EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 3.3.2010 
SEC(2010) 182 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Facts on the functioning of the system up to beginning of February 2010 
 
 
Accompanying document to the 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
 
EU PILOT EVALUATION REPORT 
  
{COM(2010) 70 final} 
 
EN 2   EN 1. ORGANISATION  IN THE  NATIONAL  AUTHORITIES  AND  IN THE  
COMMISSION 
1.1. Organisation in the Na tional Authorities 
Each of the fifteen participating Member St ates has appointed a Central Contact Point 
responsible for the ov erall management of the process. The ma in task of this person or team is 
to attribute files coming in from the Commission services to the responsible Member State authority, to monitor the functioni ng of the system with a view to ensuring its quick, effective 
and constructive operation, communicating soluti ons to problems or answers to questions 
where possible directly to the citizens or busin esses concerned, in conformity with EU law. 
A specific EU Pilot Expert Group, composed of all Central Contact Points, has been set up by 
the Commission for the exchange of views on the functioning of the system. It has met four 
times since the launch of the new system. It  provides the Central Contact Points the 
opportunity to exchange experi ences and agree together with the Commission how best to 
overcome any operational or technical problem they would face. 
As regards the appointment of the Centra l Contact Point, the organisation varies: 
Austria
 – The Contact Point is to be  found in the Federal Chancellery which attributes the 
files submitted in EU Pilot to the individual department responsible. 
Czech Republic  – The Czech Contact Point is located in the EU Law Department 
of the Foreign Affairs Ministry. The same de partment is in charge of the infringement 
proceedings; however, there is shared responsib ility among the Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
and the competent Ministry. 
Denmark  – The Contact Point belongs to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. EU Pilot files are 
treated by a special committee for Legal Affairs, chaired by the Ministry of Justice. Files are 
forwarded to all Ministries concer ned and discussed in the committee. 
Finland  – The Contact Point has been set up in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs Unit for EU 
Litigation which is also responsible for the pr eparation of EU court cases and infringement 
matters. The Contact Point attributes the cases covered by the Pilot project to the contact officer in the Ministry in charge and forwar ds the Ministry's response to the Commission 
through the Pilot's IT system. Th e Contact Point does not take pa rt in the prep aration of the 
answer. If the case falls within th e sphere of authority of several ministries, they take care, as 
a rule, of the coordination of the matter among themselves. The sa me procedure is applied if 
the response requires the particip ation of the Åland Is lands in the consider ation of the case. 
Germany  – The Contact Point belongs to the Fede ral Ministry of Economics and Technology 
(BMWi) and fulfils an overal l monitoring and coordination f unction. All correspondence from 
the Commission and vice versa is channelled via BMWi. The unit in charge for the EU-Pilot 
is also in charge for infringement cases within the Federal Gove rnment. Although BMWi 
checks all messages to the COM and as appropr iate gives juridical advice, the political 
responsibility remains with the line ministry  or the German Länder – in line with their 
political competence. 
 
