REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 2012 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) N° 300/2008 ON COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY
Date: 2013-07-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air safety, airport, civil aviation, freight rate, postal service, public safety, safety standard, supply

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 9.7.2013 
COM(2013) 523 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

2012 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REGULATION (EC) N° 
300/2008 ON COMMON RULES IN THE FIELD OF CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

This report covers the period 1 January – 31 December 2012 

INTRODUCTION 

2012  marked  the  year  in  which  the  first  transitional  period  for  the  new  aviation  security 
measures introduced by Regulation (EC) 300/2008 and its implementing provisions came to 
an end. This concerned the requirement to either establish a secure supply chain for in-flight 
supplies  and  airport  supplies  or  to  screen  100%  of  such  supplies  upon  entry  in  security 
restricted  areas  at  airports.  In  its  inspections  throughout  the  year  2012,  the  Commission 
therefore put a lot of emphasis on verifying compliance with these new requirements.  

Furthermore,  the  supplementing  provisions  to  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  were  significantly 
amended. On one hand, the amendments aimed at fine-tuning or further clarifying the existing 
procedures for certain aviation security measures. On the other hand, complex new measures 
were introduced for air cargo and air mail being carried into the Union ("ACC3"). Finally, the 
regime on EU aviation security validation was significantly strenghthened. Two changes were 
later  incorporated  to  ensure  a  secure  supply  chain  and  a  reliable  validation  system  at  Third 
Country airports, at which air cargo and air mail bound to the Union shall be loaded onboard 
an aircraft, to be in place by mid 2014. This was in reaction to the Yemen air cargo bombs 
incident that took place in October 2010.  

With regard to liquid explosives, a reappraisal on the present threat to civil aviation confirmed 
that the related risk must still be considered high and must be addressed by aviation security 
measures.  However,  it  became  clear  in  the  course  of  the  year  that  removing  the  current 
restrictions on carrying liquids, aerosols and gels (LAGs) as hand luggage by the deadline of 
29 April 2013 would not be feasible due to operational difficulties with screening equipment 
that would likely result in significant inconvenience for air passengers. Draft legislation was 
prepared to revise the approach by phasing in screening, starting with duty-free LAGs by 31 
January 2014.  

Finally, arrangements for the mutual recognition of the respective air cargo and mail security 
regimes  of  the  EU  and  the  United  States  (U.S.)  were  concluded.  This  is  an  important 
achievement  for  EU  exports  and  eliminates  duplication  in  the  application  of  security 
measures,  and  thus  in  turn  translates  into  cost  and  time  savings  for  air  cargo  and  mail 
operators.  

2 

 
 
 
 
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 are inspected against parallel provisions by the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA). 
To carry out its inspection work, the Commission has a team of 10 full and part time aviation 
security  inspectors.  This  inspection  work  is  supported  by  a  pool  of  national  inspectors 
nominated  by  Member  States,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Switzerland  who  were  certified  by  the 
Commission under the new legal framework. 57 of these national inspectors took part in the 
2012  inspections.  A  chart  summarising  all  Commission  and  ESA  compliance  monitoring 
activities to date is attached in an Annex. 

2. 

INSPECTIONS OF NATIONAL APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES 

The Commission monitored eleven (11) appropriate authorities during 2012, all of which had 
been  subject  to  a  previous  Commission  inspection.  For  several  Member  States,  these 
inspections showed significant improvements from the past. The deficiencies most commonly 
found in 2012 were similar to those identified in inspections in 2011 and mainly 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 the implementation of aviation security 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 
by the national authorities 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 used in such a way as to provide an effective deterrent effect. 

The financial crisis and resulting pressure on public budgets affected the resources available 
for national compliance monitoring activities in certain Member States.  

3. 

INITIAL INSPECTIONS AT AIRPORTS 

Twenty-three (23) initial inspections of airports were conducted during 2012, an increase by 4 
inspections  in  comparison  to  2011  mainly  due  to  the  fact  that  a  number  of  smaller  airports 
requiring a lower number of inspectors were covered. All chapters were covered (although not 
during each inspection). The overall percentage of core measures found to be in compliance in 
2012 rose to 83%. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The deficiencies which were found in the area of traditional measures1 tended to stem, by and 
large, from human factor issues. These mainly related to the quality of staff screening as well 
as  to  certain  cargo  security  requirements.  In  particular,  the  inadequate  quality  of  hand 
searches  of  staff  continued  to  be  a  challenge.  In  the  area  of  cargo,  most  non-compliances 
related  to  the  standards  for  applying  screening.  These  human  factor  issues  should  be 
addressed through better training and supervision. 

Furthermore, certain additional measures introduced under the new regulatory framework  of 
Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  had  not  yet  been  satisfactorily  implemented  at  the  airports 
inspected  in  2012.  Non-compliances  arose  in  relation  to  methods  and  standards  of  security 
controls  of  in-flight  supplies  and,  in  particular,  of  airport  supplies  (where  a  secure  supply 
chain had not yet been fully deployed), missing risk assessment for the frequency of patrols at 
airports, re-certication of screeners operating x-ray or explosive detection system equipment 
and high risk cargo and mail. Member States’ appropriate authorities should actively pursue 
the implementation of these newer provisions. 

FOLLOW-UP INSPECTIONS 

4. 
In accordance with Article 13 of Regulation 72/20102, the Commission routinely carries out a 
limited  number  of  follow-up  inspections.  Where  several  serious  deficiencies  have  been 
identified during the initial inspection, but also to a lesser extent on a random basis to verify 
the accuracy of national compliance monitoring activities and reporting, a further visit will be 
scheduled. Three (3) such activities were carried out during 2012 and mostly confirmed the 
adequate rectification of identified deficiencies. 

5. 

OPEN FILES, ARTICLE 15 CASES AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 

Inspection  files  remain  open  until  the  Commission  is  satisfied  that  appropriate  rectification 
action has been implemented. 24 files (14 airport and 10 appropriate authorities) were closed 
during 2012. In all, 14 appropriate authority and 27 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.  72/2010.  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 May 2012, which was 
closed a month later when the deficiencies had been satisfactorily corrected. 

The other possible enforcement measure in the most serious cases, or in cases of prolonged 
non-rectification  or  reoccurrence  of  deficiencies,  is  to  open  infringement  proceedings.  In 
2012,  one  infringement  proceeding  was  initiated  following  inspections  of  a  national 
administration. The concerned Member State failed to maintain the national aviation security 
programme.  During  the  year,  three  (3)  infringement  cases  could  be  closed  following 
rectification of the identified shortcomings. At the end of 2012, no infringement case was in 
progress. 

1 

2 

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

4 

 
 
                                                 
MEMBER STATES' OWN EVALUATIONS  

6. 
Point 18.1 of the Annex II to Commission Regulation (EU) 18/20103 obliges Member States 
to submit  an  annual  report to  the  Commission by the end  of March each year,  covering the 
results  of  their  national  compliance  monitoring  for  the  period  January  to  December  of  the 
preceeding  year.  The  Member  States’contributions  for  the  reporting  period  January  to 
December 2011 were submitted on time and all followed the Commission template. The main 
deficiencies  identified  related  to  the  fact  that  some  Member  States  still  failed  to  cover  all 
security measures, did not carry out sufficient covert testing and could further strengthen their 
follow-up activities and enforcement regime.  Furthermore, a lack of national quality control 
of  regulated  agents  /  suppliers  and  known  consignors  /  suppliers  –  other  than,  where 
applicable, for validation purposes – was identified.   

PART TWO 

THE LEGISLATION AND SUPPLEMENTARY TOOLS 

1. 

GENERAL 

The  underwear-bomber  incident  during  Christmas  2009,  the  Yemen  cargo  bomb  incident  in 
late 2010, several laser pointer threats in early 2012 and potential cyber attacks as well as a 
remaining  high vulnerability for liquid explosives  all  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. 

New aviation security legislative acts adopted in the year 2012 aimed firstly at further refining 
the  legal  framework  under  Regulation  (EC)  300/2008  and  secondly  at  defining  the  new 
common basic standards for EU aviation security validation. 

2. 

SUPPLEMENTARY LEGISLATION ADOPTED  

The new legislative texts adopted during 2012 were: 

• 

• 

• 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Regulation  (EU)  173/20124  concerning  clarification  and  simplification  of  certain 
specific aviation security measures; 
Regulation (EU) 711/20125 as regards methods used for screening persons other than 
passengers and items carried; 
Regulation (EU) 1082/20126 in respect of EU aviation security validation; 

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  173/2012  of  29  February  2012,  amending  Regulation  (EU)  No 
185/2010, OJ L 59 of 1.3.2012, p.1 
Commission Regulation (EU) No 711/2012 of 3 August 2012, amending Regulation (EU) No 185/2010, 
OJ L 209 of 4.8.2012, p.1 
Commission  Regulation  (EU)  No  1082/2012  of  9  November  2012,  amending  Regulation  (EU)  No 
185/2010, OJ L 324 of 22.11.2012, p.25 

5 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
• 

• 

• 

Decision C(2012)12287 concerning clarification and simplification of certain specific 
aviation security measures; 
Decision C(2012)56728 laying down detailed measures for the implementation of the 
common basic standards on aviation security in respect of air cargo and mail; 
Decision C(2012)58809 as regards the methods used for screening persons other than 
passengers and items carried. 

These  texts  were  finalised  during  6  regular  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. 

REGULATED AGENT AND KNOWN CONSIGNOR DATABASE  

3. 
The "European database of regulated agents and known consignors" RAKCdb10 has been the 
only  legal  primary  tool  to  be  used  by  regulated  agents  for  consultation  when  accepting 
consignments from another regulated agent or from a (EU aviation security validated) known 
consignor  since  1  June  2010  and,  since  1  February  2012,  contains  the  list  of  air  carriers 
authorised  to  carry  cargo  and  mail  into  the  EU  from  Third  country  airports.  It  is  operated 
under  a  Commission  framework  contract.  At  the  end  of  2012,  the  RAKCdb  contained 
approximately  16,000  records  of  regulated  agents,  (EU  aviation  security  validated)  known 
consignors  and  ACC3  entities.  Its  contractually  agreed  availability  rate  of  99.5%  was 
continuously met in 2012, too. 

4. 

EU AIRPORT INSPECTIONS – HANDBOOKS 

Regulations  (EC)  300/2008  and  (EU)  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  has  set  up  and  maintains  two  comprehensive 
handbooks with detailed prompts and guidance for EU inspectors in the field. One handbook 
covers  inspections  in  the  field  of  air  cargo  security  while  the  other  one  deals  with  airport 
inspections. In April 2012, both handbooks were revised to take account of the latest changes 
introduced  to  the  implementing  rules  and  to  add  additional  prompts  and  guidance  for 
inspectors.  

7 
8 
9 
10  

Decision C(2012)1228 final, notified to all Member States on 29.2.2012 ; not published in the OJ  
Decision C(2012)5672 final, notified to all Member States on 10.8.2012 ; not published in the OJ 
Decision C(2012)5880 final, notified to all Member States on 23.8.2012; not published in the OJ 
The  Commission  set  up  this  database,  the  use  of  which  is  mandatory  for  actors  in  the  supply  chain 
through Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 and Decision (2010) 774. 

6 

 
 
 
                                                 
PART THREE 

TRIALS, STUDIES AND NEW INITIATIVES 

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 on condition that such trial does not impact negatively on 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. 

In the course of 2012, trials and evaluations were conducted in Luxemburg, Spain, France, the 
Netherlands and the United Kingdom. These concerned the use of simulation trace detection 
chambers  (cargo  and  mail),  shoe  analyser  metal  detectors,  backscatter  security  scanners, 
different  algorithms  for  security  scanners,  auto  clear  screening  of  cabin  baggage  and  the 
combined  use  of  hand  held  metal  detectors  and  explosive  trace  detection  for  screening  of 
passengers in specific cases. 

2. 

STUDIES AND REPORTS 

By mid 2012 the final report on the Threat Image Projection (TIP) that is largely used at EU 
airports  in  screening  cabin  baggage,  items  carried  and  hold  baggage  was  submitted  by  the 
consultant Booz&Co. It mainly confirmed that, if adequatley deployed, TIP has the potential 
to positively impact screener performance. However, it also concluded that under the current 
legal deployment framework, no difference in the performance in detecting prohibited articles 
can  be  established  between  TIP  and  non-TIP  airports.  The  consultant  therefore  made  a 
number of recommendation to improve the current deployment framework.  

Furthermore,  the  same  contractor  worked  on  a  study  assessing  the  impact  of  screening  of 
liquids,  aerosols  and  gels  (LAGs)    at  airports  with  a  view  to  the  (former)  29  April  2013 
deadline for lifting restrictions for LAGs carried on by passengers. The study was completed 
by  a  Commission  reappraisal  of  the  threat  and  risk  of  liquids  explosives,  which  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  risk  posed  by  such  substances  remains  high  and  must  be  adequately 
addressed  through  screening.  Finally,  data  obtained  in  surveys  and  consultations  with  the 
industry  and  in  intense  working  groups  with  Member  States  showed  that  should  the 
aforementioned  deadline  be  kept  the  demand  would  exceed  the  supply  of  liquid  explosive 
detection systems (LEDS) under the full implementation of LAGs screening within the highly 
probable scenario of operational difficulties at European airports and severe inconvenience to 
the passengers concerned11. 

The  Commission  intensively  discussed  with  Member  States  three  major  options  included  in 
the independent SCENIHIR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health 
Risks)  report  on  health  effects  of  x-ray  scanners12:  a)  no  changes  to  current  legislation,  b) 
adding backscatter security scanners to the list of allowed screening methods for passengers 

11  

12  

The  deadline  for  a  full  deployment  of  LAGs  screening  was  postponed  to  31/01/2014;  Commission 
Regulation (EU) No 246/2013 of 19 March 2013, amending Regulation (EU) No. 185/2010, OJ L 77 of 
20 March 2013, p. 8  
http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/scenihr_o_036.pdf 

7 

 
 
                                                 
and c) amending current legislation in a sense that already deployed x-ray security scanners 
emitting  radiation  below  a  certain  ceiling  could  be  used  until  the  end  of  their  economic 
lifetime. The report was a follow-up commitment by the Commission to a legislative proposal 
in aviation security and was approved on 26 April 2012  

3. 

NEW INITIATIVES 

One  of  the  main  on-going  rulemaking  files  in  aviation  security  is  the  amendment  of  the 
current legislation on the restrictions on the carriage of liquids, gels and aerosols. Lifting of 
these  restrictions  has  been  planned  for  many  years  and  been  subject  to  several  previous 
revisions  of  legislation.  In  2012  the  Commission  together  with  MS,  airports  and  the 
manufacturers of detection equipment engaged in trials and committed a study. This resulted 
in  the  conclusion  that  full  liquid  screening  as  of  April  2013  is  not  feasible  as  necessary 
equipment  has  not  started  to  be  deployed  at  EU  airports.  In  July  2012  the  Commission 
forwarded a report on these conclusions and its proposals for the way forward to the Council 
and the European Parliament.  

In November 2012 the EU Regulatory Committee for Civil Aviation Security gave its positive 
opinion on the Commission proposals to implement the first phase of liquid screening by 31 
January 2014 at the latest and the legislation was finally adopted by the Commission in the 
month of March 2013. 

As mandated in the air cargo security action plan, the Commission has extended its action in 
this area by establishing the regulatory framework for cargo and mail being carried into the 
Union  from  Third  Countries  and  a  robust  EU  aviation  security  validation  also  applicable 
outside the jurisdiction of the European Union. Its first phase entered into force on 1 Feburary 
2012. Since that date air carriers that wish to carry cargo and mail into the Union from third 
country  airports  have  to  register  as  so-called  "ACC3"13.  To  harmonise  and  ease  the  related 
registration and consultation mechanism in the Member States as well as for the Commission, 
new  functionalities  on  ACC3  were  deployed  in  the  "European  database  of  regulated  agents 
and known consignors (RAKCdb)" in the last quarter of 2012.  

Close co-operation was pursued with customs authorities as regards a possible harmonisation 
of AEO (Authorised Economic Operator) scheme to the Aviation Security validation regimes 
for regulated agents and known consignors of cargo and mail. 'The aim of this exercise is to 
avoid  double  validation  for  economic  operators,  where  their  core  business  within  these  two 
regulatory frameworks largely overlaps and at the same time to identify any possible gaps that 
may weaken the air cargo security and proposed appropriate measures to close them.'" 

As part of the Commission's work programme on critical infrastructure protection and in the 
framework of the EU Reference Network for Critical Infrastructure (ERNCIP) a new thematic 
subgroup on aviation security technology was launched in early 2012. 

A  working  group  consisting  of  interested  MS  and  industry  has  been  established  under  the 
framework  of  the  "agenda  for  the  future".  The  group  established  an  action  plan  to  analyse 
possibilities  to  increase  efficiency  in  aviation  security.  Work  on  two  concrete  actions  has 
started  in  2012:  a)  a  risk  assessment  on  passenger  related  risks  and  b)  a  study  has  been 
commissioned to analyse different concepts related to passenger differentiation. In the future 
it could be envisaged that the Aviation Security (AVSEC) Committee itself could steer future 
implementation of an action plan by including a standing item on its agenda. 

13  

Commission  Regulation  (EU)  No  859/2011  of  25  August  2011,  amending  Regulation  (EU)  No 
185/2010, OJ L 220 of 26.8.2011, p. 9 

8 

 
 
                                                 
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  the  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  coherence  and  complementarity  with  specific  political 
dialogues launched by the EEAS.  

2. 

INTERNATIONAL BODIES 

The Commission attends the annual ICAO aviation security panel and presented in its 2012 
session (26 – 30 March 2012) four working papers (one on liquids, two on cargo and one on 
transparency of security measures). 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. To avoid overlaps or duplication of work, a Memorandum of Understanding 
was signed between the Commission and ECAC in the second half of 2012. 

Moreover, harmonised measures have been addressed in the follow-up of a EUROCONTROL 
seminar  on  laser  threat.  The  main  goal  of  this  exercise  was  to  bring  together  stakeholder 
groups  with  a  vested  interest  in  this  issue,  so  that  they  could  consider  adopting  a  collective 
approach to reducing the growing threat of unauthorised laser interference in aviation. 

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 within 
the framework of the reached one-stop security14. 

Additionally,  the  next  milestone  in  the  transatlantic  co-operation  on  aviation  security  was 
passed mid-2012 with the mutual recognition of the respective air cargo and mail regimes of 
the European Union and the United States.  

14 

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 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
The  Commission  furthermore  intervened  on  a  number  of  occasions  when  Member  States 
raised  particular  concerns  about  additional  security  demands  from  third  countries,  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, every so often causing significant 
difficulties for EU stakeholders. 

The Commission took part in one inspection at an airport in the United States of America to 
monitor compliance in certain security measures within the framework of the aforementioned 
one-stop agreement.  

The Commission also started negotiations with Canada and Israel with a view to establish an 
agreement regarding one-stop security with these countries. 

CONCLUSION 

A  high  level  of  security  continues  to  be  ensured  in  the  EU.  Commission  inspections  have 
shown a slightly increased level of compliance with main regulatory provisions. In traditional 
measures,  deficiencies  identified  in  the  areas  of  staff  and  cargo  screening  requirements 
tended, by and large, to stem from human factor issues. Further non-compliances found in the 
additional  measures  implemented  under  the  new  legal  framework  of  Regulation  (EC) 
300/2008  were  related  to  security  controls  of  airport  supplies  (where  a  secure  supply  chain 
had  not  yet  been  fully  deployed),  patrols  at  airports,  re-certification  of  screeners  operating 
certain  security  equipment  and  high  risk  cargo  and  mail.  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  2012  to 
ensure that the new basic Regulation (EC)  300/2008 is applied in a harmonised  way and in 
order to meet new threats or better mitigating existing threats.  

10 

 
 
Annex 

Commission inspections as at 31.12.2012 

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 

Non-EU Members 

Switzerland 

TOTAL 

Number of inspections 
01/2012 -12/2012 
(including follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2012 
(including follow-ups) 

9 

11 

7 

7 

8 

10 

6 

10 

17 

19 

14 

8 

9 

17 

7 

5 

7 

3 

10 

10 

10 

6 

5 

5 

15 

12 

20 

5 

272 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 

0 

3 

1 

2 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

0 

37 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EFTA Surveillance Authority inspections as at 31.12.2012 

State 

Iceland 

Norway 

TOTAL 

Number of inspections 
01/2012-12/2012 (including 
follow-ups) 

Total number of 
inspections 2004-2012 
(including follow-ups) 

0 

5 

5 

9 

40 

49 

12