ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(78)156
Vol.1978/0051

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement (CEE,Euratom) n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernant l'ouverture aupublicdesarchiveshistoriques delaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement (CE,Euratom) n°1700/2003 du22septembre 2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003, p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation (EEC,Euratom) No354/83of1February 1983
concerning theopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropean Economic
Community andtheEuropean AtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983, p.1),as
amended byRegulation (EC,Euratom) No1700/2003 of22September 2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003, p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary, classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformity withArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung (EWG,Euratom) Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar 1983überdieFreigabe derhistorischen Archive derEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom) Nr.1700/2003 vom22.September 2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003, S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenannten Verordnung freigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(78)156final.
Brussels ,12April1978.
COMMUNICATION FROMTHECOMMISSION TOTHECOUNCIL
WORKWITHIN THECOSTFRAMEWORK
European .Cooperation inthefieldofScientific
andTechnical Research
Φ\
C0K(78)156final.

TABLE OFCONTENTS
I.Preparation of"thedocument .' ■
II.NotetotheMember'softheCommission .
III.Draftcommunication fromtheCommission tothe
COUNCIL Page1
IV.COSTCOOPERATION PLAN Page8
AMEX1:Doc.COST72/74
ANHEX2:COSTProjecttitles

*
DRAFTCOMMUNICATION FROMTHECOMMISSION TOTHECOUNCIL
WORKWITHIN THECOSTFRAMEWORK -European Cooperation inthefieldof
Scientific andTechnical Research .
BACKGROUND _ .•- ■
Atthebeginning andincreasingly towardsthemiddleofthesixties,
theindustrial nations becameconvinced thattheycouldonlysecure
thestandard oflivingoftheirpopulations andfurther economic and
socialprogress aswellasmeettheirinternational commitments (for
example,assistance todeveloping countries )iftheystepped uptheir
effortinthefieldofresearch and.technological development .Research-
andsciencepolicybecamerecognized asanintegral component ofeconomic
policy. ' ->
TheEuropean Community (theCommunity )anditsMemberStatesalsotook ,
thisrealization toheart.Although onlytheTreaties setting upthe
European CoalandSteelCommunity andtheEuropean AtomicEnergy Com­
munitymadespecific provision forresearchactivities ,theCommunity
soughtattheendofthesixtiestoextenditsresearchactivity gradually
tootherfields.Inparticular ,fieldswereselected whichbytheirnature
wereofatransnational character ,suchasoceanography ,meteorology and
environmental protection ,orinwhichalargemarketwasaprecondition
forsubsequent rational production ,suchasdataprocessing .,telecommuni­
cations andnewformsoftransport ,oragain,fieldsinwhichCoordination
wasseentobeparticularly desirable (metallurgy ).
Atafairlyearlystage,European Stateswhichwerenotmembersofthe
Community wereinvitedtotakepartinthisintergovernmental formof
cooperation (COST).Thereasons were,ontheonehand,thatabovement ioned
research strategy aspects werenotexclusively confirmed totheCommunity ~
and,ontheotherhand,thatcandidates formembership couldbythismeans
bebroughtintoclosercontactwiththeCommunity atanearlystage.
Since1971,aseriesofcooperative researchprojectsintheabovementit^edfieldshavebeencarriedoutwithinthisframework embracing 19States
(including theMemberStatesandtheCommunity ).Cooperation wasmostly-
intheformof"concerted action"projects,inwhichtheindividual parti­
cipating statesareandremainfullyresponsible fortheircontribution and
onlythecoordination oftheindividual national programmes andtheexchang
ofinformation betweenthemisorganized onajointbasis.Coordination
wasmadeasflexible aspossible .
Belgium-Denmark-.France-Germany-GreatBritain-.Ireland
Italy-Luxemburg -Netherlands , '<
aswellas:
Austria-Finland-.Greece-Norway-Portugal -Spain-
Sweden-Switzerland -Turkey-Yugoslavia .