EN 3   EN Hungary  – The Contact Point is in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The EU pilot cases are 
dealt with according to the same rules and by the same team as the infringement cases. The 
reply in each case is discussed and formulated  in a working group which involves the relevant 
ministries and is approved by the Inter-ministerial Committee for European Affairs. 
Ireland  – The Contact Point is located in the Mini stry of Foreign Affa irs which asks the 
responsible Departments to treat the files raising issues falli ng under their area of 
responsibility in the system. The Departments upload themselves the answers in the system. 
Italy  – A Contact Point has been set up in the EU Policy Department ( Dipartimento per le 
Politiche Comunitarie ) within the Italian Prime Minister’s Office. The Department reports to 
the Minister for European Policies. The same t eam deals with infringement cases. The files 
are dealt with by coordinators who consult ev ery concerned Ministry, setting a deadline for 
preliminary responses allowing sufficient time fo r the work required fo r any finalisation, as 
necessary. The Ministries work together on give n cases, which helps afterwards if the file 
becomes an infringement. 
Lithuania  – Lithuania has opted for centralized manage ment of EU Pilot. The Contact Point 
belongs to the European Law Department under the Ministry of Justice, which coordinates 
and monitors all the European law infringeme nt procedures in Lithuania. European Law 
Department sends the documents received thro ugh EU Pilot to the responsible institution. 
With regard to complaints or other documents delive red through EU Pilot, the State institution 
that is in charge of the transposition or impl ementation of the relevant  EU legal act drafts a 
reply and submits it for coordination to the European Law Department. The European Law 
Department provides conclusions  on the draft reply. Then the responsible State institution 
sends the final reply to the European Law De partment, which submits the answer to the 
European Commission through the EU Pilot. 
The Netherlands  – The Contact Point is part of the European Law Division of the Legal 
Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  This division is also responsible for (the 
coordination of) infringement cases and administ rative letters. The Contact Point attributes 
the files to the departments concerned, uploads the answers into the system and monitors the 
overall operation of the EU P ilot. When asked by the respons ible Department, the Contact 
Point can also play a more substantial role. 
Portugal  – The Contact Point is placed in the Minist ry of Foreign Affairs and the same legal 
experts deal with EU Pilot a nd infringements files. They en sure coordination if several 
Ministries are involved. Short deadlines are set. There is one Contact Point for infringement 
cases, and thus EU Pilot f iles, in each Ministry. 
Slovenia  – The Contact Point belongs to the Government Office for Development and 
European Affairs. The Contact Point identifies  the relevant Ministries and contacts the 
Contact Point in each Ministry. Meetings are he ld to find solutions and it is the Government 
Office for Development and European Affairs that checks the answer and uploads it into the system. 
Spain
 – The Contact Point belongs to the Ministry  of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation. The 
treatment of EU Pilot files follows the same syst em as for infringement cases. The Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs and Cooperation identifies which administration is responsible and it is the 
administration that will prepare the answer a nd send it to the Minist ry that ensures the 
coordination function. 
 
EN 4   EN Sweden  – The Contact Point is located in the Minist ry of Foreign Affairs which forwards the 
files to the legal secretariats  of the competent Ministries. The Ministries enter responses 
directly into the IT application. The Contact Point monito rs the overall ope ration of the 
system. 
United Kingdom  – The Contact Point belongs to the EU Section of the Cabinet Office which 
coordinates the work on EU Pilo t and infringement cases. It fulf ils a general role monitoring 
problems of application of EU La w. The files are sent to the lead Departments and policy and 
legal experts draft the response and send it to the Cabinet Offi ce that ensures the coordination 
function. 
1.2. Organisation in the European Commission services 
The system is centrally managed by the Secr etariat General of the Commission, acting as 
central Contact Point for the Member States. The Secretariat General is responsible for the overall management of the system, monitoring it s functioning, developing  the application and 
responding to questions and provi ding guidance on its operation. 
Each Commission service controlling the applica tion of EU Law has put a team of Contact 
Points in place. They include from 1 to 6 peopl e. The Contact Points in the services create the 
files and ensure the coherence of the system in  the Directorate General. They attribute the 
files to the file handlers and are responsi ble for contacts with the Member States. 
The file handlers in each Directorate General of the Commission introduce the questions to be 
put to Member States into the system, asse ss the responses provided by the Member States 
and propose any appropriate follow-up. 
2. PRACTICAL
 OPERATION  OF THE  SYSTEM 
2.1. IT application 
The Commission services and the Member Stat e authorities communicate using a newly 
developed information and communication syst em (the "EU Pilot IT application") which 
provides for the entry of issues  in the system, secure communication between the Commission 
and Member State authorities and the recording of the time taken to manage issues and the 
results achieved. 
2.2. Scope 
EU Pilot covers issues raising questions concerning the correct application of EU law or the 
conformity of Member State le gislation with EU law. The Commission services can lodge 
enquiries and complaints received from citizens a nd businesses as well as own-initiative files 
in the system. These issues either require fu rther factual or legal information for a full 
understanding or are put in to the system to see if the question could be answered or problem 
resolved through Commission-Mem ber State collaboration. Some i ssues come in directly to 
the Commission without any previous contact having been taken with the Member State 
authority concerned, while others are referred to the Commission following contact with the responsible authority in the Member State. The Commission often has all the information 
 
