REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No. 300/2008 ON COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY
Date: 2011-10-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: administrative check, air safety, airport, civil aviation, load, safety standard, transport staff

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 19.10.2011 
COM(2011) 649 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL  

2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No. 
300/2008 ON COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) No. 
300/2008 ON COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY 

This report covers the period 1 January – 31 December 2010 

INTRODUCTION 

29 April 2010 marked the date at which Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 and its implementing 
provisions entered into force. This  new  regulatory  framework  consolidated  and  repealed  for 
clarification reasons European legal acts adopted under the former framework of Regulation 
(EC) No 2320/2002. Furthermore, it took into account technical developments and procedural 
evolutions and provided more detail on such in response to recent unlawful acts in the area of 
civil  aviation  security.  As  a  result,  standards  for  certain  types  of  screening  equipment  and 
screening procedures were refined and additional new screening methods based on common 
basic  standards  were  adopted.  Additionally,  rules  and  conditions  for  passengers  carrying 
liquids on to aircraft were completed. 

Throughout the year, the Commission worked steadily with Member States and the industry 
to  harmonise  a  smooth  and  homogenous  implementation  of  the  aforementioned  new  legal 
framework. The scientific community and manufacturers focussed on releasing technologies 
which  would  allow  passengers  to  carry  liquids  on  to  aircraft.  First  trials  on  such  equipment 
were  implemented  at  European  airports.  Further  trials  took  place  on  the  use  of  security 
scanners. On the wider stage, regular discussions continued with international organisations to 
find global solutions to common problems. 

With  the  Yemen  cargo  incident  and  the  EU  mail  parcel  incidents  in  late  October  2010 
attention  was  once  again,  and  forcibly,  directed  towards  a  new  threat.  This  was  yet  another 
reminder  –  less  than  a  year  after  the  incident  on  Northwest  Airlines  flight  253  from 
Amsterdam Schiphol to Detroit on Christmas 2009 – that extremist groups continue to regard 
civil  aviation  as  an  attractive  target  and  continue  to  seek  ways  to  avoid  detection  by  the 
current screening techniques. It served 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 and triggered the establishment of a report and action plan to strengthen 
air  cargo  security  that  was  endorsed  by  the  Transport  Council  and  the  JHA  Council  in 
December 2010. As internal and external security are insepareble, addressing threats even far 
away from our continent is essential to protecting Europe and its citizens. The Commission is 
working closely with the new established EEAS to this effect.   

 
 
 
PART ONE 

THE INSPECTIONS 

1. 

GENERAL 

The  Commission  is  required,  under  the  terms  of  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  to  conduct 
inspections of Member States' aviation security administrations (the 'appropriate authorities') 
and of EU airports. Switzerland is also covered by the Union programme, while Norway and 
Iceland  (and  Liechtenstein)  are  inspected  against  parallel  provisions  by  the  EFTA 
Surveillance Authority (ESA). To carry out its inspection work, the Commission has a team 
of  11  aviation  security  inspectors.  This  inspection  work  is  supported  by  a  pool  of  national 
inspectors  nominated  by  Member  States,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Switzerland  who  were  re-
certified by the Commission in course of the year 2010 under the new legal framework. 46 of 
these  national  inspectors  took  part  in  the  2010  inspections.  A  chart  summarising  all 
Commission and ESA compliance monitoring activity to date is attached in an Annex.  

2. 

INSPECTIONS OF NATIONAL APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES 

The  Commission  monitored  5  appropriate  authorities  during  2010,  all  of  which  had  been 
subject to a previous Commission inspection. The deficiencies most commonly found in 2010 
were  related  to  the  yet  outstanding  full  alignment  of  the  National  Aviation  Security 
Programmes  and  the  National  Quality  Control  Programmes  to  the  new  legal  framework  of 
Regulation (EC) 300/2008. 
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 Member 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. 

3. 