InJanuary 1974,theCommunity vtselfissuedguidelines foritsown
research anddevelopment policy.Sincethen,ithasbeenpossible to
carryoutCommunity research programmes infieldsnotspecifically re­
ferredtointheTreaties -pursuant toArticle 235oftheEECTreaty-
intheformofdirect,indirect orconcerted actionprojects .
'Theguidelines offeredopportunities fornon-Member-Statestotakepart
intheseprogrammes ,ifthiswasseentobedesirable andadvantageous
fromthepointofviewofCommunity programmes .
TheCommunity itselfaswellastheindividual MemberStates,wasnow
inaposition tocarryoutscientific andtechnical research programmes
outsidethenuclear andcoalandsteelfields.Hencecooperation with
Non-Plember-StatesinEuropewithintheCOSTframework couldbeplaced
onanewfooting.
InSeptember 1974,theCouncilconfirmed thatCOSTwouldcontinue to
bethepermanent .framework ofcooperation withnon-Member-Statesin
Europe (AnnexI).Projects ofCommunity interest wouldbereviewed in
thecontextofCOSTwithaviewtoconcluding suitable agreements bet­
weentheCommunity andthenon-Membei–Statesconcerned .Theformof
intergovernmental projects hitherto employed wasnotruledout.
PRESENT SITUATION
Therecannowbesaidtobefourmaincategories ofresearchprojects in
COST: '
1=Projects inwhichinterested COSTStatesareinvitedtoparticipate .
(Community programmes )
-Thisincludes 2plannedprojects .
-Examples :The"concerted action"projects inthefieldofmedical
iTesearch .Inthisconnection ,themodelcooperation
agreement withSwedenandSwitzerland inthefieldof
fusionresearch shouldbementioned ,thoughthisagree­
mentdoesnotrepresent aCOSTaction.
II.Projects putforwardinCOSTwithaneyetocooperative research
betweentheCommunity andnon-Member-States. (Community programmes
withnon-Member-States ).
-Thisincludes 7plannedprojects .
Examples :COSTProjects 68bis(SewageSludgeProcessing )
" "61a(Research onthephysico-chemical be­
,. haviour .ofSO.,intheatmosphere )
""64b(Analysis oforganicmicropollutants
inwater)
90(Physical properties offoodstuffs )

rnsT with theCommunity partici --
IT^nlVcZ^TZuTZl "Member States .(COST-projects with
Community participation ). _
-This includes 3executed projects .
-Examples :COSTProjects It aids onmajor roads )
„ m 50(Materials for6asTurbines ).
rnsT without theCommunity spar-
Projects drawn u?an?**"^ ectswithoutCommunity participation )
ticipating . ^.ua.-p.uj– . .
-This 1includes 13executed projects and6planned projects
-Examples :COSTProject ,3-eanographic andMeteorological »ata
'70vCentreformedium-range weather fore
casting ).
Annex IIpresents alistofallCOSTactivities either completed or
participate (Category I) , v .
■*.*+h.T_-f-irst cateqory ,thestarting point ofcooper -Inprojects oftheInrst c*9 twith which ,inaccordance
ation isaCommunity resea January 1974 ,itproves necessarywiththeCouncil defin'P°°!tatesshould beassociated .Before
ordesirable that norr~Membe ^ ,tthecouncil fortheinitiation
theCommission presents apP itobtains theopinions of
ofnegotiations with concerned .andof
theAdvisory Committee onPrg ' treaty ,itthen con-
CREST.FortheprojectsP^^Vf *h"^otUUng brief given
b^the' Council' 13In°new Community programmes ,theCouncil canmake
thenegotiating brief effect
negotiations leadtoan decisi onandwhere thenon-Member -ontheCommunity side byCoun orovisions inforce in
.states areconcerned in^c-fnffnaw;cfaLth/onrribitionsofthenon-
theindividual c0UI [,t"e^! ■intheinternational agreement .TheMember -States arelaid dow SUDerv iSedbyajoint
:S=&,.=•STÄST
^eCOnonC-Member-nstrates!d^h/sec^aMardui'ies aretakenonbyth
Commission .
IIpri^t «.p„tforwardinCOSTwithaneyetocooper ative resear c...hptueen theCommunity anHnon-Member-States (CateaopLl ,
Inthe case^ 'Ut^I sogreat .f–^J^ ra
States ,th.M-unlty ..."^^" irkV/.lrt.r.t.d within the
COST'framework^a 1Community programme proposal isdrawnupinview^
oftheCOSTNon-Member -States participation .Even in
*'committee forScientific andTechnical Research .