EN 5   EN necessary to respond directly a nd fully on the issues, in which case no further investigation in 
EU Pilot may be necessary. The re adiness of Member States to resolve issues raised in the 
system more quickly than through  recourse to infringement pro ceedings can usefu lly be tested 
even where factual and legal position seems r easonably clear. However, sometimes further 
factual or legal information is required on the issue before it can be fully understood. 
Apart from the treatment of cross-frontier issues  in the internal market through SOLVIT1, as 
described below, EU Pilot is used for all instances in which the Commission services decide, either as a result of incoming correspondence or of their own initiative, that contact with a 
Member State authority could he lp to provide useful informa tion or to resolve a problem 
raised concerning the implementatio n or application of EU law in  a particular Member State. 
This includes correspondence coming from a ci tizen or an undertaking (new complaint or 
request for information), a lobby/ interest organisation or an i ssue otherwise identified by the 
Commission service concerned as requiring clar ification or resolution, including for example 
issues raised with the Commission in the Europe an Parliament Petitions' Committee or a letter 
from a Member of the European Parliament. EU  Pilot is not used to manage any issue on 
which an infringement proceeding has been initiat ed, through the issuing of a letter of formal 
notice, under Article 258 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TfEU – ex-
Article 226 of the EC Treaty), or  to follow-up on a Court of Ju stice ruling on the existence of 
an infringement. 
EU Pilot is used by the Commission services for a wide range of written contacts with the 
participating Member States concerning specific issues of the interpretation or application of EU law. This does not exclude the use of other forms of contacts as, for instance, committee or expert group work, an organised programme of work on the transposition of a directive, 
package meetings or management or audit a rrangements for specific EU Policies or Funds. 
In EU Pilot, the relevant Commission Departme nt conducts an initial evaluation of incoming 
correspondence before any correspondence is tran smitted to the participating Member State. 
The decision to use EU Pilot depends on factors such as the nature of the issues raised, the 
information already available a nd the likelihood that the Member  State authorities concerned 
should be able to clarify or resolve the issues at stake. Issu es that have already been presented 
to the Member State directly by the citizen  and upon which the MS has already taken a 
position need to be assessed carefully so as to  avoid unnecessary and repetitive consultations. 
The EU Pilot project is not intended to add any unnecessary steps to the investigation of 
complaints and enquiries. Issues which are subject  to judicial proceedin gs in a Member State 
can be submitted to EU Pilot with a view at l east to obtaining confirmation of this fact and 
indications of the timing of the proceedings in  question as well as to identify the nature and 
scope of the issues covered.  
EU Pilot is not to be used once the first formal  step in an infringement proceeding has been 
taken through the se nding of a le tter of formal notice.  
2.3. EU Pilot and SOLVIT 
SOLVIT deals with cross-frontier problems fa ced by individual citizen s and organisations 
caused by bad application of EC internal market rules. Such issues can be submitted directly 
                                                 