INITIAL INSPECTIONS AT AIRPORTS 

Nineteen (19) initial inspections of airports were conducted during 2010, the same number as 
carried  out  in  2009.  All  chapters  were  covered  (although  not  during  each  inspection).  The 
overall percentage of core measures found to be in compliance in 2010 was almost 80%. 
The deficiencies which were found in the area of traditional measures1 tended, by and large, 
to stem from human factor issues. Non-compliances in the area of traditional measures at the 
airports inspected during 2010 mainly related to the quality of staff and passenger screening 
as  well  as  to  cargo  security  requirements.  In  particular,  the  hand  searches  of  staff  and 
passengers did not always meet the common basic standards, which had been for clarification 
reasons  set  out  in  detail  in  the  new  regulatory  framework.  In  the  area  of  cargo,  most  non-
compliances  related  to  the  selection  of  the  most  suitable  methods  for  screening,  given  the 
nature of the consignment, and standards for applying them. These human factor issues should 
be addressed through better training and supervision. 

1 

Measures  are  defined  as  ‘traditional’  if  already  applicable  under  the  legal  framework  of  Regulation 
(EC) 2320/2002 

 
 
 
                                                 
Furthermore, certain additional measures introduced under the new regulatory framework had 
not  yet  been  fully  implemented  at  the  airports  inspected  in  period  June  –  December  2010. 
Non-compliances arose in relation to methods and standards of screening of in-flight supplies 
and of airport supplies (where a secure supply chain had not yet been fully deployed), accredi-
tation procedures for staff to be exempted from screening and missing risk assessment for the 
frequency of patrols at airports. Member States’ appropriate authorities should actively pursue 
the implementation of these new provisions. 

Finally, some issues were found at airports inspected in course of the year 2010 in the areas of 
access control to security restricted zones, reconciliation of hold baggage, screening methods 
for unaccompanied baggage and standards of security screening equipment . 

4. 

FOLLOW-UP INSPECTIONS 

In accordance with Article 13 of Regulation 72/2010, the Commission routinely carries out a 
limited  number  of  follow-up  inspections.  Where  several  serious  deficiencies  have  been 
identified during the initial inspection at an airport, a further visit will certainly be scheduled. 
Two such activities were judged necessary during 2010 and the conclusion in both cases 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. 27 files (21 airport and 6 appropriate authorities) were closed during 
2010. In all, 11 appropriate authority and 17 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 Union, the Commission will activate Article 
15  of  Regulation  (EU)  No.  72//20102.  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. One Article 15 case was initiated in mid July 2010, which 
was closed again 4 months later when the deficiencies had been satisfactorily addressed. 

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 respectively 
EU-Pilots against Member States that have notified to the Commission Services to participate 
in  that  procedure.  In  2010,  two  infringement  proceedings  and  one  EU-Pilot  were  initiated 
following  inspections  of  national  administrations.  In  one  case,  the  concerned  Member  State 
failed  to  maintain  its  national  aviation  security  programme.  The  second  case  related  to  the 
application  of  the  EU  rules  at  small  airports.  The  third  case  was  linked  to  lack  of  human 
resources  for  compliance  monitoring.  During  the  year  two  infringement  cases  and  one  EU-
Pilot  could  be  closed  following  rectification  of  the  identified  shortcomings.  In  total  five 
infringement cases were still in progress at the end of 2010. 

2 

Commission Regulation (EU) No 72/2010 of 26 January 2010 laying down procedures for conducting 
Commission inspections in the field of civil aviation security, OJ L23 of 27.1.2010, p.1 

 
 
                                                 
MEMBER STATES' OWN EVALUATIONS  

6. 
Article 6 of Commission Regulation 1217/20033 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  Member 
States’ contributions for the reporting period Jan-Dec 2009 were all submitted on time and all 
followed the Commission template. The deficiencies identified mainly 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  largely  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 of the inspection 
methodology,  with  the  latter  often  indicating  a  lower  level  of  compliance  than  the  national 
reports might suggest.  

PART TWO 

THE LEGISLATION AND SUPPLEMENTARY TOOLS 

1. 

