union is done in accordance with the EU data protection framework, as set out in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as well as Directive 95/46/EC (8) and Directive 2002/58/EC (9). |
| --- | --- |

9.

It is therefore essential that the processing of data through tachographs within the European Union is done in accordance with the EU data protection framework, as set out in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as well as Directive 95/46/EC (8) and Directive 2002/58/EC (9).

| 10. | It is worth noting that at the time the Regulation was adopted in 1985, there was no comprehensive data protection framework in the EU. The current review of the Regulation is therefore an opportunity to update the Regulation in line with the current data protection regime. |
| --- | --- |

10.

It is worth noting that at the time the Regulation was adopted in 1985, there was no comprehensive data protection framework in the EU. The current review of the Regulation is therefore an opportunity to update the Regulation in line with the current data protection regime.

| 11. | The EDPS particularly welcomes the introduction in the Proposal of a recital and a dedicated provision on data protection (10). The EDPS however notes that these provisions alone do not resolve all data protection issues raised by the different measures put forward in the Proposal. Therefore, additional guarantees should be included in the Proposal and in the complementary measures described in the Communication. |
| --- | --- |

11.

The EDPS particularly welcomes the introduction in the Proposal of a recital and a dedicated provision on data protection (10). The EDPS however notes that these provisions alone do not resolve all data protection issues raised by the different measures put forward in the Proposal. Therefore, additional guarantees should be included in the Proposal and in the complementary measures described in the Communication.

| 12. | In this Opinion, the EDPS points to several aspects of the Proposal which require further consideration from a data protection standpoint. The EDPS will focus in particular on the following issues, which will be examined in turn in Section II below:






  (i) | the general data protection and security requirements set out in the dedicated provisions of the Proposal; |
| --- | --- | --- |

12.

In this Opinion, the EDPS points to several aspects of the Proposal which require further consideration from a data protection standpoint. The EDPS will focus in particular on the following issues, which will be examined in turn in Section II below:

(i)

the general data protection and security requirements set out in the dedicated provisions of the Proposal;

| (ii) | the proportionality of the data processing undertaken through tachographs; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

the proportionality of the data processing undertaken through tachographs;

| (iii) | the modalities of access to the data and the further use of the data recorded in tachographs; and |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

the modalities of access to the data and the further use of the data recorded in tachographs; and

| (iv) | the specific issues raised by the proposed use of driver cards. |
| --- | --- |

(iv)

the specific issues raised by the proposed use of driver cards.

II.   ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSAL

II.1.   General data protection and security requirements

General data protection measures to be implemented by data controllers, Member States and tachograph designers

| 13. | The EDPS welcomes the insertion of a dedicated provision on data protection in Article 34 of the Proposal. Article 34 clearly underlines the responsibility of owners of vehicles and/or transport undertakings, as data controllers, to comply with applicable data protection law. Amongst other things, this will require them to inform professional drivers about the processing of their data in tachographs, grant drivers access to their data and rectify incorrect or incomplete data. The EDPS underlines that such information about the processing must be complete for all the processing activities undertaken, and he therefore welcomes the fact that Article 5(6) of the Proposal requires data controllers to inform drivers specifically about the possibility of remote control by control authorities. The EDPS further emphasises that data controllers must notify the processing to the supervisory authorities as provided for in Articles 18 to 20 of Directive 95/46/EC. |
| --- | --- |

13.

The EDPS welcomes the insertion of a dedicated provision on data protection in Article 34 of the Proposal. Article 34 clearly underlines the responsibility of owners of vehicles and/or transport undertakings, as data controllers, to comply with applicable data protection law. Amongst other things, this will require them to inform professional drivers about the processing of their data in tachographs, grant drivers access to their data and rectify incorrect or incomplete data. The EDPS underlines that such information about the processing must be complete for all the processing activities undertaken, and he therefore welcomes the fact that Article 5(6) of the Proposal requires data controllers to inform drivers specifically about the possibility of remote control by control authorities. The EDPS further emphasises that data controllers must notify the processing to the supervisory authorities as provided for in Articles 18 to 20 of Directive 95/46/EC.

| 14. | This provision also puts particular emphasis on the duty of Member States and independent supervisory authorities to ensure that the processing of personal data in tachographs used in road transport is done in accordance with applicable data protection law. This will require that Member States adopt specific measures with respect to the use of specific technologies, such as Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), remote communications and ITS interfaces, or as concerns the electronic exchange of information on driver cards and storage of records by transport undertakings. Whenever possible, data protection authorities in the Member States should be consulted before the adoption of such measures, in order to develop frames that are compatible with applicable data protection requirements. |
| --- | --- |

14.

This provision also puts particular emphasis on the duty of Member States and independent supervisory authorities to ensure that the processing of personal data in tachographs used in road transport is done in accordance with applicable data protection law. This will require that Member States adopt specific measures with respect to the use of specific technologies, such as Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), remote communications and ITS interfaces, or as concerns the electronic exchange of information on driver cards and storage of records by transport undertakings. Whenever possible, data protection authorities in the Member States should be consulted before the adoption of such measures, in order to develop frames that are compatible with applicable data protection requirements.

| 15. | The EDPS welcomes the fact that the concept of privacy by design is embedded in the Proposal by providing that recording equipment must be ‘designed in such a way as to ensure privacy’. The EDPS emphasises that from an early stage of digital tachograph design, this should be privacy- and data protection-friendly. These privacy-friendly measures should be appropriately reflected in the update of specifications contained in Annex IB. |
| --- | --- |

15.

The EDPS welcomes the fact that the concept of privacy by design is embedded in the Proposal by providing that recording equipment must be ‘designed in such a way as to ensure privacy’. The EDPS emphasises that from an early stage of digital tachograph design, this should be privacy- and data protection-friendly. These privacy-friendly measures should be appropriately reflected in the update of specifications contained in Annex IB.

| 16. | However, as underlined in paragraph 11 above, Article 34 and recital 15 of the Proposal alone do not tackle all data protection concerns linked to the use of tachographs. Therefore, the EDPS highlights in this Opinion the additional measures necessary to guarantee a satisfactory level of data protection in tachographs. |
| --- | --- |

16.

However, as underlined in paragraph 11 above, Article 34 and recital 15 of the Proposal alone do not tackle all data protection concerns linked to the use of tachographs. Therefore, the EDPS highlights in this Opinion the additional measures necessary to guarantee a satisfactory level of data protection in tachographs.

The Proposal insufficiently describes the security requirements to be met for the use of tachographs

| 17. | The EDPS considers that the security requirements for the digital tachograph, contained in several parts of the Proposal and in Article 15, are insufficiently developed in the Proposal. Furthermore, the EDPS underlines that the Proposal introduces the use of many technologies so as to create a ‘new digital tachograph’, for which the current Annex IB is outdated and contains neither relevant specifications nor appropriate security measures. |
| --- | --- |

17.

The EDPS considers that the security requirements for the digital tachograph, contained in several parts of the Proposal and in Article 15, are insufficiently developed in the Proposal. Furthermore, the EDPS underlines that the Proposal introduces the use of many technologies so as to create a ‘new digital tachograph’, for which the current Annex IB is outdated and contains neither relevant specifications nor appropriate security measures.

| 18. | The EDPS underlines that industry might suffer from the unclear legal framework resulting from the adoption of an updated Regulation introducing many technological changes whose technical specifications will not be detailed in the existing, outdated annexes. There is therefore a risk that privacy-unfriendly measures and frameworks are developed by industry until the specifications are updated, and this risk will exist for as long as the review process of these annexes is taking place, i.e. until end of 2014. |
| --- | --- |

18.

The EDPS underlines that industry might suffer from the unclear legal framework resulting from the adoption of an updated Regulation introducing many technological changes whose technical specifications will not be detailed in the existing, outdated annexes. There is therefore a risk that privacy-unfriendly measures and frameworks are developed by industry until the specifications are updated, and this risk will exist for as long as the review process of these annexes is taking place, i.e. until end of 2014.

| 19. | The EDPS strongly recommends that the introduction of any technological update (GNSS, remote communication, ITS) in tachographs is duly supported by carrying out privacy impact assessments to evaluate the privacy risks raised by the use of these technologies. |
| --- | --- |

19.

The EDPS strongly recommends that the introduction of any technological update (GNSS, remote communication, ITS) in tachographs is duly supported by carrying out privacy impact assessments to evaluate the privacy risks raised by the use of these technologies.

| 20. | The EDPS furthermore recommends inserting in the Proposal a dedicated article on the level of security to be achieved at all stages of development and use of tachographs (not only in the design and installation phases but also, and rather importantly, during their use). This article should emphasise the following:






  — | appropriate security measures must be adopted to preserve the confidentiality of the data, to ensure data integrity and to prevent fraud and unlawful manipulation, |
| --- | --- | --- |

20.

The EDPS furthermore recommends inserting in the Proposal a dedicated article on the level of security to be achieved at all stages of development and use of tachographs (not only in the design and installation phases but also, and rather importantly, during their use). This article should emphasise the following:

—

appropriate security measures must be adopted to preserve the confidentiality of the data, to ensure data integrity and to prevent fraud and unlawful manipulation,

| — | the whole chain of processing, which includes not only the recording equipment and the cards themselves but also the system of remote communication and the use of GNSS equipment, must respect the security requirements of Article 17 of Directive 95/46/EC, |
| --- | --- |

—

the whole chain of processing, which includes not only the recording equipment and the cards themselves but also the system of remote communication and the use of GNSS equipment, must respect the security requirements of Article 17 of Directive 95/46/EC,

| — | for purposes of accountability, the way independent evaluators will perform their work should be clarified, |
| --- | --- |

—

for purposes of accountability, the way independent evaluators will perform their work should be clarified,

| — | privacy impact assessments should be carried out before introducing any technological update. |
| --- | --- |

—

privacy impact assessments should be carried out before introducing any technological update.

| 21. | To promote good data protection practices, it would be helpful that the EDPS and the Article 29 Working Party of Data Protection Authorities were included in the list of participants at the Tachograph Forum foreseen in Article 41 of the Proposal. |
| --- | --- |

21.

To promote good data protection practices, it would be helpful that the EDPS and the Article 29 Working Party of Data Protection Authorities were included in the list of participants at the Tachograph Forum foreseen in Article 41 of the Proposal.

II.2.   Proportionality of the data processing

The Proposal lacks clarity and certainty on the modalities of the processing which are left to a later update of Annex IB of the Regulation

| 22. | The Proposal lacks precision and certainty regarding many modalities of the processing, which should however be clarified to ensure that these measures respect the proportionality principle set out in Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 95/46/EC. This notably concerns the types of data processed and recorded in tachographs and through use of geolocation equipment, the period of time such data may be kept and which recipients are allowed access to which data, in particular regarding the use of remote communications. |
| --- | --- |

22.

The Proposal lacks precision and certainty regarding many modalities of the processing, which should however be clarified to ensure that these measures respect the proportionality principle set out in Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 95/46/EC. This notably concerns the types of data processed and recorded in tachographs and through use of geolocation equipment, the period of time such data may be kept and which recipients are allowed access to which data, in particular regarding the use of remote communications.

| 23. | Many of the data processing details are currently set out in Annex IB of the Regulation, which is no longer up to date and will later be subject to review by means of delegated acts of the Commission. There is therefore no legal certainty about whether the processing envisaged will meet the conditions of proportionality, since many measures are left to be decided later on in regulatory committees. Furthermore, there is a risk that during the time taken to update the annexes, industry will develop its own schemes, which may lead to possible discrepancies. |
| --- | --- |

23.

