REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION Second Evaluation Report on EU Pilot
Date: 2011-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: complaint to the Commission, information system, infringement procedure (EU), institutional cooperation, project evaluation, project of common interest

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 21.12.2011 
COM(2011) 930 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

Second Evaluation Report on EU Pilot 

{SEC(2011) 1626 final} 

 
 
 
 
  
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

In  2007,  the  European  Commission  adopted  a  Communication  on  "A  Europe  of  Results  – 
Applying Community law"1. In this Communication the Commission suggested the initiation 
of a project, based on a partnership approach between the Commission and the Member States 
to  ensure  the  correct  application  of  EU  law,  to  provide  more  rapid  answers  to  citizens  and 
businesses  and  solutions  to  problems,  and  to  tighten  up  the  handling  and  management  of 
existing procedures. 

In April 2008, the EU Pilot project was designed for this purpose and started operating with 
15  volunteer  Member  States.  In  March  2010  the  Commission  adopted  the  first  EU  Pilot 
Evaluation Report2. In the latter Report the Commission noted that the system had started to 
produce  positive  results,  although  there  were  also  many  aspects  which  could  be  developed 
further in order to improve the functioning of the system, increase understanding between the 
Commission  and  participating  Member  States  and  speed  up  the  processing  of  files  and 
improve the results achieved3. 

In  2010  and  2011  the  Commission  continued  to  implement,  complete  and  fine-tune  the 
project.  The  following  major  developments  have  occurred  with  regard  to  the  application  of 
the EU Pilot project since the adoption of the first Evaluation Report in March 2010: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 
2 
3 
4 

Following the overall positive evaluation of EU Pilot in the first Evaluation Report, 
the remaining 12 Member States were invited by the Commission to join the project. 
Subsequently, ten further Member States joined EU Pilot4. 

Since March 2010, a benchmark of ten weeks has been applied to provide a general 
reference for the Commission assessment of Member States' responses on the same 
basis as for Member States.  

Since March 2010, the scope of EU Pilot has been expanded and, as a general rule, 
the system is used in all cases (subject to limited exceptions) concerning the correct 
application and implementation of EU law or the conformity of the national law with 
EU law at an early stage before any possible recourse to an infringement procedure 
under Article 258 TFEU. 

The  Commission  has  improved  the  IT  system,  on  which  the  EU  Pilot  project  is 
based,  to  ensure  the  efficient  functioning  of  the  system  and  to  make  it  more  user 
friendly.  

COM(2007)502, cf. section 2.2. "Improving working methods". 
COM(2010)70 final. 
Cf. section 4 "General Conclusions". 
The  25  Member  States  are:  Austria,  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Estonia, 
France, Germany, Greece, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, 
Portugal,  Romania,  Slovakia,  Slovenia,  Sweden,  Spain  and  the  United  Kingdom.  Malta  is  making 
necessary internal arrangements and should start using the system soon; negotiations are still on going 
with Luxembourg. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                      
In  its  first  Evaluation  Report  the  Commission  committed  to  deliver  a  further  evaluation  in 
2011. This document contains the second evaluation report of the EU Pilot project. In order to 
have a comprehensive overview of the system, this report covers the period from the start-up 
of the project in April 2008 until September 2011. It concentrates on the main findings which 
enable the efficiency of the system to be assessed. It builds on figures and volumes of files, 
looks at the policy areas at stake and compliance with the relevant benchmarks, and also takes 
into account available data on the quality of files. Supporting statistical details are contained 
in the Commission staff working paper accompanying this report. 

2. 

WORKING METHOD 

EU Pilot is the main tool for the Commission to communicate with the participating Member 
States  on  issues  raising  a  question  concerning  the  correct  application  of  EU  law  or  the 
conformity  of  the  law  in  a  Member  State  with  EU  law  at  an  early  stage  (i.e.  before  an 
infringement procedure is launched under Article 258 TFEU). 

