Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL setting up a Union system for supply chain due diligence self-certification of responsible importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating in conflict-affected and high-risk areas
Date: 2014-03-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: certificate of origin, customs inspection, gold, import (EU), mineral resources, tantalum, third country, tin, tungsten, war













EUR-Lex - 52014PC0111 - EN











|



52014PC0111

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL setting up a Union system for supply chain due diligence self-certification of responsible importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating in conflict-affected and high-risk areas /* COM/2014/0111 final - 2014/0059 (COD) */









EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
Ground for and
objectives for a proposal
The main objective of this proposal is to help
reduce the financing of armed groups and security forces[1] through mineral
proceeds in conflict-affected and high-risk areas by supporting and further
promoting responsible sourcing practices of EU companies in relation to tin,
tantalum, tungsten and gold originating from such areas. The proposal builds on
existing international due diligence frameworks and principles.
General
context
Today, international measures exist to
promote responsible sourcing of minerals in areas at risk or affected by armed
conflict. The two best-known were adopted in 2011 and 2010 respectively: the OECD
Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from
Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (OECD Due Diligence Guidance) and
Section 1502 of the United States Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act.
The former is not country or
region-specific and sets out a process to be followed by countries interested
in developing responsible sourcing capabilities. While primarily at the
disposal of companies in OECD jurisdictions, the Due Diligence Guidance is also
a source of inspiration attracting the participation of companies performing
significant transformative or trading functions in mineral supply chains for
gold, tin, tantalum and tungsten. In 2011, the EU took a political commitment
in the OECD framework to support the further uptake of the Guidance.
The Dodd-Frank Act focuses on the
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and nine adjoining countries. Section 1502
of the Act requires companies listed on US stock exchanges which use 'conflict
minerals'[2]
to report to the Security Exchange Commission on the origin of such minerals
and on relevant due diligence measures. These reports require an extensive
supply chain inquiry. US-listed companies are turning increasingly to their
suppliers, including in the EU, for relevant information and evidence of due
diligence. One of the business responses to the Act has been to redirect trade
away from Central Africa with impacts on the local markets for gold, tin,
tantalum and tungsten. Legitimately mined minerals make it to US and EU markets
with some difficulty.
The trade of conflict minerals is very well
documented in the case of the DRC and is the subject of UN Security Council
Resolution 1952 (2010). However, other cases abound elsewhere in Africa, Asia
and Latin America and the cause is being taken up outside the OECD too. In June
2013, G8 leaders expressed their commitment[3]
to increase transparency in the extractive industry.
Against this background, the European
Commission and the High Representative have been working to develop a
comprehensive EU responsible mineral sourcing framework. This work follows up a
2010 European Parliament Resolution calling for the EU to legislate along the
lines of US legislation as well as two Communications in 2011 and 2012[4] that announced the
Commission's intention to explore ways of improving supply chain transparency.
This legislative proposal will therefore be accompanied by a Communication
detailing other policy measures that can be deployed to tackle the problem as
broadly as possible.
Existing
provisions in the area of the proposal
Existing EU initiatives in relation to
natural resources, financial transparency and conflict-sensitive management of
international diamond trade and forestry:
–                        
Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20
December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the
international trade in rough diamonds
–                        
Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of
operators who place timber and timber products on the market. 
–                        
Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament
and the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements,
consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of
undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and the Council
and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC.
Consistency
with the other policies and objectives of the Union
The proposal is
consistent with, and aims at contributing to the EU foreign policy goals and
development strategy of better governance, sustainable management and law
enforcement in relation to the exploitation of natural resources in
mineral-producing conflict-affected and high-risk areas as well as to EU
enterprises and corporate social responsibility policies, which recommend companies
to mitigate any potential negative impacts that they might have on society, and
therefore pay attention to any potential human rights violations. 
2.           RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS
WITH THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
Consultation
of interested parties
A broad consultation process was held between
December 2012 and June 2013 which included a web-based public consultation and
numerous meetings with stakeholders. An assessment study into due diligence
compliance costs, benefits and related effects on selected operators in
relation to the responsible sourcing of minerals was finalised mid-September
2013. 
A summary of the results of the public
consultation and the final report of the assessment study are made available on
the Commission's web-site concurrently with this proposal.
The Commission carried out an impact
assessment of the proposed policy options taking into account the results of
the public consultation and the assessment study, which led to the publication
of a report. The following six options were considered:
·        
Option 1 – Standalone EU Communication 
This option consists of the following measures
to be included in a joint Communication of the Commission and the High Representative:
(i) National Contact Points (NCPs) and the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN)
would advocate the uptake of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance; (ii) EU public
procurement: the application of performance clauses in Commission and EU Member
States' public procurement contracts for relevant products (e.g. computers,
cell phones); (iii) financial assistance to the existing OECD programmes; (iv)
Commission support to 'Letters of Intent' by the European industry, and (v) government-to-government
actions.
·        
Option 2 – 'Soft-law' approach
This option combines the measures described
under Option 1 with a Council Recommendation to raise awareness of and promote
the voluntary uptake by EU enterprises of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance
notably for those enterprises that are not already subject to a mandatory third
country scheme.
·        
Option 3 - Regulation establishing obligations
under an 'EU Responsible Importer' certification based on the OECD Due
Diligence Guidance - VOLUNTARY
This option combines the measures described
under Option 1, with a Regulation targeting all EU importers of tin, tantalum and
tungsten ores and metals, and gold, regardless of the origin of the products.
The Regulation relies on the OECD Due Diligence Guidance to define obligations
for EU importers that opt to be self-certified as responsible importers of tin,
tantalum and tungsten ores and metals, and gold, on the basis of a
self-declaration of compliance. 
