Report from the Commission eu pilot evaluation report {SEC(2010) 182}
Date: 2010-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU initiative, application of EU law, complaint to the Commission, exchange of information, information processing, information system, infringement procedure (EU), project evaluation

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 3.3.2010 
COM(2010) 70 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

EU PILOT EVALUATION REPORT 

{SEC(2010) 182} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

EU PILOT EVALUATION REPORT 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Under the Treaties, the application of European Union law is a primary responsibility of the 
Member States. The Commission, in its role as guardian of the Treaties, has the authority and 
responsibility to ensure that the law is applied correctly. Given the scope of the EU acquis and 
the size of the EU, many questions and concerns are raised by citizens, civil society interests 
and businesses. For the law to be correctly understood and applied, it is necessary for these 
questions and concerns to be answered and for any problems in the application of EU law to 
be corrected as quickly and effectively as possible.  

This work ensuring the correct understanding and application of the law has always involved 
a joint effort of Commission services and Member State authorities identifying the issues at 
stake, clarifying the legal and factual situation, finding solutions and answering questions. A 
variety  of  means  of  contact  have  been  used  over  time  for  this  purpose.  However,  there  has 
been no overall structure, no systematic commitment and no means of measuring efficiency 
and progress in the way this work has been done.  

In  its  Communication  'A  Europe  of  Results  –  Applying  Community  law'1,  the  Commission 
suggested  the  initiation  of  a  project  to  test  increased  commitment,  co-operation  and 
partnership  between  the  Commission  and  Member  States  in  this  work.  It  suggested  a  new 
joint commitment of the Commission and Member State authorities to test the possibility to 
work  more  closely  together  and  more  consistently  to  produce  quicker and  better  answers  to 
questions and solutions to problems. The idea was to use this method of working to correct 
infringements of EU law at an early stage wherever possible without the need for recourse to 
infringement  proceedings.  The  project  would  not  therefore  be  used  to  manage  any  issue  on 
which an infringement proceeding has been initiated, 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 Justice ruling on the existence of 
an infringement. 

A confidential on-line database was created for communication between Commission services 
and  Member  State  authorities.  A  network  of  contacts  was  set  up  to  operate  the  system, 
ensuring that files entered into it reached their correct destination and to monitor progress and 
push for efficient and constructive use of the system. Through these means, all aspects of the 
legal and factual position at EU and Member State level would be clarified and confirmed and 
appropriate  conclusions  drawn,  citizens  and  business  informed  and  solutions  found  for 
problems, ensuring conformity with EU law. 

This  project,  called  "EU  Pilot",  has  been  operating  since  mid  April  2008  with  fifteen 
volunteer  Member  States:  Austria,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Germany,  Finland,  Hungary, 

1 

COM(2007) 502, Section 2.2 "Improving working methods", p. 8. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, Spain and the United 
Kingdom.  

The Commission proposed an evaluation of the performance of the project after its first year 
of operation. This document contains the evaluation report of the functioning of the system up 
to beginning of February 2010. 

2. 

INFORMATION ON THE OPERATION OF EU PILOT 

As of beginning of February 2010, 723 files had been submitted to EU Pilot. Of these, 424 
files have passed all the way through the EU Pilot process. This constitutes a sufficient basis 
for a first evaluation of the functioning of EU Pilot.  

Over  60%  of  files  take  the  form  of  complaints,  while  over  20%  constitute  enquiries  and 
approaching  20%  are  files  created  by  the  Commission  of  its  own  initiative.  Among  the 
complaints  and  enquiries,  43%  of  files  come  from  citizens  and  36%  from  business  or  civil 
society bodies. The subject-matter of the files confirms existing experience of the volume of 
questions  and  problems  arising  in  the  different  sectors  of  EU  law:  36%  concerning  the 
environment; 21% the internal market,  8% taxation, 7% employment, labour law and social 
security; 6% justice, freedom and security, 5% enterprise; 4% health and consumer protection 
and 4% agriculture. 

It  is  clear  that  larger  Member  States  have  a  tendency  to  receive  more  files,  given  that  they 
have  a  higher  number  of  citizens,  business  and  civil  society  interests.  Some  Member  States 
have only so far had to treat a small number of files. At this stage, feedback received from the 
Member  States  has  been  largely  positive.  Member  States  particularly  highlighted  the 
contribution  that  EU  Pilot  can  make  to  enhancing  communication  with  the  Commission, 
thereby leading to quicker and better responses to inquiries and complaints. At the same time, 
the  Member  States  pointed  to  the  need  to  improve  further  the  concrete  functioning  of  the 
system  (e.g.  by  clarifying  its  scope  and  the  rules  for  the  handling  of  the  files  by  the 
Commission). 