Wherever there might be recourse to the infringement proceeding, as a general rule EU Pilot 
is  used  before  the  first  step  in  such  a  proceeding  under  Article  258  TFEU  is  taken  by  the 
Commission.  This  replaces  the  previous  regular  practice  whereby  the  Commission  sent 
administrative letters for this purpose. However, where urgency or another overriding interest 
requires  the  immediate  launching  of  an  infringement  procedure  under  Article  258  TFEU, 
exceptions may be authorised and infringement procedures can be launched without previous 
contacts  through  EU  Pilot.  In  such  exceptional  situations,  the  Commission  can  immediately 
respond to an alleged infringement by a Member State and urge that Member State to act in 
conformity  with  EU  law.  The  system  manages  enquiries  and  complaints  received  from 
citizens  and  businesses  as  well  as  own-initiative  cases.  These  include  issues  raised  with  the 
Commission in the European Parliament Petitions' Committee or via a letter from a Member 
of the European Parliament. 

The database is built in English. However, several Member States have maintained their right 
to correspond in their official language. The need for translations is met by the Commission 
as necessary. 

Individual  files,  including  a  description  and  questions  about  a  particular  issue,  are  then 
submitted to the Member State concerned via the EU Pilot application, giving ten weeks for 
the national authorities to reply to the questions raised as exhaustively as possible and propose 
a solution to the identified problems that is compatible with EU law. The Member States may 
likewise  justify  the  need  for  an  extension  of  the  ten  week  period,  thereby  indicating  to  the 
Commission that they need more time to work on their response. It is decided on a case-by-
case basis whether or not to accept the request for an extension of the general timeframe. 

In exceptional cases a timeframe shorter than ten weeks may be set. The reasons for a shorter 
timeframe are explained to the Member State. 

Within  a  further  ten  weeks  benchmark,  the  replies  received  from  the  Member  State,  if 
required,  after  being  translated,  are  examined  and  an  assessment  of  the  Member  State's 
response  is  uploaded  into  the  EU  Pilot  database.  If  no  solution  compatible  with  EU  law  is 
found, an infringement proceeding under Article 258 TFEU may be launched. In the event of 
a complaint, a response will also be prepared to inform the complainant of the outcome of the 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
enquiry  into  her/his  complaint.  If  needed,  the  Member  State  authorities  may  be  asked  to 
provide additional information. 

Observance  of  these  benchmarks  by  both  parties  might  be  a  challenge  but  it  is  essential  to 
ensuring that the first key step in the management of such files (that is either the sending of a 
letter of formal notice under Article 258 TFEU or the closing of the file) can be taken within 
the maximum period of 12 months from the date of registration of a complaint in the registry 
system (CHAP) or the creation of an own-initiative case in EU Pilot. Therefore, respecting the 
ten-week  benchmark  is  one  aspect  of  assessing  the  performance  of  both  the  Member  States 
and the Commission. 

Requests of access to documents on EU Pilot files are governed by Parliament and Council 
Regulation  No  1049/2001  regarding  public  access  to  European  Parliament,  Council  and 
Commission documents5, as implemented by the Commission Decision of 5 December 2001 
amending its Rules of Procedure6. 

3. 

EVALUATION 

This  evaluation  is  divided  into  two  periods  of  time:  the  appraisal  of  closed  files  covers  the 
period  March  2010-February  2011,  and  the  overall  statistical  data  on  the  functioning  of  the 
system covers the period from the start-up of the project in April 2008 until September 2011. 

Particularly, the evaluation covers:  

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

An  appraisal  of  the  EU  Pilot  files  closed  between  March  2010  and  February  2011 
conducted by the Member States and the Commission on the basis of the quality and 
cooperation/support criteria; 

The  volume  of  files  treated  in EU  Pilot.  This  evaluation  also  looks  at  trends  in  the 
various  Member  States,  taking  into  account  the  fact  that  not  all  of  them  joined  EU 
Pilot at the same time; 

The origin of the files and the policy fields concerned by the files submitted in the 
system; 

The  average  length  of  time  taken  by  the  Member  States  and  the  Commission  to 
process the files and compliance with the general ten week benchmarks; 

And,  finally,  the  "success"  rate  of  the  project,  which  means  how  many  responses 
provided by the Member States were considered acceptable with no need to launch 
the  formal  infringement  proceeding  under  Article  258  TFEU.  The  objective  of  EU 
Pilot is to achieve speedier results and to find solutions compatible with EU law for 
citizens and business through better cooperation between the Member States and the 
Commission without the need to launch  infringement procedures under Article 258 
TFEU. 