Although the Regulation is voluntary, EU
importers opting for self-certification are obliged to integrate all elements
of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance in their management system by: (i)
maintaining a system of controls and transparency over the mineral supply
chain, which includes inter alia the country of mineral origin and the
smelters/refiners; (ii) identifying and assessing risks in the supply chain
against the OECD model supply chain policy; (iii) designing and implementing a
strategy to respond to identified risks; (iv) obtaining independent third-party
audit assurances of supply chain due diligence; and (v) reporting publicly on
supply chain due diligence.
The EU self-certified importer is required
to disclose annually to the Member State competent authority the identity and
geographical location of the smelters/refiners in its supply chain. On this
basis, an EU list of responsible smelters/refiners established in or supplying
to the EU, would be drawn up.
The scheme will be evaluated after three
years, or before in case available information will allow it, and the results
will be used for decision-making needs on the future of the EU approach and for
amendments to the regulatory framework, making it mandatory, if appropriate, on
the basis of a further impact assessment. 
·        
Option 4 - Regulation establishing obligations
under an 'EU responsible importer' certification based on the OECD Due
Diligence Guidance – MANDATORY
This option combines the measures described
under Option 1, with a compulsory version of the Regulation described in Option
3 under which all EU importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten ores and metals,
and gold, would be subject to the obligations defined under the Regulation.
·        
Option 5 - Directive establishing obligations
for EU-listed companies based on the OECD Due Diligence Guidance
This option combines the measures described
under Option 1, with a Directive targeting almost 1,000 EU-listed companies
using tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold, regardless of origin, in their supply
chain.
The Directive would define the obligations
for EU-listed companies to integrate OECD Due Diligence Guidance in their
management system by (i) maintaining a system of controls and transparency over
the mineral supply chain, which includes inter alia the country of
mineral origin and the smelters/refiners; (ii) identifying and assessing risks
in the supply chain against the OECD model supply chain policy; (iii) designing
and implementing a strategy to respond to identified risks; (iv) obtaining an
independent third-party audit of supply chain due diligence of the EU-listed
company; and (v) reporting publicly on supply chain due diligence.
EU-listed companies should disclose to
Member States' competent authorities the outcome of the independent third-party
audit.
·        
Option 6 - Prohibition of imports when EU
importers of mineral ores fail to demonstrate compliance with OECD Due
Diligence Guidance 
This option consists of the measures
described under Option 1, and in addition it would require EU importers to
mandatorily demonstrate compliance with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. Providing
evidence on compliance to Member States' customs authorities, importers will be
eligible to access the EU market.
This option would follow the approach taken
by the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme targeting the trade in rough
diamonds and Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 based on
Article 133 EC (now Article 207 TFEU) which sets out the rules applicable for
imports and exports of rough diamonds. In this case, an international agreement
supports the importation ban for so-called "conflict diamonds". 
3.           LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE
PROPOSAL
Summary of the
proposed action
The proposed action is Option 3. It focuses
on all EU operators importing tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold into
the EU market. It defines the conditions for them to be self-certified as
responsible importers of the mineral and metals in scope. The proposal is based
on a due diligence framework allowing EU importers to apply the principles and
processes set out in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance and thereby addressing the
risk of financing armed groups and security forces and mitigating other adverse
impacts including serious abuses associated with the extraction, transport or
trade of the minerals in scope. 
The due diligence framework requires responsible
importers of the mineral and metal within the scope of the Regulation to establish
a strong company management system; to identify and assess risks in the supply
chain; to design and implement a strategy to respond to identified risks; to carry
out independent third-party audits of supply chain due diligence at identified
points in the supply chain; and to report on supply chain due diligence. 
In addition, responsible importers of those
minerals and metals are required to make available on an annual basis, where
applicable, the identity of all smelters and/or refiners supplying them, as
well as to provide independent third-party audit assurances and pass them on to
Member States' competent authorities and to downstream purchasers, with due
regard to business confidentiality and other competitive concerns. 
The proposal aims to help reduce the
financing of armed groups and security forces through mineral proceeds in
conflict-affected and high-risk areas by encouraging EU operators importing the
minerals and metals within the scope of the Regulation from such areas, to do
so responsibly and facilitate due diligence efforts of downstream purchasers.
On the basis of the information disclosed
to the competent authorities, the EU will publish annually, after consultation with
the OECD, a list of responsible smelters and refiners that source according to the
Regulation. 
Legal basis 
Article 207 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union.
The principles
of subsidiarity and proportionality 
The proposal falls under the exclusive
competence of the Union. The subsidiarity principle does therefore not apply.
It should however be noted that in the light of the problems outlined above,
EU-level action provides more critical mass and global leverage relative to individual
Member State action. 
The principle of proportionality requires
that any intervention is targeted and does not go beyond what is necessary to
achieve the objectives. This principle has guided the preparation of this
proposal from the identification and evaluation of alternative policy options
to the drafting of the legislative proposal.
Choice of the
instrument
The proposed instrument is a Regulation to
ensure the highest level of harmonisation across Member States and guarantee
sufficient authority over participating operators and leverage in relation to
the identification of smelters and refiners. 
4.           BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
The present proposal entails limited
financial implications for the Union budget for administrative purposes.
2014/0059 (COD)
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL
setting up a Union system for supply chain
due diligence self-certification of responsible importers of tin, tantalum and
tungsten, their ores, and gold originating in conflict-affected and high-risk
areas 
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 207 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the
European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative
act to the national Parliaments,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1)       Natural mineral resources in
conflict-affected or high risk areas − although holding great potential
for development – can be a cause of dispute where their revenues are fuelling the
outbreak or continuation of violent conflict, undermining national endeavours
towards development, good governance and the rule of law. In these areas,
breaking the nexus between conflict and illegal exploitation of minerals is
critical to peace and stability. 