GENERAL 

New aviation security legislative acts published during 2010 mainly aimed at completing and 
refining  the  new  legal  framework  under  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  applicable  as  from 
29  April  2010.  Furthermore,  common  basic  standards  for  two  new  screening  methods  in 
aviation security were defined: 

• 

• 

Explosive detection dogs for primary screening of hold baggage as well as of cargo 
and mail (and as supplementary screening method for other chapters) and 

Metal detectors for primary screening of certain specialised types of cargo and mail. 

Finally,  the  legal  base  for  the  implementation  of  a  one-stop  security  arrangement  with  the 
United States of America was introduced. 

2. 

SUPPLEMENTARY LEGISLATION ADOPTED  

The new legislative texts adopted during 2010 were: 

• 

3 

4 

Regulation  (EU)  18/20104  concerning  specifications  for  national  quality  control 
programmes in the field of civil aviation security; 

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 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 18/2010 of 8 January 2010, amending Regulation (EC) 300/2008, OJ 
L7 of 12.1.2010, p.3 

 
 
                                                 
• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Regulation  (EU)  72/20105  laying  down  procedures  for  conducting  Commission 
inspections in the field of aviation security; 
Regulation (EU) 185/20106 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of 
the common basic standards on aviation security; 
Regulation (EU) 357/20107 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of 
the common basic standards on aviation security (security tamper evident bags); 
Regulation (EU) 358/20108 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of 
the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation  security  (liquids,  aerosols  and  gels; 
exemption of screening for liquids, aerosols and gels obtained at  certain airports in 
third countries); 
Regulation (EU) 573/20109 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of 
the common basic standards on aviation security (explosive detection dogs); 
Regulation (EU) 983/201010 laying down detailed measures  for the implementation 
of  the  common  basic  standards  on  aviation  security  (one  stop  security  for  aircraft, 
passengers and their cabin baggage and hold baggage arriving from the United States 
of America); 
Decision C(2010)77411 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of the 
common basic standards on aviation security (implementing decision); 
Decision  C(2010)260412  laying  down  detailed  measures  for  the  implementation  of 
the common basic standards on aviation security (supplies); 
Decision  C(2010)357213  laying  down  detailed  measures  for  the  implementation  of 
the common basic standards on aviation security (explosive detection dogs); 
Decision  C(2010)913914  laying  down  detailed  measures  for  the  implementation  of 
the common basic standards on aviation security (metal detection equipment). 

These texts were finalised during 6 regular meetings and 2 special meetings of the Aviation 
Security Regulatory Committee, 6 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. 

5 
6 
7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

Commission Regulation (EU) No 72/2010 of 26 January 2010, OJ L23 of 27.1.2010, p.1 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 of 4 March 2010, OJ L55 of 5.3.2010, p.1 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 357/2010 of 23 April 2010, amending Regulation (EU) 185/2010, OJ 
L105 of 27.4.2010, p.10 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 358/2010 of 23 April 2010, amending Regulation (EU) 185/2010, OJ 
L105 of 27.4.2010, p.12 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 573/2010 of 30 June 2010, amending Regulation (EU) 185/2010, OJ 
L166 of 1.7.2010, p.1 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 983/2010 of 3 November 2010, amending Regulation (EU) 185/2010, 
OJ L286 of 4.11.2010, p.1 
Decision  C(2010)774  final,  issued  to  all  Member  States  on  13.4.2010 ;  not  published  in  the  OJ 
(restricted and confidential material) 
Decision  C(2010)2604  final,  issued  to  all  Member  States  on  23.4.2010 ;  not  published  in  the  OJ 
(restricted and confidential material) 
Decision  C(2010)3572  final,  issued  to  all  Member  States  on  30.6.2010;  not  published  in  the  OJ 
(restricted and confidential material) 
Decision  C(2010)9139  final,  issued  to  all  Member  States  on  20.12.2010;  not  published  in  the  OJ 
(restricted and confidential material) 

 
 
                                                 
3. 