5 
6 

OJ L 145, 31.05.2001, p.43. 
OJ L 345, 29.12.2001, p.94. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                      
The details of these topics are included in the Commission staff working paper accompanying 
this report. 

With regard to the assessment of closed files for the period between March 2010 and February 
2011,  the  Commission  and  the  participating  Member  States  replied  to  a  series  of  questions 
based on three main criteria: quality, cooperation and support. The results of this appraisal 
show that when dealing with a file, Member States are broadly satisfied with the quality of the 
EU  Pilot  files  submitted  by  the  Commission,  particularly  concerning  the  clarity  of  the 
questions  raised  and  the  identification  of  the  issues  at  stake.  Finally,  both  Commission  and 
Member States are highly satisfied with the level of cooperation and support underlying the 
project. 

In  terms  of  the  volume  of  files,  during  the  period  April  2008  –  September  2011  a  total  of 
2,121  files  were  submitted  to  EU  Pilot.  Of  these,  1,410  files  completed7  the  process  in  EU 
Pilot. However, the volume is not spread equally among the Member States. Apart from the 
fact that the more populated Member States receive more files in EU Pilot as a result of the 
larger number of citizens, businesses and civil society interests, there is another element that 
comes  into  play.  There  is  a  difference  in  the  number  of  files  between  those  Member  States 
which  have  used  the  system  since  the  beginning  in  2008,  and  the  others  which  joined  the 
system  during  2010  or  2011.  Out  of  2,121  files:  15.5%  of  files  were  submitted  to  Italy  and 
Spain, 8% to United Kingdom, 7.7% for Germany and 6.5% for Portugal. 

Member States refused to process only 2% of all submitted files in EU Pilot, the main reason 
being insufficient information transmitted by a complainant. 

The issues concerned in the files submitted via EU Pilot are broadly in line with the existing 
situation of the volume of questions and problems arising in the different sectors of EU law: 
Some 33% of files concerned environmental issues, 15% internal market, 10.5% taxation, 8% 
mobility and transport and 6% health and consumer protection. 

With regard to origin, 49% of these 2,121 files originated from complaints, while 7% were 
enquiries  by  citizens  or  businesses,  and  around  a  further  44%  were  files  created  by  the 
Commission on its own initiative. 

The  time  taken  by  the  Member  States  and  by  the  Commission  to  process  EU  Pilot  files  is 
measured against the ten-week  benchmark. From the start of EU Pilot in 2008, the average 
time taken by Member States for proposing responses to files is 67 days, which is in line with 
the  ten  week  (70  days)  benchmark.  Since  March  20108,  the  average  time  taken  by  the 
Commission  services  to  assess  the  replies  proposed  by  Member  States'  authorities  and  to 
decide on a follow-up of the file is 102 days, which exceeds the general benchmark. It is to be 
noted that cases which exceed the benchmark are, for the most part, those where Commission 
services  require  additional  information  from  national  authorities,  especially  in  the  case  of 
more complex files and those where translations are needed. 