-4-
phase,,jointmeetings areheldatexpertlevelwiththeparticipation
oftheNon-Member-States. Intheimplementation -phase,theCommunity
sharesresponsibility fortheexecution oftheprojectwiththenon-
Member-States .Thisisreflected inthefactthatthe"Board",-which
iscomposed ofrepresentatives oftheCommission andthenon-Membei–
States,notmerelysupervises theperformance oftheinternational
agreement ,butacceptsresponsibility fortheexecution oftheconcei–
tedactionitself.
Theactualworkofcoordination isassigned totheCommission bythe
"Board"orthesignatories oftheinternational agreement .Thenon-
Member-States arerepresented onallthetechnical advisory committees
(e.g.COMACs).Thefinancial andsecretarial aspects arehandled as
inthecaseofCateaory I(Community programmes )agreements .
III.Projects drawnupandexecuted inCOSTwiththeCommunity participating
and,"alongside individual Membei–States (CategoryIII)and
IV.Projects drawnupandexecuted inCOSTwithout theCommunity 'spartT-
.cipating assuch(Category IV).
V -•
Theprojects thatcomewithinCategories IIIorIVarethetraditional
COSTprojects .Theyareplanned,prepared andimplemented entirely
withintheCOSTframework .Thelegalformisaninter-State agreement ,
inaformofaMemorandum ofunderstanding ,according tothecase.The
twocategories differonlyinsofarastheCommunity assuchpartici­
patesinCategoryIII(COST-projects withCommunity participation )
projects alongwiththeindividual MemberStates.'TheCommunity 's
participation provestobeappropriate anddesirable asfarasthe
implementation ofacertain commonpolicyisconcerned .Itwightex­
ceptionally consistinincorporating anexisting Community programme
intoCOSTcooperation ..Community participation isinitiated bya
CouncilResolution onaCommission proposal .The"financial aspects
andthequestion ofsecretarial services aregenerally dealtwith
theinternational arrangements .^
Thepatternatpage8givesageneralviewofthemethodsofpreparation
andexecution oftheprojects aswellasthetaskstakenoverbythe
Commission .
PROBLEMS
Pastexperience withCOST,projectshasbroughtfourgeneral problems
tolight:
1.thedefinition andimplementation ofCategoryIIprojects (Community
Programmes andnon-Membei –States)
2.financing
3.ratification
4.secretarial services .
+)Ifspecifically drawn -upforparticipation intheComr.iunity programme ,,the
projectwould -cothewithinCategoryII(Community programmes andnon-Member "
States)andparallel participation byindividual MemberStateswouldbe
ruledout.
++>Inregardtotheproblems,seepage5,points 2and3,