REGULATED AGENT AND KNOWN CONSIGNOR DATABASE  

To  strengthen  the  secure  supply  chain  in  air  cargo  and  air  mail  as  well  as  to  facilitate  its 
homogenous  implementation  in  the  EU,  the  regulated  agent  and  known  consignor  (RAKC) 
database was developed and has been maintained since its full deployment on 1st June 2010 
under a Commission framework contract. The RAKC database contained at the end of 2010 
about 7,500 records of regulated agents and (independently validated) known consignors. It is 
the  only  legal  primary  tool  to  be  used  by  regulated  agents  for  consultation  when  accepting 
consignments  from  another  regulated  agent  or  (independently  validated)  known  consignor. 
Since  its  operational  start  date,  its  contractually  agreed  availability  rate  of  99.5%  has  been 
continuously met. 

4. 

EU AIRPORT INSPECTIONS – HANDBOOKS 

Regulations (EC) No. 300/2008 and (EU) No. 72/2010 require that compliance monitoring by 
the Commission Services on civil aviation security requirements shall be objective and using 
a standard methodology. 

To contribute to this aim the Commission set up and maintains two comprehensive handbooks 
with  detailed  prompts  and  guidance  for  EU  inspectors  in  the  field.  One  handbook  was 
elaborated for all chapters other than air cargo and air mail, the other one for air cargo and 
mail only, due to the complexity of compliance monitoring in the latter two areas. 

PART THREE 

REPORTS, TRIALS AND STUDIES 

1. 

REPORTS 

In  response  to  the  air  cargo  incidents  in  late  October  2010  (Yemen  cartridge  bombs  and 
incendiary devices sent through EU mail courier services) and following a special meeting of 
the Aviation Security Regulatory Committee on 5th November 2010, the Council meeting on 
8th  November  2010  requested  the  EU  Presidency  representing  the  EU  Council  and  the 
Commission to set up a High Level Working Group (HLWG) to look at ways to strengthen air 
cargo  security.  The  HLWG  presented  their  report  and  action  plan  to  the  Transport  Council 
and the JHA Council on 2nd December 2010, who endorsed the report and its action plan. 

Historically,  transfer  cargo  and  mail  have  been  associated  with  a  low  degree  of  risk  when 
transferring  at  EU  airports  because  air  cargo  and  mail  should  have  already  been  subject  to 
security  measures  at  the  airport  of  departure  according  to  ICAO15’s  principle  of  host  state 
security responsibility. 

This  principle  was  also  reflected  in  the  current  version  of  the  new  legal  framework,  where 
transfer  cargo  and  transfer  mail  arriving  by  air  are  exempted  from  screening  (provided  that 
they  are  protected  from  unauthorised  interference  from  arrival  until  the  departure  of  the 
aircraft on which they are to be carried). 

In  the  light  of  aforementioned  Yemen  incidents,  the  report  recommended  to  accelerate  the 
adoption  of  measures  enhancing  aviation  security  for  air  cargo  and  mail  originating  from 

15 

International Civil Aviation Organisation 

 
 
                                                 
outside  the  EU,  favouring  a  risk-based  approach  and  taking  into  account  the  supply  chain 
security regulated in EU legislation and as a global principle under ICAO rules. 

In  reaction  to  the  abovementioned  incidents  with  incendiary  devices  sent  through  EU  mail 
courier services, the report furthermore recommended to enhance and further harmonise the 
existing EU cargo and mail security regime. 

Both of latter actions proposed should be completed by a) examining ways to extend the EU 
scheme on regulated agents and known consignors by including the possibility to approve or 
independently  validate  such  industry  located  in  third  countries,  by  b)  further  analyzing  and 
where necessary improving screening methods and technologies, by c) harnessing intelligence 
and  law  enforcement  cooperation  that  should  lead  to  a  common  EU  threat  assessment  on 
aviation  security  and  by  d)  enhancing  global  standards  on  legal  frameworks  and  capacity 
building. 

2. 