7 

8 

"Completed" means that responses to the files have been provided by Member States and assessed by 
the Commission as compatible or not with EU law. 
This date corresponds to the introduction of a general ten week benchmark for Commission to assess 
the replies provided by the Member States within the system. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                      
As  regards  the  "success  rate"  concerning  the  1,410  files  having  completed  their  process  in 
the  system,  nearly  80%  (1,107  files)  of  the  responses  provided  by  the  Member  States  were 
assessed  as  acceptable  ,  enabling  the  file  to  be  closed  without  the  need  to  launch  an 
infringement  procedure  under  Article  258  TFEU.  The  remaining  20%  of  the  files  (303)  in 
which no acceptable solution in line with EU law could be found went on to the infringement 
phase,  which  has  already  been  launched  or  is  being  prepared  by  the  Commission  following 
the processing of the file in EU Pilot. The success rate for the first evaluation report on EU 
Pilot was 85%. The increasing number of EU Pilot files due to the new participating Member 
States might be one of the reasons for this slight decrease. Further, since the adoption of the 
first report, EU Pilot has to be used in all cases where additional factual or legal information 
is  required  for  a  full  understanding  of  an  issue  at  stake  concerning  the  correct  application, 
implementation  of  EU  law  or  the  conformity  of  the  national  law  with  EU  law,  whereas 
previously  recourse  to  EU  Pilot  was  optional  before  launching  an  infringement  procedure 
under Article 258 TFEU. 

Since  2010,  the  Commission  observes  a  reduction  in  the  volume  of  new  infringement 
proceedings9 for the first 15 volunteer EU Pilot Member States. For the remaining 12 Member 
States,  which  joined  EU  Pilot  after  March  2010,  a  decrease  is  also  observed,  although  to  a 
lesser  extent.  Although  it  is  not  possible  to  identify  all  the  reasons  for  this  tendency,  one 
explanation is the setting up of EU Pilot, which helps to clarify and solve satisfactorily some 
issues  regarding  application  of  EU  law  raised  by  the  Commission,  thus  putting  an  end  to 
problems  without  the  need  for  recourse  to  infringement  proceedings  and,  in  the  case  of 
complaints, providing more rapid results for citizens and businesses. 

4. 

CONCLUSIONS 

In line with the commitments made by the Commission in its first Evaluation Report on EU 
Pilot: 

–  EU  Pilot  has  been  extended  and  is  now  being  fully  used  by  25  Member  States.  Its 

application has been broadened, fine-tuned and strengthened.  

–  The  project  has  made  and  continues  to  make  a  positive  contribution  to  cooperation 
between  the  Commission  and  participating  Member  States  in  answering  enquiries  and 
resolving  the  problems  of  citizens,  business  and  civil  society  interests  more  speedily. 
Around  80%  of  the  responses  provided  by  the  Member  States  had  been  assessed  as 
acceptable (in line with EU law) allowing the file to be closed without the need to launch 
an infringement procedure under Article 258 TFEU. 

–  Thanks  to  more  systematic  recourse  to  EU  Pilot,  the  participating  Member  States  have 
gained  a  centralised  overview  of  the  overall  management  of  issues  related  to  the 
application of EU law. 

–  The  working  methods  and  quality  of  files  in  EU  Pilot  have  been  improved  thanks  to  the 
cooperation  between  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States,  which  are  committed  to 
continuing their efforts to maintain the good performance. 

9 

Non-communication cases are not concerned by this statistics as they are excluded from the scope of EU Pilot. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                      
–  The Member States and in particular the Commission shall continue to aim to achieve the 

standard ten-week benchmark set by the Commission for the processing of files. 

–  In close cooperation with  the Member States,  the  IT  system and  the scope of  the project 
have been further developed and clarified in order to improve the functioning of EU Pilot. 

–  There  is  still  room  for  further  improvement  in  cooperation  and  functioning,  particularly 
with regard to compliance with agreed benchmarks and the quality of  both the questions 
submitted by Commission and the replies provided by Member States. 

The Commission considers that EU Pilot is no longer a project in its early and experimental 
phase,  but  a  well-established  working  method  that  delivers  results  for  the  Commission,  the 
participating Member States and citizens. The general approach pursued by the Commission 
is to endeavour to solve problems quickly by using EU Pilot and, where necessary, to launch 
and vigorously pursue infringement proceedings. The Commission is exploring the possibility 
of  extending  EU  Pilot  as  an  instrument  for  problem-solving  and  prevention  to  all  Member 
States, and continues to pursue its contacts with those Member States not yet using EU Pilot. 

Aspects  of  the  functioning  of  EU  Pilot  will  be  covered  in  the  future  annual  reports  of  the 
Commission on monitoring the application of EU law. 

EN 

7 

   EN