-5-
1.Thedefinition andimplementation ofCategory IIprojects '
Category IIprojects (Community Programmes withnon-Member-States)
aretheoutcome oftheCouncilResolutions ofJanuary 1974,which
gavetheimpulseforaCommunity policyonscience andtechnology .
ThetakingnotebytheCouncilof23October 1974drewthefirst
conclusions withregardtocooperation within COST.Ittook ,,
almostthreeyears-untilSeptember 1977-beforethefirstcon­
certedCommunity projectissuing fromanoriginal COSTproject could
befinallyadopted bytheCouncil (COST68bis-SewageSludgePro­
cessing).Onemoreprojectfollowed (COST90-EffectsofTreatments ■
onthePhysical Properties ofFood). -
Themaindifficulties thataroseherewereindefining theroleof
thenon-Member-States. WhereastheCommission isresponsible within
theCommunity fortheimplementation ofCommunity research projects -
whetherdirect,indirect orconcerted action-andtheexperts from
theMemberStatesperform anadvisory function ontheprogramme com­
mittees,thenon-Member Stateswerenotcontentmerelytofulfilthis .
roleincaseswheretheprojects hadbeendesigned asCOSTprojects .
TomeetthewishesoftheseStates,theyweregivenashareinthe
responsibility fortheimplementation ofCategory IIProjects (Com-
~munityprogrammes withnon-Membei–States).Thisisexercised onthe
"Board",whichisnotjustasupervisory bodyasinthecaseof
Category I(Community.programmes ),butasanexecutive function .In
concerted actionprojects,therefore -whichsofararetheonlyactual
examples inCategoryII-itisthe"Board"thathasthepowerof
coordination ,thoughthisisdelegated totheCommission forpractical
purposes ofexecution .Thusthe"Board"isnotincompatible with .
theCommunity'sinternal decision-making arrangements ,wherebythis
roleisassigned totheCommission .,Inpractical matters ofcoordi­
nation,theCommission issupported bytheexpertsresponsible for
.thenational contributions meetingwithintheAdvisory Committees on
Programme Management .
2.+3.Financing andRatification
Thequestion offinancing isclosely boundupwiththatofratification .
Thedetailsoffinancing areusually Laiddownintheinternational
agreement governing theproject ..Tocircumvent theoftenlong-drawn-
outratification procedures ,the ■"Memorandum ofunderstanding "has
beenevolved,whereby .-thepartiestotheagreement declaretheir
willingness toundertake specific research workandtoexchangeresults .
TheMemorandum ofunderstanding ,however,avoidstheneedforratifi­
cationonlyifnofinancial commitments areenteredinto.Butsince
anyresearch cooperation involves somefinancial expenditure -even
ifonlytocoverthelowadministrative costsoftheconcerted action
projects theMemorandum ofunderstanding isasuitable instrument
(whichavoidstheneedforratification )onlywherethecostscanbe
coveredinsomeotherway,eitherindependently ofthespecific project
-orbytheCommission 'sproviding free-of-chargeservices (undertaking
-thesecretarial duties).
Thefirstsolution couldbeachieved intheformofanindependent
COSTfund(COST-Fund II)whichwouldcoveradministrative costsarising
fromtheimplementation ofapprovedprojects.Forsuchasolution,
thepracticalproblems couldbeenvisaged .
./.

-6-
WhereasallCOSTMemberStatesparticipate financially inthe-preparation
ofaprojectbecauseitisnotyetknownwhichofthemwillultimately
takepartintheproject,theimplementation shouldbyrightsbefinanced
onlybythoseStateswhicheffectively participate intheproject and
thusbenefitfromit.Thecomposition oftheGrou^ofparticipating
countries varies,however,fromprojecttoproject .
Forthisreason,however,itwouldberatherdifficult toassessthe
Community contribution tothisFund,sincethe'Community participates
inCategoryIIIprojects,together withsomeofitsMemberStates
(doublefinancing ).AsfarasCategory IV(COSTprojects withno
Community participation )isconcerned ,inwhichtheCommunity assuch
isnotinvolved atall,nocontribution ofanygeneralproportion what­
soever (e.g.pro-rata ofthegrossnational product )wouldbejustifiable .
Inviewofalltheseconsiderations ,COST .FundIIwillhave,inthe
opinionoftheCommission ,nochancepractically ofbeingsetupinthe
nearfuture .
TheCommission therefore feelsthatasolution totheaboveproblem
couldonlybefoundincharging theadministration feesarisingfrom
COSTcooperation totheCommission budget.AstheCommission services
alreadypointed outinaworking paperofAutumn1976(1),COSTcoope­
rationisofageneralpolitical interest totheCommunity ,whichshouldbe
acknowledged bytakingonfreeof-chargethesecretarial services involved
inactionsofCategories III(COSTactionsincluding Community partici­
pation).ThiswouldenabletheCommission toquicklycontribute tothe
practical improvement ofCOSTprocedures -i.e.thefinancing ofsecre­
tarialservices wouldnolongerconstitute anobstacle totheachievement
ofCOSTresearch actions. V
Thefinancing of,secretari atcostsbytheCommission budgetalsosquares
withaCommission communication onacommonScience andTechnology policy.(2),
inwhichtheCommission reaffirms thatCOSTistocontinue representing
aprivileged framework forthecooperation oftheCommunity withits
European neighbours .
Sincetheneedforratification -will.nolongerapplytosomeindividual
cases,thememorandum ofunderstanding mightrepresent anotherlegal-
andratherflexible-formulatocontribute tosimplifying andaccele­
ratingtheadoption offutureprojects .TheCommission 'scontribution
toimproving workintheCOSTframework wouldnecessarily require a
slightstaffincrease withintheserviceresponsible forCOSTmatters .
In1976already,theCommission foundthatwithtwoextraA-officials
andonemoreC-officialitcouldhandlealltheCOSTprojects of
Categories III(COSTprojects withCommunity participation )-and
thoseaccountforthegreatmajority .
ι,
(1)CREST/57/76
r
(2)COM283/77