Many of the data processing details are currently set out in Annex IB of the Regulation, which is no longer up to date and will later be subject to review by means of delegated acts of the Commission. There is therefore no legal certainty about whether the processing envisaged will meet the conditions of proportionality, since many measures are left to be decided later on in regulatory committees. Furthermore, there is a risk that during the time taken to update the annexes, industry will develop its own schemes, which may lead to possible discrepancies.

| 24. | The EDPS does not support such an approach and recommends clarifying in the Proposal itself the general modalities of the processing, only leaving the precise details to be dealt with in annexes. The EDPS regrets that the Proposal no longer describes the categories of data to be collected and recorded in the digital tachographs, although this was clearly specified in Article 5 of the earlier version of the Proposal communicated to the EDPS (e.g. movement and speed of the vehicle, time measurement, location of starting and ending of the driver’s daily working period, identity of the driver, activity of the driver, events and faults). Article 34(3) of the Proposal now only provides that ‘only data strictly necessary for the purpose of the processing shall be processed’ without specifying the types of data that will be processed. |
| --- | --- |

24.

The EDPS does not support such an approach and recommends clarifying in the Proposal itself the general modalities of the processing, only leaving the precise details to be dealt with in annexes. The EDPS regrets that the Proposal no longer describes the categories of data to be collected and recorded in the digital tachographs, although this was clearly specified in Article 5 of the earlier version of the Proposal communicated to the EDPS (e.g. movement and speed of the vehicle, time measurement, location of starting and ending of the driver’s daily working period, identity of the driver, activity of the driver, events and faults). Article 34(3) of the Proposal now only provides that ‘only data strictly necessary for the purpose of the processing shall be processed’ without specifying the types of data that will be processed.

| 25. | The EDPS strongly recommends describing the general modalities of the processing in the text of the Regulation, which, contrary to the adoption of annexes, would be approved through the ordinary legislative procedure. This approach would help bring more legal certainty to professional drivers, which in turn would reinforce the valid use of the data in court. |
| --- | --- |

25.

The EDPS strongly recommends describing the general modalities of the processing in the text of the Regulation, which, contrary to the adoption of annexes, would be approved through the ordinary legislative procedure. This approach would help bring more legal certainty to professional drivers, which in turn would reinforce the valid use of the data in court.

| 26. | The EDPS underlines that appropriate consideration should also be given to the proportionality principle when modifying Annex IB in line with technological developments. He strongly recommends that the EDPS is duly consulted during updating of Annex IB of the Regulation. The EDPS believes that this update should take place as soon as possible to ensure that harmonised technical specifications are embedded in tachographs by industry. |
| --- | --- |

26.

The EDPS underlines that appropriate consideration should also be given to the proportionality principle when modifying Annex IB in line with technological developments. He strongly recommends that the EDPS is duly consulted during updating of Annex IB of the Regulation. The EDPS believes that this update should take place as soon as possible to ensure that harmonised technical specifications are embedded in tachographs by industry.

The use of geolocation equipment and recording of location data

| 27. | The EDPS notes that according to recital 5 of the Proposal, the recording of geolocation data is justified to support control officers during controls. In view of the purpose limitation principle set out in Article 6(1)(b) of Directive 95/46/EC, the EDPS emphasises that the location data recorded on tachographs should not be used for any other incompatible purpose. |
| --- | --- |

27.

The EDPS notes that according to recital 5 of the Proposal, the recording of geolocation data is justified to support control officers during controls. In view of the purpose limitation principle set out in Article 6(1)(b) of Directive 95/46/EC, the EDPS emphasises that the location data recorded on tachographs should not be used for any other incompatible purpose.

| 28. | Although only two specific pieces of location data would be recorded according to Article 4 of the Proposal (identification of the starting and ending place of the daily work period), the EDPS understands that the use of geolocation equipment will enable constant positioning of the vehicle, and thus of the driver. This could be done for several purposes, for example to monitor speed and direction, to check if the vehicle is moving or not, etc. In view of Article 4 of the Proposal and the purpose limitation principle, the EDPS underlines that such uses would not be allowed. The EDPS emphasises that the installation and use of devices for the direct and principal purpose of allowing employers to monitor remotely and in real time the actions or whereabouts of their employees should not be permitted. |
| --- | --- |

28.

Although only two specific pieces of location data would be recorded according to Article 4 of the Proposal (identification of the starting and ending place of the daily work period), the EDPS understands that the use of geolocation equipment will enable constant positioning of the vehicle, and thus of the driver. This could be done for several purposes, for example to monitor speed and direction, to check if the vehicle is moving or not, etc. In view of Article 4 of the Proposal and the purpose limitation principle, the EDPS underlines that such uses would not be allowed. The EDPS emphasises that the installation and use of devices for the direct and principal purpose of allowing employers to monitor remotely and in real time the actions or whereabouts of their employees should not be permitted.

II.3.   Access to the data recorded in digital tachographs and further use

| 29. | Access to the data stored in the recording equipment may be granted at all times to (i) control authorities for control checks, and (ii) the relevant undertaking so it can comply with its legal obligations, in particular as set out in Articles 28 and 29 of the Proposal. The EDPS welcomes the fact that restrictive access rights to the data have been defined according to user type and/or identity. |
| --- | --- |

29.

Access to the data stored in the recording equipment may be granted at all times to (i) control authorities for control checks, and (ii) the relevant undertaking so it can comply with its legal obligations, in particular as set out in Articles 28 and 29 of the Proposal. The EDPS welcomes the fact that restrictive access rights to the data have been defined according to user type and/or identity.

Remote control by control authorities

| 30. | Pursuant to recital 6, remote communications for control purposes are justified to facilitate targeted roadside checks and to reduce the administrative burden created by random checks on transport undertakings. The EDPS understands the convenience of introducing such a measure but recalls that adequate safeguards must be implemented in view of the privacy risks of such continuous remote access to the information stored in the recording equipment. |
| --- | --- |

30.

Pursuant to recital 6, remote communications for control purposes are justified to facilitate targeted roadside checks and to reduce the administrative burden created by random checks on transport undertakings. The EDPS understands the convenience of introducing such a measure but recalls that adequate safeguards must be implemented in view of the privacy risks of such continuous remote access to the information stored in the recording equipment.

| 31. | In this respect, the EDPS notes with satisfaction that Article 5 of the Proposal provides a number of important safeguards, in particular that: (i) such remote access is restricted only to the competent control authorities; (ii) the scope of the data exchanged with control authorities shall be limited to those strictly necessary for targeted roadside checks; (iii) there is a clearly defined short retention period of two hours of the data gathered during remote checks; (iv) information about the possibility of remote controls shall be provided to drivers by the owner or holder of the vehicle; and (v) appropriate security measures must be implemented to ensure data integrity and authentication. |
| --- | --- |

31.

In this respect, the EDPS notes with satisfaction that Article 5 of the Proposal provides a number of important safeguards, in particular that: (i) such remote access is restricted only to the competent control authorities; (ii) the scope of the data exchanged with control authorities shall be limited to those strictly necessary for targeted roadside checks; (iii) there is a clearly defined short retention period of two hours of the data gathered during remote checks; (iv) information about the possibility of remote controls shall be provided to drivers by the owner or holder of the vehicle; and (v) appropriate security measures must be implemented to ensure data integrity and authentication.

| 32. | The EDPS however considers that it is not sufficiently clear which data can be exchanged through remote communications. To ensure that the amount of data communicated to control authorities is not excessive, the EDPS recommends formulating Article 5(3) differently. Instead of listing data that will not be communicated, he suggests that Article 5(3) provides for an exhaustive list of the data which may be communicated. |
| --- | --- |

32.

The EDPS however considers that it is not sufficiently clear which data can be exchanged through remote communications. To ensure that the amount of data communicated to control authorities is not excessive, the EDPS recommends formulating Article 5(3) differently. Instead of listing data that will not be communicated, he suggests that Article 5(3) provides for an exhaustive list of the data which may be communicated.

| 33. | With respect to sanctions, the EDPS also stresses that a remote control should not lead to automatic fines or penalties for the driver or undertaking. Since actual remote control is done without the knowledge of the person concerned, appropriate steps must be taken before any decision is reached. The remote control therefore should be seen as a preliminary measure which may lead to an in-depth control in the presence of the driver, should control officers have detected any anomalies in the preliminary phase. |
| --- | --- |

33.

With respect to sanctions, the EDPS also stresses that a remote control should not lead to automatic fines or penalties for the driver or undertaking. Since actual remote control is done without the knowledge of the person concerned, appropriate steps must be taken before any decision is reached. The remote control therefore should be seen as a preliminary measure which may lead to an in-depth control in the presence of the driver, should control officers have detected any anomalies in the preliminary phase.

Cross-border exchanges of data

| 34. | The Communication from the Commission indicates that a number of third countries apply the principles of the road transport regulations and the tachograph regulation. In the current version of the Proposal, there is no indication of any international exchange of tachograph data. It should be clarified in the Proposal whether any cross-border exchanges of data are contemplated with third country authorities, in which case appropriate data protection safeguards will be required to ensure that an adequate level of protection is guaranteed when data are transferred to these third countries, in compliance with Articles 25 and 26 of Directive 95/46/EC. |
| --- | --- |

34.

The Communication from the Commission indicates that a number of third countries apply the principles of the road transport regulations and the tachograph regulation. In the current version of the Proposal, there is no indication of any international exchange of tachograph data. It should be clarified in the Proposal whether any cross-border exchanges of data are contemplated with third country authorities, in which case appropriate data protection safeguards will be required to ensure that an adequate level of protection is guaranteed when data are transferred to these third countries, in compliance with Articles 25 and 26 of Directive 95/46/EC.

Further use of the data in context of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)

| 35. | Making tachographs an essential component of Intelligent Transport Systems raises a number of privacy and data protection issues, which were underlined by the EDPS in his Opinion on the ITS Directive (11). |
| --- | --- |

35.

Making tachographs an essential component of Intelligent Transport Systems raises a number of privacy and data protection issues, which were underlined by the EDPS in his Opinion on the ITS Directive (11).

| 36. | The further processing of data recorded or produced by the tachograph for use in intelligent transport systems applications should only take place if the further processing is not incompatible with the original purpose of collection. This must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. |
| --- | --- |

36.

The further processing of data recorded or produced by the tachograph for use in intelligent transport systems applications should only take place if the further processing is not incompatible with the original purpose of collection. This must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

| 37. | Data controllers must ensure that the further processing of tachograph data for use in an ITS application is done according to one of the legal bases listed in Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC. The EDPS underlines that amongst all the legal bases available, consent of drivers may be difficult to rely upon, considering the employment context within which the processing operations take place. Drivers might be pressed by their employer to use certain ITS applications for which they would therefore not have given their truly free consent (12). |
| --- | --- |

37.

Data controllers must ensure that the further processing of tachograph data for use in an ITS application is done according to one of the legal bases listed in Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC. The EDPS underlines that amongst all the legal bases available, consent of drivers may be difficult to rely upon, considering the employment context within which the processing operations take place. Drivers might be pressed by their employer to use certain ITS applications for which they would therefore not have given their truly free consent (12).

| 38. | As a consequence, the EDPS suggests modifying Article 6(2) of the Proposal to state that ‘vehicles (...) shall be fitted with recording equipment equipped with a harmonised interface allowing the data recorded or produced to be used for intelligent transport systems applications. Further use of the data recorded in tachographs shall only be allowed provided that the driver has freely agreed to such further processing and that all other requirements of Article 6 of the Directive 95/46/EC are met’. |
| --- | --- |

38.

As a consequence, the EDPS suggests modifying Article 6(2) of the Proposal to state that ‘vehicles (...) shall be fitted with recording equipment equipped with a harmonised interface allowing the data recorded or produced to be used for intelligent transport systems applications. Further use of the data recorded in tachographs shall only be allowed provided that the driver has freely agreed to such further processing and that all other requirements of Article 6 of the Directive 95/46/EC are met’.

| 39. | The EDPS furthermore emphasises that all data recorded or produced by the tachograph should not be automatically accessible for use in other ITS applications but only those that would be strictly necessary for the processing in that ITS application. This should be emphasised in Article 6(3) of the Proposal. The EDPS recommends that a specific privacy assessment is conducted for each application to determine which data are strictly necessary for the processing and the time limit during which such data should be kept. |
| --- | --- |

39.

