Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Third report on the implementation of Regulation (EC) no. 2320/2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security
Date: 2008-09-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, European standard, air safety, approximation of laws, civil aviation, fight against crime, report, safety standard

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 29.9.2008 
COM(2008) 582 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

THIRD REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No. 
2320/2002 ESTABLISHING COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL 
AVIATION SECURITY 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

THIRD REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No. 
2320/2002 ESTABLISHING COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL 
AVIATION SECURITY1 

1 

OJ L355 of 30.12.2002, p1. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

In spite of the progress made, terrorism continues to be a threat to our society. Civil aviation 
is at particular risk and can be vulnerable to attack by a variety of methods. The Commission's 
work  to  ensure  that  appropriate  legislation  is  in  force,  and  fully  implemented  across  the 
Community, therefore remains essential for the proper protection of EU citizens. There can be 
little doubt that this work has helped to prevent successful attacks during the period covered 
by this report. However, the threat is still real and it is important to remain vigilant. 

We need to ensure the effective protection of our citizens, while at the same time establishing 
the  framework  for  the  good  functioning  of  the  internal  aviation  market.  In  this  context, 
Regulation  (EC)  2320/2002  can  be  seen  as  the  first  landmark  on  a  continuing  route.  The 
planning of this route must, however, take full account of technological advances, be subject 
to regular review and be promoted worldwide through international negotiations. Every effort 
must  be  made  to  assist  airport  and  airline  staff,  minimise  inconvenience  for  the  travelling 
public and streamline processes while maintaining high levels of security. 

This  is  the  Commission's  third  report  on  the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  2320/2002 
and covers the period January-December 2007. It falls into two parts. Part One first gives an 
analysis  of  Commission  inspection  reports  compiled  during  2007,  including  the  follow  up 
actions. Part Two sets out the steps taken to rationalise the process of putting the rules into 
operation, taking greater account of the needs of passengers and the industry. 

The  report  confirms  continuing  progress  in  the  implementation  of  common  rules  for  civil 
aviation  security,  from  a  strong  global  base  -  although  there  is  certainly  still  room  for 
improvement.  It  also  details  the  proactive  approach  being  taken  by  the  Community  in 
developing a flexible, practical and harmonised system, designed to facilitate the movement 
of passengers and cargo through a secure airport environment. 

PART ONE 

COMMISSION INSPECTIONS 

1. 

Overview 

The Commission is required to monitor Member States' compliance with the aviation security 
legislation and accordingly carries out: 

– 

– 

– 

inspections of national appropriate authorities; 

airport inspections; and 

follow-up inspections, to confirm the implementation of remedial actions. 

Altogether,  117  inspections  were  undertaken  between  February  2004  and  December  2007, 
including 28 during the 12 months covered by this report. Between 1 and 6 airport inspections 
have  been  completed  in  each  Member  State  (except  Bulgaria)  and  all  Member  States' 
appropriate authorities (except Rumania) have been monitored at least once. Switzerland has 
also been included in the Community programme, while since December  2005  Norway  and 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Iceland have been inspected against parallel provisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. 
(See Annex 1 for details of all inspections.) 

2. 

Inspections of national appropriate authorities 

Each Member State is required to adopt a national aviation security programme and nominate 
a single appropriate authority to co-ordinate and monitor its implementation. All 27 have done 
so. Appropriate authorities must: 

– 

– 

– 

develop and implement a quality control programme; 

monitor airport and airline security programmes; and 

develop and implement an aviation security training programme.2 

During 2007, the Commission inspected 10 appropriate authorities. The inspections involved 
an examination of documentary evidence, supported by interviews and - for the first time in 
2007 - on-site verifications at an airport implementing the national measures. 

The  findings  of  the  inspections  were  consistent  with  those  from  previous  monitoring 
exercises, essentially: 

– 

– 

there is a good level of compliance as regards the establishment of an adequate legal 
framework; 

is  a 

there 
implementation of the common standards. 

less  satisfactory  achievement  as  regards 

the  effectiveness  of 

2.1. 

Legal framework 

As  a  general  rule,  the  contents  of  Member  States'  national  aviation  security  programmes 
accurately  reflect  the  requirements  of  European  legislation.  However,  the  updating  of  the 
programmes  to  reflect  changes  in  Community  law  has  not  always  been  carried  out  as 
promptly as would have been desirable. 