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  on  condition  that  such  trials  do  not  prejudice  the  overall  levels  of 
security.  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  in  both  of  latter  two  senses  were  conducted  during  2010  in  Germany, 
Spain,  France,  Italy,  the  Netherlands,  Sweden,  the  United  Kingdom,  Switzerland  and  in 
Norway.  These  concerned  the  use  of  security  scanners  for  passenger  and  staff  screening 
(including  millimetre  wave  equipment),  the  use  of  liquid  explosive  detection  systems  for 
screening of cabin baggage and the use of explosive trace detection for screening of headgear 
worn by passengers. 

3. 

STUDIES 

End  2010  a  study  report  on  the  legal  situation  regarding  security  of  flights  from  third 
countries to the EU was delivered. It proposed a number of recommendations to enhance the 
ability  of  the  EU  to  monitor  and  enforce  security  standards  in  respect  of  flights  from  third 
countries. 

Furthermore,  the  Commission  launched  end  2010  two  studies  on  a)  the  usage  of  the  EU 
database  for  regulated  agents  and  known  consignors  and  on  b)  Threat  Image  Projection 
technology used in screening of cabin baggage and hold baggage. 

 
 
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 as well as 
to influence global decision making. The link and coherence between the internal and external 
security needs to be ensured. According to new legal framework set up by the Lisbon Treaty,  
the  EEAS  will  be  fully  consulted  in  the  engagement  with  international  bodies  and  third 
countries  in  order  to  ensure  as  well  coherence  and  complementarity  with  specific  political 
dialogues launched by the EEAS.  

2. 

INTERNATIONAL BODIES 

The Commission attends the annual ICAO aviation security panel and during 2010 presented 
papers on liquids screening and air cargo security. These were well received. 

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 Security Cooperation Group, which 
progressed work towards one-stop security16. 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, sometimes causing 
significant difficulties for EU stakeholders. 

The Commission took part in one inspection at an airport in the United States of America to 
assess the possibility of a future one-stop agreement. 

CONCLUSION 

While,  overall,  a  high  level  of  security  continues  to  be  ensured  in  the  EU,  Commission 
inspections have revealed some shortcomings. In traditional measures shortcomings identified 

16 

Applicable as from 1.4.2011 for aircrafts, passengers and their cabin baggage and hold baggage arriving 
from the US – Commission Regulation (EU) No 983/2010 of 3 November 2010, amending Regulation 
(EU) 185/2010, OJ L286 of 4.11.2010, p.1 

 
 
                                                 
in  the  areas  of  staff  and  passenger  screening  as  well  as  of  cargo  processing  and  screening 
requirements tended, by and large, to stem from human factor issues. In additional measures 
implemented under the new legal framework of Regulation (EC) 300/2008 further non-com-
pliances  found  were  related  to  patrols  at  airports,  risk  assessment  and  screening  of  in-flight 
supplies and airport supplies. Commission recommendations 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,  further  detailed  implementing  rules  were  adopted  during  2010  to 
ensure  that  the  new  basic  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  is  applied  in  a  harmonised  way.  The 
Yemen  cargo  incident  and  the  EU  mail  parcel  incidents  in  late  October  2010  served  as 
reminders  that  civil  aviation  continues  to  be  targeted  in  new  and  innovative  ways,  which 
should be addressed with adequate and risk based protection measures. As mandated in the air 
cargo security action plan, the Commission has extended its action in this area. 

 
 
Annex 

Commission inspections as at 31.12.2010 

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 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

Switzerland 

TOTAL 

Number of inspections 
01/2010 -12/2010 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2010 
(including follow-ups) 

1 

2 

2 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

2 

2 

1 

1 

2 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

0 

2 

2 

2 

0 

26 

9 

9 

5 

5 

5 

7 

4 

7 

12 

14 

12 

5 

8 

12 

4 

4 

5 

3 

7 

7 

8 

3 

4 

4 

12 

9 

13 

4 

202 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EFTA Surveillance Authority inspections as at 31.12.2010 

State 

Iceland 

Norway 

TOTAL 

Number of inspections 
01/2010-12/2010 (including 
follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2010 
(including follow-ups) 

1 

3 

4 

7 

31 

38