Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism
Date: 2017-11-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, aid to disaster victims, civil defence, emergency aid, environmental risk prevention, man-made disaster, natural disaster

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 23.11.2017 COM(2017) 772 final 2017/0309 (COD)  Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

The  proposal  is  intended  to  introduce  some  targeted  changes  to  Council  Decision 
No 1313/2013/EU  (‘the  Decision’)  on  a  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  (‘Union 
Mechanism’),  under  which  the  European  Union  supports,  coordinates  and  supplements  the 
action of Member States in the field of civil protection to prevent, prepare for and respond to 
natural and man-made  disasters  within  and  outside the Union. Building on the principles  of 
solidarity and shared responsibility, the overall objective of this proposal is to ensure that the 
Union can provide a better crisis and emergency support to its citizens in Europe and beyond. 
The  proposal  acknowledges  that  disaster  prevention  efforts  are  crucial  to  limit  the  need  for 
crisis and emergency support. 

According to the recently conducted Interim Evaluation of the UCPM1, foreseen in Article 34 
of  Decision  No 1313/2013/EU  and  other  performance  assessments  such  as  the  'European 
Court of Auditors review of the UCPM'2, the Union Mechanism has proven to be a useful tool 
to  mobilise and coordinate the assistance  provided by the  Participating States responding  to 
crises  inside  and  outside  the  Union,  constituting  a  tangible  proof  of  European  solidarity. 
However, some conclusions extracted from these documents and additional evidence has led 
to  the  identification  of  certain  areas  where  legislative  change  is  warranted.  In  this  regard, 
operational  experience  has  been  a  key  consideration,  representing  a  major  factor  leading  to 
this initiative, as it has underlined the limitations of the current framework. 

Since 2013 the Union has faced a large number of disasters with tragic loss of lives and other 
damaging  consequences  for  citizens,  businesses,  communities  and  the  environment.  More 
concretely, the response to a number of recent disasters, including the humanitarian impact of 
the refugee and migration crisis, the lack of available assets during the 2016 and 2017 forest 
fire seasons, the latter having been particularly long and intense resulting in over 100 deaths, 
as well as the severe impact of a series of hurricanes in the Caribbean and fierce storms and 
flooding  in  the  EU,  have  constituted  a  real  stress  test  for  the  UCPM.  This  has  been 
particularly  evident  during  large-scale  emergencies  affecting  several  Member  States  at  the 
same  time.  In  such  circumstances,  the  voluntary  nature  of  Member  States'  contributions  to 
respond  to  disasters  has  too  often  been  insufficient,  and  the  existing  gaps  in  certain  critical 
response capacities, as outlined by the Capacity Gaps Report published in early 20173, have 
become  all  too  apparent.  The  most  striking  examples  in  this  context  are  the  inability  of  the 
EU's collective capacity to react to all 17 requests for forest fire assistance, of which only 10 
could be granted, at times hampered by delays diminishing the timeliness of the response. 

Given  this  context,  there  are  solid  reasons  to  undertake  a  targeted  revision  of  the  current 
UCPM  legislation  in  order  to  address  the  main  challenges  that  the  Union  Mechanism  faces 

final 

Interim  Evaluation).  The 

ICF,  'Interim  Evaluation  of  the  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism.  2014-2016',  Final  Report,  August  2017 
here: 

1 
report 
(hereafter: 
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/eb41bfee-78c3-11e7-b2f2-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF 
2 
responses 
the 
http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR16_33/SR_DISASTER_RESPONSE_EN.pdf 
3 
the European Emergency Response Capacity, 17.02.2017. 

European  Court  of  Auditors,  Special  Report  (2016),  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism:  the  coordination  of 
at: 

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on progress made and gaps remaining in 

Interim  Evaluation 

Available 

effective. 

disasters 

broadly 

outside 

found 

been 

can 

has 

EU 

the 

be 

of 

to 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
                                                 
today.  In  concrete  terms,  the  changes  contained  in  this  proposal  are  aimed  at  achieving  the 
following objectives: 

a) Strengthening the effectiveness of prevention action as part of the disaster risk management 
cycle,  as  well  as  reinforcing  links  with  other  key  EU  policies  acting  in  the  field  of  disaster 
prevention and disaster response; 

b)  Reinforcing  the  Union  and  Member  States’ collective  ability  to  respond  to  disasters, and 
addressing recurrent and emerging capacity gaps, especially with the creation of a dedicated 
reserve  of  response  capacities  at  Union  level,  with  decisions  on  deployment  taken  by  the 
Commission,  which  retains  command  and  control  (to  be  known  as  rescEU).  rescEU  will  be 
equipped with selected emergency capacities to respond to wildfires, floods, earthquakes and 
health emergencies as appropriate. Following discussion with Member States, a field hospital 
that  can  rapidly  be  deployed  inside  or  outside  the  Union  as  part  of  the  European  Medical 
Corps should also be foreseen for cases of epidemics such as Ebola and Zika. Also, Europe 
has been hit by numerous terrorist attacks. Making such capacities available at EU level will 
also  help  generate  economies  of  scale  and  reduce  costs  of  procuring  the  same  capacities 
individually. 

c)  Ensuring  the  Union  Mechanism  is  agile  and  effective  in  its  administrative  procedures  in 
support of emergency operations. 

The  need  to  strengthen  European  Civil  Protection  in  the  light  of  disaster  trends,  including 
extreme weather, and against the background of internal security concerns, has been widely 
recognised.  This  proposal  is  based  on  further  recent  analysis  and  close  reflections  on  the 
identified gaps, jointly undertaken with the responsible Civil Protection Authorities.  

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area 

This proposal contributes to one of the ten political priorities set out by the Commission for 
the  2015-2019  period,  namely  the  achievement  of  'An  Area  of  Justice  and  Fundamental 
Rights Based on Mutual Trust'. Mutual trust is enshrined in the principle of solidarity, which 
underpins  Decision  No 1313/2013/EU,  and  will  be  strengthened  under  this  proposal, 
alongside the principles of shared responsibility and accountability. 

The  changes  proposed  are  fully  consistent  with  the  broader  objective  of  working  towards  a 
‘Europe that protects’, which has guided the efforts of the Commission during the past years, 
and will continue to do so in the coming future. This proposal builds on the positive results 
the  existing  framework  has  delivered  so  far,  and  intends  to  correct  its  shortcomings  with 
reinforced provisions so as to continue to support, coordinate and complement the action of 
the Member States in this area. 

• 

Consistency with other Union policies 

The actions envisaged under the revised UCPM are aligned with the overall objective of the 
Union  to  ensure  that  all  relevant  EU  policies  and  instruments  contribute  to  reinforcing  the 
Union’s capacities in terms of disaster risk management, from disaster prevention, to disaster 
preparedness, response and recovery. It also reflects the objective set out in Article 3(3) of the 
Treaty on the European Union to support solidarity among Member States. 

In particular, special attention is being given to ensuring close coordination and consistency 
with actions carried out under other EU policies, such as on climate change adaptation, and 
instruments  acting  in  the  field  of  disaster  prevention  and  disaster  risk  reduction,  such  as 
cohesion,  rural  development,  research,  health,  as  well  as  migration  and  security  policies. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
Likewise,  the  proposal  seeks  to  establish  stronger  synergies  with  humanitarian  aid  policy, 
particularly in the response to emergencies outside the Union. 

No legislative act under other Union policies can currently achieve the objectives pursued by 
this proposal. There should therefore also be no overlap of actions in the field. 

2. 

• 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The  legal  basis  for  this  proposal  is  Article  196  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European Union.  

• 

Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)  

The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting on 
their  own.  The  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  was  established  because  major  disasters 
can  overwhelm the response capacities  of any Member State acting alone. The  provision  of 
well-coordinated and rapid mutual assistance amongst Member States is at its core.  

Besides  amendments  to  ensure  coherence  and  simplification,  this  proposal  also  foresees 
additional  possibilities  to  reinforce  the  collective  ability  to  prepare  for  and  respond  to 
disasters. This is particularly significant when faced with a disaster, or several disasters, with 
wide-ranging impacts which overwhelm the capacities of a critical number of Member States 
at the same time and which may paralyse mutual assistance amongst them. It is also the case 
for capacities that  would be needed in the case of a  major  low probability- but  high impact 
disaster  scenario.  In  such  cases  it  is  clear  that  Member  States  cannot  ensure  a  sufficient 
response alone and, hence, EU support is required to support and complement Member State 
action  in  accordance  with  Article  196  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European 
Union. 

Taking into account the benefits in terms of reducing the loss of human life, environmental, 
economic and material damage, the proposal brings clear EU added value. 

• 

Proportionality 

The  proposal  does  not  go  beyond  what  is  necessary  to  achieve  the  objectives.  It  addresses 
gaps  that  have  been  identified  during  the  interim  evaluation  and  by  other  recent  documents 
assessing  UCPM  performance  (European  Court  of  Auditors  (ECA)  special  report  on  the 
UCPM4,  Commission's  Report  on  progress  made  and  gaps  remaining  in  the  EERC5  - 
previously  mentioned,  and  the  EU  Risk  Overview6)  and  proposes  solutions  in  line  with  the 
mandate given by the Council and the European Parliament. 

The  administrative  burden  for  the  Union  and  the  Member  States  is  limited  and  does  not  go 
beyond  what  is  necessary  to  achieve  the  objectives  of  the  proposal.  In  addition,  the 
streamlining of certain EU co-financing rates and the abolition of co-financing in certain areas 
will reduce the administrative burden. 

4 
5 
6 

See footnote no 2. 
See footnote no 3. 
Staff  Working  Document,  Overview  of  Natural  and  Man-made  Disaster  Risks  the  European  Union  may  face,  23.05.2017, 
SWD(2017)176 final. 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
                                                 
• 

Choice of the instrument 

Proposal  for  a  Decision  Amending  Decision  No  1313/2013/EU  of  the  European  Parliament 
and of the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism. 

3. 

• 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EX-POST 

EVALUATIONS, 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Stakeholder consultations 

The shortcomings this proposal aims to tackle were identified from operational experience, as 
well as from the results of the comprehensive stakeholder consultation recently conducted in 
the framework of the UCPM Interim Evaluation7. The general objective of the latter was to 
give all concerned stakeholders the opportunity to express their views on the performance of 
the UCPM during the first half of its implementation. The specific objectives were to:  

(a)  Collect views and opinions of European citizens on the results achieved by the 

UCPM so far; 

(b)  Determine  the  importance  of  different  priorities  for  disaster  risk  management 

as they are perceived across the EU; 

(c)  Obtain targeted feedback and technical advice from the primary stakeholders of 

the UCPM; 

(d)  Gather evidence to support the interim evaluation of the UCPM for each of the 

main evaluation criteria. 

Four main groups of stakeholders were addressed during the consultation activities: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

• 

Entities  implementing  the  UCPM:  Member  States  civil  protection  authorities 
contributing  with  modules  and/or  experts  to  the  European  Emergency  Response 
Capacity; other civil protection authorities of the Member States; the civil protection 
authorities of Participating States8. 

Entities affected by the UCPM: Host countries having received UCPM support (EU, 
Accession  countries,  European  Neighbourhood  countries  and  other  third  countries), 
European Parliament, Committee of Regions, local authorities. 

Entities with a stated interest in the UCPM: Other authorities of the Member States, 
other  authorities  of  Participating  States,  UN  agencies,  World  Bank,  NGOs,  Private 
Sector, Foundations, etc. 

Entities  having  expertise  relevant  to  the  UCPM  (i.e.  disaster  risk  management): 
Universities/centres of excellence and think tanks, mainly in PS. 

Collection and use of expertise 

The  Interim  Evaluation  underpinning  this  proposal  was  carried  out  by  an  external  evaluator 
between September 2016 and June 2017. It was based on inputs received during discussions 
with  Participating  States  (Civil  Protection  Committee,  Civil  Protection  Council  Working 
Party, and Directors-General meetings) and took into account the information obtained via an 
Open  Public  Consultation,  the  European  Court  of  Auditors  (ECA)  special  report  on  the 
UCPM and the Commission's Report on progress made and gaps remaining in the EERC. 

7 

8 

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Interim Evaluation of the Union Civil Protection 
Mechanism for the period of 2014-2016, 30.08.2017, COM (2017) 460 final. 
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia and Turkey. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
                                                 
The evaluation consisted of three phases:  

(i) 

(ii) 

inception, including a desk review of UCPM activities and scoping interviews 
with desk officers; 
research,  including  a  targeted  consultation  of  main  UCPM  stakeholders9 
through  online  surveys,  face-to-face  and  telephone  interviews,  and  three  case 
studies (Cyprus Forest Fires, Estonia Module Exercise, Migration crisis). 

(iii)  analysis and synthesis, including data triangulation, elaboration of conclusions 

and recommendations, and drafting.  

The  above-mentioned  Open  Public  Consultation  (OPC)  was  carried  out  online  for  three 
months  (November  2016  –  February  2017),  with  130  responders  from  all  over  Europe 
providing feedback on the UCPM. A report on the outcome of the OPC was published at the 
end of March 201710. 

Impact assessment 

An Impact Assessment has not been carried out to accompany this proposal given that there is 
an extreme urgency for implementing the proposed changes due to gaps in critical capacities 
at  European  level,  demonstrated  in  particular  by  the  2017  forest  fire-fighting  season.  Such 
gaps have substantially affected the EU's response to disasters and resulted in a high number 
of casualties, heavy economic impacts and damage to the environment. 

• 

Regulatory fitness and simplification 

The proposed revision is limited in scope and nature, it balances Member States' interests, and 
is proportional to what is operationally required.  

As  this  is  a  revision  of  an  existing  piece  of  legislation,  the  Commission  has  looked  at 
opportunities to simplify and reduce burdens. While a number of simplification actions have 
been  identified,  as  explained  below,  it  has  not  been  possible  to  quantify  these,  given  the 
limited availability of data in the tight time frame. 

This  proposal  removes  red  tape  by introducing a  specific  reference  to  the  use  of  unit  sums, 
lump  sums  and  flat  rates  in  relation  to  the  co-financing  of  transport  costs.  Moreover,  it 
simplifies existing administrative procedures by streamlining co-financing rules.  

More generally, this proposal seeks to update operational procedures to ensure they are fit for 
purpose, agile and straightforward to understand and apply, therefore ensuring Member States 
are  able  to  access  support  and  facilitation  from  the  Union  Mechanism  when  needed.  For 
example, recent disasters have highlighted that the Union might not be sufficiently equipped 
for emergencies with wide-ranging impact affecting several Member States at the same time 
(e.g. wildfires, extreme weather events, large-scale flooding, earthquakes, epidemics (such as 
Ebola), terrorist attacks). In such circumstances, Member States are not always able to offer 
assistance.  

9 

10 

Stakeholders  that  responded  include:  Civil  Protection  authorities  from  26  Participating  States  (PS)  (online  surveys);  Civil 
Protection authorities from 17 PS (interviews); National Training Coordinators from 21 PS (online surveys); 137 experts having 
participated in the Exchange of Expert Programme and 23 leads of projects funded via the UCPM from 13 PS (online surveys); 14 
international  partners  including  UN  agencies,  OECD,  World  Bank,  Red  Cross,  etc.(interviews);  15  Directorates-General  and 
services of the EU (interviews). 
The report is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/echo/EUCPM-consult_en. 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

As  stated  in  Article  19  of  Decision  No  1313/2013/EU,  the  financial  envelope  for  the 
implementation  of  the  Union  Mechanism  during  the  2014-2020  Multi-Annual  Financial 
Framework  period  is  of  EUR  368.4  million.  This  amount  is  composed  of  a  contribution  of 
EUR  223.8  million  from  Heading  3  ‘Security  and  Citizenship’  and  of  EUR  144.6  million 
from Heading  4 ‘Global Europe’. In addition, administrative and human resources costs are 
covered by Heading 5 for an approximate total of EUR 52.5 million. 

In order to be able to achieve the objectives set out in Section 1 above, namely: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

reinforcing the collective capacity of the Member States and the Union to respond to 
disasters  with  the  creation  of  a  dedicated  reserve  of  response  capacities,  with 
command and control executed by the Commission (rescEU),  

higher  co-financing  rates  (75%)  of  capacities  that  are  put  at  the  disposal  of  the 
European pool. This includes adaptation, repair, transport and operational costs; 

strengthening  the  focus  on  prevention  and  enhancing  coherence  with  other  key  EU 
policies, and; 

strengthening cooperation with neighbourhood countries. 

This  proposal  seeks  a  total  overall  increase  in  the  UCPM  financial  envelope  for  the  period 
2018-2020 of EUR 280 additional million.  

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

Article 34(2) of Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism applies. 
It provides that actions receiving financial assistance shall be monitored regularly in order to 
follow their implementation. More general requirements for the Commission to evaluate the 
application  of  the  Decision  and  submit  interim  and  ex  post  evaluation  reports,  as  well  as  a 
communication  on  implementation,  are  also  provided  therein.  Such  evaluations  should  be 
based on the indicators provided for in Article 3 of the Decision. 

• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

This proposal amends a limited number of articles of Decision No 1313/2013/EU in order to 
achieve the objectives set out earlier. 

In relation to the first objective, i.e. enhancing the collective capacity to  respond to disaster 
and supporting Member States in addressing the disasters that have, over the past few years, 
more  commonly  affected  the  social  fabric  of  Europe  (aerial  firefighting  capacities,  high 
capacity pumping, Urban search and rescue, field hospitals and emergency medical teams) is 
attained through the following means: 

– 

Creation of a dedicated reserve of assets: rescEU. This proposal expressly allows the 
Commission to acquire its own operational capacities, and to set up arrangements for 
ensuring  rapid  access  to  those  capacities  in  order  to  create  a  dedicated  reserve  of 
assets that will help cover existing gaps at national level. Capacities rented or leased 
via  EU  arrangements  or  acquired  with  full  EU  financing  would  become  part  of 
rescEU. All costs of these capacities would be fully covered by EU financing, which 
will retain the operational command and control of these assets and decide on their 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
– 

deployment, once the Mechanism has been activated. The identification of additional 
capacities will be undertaken in consultation with a rescEU expert group.  

Reinforcement of the European Emergency Response Capacity where Member States 
can  pre-commit  national  response  capacities  (e.g.  CBRN  detection  and  sampling, 
water  purification,  ground  forest  fire  fighting,  flood  rescue  using  boats  or  other 
capacities  such  as  mobile  laboratories),  will  continue  to  be  a  central  piece  of  the 
UCPM  and  will  now  be  known  as  the  "European  Civil  Protection  Pool".  This 
proposal  revises  the  system  of  incentives  for  committing  assets  into  the  European 
Civil  Protection  Pool  by  increasing  the  co-financing  rates,  as  well  as  the  types  of 
eligible  costs.  In  particular,  under  the  new  proposal,  assets  committed  to  the 
European  Civil  Protection  Pool  will  benefit  from  a  75%  coverage  of  all  costs 
incurred  during  UCPM  operations  within  the  Union,  including  adaptation,  repair, 
transportation and operational costs. 

Capacities  benefitting  from  any  sort  of  EU  co-financing  will  need  to  be  included  into  the 
European  Civil  Protection  Pool.  In  order  to  simplify  the  system  and  make  availability  of 
assets more predictable, financial assistance for assets outside the European Civil Protection 
Pool will no longer be granted. Finally, strengthened incentives for pooling of capacities (e.g. 
the  Commission  to  cover  the  transport  costs  of  'to  be  pooled'  assistance  from  one  Member 
State to another and the payment of transit and warehousing costs of pooled assistance in third 
countries) have also been included. 

In relation to the second objective, the links between prevention, preparedness and response 
have  been  reinforced  by  connecting  risk  assessments  to  risk  management  planning  and 
requiring  Member  States  to  provide  their  risk  management  plans  to  the  Commission  at  the 
latest  by  31  January  2019.  To  ensure  that  all  Member  States  have  effective  prevention 
measures in place and that rescEU will not be used as a substitute for national capacities, the 
Commission  will  be  able  to  require specific  prevention and  preparedness  plans  from  one  or 
several  Member  States.  The  prevention  plans  need  to  include  in  addition  to  short-term 
prevention actions, also longer-term prevention efforts, looking at the overall adaptation to the 
increasing  impacts  of  climate  change.  In  addition,  future  scenario-planning  should  be  based 
on  risk  assessments  and  capacity  deployments,  creating  a  stronger  real  link  between 
prevention, preparedness and response.  

Coherence with other Union instruments on disaster risk prevention and management is also 
strengthened  by  creating  a  link  between  this  Mechanism  and  cohesion,  rural  development, 
health and research policies. Progress made by Member States in the field of prevention and 
preparedness  will  inform  funding  decisions  in  this  area.  Furthermore,  regarding  coherence 
with  other  EU  policies  intervening  in  disaster  response,  the  complementarity  and/or 
synchronicity  of  financial  assistance  made  available  under  the  Union  Mechanism  and  other 
Union  instruments  (such  as  the  Humanitarian  Aid  Regulation)  is  also  improved.  In  this 
context, a derogation to Article  129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/201211 will ensure 
better  use  of  existing  funding  possibilities  and  improve  the  effectiveness  of  Member  State 
response operations. EU visibility is also strengthened via a dedicated Article. 

Linked to the second objective, and in the pursuit of greater policy coherence, this proposal 
also  includes  provisions  to  ensure  that  the  disbursement  of  EU  funds  through  the  Union 
Mechanism  is  accompanied  by  adequate  visibility  to  the  Union.  On  a  related  note,  this 

11 

Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules 
applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1). 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
                                                 
proposal  also  opens  the  door  to  the  development  of  a  dedicated  network-type  structure,  the 
Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network, which will reinforce the training component of 
the UCPM, in close cooperation with existing relevant national structures on the matter. 

Finally,  in  relation  to  the  third  objective,  the  proposal  seeks  to  streamline  administrative 
procedures in order to reduce delays in the deployment of assistance. It simplifies the current 
system by introducing only  one category of  response  assets its use requires co-financing by 
Member  States  and  the  EU  budget,  i.e.  the  European  Civil  Protection  Pool.  A  specific 
reference to the use of unit sums, lump sums and flat rates is introduced in relation to the co-
financing  of  transport  costs  to  improve  both  consistency  and  efficiency.  Moreover,  specific 
provisions limiting activations of the Union Mechanism to a 90 day period (unless otherwise 
justified)  have  been  included  in  order  to  clarify  scope  and  incentivise  use  of  assets  in  the 
immediate response phase. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
2017/0309 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Decision No 1313/2013/EU on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism 

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 196 thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions, 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

The  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  ('the  Union  Mechanism')  governed  by 
Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and the Council12 strengthens 
cooperation between the Union and the Member States and facilitates coordination in 
the  field  of  civil  protection  in  order  to  improve  the  Union's  response  to  natural  and 
man-made disasters. 

(2)  Whilst  recognising  the  primary  responsibility  of  Member  States  for  preventing, 
preparing  and  responding  to  natural  and  man-made  disasters,  the  Union  Mechanism 
promotes  solidarity  between  Member  States  in  accordance  with  Article  3(3)  of  the 
Treaty on European Union. 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

12 

Natural  and  man-made  disasters  can  strike  anywhere  across  the  globe,  often  without 
warning.  Whether  of  natural  or  man-made  origin,  they  are  becoming  increasingly 
frequent,  extreme  and  complex,  exacerbated  by  the  impacts  of  climate  change,  and 
irrespective  of  national  borders.  The  human,  environmental,  and  economic 
consequences stemming from disasters can be enormous. 

Recent  experience  has  shown  that  reliance  on  voluntary  offers  of  mutual  assistance, 
coordinated  and  facilitated  by  the  Union  Mechanism,  does  not  always  ensure  that 
sufficient capacities are made available to address the basic needs of people affected 
by  disasters  in  a  satisfactory  manner,  nor  that  the  environment  and  property  are 
properly safeguarded. This is particularly so where Member States are simultaneously 
affected by recurrent disasters and collective capacity is insufficient. 

Prevention  is  of  key  importance  for  protection  against  disasters  and  requires  further 
action. To that effect, Member States should share risk assessments on a regular basis 
as well as summaries of their disaster risk management planning in order to ensure an 
integrated approach to disaster management, linking risk prevention, preparedness and 
response  actions.  In  addition,  the  Commission  should  be  able  to  require  Member 

Decision  No  1313/2013/EU of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of 17  December 2013 on  a  Union  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924). 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
                                                 
States  to  provide  specific  prevention  and  preparedness  plans  in  relation  to  specific 
disasters,  notably  with  a  view  to  maximising  overall  Union  support  to  disaster  risk 
management.  Administrative  burden  should  be  reduced  and  prevention  policies 
strengthened,  including  by  ensuring  necessary  links  to  other  key  Union  policies  and 
instruments, notably the European Structural and Investment Funds as listed in recital 
2 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/201313.  

There is a need to reinforce the collective ability to prepare and respond to disasters 
notably  through  mutual  support  in  Europe.  In  addition  to  strengthening  the 
possibilities already offered by the European Emergency Response Capacity ('EERC' 
or 'voluntary pool'), from now on referred to as "European Civil Protection Pool", the 
Commission should also establish rescEU. The composition of rescEU should include 
emergency  response  capacities  to  respond  to  wildfires,  large-scale  floods  and 
earthquakes, as well as a field hospital and medical teams in line with World Health 
Organisation standards, that can be rapidly deployed. 

The  Union  should  be  able  to  support  Member  States  where  available  capacities  are 
insufficient  to  allow  for  an  effective  response  to  disasters  by  contributing  to  the 
financing of leasing or rental arrangements for ensuring rapid access to such capacities 
or by financing their acquisition. This would substantially increase the effectiveness of 
the  Union  Mechanism,  by  ensuring  availability  of  capacities  in  cases  where  an 
effective  response  to  disasters  would  otherwise  not  be  ensured,  particularly  for 
disasters with wide ranging impacts affecting a significant number of Member States. 
Union  procurement  of  capacities  should  allow  for  economies  of  scale  and  better 
coordination when responding to disasters. 

Reinforcing the European Civil Protection Pool requires enhanced Union financing in 
terms of adaptation and repair of capacities, as well as operational costs. 

In  order  to  strengthen  efficiency  and  effectiveness  of  training  and  exercises  and 
enhance co-operation between Member States' national civil protection authorities and 
services it is necessary to establish a Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network that 
is based on existing structures. 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

(10) 

In  order  to  achieve  the  functioning  of  the  rescEU  capacity,  additional  financial 
appropriations should made available to finance actions under the Union Mechanism. 

(11)  There  is  a  need  to  simplify  Union  Mechanism  procedures  to  ensure  that  Member 
States  can  access  assistance  and  capacities  needed  in  order  to  respond  to  natural  or 
man-made disasters as rapidly as possible. 

(12) 

In  order  to  maximise  the  use  of  existing  funding  instruments  and  support  Member 
States in delivering assistance, particularly in response to disasters outside the Union, 
a derogation to Article 129(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 966/2012 of the European 
Parliament  and  the  Council14  should  be  provided  for  when  financing  is  granted 
pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of Decision No 1313/2013/EU. 

13  

14  

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17  December 2013 
laying  down  common  provisions  on  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund,  the  European  Social 
Fund,  the  Cohesion  Fund,  the  European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development  and  the  European 
Maritime  and  Fisheries  Fund  and  laying  down  general  provisions  on  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund,  the  European  Social  Fund,  the  Cohesion  Fund  and  the  European  Maritime  and 
Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320). 
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 
2012  on  the  financial  rules  applicable  to  the  general  budget  of  the  Union  and  repealing  Council 
Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1). 

EN 

10 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(13) 

It is important to ensure that Member States take all the necessary actions in order to 
effectively  prevent  natural  and  man-made  disasters  and  mitigate  their  effects. 
Provisions  should  reinforce  links  between  prevention,  preparedness  and  response 
actions  under  the  Union  Mechanism.  Coherence  should  also  be  ensured  with  other 
relevant Union legislation on prevention and disaster risk management, including for 
cross-border  prevention  action  and  response  to  threats  such  as  serious  cross-border 
health 
international 
commitments such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030, 
the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. 

threats15.  Likewise,  coherence  should  be  ensured  with 

(14)  The delegation of power conferred to the Commission by Decision No 1313/2013/EU 
should be amended, in order to allow for effective emergency support capacity for the 
European Union (rescEU). The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of 
the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union  should  be  delegated  to  the 
Commission to define additional types of response capacities on the basis of identified 
risks and taking into account a multi-hazard approach. 

(15)  Since the objectives  of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member 
States acting alone but can rather, by reason of scale or effects, be better achieved at 
Union  level,  the  Union  may  adopt  measures,  in  accordance  with  the  principle  of 
subsidiarity  as  set  out  in  Article  5  of  the  Treaty  on  European  Union.  In  accordance 
with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not 
go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. 

(16)  Decision No 1313/2013/EU should therefore be amended accordingly, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION: 

Article 1 

Decision No 1313/2013/EU is hereby amended as follows: 

(1) 

Article 3 is amended as follows: 

(a) in paragraph 1 the following point (e) is added: 

'(e) 

to increase the availability and use of scientific knowledge on disasters.' 

(b) point (a) of paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

'(a)  progress in implementing the disaster prevention framework: measured by the 
number  of  Member  States  that  have  made  available  to  the  Commission  their 
risk  assessments,  an  assessment  of  their  risk  management  capability  and  a 
summary of their disaster management planning as referred to in Article 6;' 

(2) 

in Article 4, the following point 12 is added: 

'(12)  Participating  State'  means  a  third  country  participating  in  the  Union 
Mechanism in accordance with Article 28(1);' 

(3) 

in Article 5 (1), point (a) is replaced by the following: 

take action to improve the knowledge base on disaster risks and facilitate the 
'(a) 
sharing  of  knowledge,  the  results  of  scientific  research,  best  practices  and 
information, including among Member States that share common risks.' 

15  

Decision  No  1082/2013/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  22  October  2013  on 
serious cross border threats to health and repealing Decision No 2119/98/EC (OJ L 293, 5.11.2013, p. 
1). 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
(4) 

Article 6 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

points (a) and (b) are replaced by the following: 

'(a)  develop risk assessments at national or appropriate sub-national level and make 
them available to the Commission by 22 December 2018 and every three years 
thereafter; 

(b)  develop  and  refine  their  disaster  risk  management  planning  at  national  or 
appropriate sub-national level based on the risk assessments referred to in point 
(a) and taking into account the assessment of their risk management capability 
referred  to  in  point  (c)  and  the  overview  of  risks  referred  to  in  point  (c)  of 
Article 5(1).' 

(b) 

the following second subparagraph is added: 

'A summary of the relevant elements of the risk management planning shall be 
provided to the Commission, including information on the selected prevention 
and  preparedness  measures,  by  31  January  2019  and  every  three  years 
thereafter. In addition, the Commission may require Member States to provide 
specific prevention and preparedness plans, which shall cover both short- and 
long-term  efforts.  The  Union  shall  duly  consider  the  progress  made  by  the 
Member States with respect to disaster prevention and preparedness as part of 
any future ex-ante conditionality mechanism under the European Structural and 
Investment Funds.' 

(c) 

the following point (e) is added: 

'(e)  The  Commission  may  also  establish  specific  consultation  mechanisms  to 
enhance  appropriate  prevention  and  preparedness  planning  and  coordination 
among Member States prone to similar type disasters.' 

(4) 

In Article 10, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

'1.  The  Commission  and  the  Member  States  shall  work  together  to  improve  the 
planning  of  disaster  response  operations  under  the  Union  Mechanism, 
including  through  scenario-building  for  disaster  response  based  on  the  risk 
assessments  referred  to  in  point  (a)  of  Article  6  and  the  overview  of  risks 
referred to in point (c) of Article 5(1), asset mapping and the development of 
plans for the deployment of response capacities.' 

(5) 

Article 11 is amended as follows: 

(a)  The title is replaced by the following: 

'European Civil Protection Pool' 

(b) paragraphs 1 and 2 are replaced by the following: 

'1.  A European Civil Protection Pool shall be established. It shall consist of a pool 
of  pre-committed  response  capacities  of  the  Member  States  and  include 
modules, other response capacities and experts. 

2.  On the basis of identified risks, the Commission shall define the types and the 
number of key response capacities required for the European Civil Protection 
Pool  ("capacity  goals").  The  Commission  shall  monitor  progress  towards  the 
capacity  goals  and  remaining  gaps  and  shall  encourage  Member  States  to 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
 
address such gaps. The Commission may support Member States in accordance 
with Article 20, point (i) of Article 21(1) and Article 21(2).' 

(c) 

paragraphs 7 and 8 are replaced by the following: 

'7.  Response capacities that Member States make available for the European Civil 
Protection  Pool  shall  be  available  for  response  operations  under  the  Union 
Mechanism  following  a  request  for  assistance  through  the  ERCC,  unless 
Member  States  are  faced  with  an  exceptional  situation  substantially  affecting 
the discharge of national tasks. 

8. 

In  the  event  of  deployment  of  such  response  they  shall  remain  under  the 
command and control of the Member States making them available and may be 
withdrawn  when  Member  States  are  faced  with  an  exceptional  situation 
substantially  affecting  the  discharge  of  national  tasks  preventing  them  from 
keeping  those  response  capacities  available.  In  such  cases,  the  Commission 
shall be consulted. 

The  coordination  of  different  response  capacities  shall  be  facilitated  where 
appropriate by the Commission through the ERCC in accordance with Articles 
15 and 16.' 

(d) 

the following paragraph 10 is added: 

'10.  The references to the European Emergency Response Capacity, EERC and the 
voluntary  pool  shall  be  understood  as  a  reference  to  the  European  Civil 
Protection Pool.' 

(6) 

Article 12 is replaced by the following: 

'rescEU' 

1. 

rescEU  shall  be  established  to  provide  relief  where  existing  capacities  do  not 
allow responding effectively to disasters. 

2. 

The composition of rescEU shall consist of the following capacities: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

aerial forest firefighting; 

high capacity pumping; 

urban search and rescue; 

field hospital and emergency medical teams. 

3. 

The Commission may acquire, rent, lease and/or otherwise contract capacities 
to  be  deployed  in  cases  referred  to  in  paragraph  1,  in  accordance  with  the 
Union's financial rules. 

4.  On  the  basis  of  identified  risks  and  taking  into  account  a  multi-hazard 
approach,  the  Commission  shall  be  empowered  to  adopt  delegated  acts  in 
accordance with Article 30 to define the types of response capacities required 
in  addition  to  those  identified  in  paragraph  2  of  this  Article  and  revise  the 
composition  of  rescEU  accordingly.  Consistency  shall  be  ensured  with  other 
Union policies. 

Where,  in  the  case  of  a  disaster  or  imminent  disaster,  imperative  grounds  of 
urgency  so  require,  the  procedure  provided  for  in  Article  31  shall  apply  to 
delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article. 

EN 

13 

  EN 

 
 
5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

The Commission shall define quality requirements for the response capacities 
forming part of rescEU. The quality requirements shall be based on established 
international standards, where such standards already exist. 

The  Commission  shall  ensure  the  availability  and  deployability  of  the 
capacities referred to in paragraph 2 under the Union Mechanism. 

rescEU  capacities  shall  be  available  for  response  operations  under  the  Union 
Mechanism following a request for assistance through the ERCC. The decision 
on  their  deployment  shall  be  taken  by  the  Commission,  which  shall  retain 
command and control of rescEU capacities. 

In  case  of  deployment,  the  Commission  shall  agree  with  the  requesting 
Member  State  on  the  operational  deployment  of  rescEU  capacities.  The 
requesting  Member  State  shall  facilitate  operational  co-ordination  of  its  own 
capacities and rescEU activities during operations. 

The  coordination  among  the  different  response  capacities  shall  be  facilitated 
where  appropriate  by  the  Commission  through  the  ERCC  in  accordance  with 
Articles 15 and 16. 

10.  Where  the  Commission  procures  equipment  such  as  aerial  forest  firefighting 
equipment,  by  means  of  acquisition,  leasing  or  rental,  the  following  shall  be 
ensured: 

(a) 

in  case  of  acquisition  of  equipment,  an  agreement  between  the 
Commission and a Member State provides for the registration thereof in 
that Member State.  

(b) 

in  case  of  leasing  and  rental,  the  registration  of  the  equipment  in  a 
Member State. 

11.  Member States shall be informed of the operational status of rescEU capacities 

through CECIS.' 

(7) 

the following Article 12a is inserted: 

'Article 12a 

Information to the European Parliament and the Council 

The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council of operations 
and progress made under Articles 11 and 12 every two years.' 

(8) 

in  Article  13,  the  title  and  the  first  sentence  of  paragraph  1  are  replaced  by  the 
following: 

'Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network 

1. The Commission shall establish a network of relevant civil protection and disaster 
management actors and institutions, forming together with the Commission a Union 
Civil Protection Knowledge Network.  

The  Network  shall  carry  out  the  following  tasks  in  the  field  of  training,  exercises, 
lessons  learnt  and  knowledge  dissemination,  in  close  coordination  with  relevant 
knowledge centres, where appropriate:' 

EN 

14 

  EN 

 
 
 
(9) 

in Article 15, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

'1.  When a disaster occurs within the Union, or is imminent, the affected Member 
State  may  request  assistance  through  the  ERCC.  The  request  shall  be  as 
specific  as  possible.  A  request  for  assistance  shall  lapse  after  a  maximum 
period  of  90  days,  unless  new  elements  justifying  the  need  for  continued  or 
additional assistance are provided to the ERCC.' 

(10) 

in Article 16, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

'1.  When a disaster occurs outside the Union, or is imminent, the affected country 
may  request  assistance  through  the  ERCC.  The  assistance  may  also  be 
requested  through  or  by  the  United  Nations  and  its  agencies,  or  a  relevant 
international organisation. A request for assistance shall lapse after a maximum 
period  of  90  days,  unless  new  elements  justifying  the  need  for  continued  or 
additional assistance are provided to the ERCC.' 

(11) 

in Article 19, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

'1.  The financial envelope for the implementation of the Union Mechanism for the 

period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 631 566 000 in current prices. 

EUR 480 630 000 in current prices shall derive from Heading 3 "Security and 
Citizenship" of the multiannual financial framework and EUR 150 936 000 in 
current prices from Heading 4 "Global Europe".' 

(12) 

the following Article 20a is inserted: 

'Article 20a 
Visibility 

Any assistance or funding provided under this Decision shall give appropriate visibility to the 
Union,  including  prominence  to  the  Union  emblem  for  those  capacities  referred  to  under 
Article 11, 12 and 21(2)(c).' 

(13) 

Article 21 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

'(j) 

point (j) of paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

establishing, managing and maintaining rescEU in accordance with Article 12;'  

(b)  paragraph 2 is amended as follows: 

(i) point (c) is replaced by the following: 

'(c)  costs necessary to upgrade or repair response capacities to a state of readiness 
and  availability  that  makes  them  deployable  as  part  of  the  European  Civil 
Protection  Pool,  in  accordance  with  the  quality  requirements  of  the  European 
Civil Protection Pool and, where relevant, recommendations formulated in the 
certification process ('adaptation costs'). Those costs may include costs related 
to  operability,  interoperability  of  modules  and  other  response  capacities, 
autonomy,  self-sufficiency,  transportability,  packaging,  and  other  necessary 
costs, provided that they specifically relate to the capacities' participation in the 
European Civil Protection Pool.  

Adaptation costs may cover: 

i) 75% of the eligible costs in the event of an upgrade, provided this does not 
exceed 50 % of the average cost of developing the capacity;  

EN 

15 

  EN 

 
 
ii) 75% of the eligible costs in the event of a repair. 

Response capacities benefitting from funding under points (i) and (ii) shall be 
made  available  as  part  of  the  European  Civil  Protection  Pool  for  a  minimum 
period of 5 and 10 years respectively, except where their economic lifespan is 
shorter. 

Adaptation costs may consist of unit costs or lump sums determined per type of 
capacity.' 

(ii) point (d) is deleted. 

(c) the following paragraphs are added: 

'3.  The  financial  assistance  for  the  action  referred  to  in  point  (j)  of  paragraph  1 
shall  cover  all  costs  required  to  ensure  the  availability  and  deployability  of 
rescEU capacities under the Union Mechanism when deployed in the event of a 
disaster or imminent disaster within the Union or a Participating State. 

The costs referred to in the first subparagraph shall include, as appropriate: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

the costs related to acquiring, renting and/or leasing the rescEU capacity;  

the  costs  related  to  the  operation  of  the  rescEU  capacity,  including 
transport; 

the  costs  related  to  procuring  the  services  of  public  or  private  entities 
necessary for operating rescEU capacities. 

4. 

The costs referred to in point (a) of paragraph 3 may consist of unit costs, lump 
sums or flat rates determined per category or type of capacity, as appropriate.' 

(14) 

Article 23 is amended as follows: 

(a) the title is replaced by the following: 

'Eligible actions linked to equipment and operations' 

(b) paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 are replaced by the following: 

'2.   The amount of Union financial assistance for assets committed to the European 
Civil  Protection  Pool  shall  be  limited  to  a  maximum  of  75%  of  the  costs  of 
operating  the  capacities,  including  transport,  in  the  event  of  a  disaster  or 
imminent disaster within the Union or a Participating State. 

3.   The  Union  financial  support  for  transport  may  cover  a  maximum  of  75 %  of 
the total eligible cost related to the transport of the capacities pre-committed to 
the European Civil Protection Pool when deployed in the event of a disaster or 
imminent disaster outside the Union as referred to in Article 16. 

4.   The  Union  financial  support  for  transport  resources  related  to  the  capacities 
pre-committed  to  the  European  Civil  Protection  Pool  in  accordance  with 
Article  11  may,  in  addition,  cover  a  maximum  of  100 %  of  the  total  eligible 
cost described under points (a), (b), (c) and (d) if this is necessary to make the 
pooling  of  Member  States'  assistance  operationally  effective  and  if  the  costs 
relate to one of the following: 

(a) 

short-term  rental  of  warehousing  capacity  to  temporarily  store  the 
assistance  from  Member  States  with  a  view  to  facilitating  their 
coordinated transport; 

EN 

16 

  EN 

 
 
(b)  

(c) 

(e) 

transport  from  the  Member  State  offering  the  assistance  to  the  Member 
State facilitating its coordinated transport; 

repackaging  of  Member  States'  assistance  to  make  maximum  use  of 
available 
specific  operational 
requirements; or 

transport  capacities  or 

to  meet 

local transport, transit and warehousing of pooled assistance with a view 
to  ensuring  a  coordinated  delivery  at  the  final  destination  in  the 
requesting country.' 

(e) the following paragraph is added: 

'8. 

Transport costs may consist of unit costs, lump sums or flat rates determined 
per category of cost.' 

(15)  

in Article 26 , paragraphs 1 and 2 are  replaced by the following: 

'1.  Actions  receiving  financial  assistance  under  this  Decision  shall  not  receive 
assistance  from  other  Union  financial  instruments.  By  way  of  derogation, 
financial assistance granted pursuant to Articles 21, 22 and 23 of this Decision 
shall  not  prevent  financing  from  other  Union  instruments  in  accordance  with 
the conditions established therein.  

The Commission shall ensure that the applicants for financial assistance under 
this Decision and beneficiaries of such  assistance  provide it with information 
about  financial  assistance  received  from  other  sources,  including  the  general 
budget of the Union, and about on-going applications for such assistance. 

2.  

Synergies  and  complementarity  shall  be  sought  with  other  instruments  of  the 
Union such as those supporting cohesion, rural development, research, health, 
as  well  as  migration  and  security  policies.  In  the  case  of  a  response  to 
humanitarian  crises  in  third  countries  the  Commission  shall  ensure  the 
complementarity  and  coherence  of  actions  financed  under  this  Decision  and 
actions financed under Regulation (EC) No 1257/96.' 

(16) 

in Article 28, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

International organisations, regional organisations or countries that are part of 
'3.  
the  European  Neighbourhood  Policy  may  cooperate  in  activities  under  the  Union 
Mechanism where relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements so allow.' 

(17) 

in Article 32, points (g) and (h) of paragraph 1 are replaced by the following: 

'(g) 

the establishment, management and maintaining of rescEU, as provided for in 
Article  12,  including  criteria  for  deployment  decisions  and  operating 
procedures; 

(h) 

the  establishment  and  organisation  of  the  Union  Civil  Protection  Knowledge 
Network, as provided for in Article 13;' 

EN 

17 

  EN 

 
This Decision is addressed to the Member States. 

Done at Brussels, 

Article 2 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

18 

  EN 

 
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) planned  

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

EN 

19 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT 

1. 

FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE  

1.1. 

Title of the proposal/initiative  

Proposal for a revision of Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of 
the Council on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism 

1.2. 

Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure16  

23  01  –  ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENDITURE  OF  THE  ‘HUMANITARIAN  AID 
AND CIVIL PROTECTION’ POLICY AREA 

23 03 - THE UNION CIVIL PROTECTION MECHANISM  

1.3. 

Nature of the proposal/initiative  

 The proposal/initiative relates to a new action  

  The  proposal/initiative 
project/preparatory action17  

relates 

to  a  new  action 

following  a  pilot 

X 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  

This Decision has the overall objective of strengthening the cooperation between the 
Union  and  the  Member  States  and  of  facilitating  coordination  in  the  field  of  civil 
protection when preventing, preparing for and responding to natural and man-made 
disasters 

1.4.2.  Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned  

Specific objective No. 1 

To achieve a high level of protection against disasters by preventing or reducing their 
potential effects, by fostering a culture of prevention and by improving cooperation 
between the civil protection and other relevant services; 

Specific objective No. 2 

To enhance preparedness at Member State and Union level to respond to disasters; 

Specific objective No. 3 

To  facilitate  rapid  and  efficient  response  in  the  event  of  disasters  or  imminent 
disasters; 

Specific objective No. 4 

To increase public awareness and preparedness for disasters. 

16 
17 

ABM: activity-based management; ABB: activity-based budgeting. 
As referred to in Article 54(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation. 

EN 

20 

  EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned 

23  01  –  ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENDITURE  OF  THE  ‘HUMANITARIAN  AID 
AND CIVIL PROTECTION’ POLICY AREA 

23 03 - THE UNION CIVIL PROTECTION MECHANISM  

EN 

21 

  EN 

 
1.4.3.  Expected result(s) and impact 

Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted. 

The proposal will: 

Enable  the  Union  to  support,  coordinate  and  supplement  the  actions  of  the  Member 
States  in  the  field  of  civil  protection  through  the  Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism 
(UCPM or "the Mechanism") during 2014-2020 MFF, including in particular: 

a) measures to prevent or reduce the effects of disaster; and 

b) actions designed to enhance the EU's state of preparedness for response to disasters, 
including actions enhancing EU citizens' awareness. 

c) actions in the field of disaster assistance interventions under the Mechanism; 

The  current  Mechanism  has  proved  to  be  a  good  tool  to  mobilise  and  coordinate  the 
assistance provided by the Participating States to respond to disasters inside and outside 
the  Union.  Building  on  these  strengths,  this  proposal  will  reinforce  some  of  the 
provisions of the current framework to enhance the collective capacity of Member States 
to respond to disasters by creating a stronger European civil protection capacity, which 
should be known as rescEU. This new reserve capacity, as well as higher co-financing 
rates for the European Civil Protection Pool (previously known as European Emergency 
Response Capacity, EERC) will address structural and emerging gaps in critical response 
gaps. This initiative will also help to reinforce the internal coherence of the Mechanism, 
as  well  as  to  gain  in  efficiency  by  pursuing  administrative  simplification  and 
streamlining of procedures. 

1.4.4. 

Indicators of results and impact  

Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative. 

Specific  objective:  To  achieve  a  high  level  of  protection  against  disasters  by 
preventing or reducing their effects and by fostering a culture of prevention: 

Number  of  Member  States  that  have  submitted  national  risk  assessments  and 

1. 
disaster risk management capability; 

Number  of  Member  States  that  have  submitted  a  summary  of  their  disaster 

2. 
management planning; 

Specific  objective:  To  Enhance  the  Union'  s  state  of  preparedness  to  respond  to 
disasters: 

Number of experts trained by the UCPM who are deployed in a UCPM response 

1. 
mission; 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Number of Exchanges of Experts within EU and with Neighbours; 

Number and type of assets acquired to be part of rescEU; 

Number and type of assets certified to join the European Civil Protection Pool; 

Number of Member States committing assets to European Civil Protection Pool; 

Number  of  rescEU  missions  vs.  total  number  of  European  Civil  Protection  Pool 

6. 
response missions. 

EN 

22 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
Specific objective: To facilitate rapid and efficient emergency response interventions 
in the event of major disasters or their imminence: 

Speed of operations: time between the request for assistance and deployment on site 

1. 
of assistance, as well as the full operability of assessment/coordination teams; 

Ratio  between  assets deployed from  rescEU  and assets deployed from the European 

2. 
Civil Protection Pool; 

3. 

Number of the transport grants and services; 

Amounts  of  EU  financing  for  rescEU  operations  inside  Europe  and  outside  Europe 

4. 
(operational and transport costs in exceptional circumstances); 

Amounts  of  EU  co-financing  for  European  Civil  Protection  Pool  operations  inside 

5. 
Europe and outside Europe (transport operations); 

6. 

7. 

Overall amount of the EU co-financing provided to MS 

Number of occurrences pooling was used vs. overall number of UCPM missions 

Specific Objective 4: "To increase public awareness and preparedness for disasters" 

Number of participants/website visitors to risk awareness PPPs financed by the 

1. 
UCPM 

2. 

EU citizens' awareness of UCPM (survey of EU citizens) 

1.5. 

Grounds for the proposal/initiative  

1.5.1.  Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term  

European civil protection has developed rapidly in recent years. Since the creation of the first 
mechanism  in  2001  (Community  Civil  Protection  Mechanism)  to  the  current  state  of  play, 
civil  protection  at  a  EU  level  has  seen  its  legal  foundations  reinforced  (specific  treaty 
reference since the Lisbon treaty in 2009), and its operational capacity enhanced (creation of 
the EERC/EMC, the Emergency Response Coordination Centre  - ERCC, etc.). The current 
UCPM  has  provided  assistance  to  emergencies  over  80  times  both  in  Europe  and  beyond, 
contributed  to  develop  and  disseminate  know-how  and  expertise  on  disaster  management, 
and fostered a culture of prevention among Participating States. 

However,  the  recently  conducted  Interim  Evaluation,  as  well  as  other  key  reports  and 
documents have identified several areas where improvements could be achieved. In the light 
of this, this proposal aims at amending the current legislation with the purpose of achieving 
the following objectives: 

a) Reinforcing the Union and Member States’ collective ability to respond to disasters, and 
addressing recurrent and emerging capacity gaps, especially with the creation of a dedicated 
reserve of response capacities that should be known as rescEU. 

b)  Strengthening  the  focus  on  prevention  action  as  part  of  the  disaster  risk  management 
cycle,  as  well  as  reinforcing  coherence  with  other  key  EU  policies  acting  in  the  field  of 
disaster prevention and disaster response; 

c) Ensuring the Union Mechanism is agile and effective in its administrative procedures in 
support of emergency operations. 

1.5.2.  Added value of EU involvement 

The EU's added value comes in the form of: 

- Reducing the loss of human life, environmental, economic and material damage. 

EN 

23 

  EN 

 
 
-  Better  coordination  of  civil  protection  activities  since  all  offers  of  assistance  are 
communicated through the ERCC for acceptance by the authorities of the affected State. 

-  Cost-effectiveness  since  the  assistance  accepted  by the  affected  State  can  be  pooled  with 
the assistance of other countries through the transport procedure. 

-  Improved  efficiency  through  an  increased  level  of  preparedness  and  a  more  coherent 
disaster risk management policy; 

- Coherent and effective response through the creation of rescEU ready to help everywhere 
in the EU and in Participating States when needed; 

- Better visibility of the EU's response to disasters; 

- Better use of scarce resources by sharing the EU funded assets; 

-  Enhance  regional  coordination  and  knowledge-sharing  through  the  development  of  a 
network of EU civil protection hubs. 

1.5.3. 

 Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past 

These proposals build upon:  

- Interim Evaluation of the UCPM (2014-2016), conducted by an external consultant. August 
2017. 

-  European  Court  of  Auditors,  'Union  Civil  Protection  Mechanism:  the  coordination  of 
responses  to  disasters  outside  the  EU  has  been  broadly  effective',  Special  Report  no.  33, 
2016; 

-  Staff  Working  Document,  'Overview  of  Natural  and  Man-made  Disaster  Risks  the 
European Union may face', SWD(2017)176 final, 23.05.2017; 

- Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on progress made 
and  gaps  remaining  in  the  European  Emergency  Response  Capacity,  COM(2017)78  final, 
17.02.2017.experience gained in emergencies handled by the Mechanism since its creation in 
2001; 

-  Experience  gained  as  a  result  of  the  projects  financed  within  the  framework  of  the  calls 
launched since 2013 in the field of preparedness and prevention; 

- Experience gained as a result of the pilot project financed within the framework of the call 
launched  in  2008  "Call  for  proposal  for  a  pilot  project  to  step  up  cooperation  between 
Member States on combating forest fires"; 

1.5.4.  Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments 

Consistency with:  

- Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid; 

- Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 
2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency;  

- Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European 
Union Solidarity Fund;  

-  Regulation  (EC)  No  1717/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15 
November 2006 establishing an Instrument for Stability; 

- Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 
2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism 

-  Regulation  (EU)  No  375/2014 of  the European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  3  April 
2014  establishing  the  European  Voluntary  Humanitarian  Aid  Corps  (‘EU  Aid  Volunteers 
initiative’); 

EN 

24 

  EN 

 
 
-  Council  Regulation  (EU)  2016/369  of  15  March  2016  on  the  provision  of  emergency 
support within the Union 

EN 

25 

  EN 

 
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 [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY 

X Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration 

X Implementation with a start-up period from 1/01/2018 to 31/12/2020, 

followed by full-scale operation. 
Management mode(s) planned18  

1.7. 

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  

X Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to: 

 third countries or the bodies they have designated; 

X 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  

[…] 

[…] 

18 

Details  of  management  modes  and  references  to  the  Financial  Regulation  may  be  found  on  the 
BudgWeb site: http://www.cc.cec/budg/man/budgmanag/budgmanag_en.html 

EN 

26 

  EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

MANAGEMENT MEASURES  

2.1. 

Monitoring and reporting rules  

Specify frequency and conditions. 

Actions  and  measures  receiving  financial  assistance  under  these  Decisions  shall  be 
monitored regularly.  

The Commission shall prepare and submit to the European Parliament and to the Council: 

- an interim evaluation report no later than 30 June 2017, (already completed); 

-  a  Communication  on  the  continued  implementation  of  this  Decision  no  later  than  31 
December 2018; 

- an ex post evaluation report no later than 31 December 2021. 

2.2. 

Management and control system  

2.2.1.  Risk(s) identified  

In the light of the broader role assigned to the Emergency Response Coordination Centre, if 
no sufficient posts are provided, understaffing may lead to the risk of not being able to  

-  respond  to  all  challenges  arising  from  the  increase  in  the  number  of  civil  protection 
operations,  and  to  all political exigencies under the Integrated  Political  Crisis  Reporting 
(IPCR) and the Solidarity Clause; 
- develop/add activities; 
- benefit/develop new technological systems ensuring uninterrupted availability; 
- react appropriately to imminent Civil Protection emergencies; 
- adequately implement the internal control system as described in 2.2.2. 

2.2.2. 

Information concerning the internal control system set up 

The existing internal control system of DG ECHO is foreseen to be used for guaranteeing that 
funds  available  under  new  Instrument  are  used  properly  and  in  line  with  appropriate 
legislation.  

Current system is setup as follows: 

1.  Internal  Control  team  within  DG  ECHO,  focused  on  the  compliance  with  valid 
administrative procedures and legislation in force in the area of civil protection. The Internal 
Control Framework of the Commission is used for this purpose.  

2. Regular audit of grants and contracts, awarded under the Instrument, by external auditors of 
DG ECHO, fully incorporated in the DG ECHO's Annual Audit Plan; 

3. Evaluation of activities by external partners 

The actions can also be audited by OLAF (fraud cases) and Court of Auditors. 

2.2.3.  Estimate  of  the  costs  and  benefits  of  the  controls  and  assessment  of  the  expected 

level of risk of error  

The  estimated  cost  of  DG  ECHO's  control  strategy  represents  1.9%  of  budget  2016. 
The main components of this indicator are: 

- The total staff costs of DG ECHO experts in the field, plus those of the financial and 
operational  units  multiplied  by  the  estimated  portion  of  time  (50%)  dedicated  to 
quality assurance, control and monitoring activities; 

- the total resources in DG ECHO's external audit sector devoted to audits and verifications 

EN 

27 

  EN 

 
Taking  into  account  the  very  limited  cost  of  such  controls  together  with  the  quantifiable 
(corrections and recoveries) and unquantifiable (deterrent effect and quality insurance effect of 
controls) benefits linked to these, the Commission is able to conclude that the quantifiable and 
unquantifiable benefits from controls largely outweigh the limited cost of these. 

This is confirmed by the 1.02% multi-annual residual error rate reported by the Commission in 
2016 for its humanitarian aid and civil protection department. 

2.3. 

Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities  

Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures. 

DG ECHO's anti-fraud strategy, in line with the Commission's anti-fraud strategy (CAFS), is 
used in order to ensure inter alia that: 

- DG ECHO's internal anti-fraud related controls are fully aligned with the CAFS; 

-  DG  ECHO's  fraud  risk  management  approach  is  geared  to  identify  fraud  risk  areas  and 
adequate  

responses. 

The  systems  used  for  spending  EU  funds  in  third  countries  enable  relevant  data  to  be 
retrieved  with  a  view  to  feeding  this  data  into  fraud  risk  management  (e.g.  detection  of 
double funding). 

Where  necessary,  networking  groups  and  adequate  IT  tools  dedicated  to  analysing  fraud 
cases related to the sector may be set up. 

EN 

28 

  EN 

 
 
3. 

3.1. 

ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE  

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. 

Budget line 

Heading of 
multiannual 
financial 
framework 

Number and Title 

Type of  
expenditure 

Diff./Non-
diff.19 

Contribution  

from 
EFTA 
countries
20 

from 
candidate 
countries21 

from third 
countries 

within the 
meaning of 
Article 21(2)(b) of 
the Financial 
Regulation  

3 

4 

3 

4 

4 

23 03 01 01 - Disaster prevention and 
preparedness within the Union  
23 03 01 01 - Disaster prevention and 
preparedness in third countries 
23 03 02 01 Rapid and efficient 
emergency response interventions in the 
event of major disasters within the Union 
23 03 02 02 - Rapid and efficient 
emergency response interventions in the 
event of major disasters in third countries 
23 01 04 - Support expenditure for 
operations and programmes in the 
‘Humanitarian aid and civil protection’ 
policy area 

Diff. 

YES 

YES 

Diff. 

YES 

YES 

NO 

NO 

Diff. 

YES 

YES 

NO 

NO 

NO 

NO 

Diff. 

YES 

YES 

NO 

NO 

Non – 
Diff. 

NO 

NO 

NO 

NO 

19 
20 
21 

Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations. 
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.  
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidate countries from the Western Balkans. 

EN 

29 

  EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
3.2. 

Estimated impact on expenditure  

3.2.1.  Summary of estimated impact on expenditure  

Heading of multiannual financial  
framework  

Number  Heading 3 Security and Citizenship 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

DG ECHO – European Civil Protection and 
Humanitarian Aid Operations 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

 Operational appropriations  

23 03 01 01 

23 03 02 01 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1) 

(2) 

(1a) 

(2a) 

14,000 
7,000 
5,157 
4,000 

105,900 
46,560 
9,300 
10,000 

109,279 
104.395 
13,218 
11,000 

229.179 
157.955 
27,675 
25,000 

Appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed  from  the  envelope  of  specific 
programmes22  

Number of budget line 

(3) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG ECHO 

Commitments 

=1+1a +3 

Payments 

=2+2a 

+3 

19,157 

115,200 

122,497 

256,854 

11,000 

56,560 

115,395 

182,955 

 TOTAL operational appropriations  

Commitments 

(4) 

19,157 

115,200 

122,497 

256,854 

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. 

30 

EN 

22 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed  from  the 
envelope for specific programmes  

Payments 

(5) 

(6) 

11,000 

56,560 

115,395 

182,955 

0 

0 

0 

TOTAL 

TOTAL appropriations  
under HEADING 3 
of the multiannual financial framework 

Commitments 

=4+ 6 

Payments 

=5+ 6 

19,157 

115,200 

122,497 

256,854 

11,000 

56,560 

115,395 

182,955 

Heading of multiannual financial  
framework  

Number  Heading 4 Global Europe 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

DG ECHO – European Civil Protection and 
Humanitarian Aid Operations 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

 Operational appropriations  

23 03 01 02 

23 03 02 02 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1) 

(2) 

(1a) 

(2a) 

- 
- 
2 
0,8 

- 
- 
2 
1,8 

- 
- 
2,284 
2,014 

- 
- 
6,284 
4,614 

Appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed  from  the  envelope  of  specific 
programmes23  

Number of budget line 

(3) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

TOTAL appropriations 

Commitments 

=1+1a +3 

2 

2 

2,284 

6,284 

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. 

31 

EN 

23 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
for DG ECHO 

Payments 

=2+2a 

+3 

0,8 

1,8 

2,014 

4,614 

 TOTAL operational appropriations  

Commitments 

Payments 

  TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed  from  the 
envelope for specific programmes  

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

2 

0,8 

2 

1,8 

2,284 

2,014 

6,284 

4,614 

0 

0 

0 

TOTAL 

TOTAL appropriations  
under HEADING 4 
of the multiannual financial framework 

Commitments 

=4+ 6 

Payments 

=5+ 6 

2 

0,8 

2 

1,8 

2,284 

2,014 

6,284 

4,614 

Heading of multiannual financial  
framework  

5 

‘Administrative expenditure’ 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

EN 

32 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DG ECHO – European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid 
Operations 

 Human resources  

 Other administrative expenditure  

TOTAL DG ECHO 

Appropriations  

1,682  

     5,034  

       9,436  

                       16,152  

0,1500 

0,230 

0,330 

0,710 

1,832  

      5,264  

        9,766  

               16,862  

TOTAL appropriations 
under HEADING 5 
of the multiannual financial framework  

(Total commitments = Total payments) 

1,832 

5,264 

9,766 

16,862 

TOTAL appropriations  
under HEADINGS 1 to 5 
of the multiannual financial framework  

Commitments 

Payments 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

22,989 

122,464 

134,547 

13,632 

63,624 

127,174 

280,000 

204,430 

EN 

33 

EN 

 
 
            
              
 
 
 
 
3.2.2.  Estimated impact on operational appropriations  

 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  

Year 
2018 

Year 
2019 

Year 
2020 

TOTAL 

OUTPUTS 

 

Type 
output24 

of 

Averag
r
e
e cost  
b
m
of the 
u
output  N

s
t
u
p
t
u
o

f
o

Cost 

r
e
b
m
u
N

s
t
u
p
t
u
o

f
o

Cost 

r
e
b
m
u
N

s
t
u
p
t
u
o

f
o

Cost 

Total 
number 
of 
outputs 

Total  
cost 

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1 - 
Prevention25… 

Number 
projects 
financed 
prevention 

of 

for 

Studies 

Grant 
agreements 

Number  of 
contracts 

0.3 

15 

3 

15 

3 

15 

3 

45 

9 

0.1 

5 

0.5 

5 

0.5 

5 

0.5 

15 

1.5 

Sub-total for specific objective N°1 

20 

3.5 

20 

3.5 

20 

3.5 

60 

10.5 

24 
25 

Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.). 
As described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific objective(s)…" 

EN 

34 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
SPECIFIC  OBJECTIVE  No  2 
Preparedness 

- 

0.5 

100 

5 

100 

5 

100 

5 

300 

15 

Grant 
agreements 
and 
contracts 

of 

Number 
projects 
financed 
preparedness 
(incl.  training 
and exercises) 

for 

Early warning 
systems 

Emergency 
Response 
Capacity 

Number  of 
adm. 
Arrang. 

Number  of 
grant 
agreements 
+contracts 

1.25 

1 

2 

7 

2.5 

2 

2.5 

2 

2.5 

6 

7.5 

7 

13 

13 

20 

20 

40 

40 

Sub-total for specific objective N°2 

109 

14.5 

115 

20.5 

122 

27.5 

346 

62.5 

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 3 – 
Response26 

Deployment 
of experts  

Number of 
contracts 

0.005 

200 

of  

 Number 
operations 
inside the EU 

Grant 
agreement/ 
service 
contract 

0.1 

80 

1 

8 

200 

80 

1 

8 

200 

80 

1 

8 

600 

3 

240 

24 

26 

As described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific objective(s)…" 

EN 

35 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
0.13 

40 

5.2 

40 

5.2 

40 

5.2 

120 

15.6 

 Number 
transport 
operations 
outside 
EU 

of 

the 

Grant 
agreement/ 
service 
contract 

Sub-total for specific objective N°3 

320 

14.2 

320 

14.2 

320 

14.2 

960 

42.6 

TOTAL COST 

449 

32.2 

455 

38.2 

462 

45.2 

1366 

115.6 

EN 

36 

EN 

 
 
 
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) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

TOTAL 

HEADING 5 
of the multiannual 
financial framework 

Human resources  

1,682 

5,034 

9,436 

16,152 

Other administrative 
expenditure  

Subtotal HEADING 5 
of the multiannual 
financial framework  

Outside HEADING 527 
of the multiannual 
financial framework  

Human resources  

Other expenditure  
of an administrative 
nature 

Subtotal  
outside HEADING 5 
of the multiannual 
financial framework  

0,15 

0,23 

0,33 

0,710 

1,832 

5,264 

9,766 

16,862 

0 

0 

0 

0 

TOTAL 

1,832 

5,264 

9,766 

16,862 

The  appropriations  required  for  human  resources  and  other  expenditure  of  an  administrative  nature  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 
constraints.
allocation 

procedure 

budgetary 

light 

and 

the 

of 

in 

27 

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. 

EN 

37 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
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 
N 

Year 
N+1 

Year 
N+2 

2018  2019  2020 

 Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary agents) 

7 

12 

16 

23 01 01 01 (Headquarters and 
Commission’s Representation 
Offices) 

XX 01 01 02 (Delegations) 

XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research) 

10 01 05 01 (Direct research) 

 External personnel (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)28 

10 

24 

31 

23 01 02 01 (CA, INT, SNE 
from the "global envelope") 

XX 01 02 02 (CA, INT, JED, LA 
and SNE in the delegations) 

XX 
01 
04 
yy 
29 

- at 
Headquarters30 

- in 
delegations  

XX 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - 
Indirect research) 

10 01 05 02 (CA, INT, SNE - 
Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) 

TOTAL 

17 

36 

47 

* These figures might be complemented by additional 15 FTEs to be provided by redeployment from other DGs 
through a call for interest. 

XX 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  additional  staff  requested  for  the  period  2018-2020  is  needed  to  perform  the 
following  tasks:  a) developing  and  managing  the  newly created  capacity  RescEU; b) 

28 

29 
30 

CA= Contract Agent; INT= agency staff ("Intérimaire"); JED= "Jeune Expert en Délégation" (Young 
Experts in Delegations); LA= Local Agent; SNE= Seconded National Expert;  
Under the ceiling for external personnel from operational appropriations (former "BA" lines). 
Essentially  for  Structural  Funds,  European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development  (EAFRD)  and 
European Fisheries Fund (EFF). 

EN 

38 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
reinforcing  the  Voluntary  Pool;  c)  supporting  the  policy  units,  including  prevention 
activities; d) developing the concept of the European civil protection academy; and e) 
ensuring management and support activities. 

The bulk of the increase in personnel will be dedicated to the development of RescEU, 
performing tasks such as managing the acquisition and/or leasing of assets (contracts), 
managing  the  assets,  monitoring  and  coordination  tasks,  as  well  as  communication 
tasks. 

External staff 

Ensuring the running of the 24/7 Emergency Response Centre; necessary work on the 
field; administrative support. 

EN 

39 

  EN 

 
3.2.4.  Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework  

 The proposal/initiative is compatible the current multiannual financial framework. 

X  The  proposal/initiative  will  entail  reprogramming  of  the  relevant  heading  in  the 
multiannual financial framework. The following amounts will be redeployed: 

heading 3 

2018 

2019 

2020 

total 

33.0201 

33.0202 

33.0301 

33.0302 

Rights, equality and citizenship 

Ensuring the protection of rights and 
empowering citizens 

Promoting non-discrimination and 
equality 

Justice 

Supporting and promoting judicial 
training 
Facilitating and supporting judicial 
cooperation in civil and criminal 
matters 
total heading 3 
heading 4 

21.020703  Human development (DCI) 

Support to Turkey -Economic, social 
and territorial development and 
related progressive alignment with 
the Union acquis(IPA II - Turkey) 
total heading 4 

22.020302 

1,34 

1,55 

2,89 

0,98 

1,22 

2,2 

4,93 

5,25 

10,18 

4,77 
12,02 
2019 

5,02 
13,04 
2020 

9,79 
25,06 

total 

2,00 

2018 
2,00 

2,00 
2,00 

2,28 
2,28 

4,284 
6,284 

2,00 

–  X  The proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument. 

Use of the flexibility instrument 

       2018 
19,157 

       2019 
103,18 

2020 
109,457 

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 three 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  

EN 

40 

  EN 

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTAL appropriations 
co-financed  

EN 

41 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.3. 

Estimated impact on revenue  

X  The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue. 

 The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact: 

 

 

on own resources  

on miscellaneous revenue  

Appropriation
s available for 
the current 
financial year 

Budget revenue line: 

Article …………. 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Impact of the proposal/initiative31 

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) 

For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected. 

[…] 

Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue. 

[…] 

31 

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. 

EN 

42 

  EN