CELEX: 52012PC0081
Language: en
Date: 2012-04-30
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (recast)

|
			
		
		
		52012PC0081
		
			Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (recast) /* COM/2012/081 final - 2012/0033 (NLE) */
			
				
		
		
			
			   	EXPLANATORY
MEMORANDUM
1.           Context
of the proposal
•           General context
The Schengen Information System (SIS) set up pursuant to the provisions of Title IV of the Convention of 19 June 1990 implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the
Federal Republic of Germany and France on the gradual abolition of checks at
their common borders (the Schengen Convention), and its development, SIS
1+, constitute an essential tool for the application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis as integrated into
the framework of the European Union.
The development of the second generation of
SIS (SIS II) has been entrusted to the Commission pursuant to Council
Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001[1]
and Council Decision 2001/886/JHA of 6 December 2001 on the development of the
second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[2]. SIS II will replace SIS 1+. SIS II development takes into account
the latest evolutions in the field of information technology and allows the
introduction of added functionalities.
Provisions on the establishment, operation
and use of SIS II are laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the
establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[3] and Council Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June
2007 on the establishment, operation and use of
the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) [4]. These legal acts foresee that they
will apply to the Member States participating in SIS 1+ only as of dates to be
fixed by the Council, acting by the unanimity of its Members representing the
governments of the Member States participating in SIS 1+. They will then
replace the provisions of the Schengen acquis governing SIS 1+, in particular the relevant provisions in the Schengen Convention.
Before this
can take place, the users of the SIS 1+ will have to migrate to the SIS II
environment. A legal framework for the migration from
SIS 1+ to the SIS II was therefore designed in Council Regulation (EC) No
1104/2008[5]
and Council Decision 2008/839/JHA[6]
of 24 October 2008 on
migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second
generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (together "migration instruments"). 
2.           Grounds
for and objectives of this proposal
The objective of this proposal is to recast
in a single legal instrument Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Council
Decision 2008/839/JHA. This
proposal provides for a revised legal regime for the
migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II which enables the Member States to use SIS II
with all its functionalities from the moment of the switchover from SIS 1+ to
SIS II. 
Transparency of the SIS II development
process for the European Parliament is maintained through the existing
reporting obligation. 
3.           Legal
elements of this proposal
•           Legal base
The legal base of this proposal is Article
74 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as it concerns
measures to ensure cooperation between the relevant departments of the Member
States, as well as between those departments and the Commission for policies
ensuring a high level of security within the area of freedom, security and
justice.
•           Subsidiarity principle
This proposal respects the principle of
subsidiarity as the main objective of the proposed action, namely the migration
from SIS 1+ to SIS II, cannot be achieved by the Member States individually and
it can be better achieved on the Union level.
•           Proportionality principle
This proposal does not go beyond what is
necessary to achieve its objective. It complies
with the proportionality principle as its primary impact is the
facilitation of migration of the Member States from SIS 1+ to SIS II. 
•           Choice of instruments
A
Council Regulation is the most appropriate legal form to recast Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Decision 2008/839/JHA, as one of the legal acts involved in the recast is a regulation. In addition, uniform rules and processes are needed for the management
of SIS II development and migration. The provisions set out in this proposal
for a regulation are precise, unconditional and directly applicable and, by
their very nature, do not require action by Member States to transpose them
into their national laws.
•           Committee
procedure
As a consequence of the repeal of Council
Decision 486/1999 of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise
of implementing powers conferred on the Commission[7], from 1
March 2011, reference has to be made in the provision on committee procedure to
the new 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[8]. The
regulatory procedure applied under the former committee procedure in this
proposal will be replaced by the examination procedure. 
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA establishing the committee contain
rules on the former regulatory procedure. However, according to the transitory
measures of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011,
the existing committees should start to work from 1 March 2011 under the new
rules, in the present case under the examination procedure.  The formal modification
of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA is not
required.
4.           Detailed
explanation 
This proposal contains
entirely or partially new provisions on the following:
(a)                   
Recast
The most appropriate
mean to reflect the principles of better regulation is to apply to the recast
legislative technique as 
a) a number of
substantive amendments are to be made to the  migrations
instruments and
b) the pillar structure, which led to the
existence of two legal instruments with an essentially identical content, is no
longer relevant following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. 
Point 2 of the Interinstitutional
Agreement of 28 November 2001 between the European Parliament, Council and
Commission on a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts[9] stipulates
that where substantive amendments have to be made to an earlier legal act, the
recasting technique permits the adoption of a single legislative text which
simultaneously makes the desired amendment, codifies that amendment with the
unchanged provision of the earlier act, and repeals that act. In the joint
declaration to that point the three institutions stated that the recasting may
be either "vertical" whereby the new legal act replaces a single
earlier act with its subsequent amendments or "horizontal" whereby
the new legal act replaces several parallel earlier acts relating to the same
subject.
Under the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, it would not be possible to modify a former third pillar
instrument. Therefore, the only one correct legal technique is to incorporate Regulation
(EC) No 1104/2008 and Decision 2008/839/JHA in a single legal act under the
same legal base. The recast of the migration instruments therefore combines the
elements of a vertical and a horizontal recast.
This proposal indicates clearly the new and
the adapted provisions. It contains a repeal clause as well as a correlation
table.
(b)                   
Legal regimes for the migration
This proposal applies a differentiated
legal approach for the two phases of the migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II. The
migration consists of two steps:
(1)         
a data loading of N.SIS II 
The phase of data loading of N.SIS II
continues to be governed by the Schengen Convention.
(2)         
a switchover from N.SIS to N.SIS II
This differentiated approach enables Member
States to use SIS II with all its functionalities from the moment of the
switchover from SIS 1+ to SIS II by providing for the application of Regulation
(EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA.
In accordance with Article 12 of the migration
instruments as worded until now, the migration from SIS 1+ into SIS II is to take place pursuant to Title IV of the Schengen
Convention. This rule, however, prevents Member
States from using SIS II with its full functionalities
from the moment that a Member State successfully switches from SIS 1+ into SIS
II. As a consequence, the Member States have to disable all SIS II features
that are not in SIS 1+ until the Council decides on the date of application of
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA. 
On 23 February 2011 the Member States in the SIS-VIS Committee invited the Commission to initiate without delay the process of
adapting the migration legal framework to reflect the technical migration
approach outlined in the Migration Plan. The Migration Plan describes that,
within one shot switchover period, all Member States will perform the
individual switchovers of their national application from SIS I into SIS II one
after the other. It is desirable that a Member State that has switched over
should be able to use SIS II fully as from the time of the switchover and it
does not have to wait until other Member States have also switched over.
Therefore, it is necessary to apply Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision
2007/533/JHA from the time of the initiation of the switchover by the first
Member State. The period of migration should be kept as short as possible. The
application of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA does not
prevent Member States which have not switched over yet or which have a fallback
during the intensive monitoring period from using SIS II in functionalities
limited to SIS 1+. 
The proposal not only enables Member States
to take full advantage of all the advanced applications available by SIS II but
also represents considerable savings for the Member States.
(c)                   
Interim migration architecture
The application of Regulation (EC) No
1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA will replace Article 64 and Articles 92 to
119 of the Schengen Convention, with the exception of Article 102a thereof, as
it is laid down in Article 52 paragraph 1 and Article 68 paragraph 1
respectively of the said legal acts. As article 92a of the Schengen Convention
contains detailed rules on the interim migration architecture, it is desirable
to keep it in force during the entire duration of the migration process. 
The interim migration architecture for the
operations of SIS 1+ allows that SIS 1+ and certain technical parts of the
architecture of SIS II, which need to be in use to make possible an incremental
migration from one system to another, operate in parallel during a limited
transitional period.
It is therefore necessary to incorporate the
relevant provisions of Article 92a of the Schengen Convention into the
migration legal framework.
•           Existing provisions in the area covered by this
proposal
–      Convention of 19 June 1990 implementing the Schengen
Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union,
the Federal Republic of Germany and France on the gradual abolition of
checks at their common borders[10]
(the Schengen Convention);
–     
Council Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001 of 6
December 2001 on the development of the second
generation Schengen
Information System (SIS
II)[11];
–     
Council Decision 2001/886/JHA of 6 December 2001[12] on the development of the
second generation Schengen Information
System (SIS II);
–     
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment,
operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) ;
–     
Council Decision No 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007
on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) ;
–     
Regulation (EC) No 1986/2006 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 regarding access to the
Second Generation Schengen Information
System (SIS II) by the services in the Member States responsible for issuing
vehicle registration certificates[13];
–     
Commission Decisions 2007/170/EC and 2007/171/EC
of 16 March 2007 laying down the network
requirements for the Schengen
Information System II[14];
–     
Council Regulation (EC) No 189/2008 of 18
February 2008 on the tests of the second generation Schengen
Information System (SIS II)[15];
–     
Council Decision 2008/173/EC of 18 February 2008
on the tests of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[16];
–     
Council Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 of 24
October 2008 on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the
second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[17];
–     
Council Decision 2008/839/JHA of 24 October 2008
on migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second
generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) [18];
–     
Commission Decision 2009/724/JHA of 17 September
2009 laying down the date for the completion of migration from the Schengen
Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information
System (SIS II)[19].
