Commission Regulation (EC) No 118/2004 of 23 January 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92
Date: 2004-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, aid system, aid to agriculture, management information system

24.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 17/7

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 118/2004

of 23 January 2004

amending Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 laying down detailed rules for applying the integrated
administration and control system for certain Community aid schemes established by Council
Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 of 27
November 1992 establishing an integrated administration and
control system for certain Community aid schemes (1), and in
particular Article 12 thereof,

Whereas:

In the light of experience gained with the application of
the rules concerning administrative checks as contained
in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 (2), some
clarifications should be introduced with regard to the
kind of checks to be carried out and with regard to the
measures to be taken in case of doubts after cross-
checks.

provisions should be amended so as to ensure that the
reductions and exclusions are at all times strictly graded
according to the gravity of the irregularity.

(7)

(8)

(9)

Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 introduced prescription
rules in respect of the recovery of undue payments.
These rules should, under certain conditions, also be
made applicable to aid applications relating to marketing
years and/or premium periods which started before 1
January 2002.

Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 should be amended
accordingly.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of the Fund Committee,

Certain clarifications and additional elements should be
introduced with regard to risk-sampling.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

The existing rules of Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001
concerning remote sensing should be enhanced to
ensure a proper use of remote sensing in the perfor-
mance of the controls by Member States.

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 is amended as follows:

1. Article 16 is replaced by the following:

In the light of experience,
the existing provisions
concerning the timing and content of certain on-the-spot
checks in respect of the bovine premium should be
modified to ensure a balanced and uniform approach.

‘Article 16

Cross checks

The existing provisions relating to ewes and goats should
be developed in the light of practical reality in so far as
animals sometimes need to be replaced during the reten-
tion period, and to avoid undue penalisation in some
cases of certain farmers maintaining both ewes and
goats. The delays for the replacements, the entry of the
replacement into the register and the information of the
replacement to the competent authority should be fixed
in the light of the length of the retention period and of
the necessity for effective controls.

(6)

In order to protect the Community's financial interests,
title IV of Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 lays down
provisions for the reduction of and exclusion from Com-
munity aid in the event of irregularities. Some of these

(1) OJ L 355, 5.12.1992, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commis-

sion Regulation (EC) No 495/2001 (OJ L 72, 14.3.2001, p. 6).

(2) OJ L 327, 12.12.2001, p. 11. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 2550/2001 (OJ L 341, 22.12.2001, p. 105).

The administrative checks referred to in Article 8(1)
1.
of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 shall permit the auto-
mated detection of
irregularities using computerised
means, including in particular:

(a) cross-checks on declared agricultural parcels and
animals in order to avoid undue multiple granting of
the same aid in respect of
the same calendar or
marketing year and to prevent any undue cumulation
of aid granted under Community aid schemes invol-
ving declarations of areas as referred to in Article 9a of
Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92;

(b) cross-checks by means of the computerised database
or, in the case of area aid applications, by any other
computerised means, to verify eligibility for the aid.

irregularities

Indications of

2.
resulting from cross-
checks shall be followed-up by any other appropriate
administrative procedure and, where necessary, by an on-
the-spot check.’

L 17/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.1.2004

2. Article 19 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 19

Selection of applications to be checked on the spot

1.
Farmers subjected to on-the-spot checks shall be
selected by the competent authority on the basis of a risk
analysis and an element of representativeness of the aid
applications submitted. The effectiveness of risk analysis
parameters used in previous years shall be assessed on an
annual basis.

To provide the element of representativeness, the Member
States shall select randomly between 20 % and 25 % of the
minimum number of farmers to be subjected to on-the-
spot checks as provided for in Article 18(1).

2.

The risk analysis shall take account of:

(a) the amount of aid involved;

(b) the number of agricultural parcels and the area or

number of animals for which aid is requested;

(c) changes from the previous year;

(d) the findings of checks made in past years;

(e) cases of non-compliance with Regulation (EC) No

1760/2000;

(f) those farmers who are either just above or below ceil-

ings or limits relevant for the granting of aid;

(g) replacements of animals pursuant to Article 37;

(h) other factors to be defined by the Member States.