Most  Member  States  have  established  satisfactory  national  quality  control  programmes, 
clearly setting out the recruitment, training, duties and powers of the national inspectors, the 
priorities  and  methodology  for  the  inspection  programme.  Sometimes,  however,  the 
programmes fail to meet all requirements, for instance they do not make provision for a test 
programme or omit frequencies for monitoring activities. There is a clear case for improved 
sharing of best practice and generally for greater harmonisation of national programmes. 

Airport security programmes are in most cases up to date and monitored by Member States. 
Airline  security  programmes  are  less  likely  to  be  compliant  and  are  less  well  monitored, 
especially in respect of airlines registered outside the EU, and in particular as regards check 
and search procedures.  

National  security  training  programmes  generally  meet  requirements,  with  the  most 
common failing being an absence of provisions governing general awareness training for non 

2 

All requirements under Article 5 of Regulation 2320/2002. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
security  specialist  staff  and  no  specifications  concerning  recurrent  training  to  keep  security 
specialists up to date with developments. 

2.2 

Implementation of legal requirements 

While  the  standard  of  implementation  of  the  national  quality  control  programme  is  high  in 
some  States,  it  unfortunately  remains  unsatisfactory  in  many  others,  with  a  significant 
incidence  of  serious  deficiencies.  Even  in  the  Member  States  with  the  most  well-developed 
programmes, the inspection process identifies regularly deficiencies. 

In  some  cases,  inadequate  record  keeping  has  made  it  difficult  for  Commission  inspectors 
(and  indeed  national  authorities  themselves)  to  assess  how  well  the  requirements  on 
implementation are being met. However, the following general conclusions may be drawn: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the  appropriate  authority  does  not  always  hold  all  the  information  necessary  to 
adequately plan inspection activities (e.g. they are not always aware of all the entities 
involved in the security chain); 

a number of Member States do not use the full range of monitoring techniques (i.e. in 
depth  security  audits,  more  narrowly  focussed  inspections  and  tests)  and  so  cannot 
make a complete assessment of all aspects of implementation; 

a  significant  number  of  Member  States  do  not  have  enough  human  resources 
dedicated  to  monitoring  all  airports  and  all  Chapters  of  the  legislation  with  a 
frequency sufficient to ensure the swift detection and rectification of deficiencies; 

where deficiencies are found, the enforcement of swift rectification is inadequate. 

Nonetheless,  a  positive  consequence  of  Commission  inspection  findings  in  some  Member 
States has been the allocation of greater resources to aviation security and an increase in the 
number of national inspectors. There are signs that this development will continue. 

3. 

Inspections at airports 

3.1. 

Selecting the airports and inspection teams 

Between  February  2004  and  December  2007,  the  Commission  carried  out  83  airport 
inspections (including follow up inspections). The inspection programme is determined on a 
risk  assessment  basis,  but  has  encompassed  some  of  the  smallest  commercial  operations 
falling under the provisions of Regulation 2320/2002 as well as most of the largest airports in 
the Community: of the 20 EU airports with close to and more than 20 million passengers per 
year, 17 have already been inspected by the Commission. 24 of the initial evaluations led to 
follow-up inspections to assess the rectification actions taken. 

EU  inspections  are  carried  out  by  members  of  the  Commission  team  of  10  inspectors 
supported by a pool of national auditors. All but three Member States have nominated at least 
one national auditor to take part in Commission inspections, in accordance with Article 5 of 
Commission Regulation 1486/2003.3 

3 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  1486/2003  laying  down  procedures  for  conducting  Commission 
inspections in the field of civil aviation security, OJ L213 of 23.8.2003, p3. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3.2 

Overview of deficiencies found 

In general terms, the level of security at European airports is high – especially when measured 
against global standards and practices. The level of compliance has improved by almost 40% 
since inspections began and the number of serious deficiencies continues to fall. At only one 
airport inspected by the Commission was the lack of compliance considered serious enough to 
present  a  significant  threat  to  the  overall  level  of  civil  aviation  security  in  the  Community 
(Article  15  of  Regulation  1486/2003)  and  all  Member  States  notified  accordingly.  While 
further  effort  is  clearly  required,  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  the  assessments  are  being 
made against some of the most stringent standards in the world. 