The EDPS furthermore emphasises that all data recorded or produced by the tachograph should not be automatically accessible for use in other ITS applications but only those that would be strictly necessary for the processing in that ITS application. This should be emphasised in Article 6(3) of the Proposal. The EDPS recommends that a specific privacy assessment is conducted for each application to determine which data are strictly necessary for the processing and the time limit during which such data should be kept.

II.4.   Driver cards

Integrating driver cards with driving licences

| 40. | Article 27 envisages merging the functionalities of driver cards with driving licences. Considering the potential amount of information recorded about driver activities, the driver card is more than a simple identity card certifying that the person is a professional driver. It is therefore more intrusive from a data protection viewpoint since it is aimed at monitoring a person's compliance with social regulations in the field of road transport. |
| --- | --- |

40.

Article 27 envisages merging the functionalities of driver cards with driving licences. Considering the potential amount of information recorded about driver activities, the driver card is more than a simple identity card certifying that the person is a professional driver. It is therefore more intrusive from a data protection viewpoint since it is aimed at monitoring a person's compliance with social regulations in the field of road transport.

| 41. | The integration of this card with the driving licence raises data protection concerns, in particular in view of the purpose limitation principle and of the proportionality principle. Furthermore, the necessity and benefit of integrating the driver card into the driving licence have not been sufficiently demonstrated. In particular, it is not proven how such integration would be the best way to help fight fraud and misuse of driver cards. The EDPS recommends that this integration should only be envisaged after a privacy and security impact assessment has been carried out. This should be clearly mentioned in Article 27 of the Proposal. |
| --- | --- |

41.

The integration of this card with the driving licence raises data protection concerns, in particular in view of the purpose limitation principle and of the proportionality principle. Furthermore, the necessity and benefit of integrating the driver card into the driving licence have not been sufficiently demonstrated. In particular, it is not proven how such integration would be the best way to help fight fraud and misuse of driver cards. The EDPS recommends that this integration should only be envisaged after a privacy and security impact assessment has been carried out. This should be clearly mentioned in Article 27 of the Proposal.

| 42. | Furthermore, such integration will require amending Directive 2006/126/EC on driving licences, a proposal for which shall be put forward by the Commission. Considering the data protection aspects raised by such amendments, the EDPS underlines that he wishes to be duly consulted on this proposal. |
| --- | --- |

42.

Furthermore, such integration will require amending Directive 2006/126/EC on driving licences, a proposal for which shall be put forward by the Commission. Considering the data protection aspects raised by such amendments, the EDPS underlines that he wishes to be duly consulted on this proposal.

Exchange of information on driver cards through TACHOnet

| 43. | Information on driver cards will be exchanged electronically through national electronic registers before driver cards are issued to check that the applicant does not already hold such a card. This exchange of information will be done through an existing system, TACHOnet. Article 26 provides the legal basis for such an electronic exchange of information. The EDPS welcomes the fact that the specific personal data recorded in these registers are clearly spelled out in Article 26 of the Proposal, as well as their retention period and the authorised recipients of the data. The EDPS emphasises that all the general modalities of the processing in TACHOnet should be described in this Article and that only purely technical specifications shall be adopted by means of implementing acts. |
| --- | --- |

43.

Information on driver cards will be exchanged electronically through national electronic registers before driver cards are issued to check that the applicant does not already hold such a card. This exchange of information will be done through an existing system, TACHOnet. Article 26 provides the legal basis for such an electronic exchange of information. The EDPS welcomes the fact that the specific personal data recorded in these registers are clearly spelled out in Article 26 of the Proposal, as well as their retention period and the authorised recipients of the data. The EDPS emphasises that all the general modalities of the processing in TACHOnet should be described in this Article and that only purely technical specifications shall be adopted by means of implementing acts.

| 44. | The EDPS notes that the role of the Commission in the interconnection of the electronic registers lacks sufficient clarity. He emphasises that this role should be further clarified in the proposed implementing acts. He further stresses that whenever this role would involve the processing of personal data by the Commission, such processing should respect Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. |
| --- | --- |

44.

The EDPS notes that the role of the Commission in the interconnection of the electronic registers lacks sufficient clarity. He emphasises that this role should be further clarified in the proposed implementing acts. He further stresses that whenever this role would involve the processing of personal data by the Commission, such processing should respect Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

III.   CONCLUSION

| 45. | The EDPS welcomes being consulted on a Proposal which impinges on the privacy of professional drivers in a very visible manner. He particularly welcomes the fact that a dedicated provision on data protection is provided for in the Proposal. The EDPS notes however that this provision alone cannot tackle all the data protection issues raised by the measures put forward in the Proposal. Additional guarantees are therefore required in the Proposal and in the complementary measures described in the Communication. |
| --- | --- |

45.

The EDPS welcomes being consulted on a Proposal which impinges on the privacy of professional drivers in a very visible manner. He particularly welcomes the fact that a dedicated provision on data protection is provided for in the Proposal. The EDPS notes however that this provision alone cannot tackle all the data protection issues raised by the measures put forward in the Proposal. Additional guarantees are therefore required in the Proposal and in the complementary measures described in the Communication.

| 46. | The EDPS considers that the general modalities of the processing in tachographs should be set out in the Proposal itself and not in annexes to the Regulation. The main aspects of the processing should be described in the Proposal itself, such as the types of data recorded in tachographs and through geolocation equipment, the recipients, and the time periods for retention. The annexes of the Regulation should only provide purely technical details of general principles that have been set out in the Regulation itself. |
| --- | --- |

46.

The EDPS considers that the general modalities of the processing in tachographs should be set out in the Proposal itself and not in annexes to the Regulation. The main aspects of the processing should be described in the Proposal itself, such as the types of data recorded in tachographs and through geolocation equipment, the recipients, and the time periods for retention. The annexes of the Regulation should only provide purely technical details of general principles that have been set out in the Regulation itself.

| 47. | Furthermore, the EDPS notes that the existing annexes are outdated, which might lead to discrepancies in how tachographs are developed by industry. The Proposal introduces many technological updates, for which no relevant technical specifications are set out in the existing annexes to the Regulation. There is a risk that privacy-unfriendly frameworks will be developed by industry for as long as the update of the annexes to the Regulation is pending. The EDPS urges the Commission to update the annexes of the Regulation as soon as possible. |
| --- | --- |

47.

Furthermore, the EDPS notes that the existing annexes are outdated, which might lead to discrepancies in how tachographs are developed by industry. The Proposal introduces many technological updates, for which no relevant technical specifications are set out in the existing annexes to the Regulation. There is a risk that privacy-unfriendly frameworks will be developed by industry for as long as the update of the annexes to the Regulation is pending. The EDPS urges the Commission to update the annexes of the Regulation as soon as possible.

| 48. | The EDPS recommends introducing the following amendments in the Proposal:






  — | insert a dedicated provision on the level of security to be achieved in tachographs and provide that a privacy impact assessment shall be carried out before introducing any technological update, |
| --- | --- | --- |

48.

The EDPS recommends introducing the following amendments in the Proposal:

—

insert a dedicated provision on the level of security to be achieved in tachographs and provide that a privacy impact assessment shall be carried out before introducing any technological update,

| — | clarify the specific and legitimate purposes for which constant geolocation will be carried out; it should be clearly specified in the Proposal that the installation and use of devices for the direct and principal purpose of allowing employers to monitor remotely and in real time the actions or whereabouts of their employees is not permitted, |
| --- | --- |

—

clarify the specific and legitimate purposes for which constant geolocation will be carried out; it should be clearly specified in the Proposal that the installation and use of devices for the direct and principal purpose of allowing employers to monitor remotely and in real time the actions or whereabouts of their employees is not permitted,

| — | define in Article 5(3) an exhaustive list of data that can be exchanged with control authorities and ensure that remote controls do not lead to automatic sanctions, |
| --- | --- |

—

define in Article 5(3) an exhaustive list of data that can be exchanged with control authorities and ensure that remote controls do not lead to automatic sanctions,

| — | clarify whether there will be any cross-border data exchanges with control authorities in third countries, and if so adopt adequate data protection safeguards to ensure compliance with Articles 25 and 26 of Directive 95/46/EC, |
| --- | --- |

—

clarify whether there will be any cross-border data exchanges with control authorities in third countries, and if so adopt adequate data protection safeguards to ensure compliance with Articles 25 and 26 of Directive 95/46/EC,

| — | require data controllers to ensure that the further processing of the data recorded in tachographs for use in ITS applications is done in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC, in particular that professional drivers give their express and free consent to this and that such further processing is not incompatible with the original purpose of collection; furthermore, it should be emphasised in Article 6(3) that access to the data stored in the tachograph equipment shall be restricted only to those strictly necessary for the processing in the ITS application, |
| --- | --- |

—

require data controllers to ensure that the further processing of the data recorded in tachographs for use in ITS applications is done in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC, in particular that professional drivers give their express and free consent to this and that such further processing is not incompatible with the original purpose of collection; furthermore, it should be emphasised in Article 6(3) that access to the data stored in the tachograph equipment shall be restricted only to those strictly necessary for the processing in the ITS application,

| — | provide in Article 27 that the merging of the driver cards with driving licences should only be envisaged after a privacy and security impact assessment has been carried out, |
| --- | --- |

—

provide in Article 27 that the merging of the driver cards with driving licences should only be envisaged after a privacy and security impact assessment has been carried out,

| — | clarify further the role of the Commission in the exchange of information on driver cards through national electronic registers and the modalities of exchange. |
| --- | --- |

—

clarify further the role of the Commission in the exchange of information on driver cards through national electronic registers and the modalities of exchange.

| 49. | The EDPS calls on Member States to consult data protection supervisory authorities before adopting national measures for tachographs, in particular those measures on the use of geolocation equipment, remote communications, ITS interfaces and TACHOnet. |
| --- | --- |

49.

The EDPS calls on Member States to consult data protection supervisory authorities before adopting national measures for tachographs, in particular those measures on the use of geolocation equipment, remote communications, ITS interfaces and TACHOnet.

| 50. | To ensure appropriate consideration of data protection requirements in further complementary actions by the Commission, the EDPS wishes to be included in the list of participants in the Tachograph Forum and to be consulted on the update of Annex IB and on the Proposal to amend Directive 2001/126/EC on driving licences. |
| --- | --- |

50.

To ensure appropriate consideration of data protection requirements in further complementary actions by the Commission, the EDPS wishes to be included in the list of participants in the Tachograph Forum and to be consulted on the update of Annex IB and on the Proposal to amend Directive 2001/126/EC on driving licences.

Done at Brussels, 5 October 2011.

Giovanni BUTTARELLI

Assistant European Data Protection Supervisor

---

(1)  OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

1

(2)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

2

(3)  COM(2011) 451 final.

3

(4)  COM(2011) 454 final.

4

(5)  See in particular, Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on driving times and rest periods, Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities, and Directive 92/6/EEC on the installation and use of speed limitation devices for certain categories of motor vehicles in the Community.

5

(6)  A tachograph card may be of the following types: (i) driver card; (ii) control card; (iii) workshop card; and (iv) company card; see definitions in Article 2 of the Proposal.

6

(7)  As per Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport (OJ L 207, 6.8.2010, p. 1).

7

(8)  Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

8

(9)  Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OL L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37).

9

(10)  See recital 15 and Article 34 of the Proposal.