1 Commission Communication "Effective Problem Solving in the Internal Market (SOLVIT)" 
[COM(2001/0702) final] 
 
EN 6   EN to the SOLVIT system by individuals, organi sations or concerned parties (e.g. Members of 
the European Parliament). Should such issues  be submitted to the Commission, and should the 
Commission wish for some clarification of the issue to be obtained from the Member State, the relevant service can submit the issue to SO LVIT. Hence, all cross-border EU law issues 
(i.e. involving two or more Member States) encountered by a citize n or organisation in 
relation to the functioning of the internal market (Article 14(2) of the EC Treaty) which are 
not the subject of a formal infringement  proceeding should be put into SOLVIT. 
EU Pilot differs from SOLVIT in  terms of the type of issues it handles and the fact that 
communication is between the Commission and the relevant Member States whereas within SOLVIT Member States work together to solv e cross border problems. If it is already clear 
from the start that a cross-frontier problem ar ising in the internal market is caused by non-
conformity of national legislat ion with EU legislation, the case may be more suitable for 
treatment in EU Pilot rather than SOLVIT. Howe ver, if the cause of th e problem is not clear 
from the outset and a consistent administ rative practice wrongly applying EU law or a 
regulatory barrier is encountered in the proces s of handling a SOLVIT case, SOLVIT centres 
are often prepared to continue their attempts to resolve the problem and correct the infringement (this is called SOLVIT+). 
Member States have the possibility  to redirect cases that have been submitted to EU Pilot by 
mistake and the other way around. The EU Pilot Central Contact Points need to cooperate 
closely with the SOLVIT Centres to ensure  the smooth functioning of the two systems. 
2.4. Relationship of EU Pilot with other information services organised by the 
Commission 
There is a range of other services organised by the Commission to provide information to 
citizens or organisations. Some of them offer dispute resolution possibilities to citizens or 
organisations in their dealings with pub lic authorities or private operators.  
EU Pilot is distinct from these services in that  EU Pilot is not a general information system or 
a system for the settlement of disputes betw een citizens and commerci al operators. It is a 
system for direct co-operation between th e Commission services and Member State 
authorities to respond to specific questions and problems and to correct, at an early stage, 
infringements arising in the context of the da ily interpretation and application of EU law by 
those authorities. 
2.5. Working method 
If the Commission Department considers that a particular problem could be resolved by the 
competent Member State authority, or that additional information from the Member State authority or a statement of the position of th e authority on the issue should be possible and 
could be helpful, it will refer the issu e to the Member State through EU Pilot. 
A ten week benchmark has been set for Member States to send as comprehensive and 
complete a reply as possible, wherever possibl e providing a solution to identified problems. In 
some cases, the Commission may present a reas oned justification for a shorter period or a 
Member State may likewise justify th e need for longer time to respond.  
 
EN 7   EN The responsible Commission Department will assess the response of the Member State and 
decide either to accept the position expressed by the national authorities and to close the file, 
or to ask for more information or to reject th e answer and inform the concerned authorities of 
the conclusion that the problem di d not appear to have  been resolved and some further action 
may be taken. If an infringement is detected, the launch of the infringement procedure may be 
decided. 
A flow chart showing the main steps in EU Pilot is annexed. 
2.6. Confidentiality 
Existing rules2 protecting the identity of complainants followed in the treatment of 
correspondence and complaints  apply to EU Pilot.  
The Commission services send an evaluation of th e response of the Memb er State authority to 
the citizen at the end of the process informi ng the Member State through the recording of a 
copy in the EU Pilo t IT application. 
When citizens and organisations are willing to reveal their identity for fact-finding reasons, 
the Member State authority or Contact Point ma y inform the correspondent directly of its 
response to his enquiry or complaint, with  a copy to the Commission. However, if the 
Member State decides to not correspond directly with the citizen, the Member State will send 
its response to the Commission and the Commi ssion will reply to the correspondent. The 
Commission will communicate the informati on provided, informing the Member State 
through the recording of a copy in the EU Pilot IT application.  
Access to documents on EU Pilot held by th e Commission is governed by Parliament and 
Council Regulation N° 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council 
and Commission documents (OJ L145, 31.05.2001, p.43) , as implemented by the Commission 
Decision of 5 December 2001 amending its Rules of Procedure (J L345, 29.12.2001, p.94). 
National authorities are also bound by their ow n national legislation on access to documents. 
3. DEVELOPMENT  AND  CLARIFICATION  OF THE  WORKING  METHOD  IN 
THE  FIRST  YEAR  OF OPERATION 
3.1. Operational aspects 
Some aspects of the working method have been developed or clarified during the operation of 
the new system: 
– Overall quality of operation  – For the smooth functioning of the new working method, it 
is essential that national aut horities and Commission services  work in close cooperation, 
trying to ensure that the system produces as quick and positive results as possible. 
                                                 
2  Regulation 45/2001 of the Eu ropean Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the 
protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the EU institutions and 
bodies and on the free movement of such data and Commission Communication on relations with the 
complainant in respect of infringements of EU law [COM final (2002) 0141]. 
 