-7-
CONCLUSIONS
TheCommission considers clarificationofthepreceding points
necessary .Atthesametime,withthissubmission itcomplies with
CREST'sdesireforsuggestions concerning themoreeffective orga­
nisation ofcooperation within COST(3)..
TheCommission requests theCouncilto:
1.approvetheformsofcooperation suggested bytheCommission inthe
enclosed pattern; ■v
tonotethetakingoverbytheCommission ofthesecretariat fun­
ctionsforalltheCategories whichareintheenclosed pattern .
(3)R/5/78(RECH2)

-8
πίι;ρλιϊλτ.γο\υ/
ORIGINOityjvjOl'1AOP.lCainri ]pAUTTCIPA -rTo|n';:o;i'.roAI .co'/iV.-T.
ACTION
III
COST,\^recr.ontfor
coopération JC-
non-I'crnbcr Stateoor.v«(>•):•'...A'i'io".r<j^.
I o:>.r\,y'-atio':.:î"iin.".i-m
v-1'L.•'"TA'i'in"
Community +
non-V.onfnor
:*)States.Conmiosion (nor-!.eauer
j'.itator,accordingtoa
Inanontbythocouncil)1)ltdir<;ctactionprojectc.r.furion,radiation
protection .
2)concerted action,
e.,T.r.î«.C0:^-nor-rember State-..L)States. ™–m
«TTY • concerto11111•1 . .l'.'î
Community+jCommission+r.on".ember
^ 1States.Jointbof.y )
■'Renrcsontativcs of
ItheCommunity +non-
I'.emberStates)Commissi on
departr.er.ts «
L:C/non-Member
States
COST-Agreement
I 'tuten,Agcr.ciet :|COST
IV
COST
1
!Intergovernmental
Agreement )andj
othertypesof
agreementCommunity +
L)non-Kcmber
States
Community ;+ I
I-'emberStates +
non-l'.ember Sta-J
tes(orInsti­l)concertedactionproject,e.g.project63(-sludge)
2)Possibleindirecteactioi
project, ■e.g.Project46
(mariculture)
COSTwiththeassist,
ofCommission dopts.+
(whereappropriate )
secondednationalcivil
servant.
Intergovernmental
a.^recment and
othertypesof
AgreementCOST1'embcr
States(orIns­
titutes ,Agen­
cies)COSTwiththeassist,
ofCommission dopts..+
(whereappropriate )
secondednationalcivil
servant
U1)TyneofAgreementbetweentheCommunityandnon-memberotates-i"whichtheCommunityparticipates onthebasisofaCouncil
decisionrelatingtotheadoptionoftheprojectorprogramme
inquestion(Bridgingagreement)- ,1
2)AgreementinwhichtheCommunityparticipates asaconsequence
1)workonthesubjectinquestioncarriedoutbytheJRC
(COST11,COST50)or .2)theLinksexistingbetweentheprojectinquestionana
oftheEC'ssectoralpolicies.(COST30)1)concertedactionproject }e.g.COST50,COST30
2)concertedactionproject,
withajointfund,-
e.g.COST11Board4)(Commission
+non-MemberStates)
Accordingtothecas<jCommission jdepartments or'|
non-He-mberStated
Management ConunitteeCommission
Dcmrtraar.ts
orMemberStates
orNon-Member
l)Concertedactionproject
e.g.COST43
2)Joint,projectJOlIIïjJIIUJcv /u, i<e.T.netcorological Centréproject.)Cu,4.departments
1);I!anagement Corarnit^
tec.
2)Boardofthejoint•I
■lemberSt-jtesor
ion-MernL^f~States
?)Staffoftn»
jointproject
SThejointbodysupervisestheproperimplementation ofthis
Agreement .
♦)The"BoardwillIrresponsible' fortheimplementation ofthis
Agreement . ,"