10

(11)  EDPS Opinion of 22 July 2009 on the Communication from the Commission on an Action Plan for the Deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in Europe and the accompanying Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other transport modes, OJ C 47, 25.2.2010, p. 6:

11

http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2009/09-07-22_Intelligent_Transport_Systems_EN.pdf

(12)  See Article 29 Working Party Opinion 15/2011 on consent: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2011/wp187_en.pdf

12

---

III Preparatory acts

European Commission

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/14

---

Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

2012/C 37/03

| Document | Part | Date | Title |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| COM(2011) 319 | | 1.6.2011 | Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection status |
| COM(2011) 320 | | 1.6.2011 | Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers |
| COM(2011) 406 | | 20.7.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Union action for the European Heritage Label |
| COM(2011) 423 | | 8.7.2011 | Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names and related labelling of textile products |
| COM(2011) 475 | | 27.7.2011 | Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 and repealing Directives 87/250/EEC, 90/496/EEC, 1999/10/EC, 2000/13/EC, 2002/67/EC, 2008/5/EC and Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 |
| COM(2011) 478 | | 11.8.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) |
| COM(2011) 498 | | 11.8.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing on the market and use of biocidal products |
| COM(2011) 533 | | 2.9.2011 | Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety |
| COM(2011) 550 | | 19.7.2011 | Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures |
| COM(2011) 559 | | 16.9.2011 | Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis |
| COM(2011) 589 | | 23.9.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 78/660/EEC on the annual accounts of certain types of companies as regards micro-entities |
| COM(2011) 597 | | 23.9.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council granting an EU guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside the European Union and repealing Decision No 633/2009/EC |
| COM(2011) 632 | | 3.10.2011 | Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription and as regards pharmacovigilance |
| COM(2011) 633 | | 11.10.2011 | Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2001/83/EC, as regards information to the general public on medicinal products subject to medical prescription and as regards pharmacovigilance |
| COM(2011) 634 | | 11.10.2011 | Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 and Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards distribution of food products to the most deprived persons in the Union |
| COM(2011) 697 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain provisions for fishing in the GFCM (General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean) Agreement Area |

Document

Part

Date

Title

COM(2011) 319

1.6.2011

Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection status

COM(2011) 320

1.6.2011

Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down standards for the reception of asylum seekers

COM(2011) 406

20.7.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Union action for the European Heritage Label

COM(2011) 423

8.7.2011

Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on textile names and related labelling of textile products

COM(2011) 475

27.7.2011

Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 and repealing Directives 87/250/EEC, 90/496/EEC, 1999/10/EC, 2000/13/EC, 2002/67/EC, 2008/5/EC and Regulation (EC) No 608/2004

COM(2011) 478

11.8.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)

COM(2011) 498

11.8.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing on the market and use of biocidal products

COM(2011) 533

2.9.2011

Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety

COM(2011) 550

19.7.2011

Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 294(7)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the European Parliament's amendment[s] to the Council's position regarding the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures

COM(2011) 559

16.9.2011

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis

COM(2011) 589

23.9.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 78/660/EEC on the annual accounts of certain types of companies as regards micro-entities

COM(2011) 597

23.9.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council granting an EU guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside the European Union and repealing Decision No 633/2009/EC

COM(2011) 632

3.10.2011

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards information to the general public on medicinal products for human use subject to medical prescription and as regards pharmacovigilance

COM(2011) 633

11.10.2011

Amended proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2001/83/EC, as regards information to the general public on medicinal products subject to medical prescription and as regards pharmacovigilance

COM(2011) 634

11.10.2011

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 and Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards distribution of food products to the most deprived persons in the Union

COM(2011) 697

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain provisions for fishing in the GFCM (General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean) Agreement Area

These texts are available on EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/16

---

Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

2012/C 37/04

| Document | Part | Date | Title |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| COM(2011) 452 | | 20.7.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investement firms |
| COM(2011) 480 | | 31.10.2011 | Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Councilon the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2011/002 IT/Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol Construction of buildings from Italy) |
| COM(2011) 614 | | 6.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific provisions concerning the European Regional Development Fund and the ‧Investment for growth and jobs‧ goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 |
| COM(2011) 615 | | 6.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 |
| COM(2011) 625 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy |
| COM(2011) 626 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) |
| COM(2011) 627 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) |
| COM(2011) 628 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy |
| COM(2011) 629 | | 12.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Regulation determining measures on fixing certain aids and refunds related to the common organisation of the markets in agricultural products |
| COM(2011) 630 | | 12.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Councilamending Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as regards the application of direct payments to farmers in respect of the year 2013 |
| COM(2011) 631 | | 12.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards the regime of the single payment scheme and support to vine-growers |
| COM(2011) 635 | | 11.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law |
| COM(2011) 640 | | 13.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union concerning the adoption of a Decision by the Joint Committee of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on a common transit procedure and a Decision by the Joint Committee of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on the simplification of formalities in trade of goods concerning an invitation to Croatia and Turkey to accede to these Conventions |
| COM(2011) 644 | | 14.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Implementing Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain fatty alcohols and their blends originating in India, Indonesia and Malaysia |
| COM(2011) 650 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Union guidelines for the development of the Trans-European Transport Network |
| COM(2011) 651 | | 20.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse) |
| COM(2011) 652 | | 20.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments and amending Regulation [EMIR] on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories |
| COM(2011) 654 | | 20.10.2011 | Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal sanctions for insider dealing and market manipulation |
| COM(2011) 655 | | 12.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 as regards certain provisions relating to risk-sharing instruments for Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability |
| COM(2011) 656 | | 20.10.2011 | Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments repealing Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (recast) |
| COM(2011) 657 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a series of guidelines for trans-European telecommunications networks |
| COM(2011) 658 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on guidelines for the implementation of European energy infrastructure priorities repealing Decision No 1364/2006/EC |
| COM(2011) 659 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1639/2006/EC establishing a Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (2007-2013) and Regulation (EC) No 680/2007 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of the trans-European transport and energy networks |
| COM(2011) 661 | | 18.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the financial contributions to be paid by the Member States to finance the European Development Fund (the 3rd instalment 2011) |
| COM(2011) 663 | | 21.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries |
| COM(2011) 664 | | 13.10.2011 | Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2011/005 PT/Norte-Centro Automotive from Portugal) |
| COM(2011) 665 | | 19.10.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility |
| COM(2011) 671 | | 24.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union in the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons as regards the replacement of Annex II to that Agreement on the coordination of social security schemes |
| COM(2011) 677 | | 25.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union in the EEA Joint Committee concerning an amendment to Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement |
| COM(2011) 678 | | 25.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision authorising the signature and provisional application of the trade part (Part IV) of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other |
| COM(2011) 679 | | 25.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other |
| COM(2011) 683 | | 25.10.2011 | Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2004/109/EC on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market and Commission Directive 2007/14/EC |
| COM(2011) 691 | | 26.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on the financial contributions to be paid by the Member States to finance the European Development Fund in 2012 and 2013, including the first instalment for 2012 |
| COM(2011) 704 | | 7.11.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items |
| COM(2011) 708 | | 14.11.2011 | Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council to include flufenoxuron as an active substance for product type 8 in Annex I thereto |
| COM(2011) 710 | | 11.11.2011 | Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards driving licences which include the functionalities of a driver card |
| COM(2011) 714 | | 11.11.2011 | Proposal for a Council Directive on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States |
| COM(2011) 715 | | 9.11.2011 | Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2007 on administering certain restrictions on imports of certain steel products from the Russian Federation |
| COM(2011) 716 | | 31.10.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision on a European Union position concerning the decision by the WTO General Council on the extension of the WTO waiver in order to implement the EU autonomous trade preferential regime for the Western Balkans |
| COM(2011) 717 | | 10.11.2011 | Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities available in Union waters and, to Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters for certain fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements |
| COM(2011) 718 | | 10.11.2011 | Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 131/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Sudan |
| COM(2011) 719 | | 10.11.2011 | Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EU) No 1284/2009 imposing certain specific restrictive measures in respect of the Republic of Guinea |
| COM(2011) 730 | | 14.11.2011 | Proposal for a Council Regulation on administrative cooperation in the field of excise duties |
| COM(2011) 732 | | 11.11.2011 | Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Union position within the relevant instance of the World Trade Organisation on the accession of Samoa to the World Trade Organisation |
| COM(2011) 745 | | 11.11.2011 | Proposal for a Council Implementing Decision amending Implementing Decision 2011/77/EU on granting Union financial assistance to Ireland |
| COM(2011) 754 | | 8.11.2011 | Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya |
| COM(2011) 761 | | 9.11.2011 | Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria |

Document

Part

Date

Title

COM(2011) 452

20.7.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investement firms

COM(2011) 480

31.10.2011

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Councilon the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2011/002 IT/Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol Construction of buildings from Italy)

COM(2011) 614

6.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific provisions concerning the European Regional Development Fund and the ‧Investment for growth and jobs‧ goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006

COM(2011) 615

6.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006

COM(2011) 625

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy

COM(2011) 626

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)

COM(2011) 627

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)

COM(2011) 628

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy

COM(2011) 629

12.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Regulation determining measures on fixing certain aids and refunds related to the common organisation of the markets in agricultural products

COM(2011) 630

12.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Councilamending Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as regards the application of direct payments to farmers in respect of the year 2013

COM(2011) 631

12.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards the regime of the single payment scheme and support to vine-growers

COM(2011) 635

11.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law

COM(2011) 640

13.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union concerning the adoption of a Decision by the Joint Committee of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on a common transit procedure and a Decision by the Joint Committee of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on the simplification of formalities in trade of goods concerning an invitation to Croatia and Turkey to accede to these Conventions

COM(2011) 644

14.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Implementing Regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain fatty alcohols and their blends originating in India, Indonesia and Malaysia

COM(2011) 650

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Union guidelines for the development of the Trans-European Transport Network

COM(2011) 651

20.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse)

COM(2011) 652

20.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments and amending Regulation [EMIR] on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories

COM(2011) 654

20.10.2011

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on criminal sanctions for insider dealing and market manipulation

COM(2011) 655

12.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 as regards certain provisions relating to risk-sharing instruments for Member States experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability

COM(2011) 656

20.10.2011

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments repealing Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (recast)

COM(2011) 657

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a series of guidelines for trans-European telecommunications networks

COM(2011) 658

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on guidelines for the implementation of European energy infrastructure priorities repealing Decision No 1364/2006/EC

COM(2011) 659

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1639/2006/EC establishing a Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (2007-2013) and Regulation (EC) No 680/2007 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of the trans-European transport and energy networks

COM(2011) 661

18.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the financial contributions to be paid by the Member States to finance the European Development Fund (the 3rd instalment 2011)

COM(2011) 663

21.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries

COM(2011) 664

13.10.2011

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2011/005 PT/Norte-Centro Automotive from Portugal)

COM(2011) 665

19.10.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility

COM(2011) 671

24.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union in the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons as regards the replacement of Annex II to that Agreement on the coordination of social security schemes

COM(2011) 677

25.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Union in the EEA Joint Committee concerning an amendment to Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement

COM(2011) 678

25.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision authorising the signature and provisional application of the trade part (Part IV) of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other

COM(2011) 679

25.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other

COM(2011) 683

25.10.2011

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2004/109/EC on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market and Commission Directive 2007/14/EC

COM(2011) 691

26.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on the financial contributions to be paid by the Member States to finance the European Development Fund in 2012 and 2013, including the first instalment for 2012

COM(2011) 704

7.11.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items

COM(2011) 708

14.11.2011

Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council to include flufenoxuron as an active substance for product type 8 in Annex I thereto

COM(2011) 710

11.11.2011

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards driving licences which include the functionalities of a driver card

COM(2011) 714

11.11.2011

Proposal for a Council Directive on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States

COM(2011) 715

9.11.2011

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2007 on administering certain restrictions on imports of certain steel products from the Russian Federation

COM(2011) 716

31.10.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision on a European Union position concerning the decision by the WTO General Council on the extension of the WTO waiver in order to implement the EU autonomous trade preferential regime for the Western Balkans

COM(2011) 717

10.11.2011

Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities available in Union waters and, to Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters for certain fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements

COM(2011) 718

10.11.2011

Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 131/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Sudan

COM(2011) 719

10.11.2011

Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EU) No 1284/2009 imposing certain specific restrictive measures in respect of the Republic of Guinea