The overall evaluation of Commission is that the issues raised in the overwhelming majority 
of  these  files  have  relevant  content  which  merits  a  response.  The  initial  evaluation  of  the 
success rate has been high with the Commission services considering that 85% of responses 
provided  by  Member  States  were  acceptable  allowing  the  file  to  be  closed.  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. Concerning the treatment of the files received, there has been a very low level of 
refusal of files by Member States (3%) mostly linked to insufficient information transmitted 
by the complainant. Nearly 67% of files received a response from the Member State within 
ten weeks, with an average of 73 days. No timeframe was set for the work of the Commission 
services following-up on responses given by Member States, but around 40% were completed 
within a further ten weeks, with an average of 109 days. 

The  Commission  has  an  initially  positive  perception  of  the  functioning  of  EU  Pilot  and  the 
way  in  which  most  files  have  been  treated.  EU  Pilot  has  started  to  contribute  to  make  a 
positive contribution to Commission / Member State co-operation to produce results on issues 
of application of EU law within reasonable timeframes. At the same time, the efficiency of the 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
system could be improved further through increased communication and co-operation on the 
individual files and shortening of the average time taken to process the files. 

3. 

FURTHER ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT OF EU PILOT 

Commission services and Member State authorities have developed a clear understanding of 
the technical platform and are operating it efficiently. There are aspects that can be clarified 
and improved, to facilitate its use. Many developments are already programmed. 

The  nature  of  the  files  introduced  to  EU  Pilot  is  generally  considered  to  be  relevant  to  the 
scope of application of EU Pilot and raising issues justifying attention. At the outset it was not 
clear for some Member States that the project would cover own-initiative files introduced by 
the Commission services as the project was essentially designed to deal with issues raised by 
citizens, business and civil society interests. However, this issue has been discussed and broad 
agreement  has  been  reached  on  the  advantages  of  using  the  system  for  all  such  kinds  of 
communication  between  the  Commission  services  and  Member  State  authorities.  For 
particularly  complex  cases,  exchanges  through  EU  Pilot  could  be  complemented  through 
expert meetings. 

There has been confirmation of the value of a more consistent use of EU Pilot by Commission 
services.  Without  prejudice  to  other  mechanisms  established  by  EU  law,  this  means  that  all 
files  should  be  entered  into  EU  Pilot  so  that  the  factual  or  legal  position  can  be  clarified. 
However, where urgency or another overriding interest requires the immediate launching of 
an infringement procedure, exceptions may be authorised. In many cases this will ensure that 
questions  are  answered  or  a  solution  is  found  to  a  problem  more  quickly  than  through 
infringement  proceedings  thereby  ensuring  improved  information  exchange  and  tracking  of 
files.  Where,  as  now,  the  Commission  service  considers  it  useful  to  send  an  administrative 
letter before any formal step is taken, a form will be provided to be completed in EU Pilot and 
sent  through  the  system  as  the  sole  means  of  communicating  this  information.  This  would 
replace  regular  practice  of  Commission  services  to  send  administrative  letters  and  ensure  a 
more consistent and general practice of recourse to EU Pilot. It would provide at least a short 
period  of  consultation  with  Member  State  authorities  to  find  a  constructive  solution  more 
quickly than would be possible through an infringement proceeding. Use of EU Pilot does not 
preclude the  discretion to use additional contacts to ensure further follow-up on files in EU 
Pilot.  It  does  guarantee  that  Member  States  would  at  least  be  consistently  informed  of  the 
likely  launch  of  infringement  proceedings,  without  requiring  any  delay  in  the  initiation  of 
those  proceedings.  This  would  always  be  done,  unless  urgency  requires  immediate  formal 
action,  thereby  confirming  the  continuing  mutual  commitment  to  seek  the  earliest  possible 
resolution of all issues at whatever stage in the process to reinforce the correct application of 
EU law. This would bring benefits for citizens, consistency and efficiency in the organisation 
of this work for both Member State authorities and Commission services.  

The  Commission  services  are  also  working  to  ensure  that  the  issues  raised  in  EU  Pilot  are 
always  introduced  on  the  basis  of  the  clearest  possible  explanation  of  the  issues,  thereby 
adding  the  interest  and  authority  of  the  Commission  to  issues  raised  by  the  citizen.  This 
facilitates  the  work  of  Member  State  authorities  to  ensure  that  their  responses  also  provide 
clear  explanations  and  solutions  targeting  the  key  issues.  Member  State  authorities  are 
committed to ensuring that issues raised are well-targeted by the responses provided. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
The question has arisen of the languages to be used for communication to and from Member 
States  and  with  the  citizens,  business  or  civil  society  interest  groups  concerned.  It  is 
recognised  that  texts  can  need  to  be  translated  at  one  or  other  moment  in  the  process.  The 
Commission is committed to ensure that the system works as effectively as possible, taking 
account  of  relevant  rules  and  procedures  and  the  varying  use  of  languages  possible  in 
different  administrative  contexts.  The  Commission  will  ensure  translation  for  its  own 
purposes and where necessary to support Member State work. 