(2)       The issue concerns
resource-rich regions where the challenge posed by the desire to minimise the
financing of armed groups and security forces has been taken up by governments
and international organisations together with business operators and civil
society organisations. 
(3)       The Union has been
actively engaged in an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
initiative to advance the responsible sourcing of minerals from conflict
regions, which has resulted in a government-backed multi-stakeholder process
leading to the adoption of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible
Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (OECD
Due Diligence Guidance[5])
including supplements on tin, tantalum and tungsten, and on gold. In May 2011,
the OECD Ministerial Council recommended to actively promote the observance of
this Guidance. 
(4)       The concept of responsible
sourcing is referred to in the updated OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises[6]
and is in line with the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights[7].
These documents aim at advancing supply chain due diligence practices when
businesses source from regions affected by conflict and instability. At the
highest international level, UN Security Council Resolution 1952 (2010)
specifically targeted the Democratic Republic of Congo (the DRC) and its
neighbours in Central Africa calling for supply chain due diligence to be
observed; the UN Group of Experts on the DRC, following up Security Council Resolution
1952 (2010), also advocates compliance with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. 
(5)       In addition to
multilateral initiatives, on 15 December 2010, the Heads of State and
Government of the Great Lakes Region took a political commitment in Lusaka to fight the illegal exploitation of natural resources in the region and approved inter
alia a regional certification mechanism based on the OECD Due Diligence
Guidance.
(6)       The Commission in its 2008
Communication[8]
recognised that securing reliable and undistorted access to raw materials is an
important factor for the EU's competitiveness. The Raw Materials Initiative
(RMI) is an integrated strategy aimed at responding to different challenges
related to access to non-energy non-agriculture raw materials. The RMI
recognises and promotes financial as well as supply chain transparency, and the
application of corporate social responsibility standards.
(7)       On 7 October 2010, the
European Parliament passed a Resolution calling for the Union to legislate along
the lines of the US 'conflict minerals' law alias Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; and the Commission
announced in its Communications of 2011[9]
and 2012[10] its intention to explore ways of improving
transparency throughout the supply chain, including aspects of due diligence. In
the latter communication and in line with the commitment it had made at the May
2011 OECD Ministerial Council, the Commission also advocated greater support
for and use of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and of the OECD
Due Diligence Guidance – even outside the OECD membership. 
(8)       Union citizens and civil
society actors have raised awareness with respect to companies operating under the
 Union's jurisdiction for not being held accountable for their potential connection
to the illicit extraction and trade of minerals from conflict regions. The consequence
is that such minerals, potentially present in consumer products, link consumers
to conflicts outside the Union. To this end, citizens have requested, notably through
petitions, that legislation be proposed to the European Parliament and the
Council holding companies accountable under the Guidelines as established by
the UN and OECD.
(9)       In the context of this
Regulation, supply chain due diligence is an on-going, proactive and reactive
process through which business operators monitor and administer their purchases
and sales with a view to ensuring that they do not contribute to conflict and
adverse impacts thereof.
(10)     Third-party auditing of a company's
supply chain due diligence practices ensures credibility for the benefit of downstream
companies and contributes to the improvement of the upstream due diligence
practices.
(11)     Public reporting by a
company on its supply chain due diligence policies and practices provides the
necessary transparency to generate public confidence in the measures companies
are taking. 
(12)     Union companies have
expressed their interest through the public consultation in the responsible
sourcing of minerals and reported on current industry schemes designed to
pursue their corporate social responsibility objectives, customer requests, or
the security of their supplies. However, Union companies have also reported countless
difficulties in the exercise of supply chain due diligence because of lengthy
and complex global supply chains involving a high number of operators that are
often insufficiently aware or ethically unconcerned. The cost of responsible
sourcing and their potential impact on competitiveness notably on SMEs should
be monitored by the Commission.
(13)     Smelters and refiners are
an important point in global mineral supply chains as they are typically the last
stage in which due diligence can effectively be assured by collecting, disclosing
and verifying information on the mineral's origin and chain of custody. After
this stage of transformation it is often considered unfeasible to trace back the
origins of minerals. A Union list of responsible smelters and refiners could
therefore provide transparency and certainty to downstream companies as regards
supply chain due diligence practices.
(14)     The Member State competent authorities are responsible to ensure the uniform compliance of the self-certification
of responsible importers by carrying out appropriate ex-post checks so as to
verify whether the self-certified responsible importers of the minerals and/or
metals within the scope of the Regulation comply with the supply chain due
diligence obligations. Records of such checks should be kept for at least 5
years. Member States are responsible to lay down the rules applicable to
infringements of the provisions of this Regulation.
(15)     In order to ensure the proper
implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on
the Commission. The implementing powers relating to the list of responsible
smelters and refiners and the list of Member State competent authorities should
be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011[11]. 
(16)     The Commission should report
regularly to the Council and the European Parliament on the effects of the
scheme. No later than three years after entering into force and every six years
thereafter, the Commission should review the functioning and the effectiveness
of this Regulation, including as regards the promotion of responsible sourcing
of the minerals within its scope from conflict-affected and high-risk areas.
The reports may be accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate legislative
proposals, which may include mandatory measures,
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Subject
matter and scope
1.           This Regulation sets up a
Union system for supply chain due diligence self-certification in order to
curtail opportunities for armed groups and security forces[12] to trade in tin, tantalum
and tungsten, their ores, and gold. It is designed to provide transparency and
certainty as regards the supply practices of importers, smelters and refiners sourcing
from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. 
2.           This Regulation lays down
the supply chain due diligence obligations of Union importers who choose to be self-certified
as responsible importers of minerals or metals containing or consisting of tin,
tantalum, tungsten and gold, as set out in Annex I. 