COM(2011) 730

14.11.2011

Proposal for a Council Regulation on administrative cooperation in the field of excise duties

COM(2011) 732

11.11.2011

Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Union position within the relevant instance of the World Trade Organisation on the accession of Samoa to the World Trade Organisation

COM(2011) 745

11.11.2011

Proposal for a Council Implementing Decision amending Implementing Decision 2011/77/EU on granting Union financial assistance to Ireland

COM(2011) 754

8.11.2011

Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

COM(2011) 761

9.11.2011

Joint Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

These texts are available on EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/20

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

9 February 2012

2012/C 37/05

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3288 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 102,63 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4320 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83665 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,8045 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2103 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,6300 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,985 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 290,90 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6989 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1971 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3535 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,3331 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,2295 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3219 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,3056 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5896 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6548 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 483,80 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 10,0959 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,3717 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5857 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 855,69 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0004 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,132 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,5546 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,861 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2882 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,8765 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 65,5830 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3288

JPY

Japanese yen

102,63

DKK

Danish krone

7,4320

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83665

SEK

Swedish krona

8,8045

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2103

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,6300

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,985

HUF

Hungarian forint

290,90

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6989

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1971

RON

Romanian leu

4,3535

TRY

Turkish lira

2,3331

AUD

Australian dollar

1,2295

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3219

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,3056

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5896

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6548

KRW

South Korean won

1 483,80

ZAR

South African rand

10,0959

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,3717

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5857

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 855,69

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0004

PHP

Philippine peso

56,132

RUB

Russian rouble

39,5546

THB

Thai baht

40,861

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2882

MXN

Mexican peso

16,8765

INR

Indian rupee

65,5830

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/21

---

Latest publication of COM documents other than legislative proposals and legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

2012/C 37/06

OJ C 335 of 16.11.2011

History of previous publications:

| | OJ C 264 of 8.9.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 264 of 8.9.2011

| | OJ C 189 of 29.6.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 189 of 29.6.2011

| | OJ C 140 of 11.5.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 140 of 11.5.2011

| | OJ C 121 of 19.4.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 121 of 19.4.2011

| | OJ C 94 of 26.3.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 94 of 26.3.2011

| | OJ C 88 of 19.3.2011 |
| --- | --- |

OJ C 88 of 19.3.2011

---

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/22

---

COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

2012/C 37/07

| Document | Part | Date | Title |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| COM(2011) 323 | | 1.6.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — ‧Synthesis of the Commission’s management achievements in 2010‧ |
| COM(2011) 327 | | 14.6.2011 | Green Paper — ‧Strengthening mutual trust in the European judicial area – A Green Paper on the application of EU criminal justice legislation in the field of detention‧ |
| COM(2011) 345 | | 10.6.2011 | Report from the Commission — ‧Annual Report 2010 on relations between the European Commission and national parliaments‧ |
| COM(2011) 408 | | 7.7.2011 | Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of macro-financial assistance to third countries in 2010 |
| COM(2011) 417 | | 13.7.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — ‧Reform of the common fisheries policy‧ |
| COM(2011) 473 | | 26.7.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — ‧Annual accounts of the European Union — financial year 2010‧ |
| COM(2011) 571 | | 20.9.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — ‧Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe‧ |
| COM(2011) 595 | | 29.9.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — ‧Protection of the European Union's financial interests — Fight against fraud — Annual Report 2010‧ |

Document

Part

Date

Title

COM(2011) 323

1.6.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — ‧Synthesis of the Commission’s management achievements in 2010‧

COM(2011) 327

14.6.2011

Green Paper — ‧Strengthening mutual trust in the European judicial area – A Green Paper on the application of EU criminal justice legislation in the field of detention‧

COM(2011) 345

10.6.2011

Report from the Commission — ‧Annual Report 2010 on relations between the European Commission and national parliaments‧

COM(2011) 408

7.7.2011

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of macro-financial assistance to third countries in 2010

COM(2011) 417

13.7.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — ‧Reform of the common fisheries policy‧

COM(2011) 473

26.7.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — ‧Annual accounts of the European Union — financial year 2010‧

COM(2011) 571

20.9.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — ‧Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe‧

COM(2011) 595

29.9.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — ‧Protection of the European Union's financial interests — Fight against fraud — Annual Report 2010‧

These texts are available on EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/23

---

COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

2012/C 37/08

| Document | Part | Date | Title |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| COM(2011) 471 | | 26.7.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — Final accounts of the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds — Financial year 2010 |
| COM(2011) 613 | | 6.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The future of the European Union Solidarity Fund |
| COM(2011) 637 | | 13.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Increasing the impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change |
| COM(2011) 638 | | 13.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The future approach to EU budget support to third countries |
| COM(2011) 641 | | 12.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) — Revised multiannual indicative financial framework for 2012-13 |
| COM(2011) 642 | | 14.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Industrial Policy: Reinforcing competitiveness |
| COM(2011) 643 | | 7.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Annual Report to the Discharge Authority on internal audits carried out in 2010 (Article 86(4) of the Financial Regulation) |
| COM(2011) 648 | | 18.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Evaluation of the implementation of the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) during its first 3 years (2007-09) |
| COM(2011) 649 | | 19.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 2010 Annual Report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation security |
| COM(2011) 653 | | 21.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Interim Evaluation of External Cooperation Agreements in Higher Education, Training and Youth with the United States of America and Canada |
| COM(2011) 660 | | 19.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A pilot for the Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative |
| COM(2011) 662 | | 19.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — A framework for the next generation of innovative financial instruments — The EU equity and debt platforms |
| COM(2011) 667 | | 12.10.2011 | Commission Opinion on the application for accession to the European Union by the Republic of Croatia |
| COM(2011) 669 | | 12.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission — A roadmap to stability and growth |
| COM(2011) 670 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Setting up an Aviation Safety Management System for Europe |
| COM(2011) 672 | | 21.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 4th financial report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) — 2010 financial year |
| COM(2011) 673 | | 21.10.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 4th financial report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund — 2010 financial year |
| COM(2011) 674 | | 18.10.2011 | Draft amending budget No 6 to the general budget 2011 — General statement of revenue statement of expenditure by section — Section III — Commission |
| COM(2011) 680 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Smart borders — Options and the way ahead |
| COM(2011) 681 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility |
| COM(2011) 682 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Social Business Initiative — Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation |
| COM(2011) 686 | | 9.11.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on EAGF expenditure Early warning system |
| COM(2011) 689 | | 25.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Towards a stronger European response to drugs |
| COM(2011) 693 | | 31.10.2011 | Report from the Commission — 22nd Annual Report on implementation of the structural funds (2010) |
| COM(2011) 694 | | 31.10.2011 | Report from the Commission — European Union Solidarity Fund — Annual Report 2010 |
| COM(2011) 695 | | 4.11.2011 | Report from the Commission — Annual Report on the Instrument for Structural Policies for pre-Accession (ISPA) — 2010 |
| COM(2011) 696 | | 10.11.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Report on the evaluation of the application of the Civil Protection Mechanism and the Civil Protection Financial Instrument for the years 2007-09 |
| COM(2011) 698 | | 25.10.2011 | Amending Letter No 3 to the draft general budget 2012 — Statement of expenditure by section — Section III — Commission |
| COM(2011) 700 | | 10.11.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the impact of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport |
| COM(2011) 702 | | 9.11.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — ‘Small Business, Big World — a new partnership to help SMEs seize global opportunities’ |
| COM(2011) 703 | | 26.10.2011 | Recommendation for a Council decision amending Council Decision 2011/XXX/EU of 12 July 2011 addressed to Greece with a view to reinforcing and deepening fiscal surveillance and giving notice to Greece to take measures for the deficit reduction judged necessary to remedy the situation of excessive deficit |
| COM(2011) 705 | | 26.10.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the Council — Follow-up to the Council Decision 2011/XXX/EU of 12 July 2011 addressed to Greece with a view to reinforcing and deepening fiscal surveillance and giving notice to Greece to take measures for the deficit reduction judged necessary to remedy the situation of excessive deficit (October 2011) |
| COM(2011) 712 | | 11.11.2011 | Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee — Double Taxation in the single market |
| COM(2011) 729 | | 11.11.2011 | Report from the Commission to the Council on the functioning of the transitional arrangements on free movement of workers from Bulgaria and Romania |
| COM(2011) 731 | | 14.11.2011 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the single sky legislation: time to deliver |
| COM(2011) 741 | | 14.10.2011 | Report from the Commission — Annual Report on the Cohesion Fund (2010) |

Document

Part

Date

Title

COM(2011) 471

26.7.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors — Final accounts of the 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds — Financial year 2010

COM(2011) 613

6.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The future of the European Union Solidarity Fund

COM(2011) 637

13.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Increasing the impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change

COM(2011) 638

13.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The future approach to EU budget support to third countries

COM(2011) 641

12.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) — Revised multiannual indicative financial framework for 2012-13

COM(2011) 642

14.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Industrial Policy: Reinforcing competitiveness

COM(2011) 643

7.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Annual Report to the Discharge Authority on internal audits carried out in 2010 (Article 86(4) of the Financial Regulation)

COM(2011) 648

18.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Evaluation of the implementation of the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) during its first 3 years (2007-09)

COM(2011) 649

19.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 2010 Annual Report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation security

COM(2011) 653

21.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Interim Evaluation of External Cooperation Agreements in Higher Education, Training and Youth with the United States of America and Canada

COM(2011) 660

19.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A pilot for the Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative

COM(2011) 662

19.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — A framework for the next generation of innovative financial instruments — The EU equity and debt platforms

COM(2011) 667

12.10.2011

Commission Opinion on the application for accession to the European Union by the Republic of Croatia

COM(2011) 669

12.10.2011

Communication from the Commission — A roadmap to stability and growth

COM(2011) 670

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Setting up an Aviation Safety Management System for Europe

COM(2011) 672

21.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 4th financial report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) — 2010 financial year

COM(2011) 673

21.10.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — 4th financial report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund — 2010 financial year

COM(2011) 674

18.10.2011

Draft amending budget No 6 to the general budget 2011 — General statement of revenue statement of expenditure by section — Section III — Commission

COM(2011) 680

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Smart borders — Options and the way ahead

COM(2011) 681

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility

COM(2011) 682

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Social Business Initiative — Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation

COM(2011) 686

9.11.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on EAGF expenditure Early warning system

COM(2011) 689

25.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Towards a stronger European response to drugs

COM(2011) 693

31.10.2011

Report from the Commission — 22nd Annual Report on implementation of the structural funds (2010)

COM(2011) 694

31.10.2011

Report from the Commission — European Union Solidarity Fund — Annual Report 2010

COM(2011) 695

4.11.2011

Report from the Commission — Annual Report on the Instrument for Structural Policies for pre-Accession (ISPA) — 2010

COM(2011) 696

10.11.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — Report on the evaluation of the application of the Civil Protection Mechanism and the Civil Protection Financial Instrument for the years 2007-09

COM(2011) 698

25.10.2011

Amending Letter No 3 to the draft general budget 2012 — Statement of expenditure by section — Section III — Commission

COM(2011) 700

10.11.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the impact of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport

COM(2011) 702

9.11.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — ‘Small Business, Big World — a new partnership to help SMEs seize global opportunities’

COM(2011) 703

26.10.2011

Recommendation for a Council decision amending Council Decision 2011/XXX/EU of 12 July 2011 addressed to Greece with a view to reinforcing and deepening fiscal surveillance and giving notice to Greece to take measures for the deficit reduction judged necessary to remedy the situation of excessive deficit

COM(2011) 705

26.10.2011

Communication from the Commission to the Council — Follow-up to the Council Decision 2011/XXX/EU of 12 July 2011 addressed to Greece with a view to reinforcing and deepening fiscal surveillance and giving notice to Greece to take measures for the deficit reduction judged necessary to remedy the situation of excessive deficit (October 2011)

COM(2011) 712

11.11.2011

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee — Double Taxation in the single market

COM(2011) 729

11.11.2011

Report from the Commission to the Council on the functioning of the transitional arrangements on free movement of workers from Bulgaria and Romania

COM(2011) 731

14.11.2011

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the single sky legislation: time to deliver

COM(2011) 741

14.10.2011

Report from the Commission — Annual Report on the Cohesion Fund (2010)

These texts are available on EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---

Court of Auditors

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/26

---

Special Report No 16/2011 ‘EU Financial assistance for the decommissioning of nuclear plants in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia: Achievements and Future Challenges’

2012/C 37/09

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 16/2011 ‘EU Financial assistance for the decommissioning of nuclear plants in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia: Achievements and Future Challenges’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:

| European Court of Auditors |
| --- |
| Unit ‘Audit: Production of Reports’ |
| 12, rue Alcide de Gasperi |
| 1615 Luxembourg |
| LUXEMBOURG |
| Tel. +352 4398-1 |
| E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu |

European Court of Auditors

Unit ‘Audit: Production of Reports’

12, rue Alcide de Gasperi

1615 Luxembourg

LUXEMBOURG

Tel. +352 4398-1

E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/27

---

CALL FOR PROPOSALS — EACEA/11/12

INTRA-ACP academic mobility scheme

Africa (Mwalimu Nyerere) and the Caribbean and Pacific

2012/C 37/10

1.   Objectives and description

The objective of the programme is to promote sustainable development and poverty alleviation by increasing the availability of trained and qualified high-level professional manpower in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.