5.           Consultation
of interested parties and impact assessment
•           Consultation of interested
parties
Member States' experts are closely involved
in the continued development of SIS II, in particular in the framework of the
SIS-VIS Committee and the Global Programme Management Board. In addition, SIS
II developments are continuously discussed in the Council preparatory bodies. 
European Data Protection Supervisor is also
involved in the consultation given that personal data will also be uploaded the
in the course of the migration.
•           Summary of responses and how
they have been taken into account
This proposal takes into account the result
of extensive discussions with Member States within the Council, especially
within the framework of the SIS-TECH and SIS-SIRENE Council working groups, as
well as of the views expressed by the members of the Global Programme Management
Board. It, furthermore, responds to an invitation made to the Commission by the
Member States to align the legal framework governing
the migration with the technical scenario retained by their experts.
•           Collection and use of
expertise
External expertise was not used to prepare
this proposal.
•           Impact assessment
No impact assessment is required for this
proposal as it is the continuation of a technical project without clearly
identifiable economic, social and environmental impacts.
6.           Budgetary
implications
Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001 and Decision 2001/886/JHA laid down that the expenditure
involved in the development of the SIS II is to be charged to the general
budget of the Union. Under Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and under Article 5 of Council Decision
533/2007/JHA the costs of setting up, operating and maintaining
Central SIS II and the communication infrastructure are to be borne by the
general budget of the Union. The costs of testing, operating and maintaining
each N.SIS II shall be borne by the Member State concerned.
Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Council Decision 2008/839/JHA maintained the same
principles of costs distribution as above. However, a new category of costs was
introduced, namely those related to the migration from SIS 1 to SIS II. Under Articles
15 of those legal acts the costs for migration at the central level, together
with those for testing, maintenance and development measures (Central SIS II
and communication infrastructure) had been allocated to the general budget of
the Union. The costs associated with the national N.SIS II remained to be borne
by the Member States.
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA as well as Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 23 May 2007 establishing the External Borders Fund for the
period 2007 to 2013 as part of the General Programme Solidarity and Management
of Migration Flows[20], included SIS II national developments among the eligible actions to
be co-financed under the External Borders Fund (EBF). Commission Decision 2007/599/EC of 27 August 2007 implementing
Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as
regards the adoption of strategic guidelines for 2007 to 2013[21]  further identified SIS II as one of the five
strategic priorities under the EBF, recognizing the importance of supporting
the coherent and timely development of the national projects alongside the
central SIS II.
Since the adoption of all legal acts referred
above, the SIS II project received a significant reorientation in the course of
2010, after the completion of an important test campaign, the so-called
Milestone 1. Furthermore, the evolutions in the use of SIS by its users (Member
States) led to a need to update the SIS II technical requirements concerning
performance and storage capacity, which increased significantly after the
accession of nine new Member States and Switzerland. The upgraded features were
reflected in the new version of the Interface Control Document, the ICD 3.0.
All these modifications affected the costs of the project both at central and
national level. 
With regard to the migration process, the
evolution in requirements and the advances made in the completion of the
project led to a redefinition of the migration architecture, of the migration
calendar and of the testing requirements. An important part of the activities
that would now be required at Member State level for the migration to SIS II
were not anticipated at the time when Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Council
Decision 2008/839/JHA were adopted or at the time when the financial package
and the multiannual programmes under the EBF were drawn up.  
It is therefore necessary to partly realign
the cost distribution principles insofar as the migration from SIS 1 to SIS II
is concerned. Certain national activities related to
migration, in particular in connection with the participation of Member States
in migration-related testing activities could be
co-financed from the SISII budget line of the general
budget of the Union. This possibility would cover specific and well-defined
activities beyond, and not to coincide with, other SIS II related actions which
would continue to be supported under the EBF. The financial assistance thus
provided under this proposal would therefore be complementary to that provided
by the EBF. 
As the setting up of the national systems
is the primary obligation of Member States, the Union contribution remains
optional and this proposal does not intend to create any obligation for the Union.
It is also necessary to determine the ceiling of the Union contribution in
relation to each Member State. This proposal does not require any additional
appropriations as the appropriations still available in 2011 will be used to
cover the difference between the total costs in 2012 and the appropriations
entered in SIS II budget line for 2012.
The Commission will appraise, decide and
administer the co-financing operation in accordance with the budgetary and
other procedures, in particularly those laid down in the Financial Regulation. Member States must comply with the principles of sound
financial management, in particular, value for money and cost-effectiveness.
The Commission will be entitled to
carry out all the checks and inspections necessary to ensure the proper
management of the Union funds and to protect the Union’s financial interest
against any fraud or irregularity. The Court of Auditors of the European Union
will be empowered to carry out the audits required by Article 287 of the
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The costs arising from activities at SIS 1+
level, including supplementary activities of France, acting on behalf of the
Member States participating in SIS 1+, shall continue to be borne in line with
Article 119 of the Schengen Convention.
This article provides that the costs of installing and operating the technical
support function of SIS 1+, as referred to in Article 92 (3) of the Convention,
including the cost of lines connecting the national sections of the Schengen Information System to the technical
support function, are borne jointly by the Member States, while the costs of
installing and operating the national section of the Schengen
Information System are borne by each Member State
individually.
The Commission has prepared a financial
statement annexed to this proposal.
7.           Additional
information
•           Amendment of existing
legislation
The proposal recasts Regulation (EC) No
1104/2008 and Decision 2008/839/JHA into a single legal act as a
regulation.
•           Deletion of the expiry date
Given the complexity of the migration
process which, despite extensive preparation by all stakeholders, entails
significant technical risks, this proposal provides for the necessary
flexibility to respond to unexpected difficulties that the central system or
one or several national systems could face with during the migration process;
therefore no longer contains an expiry date. 
In accordance with Article 55 of
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Article 71 Decision 2007/533/JHA, it is
for the Council to determine the dates for the applicability of those legal
acts as well as for the migration. As following the migration a one-month fall
back period is foreseen in the technical documentation the date of
applicability of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA
should precede the expiry of the migration instruments with at least one month.
•           Timetable
In order to ensure the continuity of the
preparations and the timely execution of the migration, this proposal should be
adopted at the latest in the second quarter of 2012.
2012/0033 (NLE)
Proposal for a
COUNCIL REGULATION
on migration from
the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen
Information System (SIS II) (recast)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
ê 1104/2008
ð new
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unionestablishing
the European Community, and in particular Article 7466 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the
Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the
European Parliament[22],
ð Having consultated the European Data
Protection Suprevisor, ï
Whereas:
ò new
(1)       Council
Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 of 24 October 2008 on migration from the Schengen Information
System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[23] and Council Decision
2008/839/JHA of 24 October 2008 on migration from the Schengen Information
System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[24] have been substantially
amended. Since further amendments are to be made, they should be recast in the
interest of clarity. 
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
ð new
(2)       The
Schengen Information System (SIS) set up pursuant to the provisions of Title IV
of the Convention of 19 June 1990 implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14
June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union,
the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition
of checks at their common borders[25]
(the Schengen Convention), and the further development, thereof, SIS 1+,
constitute essential tools for the application of the provisions of the
Schengen acquis as integrated into the framework of the European Union.
(3)       The
development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) was
entrusted to the Commission pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001[26] and Council Decision 2001/886/JHA[27] of 6 December 2001 on the development of the second
generation Schengen Information System (SIS II). ð Those instruments expired on 31
December 2008 prior to the completion of the SIS II developments. Those
instruments therefore needed to be supplemented firstly by Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008
and by Decision 2008/839/JHA and subsequently by this Regulation until a date
to be fixed by the Council acting in accordance with Regulation (EC) No
1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on
the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen
Information System (SIS II)[28]
 ï and
Council Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment, operation
and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[29].
(4)       SIS
II was established by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and by Council
Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment,
operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)[30]. This Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions of
those acts.
(5)       Certain
tests of SIS II are provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 189/2008[31] and in Council Decision 2008/173/JHAEC[32] on the tests of the second generation Schengen
Information System (SIS II).
(6)       The
development of SIS II should be continued and should be finalised in the
framework of the SIS II global schedule endorsed by the Council on 6 June 2008 ð  presented by the Commission in
October 2010  ï .
(7)       A
comprehensive test of SIS II should be conducted in full cooperation between
the Member States and the Commission, in accordance with the provisions of this
Regulation. As soon as possible after its completion, the test should be
validated as provided for by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision
2007/533/JHA.ð  Only test data should be used
for the purpose of the comprehensive test.ï
(8)       Member
States should perform a test on the exchange of supplementary information.
(9)       As
regards SIS 1+, the Schengen Convention provides for a technical support
function (C.SIS). As regards SIS II, Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision
2007/533/JHA provide for a Central SIS II composed of a technical support
function and a uniform national interface (NI-SIS). The technical support function
of Central SIS II should be located in Strasbourg (France) and a backup in St
Johann im Pongau (Austria).
(10)     In
order to better manage the potential difficulties brought about by the
migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II, an interim migration architecture for SISthe Schengen Information System
should be established and tested. The interim migration architecture should
have no impact on the operational availability of SIS 1+. A converter should be
provided by the Commission.
(11)     The
Member State issuing an alert should be responsible for ensuring that the data
entered into SISthe
Schengen Information System is accurate, up to date and
lawful.
(12)     The
Commission should remain responsible for Central SIS II and its communication
infrastructure. This responsibility includes the maintenance and continuation
of the development of SIS II and its communication infrastructure, including at
all times the correction of errors. The Commission should provide coordination
and support for the joint activities. The Commission should provide, in
particular, the necessary technical and operational support to the Member
States at Central SIS II level including the availability of a helpdesk.
(13)     The
Member States are and should remain responsible for the development and maintenance
of their national systems (N.SIS II).
(14)     France
should remain responsible for the technical support function of SIS 1+, as
expressly provided for in the Schengen Convention.
(15)     Representatives
of the Member States participating in SIS 1+ should coordinate their actions
within the framework of the Council. It is necessary to set out a framework for
that organisational action.
ò new
(16)     In order to support Member States in
opting for the most favourable technical and financial solution the Commission should
initiate without delay the process of adapting this Regulation by proposing a
legal regime for the migration which better reflects to the technical migration
approach outlined in the Migration Plan for the SIS Project (Migration Plan) endorsed
by Member States on 23 February 2011.
(17)     The
Migration Plan describes that within the switchover period all Member States,
consecutively, will perform their individual switchover of the national
application from SIS I into SIS II. It is desirable from a technical point of
view that Member States that have switched over be able to use SIS II full
scope from the time of the switchover and do not have to wait until other
Member States have also switched over. Therefore, it is necessary to apply
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA from the time of the
initiation of the switchover by the first Member State. The period of migration
should be kept as short as possible. The application of Regulation (EC) No
1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA does not prevent Member States which have
not switched over yet or which has a fall back to use SIS II limited to SIS 1+ functionalities
during the intensive monitoring period.
(18)     It
is necessary to maintain the application of certain provisions of Title IV of
the Schengen Convention on a temporary basis by incorporating those provisions
into this Regulation as they provide the legal framework for the converter and
the interim migration architecture during the migration. The interim migration
architecture for the operations of SIS 1+ allows SIS 1+ and certain technical
parts of the SIS II architecture to operate in parallel during a limited
transitional period which is needed to make possible an incremental migration.
ê 541/2010
(19)     Regulation
(EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA provide that the best available
technology, subject to a cost-benefit analysis, should be used for Central SIS
II. The Annex to the Council Conclusions on the further direction of SIS II of 4-5 June 2009 laid down milestones which should be met in order to
continue with the current SIS II project. In parallel, a study has been
conducted concerning the elaboration of an alternative technical scenario for
developing SIS II based on SIS 1+ evolution (SIS 1+ RE) as the contingency
plan, in case the tests demonstrate non-compliance with the milestone
requirements. Based on these parameters, the Council may decide to invite the
Commission to switch to the alternative technical scenario.
(20)     The
description of the technical components of the migration architecture should therefore be adapted to allow for another technical solution, and in
particular the SIS 1+ RE regarding the development of Central SIS II. SIS 1+ RE
is a possible technical solution to develop Central SIS II and to achieve the
objectives of the SIS II laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision
2007/533/JHA. 
(21)     The
SIS 1+ RE is characterised by uniqueness of means between SIS II development
and SIS 1+ . The references in this Regulation to the technical architecture of
SIS II and to the migration process should therefore, in case of implementation
of an alternative technical scenario, be read as the references to SIS II based
on another technical solution, as applied mutatis mutandis to the technical
specificities of this solutions, in keeping with the objective to develop
Central SIS II.
ê 541/2010
ð new
(22)     In
any technical scenario, the result of migration at central level should be
availability of the SIS 1+ database and new SIS II functionalities, including
additional data categories, in the Central SIS II ð . In order to facilitate  data
loading it should be specified that deleted data as referred to in Article 113
(2) of the Schengen Convention will not be migrated from SIS 1+ to SIS II. ï
ê 1104/2008

(23)     The
Commission should be empowered to contract out to third parties, including
national public bodies, tasks conferred upon it by this Regulation and tasks
relating to the implementation of the budget, in accordance with Council
Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial
Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities[33] ("the Financial Regulation"). 

Any such
contract should respect the rules of data protection and data security and take
into account the role of the relevant data protection authorities applicable to
the SIS, in particular the provisions of the Schengen Convention and of this Regulation.
ê 541/2010
(24)     As
regards the financing of the development of the Central SIS II based on an
alternative technical solution, it should be covered by the general budget of
the Union while respecting the principle of sound financial management. In
accordance with the Financial Regulation
the Commission may delegate budget implementation tasks to national public
sector bodies. Following the political orientation and subject to the
conditions laid down in the Financial
Regulation, the Commission would be invited, in case of switchover
to the alternative solution, to delegate the budget implementation tasks
related to the development of the SIS II based on SIS 1+ RE to France.
ò new
(25)     Regulation
(EC) No 1987/2006 and Decision 2007/533/JHA as well as Decision
No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
23 May 2007 establishing the External Borders Fund for the period 2007 to
2013 as part of the General Programme Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows[34] included SIS II national
developments among the eligible actions to be co-financed under the External
Borders Fund (EBF). Commission Decision 2007/599/EC of 27 August 2007
implementing Decision No 574/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council as regards the adoption of strategic guidelines for 2007 to 2013[35]  further identified SIS II as
one of the five strategic priorities under the EBF, recognizing the importance
of supporting the coherent and timely development of the national projects alongside
the central SIS II. 
Since the adoption of all those legal acts, the SIS
II project received a significant reorientation in the course of 2010, after
the completion of an important test campaign, the so-called Milestone 1.
Furthermore, the evolutions in the use of the SIS by the Member States led to a
need to update the SIS II technical requirements concerning performance and
storage capacity which affected the costs of the project both at central and
national level. 
(26)     With
regard to the migration process, the evolution in requirements and the advances
made in the completion of the project led to a redefinition of the migration
architecture, of the migration calendar and of the testing requirements. An
important part of the activities that would now be required at Member State
level for the migration to SIS II were not anticipated at the time when
Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Council Decision 2008/839/JHA were adopted or
at the time when the financial package and the multiannual programmes under the
EBF were drawn up.   
It is, therefore, necessary to partly realign the
cost distribution principles for the migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II. Certain
national activities related to migration, in particular in connection with the
participation of Member States in migration-related testing activities could be
co-financed from the SIS II budget line of the general budget of the Union.
This possibility should cover specific and well-defined activities beyond, and
not to coincide with, other SIS II related actions which would continue to be
supported under the EBF. The financial assistance thus provided under this
proposal should be complementary to that provided by the EBF.
(27)  In
relation to the co-financing provided under this Regulation, appropriate
measures should be taken to prevent irregularities and fraud and the necessary
steps should be taken to recover funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used
in accordance with Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December
1995 on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests[36], Council Regulation (Euratom,
EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and
inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European
Communities’ financial interests against fraud and other irregularities[37], and Regulation (EC) No
1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999
concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)[38].
(28)     In
order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation,
implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should
be exercised in accordance with 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[39].
ê 541/2010
(adapted)
(29)     The
Commission and the Member States should continue to cooperate closely during
all steps of the development and the migration in order to complete the
process. In the Council conclusions on SIS II of 26-27 February 2009 and 4-5
June 2009, an informal body consisting of the experts of the Member States and
designated as the Global Programme Management Board, was established to enhance
the cooperation and to provide direct Member States support to the central SIS
II project. The positive result of the work of the group and the necessity to
further enhance the cooperation and the transparency of the project justify the
formal integration of the group into the SIS II management structure. A group
of experts, called the Global Programme Management Board should therefore be
formally established to complement the current Ö SIS II Õ organisational
structure. In order to ensure efficiency as well as cost effectiveness the
number of experts should be limited. This group of experts should be without
prejudice to the responsibilities of the Commission and of the Member States.
ê 1104/2008
(30)     Regulation
(EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December
2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal
data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such
data[40]
applies to the processing of personal data by the Commission.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
ð new
(31)     The European Data Protection Supervisor, appointed pursuant to ð is responsible for monitoring and
ensuring the application of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and itï Decision
2004/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 December 2003
appointing the independent supervisory body provided for in Article 286 of
the EC Treaty[41], is competent to monitor the activities of the Community  Ö Union Õ institutions
and bodies in relation to the processing of personal data. ð This Regulation should be without
prejudice to the specific provisions of the Schengen Convention as well as of
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and of Decision 2007/533/JHA on the protection and
security of personal data. ï
ò new
(32)     The migration is a complex process which,
despite extensive preparation by all stakeholders, entails significant
technical risks. It is desirable for the legal framework to provide for the
necessary flexibility to respond to unexpected difficulties which the central
system or one or several national systems could face during the migration
process. No expiry date should therefore be specified in this Regulation. The
final date for the migration is to be set by the Council in accordance with
Article 55 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Article 71 (2) of
Decision 2007/533/JHA.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
(33)     Since
the objectives of this Regulation, namely
setting up the interim migration architecture and migrating the datathe
migration of data from SIS 1+ to SIS II, cannot be sufficiently
achieved by the Member States and can, therefore, by reason of the scale and
effects of the action, be better achieved at UnionCommunity
level, the UnionCommunity
may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, as set out
in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European
Unionestablishing the European Community. In
accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article,
this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those
objectives.
(34)     This
Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles
recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union.
(21)     The
Schengen Convention should be amended to allow the integration of SIS 1+ into
the interim migration architecture.
(35)     In
accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol (No
22) on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European
Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of
the European Union, Denmark is not
takingdoes not take part in the adoption of
this Regulation and is therefore not
bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds
upon the Schengen acquis, under
the provisions of Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the
European Community, Denmark shallshould, in
accordance with Article 45
of thatthe
said Protocol, decide within a period of six months after
the adoption of this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national
law.
ê 2008/839/JHA
ð new
(36)     This
Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis
in which the United Kingdom is taking part, in accordance with Article 8 (2) of
Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the request of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of
the provisions of the Schengen acquis[42],
ðto the extent that that article refers to
the provision of the Schengen Convention establishing the SIS with the
exception of Article 96 thereof. ï
(37)     This
Regulation constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis
in which Ireland is taking part, in accordance with Article 6 (2) of Council
Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland’s request to take
part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis[43], ðto the extent that that article refers to
the provision of the Schengen Convention establishing the SIS with the
exception of Article 96 thereof. ï
(38)     This
Regulation is without prejudice to the arrangements for the United Kingdom’s
and Ireland’s partial participation in the Schengen acquis as determined
by Council Decisions 2000/365/EC and 2002/192/EC respectively.
(39)     As
regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of
provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement
concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and
the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latters'
association of those two States with the implementation,
application and development of the Schengen acquis[44], which fall within the area
referred to in Article 1, point G of Council Decision 1999/437/EC[45] on certain arrangements for
the application of that Agreement.
(40)     As
regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis
within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European
Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association
with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis[46], which fall within the area
referred to in Article 1, point G of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction
with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC[47].
(41)     As
regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation constitutes a development of the
provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol
between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and
the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of
Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European
Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association
with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis
which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point G of Council
Decision 1999/437/EC of 17 May 1999 read in conjunction with Article 3 of
Council Decision 2011/350/EU[48].
ò new
(42)     As
regards Cyprus, this Regulation constitutes an act building upon, or otherwise
related to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 3(2) of
the 2003 Act of Accession,
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
General purpose
1. The Schengen Information System (SIS),
set up pursuant to the provisions of Title IV of the 1990 Schengen Convention
(SIS 1+), shall be replaced by a new system, the Schengen Information System II
(SIS II), the establishment, operation and use of which is regulated by
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 Ö and by
Decision 2007/533/JHA Õ .
2. In accordance with the procedures and
the division of tasks set out in this Regulation, SIS II shall be developed by
the Commission and the Member States as a single integrated system and shall be
prepared for operations.
ê 541/2010
Art. 1.1
3. The development of SIS II may be
achieved by implementing an alternative technical scenario characterised by its
own technical specifications.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
ð new
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the
following definitions shall apply:
(a)‘Central SIS II’ means the technical
support function of SIS II containing a database, the ‘SIS II database’, and a
uniform national interface (NI-SIS); 
(b)‘C.SIS’ means the technical support
function of SIS 1+, containing the reference database for SIS 1+ and the
uniform national interface (N.COM);
(c)‘N.SIS’ means the national system of SIS
1+, consisting of the national data systems which communicate with C.SIS;
(d)‘N.SIS II’ means the national system of SIS
II, consisting of the national data systems which communicate with Central SIS
II;
(e)‘converter’ means a technical tool to allow
consistent and reliable communication between C.SIS and Central SIS II, ensuring
the functionalities provided for in Article 10(3) ð  allowing
the conversion and synchronisation of data between the C.SIS and the Central
SIS II; ï
(f)‘comprehensive test’ means the test
referred to in Article 55(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 Ö and in
Article 71 (3)(c) of Decision 2007/533/JHA Õ ;
(g)‘test on supplementary information’ means
functional tests between the Sirene Bureaux.
Article 3
Subject matter and scope
This Regulation defines the tasks and
responsibilities of the Commission and the Member States participating in SIS
1+ with respect to the following tasks:
(a) the maintenance
and continuation of the development of SIS II;
(b) a comprehensive
test of SIS II;
(c) a test on
supplementary information;
(d) the
continuation of the development and testing of a converter;
(e) the
establishment and testing of a provisional migration architecture;
(f) the migration
from SIS 1+ to SIS II. 
Article 4
Technical components of the migration
architecture
ê 541/2010
Art. 1.2
In order to ensure the migration from SIS
1+ to SIS II, the following components shall be made available to the extent
necessary:
ê 1104/2008
(a) the C.SIS and the connection to the converter;
(b) the communication infrastructure for SIS
1+ allowing the C.SIS to communicate with the N.SIS;
(c) the N.SIS;
(d) Central SIS II, NI-SIS and the
communication infrastructure for SIS II allowing the Central SIS II to
communicate with N.SIS II and the converter;
(e) the N.SIS II;
(f) the converter.
Article 5
Main responsibilities in the
development of SIS II
1. The Commission shall continue to develop
the Central SIS II, the communication infrastructure and the converter.
2. France shall make available and operate
C.SIS in accordance with the provisions of the Schengen Convention.
3. The Member States shall continue to
develop N.SIS II.
4. The Member States participating in SIS
1+ shall maintain N.SIS in accordance with the provisions of the Schengen
Convention.
5. The Member States participating in SIS
1+ shall make available and operate the communication infrastructure for
SIS 1+.
6. The Commission shall coordinate the
activities and provide the necessary support for the implementation of the
tasks and responsibilities referred to in paragraphs 1 to 3.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
Article 6
Continuing development
The measures necessary to continue the
development of SIS II as referred to in Article 5(1), in particular measures
necessary for the correction of errors, shall be implementing acts. Those acts
shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure defined in
Article Ö 17(2) Õ .
The measures necessary to continue the
development of SIS II as referred to in Article 5(3), insofar as it concerns
the uniform national interface ensuring the compatibility of N.SIS II with
Central SIS II, shall be implementing acts . Those acts shall be adopted in
accordance with the examination procedure defined in Article Ö 17(2) Õ .
Article 7
Main activities
1. The Commission together with Member
States participating in SIS 1+ shall conduct a comprehensive test.
2. An interim SIS
migration architecture shall be set up and a test of that architecture shall be
performed by the Commission together with France and the other Member States
participating in SIS 1+.
3. The Commission and the Member States
participating in SIS 1+ shall perform the migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II.
4. The Member States participating in SIS
1+ shall perform a test on the exchange of supplementary information.
5. The Commission shall provide the
necessary support at Central SIS II level for the activities in paragraphs 1 to
4.
6. The activities in paragraphs 1 to 3
shall be coordinated by the Commission and the Member States participating in
SIS 1+ acting within the Council. 
Article 8
Comprehensive test
1. The comprehensive test shall not start
before the Commission has declared that it considers that the level of success of
the tests referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 189/2008 Ö and in
Article 1 of Decision 2008/839/JHA Õ is sufficient
to begin such a test.
2. A comprehensive test aiming at
confirming, in particular, the completion by the Commission and the Member
States participating in SIS 1+ of the necessary technical arrangements to
process SIS II data and the demonstration that the level of performance of SIS
II is at least equivalent to that achieved with SIS 1+ shall be performed.
3. The comprehensive test shall be executed
by the Member States participating in SIS 1+ for the N.SIS II and by the
Commission for the Central SIS II.
4. The comprehensive test shall follow a
detailed schedule defined by Member States participating in SIS 1+ acting
within the Council in cooperation with the Commission.
5. The comprehensive test shall be based on
the technical specifications defined by the Member States participating in SIS
1+ acting within the Council in cooperation with the Commission.
6. The Commission and the Member States
participating in SIS 1+ acting within the Council shall define the criteria for
determining whether the necessary technical arrangements to process SIS II data
are completed and the level of performance of SIS II is at least equivalent to
that achieved with SIS 1+.
7. The test results shall be analysed using
the criteria referred tomentioned
in paragraph 6 of this Article, by
the Member States participating in SIS 1+ acting within the Council and the
Commission. The test results shall be validated in accordance with Article
55(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 Ö and
Article 71 (3)(c) of Decision 2007/533/JHA Õ .
8. Member States not participating in SIS
1+ may participate in the comprehensive test. Their results shall not affect
the overall validation of the test.
Article 9
Test on supplementary information
1. The Member States participating in SIS
1+ shall conduct functional Sirene  SIRENE tests.
2. The Commission shall make available
Central SIS II and its communication infrastructure during the execution of the
test on supplementary information.
3. The test on supplementary information
shall follow a detailed schedule defined by Member States participating in SIS
1+ acting within the Council.
4. The test on supplementary information
shall be based on the technical specifications defined by the Member States
participating in SIS 1+ acting within the Council.
5. The test results shall be analysed by
the Member States participating in SIS 1+ acting within the Council.
6. Member States not participating in SIS
1+ may participate in the test on supplementary information. Their results
shall not affect the overall validation of the test.
Article 10
Interim migration architecture
1. An interim SIS
migration architecture shall be set up. The converter connects Central SIS II
and C.SIS for a transitional period. The N.SIS are connected to C.SIS, the
N.SIS II to Central SIS II.
2. The Commission shall provide a
converter, the Central SIS II and its communication infrastructure as part of
the interim SIS migration architecture.
ê 541/2010
Art. 1.3
3. To the extent necessary, the converter
shall convert data in two directions between the C.SIS and Central SIS II and
keep C.SIS and Central SIS II synchronised.
ê 1104/2008
4. The Commission shall test the
communication between Central SIS II and the converter.
5. France shall test the communication
between C.SIS and the converter.
6. The Commission and France shall test the
communication between Central SIS II and C.SIS via the converter.
7. France, together with the Commission,
shall connect C.SIS via the converter to Central SIS II.
8. The Commission, together with France and
the other Member States participating in SIS 1+, shall test the interim SIS
migration architecture as a whole in accordance with a test plan provided by
the Commission.
9. France shall make available data for
test purpose, if necessary.
ê 1104/2008
ð new
Article 11
Migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II
1. For the migration from C.SIS to Central
SIS II, France shall make available the SIS 1+ database and the Commission
shall introduce the SIS 1+ database into Central SIS II. ð  Data of SIS 1+ database
referred to in Article 113 (2) of the Schengen Convention shall not be
introduced into Central SIS II ï.
ê 541/2010
Art. 1.4
2. The Member States participating in SIS
1+ shall migrate from N.SIS to N.SIS II using the interim migration architecture,
with the support of France and of the Commission.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
Ö 3. The
migration of the national system from SIS 1+ to SIS II starts with the data loading of N.SIS
II, when that N.SIS II is to contain a data file, the national copy, containing
a complete or partial copy of the SIS II database.  Õ
Ö The data
loading as described in the first subparagraph shall be followed by a switchover
from N.SIS to N.SIS II for each Member State.  Õ
Ö The
migration shall follow a detailed schedule provided by the Commission and the
Member States participating in SIS 1+ acting within the Council. Õ
ê 1104/2008
ð new
4. The Commission shall assist in
coordination and support of the common activities during the migration.
ð 5. The switchover shall be carried
out after the validation referred to in Article 8(7) on the date fixed by the
Council in accordance with Article 55 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and
Article 71 (2) of Decision 2007/533/JHA. ï
ê 1104/2008
Article 12
Substantive legal framework
ò new
During the migration
for the data loading referred to in the first subparagraph  of Article 11
(3), the provisions of Title IV of the Schengen Convention shall continue to
apply to the SIS 1+.
As from the
switchover of the first Member State from N.SIS to N.SIS II, as referred to in the
second subparagraph of Article 11 (3) of this Regulation, Regulation (EC)
1987/2006 and Decision 533/2007/JHA shall apply. 
ê 1104/2008
Article 13
Cooperation
1. The Member States and the Commission
shall cooperate for the execution of all the activities covered by this Regulation
in accordance with their respective responsibilities.
2. The Commission shall in particular
provide the necessary support at Central SIS II level for the testing and
migration of N.SIS II.
3. Member States shall in particular
provide the necessary support at N.SIS II level for the testing of the interim
migration infrastructure.
ò new
Article 14
Replacement of the national sections by N.SIS II
1. The N.SIS II
may replace the national section referred to in Article 92 of the Schengen
Convention, in which case the Member States need not hold a national data file.

2. If any of the
Member States replace their national section by N.SIS II, the compulsory
functions of the technical support function towards that national section as referred
to in Article 92(2) and (3) of the Schengen Convention shall become compulsory
functions towards Central SIS II, without prejudice to the obligations referred
to in Article 5(1) and Article 10(1), (2) and (3) of this Regulation. 
ê 1104/2008
Article 15
ò new
Processing
data and keeping of
records in Central SIS II 
1. The Central SIS II database shall be
available for the purpose of carrying out automated searches in the territory
of each Member State.
2. Central SIS II
shall provide the services necessary for the entry and processing of SIS 1+
data, the online update of N.SIS II national copies, the synchronisation of and
consistency between N.SIS II national copies and the Central SIS II database
and provide operations for initialisation and restoration of N.SIS II national
copies.
ê 1104/2008
3. Without prejudice to the relevant provisions of Title IV of the
Schengen Convention, the Commission shall ensure that every access to and all
exchanges of personal data within Central SIS II are recorded for the purposes
of checking whether or not the search is lawful, monitoring the lawfulness of
data processing and ensuring the proper functioning of Central SIS II and of
national systems, data integrity and security.
4. The records shall show, in particular, the date and time of the
data transmitted, the data used to perform searches, the reference to the data
transmitted and the name of the competent authority responsible for processing
the data.
5. The records may only be used for the purposes referred to in
paragraph 1 and shall be deleted at the earliest one year, and at the latest
three years after their creation.
6. Records may be kept longer if they are required for monitoring
procedures that are already under way.
7. The competent authorities in charge of checking whether or not a
search is lawful, monitoring the lawfulness of data processing, self-monitoring
and ensuring the proper functioning of Central SIS II, data integrity and
security, shall have access, within the limits of their competence and at their
request, to those records for the purpose of fulfilling their tasks.
ê 1104/2008
ð new
Article 16
Costs
1. The costs arising from migration, the
comprehensive test, the test on supplementary information, maintenance and
development measures at Central SIS II level or concerning the communication
infrastructure shall be borne by the general budget of the European
Union.
2. The costs arising from ð installation ï migration, testing, maintenance and development of the national
systems ð as well as
from the tasks to be performed by the national systems under this Regulation ï shall be borne by each
Member State concerned. 
ò new
3. The Union may provide a financial contribution to the
expenditures of the Member States for their migration and migration related testing
activities performed under this Regulation which are not eligible for funding under
the External Borders Fund provided that the Member State concerned is able to
clearly demonstrate its needs for additional funds.
The Union
contribution related to the activities referred to in the first subparagraph will
take the form of grants as provided for by Title VI of the Financial
Regulation. The Union contribution shall not exceed 75 % of the eligible
expenditures of each Member State and it shall not exceed EUR 750 000 per
Member State. The Commission shall appraise, decide and administer the
co-financing operation in accordance with the budgetary and other procedures,
in particularly those laid down in the Financial Regulation.
Each Member State
requesting such a financial contribution shall prepare a financial forecast
indicating a breakdown of the operational as well as administrative costs of
the activities related to the testing and migration. Where Member States use Union funds for their
expenditures, those expenditures shall be reasonable and comply with the
principles of sound financial management, in particular, value for money and
cost-effectiveness. Member States shall present a report to the Commission on
their use of the Union's contribution by not later than six months following
the date fixed by the Council
in accordance with Article 55 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Article
71 (2) of Decision 2007/533/JHA.  
Where the Union contribution is not implemented or is
implemented inadequately, partially or late, the Union may reduce, withhold or
terminate its financial contribution. Where the Member States do not contribute
or contribute only partially or late to the financing of activities referred to
in paragraph 1, the Union may reduce its financial contribution.
4. The Court of Auditors of the European Union shall be
entitled to carry out the appropriate audits in liaison with national audit
bodies or with the competent national departments. The Commission shall be empowered
to carry out all the checks and inspections necessary to ensure the proper
management of the Union funds and to protect the Union’s financial interest
against any fraud or irregularity. To this end, the Member States shall make
available all the relevant documents and records to the Commission and the
Court of Auditors.
5. The costs of installing and operating the technical support
function referred to in Article 92 (3) of the Schengen Convention, including
the cost of lines connecting the national sections of SIS 1+ to the technical
support function, and of activities performed in conjunction with tasks
conferred upon France for the purpose of this Regulation shall be borne jointly
by the Member States.  
Article 16
Amendment of the
provisions of the Schengen Convention
The provisions of
the Schengen Convention are hereby amended as follows.
              1.
The following Article shall be inserted:
‘Article 92A
              1.
As from the entry into force of Council Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008[49] and Council Decision 2008/839/JHA[50] and relying on the definitions in Article 2 of
that Regulation, the technical architecture of the Schengen Information
System may be supplemented by:
         (a) an
additional central system composed of:
–              
technical support
function (Central SIS II), located in France and backup Central SIS II located
in Austria, containing the SIS II database and a uniform national interface (NI-SIS),
–              
a technical
connection between the C.SIS and the Central SIS II via the converter allowing
the conversion and synchronisation of data between the C.SIS and the Central
SIS II;
         (b) a
national system (N.SIS II), consisting of the national data systems, which
communicates with the Central SIS II;
         (c) an
infrastructure for communication between Central SIS II and the N.SIS II
connected to the NI-SIS.
              2.
The N.SIS II may replace the national section referred to in Article 92 of this
Convention, in which case the Member States need not hold a national data
file.
              3.
The central SIS II database shall be available for the purpose of carrying out
automated searches in the territory of each Member State.
              4.
In case any of the Member States replace their national section by N.SIS II,
the compulsory functions of the technical support function towards that
national section as mentioned in Article 92(2) and (3) become compulsory
functions towards Central SIS II, without prejudice to the obligations referred
to in Decision 2008/839/JHA and in Articles
5(1), 10(1), (2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008.
              5.
Central SIS II shall provide the services necessary for the entry and
processing of SIS data, the online update of N.SIS II national copies, the
synchronisation of and consistency between N.SIS II national copies and the
Central SIS II database and provide operations for initialisation and
restoration of N.SIS II national copies.
              6.
France, responsible for the technical support function, the other Member
States and the Commission shall cooperate to ensure that a search in the data
files of N.SIS II or in the SIS II database produces a result equivalent to
that of a search in the data file of the national sections referred to in
Article 92(2).’»
              2.
In Article 119 first paragraph, the first sentence shall be replaced by the
following:
              ‘The
costs of installing and operating the technical support function referred to in
Article 92(3), including the cost of lines connecting the national sections of
the Schengen Information System to the technical support function, and of
activities performed in conjunction with tasks conferred upon France in
application of Decision (JHA) 2008/839/JHA and of Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008
shall be borne jointly by the Member States.’
              3.
In Article 119, the second paragraph shall be replaced by the following:
              ‘The
costs of installing and operating the national section of the Schengen
Information System and of tasks conferred upon national systems under Decision
2008/839/JHA and Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 shall be borne by each Member
State individually.’»
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
Article 171 
Committee
Ö 1. The
Commission shall be assisted by the Committee established by Article 51 of
Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and by Article 67 of Decision 2007/533/JHA. That Committee
shall be a committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Õ
Ö 2. Where
reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011
applies. Õ
The period provided for in Article 5(6) of
Decision 1999/468/EC shall be three months.
ê 541/2010
Art. 1.5 
ð new
Article 18
Global Programme Management Board
1. Without prejudice to the respective
responsibilities and activities of the Commission, the Committee referred
to in Article 17, France and the Member States
participating in SIS 1+, a group of technical experts, called the Global
Programme Management Board (hereinafter the Board), is hereby set up. The Board
shall be an advisory body for assistance to the central SIS II project and
shall facilitate consistency between central and national SIS II projects. The
Board shall have no decision-making power nor any mandate to represent the
Commission or Member States.
2. The Board shall be composed of a maximum
of 10 members, meeting on a regular basis. A maximum of 8 experts and an equal
number of alternates shall be designated by the Member States ð participating in SIS 1+ ï acting within the Council. A maximum of two experts and two
alternates shall be designated by the Director-General of the responsible
Directorate-General of the Commission from among the Commission officials.
The meetings of the Board may be attended
by other experts of Member States’
experts and Commission officials directly involved in the
development of the SIS II projects, at the expense of their respective
administration or institution.
The Board may invite other experts to
participate in the Board’s meetings as defined in the terms of reference
referred to in paragraph 5, at the expense of their respective administration,
institution or company.
3. Experts designated by the Member States
acting as Presidency and incoming Presidency shall always be invited to
participate in the Board’s meetings.
4. The Board’s secretariat shall be ensured
by the Commission.
5. The Board shall draw up its own terms of
reference which shall include in particular procedures on:
–                        
alternative chairmanship between the Commission
and the Presidency,
–                        
meeting venues,
–                        
preparation of meetings,
–                        
admission of other experts,
–                        
communication plan ensuring full information to
non-participating Member States.
The terms of reference shall take effect
after a favourable opinion has been given by the Director-General of the
responsible Directorate-General of the Commission and by Member States ð participating in SIS 1+ ï meeting within the framework of the Committee referred
to in Article 17.
6. The Board shall regularly submit written
reports about the progress of the project including advice which has been
given, and its justification, to the Committee referred
to in Article 17 or, as appropriate, to the relevant
Council preparatory bodies.
7. Without prejudice to Article 16(2), the administrative costs and
travel expenses arising from the activities of the Board shall be borne by the
general budget of the Union, to the extent that they are not reimbursed from
other sources. As regards travel expenses of the members in the Board
designated by the Member States ð participating in SIS 1+ ï acting within the Council and experts invited pursuant to paragraph
3 of this Article which arise in connection with the work of the Board, the
Commission’s ‘Rules on the reimbursement of expenses incurred by people from
outside the Commission invited to attend meetings in an expert capacity’ shall
apply.
ê 1104/2008
Article 19
Reporting
The Commission shall submit by the end of
every six month period, and for the first time by the end of the first six
month period of 2009, a progress report to the European Parliament and the
Council concerning the development of SIS II and the migration from SIS 1+ to
SIS II.
ò new
Article  20
Repeal
Regulation (EC)
No 1104/2008 and Decision 2008/839/JHA is repealed.
References to the
repealed Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 and Decision 2008/839/JHA shall be
construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with
the correlation table in Annex II.
ê 1104/2008
(adapted)
è1 541/2010 Art. 1.6 (adapted)
Article 21 
Entry into force and applicability
Ö This
Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that
of  its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Õ è1 It shall expire on a date to be fixed by the
Council, acting in accordance with Article 55(2) of Regulation (EC) No
1987/2006 and Article 71 (2) of Decision 2007/533., and in any
case no later than on 31 March 2013 or on 31 December 2013 in case of a
switchover to an alternative technical scenario as referred to in Article 1(3)
of this Regulation. ç
Ö This
Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the
Member States in accordance with the Treaty on
the Functioning of the European Union
establishing the European Community. Õ
Done at Brussels, 
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
é
ANNEX I
Repealed acts with their successive amendments
Council Regulation (EC)
No 1104/2008
(OJ L 299, 8.11.2008,
p. 1)
Council Regulation (EC)
No 541/2010
(OJ L 155, 22.6.2010,
p. 19)
Council Decision
2008/839/JHA
(OJ L 299, 8.11.2008,
p. 43)
Council Decision 542/2010/JHA
(OJ L 155, 22.6.2010,
p. 23)
ANNEX II
Correlation table
 Council Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 || Council Decision 2008/839/JHA || This Regulation 
 Article 1 || Article 1 || Article 1 
 Article 2 || Article 2 || Article 2 
 Article 3 || Article 3 || Article 3 
 Article 4 || Article 4 || Article 4 
 Article 5 || Article 5 || Article 5 
 Article 6 || Article 6 || Article 6 
 Article 7 || Article 7 || Article 7 
 Article 8 || Article 8 || Article 8 
 Article 9 || Article 9 || Article 9 
 Article 10 || Article 10 || Article 10 
 Article 11 || Article 11 || Article 11 
 Article 12 || Article 12 || Article 12 
 Article 13 || Article 13 || Article 13 
 - || - || Article 14 
 Article 14 || Article 14 || Article 15 
 - || - ||   
 Article 15 || Article 15 || Article 16 
 Article 16 || Article 16 || - 
 Article 17 || Article 17 || Article 17 
 Article 17a || Article 17a || Article 18 
 Article 18 || Article 18 || Article 19 
 - || - || Article 20 
 Article 19 || Article 19 || Article 21 
 - || - || Annex I 
 - || - || Annex II 
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL
STATEMENT 
1........... FRAMEWORK OF THE
PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE.................................................. 34
1.1........ Title of the proposal/initiative......................................................................................... 34
1.2........ Policy area(s) concerned in the
ABM/ABB structure..................................................... 34
1.3........ Nature of the proposal/initiative..................................................................................... 34
1.4........ Objectives.................................................................................................................... 34
1.4.1..... The Commission's multiannual
strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative.... 34
1.4.2..... Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB
activity(ies) concerned.......................................... 34
1.4.3..... Expected result(s) and impact....................................................................................... 34
1.4.4..... Indicators of results and impact..................................................................................... 34
1.5........ Grounds for the proposal/initiative................................................................................. 34
1.5.1..... Requirement(s) to be met in the
short or long term......................................................... 34
1.5.2..... Added value of EU involvement.................................................................................... 34
1.5.3..... Lessons learned from similar
experiences in the past...................................................... 34
1.5.4..... Coherence and possible synergy
with other relevant instruments..................................... 34
1.6........ Duration and financial impact......................................................................................... 34
1.7........ Management mode(s) envisaged................................................................................... 34
2........... MANAGEMENT MEASURES................................................................................... 34
2.1........ Monitoring and reporting rules....................................................................................... 34
2.2........ Management and control system................................................................................... 34
2.2.1..... Risk(s) identified........................................................................................................... 34
2.2.2..... Control method(s) envisaged......................................................................................... 34
2.3........ Measures to prevent fraud and
irregularities................................................................... 34
3........... ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF
THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE................ 34
3.1........ Heading(s) of the multiannual
financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected 34
3.2........ Estimated impact on expenditure................................................................................... 34
3.2.1..... Summary of estimated impact on
expenditure................................................................ 34
3.2.2..... Estimated impact on operational
appropriations............................................................. 34
3.2.3..... Estimated impact on appropriations
of an administrative nature....................................... 34
3.2.3.1.. Summary...................................................................................................................... 34
3.2.3.2.. Estimated requirements of human
resources................................................................... 34
3.2.4..... Compatibility with the current
multiannual financial framework........................................ 34
3.2.5..... Third-party contributions............................................................................................... 34
3.3........ Estimated impact on revenue......................................................................................... 34
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR PROPOSALS
1.           FRAMEWORK
OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
1.1.        Title
of the proposal/initiative 
Proposal for a Council Regulation on migration from the Schengen
Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation of Schengen Information
System (SIS II) (recast)
1.2.        Policy
area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure[51] 
Title 18: Area of freedom, security and justice (Title: 18) 
Solidarity – External borders, return, visa policy and free movement
of people (Chapter 18 02)
1.3.        Nature
of the proposal/initiative 
¨ The
proposal/initiative relates to a new action 
¨ The
proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot
project/preparatory action[52]

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.        Objectives
1.4.1.     The
Commission's multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the
proposal/initiative 
The EU information management strategy included in the Stockholm
Programme[53]
is one of the priorities set by the European Council in 2010 in the Area of
Freedom, Security and Justice. The Schengen Information System is at the heart
of the compensatory measures ensuring a high level of security following the
lifting of the internal borders.
1.4.2.     Specific
objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned 
Specific objective No.1: To enable
persons to cross internal borders without border checks, promote secure borders
and prevent irregular migration by developing further an integrated external
border management system and high standards of border checks including by the
development of SIS II and the financial support from the External Borders Fund.
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Chapter 18.02: Solidarity – External borders, return, visa policy
and free movement of people
1.4.3.     Expected
result(s) and impact
Specify the effects
which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
The migration
instruments[54]
aim to facilitate the successful migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II by specifying
the migration architecture, the technical prerequisites, the phases of the
migration itself and the respective responsibilities of the Commission and of
the Member States participating in SIS 1+.
The main purpose of
the proposal is to align the legal framework governing the migration with the
technical scenario retained by Member States experts[55] and to include in the legal
framework a few further elements of flexibility (see section 1.5.3 below). 
In addition, further
to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the proposal also merges the
migration legal framework into a single legal act which was previously split
between two legislative instruments according to the pillar structure of the
previous Treaties. 
1.4.4.     Indicators
of results and impact 
Specify the
indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
The primary objective of the proposal will be reached with the
successful uploading of SIS1+ data to the SIS II central system (and national
systems), the successful switchover of national applications and ultimately the
full availability for all Member States of SIS II functionalities.
1.5.        Grounds
for the proposal/initiative 
1.5.1.     Requirement(s)
to be met in the short or long term 
It is necessary for the Member States as well as for the Commission
to put in place all technical elements and to execute successfully the tests
required for the comprehensive test during the preparatory phase of the
migration.
1.5.2.     Added
value of EU involvement
The very nature of SIS II is to share
information regarding certain categories of persons and objects between law
enforcement authorities, border guards, customs, visa and judicial authorities
of Schengen Countries.  The Commission is responsible for the technical
development of the Central SIS II, the communication infrastructure and the
converter.  Furthermore, the Commission is to coordinate the activities related
to the development of the SIS II and to provide Member
States with the necessary support for the implementation of their tasks and
responsibilities, thereby ensuring consistency between the central and the
national projects.
1.5.3.     Lessons
learned from similar experiences in the past
The legal framework
must allow for sufficient flexibility in order to avoid unnecessary costs in
connection to the migration process.  In particular, Member States that have
already switched over to SIS II should be allowed to use it with all its
functionalities without having to wait for the successful switchover of all
remaining Member States.
It is also necessary
to provide for the option for co-financing from the general budget of the
European Union certain national activities related to the migration (and in
particular in connection with the participation of Member States in
migration-related testing activities) in order to facilitate a smooth and
orderly migration process.
1.5.4.     Coherence
and possible synergy with other relevant instruments
The proposal builds upon Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006[56] and Decision No 2007/533/JHA[57] on the establishment, operation and use of the second
generation Schengen Information System (SIS II). The date of expiry of this proposed regulation
will be determined by the two aforesaid legal acts. Moreover, this proposal is
consistent with other legal acts concerning the testing, the network and the
security of SIS II.
1.6.        Duration
and financial impact 
x Proposal/initiative of limited
duration 
–     
x Proposal/initiative in effect from 1 July 2012[58] until the completion of the
migration, foreseeably not later than 30 June 2013.
–     
xFinancial impact in 2012 to 2013 
¨ Proposal/initiative of unlimited
duration
–     
Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY
to YYYY,
–     
followed by full-scale operation.
Comment 
The expiry
date for the migration is not set out in the proposed regulation but will be
determined by the Council in line with Article 55 (2) of Regulation (EC) No
1987/2006 and Article 71 (2) of Decision 2007/533/JHA.
1.7.        Management
mode(s) envisaged[59] 
x Centralised direct management by the Commission 
¨ Centralised indirect management with the delegation of implementation tasks to:
–     
¨  executive agencies 
–     
¨  bodies set up by the Communities[60]

–     
¨  national public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service mission 
–     
¨  persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions
pursuant to Title V of the Treaty on European Union and identified in the
relevant basic act within the meaning of Article 49 of the Financial Regulation

¨ Shared management with the Member States 
¨ Decentralised management with third countries 
¨ Joint management with international organisations (to be specified)
If more than one
management mode is indicated, please provide details in the
"Comments" section.
2.           MANAGEMENT
MEASURES 
2.1.        Monitoring
and reporting rules 
Specify frequency
and conditions.
The
Commission rigorously supervises and monitors the contractor's work on a
continuous basis, in close cooperation with its quality assurance contractor
and the Global Project Management Board. 
In
line with the contractual provisions, the Commission assesses progress of the
SIS II project at regular points and performance is measured against required
standards and pre-set criteria, with the assistance of a quality assurance
contractor. 
Progress reports describing the work carried out concerning
the development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)
and preparations for migration from SIS 1+ to SIS II are presented to the
Council and the European Parliament on a six-monthly basis in accordance with
Article 18 of the migration instruments.  These reports systematically
include a section detailing budget execution (commitments and payments) related
to the central SIS II project.
2.2.        Management
and control system 
2.2.1.     Risk(s)
identified 
1. At central level:
risk of a delay in the global schedule due to unscheduled events or underperformance
by the main development contractor.
2. At national level:
risk of a delay impacting the global schedule due to lack of readiness of one
or several Member States with national developments (lack of readiness of
certain Member States for participating in the testing phases foreseen in the
global schedule either due to delayed procurement, technical difficulties or to
a shortage of financial resources to continue the national developments and to
complete the migration)
The late readiness of
at least one Member State could jeopardise the entry into operation of SIS II because the legal prerequisites for the system to go-live would
not be met (i.e.: the need for all Member States to notify their
readiness and the successful completion of a comprehensive test with all Member
States).
2.2.2.     Control
method(s) envisaged 
The
Commission rigorously monitors the project's risks, in close cooperation with
the Global Project Management Board, the Member States and its quality
assurance contractor. 
Use
of the possible co-financing will be subject of the control exercised by the
Commission and the Court of Auditors. 
2.3.        Measures
to prevent fraud and irregularities 
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and
protection measures.
The Commission will appraise, decide and
administer the co-financing financing option (via grants) from the general
budget of the Union in line with the prescriptions of the Financial Regulation.
The Commission may reduce, withhold or terminate its financial contribution.
The Commission and the Court of Auditors will be entitled to carry out all the
checks and inspections necessary to ensure the proper management of the Union's
financial interest against fraud or irregularity.
3.           ESTIMATED
FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 
3.1.        Heading(s)
of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected 
·      Existing expenditure budget lines 
In order of
multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
 Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution 
 Number Schengen Information System II || DA ([61]) || from EFTA[62] countries || from candidate countries[63] || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 18(1)(aa) of the Financial Regulation 
 3A || 18 02 04 || DA || NO || NO || YES || NO 
·      New budget lines requested: None 
3.2.        Estimated
impact on expenditure 
3.2.1.     Summary
of estimated impact on expenditure 
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
 Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 3 A || Freedom, security and justice 
 DG: HOME ||   ||   || Year 2012 (pro rata from 1 July) || Year 2013 (pro rata until 30 June) || Year N+3 || … enter as many yeaers as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
  Operational appropriations ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Number of budget line 18.02.04 || Commitments || (1) || 28.120 || 7.120 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35.240 
 Payments || (2) || 18.184 || 17.056 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35.240 
 Number of budget line || Commitments || (1a) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Payments || (2a) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Appropriations of an administrative nature financed  from the envelope of specific programs[64] ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Number of budget line ||   || (3) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL appropriations for DG HOME || Commitments || =1+1a +3 || 28.120 [65] || 7.120 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35.240 
 Payments || =2+2a +3 || 18.184 || 17.056 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 35.240 
 Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 5 || " Administrative expenditure " 
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
   ||   ||   || Year 2012 (pro rata from  1 July) || Year 2013 (pro rata until 30 June) || Year N+3 || … enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
 DG: HOME ||   ||   || 
  Human resources || 2.675 || 2.439 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.114 
  Other administrative expenditure || 0.152 || 0.152 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.304 
 TOTAL DG HOME || Appropriations || 2.827 || 2.590 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.418 
 TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || (Total commitments = Total payments) || 2.827 || 2.590 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.418 
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
   ||   ||   || Year 2012 || Year 2013 || Year N+3 || … enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
 TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || 30.947 || 9.710 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 40.658 
 Payments || 21.011 || 19.646 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 40.658 
3.2.2.     Estimated
impact on operational appropriations 
–     
¨  The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational
appropriations 
–     
x The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational
appropriations, as explained below:
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal
places)
 Indicate objectives and outputs ò ||   ||   || Year 2012 (pro rata from 1 July) || Year 2013 (pro rata until 30 June) || TOTAL || 
 ||   || Type of output[66] || Average yearly cost of the ouput || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Total number of ouputs || Total cost || 
 || SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1[67] Preparation of operations SIS II ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 || - Output 1 || SIS II changes ||   ||   || 0 ||   || 0 ||   || 0 
 || - Output 2 || Quality Assurance ||   ||   || 1.250 ||   || 1.250 ||   || 2.500 
 || - Output 3 || sTESTA (communication infrastructure) ||   ||   || 7.500 ||   || 0 ||   || 7.500 
 || - Output 4 || Security audits ||   ||   || 0.500 ||   || 0 ||   || 0.500 
 || - Output 5 || Option security ||   ||   || 0.500 ||   || 0 ||   || 0.500 
 || - Output 6 || Option MS co-financing[68] ||   ||   || 15.750 ||   || 5.250 ||   || 21.000 
 || - Output 7 || Global Project Management ||   ||   || 0.120 ||   || 0.120 ||   || 0.240 
 || - Output 8 || Studies ||   ||   || 2.000 ||   || 0 ||   || 2.000 
 || - Output 9 || Information Campaign ||   ||   || 0.500 ||   || 0.500 ||   || 1.000 
 || Sub-total for specific objective N°1 ||   || 28.120 ||   || 7.120 ||   || 35.240 
 || TOTAL COST ||   || 28.120 ||   || 7.120 ||   || 35.240 
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 administrative
appropriations 
–     
x The proposal/initiative requires the use of administrative
appropriations, as explained below:
EUR million (to 3
decimal places)
   || Year 2012 (pro rata from 1 July) || Year 2013 (pro rata until 30 June) ||   || Year N+3 || … enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || TOTAL 
 HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Human resources || 2.675 || 2.439 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.114 
 Other administrative expenditure || 0.152 || 0.152 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.304 
 Subtotal HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || 2.827 || 2.590 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.418 
 Outside HEADING 5[69] of the multiannual financial framework ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Human resources ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other expenditure of an administrative nature ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Subtotal outside HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL || 2.827 || 2.590 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5.418 
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 amounts
(or at most to one decimal place)
 ||   || Year 2012   || Year 2013   ||   ||   || … enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) 
  Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary agents) || 
 || XX 01 01 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) || 33 || 32 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 || 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)[70] || 
 || XX 01 02 01 (CA, INT, SNE from the "global envelope") || 17 || 12 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 || XX 01 02 02 (CA, INT, JED, LA and SNE in the delegations) ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 || XX 01 04 yy [71] || - at Headquarters[72] ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 || - 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 || 50 || 44 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
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. This is without prejudice to the
establishment of a European Agency for the operational management of
large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice[73] and the externalisation of
tasks to the said Agency, which will have freed 50 FTE (27 posts and 23 FTE of
external personnel) working on SIS II, VIS and EURODAC by the end of 2013.
2012
Calculation:
Officials and Temporary agents
AD/AST – 127.000 EUR per year * 33 persons = 4.191 mEUR
          From 1 July to 31 Dec.: 2.096 mEUR
Calculation:
External personnel
Contractual staff: 64.000 EUR per year * 9 persons = 0.576 mEUR
National experts: 73.000 EUR per year * 8 persons = 0.584 mEUR
Total external personnel: 1.160 mEUR
          From 1 July to 31 Dec.: 0.580 mEUR
2013
Calculation:
Officials and Temporary agents
AD/AST – 127.000 EUR per year * 32 persons = 4.064 mEUR
          From 1 Jan
to 30 June.: 2.032 mEUR
Calculation:
External personnel
Contractual staff: 64.000 EUR per year * 7persons =  0.448 mEUR
National experts: 73.000 EUR per year * 5 persons = 0.365  mEUR
Total external personnel: 0.813 mEUR
          From 1 Jan to 30 June.: 0.407 mEUR
Description of
tasks to be carried out:
 Officials and temporary agents || Programme coordination, project management, evaluation & reporting, public procurement, contract management 
 External personnel || Technical management, IT and administrative support 
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[74].
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 2012 || Year 2013 ||   ||   || … 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 
–     
¨  Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
–     
x Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
¨         on own resources 
¨         on miscellaneous revenue 
Co-financing details
If the proposal involves co-financing by
Member States, or other bodies (please specify which) an estimate of the level
of this co-financing should be indicated in the table below (additional lines
may be added if different bodies are foreseen for the provision of the
co-financing):    N/A
·                        
Contribution from Norway
(2.406882 %) and from Iceland: (0.073102 %) [2010 figures] for operational
costs, based on Art 12 (1) 2nd paragraph of the Agreement
concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and
the Kingdom of Norway concerning the latter's association with the
implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis[75] .
·                        
Contribution from Switzerland
(3.043387 %) and from Liechtenstein: (0.026579 %) [2010 figures] for
operational costs, based on Art 11 (3) 2nd paragraph of Agreement between
the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the
Principality of Liechtenstein concerning the latter's association with the
implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis  [76]
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
 Budget revenue line: || Appropriations available for the ongoing budget exercise || Impact of the proposal/initiative[77] 
 Year 2012 || Year 2013 ||   ||   || … insert as many columns as necessary in order to reflect the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) 
 NO contribution ||   || 0.438 || 0.411 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IS contribution ||   || 0.013 || 0.012 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CH contribution ||   || 0.553 || 0.519 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LIE contribution ||   || 0.005 || 0.004 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL Article xxxx ||   || 1.009 || 0.947 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
For miscellaneous
assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Specify the method for
calculating the impact on revenue.
See above
[1]               OJ
L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 4.
[2]               OJ
L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 1.
[3]               OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 4.
[4]               OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63.
[5]               OJ
L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 1.
[6]               OJ
L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43.
[7]               OJ
L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.
[8]               OJ
L 55, 28.2.2011, p.13
[9]               OJ
C 77, 28.3.2002, p. 1.
[10]             OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 19 (OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43).
[11]             OJ L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 4.
[12]             OJ L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 1.
[13]             OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 1.
[14]             OJ L 79, 20.3.2007, p. 20 and OJ L 79, 20.3.2007,
p. 29.
[15]             OJ L 57, 1.3.2008, p. 1.
[16]             OJ L 57, 1.3.2008, p. 14.
[17]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 1.
[18]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43.
[19]             OJ
L 257, 30.9.2009, p. 41.
[20]             OJ
L 144, 6.6.2007, p. 22.
[21]             OJ
L 233, 5.9.2007, p. 3.
[22]             OJ
C …
[23]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p.1.
[24]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43.
[25]             OJ
L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 19.
[26]             OJ
L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 4.
[27]             OJ
L 328, 13.12.2001, p. 1.
[28]             OJ
L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 4.
[29]             OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63.
[30]             OJ
L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63.
[31]             OJ
L 57, 1.3.2008, p. 1.
[32]             OJ
L 57, 1.3.2008, p. 14.
[33]             OJ
L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.
[34]             OJ L 144, 6.6.2007, p. 22.
[35]             OJ L 233, 5.9.2007, p. 3.
[36]             OJ L 312, 23.12.1995, p. 1.
[37]             OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2.
[38]             OJ L 136, 31.5.1999, p. 1.
[39]             OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.
[40]             OJ
L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
[41]             OJ L 12,
17.1.2004, p. 47.
[42]             OJ
L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43.
[43]             OJ
L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20.
[44]             OJ
L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.
[45]             OJ
L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31.
[46]             OJ
L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.
[47]             OJ
L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1.
[48]             OJ
L 160, 18.5.2011, p. 19.
[49]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 1.
[50]             OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43.
[51]             ABM:
Activity-Based Management – ABB: Activity-Based Budgeting.
[52]             As
referred to in Article 49(6)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
[53]             "The
Stockholm programme — an open and secure Europe serving and protecting
citizens" – OJ C115 of 4.5.2010.
[54]             Council
Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008 of 24 October 2008 on the migration from the
Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen
Information System (SIS II)  (OJ L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 1);Council Decision
2008/839/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the migration from the Schengen Information
System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (OJ
L 299, 8.11.2008, p. 43).
[55]             This
technical scenario ('known as 'Migration Plan') was unanimously endorsed by
Member States in the framework of the SISVIS Committee of 23 February 2011.
[56]             Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment, operation and use of the
second generation Schengen Information
System (SIS II) (OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 4)
[57]             Council Decision No 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment,
operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63)
[58]             Target
date for entry into operation of the amended Council Regulation subject of this
proposal.
[59]             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
[60]             As
referred to in Article 185 of the Financial Regulation.
[61]             DA=
Differentiated appropriations / DNA= Non-Differentiated Appropriations
[62]             EFTA:
European Free Trade Association. 
[63]             Candidate
countries and, where applicable, potential candidate countries from the Western
Balkans.
[64]             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.
[65]             Since
unspent amounts are still available, these will be used. Therefore no budget
modification will be required.
[66]             Outputs
are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges
financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
[67]             As
described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific objective(s)…"
[68]             Costs
linked to Member States participation in the activities for the preparation of
the migration, in particular the coordination of tests. According to estimates,
the additional costs associated with preparations for migration should be
approximately the same for each Member State irrespective of size: 1 project manager
at €1.500€/ day, 4 specialists at €1.200 per day (database administrator,
systems specialist and application specialists/developers) and 2,5 operators at
700 per day, amounting to a total of 8050 per day for a duration of 120 days = 966
000 € / Member State participating to SIS1+.  It is assumed that 75% of the
corresponding appropriations will be committed in 2012 and the rest in 2013.
[69]             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.
[70]             CA=
Contract Agent; INT= agency staff ("Intérimaire"); JED= "Jeune
Expert en Délégation" (Young Experts in Delegations); LA= Local Agent;
SNE= Seconded National Expert; 
[71]             Under the ceiling for external personnel from operational appropriations (former "BA"
lines).
[72]             Essentially
for Structural Funds, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and European
Fisheries Fund (EFF).
[73]          Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October    2011 establishing
a European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in
the area of freedom, security and justice (OJ L 286, 1.11.2011, p. 1).
[74]             See
points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement.
[75]             OJ
L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36
[76]             OJ
L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52 and OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 84
[77]             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.