EN 8   EN However, the idea of the EU Pilot project is to build a partnership approach and therefore 
to use the system to improve and develop curr ent practice. Overall, the project has been 
conducted in a very positive spirit of collabor ation and willingness to achieve quick and 
positive results. There have been occasions when the quality of the file s put into the system 
by the Commission services or the responses provided by Member States could have been 
increased. Both the timing of responses of Member States and the time taken by 
Commission services in reviewing the responses could sometimes also have been improved. These issues have been discussed in the EU Pilot Expe rt Group and in other 
contacts with a view to future developments . In particular, in future, the Commission 
services will also work to a ten week be nchmark for the evaluation of Member State 
responses on the same basis as this benchmark is set for Member States. 
– Administrative letters  – The use of EU Pilot is intended to repl ace sending of 
administrative letters by the Commission serv ices (so-called "pre- 226 letter") to Member 
States participating in EU Pilot. However, it has taken some time for this practice to be phased-out. Where such actions have come to light, a follow-up has been organised. It is 
planned to introduce a form into the IT support platform for EU Pilot to allow attention to 
be drawn by senior Commission officials to spec ific aspects of EU Pilot files such as the 
particular need for urgent treatment or the im portance of the issues raised and offering co-
operation to find a soluti on quickly. Once this form is available, this will be the only 
method of written communication to  be used for this purpose. 
– Language issue  – English and the other official  languages of the Member States 
concerned have been variously used in the operation of EU Pilot according to the 
applicable rules and administrative possibilities.  Translation of texts and use of official 
languages of Member States is being ensure d by the Commission services as necessary.  
– Communication between Member States and complainant  –The initial design of EU 
Pilot envisaged that the Member State concer ned would reply directly to the citizen or 
business raising the issue with the Commi ssion, unless the correspondent has maintained 
identity confidentiality. However, this  method of communication has not proved 
appropriate for all files. Therefore, it has b een accepted that, whenever the Member State 
feels it appropriate, the re sponse can be communicated to  the correspondent via the 
Commission services. The evaluation of the Commission services will be added to the 
Member State response. It will be uploaded immediately into the EU Pilot database and communicated to the Member State. In al l cases the Commission communicates its own 
conclusions to the complainant and informs the Member State through the recording of a 
copy of the correspondence in the EU Pilot application. 
– Scope  – There has been some initial uncertainty  on the kinds of files appropriate to be 
taken up in EU Pilot. The idea  behind the project is that this  system should be used for all 
questions and problems concerning the appli cation of EU law, where information or 
explanations are required from the Member Stat e, or it seems possibl e that a solution might 
be found most quickly using this process. Th ere was also some initial lack of clarity 
whether EU Pilot should be used to treat  files submitted by the Commission on its own 
initiative. It has been agreed that there is no reason to limit the application of EU Pilot in terms of the origin of the issue raised conc erning the application of EU law. It should 
operate without prejudice to other mechanisms established under EU le gislation. It is also 
considered consistent to ensure that at leas t a minimum opportunity is provided for a quick 
and positive solution to be identified before any infringement proceeding is initiated, 
replacing current administrativ e practices (see indent on "administrative letters") except 
 