The programme aims to strengthen cooperation between higher education institutions (HEIs) in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific in view of increasing access to quality education that will encourage and enable students to undertake postgraduate studies, and to promote student retention in the region along with mobility of staff (academic and administrative) while increasing competitiveness and attractiveness of the institutions themselves.

More specifically the programme aims to:

| — | provide access to higher education for students including those from disadvantaged groups, |
| --- | --- |

—

provide access to higher education for students including those from disadvantaged groups,

| — | facilitate cooperation on recognition of studies and qualifications, |
| --- | --- |

—

facilitate cooperation on recognition of studies and qualifications,

| — | contribute to the improvement of the quality of higher education through the promotion of internationalisation, and harmonisation of programmes and curricula within participating institutions, |
| --- | --- |

—

contribute to the improvement of the quality of higher education through the promotion of internationalisation, and harmonisation of programmes and curricula within participating institutions,

| — | enhance the international cooperation capacity of HEIs in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, |
| --- | --- |

—

enhance the international cooperation capacity of HEIs in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries,

| — | promote cooperation between sending and hosting institutions, |
| --- | --- |

—

promote cooperation between sending and hosting institutions,

| — | enable students, academics and staff to benefit linguistically, culturally and professionally from the experience gained in the context of mobility to another country, |
| --- | --- |

—

enable students, academics and staff to benefit linguistically, culturally and professionally from the experience gained in the context of mobility to another country,

| — | enhance, in the medium-term, the political, cultural, educational and economical links between the participating countries. |
| --- | --- |

—

enhance, in the medium-term, the political, cultural, educational and economical links between the participating countries.

2.   Eligible applicants and partnership composition

Eligible applicants are higher education institutions (HEIs) in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific that provide courses at the graduate and/or doctoral level of higher education, recognised by the competent authorities in their own country. Only African, Caribbean and Pacific national HEIs accredited by relevant national authorities in Africa, in the Caribbean and in the Pacific are eligible. Branches of HEIs from outside Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific are not eligible.

The partnership will be constituted between three and twelve HEIs.

3.   Eligible activities and duration

The project will involve the identification of existing high quality master and doctoral programmes, the organisation and implementation of student and staff mobility at these levels of higher education, the provision of education/training and other services to foreign students and teaching/training and research assignments and other services to staff from the country(ies) covered by the project. Activities must take place in one of the eligible countries covered by the call for proposals and participating in the partnership.

4.   Award criteria

All applications will undergo assessments by external independent experts according to the three award criteria listed below:

| Criteria | Weight |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | Relevance |

Criteria

Weight

1.

Relevance

20 %

| 2. | Quality |
| --- | --- |

2.

Quality

70 %

| 2.1. | Academic quality |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

Academic quality

15 %

| 2.2. | Partnership composition and cooperation mechanisms |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

Partnership composition and cooperation mechanisms

20 %

| 2.3. | Organisation and implementation of the mobility |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

Organisation and implementation of the mobility

20 %

| 2.4. | Students’/staff facilities and follow-up |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

Students’/staff facilities and follow-up

15 %

| 3. | Sustainability |
| --- | --- |

3.

Sustainability

10 %

Total

100 %

5.   Budget and grant amounts

The overall indicative amount made available under this call for proposals is EUR 12 million for the following geographical windows and should allow around 400 mobility flows:

| Lot | Geographical windows | Indicative global amount |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Lot 1 | Africa | EUR 10 million |
| Lot 2 | Pacific and Caribbean | EUR 2 million |

Lot

Geographical windows

Indicative global amount

Lot 1

Africa

EUR 10 million

Lot 2

Pacific and Caribbean

EUR 2 million

6.   Submission of proposals and deadline

Only grant applications submitted on the correct form, accompanied by its annexes and duly completed will be accepted. The grant application has to be dated and signed in original by the person authorised to enter into legally binding commitments on behalf of the applicant organisation.

All additional information considered necessary by the applicant can be included on separate sheets.

The grant application and its annexes must be sent by registered mail to the following address:

| Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency |
| --- |
| Call for proposals EACEA/11/12 — ‘INTRA-ACP academic mobility scheme’ |
| Attn Mr Joachim FRONIA |
| BOUR 02/29 |
| Avenue du Bourget/Bourgetlaan 1 |
| 1140 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

Call for proposals EACEA/11/12 — ‘INTRA-ACP academic mobility scheme’

Attn Mr Joachim FRONIA

BOUR 02/29

Avenue du Bourget/Bourgetlaan 1

1140 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

The grant application must be sent also by electronic version to the following mailbox:

EACEA-INTRA-ACP@ec.europa.eu

The duly completed grant application and its annexes must be sent no later than 10 May 2012 (as per postmark).

Only applications submitted by the deadline and in accordance with the requirements specified on the grant application form will be accepted. Applications submitted by fax or e-mail only will not be accepted.

All the necessary documents are available at the following address:

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/intra_acp_mobility

---

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 10.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/30

---

STATE AID — ITALY

State aid SA.33726 (11/C) (ex SA.33726 (11/NN)) — Deferral of payment of the milk levy in Italy

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

2012/C 37/11

By letter dated 11 January 2012, reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified Italy of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the above mentioned measure.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the measure in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to the following address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development |
| Directorate M2 — Competition |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 120, 5/94A |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Fax +32 22967672 |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

Directorate M2 — Competition

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 120, 5/94A

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Fax +32 22967672

These comments will be communicated to Italy. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

SUMMARY

Article 1 of Council Decision 2003/530/EC provides that the aid which the Italian Republic intends to grant to milk producers, by itself making payment to the Community of the amount due to the Community by virtue of the additional levy on milk and milk products for the period 1995–96 to 2001–02 and by allowing these producers to repay their debt by way of deferred payment over a number of years without interest, is exceptionally considered to be compatible with the common market on condition that repayment is in full by yearly instalments of equal size and that the repayment period does not exceed 14 years, starting from 1 January 2004.

Law No 10 of 26 February 2011 (which converts Decree-Law No 225 of 29 December 2010 into law) introduces into Article 1 of Decree-Law No 225 of 29 December 2010 a paragraph 12k providing for deferral of payment of the instalment of the levy due on 31 December 2010 under the Decision referred to above to 30 June 2011.

At this stage, the Commission has doubts about the compatibility with the internal market of this deferral of payment and, as a consequence, the system of staggering payments approved by the Council but altered by the deferral, for the following reasons:

| — | the Italian authorities have let it be known that they intend to place the grant equivalent of the deferral of payment under the de minimis regime provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1535/2007 of 20 December 2007 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid in the sector of agricultural production (1); however, at this stage, the Commission has doubts about the applicability of that Regulation to this particular case because no details have been provided by the Italian authorities as regards compliance with the individual and national aid ceilings provided for in the Regulation; also, the Regulation forbids the grant of de minimis aid which raises the State aid above the permitted maximum, which the deferral appears to do at this stage, |
| --- | --- |

—

the Italian authorities have let it be known that they intend to place the grant equivalent of the deferral of payment under the de minimis regime provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1535/2007 of 20 December 2007 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid in the sector of agricultural production (1); however, at this stage, the Commission has doubts about the applicability of that Regulation to this particular case because no details have been provided by the Italian authorities as regards compliance with the individual and national aid ceilings provided for in the Regulation; also, the Regulation forbids the grant of de minimis aid which raises the State aid above the permitted maximum, which the deferral appears to do at this stage,

| — | therefore, at this stage, the Commission can only conclude that there is an element of aid which is not justified by any of the information provided by the Italian authorities so far in the light of the rules on State aid in the agriculture sector (Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013 (2)), |
| --- | --- |

—

therefore, at this stage, the Commission can only conclude that there is an element of aid which is not justified by any of the information provided by the Italian authorities so far in the light of the rules on State aid in the agriculture sector (Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector 2007 to 2013 (2)),

| — | the deferral is in breach of the Council Decision in that one of its conditions (the equal size of instalments) is no longer met; the deferral thus transforms the entire system of staggered payments into new aid which, at this stage, does not appear to be justified by any of the provisions in the guidelines referred to above. |
| --- | --- |

—

the deferral is in breach of the Council Decision in that one of its conditions (the equal size of instalments) is no longer met; the deferral thus transforms the entire system of staggered payments into new aid which, at this stage, does not appear to be justified by any of the provisions in the guidelines referred to above.

In accordance with Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, all unlawful aid may be subject to recovery from the beneficiary.

TEXT OF LETTER

| ‘(1) | a seguito dell'esame delle informazioni trasmesse dalle autorità italiane, la Commissione si pregia informare dette autorità che ha deciso di avviare la procedura prevista all'articolo 108, paragrafo 2, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea (TFUE)






  — | in relazione alla proroga semestrale prevista dalla legge 26 febbraio 2011, n. 110, di conversione del decreto legge 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, del pagamento della rata dei prelievi sul latte in scadenza al 31 dicembre 2010, in applicazione del piano di rateizzazione istituito dalla decisione 2003/530/CE del Consiglio, del 16 luglio 2003, sulla compatibilità con il mercato comune (3) di un aiuto che la Repubblica italiana intende concedere ai suoi produttori di latte (di seguito, “la decisione del Consiglio”) (4), |
| --- | --- | --- |

‘(1)

a seguito dell'esame delle informazioni trasmesse dalle autorità italiane, la Commissione si pregia informare dette autorità che ha deciso di avviare la procedura prevista all'articolo 108, paragrafo 2, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea (TFUE)

—

in relazione alla proroga semestrale prevista dalla legge 26 febbraio 2011, n. 110, di conversione del decreto legge 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, del pagamento della rata dei prelievi sul latte in scadenza al 31 dicembre 2010, in applicazione del piano di rateizzazione istituito dalla decisione 2003/530/CE del Consiglio, del 16 luglio 2003, sulla compatibilità con il mercato comune (3) di un aiuto che la Repubblica italiana intende concedere ai suoi produttori di latte (di seguito, “la decisione del Consiglio”) (4),

| — | tenuto conto del cumulo esistente tra la proroga suddetta e l'aiuto approvato dalla decisione del Consiglio con riguardo al sistema di rateizzazione da essa istituito. |
| --- | --- |

—

tenuto conto del cumulo esistente tra la proroga suddetta e l'aiuto approvato dalla decisione del Consiglio con riguardo al sistema di rateizzazione da essa istituito.