Article 2
Definitions
For the purpose of this Regulation, the
following definitions shall apply:
(a)          'minerals' means ores and concentrates
containing tin, tantalum and tungsten, and gold as set out in the Annex I;
(b)          'metals' means metals containing
or consisting of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold as set out in the Annex I;
(c)          'mineral supply chain' means the
system of activities, organisations, actors, technology, information, resources
and services involved in moving and processing the minerals from the extraction
site to their incorporation in the final product;
(d)          'chain of custody or supply chain
traceability system' means a record of the sequence of entities which have
custody of minerals and metals as they move through a supply chain;
(e)          'conflict-affected and high-risk
areas' means areas in a state of armed conflict, fragile post-conflict as well
as areas witnessing weak or non-existent governance and security, such as failed
states, and widespread and systematic violations of international law,
including human rights abuses;
(f)          'downstream' means the metal supply
chain from the smelters or refiners to the end use;
(g)          'importer' means any natural or
legal person declaring minerals or metals within the scope of this Regulation for
release for free circulation within the meaning of Article 79 of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/1992[13];
(h)          'responsible importer' means any
importer who chooses to self-certify according to the rules set out in this
Regulation;
(i)           'self-certification' means the
act of declaring one's adherence to the obligations relating to management
systems, risk management, third-party audits and disclosure as set out in this
Regulation; 
(j)           'grievance mechanism' means an early-warning
risk awareness mechanism allowing any interested party or whistle-blower to
voice concerns regarding the circumstances of mineral extraction, trade,
handling and export in conflict-affected and high-risk areas;
(k)          'model supply chain policy' conforms
to Annex II of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance outlining the risks of
significant adverse impacts which may be associated with the extraction, trade,
handling and export of minerals from conflict-affected and high risk areas;
(l)           'risk management plan' means the
importers' written response to the identified supply chain risks based on Annex
III to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance[14];

(m)         'smelting and refining' are forms
of extractive metallurgy involving processing steps with the aim to produce a
metal from its ore or concentrate;
(n)          'upstream' means the mineral
supply chain from the extraction sites to the smelters or refiners, included;
(o)          'supply chain due diligence' refers
to the obligations of responsible importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten,
their ores, and gold in relation to their management systems, risk management, third-party
audits and disclosure of information with a view to identifying and addressing
actual and potential risks linked to conflict-affected and high risk-areas to
prevent or mitigate adverse impacts associated with their sourcing activities;
(p)          'responsible smelters or
refiners' means smelters or refiners in the supply chain of the responsible
importer; 
(q)          'Member State competent
authorities' means the designated one or more authorities with auditing
competences and knowledge as regards raw materials and industrial processes. 
Article 3
Self-certification
as a responsible importer 
1.           Any importer of minerals or
metals within the scope of the Regulation may self-certify as responsible
importer by declaring to a Member State competent authority that it adheres to the
supply chain due diligence obligations set out in this Regulation. The
declaration shall contain documentation in which the importer confirms its
adherence to the obligations including results of the independent third-party
audits carried out. 
2.           The Member State competent
authorities shall carry out appropriate ex-post checks in order to ensure that
self-certified responsible importers of the minerals or metals within the scope
of this Regulation comply with their obligations pursuant to Articles 4, 5, 6, and
7 of this Regulation. 
Article 4
Management
system obligations 
The responsible importer of the minerals or
metals within the scope of this Regulation shall:
(a)          adopt and clearly communicate to
suppliers and the public its supply chain policy for the minerals and metals potentially
originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, 
(b)          incorporate in its supply chain
policy the standards against which supply chain due diligence is to be
conducted consistent with the standards set forth in the model supply chain
policy in Annex II to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, 
(c)          structure its internal management
systems to support supply chain due diligence by assigning responsibility to senior
staff to oversee the supply chain due diligence process as well as maintain
records for a minimum of 5 years,
(d)          strengthen its engagement with
suppliers by incorporating its supply chain policy into contracts and
agreements with suppliers consistent with Annex II to the OECD Due Diligence
Guidance, 
(e)          establish a company-level grievance
mechanism as an early-warning risk-awareness system or provide such mechanism through
collaborative arrangements with other companies or organisations, or by
facilitating recourse to an external expert or body (e.g. ombudsman),
(f)          as regards minerals, operate a
chain of custody or supply chain traceability system that provides, supported
by documentation, the following information: 
(i)      description of the mineral, including
its trade name and type, 
(ii)     name and address of the supplier to
the importer,
(iii)    country of origin of the minerals,
(iv)    quantities and dates of extraction,
expressed in volume or weight,
(v)     when minerals originate from
conflict-affected and high-risk areas, additional information, such as the mine
of mineral origin; locations where minerals are consolidated, traded and
processed; and taxes, fees, royalties paid, in accordance with the specific
recommendations for upstream companies as set out in the OECD Due Diligence
Guidance.
(g)          as regards metals, operate a
chain of custody or supply chain traceability system that provides, supported
by documentation, the following information: 
(i)      description of the metal, including its
trade name and type, 
(ii)     name and address of the supplier to
the importer, 
(iii)    name and address of the smelters or refiners
in the importers' supply chain,
(iv)    record of the smelters' or refiners'
third-party audit reports,
(v)     countries of origin of the minerals in
the smelters' or refiners' supply chain. 
(vi)    when metals are based on minerals
originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, additional information
shall be provided in accordance with the specific recommendations for
downstream companies set out in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. 