3.
The competent authority shall keep records on the
reasons for the selection of each farmer for an on-the-spot
check. The inspector carrying out the on-the-spot check
shall be informed accordingly prior to the commencement
of the on-the-spot check.’

3. In Article 22, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

Agricultural parcel areas shall be determined by any
‘1.
appropriate means defined by the competent authority
which ensure measurement of a precision at least equiva-
lent to that required for official measurements under the
national rules. A measurement tolerance may be defined
by the competent authority that shall not exceed either
5 % of the agricultural parcel area or a buffer of 1,5 m
applied to the perimeter of
the agricultural parcel.
However, the maximum tolerance with regard to each agri-
cultural parcel shall not, in absolute terms, exceed 1,0 ha.’

4. Article 23 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 23

Remote sensing

checking under the conditions set out in this Article. Arti-
cles 17, 18, 19 and 20, the first sentence of Article 21 and
Article 22 shall apply where appropriate.

The zones to be checked by means of remote sensing
2.
shall be selected on the basis of a risk-analysis or at
random.

In the case of selection on the basis of a risk-analysis the
take account of appropriate risk
Member States shall
factors, in particular:

(a) their financial significance in terms of Community aid;

(b) the composition of aid applications;

(c) the structure of the agricultural parcel systems, and

complexity of the agricultural landscape;

(d) the lack of coverage in previous years;

(e) the technical constraints of effective use of remote

sensing, with respect to zone definition;

(f) the findings of checks made in previous years.

3.

On-the-spot checks by remote sensing shall cover:

— either all aid applications having at least 80 % of the
area for which aid is requested under schemes referred
to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92
within the respective zone,

— or aid applications to be selected by the competent

authority on the basis of Article 19(2).

Applications selected randomly in accordance with Article
19(1) may be checked by remote sensing.

Once a farmer has been selected for an on-the-spot
4.
check in accordance with paragraph 3, at least 80 % of the
area for which he requests aid under aid schemes referred
to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 shall be
subject to the on-the-spot check by remote sensing.

5. Where a Member State applies the possibility to carry
out on-the-spot checks by remote sensing they shall:

(a) perform photo interpretation of satellite images or
aerial photographs of all agricultural parcels per appli-
cation to be checked in accordance with paragraph 4
with a view to recognising the ground cover and
measuring the area;

(b) carry out physical inspections in the field of all agri-
cultural parcels for which photo interpretation does
not make it possible to verify the accuracy of the
declaration to the
competent
authority.

satisfaction of

the

1.
The Member States may make use of remote sensing
with regard to the sample referred to in Article 18(1)(a)
instead of applying traditional means of on-the-spot

6.
The additional checks referred to in Article 18(2)
shall be carried out by means of traditional on-the-spot
checks if it is no longer possible to carry them out by
means of remote sensing within the current year.’

24.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 17/9

5. In Article 24, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘1.
For aid schemes other than those provided for in
Article 4(6) and Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1254/
1999, at least 60 % of the minimum rate of on-the-spot
checks provided for in the last sentence of Article 18(1)(b)
shall be conducted throughout the retention period of the
aid scheme concerned. The remaining percentage of on-
the-spot checks shall be conducted throughout the reten-
tion period of one of those aid schemes.’

6. In Article 32(2) the second subparagraph is replaced by

the following:

‘If the difference is more than 50 % the farmer shall be
excluded once again from receiving aid up to an amount
equal to the amount which corresponds to the difference
between the area declared and the area determined in
accordance with Article 31(2). This amount shall be off-set
against aid payments under any of the aid schemes referred
to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 to
which the farmer is entitled in the context of applications
the three calendar years
he lodges in the course of
following the calendar year of the finding. If the amount
cannot be fully off-set against those aid payments, the
outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’

7. In Article 33 the second subparagraph is replaced by the

following:

‘Moreover, where that difference is more than 20 % of the
area determined, the farmer shall be excluded once again
from receiving aid up to an amount equal to the amount
which corresponds to the difference between the area
declared and the area determined in accordance with
Article 31(2). This amount shall be off-set against aid
payments under any of the aid schemes referred to in
Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3508/92 to which the
farmer is entitled in the context of applications he lodges
in the course of the three calendar years following the
calendar year of the finding. If the amount cannot be fully
off-set against those aid payments, the outstanding balance
shall be cancelled.’