PJSX =I
COPY
jLetter from tI\Ir.HCIS'JSL ,Secretary General oftheCouncil ofthe
! European <Jommuniti03
Dated :25September 1974
»
To > :Kr»C„L *SILVER ,Chairman ofthe Corrraitt.ee ofSenior -
Officials onScientific and Technical Research
Sir ,
Ihave "been asked toinform you that atits meeting on
2SSeptember 1974 theCouncil oftheEuropean Communities took
»/.formal note oftheattached Opinion oftheScientific and
Technical Research Committee (CREST )onthecontinuation and
development ofscientific and technical co-operation with non-
member countries within theframework ofCOST ,and signified
itsagreement tothegeneral principles set out therein *
Iwould askyou toconvey this information tothenon-
member countries represented onyour Committee ,
(Complimentary close )*
.(s«)H0L2ŒL "
1
.1 «
I
I
'IDated
i–––
iTo ■
• . 't
*" * •
COST/72 -e/74(AKITEX l)mcp

OPINION
OPTHESCIENTIFICANDTECHNICAL RESEARCH COU.IITTEE (CREST)-
ONSCIENTIFIC .LNBTECHNICAL CO-OPERATIONBETWEENTHECOi.S'iUNITY
AITDNON-1-TEIviBERSPATES (COST)
AttherequestofthePermanent Representatives Committee
of16May1974,CREST,atitsmeetings on29Iv'ayand
11and.12July19Y4*examined thequestion ofthecontinuation
anddevelopment ofscientific andtechnical co-operation with
non-member countries withintheCOSTframework *
Following thisexamination ,CRESTfeltthattheprinciples
setoutbelowwouldpermitanalignment ofthenational dele­
gations'positions : ' N ('
1*InlinewiththeCouncilResolutions of14January "1974,the
COSTGroupshouldbekeptinbeingasapermanent framework
enabling non-member Stagestoparticipate inCommunity
projects whenever thiswasfeltdesirable .
2.Projects whoseCommunity interest wasrecognized bythe
Council-subsequent totheopinionofCREST ,givenwithin
threemonths-wouldbefinalized intheCOST ,framework
withaviewtoreaching appropriate agreements betweenthe
Community andtheoenon-member States.Itis•understood
thatrecognition ofCommunity interestinaprojectdoesnot
imtilyanycommitment forallMemberStatestotakepartinit,
COST/72e/74(ANNEXIT;mc.

-2-
3«Inthe case ofprojects whose Community interest wasnot recognized -
subsequent totheopinion ofCREST given within three months -the
COST Group ^could well beregarded ,during the experimental stage
referred tointhe Council Resolution of14January 1974 ,asan
appropriate framework for the preparation ofintergovernmental
agreements .The administration ofthese agreements could -possibly
beentrusted tothe Commission bythe signatories® Insuch an
event ,the Commission would not use its permanent staff ,but would
take ontheaccessary staff for theduration ofeach project .The O'
administrative costs involved would beborne bythe signatories ♦
AmTheoutlined principles' andprocedures would beapplied toproposals
from non-member States .
Onthebasis oftheinformation itreceives through regular
consultation between itsmembers ,CREST could atany time recon­
sider itsopinion ontheCommunity interest ofprojects whose
Community interest hadnotbeen recognized andcould submit any
appropriate recommendation concerning them totheCouncil and the
Commission ,
6#CREST would report totheCouncil andtheCommission inthelight .^
oftheresults' obtained during theexperimental stage referred to
inparagraph 3»
COST/72e/74(AIÎKEX II)mcp