EN 9   EN those concerning late transposition of directiv es or to ensure respect for rulings of the 
Court of Justice on the existence of an infri ngement of EU law or where urgency requires 
formal legal action. It is also agreed that some forms of enquiry may be too unspecific in 
content to justify pursuit thr ough EU Pilot absent further i ndications. The kinds of files 
concerned will be clarified. 
– Completion of the process - Some of the users of EU Pilot in the Commission and 
Member State administrations had some uncerta inty about the necessary procedural steps 
in EU Pilot and how to complete  these steps in the IT applica tion (this concerns especially 
the completion of the process and the sendi ng of a communication through the system). 
Further explanations and background documen ts were made available, indicating the 
actions required through the whole EU Pilot procedure. 
3.2. Technical aspects 
The IT application set up for EU Pilot has been frequently developed even after its entry into 
operation, taking into acc ount the remarks and wishes of th e users in the Co mmission services 
and in the Member State authorities. In the most recent months of operation, further 
suggestions of useful developments have been  identified and will be realised in the coming 
months. Further developments are envisaged to improve on the func tioning of the system, 
including on such matters as: providing for the monitoring, in the system , of a response from 
a Member State which requires the Member Stat e to take follow-up measures; adjustment of 
the application to deal better with complex files where multiple information exchanges take place, to ensure that there is space to insert all corres pondence; development of the 
application to allow for other services than t hose directly involved in  the Commission, or in 
Member State authorities, to be associated to the file and to be able to insert comments in the 
file; and to develop the sear ch and statistical functions. 
4. VOLUME
 AND  SHARES  OF FILES 
The volume of files submitted in the application increased progressively through the first year 
of operation, from 100 files after 4 months of operation, to 215 files after 8 months of 
operation, to 351 files after 12 months of operati on, to 429 files after 14 months of operation 
and finally to 723 files in early February 2010, after 22 months of operation. These figures 
show a rather constant evolution. 
The graph under point 4.1 shows the share of fi les by sector of EU la w during 22 months of 
operation of EU Pilot. These shares have  remained rather constant as well. 
The graphs under 4.2 show that the files submitted  in EU Pilot found thei r origin either in 
enquiries brought by citizens and businesses relating to the application of EU law, in complaints lodged by citizens and businesses against a Memb er State for a measure or 
practice attributable to the Member State an d which they consider incompatible with a 
provision or a principle of EU law or in the own initiative of the Commission services. A clear majority of files have been ba sed on complaints lodged by citizens. 
 
EN 10   EN 4.1. Breakdown by sector of EU Law3 
After 4 months of operation - 15 August 2008 – 100 files 
Number of files submitted
ENTR
10%EMPL
6%AGR I
4%JLS
5%
ENV
42%
SANCO
3%TAXUD
10%MA RKT
16%INFSO
4%
 
                                                 
3 AGRI= Agriculture and rural development, ELARG= Enlargement, EACU= Education and culture, 
EMPL= Employment, social affairs and equal opportunities ENTR= Enterprise and industry, ENV= Environment, INFSO= Information society and media, JLS= Justice, freedom and security, MARKT= 
Internal market and services, REGIO= Regional policy, SANCO= Health and consumers, TAXUD= 
Taxation and customs union, TREN= Energy and transport. 
 
EN 11   EN After 8 months of operation - 15 December 2009 – 215 files 
ENV
39%
SANCO
5% TAXUD
7%ENTR
7%EMPL
6%MARKT
22%INFSO
3%JLS
5%
AGRI
5%REGIO
1% TREN
0%
 
 
After 12 months of operation - 15 April 2009 – 351 files 
Number of files submitted
ENTR
5%EMPL
10%AGR I
4%TREN
2%
EA CU
0%
SANCO
4%TAXUD
5%MA RKT
22%INFSO
3%JLS
5%REGIO
2%
ENV
38%
 
 
 
EN 12   EN After 14 months of operation - 15 June 2009 – 429 files 
Number of files submitted
ENTR
5%EMPL
9%AGR I
3% ENV
40%
SANCO
4%
TAXUD
5%MA RKT
21%INFSO
3%JLS
5%REGIO
2%
TREN
3%EA CU
0%ELA RG
0%
 
After 22 months of operation – 15 February 2010 – 723 files 
Number of files submitted
ENV
36%
SANCO
4%
TAXUD
8%ENTR
5%EMPL
7%MA RKT
21%EA C
1%TREN
3%
JLS
6%REGIO
2%
INFSO
3%
AGR I
4%ELA RG
0%
 