Article 5
Risk
management obligations 
1.           The responsible importer
of the minerals or metals within the scope of this Regulation shall:
(a)     identify and assess the risks of
adverse impacts in its mineral supply chain on the basis of the information provided
pursuant to Article 4 against the standards of its supply chain policy,
consistent with Annex II and the due diligence recommendations of the OECD Due
Diligence Guidance,
(b)     implement a strategy to respond to the
identified risks designed so as to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts by
(i)      reporting findings of the supply
chain risk assessment to its designated senior management,
(ii)     adopting risk management measures consistent
with Annex II and the due diligence recommendations of the OECD Due Diligence
Guidance, considering its ability to influence, and where necessary take steps
to put pressure on suppliers who can most effectively prevent or mitigate the
identified risk, by making it possible either to
(a)     continue trade while simultaneously
implementing measurable risk mitigation efforts, 
(b)     suspend trade temporarily while pursuing
on-going measurable risk mitigation efforts, or 
(c)     disengage with a supplier after failed
attempts at mitigation, 
(iii)    implementing the risk management
plan, monitoring and tracking performance of risk mitigation efforts, reporting
back to designated senior management and considering suspending or
discontinuing engagement with a supplier after failed attempts at mitigation,
(iv)    undertaking additional fact and risk
assessments for risks requiring mitigation, or after a change of circumstances.
2.           If a responsible importer
pursues risk mitigation efforts while continuing trade or temporarily
suspending trade, it shall consult with suppliers and affected stakeholders,
including local and central government authorities, international or civil
society organisations and affected third parties, and agree on a strategy for
measurable risk mitigation in the risk management plan. 
3.           A responsible importer shall,
in order to design conflict and high-risk sensitive strategies for mitigation
in the risk management plan, rely on the measures and indicators under Annex
III of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance and measure progressive improvement. 
Article 6
Third-party
audit obligations
The responsible importer of the minerals or
metals within the scope of this Regulation shall carry out audits via an independent
third-party.
The independent third-party audit shall
(a)          include in the audit scope all of
the responsible importer's activities, processes and systems used to implement
supply chain due diligence regarding minerals or metals within the scope of the
Regulation, including the responsible importer's management system, risk
management, and disclosure of information,
(b)          determine as the objective of the
audit the conformity of the responsible importer's supply chain due diligence
practices with Articles 4, 5 and 7 of this Regulation, 
(c)          respect the audit principles of
independence, competence and accountability as set out in the OECD Due
Diligence Guidance. 
Article 7 
Disclosure
obligations
1.           By 31 March of each year
at the latest, the responsible importer of minerals or metals within the scope
of this Regulation shall submit to the Member State competent authority the
following documentation covering the previous year's calendar period: 
(a)     its name, address, full contact
details and a description of its commercial activities,
(b)     a declaration of conformity with the
obligations set out in Article 4, 5, 6 and 7,
(c)     independent third-party audits carried
out in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation. 
2.           By 31 March of each year
at the latest, the responsible importer of minerals within the scope of this
Regulation shall submit to the Member State competent authority the
documentation covering the previous year's calendar period as regards the
proportion of minerals originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas
relative to the total amount of minerals purchased, as confirmed by independent
third-party audits in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation. 
3.           By 31 March of each year
at the latest, the responsible importer of metals within the scope of this
Regulation shall submit to the Member State competent authority the following
documentation covering the previous year's calendar period: 
(a)     name and address of each of the responsible
smelters or refiners in its supply chain, 
(b)     independent third-party audits regarding
each of the responsible smelters or refiners in its supply chain carried out in
accordance with the scope, objective and principles set out in Article 6 of the
Regulation,
(c)     the proportion of minerals originating
from conflict-affected and high-risk areas relative to the total amount of
minerals purchased by each of those smelters or refiners, as confirmed by
independent third-party audits.
4.           The responsible importer of
minerals or metals within the scope of this Regulation shall make available to
its immediate downstream purchasers all information gained and maintained
pursuant to its supply chain due diligence with due regard to business
confidentiality and other competitive concerns.
5.           The responsible importer of
minerals or metals within the scope of this Regulation shall publicly report as
widely as possible, including on the internet and on an annual basis on its supply
chain due diligence policies and practices for responsible sourcing. The report
shall contain the steps taken by the responsible importer to implement the
obligations as regards its management system, risk management set out in
Article 4 and 5 respectively, as well as a summary report of the third-party audits,
including the name of the auditor, with due regard to business confidentiality
and other competitive concerns.
6.           Within two months of
reception of the submitted documentation as referred to in paragraph 1, 2 and 3
the competent authority of the Member States shall issue a notice of reception.

Article 8 
List
of responsible smelters and refiners
1.           On the basis of the
information provided by the Member States in their reports as referred to in Article
15, the Commission shall adopt and make publicly available a decision listing the
names and addresses of responsible smelters and refiners of minerals within the
scope of this Regulation. 
2.           The Commission shall
identify on the list referred to in paragraph 1 those responsible smelters and
refiners that source – at least partially – from conflict-affected and
high-risk areas. 
3.           The Commission shall adopt
the list in accordance with the template in Annex II and the regulatory
procedure referred to in Article 13(2). The OECD Secretariat shall be consulted.

4.           The Commission shall
update the information included in the list in a timely manner. The Commission
shall remove from the list the names of the smelters and refiners that are no longer
recognised as responsible importers by Member States in accordance with Article
14(3), or the names of the smelters and refiners in the supply chain of the no
longer recognised responsible importers. 
Article 9
Member State competent authorities
1.           Each Member State shall designate
one or more competent authorities in charge of the application of this
Regulation.
Member States shall
inform the Commission of the names and addresses of the competent authorities within
3 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. Member States shall
inform the Commission of any changes to the names or addresses of the competent
authorities.
2.           The Commission shall make a
decision to publish, including on the internet, a list of competent authorities
in accordance with the template in Annex III and the regulatory procedure referred
to in paragraph 2 of Article 13. The Commission shall update the list regularly.
3.           Competent authorities
shall ensure the effective and uniform implementation of this Regulation
throughout the Union.
Article 10
Ex-post checks on
responsible importers 
1.           The competent authorities
of the Member States shall carry out appropriate ex-post checks in order to ensure
whether self-certified responsible importers of minerals and metals within
scope of this Regulation comply with the obligations set out in Articles 4, 5,
6 and 7.
2.           The checks referred to in
paragraph 1 shall be conducted by taking a risk-based approach. In addition,
checks may be conducted when a competent authority is in possession of relevant
information, including on the basis of substantiated concerns provided by third
parties, concerning the compliance by a responsible importer with this
Regulation.
3.           The checks referred to in
paragraph 1 shall include, inter alia:
(a)     examination of the responsible
importer's implementation of supply chain due diligence obligations including
the management system, risk management, independent third-party audit and
disclosure,
(b)     examination of documentation and
records that demonstrate the proper compliance with the supply chain due
diligence obligations,
(c)     examination of audit obligations in
accordance with the scope, objective and principles set out in Article 6, 
(d)     on-the-spot inspections, including
field audits.
4.           Responsible importers
shall offer all assistance necessary to facilitate the performance of the
checks referred to in paragraph 1, notably as regards access to premises and
the presentation of documentation and records.
Article 11
Records
of checks on responsible importers 
The competent authorities shall keep
records of the checks referred to in Article 10(1), indicating in particular
their nature and results, as well as records of any notice of remedial action
issued under Article 14(2). 
Records of the competent authorities'
checks shall be kept for at least 5 years.
Article 12
Cooperation
between authorities
1.           Competent authorities
shall exchange information, including with their respective customs
authorities, on matters pertaining to self-certification and ex-post checks
carried out. 
2.           Competent authorities shall
exchange information on shortcomings detected through the ex-post checks
referred to in Article 10 and on the rules applicable to infringement in
accordance with Article 14 with the competent authorities of other Member
States and with the Commission.
3.           Cooperation between
authorities shall be in full respect of the Directive 95/46/EC and Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001 on data protection and the provisions of the Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2913/92 relating to the disclosure of confidential information.
Article 13
Committee
procedure
1.           The Commission shall be
assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee within the meaning
of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
2.           Where reference is made to
this paragraph, Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply. 
Where the opinion of the committee is to be
obtained by written procedure, that procedure shall be terminated without
result when, within the time-limit for delivery of the opinion, the chair of
the committee so decides or a simple majority of committee members so request. 
Article 14
Rules
applicable to infringement
1.           The Member States shall
lay down the rules applicable to infringements of the provisions of this
Regulation. 
2.           In case of an infringement
of the provisions of this Regulation, the competent authorities of Member
States shall issue a notice of remedial action to be taken by the responsible
importer. 
3.           In case of inadequate
remedial action by the responsible importer, the competent authority shall issue
to the importer a notice of non-recognition of its responsible importer
certificate as regards the minerals or metals within the scope of this
Regulation and inform the Commission. 
4.           The Member States shall
notify the rules to the Commission and shall notify it without delay of any
subsequent amendment thereto. 
Article 15
Reporting
and review
1.           Member States shall submit
to the Commission by 30 June of each year at the latest, a report on the implementation
of this Regulation during the previous calendar year, including any information
on responsible importers as set out in Article 7(1) (a), 7.2 and 7.3 (a) and
(c). 
2.           On the basis of this
information the Commission shall draw up a report which shall be submitted to
the European Parliament and to the Council every three years.
3.           Three years after the entry
into force of this Regulation and every six years thereafter, the Commission
shall review the functioning and effectiveness of this Regulation, including on
the promotion and cost of responsible sourcing of the minerals within its scope
from conflict-affected and high-risk areas. The Commission shall submit a
review report to the European Parliament and to the Council. 
Article 16
Entry
into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on
the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal
of the European Union.
This Regulation
shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels,
For the European Parliament                        For
the Council
The President                                                 The
President
 LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1.           FRAMEWORK OF THE
PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
              1.1.    Title of the proposal/initiative 
              1.2.    Policy
area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure
              1.3.    Nature
of the proposal/initiative 
              1.4.    Objective(s)

              1.5.    Grounds
for the proposal/initiative 
              1.6.    Duration
and financial impact 
              1.7.    Management
mode(s) envisaged 
2.           MANAGEMENT MEASURES 
              2.1.    Monitoring
and reporting rules 
              2.2.    Management
and control system 
              2.3.    Measures
to prevent fraud and irregularities 
3.           ESTIMATED FINANCIAL
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
              3.1.    Heading(s)
of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected 
              3.2.    Estimated
impact on expenditure 
              3.2.1. Summary of
estimated impact on expenditure 
              3.2.2. Estimated impact
on operational appropriations 
              3.2.3. Estimated impact
on appropriations of an administrative nature
              3.2.4. Compatibility
with the current multiannual financial framework
              3.2.5. Third-party
contributions 
              3.3.    Estimated impact on revenue
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1.           FRAMEWORK OF THE
PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
1.1.        Title of the
proposal/initiative 
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council setting up
a Union system for supply chain due diligence self-certification of responsible
importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores and gold originating in
conflict-affected and high-risk areas
1.2.        Policy area(s) concerned
in the ABM/ABB structure[15] 
20 Trade Policy
1.3.        Nature of the
proposal/initiative 
X The proposal/initiative relates to a new
action 
¨ The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
following a pilot project/preparatory action[16]

¨ The proposal/initiative relates to the extension of
an existing action 
¨ The proposal/initiative relates to an action
redirected towards a new action 
1.4.        Objective(s)
1.4.1.     The Commission's
multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative 
Foster a sustainable economic, social and environmental development
in particular for developing countries.
1.4.2.     Specific objective(s) and
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned 
Specific objective No
3
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Foster a sustainable economic, social and environmental development,
focusing on green and inclusive growth, in particular for developing countries
1.4.3.     Expected result(s) and
impact
Specify the effects
which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
N/A
1.4.4.     Indicators of results and
impact 
Specify the
indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
N/A
1.5.        Grounds for the
proposal/initiative 
1.5.1.     Requirement(s) to be met in
the short or long term 
N/A
1.5.2.     Added value of EU
involvement 
N/A
1.5.3.     Lessons learned from
similar experiences in the past 
N/A
1.5.4.     Compatibility
and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments 
N/A
1.6.        Duration and financial
impact 
¨ Proposal/initiative of limited
duration 
–     
¨  Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY 
–     
¨  Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY 
X Proposal/initiative
of unlimited duration
–     
Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY
to YYYY,
–     
followed by full-scale operation.
1.7.        Management mode(s) planned 
From the 2014 budget
X Direct
management by the Commission
–     
x by its departments, including by its
staff in the Union delegations; 
–     
¨  by the executive agencies; 
¨ Shared management with the Member States 
¨ Indirect management by delegating implementation tasks to:
–     
¨ third countries or the bodies they have designated;
–     
¨ international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
–     
¨the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
–     
¨ bodies referred to in Articles 208 and 209 of the Financial
Regulation;
–     
¨ public law bodies;
–     
¨ bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the
extent that they provide adequate financial guarantees;
–     
¨ bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the implementation of a public-private partnership and that
provide adequate financial guarantees;
–     
¨ persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in
the CFSP pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic
act.
–       If more than one management mode is
indicated, please provide details in the "Comments" section.
Comments 
N/A
2.           MANAGEMENT MEASURES 
2.1.        Monitoring and reporting
rules 
Specify frequency and
conditions. 
Standard monitoring and supervision mechanisms applicable in DG
TRADE will apply, such as the spring/autumn reviews, resources report and
weekly financial reporting.
2.2.        Management and control
system 
2.2.1.     Risk(s)
identified 
No particular risks were identified.
2.2.2.     Information concerning the
internal control system set up 
The management of the related expenditure will be governed by the
overall internal control system set up at DG TRADE.
2.2.3.     Estimate of the costs and
benefits of the controls and assessment of the expected level of risk of error 
Expected level of risk of error is expected to be zero.
2.3.        Measures to prevent fraud
and irregularities 
Specify existing or
envisaged prevention and protection measures.
DG TRADE’s anti-fraud strategy, adopted in November 2013, will
apply.
3.           ESTIMATED FINANCIAL
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
3.1.        Heading(s) of the
multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected 
·      Existing budget lines 
In order of
multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
 Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution 
 Number Heading 5 || Diff/non-diff. ([17])   || from EFTA countries[18]   || from candidate countries[19]   || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 21(2)(b) of the Financial Regulation 
   || […][XX.YY.YY.YY]   || non-diff. || NO || NO || NO || NO 
·      New budget lines requested 
In order of multiannual financial framework
headings and budget lines.
 Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution 
 Number […][Heading………………………………………...……….] || Diff./non-diff. || from EFTA countries || from candidate countries || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 21(2)(b) of the Financial Regulation 
   || […][XX.YY.YY.YY]   ||   || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO 
3.2.        Estimated impact on
expenditure 
3.2.1.     Summary of estimated impact
on expenditure 
EUR million (to three decimal places)
 Heading of multiannual financial framework || Number || […][Heading……………...……………………………………………………………….] 
 DG: <…….> ||   ||   || Year N[20] || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
 Ÿ Operational appropriations ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Number of budget line || Commitments || (1) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || (2) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Number of budget line || Commitments || (1a) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || (2a) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes[21]   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Number of budget line ||   || (3) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations for DG <….> || Commitments || =1+1a +3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || =2+2a +3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Ÿ TOTAL operational appropriations || Commitments || (4) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || (5) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Ÿ TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope for specific programmes || (6) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations for HEADING <….> of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || =4+ 6 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || =5+ 6 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
If more than one heading is affected by the proposal /
initiative:
 Ÿ TOTAL operational appropriations || Commitments || (4) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || (5) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Ÿ TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope for specific programmes || (6) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 4 of the multiannual financial framework (Reference amount) || Commitments || =4+ 6 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || =5+ 6 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Heading of multiannual financial framework || 5 || " Administrative expenditure " 
EUR million (to three decimal places)
   ||   ||   || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Year 2021 || TOTAL || 
 DG: TRADE ||   ||   ||   || 
 Ÿ Human resources || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 2.1 ||   ||   ||   
 Ÿ Other administrative expenditure || 0.26 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.62 ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL DG TRADE || Appropriations || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations for HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || (Total commitments = Total payments) || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 
EUR million (to three decimal places)
   ||   ||   || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 ||   || TOTAL 
 TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 
 Payments || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 
3.2.2.     Estimated impact on
operational appropriations 
–     
x   The proposal/initiative does not
require the use of operational appropriations 
–     
¨  The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational
appropriations, as explained below:
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three
decimal places)
 Indicate objectives and outputs   ò ||   ||   || Year N || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
 OUTPUTS 
 Type[22]   || Average cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No || Cost || No total || Total cost 
 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1[23] ...   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 - Output ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 - Output ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 - Output ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Subtotal for specific objective No 1 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE NO 2 ... ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 - Output ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Subtotal for specific objective No 2 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL COST ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
3.2.3.     Estimated impact on
appropriations of an administrative nature
3.2.3.1.  Summary

–     
¨  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations
of an administrative nature 
–     
X  The proposal/initiative requires
the use of appropriations of an administrative nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to
three decimal places)
   || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Year 2021 || TOTAL 
 HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Human resources || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 2.1 
 Other administrative expenditure || 0.26 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.06 || 0.62 
 Subtotal HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 
 Outside HEADING 5[24] of the multiannual financial framework   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Human resources ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other expenditure of an administrative nature ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Subtotal outside HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL || 0.56 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 0.36 || 2.72 
The human resources
appropriations required will be met by appropriations from the DG that are
already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within
the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be
granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the
light of budgetary constraints.
3.2.3.2.   Estimated
requirements of human resources 
–     
¨  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human
resources. 
–     
X  The proposal/initiative requires
the use of human resources, as explained below:
Estimate to be expressed in full time
equivalent units
   || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year N 
 Ÿ Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) ||   ||   
 XX 01 01 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 
 XX 01 01 02 (Delegations) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 10 01 05 01 (Direct research) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Ÿ External staff (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)[25]   ||   
 XX 01 02 01 (CA, SNE, INT from the "global envelope") ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XX 01 02 02 (CA, LA, SNE, INT and JED in the delegations) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XX 01 04 yy[26]   || - at Headquarters   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 - Delegations ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XX 01 05 02 (CA, SNE, INT - Indirect research) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 10 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - Direct research) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other budget lines (specify) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 || 2.5 
20 is the policy
area or budget title concerned.
The human resources
required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to
management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if
necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing
DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary
constraints.
Description of
tasks to be carried out:
 Officials and temporary staff || The drafting and implementation of public procurement handbook would require 1 full-time equivalent (FTE) for a number of consecutive years. In addition, the Regulation would require 1.5 FTE to deal with the implementing guidelines. 
 External staff ||   
3.2.4.     Compatibility with the
current multiannual financial framework 
–     
X  Proposal/initiative is compatible
the current multiannual financial framework.
–     
¨  Proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant
heading in the multiannual financial framework.
Explain what reprogramming is required,
specifying the budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.
–     
¨  Proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility
instrument or revision of the multiannual financial framework[27].
Explain what is required, specifying the
headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.
3.2.5.     Third-party contributions 
–     
The proposal/initiative does not provide for
co-financing by third parties. 
–     
The proposal/initiative provides for the
co-financing estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
   || Year N || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || Total 
 Specify the co-financing body ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations cofinanced ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
3.3.        Estimated impact on
revenue 
–     
X  Proposal/initiative has no
financial impact on revenue.
–     
¨  Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
¨         on own resources 
¨         on miscellaneous revenue 
EUR million (to three decimal places)
 Budget revenue line: || Appropriations available for the current financial year || Impact of the proposal/initiative[28]   
 Year N || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) 
 Article …………. ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
For miscellaneous
‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Specify the method for
calculating the impact on revenue. 
[1]               'Armed
groups and security forces' as defined in Annex II of the 'OECD Due Diligence
Guidance' (OECD (2013), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply
Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Second Edition, OECD
Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264185050-en. 
[2]               The US Dodd-Frank Act defines 'conflict minerals' as
colombite-tantalite or coltan (the metal ore from which tantalum is extracted);
cassiterite (the metal ore from which tin is extracted); gold; wolframite (the
metal ore from which tungsten is extracted or their derivates that are
financing conflict in the DRC, Angola, Burundi, the Central African Republic,
the Republic of Congo, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.
[3]               G8 Leaders' Lough Erne Summit, Communique, Paragraph
40, 18 June 2013.
[4]               Respectively Commodity markets and raw materials,
COM(2011) 25 final and Trade, growth and development, COM(2012) 22
final.
[5]               OECD
Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from
Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Second Edition, OECD Publishing (OECD (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264185050-en.
[6]               OECD Guidelines for
Multinational Enterprises, OECD 2011 edition.
[7]               Guiding Principles on
Business and Human Rights, UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, New York and Geneva 2011.
[8]               The
Raw Materials Initiative – meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs in Europe, COM(2008) 699.
[9]               Commodity markets and raw
materials, COM(2011) 25 FINAL.
[10]             Trade, growth and
development, COM(2012) 22 FINAL. 
[11]             Regulation
(EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control
by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55,
28.2.2011, p. 13).
[12]             'Armed
groups and security forces' as defined in Annex II of the OECD Due Diligence
Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and
High-Risk Areas: Second Edition, OECD Publishing (OECD (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264185050-en.
[13]             Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992
establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p. 1). 
[14]             OECD
Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from
Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas: Second Edition, OECD Publishing (OECD (2013),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264185050-en.
[15]             ABM: activity-based management – ABB: activity-based
budgeting.
[16]             As referred to in Article 54(2)(a) or (b) of the
Financial Regulation.
[17]             Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-Diff. =
Non-differentiated appropriations.
[18]             EFTA: European Free Trade Association. 
[19]             Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential
candidate countries from the Western Balkans.
[20]             Year N is the year in which implementation of the
proposal/initiative starts.
[21]             Technical and/or administrative assistance and
expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions
(former "BA" lines), indirect research, direct research.
[22]             Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.:
number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
[23]             As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’ 
[24]             Technical and/or administrative assistance and
expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions
(former "BA" lines), indirect research, direct research.
[25]             CA= Contract Staff; LA = Local Staff; SNE= Seconded
National Expert; INT = agency staff; JED= Junior Experts in Delegations). 
[26]             Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational
appropriations (former "BA" lines).
[27]             See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional
Agreement (for the period 2007-2013).
[28]             As regards traditional own resources (customs duties,
sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net amounts, i.e. gross amounts
after deduction of 25% for collection costs.