PROCEDURA

| (2) | Dopo essere stata informata dell'entrata in vigore, il 27 febbraio 2011, della legge di conversione del decreto-legge del 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, la Commissione ha chiesto alle autorità italiane complementi di informazione sulle misure in oggetto con lettera datata 17 marzo 2011. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Dopo essere stata informata dell'entrata in vigore, il 27 febbraio 2011, della legge di conversione del decreto-legge del 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, la Commissione ha chiesto alle autorità italiane complementi di informazione sulle misure in oggetto con lettera datata 17 marzo 2011.

| (3) | Con lettera datata 24 giugno 2011, protocollata il 29 giugno 2011, le autorità italiane hanno trasmesso alla Commissione i complementi di informazione richiesti. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Con lettera datata 24 giugno 2011, protocollata il 29 giugno 2011, le autorità italiane hanno trasmesso alla Commissione i complementi di informazione richiesti.

| (4) | Con fax del 14 ottobre 2011 i servizi della Commissione, previo esame delle informazioni trasmesse dalle autorità italiane e tenuto conto del fatto che la misura era stata applicata senza l'accordo della Commissione, hanno notificato alle autorità italiane l'apertura di un fascicolo con il numero SA.33726 (11/NN). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Con fax del 14 ottobre 2011 i servizi della Commissione, previo esame delle informazioni trasmesse dalle autorità italiane e tenuto conto del fatto che la misura era stata applicata senza l'accordo della Commissione, hanno notificato alle autorità italiane l'apertura di un fascicolo con il numero SA.33726 (11/NN).

DESCRIZIONE

La decisione 2003/530/CE del Consiglio

| (5) | La decisione 2003/530/CE del Consiglio recita all'articolo 1:
  “L'aiuto che la Repubblica italiana intende concedere ai produttori di latte, sostituendosi a questi nel pagamento degli importi da essi dovuti alla Comunità a titolo del prelievo supplementare sul latte e sui prodotti lattiero-caseari per il periodo dal 1995/1996 al 2001/2002 e consentendo agli stessi produttori di estinguere il loro debito mediante pagamenti differiti effettuati su vari anni senza interessi, è eccezionalmente considerato compatibile con il mercato comune a condizione che:






  — | l'importo sia interamente rimborsato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo e |
| --- | --- | --- |

(5)

La decisione 2003/530/CE del Consiglio recita all'articolo 1:

“L'aiuto che la Repubblica italiana intende concedere ai produttori di latte, sostituendosi a questi nel pagamento degli importi da essi dovuti alla Comunità a titolo del prelievo supplementare sul latte e sui prodotti lattiero-caseari per il periodo dal 1995/1996 al 2001/2002 e consentendo agli stessi produttori di estinguere il loro debito mediante pagamenti differiti effettuati su vari anni senza interessi, è eccezionalmente considerato compatibile con il mercato comune a condizione che:

—

l'importo sia interamente rimborsato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo e

| — | il periodo di rimborso non superi 14 anni, a decorrere al 1o gennaio 2004.” |
| --- | --- |

—

il periodo di rimborso non superi 14 anni, a decorrere al 1o gennaio 2004.”

La legge di conversione del decreto-legge 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225 (legge 26 febbraio 2011, n. 10)

| (6) | La legge 26 febbraio 2011, n. 10, introduce all'articolo 1 del decreto 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, un comma 12 duodecies che proroga al 30 giugno 2011 il pagamento della rata dei prelievi sul latte in scadenza al 31 dicembre 2010. Il costo della proroga è imputato su una dotazione globale di 5 milioni di euro destinata a fini diversi. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

La legge 26 febbraio 2011, n. 10, introduce all'articolo 1 del decreto 29 dicembre 2010, n. 225, un comma 12 duodecies che proroga al 30 giugno 2011 il pagamento della rata dei prelievi sul latte in scadenza al 31 dicembre 2010. Il costo della proroga è imputato su una dotazione globale di 5 milioni di euro destinata a fini diversi.

| (7) | Nella loro lettera del 24 giugno 2011 le autorità italiane hanno precisato che l'equivalente sovvenzione di tale misura sarà imputato sull'aiuto de minimis previsto per l'Italia dal regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, del 20 dicembre 2007, relativo all'applicazione degli articoli 87 e 88 del trattato CE (5) agli aiuti de minimis nel settore della produzione dei prodotti agricoli (6). |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Nella loro lettera del 24 giugno 2011 le autorità italiane hanno precisato che l'equivalente sovvenzione di tale misura sarà imputato sull'aiuto de minimis previsto per l'Italia dal regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, del 20 dicembre 2007, relativo all'applicazione degli articoli 87 e 88 del trattato CE (5) agli aiuti de minimis nel settore della produzione dei prodotti agricoli (6).

VALUTAZIONE

Esistenza di un aiuto

| (8) | A norma dell'articolo 107, paragrafo 1, del TFUE, sono incompatibili con il mercato interno, nella misura in cui incidano sugli scambi tra Stati membri, gli aiuti concessi dagli Stati, ovvero mediante risorse statali, sotto qualsiasi forma che, favorendo talune imprese o talune produzioni, falsino o minaccino di falsare la concorrenza. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

A norma dell'articolo 107, paragrafo 1, del TFUE, sono incompatibili con il mercato interno, nella misura in cui incidano sugli scambi tra Stati membri, gli aiuti concessi dagli Stati, ovvero mediante risorse statali, sotto qualsiasi forma che, favorendo talune imprese o talune produzioni, falsino o minaccino di falsare la concorrenza.

| (9) | La misura in oggetto corrisponde in prima analisi a questa definizione, in quanto è concessa dallo Stato (per il quale la proroga di pagamento si traduce in una perdita di risorse), favorisce determinate imprese (le aziende lattiero-casearie) e una determinata produzione (la produzione lattiera) e può incidere sugli scambi (7) e falsare la concorrenza (8). |
| --- | --- |

(9)

La misura in oggetto corrisponde in prima analisi a questa definizione, in quanto è concessa dallo Stato (per il quale la proroga di pagamento si traduce in una perdita di risorse), favorisce determinate imprese (le aziende lattiero-casearie) e una determinata produzione (la produzione lattiera) e può incidere sugli scambi (7) e falsare la concorrenza (8).

| (10) | Nel caso di specie le autorità italiane hanno affermato che intendevano imputare l'equivalente-sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento in oggetto sull'aiuto de minimis previsto per l'Italia dal regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

Nel caso di specie le autorità italiane hanno affermato che intendevano imputare l'equivalente-sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento in oggetto sull'aiuto de minimis previsto per l'Italia dal regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione.

| (11) | Ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, primo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, “[l]'importo complessivo degli aiuti de minimis concessi a una medesima impresa non supera 7 500 EUR nell'arco di tre esercizi fiscali. Tale massimale si applica indipendentemente dalla forma degli aiuti o dall'obiettivo perseguito.” |
| --- | --- |

(11)

Ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, primo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, “[l]'importo complessivo degli aiuti de minimis concessi a una medesima impresa non supera 7 500 EUR nell'arco di tre esercizi fiscali. Tale massimale si applica indipendentemente dalla forma degli aiuti o dall'obiettivo perseguito.”

| (12) | Ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 3, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, “[l]'importo cumulativo degli aiuti de minimis concessi per Stato membro alle imprese del settore della produzione dei prodotti agricoli nel corso di tre esercizi fiscali non supera il valore massimo stabilito nell'allegato [del regolamento].” (320 505 000 EUR per l'Italia). |
| --- | --- |

(12)

Ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 3, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, “[l]'importo cumulativo degli aiuti de minimis concessi per Stato membro alle imprese del settore della produzione dei prodotti agricoli nel corso di tre esercizi fiscali non supera il valore massimo stabilito nell'allegato [del regolamento].” (320 505 000 EUR per l'Italia).

| (13) | Gli aiuti che rientrano nel massimale individuale e nel massimale nazionale suindicati non costituiscono quindi aiuti di Stato ai sensi dell'articolo 107, paragrafo 1, del TFUE. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

Gli aiuti che rientrano nel massimale individuale e nel massimale nazionale suindicati non costituiscono quindi aiuti di Stato ai sensi dell'articolo 107, paragrafo 1, del TFUE.

| (14) | Tuttavia ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, secondo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, se “... per una misura di aiuto l'importo complessivo dell'aiuto concesso supera il massimale di [7 500 EUR per beneficiario nell'arco di tre esercizi fiscali], tale importo complessivo non può beneficiare dell'esenzione prevista dal [...] regolamento, neppure per la frazione che non supera detto massimale. In questo caso, tale misura d'aiuto non può beneficiare delle disposizioni del [...] regolamento, né al momento della concessione dell'aiuto, né in un momento successivo.” |
| --- | --- |

(14)

Tuttavia ai sensi dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, secondo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, se “... per una misura di aiuto l'importo complessivo dell'aiuto concesso supera il massimale di [7 500 EUR per beneficiario nell'arco di tre esercizi fiscali], tale importo complessivo non può beneficiare dell'esenzione prevista dal [...] regolamento, neppure per la frazione che non supera detto massimale. In questo caso, tale misura d'aiuto non può beneficiare delle disposizioni del [...] regolamento, né al momento della concessione dell'aiuto, né in un momento successivo.”

| (15) | Inoltre l'articolo 3, paragrafo 7, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione dispone che “[gli] aiuti de minimis non sono cumulabili con aiuti pubblici concessi per le stesse spese ammissibili se tale cumulo dà luogo a un'intensità d'aiuto superiore a quella stabilita, per le specifiche circostanze di ogni caso, dalla normativa comunitaria.” |
| --- | --- |

(15)

Inoltre l'articolo 3, paragrafo 7, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione dispone che “[gli] aiuti de minimis non sono cumulabili con aiuti pubblici concessi per le stesse spese ammissibili se tale cumulo dà luogo a un'intensità d'aiuto superiore a quella stabilita, per le specifiche circostanze di ogni caso, dalla normativa comunitaria.”

| (16) | Le informazioni di cui dispone attualmente non consentono alla Commissione di concludere che l'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento, preso separatamente, non superi i 7 500 EUR per beneficiario né che, cumulato con altri aiuti de minimis sugli esercizi fiscali 2011, 2010 e 2009, non comporti per nessun beneficiario un superamento della soglia di 7 500 EUR. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

Le informazioni di cui dispone attualmente non consentono alla Commissione di concludere che l'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento, preso separatamente, non superi i 7 500 EUR per beneficiario né che, cumulato con altri aiuti de minimis sugli esercizi fiscali 2011, 2010 e 2009, non comporti per nessun beneficiario un superamento della soglia di 7 500 EUR.

| (17) | Sulla base di quanto precede, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare del regolare rispetto delle disposizioni dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, primo e secondo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, e quindi dell'ammissibilità del ricorso al regime de minimis per i beneficiari della proroga di pagamento di cui trattasi. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

Sulla base di quanto precede, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare del regolare rispetto delle disposizioni dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, primo e secondo comma, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione, e quindi dell'ammissibilità del ricorso al regime de minimis per i beneficiari della proroga di pagamento di cui trattasi.

| (18) | Essa nutre gli stessi dubbi per quanto riguarda l'osservanza delle disposizioni dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 3, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione. Infatti, nonostante si preveda di imputare al regime de minimis l'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento, le informazioni di cui attualmente dispone la Commissione non consentono di concludere che il massimale nazionale sarà effettivamente rispettato. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

Essa nutre gli stessi dubbi per quanto riguarda l'osservanza delle disposizioni dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 3, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 della Commissione. Infatti, nonostante si preveda di imputare al regime de minimis l'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento, le informazioni di cui attualmente dispone la Commissione non consentono di concludere che il massimale nazionale sarà effettivamente rispettato.