 
 
EN 13   EN 4.2. Breakdown by origin of the files 
 
Enquiries, complaints or own initiative of the Commission 
File nature
Enquiry
17%
Complaint
62%Ow n Initiative
21%
 
Organizations, citizens or Commission 
Correspondent type
Organization
36%Commission
21%
Citizen
43%
 
 
EN 14   EN 4.3. Breakdown by nature of the problem at stake 
a) Definitions The nature and content of files submitted in EU  Pilot varies greatly. However, for the test 
purposes, a first attempt has been made to identify four categor ies of files which have passed 
all the way through the EU Pilot process: 
(1) Simple enquiries seeking information : files submitted in EU Pilot with the purpose 
of seeking information requested by a citizen or an organisation. 
(2) Apparent problems in the application of EU law : files indicating a situation which 
seems contrary to EU law, in which the ci tizen does not have a direct or immediate 
interest, for which the Commission does not have all the necessary information to 
reach a conclusion and which therefore neces sitates a request to the Member State 
concerned to clarify the situation. 
(3) Problems to exercise rights under EU law : files relating to a problem which seems 
to prevent the full exerci se of rights given under EC law by a citizen or an 
organisation. 
(4) Potential infringements : files indicating practices or rules which, in the view of the 
Commission services, seem clear ly to contravene EC law and for which explanations 
or solutions are requested form the Member State without, at this early stage, having 
recourse to the infringement procedure w ith a view to finding a quick solution in 
conformity with EU law. 
By mid-June 2009, the content of the files submitted to the nati onal authorities was subject to 
an initial assessment according to the above-mentioned classifi cation. It appears that all 
provisional categories are re presented among those files: 
– 2% are simple enquiries seeking information (9 files). 
– 59%  are enquiries on apparent problems in application  of EU law (232 files); 
– 15%  are enquiries on problems to exercise rights  under EU law (57 files); 
– 24%  are possible infringements  (94 files); 
b) Figures 
The following graphs show the shares among Co mmission services in the four different 
categories of files: 
 
EN 15   EN 1. Simple enquiries seeking information   
EMPL 
45%
ENV
11%MA RKT
11%SANCO
22%TAXUD
11%
 
 
 
2. Enquiries on apparent problems in application of EU law  
ENV
63%AGR I
3%MA RKT
10%INFSO 
3%JLS
0%
REGIO
2%SANCO
4%
TAXUD
1%
EMPL 
11%TREN
1%
ENTR 
2%
 
 
 
EN 16   EN  
3. Enquiries on problems to ex ercise rights under EU law   
AGR I
5%EMPL 
9%
ENTR 
4%
ENV
16%
INFSO 
7% JLS
11%MA RKT
36%TREN
5%TAXUD
5%
SANCO
2%
 
 
  
4. Potential infringements 
ENTR 
15%
ENV
1%
INFSO 
1%
JLS
13%MA RKT
36%REGIO
4%SANCO
3%TAXUD
14%
EMPL 
6%TREN
2%AGR I
4%EA CU
1%
 