8. In Article 34, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

‘2. Where a difference of more than 50 % is found
between the area declared and the area determined in
in the
accordance with Article 31(2), the farmer shall,
framework of aid applications he lodges in the course of
the three calendar years following the calendar year of the
finding, be excluded once again in respect of a forage area
equal to the difference between the area declared and the
area determined. If the area to be excluded cannot be fully
off-set within this period, the outstanding balance shall be
cancelled.’

claimed in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC)
No 2529/2001 may be replaced during the retention
period within the limits provided for
in that Article
without the loss of the right to the payment of the aid
applied for.

4.
Replacements pursuant to paragraph 3 shall occur
within ten days following the event necessitating the repla-
cement and shall be entered in the register not later than
three days after the day of replacement. The competent
authority to which the application was submitted shall be
informed within five working days after the replacement.’

10. Article 38 is amended as follows:

(a) in paragraph 2 the third subparagraph is replaced by

the following:

‘If the percentage established in accordance with para-
graph 3 is more than 50 %, the farmer shall, moreover,
be excluded once again from receiving aid up to an
amount corresponding to the difference between the
number of animals declared and the number of animals
determined in accordance with Article 36(3). This
amount shall be off-set against aid payments under the
bovine aid schemes to which the farmer is entitled in
the context of applications he lodges in the course of
the three calendar years following the calendar year of
the finding.
the amount cannot be fully off-set
against those aid payments, the outstanding balance
shall be cancelled.’;

If

(b) in paragraph 4 the second subparagraph is replaced by

the following:

‘Where the difference established in accordance with
paragraph 3 is more than 20 %, the farmer shall be
excluded once again from receiving aid up to an
amount corresponding to the difference between the
number of animals declared and the number of animals
determined in accordance with Article 36(3). This
amount shall be off-set against aid payments under the
bovine aid schemes to which the farmer is entitled in
the context of applications he lodges in the course of
the three calendar years following the calendar year of
the amount cannot be fully off-set
the finding.
against those aid payments, the outstanding balance
shall be cancelled.’

If

11. Article 39 is amended as follows:

(a) in paragraph 1,
sentence is added:

first

subparagraph,

the following

‘However, the amount of aid to be reduced shall not be
more than 20 % of that total amount to which the
farmer is entitled.’;

9. In Article 37, the following paragraphs are added:

(b) in paragraph 2, the explanation for symbol ‘b’ of the

‘3. Where a farmer applies for aid in respect of both
ewes and goats and where there is no difference in the
level of aid paid, a ewe may be replaced by a goat and a
goat by a ewe. Ewes and goats in respect of which aid is

formula is replaced by the following:

‘b = the number of bovine animals present on the
holding at the time of the on-the-spot check; this
number shall not be lower than 1.’

L 17/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.1.2004

12. In Article 40, the following paragraph is added:

‘7.
In respect of farmers maintaining both ewes and goats entitled to the same level of premium,
where an on-the-spot check reveals a difference in the composition of the flock in terms of numbers
of animals per species, the animals shall be regarded as being of the same group.’

13. In title VI the following Article 52a is inserted:

‘Article 52a

Prescription with regard to aid applications relating to marketing years and premium periods
which started before 1 January 2002

By way of derogation from Article 54(2) and without prejudice to more favourable rules on limitation
periods laid down by Member States, Article 49(5) shall also apply to aid applications relating to the
marketing years and premium periods that started before 1 January 2002, unless the beneficiary has
already been notified by the competent authority of the undue nature of the payment concerned
before 1 February 2004.’

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal
of the European Union.

Article 2

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 23 January 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission