REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS FIFTH REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No 2320/2002 ESTABLISHING COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY
Date: 2010-12-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, European standard, air safety, approximation of laws, civil aviation, fight against crime, report, safety standard

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 10.12.2010 
COM(2010) 725 final 

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

FIFTH 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 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE 
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

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

This report covers the period 1 January – 31 December 2009 

INTRODUCTION 

2009 was a time of consolidation in the EU world of aviation security. Throughout the year, 
the Commission worked steadily with Member States and the industry to finalise the details of 
the  new  package  of  implementing  legislation  intended  to  complement  Regulation  (EC) 
300/20081. The scientific community and manufacturers focussed on developing technologies 
which  would  allow  passengers  to  carry  liquids  on  to  aircraft.  The  European  Parliament 
continued  its  careful  consideration  of  the  issues  surrounding  the  possible  use  of  security 
scanners  at  European  airports.  On  the  wider  stage,  regular  discussions  were  held  with 
international organisations to find global solutions to common problems.  

It was not until the final days of the year, with the incident on Northwest Airlines flight 253 
from  Amsterdam  Schiphol  to  Detroit,  that  attention  was  once  again,  and  forcibly,  directed 
towards a new threat. This was yet another reminder that extremist groups continue to regard 
civil  aviation  as  an  attractive  target  and  will  always  seek  ways  to  avoid  detection  by  the 
current screening techniques. It again served – if this were necessary - to underline the vital 
nature  of  the  work  being  done  by  the  Commission  and  its  partners  towards  protecting 
travellers and the European aviation industry as a whole. 

PART ONE 

THE INSPECTIONS 

1. 

GENERAL 

The  Commission  is  required,  under  the  terms  of  Regulation  (EC)  2320/2002  to  conduct 
inspections of Member States' aviation security administrations (the 'appropriate authorities') 
and of EU airports. Switzerland is also covered by the Community programme, while Norway 
and Iceland are inspected against parallel provisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. To 
carry out its inspection work, the Commission has a team of 11 aviation security inspectors, 
supported by a pool of national inspectors nominated by Member States. 50 of these national 
inspectors took part in the 2009 inspections. A chart summarising all Commission and EFTA 
Surveillance Authority compliance monitoring activity to date is attached in an Annex.  

1 

OJ L97 of 9.4.2008, p.72 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

INSPECTIONS OF NATIONAL APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES 

The  Commission  monitored  9  appropriate  authorities  during  2009,  all  of  which  had  been 
subject  to  a  previous  Commission  inspection.  The  deficiencies  most  commonly  found  in 
national quality control programmes followed the pattern of previous years.  

As regards implementation of the measures, there was still evidence in some Member States 
of a lack of capacity to detect and correct failures swiftly. Some States had failed to monitor 
all aspects of the legislation and some airports went uninspected for long periods. Follow-up 
activities  were  sometimes  inadequate  or  not  carried  out,  and  it  was  not  unusual  to  find 
significant delays before deficiencies were corrected. Sanctions were available to all Member 
States,  but  were  not  always  strong  enough  or  always  used  in  such  a  way  as  to  provide  a 
deterrent  effect.  One  appropriate  authority  had  still  not  brought  its  national  civil  aviation 
security programme into line with the latest EU legislative developments and still needed to 
separate the operational implementation of requirements from the management of the quality 
control programme, although these issues had been previously identified by the Commission 
as serious deficiencies. Of very particular concern, another authority had reneged on a written 
commitment  to  increase  compliance  monitoring  resources  in  response  to  the  findings  of  the 
previous Commission inspection.  

3. 

INITIAL INSPECTIONS AT AIRPORTS 

Nineteen  (19)  initial  inspections  of  airports  were  conducted  during  2009,  almost  double  the 
number carried out in 2008. All chapters were covered (although not during each inspection). 
The overall percentage of core measures found to be in compliance rose once again by a small 
margin, to almost 85%. The deficiencies which were found tended, by and large, to occur in 
the same areas as for previous inspections, frequently stemming from human factor issues. 

The  weakest  areas  at  the  airports  inspected  during  2009  related  to  the  quality  of  staff 
screening,  the  provisions  governing  staff  use  of  prohibited  articles  and  implementation  of 
cargo  security  requirements.  For  instance,  staff  were  not  always  required  to  remove  their 
jackets before screening and hand searches of staff did not follow the same methodology as 
for passengers. Several airports also failed to implement adequate procedures for identifying 
staff members formally authorised to carry prohibited articles into the security restricted area. 
All seven inspections covering cargo security revealed a number of problem areas, including 
poor security programmes and failure to select the most appropriate screening method, given 
the  nature  of  the  consignment.  Other  common  deficiencies  concerned  the  requirements  for 
taking liquids into the security restricted area (such as the use of proper tamper-evident plastic 
bags),  failure  to  fully  protect  baggage  in  the  make-up  area,  vehicle  search  and  technical 
standards for equipment.  

Compliance  with  the  provisions  covering  passengers  and  cabin  baggage  was  mostly  high 
although sometimes continuous random search ratios were not observed and/or the quality of 
passenger  hand  search  was  not  fully  satisfactory.  Compliance  in  the  area  of  hold  baggage 
screening  was  extremely  high,  although  at  one  location  dogs  were  used  to  screen  hold 

EN 

3 

   EN 

baggage,  despite  the  fact  that  this  was  not  allowed  under  the  then  existing  legislative 
provisions2. 

There  were  some  access  control  issues  in  relation  to  catering  and  cleaning  premises.  As 
regards air carriers, the areas needing most additional efforts were search and check of aircraft 
and procedures for dealing with rush bags. 

4. 

FOLLOW UP INSPECTIONS  

The  Commission  routinely  carries  out  a  limited  number  of  follow  up  inspections.  Where 
several  serious  deficiencies  have  been  identified  during  the  initial  inspection,  a  further  visit 
will  certainly  be  scheduled.  4  such  activities  were  judged  necessary  during  2009  and  the 
conclusion  in  each  case  was  that  most,  but  not  all,  of  the  reported  deficiencies  had  been 
rectified. 

5. 

OPEN FILES, ARTICLE 15 CASES AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 

Inspection  files  remain  open  until  the  Commission  is  satisfied  that  appropriate  rectification 
action has been taken. 20 files (14 airport and 6 appropriate authorities) were closed during 
2009. In all, 17 appropriate authority and 20 airport inspection files remained open at the end 
of the year.  

If deficiencies found at an airport are considered so serious as to present a significant threat to 
the  overall  level  of  civil  aviation  security  in  the  Community,  the  Commission  will  activate 
Article  15  of  Regulation  1486/20033.  This  means  that  all  other  appropriate  authorities  are 
alerted  to  the  situation  and  additional  measures  would  have  to  be  considered  in  respect  of 
flights from the airport in question. There were no Article 15 cases open at the beginning of 
the year and none were initiated during 2009. 

The  other  possible  sanction  in  the  most  serious  cases,  or  in  cases  of  prolonged  non-
rectification  or  reoccurrence  of  deficiencies,  is  to  open  infringement  proceedings.  The 
Commission closed 1 infringement procedure in 2009, after a 14 month delay, when the key 
issues, relating to lack of resources and lack of enforcement, had been resolved. The Member 
State  in  question  introduced  new  administrative  arrangements  and  appointed  additional 
inspectors.  One  new  infringement  procedure  was  initiated  during  the  year,  in  respect  of  a 
Member  State  which  had  failed  to  increase  resources  and  monitoring  activities  despite 
committing  to  doing  so  following  a  deficiency  at  a  previous  inspection.  In  total  three 
infringement cases were pending at the end of 2009. 

2 

3 

Detailed  provisions  for  the  use  of  dogs  in  hold  baggage  screening  have  since  been  developed  and 
included  in  Regulation  (EU)  573/2010  of  30  June  2010  (OJ  L166  of  1.7.  2010,  p.1)  and  Decision 
2010/3572/EU, issued to all Member States but not published in the OJ.  
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1486/2003 of 22 August 2003 laying down procedures for conducting 
Commission  inspections  in  the  field  of  civil  aviation  security,  OJ  L213  of  23.8.2003,  p.3.  Since 
repealed  and  replaced  by  Commission  Regulation  (EU)  72/2010  of  26  January  2010,  implementing 
Regulation (EC) 300/2008, OJ L23 of 27.1.2010, p.1 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
6. 

MEMBER STATES' OWN EVALUATIONS  

Article 6 of Commission Regulation 1217/20034 obliged Member States to submit an annual 
report  to  the  Commission  by  the  end  of  February  each  year,  covering  the  results  of  their 
national  compliance  monitoring  for  the  period  Jan-Dec  of  the  preceding  year.  The  2009 
reports  were  all  submitted  on  time  and  all  followed  the  Commission  template.  The 
deficiencies  identified  related  to  low  numbers  of  man  days  in  the  field,  failures  to  cover  all 
requirements,  insufficient  follow-up  activities  and  failure  to  use  the  available  enforcement 
measures.  

Harmonisation of these compliance monitoring regimes in the EU has in fact proved difficult 
since  the  programme  began  in  2003.  This  has  been  because  the  different  Member  States 
varied  in  their  understanding  of  terms,  development  of  methodologies  and  reporting 
requirements.  This  situation  has  improved  over  time,  but  could  still  be  better.  A  certain 
number  of  discrepancies  between  the  results  of  national  compliance  monitoring  and  the 
findings of Commission inspections stem from the lack of harmonisation, with the latter often 
indicating a lower level of compliance than the national reports might suggest.  

7. 

ICAO AUDIT OF THE COMMISSION 

During  2009,  for  the  first  time,  ICAO  conducted  an  audit  of  the  Commission  as  the  EU 
monitoring body and provided a very positive report, with no recommendations for change. 
The  results  of  this  inspection  facilitated  a  reduction  of  ICAO  monitoring  activities  at  EU 
airports, as these were felt to be adequately covered by the European programme.  

PART TWO 

THE LEGISLATION 

1. 

GENERAL 

Few new aviation security legislative acts were published during 2009, although a great deal 
of  work  was  done  towards  preparing  the  new  package  in  order  to  meet  the  April  2010 
deadline. Separately, work was also begun on new rules for the screening of liquids, the use of 
dogs  in  aviation  security  screening  and  the  use  of  metal  detectors  for  screening  certain 
specialised types of cargo.  

2. 

SUPPLEMENTARY LEGISLATION ADOPTED  

The new legislative texts adopted during 2009 were: 

4 

Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  1217/2003  of  4  July  2003  laying  down  common  specifications  for 
national  civil  aviation  quality  control  programmes  OJ  L169  of  8.7.2003,  p.  44.  Since  repealed  and 
replaced by Commission Regulation (EU) No 18/2010 of 8 January 2010, amending Regulation (EC) 
300/2008, OJ L7 of 12.1.2010, p.3. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
•  Regulation (EC) 272/20095, supplementing the common basic standards on civil aviation 

security set out in the framework Regulation; and 

•  Regulation (EU) 1254/20096 setting criteria to allow Member States to derogate from the 

common basic standards on civil aviation and to adopt alternative security measures. 

These texts were finalised during 8 meetings of the Aviation Security Regulatory Committee, 
8  meetings  of  the  Stakeholders’  Advisory  Group  on  Aviation  Security  and  a  number  of 
focussed working group sessions in which both Member States and industry were involved. 

•  Regulation  (EC)  272/2009  is  the  'second  level'  in  the  legislative  package,  supplementing 
Regulation  (EC)  300/2008.  It  sets  out  the  broad  areas  where  implementing  rules  may  be 
developed,  listing,  for  instance,  the  various  types  of  screening  technologies  allowed  for 
passengers, baggage and cargo, but not specifying how these should be deployed.  

•  Regulation (EU) 1254/2009 deals with a specific aspect of aviation security – the types of 
aircraft  operations  which  Member  States  may  exempt  from  the  rules  which  apply 
elsewhere,  as  they  present  a  lesser  risk.  This  would  include,  for  instance,  very  small 
aircraft. In these cases, other, national rules must apply and be notified to the Commission.  

3. 

AMENDING LEGISLATION ADOPTED 

The  aviation  security  legislation  depending  on  Regulation  (EC)  2320/2002  was  adjusted  by 
one  amending  measure7,  during  the  period  covered  by  this  report.  This  concerned  duty  free 
liquids exemptions for South Korea –  although the  adjustment  was  in  the  end  not  generally 
implemented. Difficulties during other related negotiations with South Korea meant that, on 
the  recommendation  of  the  Commission,  the  exemptions  allowed  for  that  State  were  not 
activated at many EU airports. 

4. 

NEW FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTING PACKAGE DRAFTED 

The greatest efforts of the Commission and Member States during 2009 were concentrated on 
the  preparation  of  the  detailed  implementing  package  and  the  new  inspection  and  quality 
control regulations. By the end of the year, the inspection and quality control texts had both 
been  subject  to  positive  votes  in  the  Regulatory  Committee  and  the  larger  implementing 
package was available in an almost complete draft form, already split, as intended into a draft 

5 

6 

7 

Commission Regulation (EC) No 272/2009 of 2 April 2009 supplementing the common basic standards 
on  civil  aviation  security  laid  down  in  the  Annex  to  Regulation  (EC)  No  300/2008  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council, OJ L91 of 3.4.2009, p7. 
Commission  Regulation  (EU)  No  1254/2009  of  18  December  2009  setting  criteria  to  allow  Member 
States to derogate from the common basic standards on civil aviation security and to adopt alternative 
security measures, OJ L338 of 19.12.2009, p17.  
Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  483/2009  of  9  June  2009  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  820/2008 
laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security, OJ L 
145, 10.6.2009, p. 23.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
Regulation8,  containing  information  which  could  be  made  publicly  available,  and  a  draft 
Decision9, containing the more sensitive material.  

5. 

PROVISIONS ON FINANCING 

The Commission published its report10 on aviation security funding, as required by Article 22 
of  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008,  in  February  2009.  The  Commission  subsequently  adopted  a 
proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on aviation security 
charges11, which defined the basic principles to be respected by airport operators when they 
determine their aviation security charges. These included non-discrimination between carriers 
or passengers, consultations between airport management and air carriers, transparency, cost-
relatedness and the identification of a supervisory authority.  

PART THREE 

TRIALS AND STUDIES 

1. 

TRIALS 

A 'trial' in the sense of the EU aviation security legislation is conducted when a Member State 
agrees  with  the  Commission  that  it  will  use  a  particular  means  or  method  not  recognised 
under  the  terms  of  the  legislation  to  replace  one  of  the  recognised  security  controls,  for  a 
limited period of time. The term does not, in the legal sense, apply when a Member State or 
entity  is  conducting  an  evaluation  of  a  new  security  control  deployed  in  addition  to  one  or 
more of those already covered by the legislation. 

A number of trials were conducted during 2009. These concerned the use of security scanners 
for passenger and staff screening and the use of dogs for security screening. Information from 
the scanner trials was passed to the Commission to assist with the preparation of the planned 
report  on  the  use  of  this  equipment.  Information  from  the  dog  trials  was  considered  in  the 
work towards a future legislative proposal.  

2. 

STUDIES 

The  QinetiQ  study  on  human  factors  in  aviation  security  screening  was  presented  to  the 
Aviation  Security  Regulatory  Committee  in  January  2009.  The  recommendations  fed,  in 
particular,  into  discussions  on  the  proposed  new  legislative  chapter  on  training  and 
recruitment.  

8 

9 

10 
11 

Since published as Commission Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 of 4 March 2010 laying down detailed 
measures  for  the  implementation  of  the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation  security,  OJ  L55  of 
5.3.2010, p1.  
Subsequently Decision 2010/774/EU, issued to all Member States on 13.4.2010. Not published in the 
OJ. 
COM(2009) 30 final of 2.2.2009 
COM (2009) 217 of 11 May 2009 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
PART FOUR 

DIALOGUE WITH INTERNATIONAL BODIES AND THIRD COUNTRIES 

1. 

GENERAL 

The Commission is fully engaged with international bodies and key third country partners and 
is regularly represented at international meetings, generally co-ordinating the EU position and 
often making  presentations or submitting papers. Dialogues are also  opened,  as appropriate, 
with individual third countries on issue of local concern or shared interest, such as exemptions 
from the normal requirements governing the carriage of liquids purchased in duty free outlets. 
Such contacts enable the EU to both keep abreast of and disseminate good practice.  

2. 

INTERNATIONAL BODIES 

The Commission attends the annual ICAO AvSec panel and during 2009 presented papers on 
liquids, one  stop  security  and significant security threats. These were all  well received. The 
Commission  hosted  an  ICAO  workshop  on  liquids  in  Brussels  in  November  2009,  where 
there was international agreement on steps towards phasing out the current ban.  

The Commission also regularly takes part in meetings of the ECAC Technical Task Force and 
Training Task Force. Conclusions drawn by each of these groups have subsequently formed 
the  basis  of  discussions  during  meetings  of  the  Regulatory  Committee  and  its  associated 
working groups.  

3. 

THIRD COUNTRIES 

The Commission actively continued the dialogue with aviation security issues with the US in 
a  number  of  fora,  in  particular  the  EU-US  Transportation  Group,  which  progressed  work 
towards one-stop security. The Commission also intervened on a number of occasions when 
Member  States  raised  particular  concerns  about  additional  US  security  demands,  which 
appeared  to  give  inadequate  consideration  to  the  robust  EU  systems  already  in  place.  This 
sometimes  involved  the  continued  US  practice  of  issuing,  without  prior  consultation, 
Emergency Amendments to airlines operating from the EU.  

The  Commission  took  part  in  inspections  at  a  number  of  US  and  Canadian  airports,  with  a 
view to granting exemptions from the requirements relating to duty free liquids purchased at 
their  airside  outlets  when  subsequently  presented  at  transfer  points  in  the  EU  and  also  to 
assess the possibility of future one-stop agreements. The Commission additionally carried out 
inspections  in  Singapore  and  at  Dubrovnik  airport,  to  monitor  standards  on  duty  free  liquid 
processing, in view of the exemptions granted. An agreement was reached with South Korea 
on duty free liquids exemptions, but difficulties arose later, as referred to at point 3 of Part 2.  

CONCLUSION 

While,  overall,  a  high  level  of  security  continues  to  be  ensured  in  the  EU,  Commission 
inspections have – as in previous years – revealed some shortcomings. These most commonly 
related to staff screening and cargo processing requirements. Commission recommendations 

EN 

8 

   EN 

for corrective action were on the whole followed up satisfactorily, but the inspectors' findings 
confirm the importance of a robust EU inspection regime and of adequate quality assurance at 
Member  State  level.  The  Commission  will  continue  its  efforts  to  ensure  that  all  legal 
requirements are fully and correctly implemented, instigating formal infringement procedures 
if necessary.  

On  the  legislative  front,  much  solid  work  was  done  during  2009  to  ensure  that  the  new 
implementing  texts  would  lead  to  a  harmonised  understanding  and  implementation  of  the 
rules. The groundwork was completed for their final adoption and plans laid for their further 
elaboration,  particularly  in  respect  of  screening  technologies  and  agreements  with  third 
countries. The security incident which occurred just days before the end of the year served as 
a reminder that the adequacy of screening options must constantly be reviewed and close co-
operation  with  international  partners  continued.  The  Commission  will  maintain  and,  as 
necessary, extend its programme in these two key areas. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

Annex  

Commission inspections as at 31.12.2009 

State 

Austria 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Cyprus 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Hungary 

Ireland 

Italy 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Number of inspections 
01/2009 -12/2009 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2009 
(including follow-ups) 

8 

7 

3 

5 

5 

6 

4 

7 

10 

12 

11 

4 

6 

11 

4 

3 

5 

3 

6 

7 

7 

2 

4 

4 

10 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

2 

1 

0 

1 

1 

0 

1 

2 

0 

1 

0 

3 

10 

EN 

   EN 

  
Sweden 

United Kingdom 

Switzerland 

TOTAL 

1 

1 

2 

32 

7 

11 

4 

176 

EFTA Surveillance Authority inspections as at 31.12.2009 

State 

Number of inspections 
01/2009 -12/2009 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2009 
(including follow-ups) 

Iceland 

Norway 

TOTAL 

1 

5 

6 

6 

28 

34 

EN 

11 

   EN