The 2007 findings tend to repeat the pattern of earlier inspections.  As regards  what may  be 
regarded  as  the  core  areas  of  aviation  security  -  airport  security,  aircraft  security,  passenger 
and  cabin  baggage  screening  and  hold  baggage  screening  –  the  results  are  certainly 
improving; but there nonetheless remain significant areas of non compliance. These relate in 
particular to areas where the human factor is key, but other relevant issues would be: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

overly prescriptive requirements in parts of the current legislation; 

lead times required for adjusting to new requirements; 

insufficient monitoring at national level; and 

lack of enforcement powers at the level of the appropriate authorities. 

The  2007  inspections  also  initiated  EU  monitoring  of  areas  which  were  rarely  included  in 
previous reports – catering, cleaning, company mail and material and technical requirements 
for  equipment.  Although  there  is  still  insufficient  data  in  these  areas  to  provide  meaningful 
conclusions, Commission inspectors have  expressed some concerns about the monitoring of 
standards  for  equipment.  This  may  reflect  a  lack  of  available  technical  expertise  in  some 
Member States. 

3.3 

Follow up inspections 

8  follow  up  inspections  were  conducted  at  EU  airports  during  2007.  In  these  cases,  it  has 
generally been found that at least a third of the serious deficiencies identified during the initial 
inspection were rectified within a reasonable time frame; but no airport was able to remedy all 
serious deficiencies before the follow up inspection was carried out. In some cases, this was 
because  the  deficiency  could  only  be  addressed  by  reconfiguring  ground  facilities  and  the 
necessary construction work could not be quickly completed. 

The  most  intractable  difficulties  appear  to  involve  staff  screening  (human  factors,  the 
inappropriate use of hand held metal detectors) and aircraft security. 

3.4 

Member States' own evaluations 

Under Article 6 of Commission Regulation 1217/2003,4 Member States are obliged to submit 
an annual report to the Commission by the end of February each year, covering the results of 

4 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  1217/2003  laying  down  common  specifications  for  national  civil 
aviation quality control programmes OJ L169 of 8.7.2003, p.44. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
their national compliance monitoring for the period Jan - Dec of the preceding year. Generally 
speaking, these reports show a higher level of compliance than is found during Commission 
inspections.  This  indicates  that  requirements  are  not  being  enforced  in  a  sufficiently 
harmonised manner. 

4. 

Position at the end of 2007 

4.1 

Open files 

Covering  the  whole  period  of  inspections  2004-7,  43  inspection  files  remain  open  by  end 
2007, meaning that rectification of the deficiencies reported by the Commission has still not 
been confirmed - although rectification action plans have, in most cases, been provided. 16 of 
the open files relate to appropriate authority and 27 to airport inspections, including 20 from 
2007. 

4.2 

Infringement proceedings 

During  2007,  the  Commission  opened  infringement  proceedings  under  Article  226  of  the 
Treaty against Luxembourg following its failure to adequately rectify deficiencies identified 
during  an  inspection  and  against  the  Slovak  Republic  as  a  result  of  its  failure  to  supply  an 
action plan following a follow up inspection of an airport and for failing to dedicate adequate 
resources to aviation security.5 

PART TWO 

STREAMLINING THE PROCESS 

5. 

Overview 

The  results  of  the  Commission  inspections  have  indicated  a  number  of  difficulties  in 
connection  with  implementation  of  the  Regulations.  Annual  reports  and  other  information 
from  Member  States  and  the  industry  have  flagged  up  similar  problems.  The  main  issues 
appear to be: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

5 

lack of clarity or over-onerous requirements in the current legislation; 

variations  between  Member  States'  requirements,  leading  to  a  lack  of  harmony 
across the Community; 

lack of transparency and proper review; 

a perception that operational requirements are not sufficiently taken into account; 

lack of standardisation on technological requirements; 

variations  between  Community  requirements  and  those  of  third  countries, 
particularly the US; and 

The  Luxembourg  case  has  since  been  resolved.  The  Slovak  case  has  been  resolved  in  respect  of  the 
action plan. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
– 

excessive  demand  on  Member  States  resources  arising  from  duplication  of 
requirements, especially in relation to different inspection regimes (ICAO and TSA 
in addition to EU). 