ANNEX2
No.COST-Proiect titlesenumerated inthegeneraltableSphere
-11
25/1
25/2
50/51/52
53
61a
64b
68
70
25/4
33
20
201
202
208
.211.
30
A3
,46
47
72
82
83
84;
85
86
90
91DATAPROCESSING
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
METALLURGY
METALLURGY
ENVIRONMENTDataTransmission NetworksbetweenResearchCentres
.„, TELECOMMUNICATIONSAerialNetworkwithPhaseControl
'-,,u' •r/TwiVirf TELECOMMUNICATIONSAerialswithreducedsides-lobes andmaxirrum G/Tyield
„.. METALLURGYMaterials forGasTurbines
D. METALLURGYMaterials forDesalination Plants
Researchonthephysico-chemical behaviourofS02intheENVIRONMENT
atmosphere
Analysisoforganicmicro-polluantsinwater ENVIRON .
Development ofSludgeProcessing Methods ENVIRONMENT
EuropeanCentreforMediumRangeWeatherForecasts METEOROLOGY
Influenceofatmospheric conditions onelectromagnetic waveTELECOMMUNICATE
propagation at'frequencies above10GHz ,
ForwardStudyofPassengerTransportbetweenlarge TRANSPORT
conurbations
ForwardStudiesofTelecommunication Service TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Methodsofoptimization andplanningoftelecommunications TELECOMMUNICATION' ,
networks
Digitaltechniquestobeusedinlocaltelecommunication ,TELECOMMUNICATION J
•networkswithaviewtoproviding acomprehensive rangeoi
fec'hnTcaI'and' rt&VJs*VaSisedbytheopticalfibreTELECOMMUNICATIONS
communication systems
' .•,. ^,u TELECOMMUNICATIONSRedundancy reduction techniques forvisualtelephone sianrH-S
DevicesforElectronicTrafficAids TRANSP0R_
Oceanographic andMeteorological DataBuoyNetwork1n OCEANOGRAPHY
European Waters .* -
OCEANOGRAPHYManculture
Base-linestudiesincoastalecology 0CEAN0GRAPH
Development andstandardization ofmeteorological equipment METEOROLOGYENVIRONMENT
ENVIRONMENT '
METE0R0L0GY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TRANSPORT
TELECOMMUNICATION"' .
Maizeas-thebasisofthecompletefeedinintensive
animalproduction
Production ofbi©synthetic proteins
Application ofsingle-cell proteinsandsynthetic amino
acidsinthenutrition ofmonogastric animals
Earlyweaningofpigletswithspecialreferencetocage-
rearingandthephysiology ofreproduction ofsows
Problemsofmineralenrichment ofbasiccrops
Effectofprocessing onthephysicalproperties of
foodstuffs
Qualitative andNutrional PropertiesAGRICULTURAL RESC«RCH
FC0DTECHNOLOGY
•9
91

°w
Wl
ι
οοΜΛ/Λ/έ:Ty^£>^)CCC?/?D
et
~yP£ ^o'/qcr/oA/E7XTS/=&/??-/<r/FWA/rs</"
o2?x'£>//e^?77£>i/^ΔΑλ/
Coç^t:
c/er
sr£c//£~/?<r//OoDû
c/a^?£?ίΟΛ/6/9Γ/0Λ>SfCf ,'£T/?*//!/
\ckc^
Ty/>£
ÙXCCcPtL
VINFORMATIQUE ACCORDS
INTERGOUVERNE -F,I,YU,NL,P,D,CH,S,GB,N
tURATOM5ans
1.2.1978 3,6MUCFond
commun
1LMurenvueCommission
DGIII :IH
ISATELECOMMUNICATIONSMENTAUX I
I
I
ACTIONS
CONCERTEES),F,NL,SF,S +)1 3ans
16.6.1975
2ans
1.6.19750.80MUC1*' ■-
Pris
en
charge
par
la
Commission -pas
envisagéeCommission ;
0GIII ;IV
zskM :,I(1°phase),YU,NL,CH 0,15MUC en
examenCommission
DGIII iIV
50METALLURGIE},D,F,I,L,A,CH,S,GB>w ,
EURAT0MC+23ans
1.7.1975 7,47MUCdu1.8.77
pour3ansCommission
DGXIIIII
53
ii MB,D,E,F,I,YU ,^NL,A,GB 3ans
1.11.1975.2,25MUCpas
envisagéeCommission
DGXIIiIV
CiaENVIRONNEMENT B,D,DK,E,F ,.,I,NL,YU,
N,P,CH,GB .6-A.4ans
1.11.19762,06MUCcommepro­
grammectairCommission
e.DGXIIIV
Hii DK,D,E,F,IRL,I,NL /YU,
N,P,CH,GB3ans
1.11.19753,225MUC envisagéeCommission
DGXIIr-
IV
68II B,DK,D,I,NL,YU,N,P,CH ,
GB,F2ans
1.8.1974 1,032MUCenprogramme !
communautair !
deDuis27.9.CommissionLDGXII IV
7±METEOROLOGIECONVENTION
0RGANIS .INTERNAT .B,DK,D,E,NL,YU ,,P,F,GR
IRL,I,P,CH,SF /S,GB.A!
9 '!
illimitée22MUC+
9MUC/anpas
spécifiéConseil 1
deGestionI
!iv
mTELECOMMUNICATIONSRESOLUTION
ACTION CONCERTEEB,D,F/GR,IRL,I,NL,N,A ,
P,SF,CH,ESR0,S,GB3ans
23.11.1974 3MUCparla
Commissionjusqu'àla
findesCommission
DGIII IV
33TRANSPORTSRESOLUTION
ETUDEP,E,F,I,NL/CH,GB,B
!(0CDE)3ans
1.1.19761
0.C.D.E.11avauA
envisagée en
étudectaireIV
20
■ 1LELECOMMUNI CATIONS ETUDE ;B,DK,D,F,IRL,NL,N,A,CH ,
E,S,GB2ans
rapport CEPT
du14.6.197410,03MUC
I(contrat
CFPT)!
iCommission
DGIIIIV
MII EN
PARun
Etatparti­
cipantCIV)
2o2i
"
i
i 1JPREPARATION
1IV)
MII |
i– 1DECLARATIONS
COMMUNES
D'INTENTIOND,IRL,I,NL,GB,S (+3 de3ans
en3ans 1,00MUC
(+5à
déterminer IV
ZHh ACTIONS
CONCERTEES
IB,D,F,GB,S etNLII
II!2,00MUC
I(+5Pris
encharge
parla
Commission
jCommission CCR IIV
3oTRANSPORTS:B,D,F,I,NL,A,CH,S,GB ,
!CEEII
II5,00MUCCommission in­
térim.àprévoirIII
f3
1OCEANOGRAPHIEACCORD INTERG.
ACTION CONCERTEEB,DK,F,IRL,I,P,N,E /SF,
S,GB 4ansι15κοοΜυ^
I ί+ς0,35MUC
fondcommunadéterminerIV
II
EN
tCommission
DGXIV(II):
IIPREPARATION
I
!
I
ICommission
DGXIII
(II)|
72METEOROLOGIE Commission
DGXII(IV)
82RECHERCHE !
AGRICOLE iPROGRAMME
COMMUNAUTAIRE ENI
I
1
1
COMMISSION
DGVf
+
Expertnational
détaché
I(II)'
83!
M
1PREPARATION
t
i
I(II):
I
1
1ENPREPARATION'
1 I(IV)I
I
8511 hi 1
1 1I
i!
(IV)
(IV) 8GM
TECHNOLOGIE
DENREES ALIMENT ..11
1
1
9oPROGRAMME
COMMUNAUTAIRE
ENPREPARATION
PROGRAMMES
COMMUNAUTAIRES
ACTION INDIRECTES
PROGR.COMMUNAUT .
ACTION CONCERTEE(ex6g)
ciDPnLtJÇHpniiie 41ETATSMEMBRES-L
OUVERT AUX
FTATS TTFPS3ans 7,5MUC
(+50,25MUC Commission
DGIII+
Expertnational
détaché!
(II)
1
9j
EUII
)/!#ΟΗν£Η£Λ /ΤI
(Il)i
ETATSMEMBRES
OUVERT AUX
ETATSTIERS
tttpî1Q7C5ans
fin198016MUCCommission
DGXII(I)
O/O-P&OTWC77CW 5ans
fin198039MUCI
(I)
-TKAtrr/t*A/r
Bouesûr/OM
*1)LaFranceneDarti3ans
27-9-806MUC
f0,14MUC+
0,015MUC
larEtatstiiI
;ns(Il)
+2)LaCEEAparticipe depuisNovembre 1977
+3)ontl'intention designer,plustardleDKetlaF
+4)Listeprovisoire
+5)Estimation globaleapproximative
+a)Catégorie dutyped'accordenréférence àl'Annexe3.