| (19) | La Commissione constata inoltre che la proroga di pagamento in parola viene ad aggiungersi ad un aiuto approvato dal Consiglio che, per la sua natura e il suo carattere eccezionale, va considerato come un aiuto unico massimo non cumulabile con nessun altro tipo di intervento (l'articolo 1 della decisione del Consiglio indica esplicitamente che la rateizzazione del pagamento del prelievo sul latte per le campagne 1995/1996 e 2001/2002 è eccezionalmente considerata compatibile con il mercato comune). Tuttavia, come rilevato al punto 15, l'articolo 3, paragrafo 7, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 dispone che “[gli] aiuti de minimis non sono cumulabili con aiuti pubblici concessi per le stesse spese ammissibili se tale cumulo dà luogo a un'intensità d'aiuto superiore a quella stabilita, per le specifiche circostanze di ogni caso, dalla normativa comunitaria”. Nel caso di specie, il fatto che al regime di rateizzazione approvato dalla decisione del Consiglio, volto ad alleviare momentaneamente l'onere finanziario gravante sui produttori di latte interessati, venga ad aggiungersi una proroga di pagamento si traduce in un superamento dell'aiuto massimo approvato dal Consiglio. Allo stadio attuale la Commissione è quindi costretta a dubitare dell'ammissibilità dell'inclusione nel regime de minimis dell'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

La Commissione constata inoltre che la proroga di pagamento in parola viene ad aggiungersi ad un aiuto approvato dal Consiglio che, per la sua natura e il suo carattere eccezionale, va considerato come un aiuto unico massimo non cumulabile con nessun altro tipo di intervento (l'articolo 1 della decisione del Consiglio indica esplicitamente che la rateizzazione del pagamento del prelievo sul latte per le campagne 1995/1996 e 2001/2002 è eccezionalmente considerata compatibile con il mercato comune). Tuttavia, come rilevato al punto 15, l'articolo 3, paragrafo 7, del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 dispone che “[gli] aiuti de minimis non sono cumulabili con aiuti pubblici concessi per le stesse spese ammissibili se tale cumulo dà luogo a un'intensità d'aiuto superiore a quella stabilita, per le specifiche circostanze di ogni caso, dalla normativa comunitaria”. Nel caso di specie, il fatto che al regime di rateizzazione approvato dalla decisione del Consiglio, volto ad alleviare momentaneamente l'onere finanziario gravante sui produttori di latte interessati, venga ad aggiungersi una proroga di pagamento si traduce in un superamento dell'aiuto massimo approvato dal Consiglio. Allo stadio attuale la Commissione è quindi costretta a dubitare dell'ammissibilità dell'inclusione nel regime de minimis dell'equivalente sovvenzione della proroga di pagamento.

| (20) | Tenuto conto di quanto esposto ai punti da 16 a 20, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare dell'applicabilità delle disposizioni del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 alla proroga di pagamento in questione. Essa deve pertanto constatare la sussistenza di un aiuto, cosa che risulta ulteriormente corroborata dalle osservazioni formulate al punto 9. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

Tenuto conto di quanto esposto ai punti da 16 a 20, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare dell'applicabilità delle disposizioni del regolamento (CE) n. 1535/2007 alla proroga di pagamento in questione. Essa deve pertanto constatare la sussistenza di un aiuto, cosa che risulta ulteriormente corroborata dalle osservazioni formulate al punto 9.

Compatibilità dell'aiuto inerente alla proroga di pagamento

| (21) | Nei casi previsti dall'articolo 107, paragrafi 2 e 3, del TFUE, alcuni aiuti possono considerarsi, in via derogatoria, compatibili con il mercato interno. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

Nei casi previsti dall'articolo 107, paragrafi 2 e 3, del TFUE, alcuni aiuti possono considerarsi, in via derogatoria, compatibili con il mercato interno.

| (22) | Nella fattispecie, tenuto conto della natura del regime in parola, l'unica deroga eventualmente applicabile è quella prevista dall'articolo 107, paragrafo 3, lettera c), del TFUE, in base alla quale possono considerarsi compatibili con il mercato interno gli aiuti destinati ad agevolare lo sviluppo di talune attività o di talune regioni economiche, sempre che non alterino le condizioni degli scambi in misura contraria al comune interesse. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Nella fattispecie, tenuto conto della natura del regime in parola, l'unica deroga eventualmente applicabile è quella prevista dall'articolo 107, paragrafo 3, lettera c), del TFUE, in base alla quale possono considerarsi compatibili con il mercato interno gli aiuti destinati ad agevolare lo sviluppo di talune attività o di talune regioni economiche, sempre che non alterino le condizioni degli scambi in misura contraria al comune interesse.

| (23) | Nel settore agricolo, trattandosi di un regime settoriale che non risulta in alcun modo riservato a piccole e medie imprese, la deroga suddetta è concessa soltanto se le misure proposte soddisfano le pertinenti condizioni stabilite dagli Orientamenti comunitari per gli aiuti di Stato nel settore agricolo e forestale 2007-2013 (9) (di seguito, “gli orientamenti”). |
| --- | --- |

(23)

Nel settore agricolo, trattandosi di un regime settoriale che non risulta in alcun modo riservato a piccole e medie imprese, la deroga suddetta è concessa soltanto se le misure proposte soddisfano le pertinenti condizioni stabilite dagli Orientamenti comunitari per gli aiuti di Stato nel settore agricolo e forestale 2007-2013 (9) (di seguito, “gli orientamenti”).

| (24) | Le informazioni fino ad ora trasmesse dalle autorità italiane non consentono di concludere che la proroga di pagamento in questione è giustificabile alla luce di uno qualsiasi dei criteri previsti dagli orientamenti. Al contrario, essa sembra costituire allo stadio attuale un mero strumento destinato ad alleviare l'onere finanziario che graverebbe normalmente sui beneficiari. Il punto 15 degli orientamenti indica infatti chiaramente che gli aiuti di Stato unilaterali intesi meramente a migliorare la situazione finanziaria dei produttori senza contribuire in alcun modo allo sviluppo del settore sono considerati aiuti al funzionamento, incompatibili con il mercato interno. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

Le informazioni fino ad ora trasmesse dalle autorità italiane non consentono di concludere che la proroga di pagamento in questione è giustificabile alla luce di uno qualsiasi dei criteri previsti dagli orientamenti. Al contrario, essa sembra costituire allo stadio attuale un mero strumento destinato ad alleviare l'onere finanziario che graverebbe normalmente sui beneficiari. Il punto 15 degli orientamenti indica infatti chiaramente che gli aiuti di Stato unilaterali intesi meramente a migliorare la situazione finanziaria dei produttori senza contribuire in alcun modo allo sviluppo del settore sono considerati aiuti al funzionamento, incompatibili con il mercato interno.

| (25) | In simili circostanze, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare della compatibilità con il mercato interno dell'aiuto inerente alla proroga di pagamento. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

In simili circostanze, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare della compatibilità con il mercato interno dell'aiuto inerente alla proroga di pagamento.

Incidenza della proroga di pagamento sull'aiuto di Stato approvato dalla decisione del Consiglio

| (26) | Come indicato nel precedente punto 5, la decisione del Consiglio subordina l'approvazione dell'aiuto di Stato a favore dei produttori di latte italiani al rispetto di una serie di condizioni. Una di queste prevede che il rimborso dell'aiuto allo Stato italiano da parte dei suddetti produttori sia effettuato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo. Tuttavia la proroga ha di fatto interrotto la regolarità del rimborso rateale, dal momento che, per definizione, i produttori non hanno versato una rata annuale alla scadenza prevista. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

Come indicato nel precedente punto 5, la decisione del Consiglio subordina l'approvazione dell'aiuto di Stato a favore dei produttori di latte italiani al rispetto di una serie di condizioni. Una di queste prevede che il rimborso dell'aiuto allo Stato italiano da parte dei suddetti produttori sia effettuato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo. Tuttavia la proroga ha di fatto interrotto la regolarità del rimborso rateale, dal momento che, per definizione, i produttori non hanno versato una rata annuale alla scadenza prevista.

| (27) | La Commissione constata che l'inosservanza della condizione del rimborso effettuato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo viola la decisione del Consiglio, la quale si applica al regime di aiuto nel suo insieme senza possibilità di deroga. Tale inosservanza fa inoltre sì che l'aiuto quale modificato dalla proroga non corrisponda più all'aiuto approvato dal Consiglio e divenga pertanto un nuovo aiuto, non notificato, che deve essere esaminato alla luce delle pertinenti disposizioni degli orientamenti. Tuttavia, come è già stato indicato al punto 24, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare del rispetto di tali disposizioni. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

La Commissione constata che l'inosservanza della condizione del rimborso effettuato mediante rate annuali di uguale importo viola la decisione del Consiglio, la quale si applica al regime di aiuto nel suo insieme senza possibilità di deroga. Tale inosservanza fa inoltre sì che l'aiuto quale modificato dalla proroga non corrisponda più all'aiuto approvato dal Consiglio e divenga pertanto un nuovo aiuto, non notificato, che deve essere esaminato alla luce delle pertinenti disposizioni degli orientamenti. Tuttavia, come è già stato indicato al punto 24, allo stadio attuale la Commissione non può fare a meno di dubitare del rispetto di tali disposizioni.

| (28) | Alla luce di quanto precede, la Commissione invita l'Italia, nell'ambito della procedura prevista all'articolo 108, paragrafo 2, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, a presentare le proprie osservazioni e a fornire qualsiasi informazione che possa essere utile ai fini della valutazione della misura entro un mese dalla data di ricezione della presente. Essa invita inoltre le autorità italiane a trasmettere senza indugio copia della presente lettera ai beneficiari dell'aiuto. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

Alla luce di quanto precede, la Commissione invita l'Italia, nell'ambito della procedura prevista all'articolo 108, paragrafo 2, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, a presentare le proprie osservazioni e a fornire qualsiasi informazione che possa essere utile ai fini della valutazione della misura entro un mese dalla data di ricezione della presente. Essa invita inoltre le autorità italiane a trasmettere senza indugio copia della presente lettera ai beneficiari dell'aiuto.

| (29) | La Commissione fa presente all'Italia che l'articolo 108, paragrafo 3, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea ha effetto sospensivo e rimanda all'articolo 14 del regolamento (CE) n. 659/1999 del Consiglio, a norma del quale tutti gli aiuti illegittimi possono essere recuperati presso i beneficiari.’ |
| --- | --- |

(29)

La Commissione fa presente all'Italia che l'articolo 108, paragrafo 3, del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea ha effetto sospensivo e rimanda all'articolo 14 del regolamento (CE) n. 659/1999 del Consiglio, a norma del quale tutti gli aiuti illegittimi possono essere recuperati presso i beneficiari.’

---

(1)  Now Articles 107 and 108 TFEU.

1

(2)  OJ C 319, 27.12.2006, p. 1.

2

(3)  Ora denominato “mercato interno”. Ogni riferimento al mercato comune nella citazione di un testo vigente si intende fatto al mercato interno.

3

(4)  GU L 184 del 23.7.2003, pag. 15.

4

(5)  Diventati gli articoli 107 e 108 del TFUE.

5

(6)  GU L 337 del 21.12.2007, pag. 35.

6

(7)  Nel 2009 l'Italia era il quinto produttore di latte vaccino dell'Unione, con una produzione di 11,364 milioni di tonnellate. Nel 2010 ha importato 1 330 602 tonnellate ed esportato 4 722 tonnellate di latte.

7

(8)  In base alla giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia, il semplice fatto che la situazione concorrenziale dell'impresa risulti migliorata dal conferimento di un vantaggio, che essa non avrebbe potuto ottenere in condizioni normali di mercato e del quale non usufruiscono le imprese concorrenti, è sufficiente per dimostrare una distorsione della concorrenza (causa 730/79, Philip Morris/Commissione, Racc. 1980, pag. 2671).

8

Philip Morris/Commissione

(9)  GU C 319 del 27.12.2006, pag. 1.

9

---