 
EN 17   EN 5. RESULTS  AND  SPEED  OF TREATMENT 
5.1. Speed 
Treatment of issues of application of EU la w by the Commission must be as quick as possible 
in order to meet the object ives set by the Commission4 for the benefit of citizens and 
businesses.  
Concerning the timing of the functi oning of EU Pilot, it should be recalled that the treatment 
of files in Member States involves a number of  steps including: transmission to the relevant 
Member State authorities, examination of the issues, internal consultation, drafting, possible 
need for translation, possible inter-depar tmental consultation and submission to the 
Commission. The evaluation of Member State re sponses in the Commi ssion involves analysis, 
internal and possible inter-service consultation, approval and the completi on of final steps in 
the IT application, sometimes also requiri ng translation of both incoming and outgoing 
documents.  
At the time of the creation of EU Pilot, a gene ral benchmark was set for files to be managed 
within ten weeks. This benchmark reflected the need for quick action on the files entered into 
the system. It was set despite the fact that the kinds of issue fed into the system were clearly likely to vary greatly in conten t and therefore also in the time required for their treatment.  
On average, the Member States responded on f iles within 73 days, ranging from the quickest 
response received in 8 days an d the longest in 245 days. Nearly  67% of files were treated 
within the ten week period.  
No benchmark was set for the time taken by Co mmission services in evaluating Member State 
responses. However, on average, the Commissi on services took 109 days to evaluate and 
comment on the responses, ranging from the quickest evaluation done in 2 days and the 
longest having taken  473 days. 40% of files were ther efore evaluated by the Commission 
services within ten weeks. 
The average number of days taken to complete  the whole process in EU Pilot is 169 days. 
5.2. Results 
The EU Pilot project aims at reinforcing the commitment of the Commission and the 
participating Member States to work together more constructively and efficiently to answer questions and resolve probl ems of citizens and business concer ning the application of EU law. 
The project is contributing to the development of a partnership approa ch, based on frequent 
contact on file-specific issues alongside the broader work of both Commission services and 
Member State authorities in the manage ment of the functioning of EU law. 
This new working method has generally allo wed for systematic and accelerated secure 
communication from and to Commission services and Member State authorities, directed to 
                                                
 
4 Communication on relations with the complainants [COM (2002)141] and Communication "A Europe 
of results – Applying EU Law" [COM(2007) 502 final] 
 
EN 18   EN the responsible officials, while also ensuring an easy system of track ing progress and follow-
up.  
An initial process of verification by the Commissi on services and Member State authorities of 
the outcomes of the processing of files in EU Pilot has been organised. This process requires 
further examination and possible development, for example, to improve evaluation criteria. 
However, the initial conclusions are as follows.  
Only a few files submitted by the Commission ha ve been judged by the Member States to be 
inappropriate for EU Pilot (4.5%). Less than a quarter of responses provided by the Member 
States have been judged incomplete by the Commission services (23%) which may in part, 
have been due to insufficiently clear initia l definition of the issues to be addressed. 
The Commission services and Member State authorities have managed to agree on the 
conclusions reached on the vast majority of files which had already completed the process by 
beginning of February 2010 (success rate of 85%). When responses given by Member States 
were rejected by Commission services, the inform ation exchanged has nevertheless helped to 
clarify the issues, allowing for any appropriate further action, be it th rough the infringement 
procedure or any other means. Some files did proceed to the infringement phase, resulting, by 
beginning of February 2010, in 40 infringements proceedings either already launched or being 
prepared following treatment in EU Pilot. 
*** 
 
EN 19   EN Annex  
 
Flow chart on the main steps in EU Pilot  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Input from the Member State 
is useful or required: 
treatment of the file in EU 
Pilot 
Assessment of the response by the 
Commission Department 
The Member State 
proposes a solution 
compatible with 
Community law The Member State proposes a 
solution compatible with 
Community law, but incomplete 
 The Member State 
proposes no Community 
law compatible solution 
to an established 
infringement 
The Commission accepts the response 
 Member State examination and response 
 
- The Central Contact Point refers the issue to responsible national, regional or local authority for investigation and monitor s 
follow-up 
- A response is given to the Commission in the system 
Launch of an 
infringement 
procedure Submission of the file to the 
Member State The Commission identifies an issue of bad application/incorrect transposition of Community Law by 
a Member State participating in EU Pilot 
The Commi ssion closes the file in E U PilotThe complainant 
does not  provide 
new elements  The complainant 
provides new 
elements  The Commission 
requests additional 
information The Commission rejects 
the response, providing a 
justification to the 
Member State 
Other 
appropriate 
follow-up No input required from the 
Member State: reply to citizen 
without prior contact with the 
Member State Clear infringement: 
possible launch of an 
infringement procedure 
with an advance notice in 
EU Pilot *  
 
* = Where urgency requires, the Commission will proceed dire ctly to the initiation of an infringement proceeding.