EU  Pilot  envisages  direct  communication  of  Member  State  authority  responses  to  the  final 
addressee  whenever  appropriate  to  simplify  and  shorten  the  time  taken  to  process  files 
dependent  on  the  particular  context  and  issues  raised.  Moreover,  some  Member  States 
consider  that  it  is  generally  more  appropriate  for  the  Commission  to  respond  to 
correspondence which has, in the first place, anyway been addressed to the Commission. This 
also ensures that the correspondent receives all elements of the response, containing elements 
provided  by  the  Commission  services  and  the  Member  State  authorities,  at  the  same  time. 
Therefore,  the  response  to  the  correspondent  can  be  sent  out  via  the  Commission  services 
unless  the  Member  State  considers  a  direct  response  appropriate.  Either  way,  the 
correspondent will always receive an evaluation by the Commission services of the response 
of the Member State authority. 

In  undertaking  this  first  evaluation  of  the  functioning  of  EU  Pilot,  a  first  attempt  has  been 
made to categorise files according to their content. The purpose is to try to identify if different 
kinds of file needing to be processed in different ways and to see if a standard method can be 
designed  by  which  to  evaluate  how  much  time  seems  appropriate  for  the  processing  of 
different  kinds  of  issue.  The  further  examination  of  this  question  will  form  part  of  the  on-
going  work  on  the  project.  This  approximate  breakdown  of  the  files  indicates  around  60% 
identifying  a  possible  practical  difficulty  perceived  by  a  citizen  or  business  arising  in  the 
context  of  the  application  of  EU  law,  25%  raising  a  possible  infringement  of  EU  law,  15% 
concerning  enquiries  on  issues  linked  to  the  exercise  of  rights  under  EU  law  and  2% 
constituting simple requests for information or explanations. 

The ten week benchmark set for responses in EU Pilot is recognised as providing a general 
reference  for  the  processing  of  responses  by  Member  State  authorities.  This  is  because  the 
nature of the issue raised and the action required to deal with it can vary greatly, as the widely 
varying  length  of  time  taken  on  different  files  which  have  passed  through  the  system  has 
confirmed.  Many  issues  should  be  capable  of  a  response  far  more  quickly  than  ten  weeks, 
while others may require longer. The Commission services sometimes request a response in 
less  than  ten  weeks,  for  reasons  to  be  explained  in  the  request.  Overall  performance  is 
measured  against  the  ten  week  benchmark.  The  time  taken  by  Commission  services  in 
evaluating responses and informing the final addressee of the conclusions reached is clearly 
an important element in the speed of processing of files, even more so when the Member State 
response  and  the  Commission  services'  evaluation  is  being  communicated  to  the  final 
addressee by the Commission services. A benchmark of ten weeks is therefore recognised as 
providing  a  general  reference  for  the  Commission  services'  assessment  of  Member  States' 
responses  on  the  same  basis  as  described  above  for  Member  States.  Respect  for  these 
benchmarks will ensure that the first formal step in the management of such files, that is either 
the sending of a letter of formal notice or the closing of the file, can often be taken within six 
months,  well  ahead  of  the  twelve  months  so  far  targeted  for  the  initial  processing  of 
complaints leading up to the sending of a letter of formal notice or the closing of the file. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
Overall,  Member  State  authorities  and  the  Commission  services  have  devoted  considerable 
time  and  effort  to  getting  this  project  up-and-running  and  ensure  its  initial  operation.  There 
has  been  very  good  collaboration  between  the  Commission  services  and  Member  State 
authorities  both  bilaterally  and  collectively.  Much  attention  has  been  paid  to  reviewing  the 
progress and outcome of files and the general functioning of the system. There is widespread 
support to continue to use and develop this working method and interest in the participation of 
other Member States. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
4. 

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 

The evaluation of the Commission of the functioning of EU Pilot so far has shown that: 

–  The start-up of EU Pilot has been successfully completed and the project is beginning to 
make  a  positive  contribution  to  cooperation  between  the  Commission  and  participating 
Member  States  in  answering  enquiries  and  resolving  problems  of  citizens,  business  and 
civil society interests; 

–  An  important  achievement  of  EU  Pilot  is  to  have  created  an  active  network  of  contact 
points in Commission services and national authorities. This is reinforcing oversight of the 
management of enquiry and complaint files and increasing co-ordination and cooperation 
between the Commission and the Member States; 

–  An open and collaborative relationship between the Commission services and participating 
Member State authorities has been evident in the development of the project and its early 
operation; 

–  The system has started to produce positive results while there are also many aspects which 
can be further developed to improve the functioning of the system, increase understanding 
between the Commission services and participating Member States and improve the speed 
of the processing of files and results achieved; 

–  The Commission and participating Member States are committed to continuing to work on 
improving  the  processing  of  files  through  EU  Pilot  and  improving  the  working  methods 
involved in EU Pilot; and 

–  EU Pilot should continue to be used and developed with as wide as possible participation 

of Member States to broaden and strengthen its application. 

The  Commission  intends  to  invite  those  Member  States  not  yet  participating  in  EU  Pilot  to 
join  the  project,  to  broaden  its  application,  extend  its  impact  and  strengthen  its  further 
development.  

A further evaluation of the functioning of EU Pilot is planned for 2011. 

EN 

7 

   EN