Considerable efforts were made to address each of these issues in 2007, with the express aim 
of  facilitating  passenger  movements  through  Community  airports  and  easing  the  burden  on 
the industry, without compromising security standards. 

6. 

Regulatory Developments 

6.1 

The 2007 programme 

2007 saw a heavy programme of legislative development, including: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

the  Second  Reading  and  conciliation  stage  of  the  adoption  of  the  framework 
regulation to replace Regulation 2320/20026; 

further  development  of  the  planned  new  implementing  Regulation  to  replace 
Commission Regulation 622/20037; 

further  work  on  new  texts  to  replace  Regulations  1217/2003  (national  quality 
control) and 1486/2003 (Commission inspections of Member States); 

a new layer of legislation to give the European Parliament greater powers of scrutiny 
for implementing legislation in the field of aviation security; 

agreement on technical standards for threat image projection; and 

review and amendment of the legislation addressing the threat from liquid explosives 
(cabin bag size, third country agreements). 

6.2 

The new framework and implementing legislation: Better Regulation 

Based on a Commission proposal from September 2005 Council, Parliament and Commission 
continued  during  2007  discussions  on  a  new  framework  regulation  through  the  conciliation 
procedure.  An  agreement  was  finally  reached  early  2008.  Anticipating  its  adoption,  the 
Commission,  working  with  the  Member  States  in  the  Aviation  Security  Committee  set  up 
under  Article  9  of  Regulation  2320/02,  continued  to  prepare  new  implementing  legislation 
and produced initial drafts of most Chapters. These were specifically drafted with a view to 
clarifying existing stipulations and removing requirements no longer considered necessary or 
appropriate, thus facilitating implementation. 

The Aviation Security Committee met 8 times between January and December 2007 and was 
itself  supported  by  a  number  of  working  groups.  In  addition,  there  were  8  meetings  of  the 
Stakeholders' Advisory Group on Aviation Security (SAGAS), giving industry representatives 
the  opportunity  of  debating  their  views  with  the  Commission  and  Member  States.  A  clause 

6 

7 

Since adopted as Regulation (EC) No. 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 
March 2008, OJ L 97 of 9.4.2008, p.72. 
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  622/2003,  laying  down  measures  for  the  implementation  of  the 
common basic standards on aviation security, OJ L 89 of 5.4.2003, p.9. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
formalising  this  stakeholder  committee  was  written  into  the  new  framework  Regulation, 
which also included a commitment to further consider the issue of security funding. 

6.3 

Quality control – greater harmonisation 

Work on the revisions of Regulations 1217/2003 and 1486/2003 – both of which implement 
Regulation  2320/2002  -  has  continued  in  working  group  sessions  throughout  2007,  with  a 
view  to  achieving  greater  consistency  of  implementation  across  the  Community  and 
enshrining best practice in legislation. This is expected to facilitate the future development of 
one stop security, both within the Community and beyond. 

6.4 

Parliamentary scrutiny and public information – greater transparency 

While  the  European  Court  of  Justice  gives  consideration  to  case  number  C-345/06 
(Heinrich)8, the Commission and the Committee have also undertaken a review of the existing 
legislation, to consider which elements might be put into the public domain without any risk 
to security. They have discussed a draft Regulation to this effect and will consider how in the 
future to achieve the best balance between transparency and protection from threat. This will 
mean  that  passengers  have  access  to  the  maximum  amount  of  information  possible  before 
taking a flight. 

6.5 

Technical standards – increasing standardisation 

2007  saw  agreement  on  a  new  regulation  on  standards  for  threat  image  projection  (TIP), 
although this was not in fact published in the Official Journal until January 20089. (TIP is a 
system  designed  to  improve  and  monitor  the  performance  of  staff  involved  in  cabin  bag 
screening.) 

6.6 

Liquids and the review procedure – regular review and working with third countries 

Regulation 1546/200610, introducing measures to address the threat from liquid explosives, is 
reviewed  at  six  monthly  intervals,  specifically  with  a  view  to  easing  requirements  as  new 
technology becomes available. In this context, the proposed restriction on cabin baggage size 
was first deferred and then lifted in the light of the conclusions drawn by the ECAC Technical 
Task Force after trials conducted on behalf of the Commission. 

Steps  to  address  the  problems  caused  for  transfer  passengers  from  third  countries  by  the 
restrictions on liquids were also taken via Regulations 915/200711 and 1477/200712, providing 
for Community recognition of the security measures taken at third country airports.  

8 
9 

10 

11 

OJ. C281 of 18.11.06, p19. 
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  23/2008  of  11  January  2008,  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No. 
622/2003  laying  down  measures  for  the  implementation  of  the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation 
security, OJ L9 of 12.1.2008, p12. 
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  1546/2006  of  4  October  2006,  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No. 
622/2003  laying  down  measures  for  the  implementation  of  the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation 
security, OJ L286 of 17.10.2006, p6. 
Commission Regulation (EC) No. 915/2007 of 31 July 2007, amending Regulation (EC) No. 622/2003 
laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security, OJ 
L200 of 1.8.2007, p3. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  addition,  the  Commission  began  to  work  with  Member  States  on  a  roadmap  – 
aspirationally, a staged, two-year process - towards an easing of the restrictions on liquids by 
identifying, setting standards for and deploying new screening technology. 

7. 

Equipment trials and studies 

7.1 

Trials – looking for new solutions 

Under  Regulation  65/200613,  Member  States  wishing  to  conduct  trials  of  new  equipment  or 
procedures may do so for a limited period after notifying, and receiving agreement, from the 
Commission and Committee. This procedure only applies where the equipment or procedures 
being  trialled  replace  those  specified  in  the  European  legislation.  (Member  States  of  course 
may at any time conduct trials of equipment or methods when these are in addition to those 
covered by the Regulations.) 

A  number  of  trials  have  been  progressed  during  2007,  involving  the  use  of  body  scanners 
(millimetre wave and backscatter) and dogs. At the end of the trial period,  the  Commission 
will decide whether the new method should be included in EU legislation. It is highly likely 
that this will soon be the case for body scanning equipment, which is expected to considerably 
facilitate passenger flow through screening points as well as raising standards. 

7.2 

Studies – identifying the problems, proposing the answers 

In addition to these trials, a number of Commission-sponsored studies were continued during 
2007, in particular those considering the use of sniffer dogs, factors affecting the performance 
of  security  staff  and  the  'registered  passenger'  concept.  The  reports  are  currently  being 
considered by stakeholders and may form the basis of future implementing legislation. 

The Commission has also made particular efforts to remain fully informed about the research 
carried out by industry and the ECAC Technical Task Force into liquids testing, with a view 
to introducing legislation to allow for the deployment of this new technology as soon as it is 
sufficiently developed for deployment at airports. 

In addition, the Commission pursued work on a database to facilitate the air cargo industry by 
providing a tool enabling quick verification of the security status of the main industry entities 
– regulated agents and known consignors. 

8. 

Progress with third countries 

8.1 

Developing one stop security with third countries 

Under Article 10 of Regulation 2320/2002, the Commission is required to give consideration 
to  the  development  of  global  one  stop  security.  This  means  that  the  Community  concept  of 
each Member State's recognising the security measures implemented in another - so that, for 
instance,  passengers  do  not  have  to  be  rescreened  when  transferring  to  another  flight  at  a 

12 

13 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No.  1477/2007  of  13  December  2007  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No. 
622/2003  laying  down  measures  for  the  implementation  of  the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation 
security OJ L329 of 13.12.2007, p22. 
Commission Regulation (EC) No. 65/2006 of 13 January 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 
laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security OJ 
L11 of 17.1.2006, p4. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                                                                                                                         
second  EU  airport  -  may  be  extended  to  some  third  countries.  Such  mutual  recognition  of 
measures  can  only  be  agreed  where  the  third  country  is  able  to  demonstrate  that  it  takes  an 
equivalent approach to aviation security as that set out in the EU Regulations. Priority is also 
given  to  progressing  agreements  which  would  provide  genuine  benefits  to  the  industry  and 
passengers - that is, those representing a high volume of traffic, such as the US. 

The  Commission  has  been  active  in  several  fora  to  prepare  the  way  for  more  intensive  co-
operation  on  security,  most  particularly  through  bilateral  discussions  with  the  US  and  with 
ICAO. These negotiations have already led to a number of real improvements for passengers 
and  Member  States  through  the  reduction  of  duplication  and  extraterritorial  demands  (for 
instance, the US has lifted its requirement for baggage screening at the last point of departure, 
now recognising the Community as a single block, while the US Transport Security Agency 
and  ICAO  are  both  likely  to  reduce  the  number  of  inspections  they  carry  out  in  the  EU,  in 
recognition of the robust Community regime). 

Given this encouraging progress, and the additional impetus given by third country concerns 
arising  from  the  recent  restrictions  on  liquids,  closer  co-operation  agreements  with  non  EU 
states is now high on the Commission's agenda. 

8.2 

Liquid explosives – transfer passengers 

The  concerns  surrounding  the  possible  terrorist  use  of  liquid  explosives  have  created 
particular difficulties for passengers from third countries transferring at Community airports – 
and  also  for  Community  passengers  transferring  at  some  third  country  airports.  The 
Commission has therefore taken a pivotal role both in developing international legislation to 
address the current threat and in seeking short and long term solutions to facilitate passenger 
flow at airports while maintaining adequate levels of security. This has led to the adoption of 
a regulation, allowing sales of duty free liquids at Singapore's Changi airport to be exempted 
from further controls during transfers at EU airports. Discussions on similar arrangements are 
progressing  with  several  other  States,  but  take-up  has  on  the  whole  been  disappointing, 
indicating a clear need to develop other solutions. 

9. 

Issues for the future 

The Commission has a clear programme of work for 2008: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

finalising the new implementing legislation; 

finding better ways of addressing the threat from liquid explosives; 

considering the most appropriate approach to the funding of aviation security; 

continuing  the  inspection  programme  (including  involvement  as  observers  in  some 
inspections in the US); 

introducing new technical standards; 

assisting  Member  States  to  improve  and  harmonise  national  quality  control 
programmes; 

analysing the results of studies; and 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
– 

advancing agreements with third countries. 

While  security  considerations  must  always  be  paramount,  the  active  involvement  of 
stakeholder  groups,  rigorous  appraisal  of  new  proposals  and  regular  review  of  existing 
legislation  will  ensure  that  this  programme  will  be  developed  in  a  way  which  takes  full 
consideration of practical concerns and benefit from the lessons of experience. 

CONCLUSION 

Progress  since  2002  has  been  substantial.  The  future  programme  will  build  on  this 
achievement,  enhancing  security  on  flights  in  to  and  out  of  the  Community,  protecting 
European interests and maintaining public confidence in the air transport system. It will lead 
to  a  further,  and  significant,  stage  in  the  development  of  a  comprehensive  air  transport 
security  regime,  taking  full  account  of  the  needs  of  passengers  and  the  industry.  In  many 
respects Europe leads the world in setting standards for aviation security. It should continue to 
do so. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
ANNEX 
Commission Inspections at 31.12.2007 

Member State 

Number of inspections 

2004 -12/2006 (including 
follow-ups) 

Number of inspections 
01/2007 -12/2007 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2007 
(including follow-ups) 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

5 

3 

3 

2 

4 

2 

4 

6 

6 

6 

2 

4 

5 

3 

3 

2 

2 

3 

4 

3 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

6 

4 

1 

4 

3 

5 

3 

4 

7 

8 

8 

2 

5 

7 

3 

3 

4 

2 

4 

5 

3 

1 

3 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

Switzerland14 

TOTAL 

3 

4 

3 

4 

1 

89 

0 

2 

2 

3 

3 

6 

5 

7 

1 

28 

117 

EFTA Surveillance Authority inspections as at 31.12.2007 

EEA EFTA state 

Number of inspections 

2005 -12/2006 (including 
follow-ups) 

Number of inspections 
01/2007 -12/2007 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2007 
(including follow-ups) 

Iceland 

Norway 

TOTAL 

2 

9 

11 

2 

10 

12 

4 

19 

23 

14 

The  Commission  has  powers  to  conduct  inspections  in  Switzerland  under  a  bilateral  EU-Switzerland 
agreement. 

EN 

14 

   EN