title: Council Decision 2011/361/CFSP of 20 December 2010 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in European Union crisis management operations#Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in European Union crisis management operations

text:
               23.6.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 163/1

         COUNCIL DECISION 2011/361/CFSP
   of 20 December 2010
   on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in European Union crisis management operations
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article 37 thereof,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular Article 218, paragraphs 5 and 6 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (‘the HR’),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Conditions regarding the participation of third States in European Union crisis management operations should be laid down in an agreement establishing a framework for such possible future participation, rather than defining those conditions on a case-by-case basis for each operation concerned.

               (2)

               Following the adoption of a Decision by the Council on 26 April 2010 authorising the opening of negotiations, the HR negotiated an agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in European Union crisis management operations (‘the Agreement’).

               (3)

               The Agreement should be approved,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in the European Union crisis management operations is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.
   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in order to bind the Union.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 20 December 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         J. SCHAUVLIEGE

      AGREEMENT
      between the European Union and the Republic of Serbia establishing a framework for the participation of the Republic of Serbia in European Union crisis management operations
      THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      of the one part, and
      THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
      of the other part,
      hereinafter referred to as the ‘Parties’,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  The European Union (EU) may decide to take action in the field of crisis management.

                  (2)

                  The European Union will decide whether third States will be invited to participate in an EU crisis management operation. The Republic of Serbia may accept the invitation by the European Union and offer its contribution. In such case, the European Union will decide on the acceptance of the proposed contribution of the Republic of Serbia.

                  (3)

                  Conditions regarding the participation of the Republic of Serbia in EU crisis management operations should be laid down in an agreement establishing a framework for such possible future participation, rather than defining those conditions on a case-by-case basis for each operation concerned.

                  (4)

                  Such an agreement should be without prejudice to the decision-making autonomy of the European Union, and should not prejudge the case-by-case nature of the decisions of the Republic of Serbia to participate in an EU crisis management operation.

                  (5)

                  Such an agreement should only address future EU crisis management operations and should be without prejudice to any existing agreements regulating the participation of the Republic of Serbia in an EU crisis management operation that has already been deployed,

            HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
      SECTION I

         GENERAL PROVISIONS

      Article 1
      Decisions relating to the participation
      1.   Following the decision of the European Union to invite the Republic of Serbia to participate in an EU crisis management operation, and once the Republic of Serbia has decided to participate, the Republic of Serbia shall provide information on its proposed contribution to the European Union.
      2.   The assessment by the European Union of the Republic of Serbia’s contribution shall be conducted in consultation with the Republic of Serbia.
      3.   The European Union shall provide the Republic of Serbia with an early indication of the likely contribution to the common costs of the operation as soon as possible with a view to assisting the Republic of Serbia in the formulation of its offer.
      4.   The European Union shall communicate the outcome of this assessment to the Republic of Serbia by a letter with a view to securing the participation of the Republic of Serbia in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
      Article 2
      Framework
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall associate itself with the Council Decision by which the Council of the European Union decides that the EU will conduct the crisis management operation, and with any other decision by which the Council of the European Union decides to extend the EU crisis management operation, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement and any required implementing arrangements.
      2.   The contribution of the Republic of Serbia to an EU crisis management operation shall be without prejudice to the decision-making autonomy of the European Union.
      Article 3
      Status of personnel and forces
      1.   The status of personnel seconded to an EU civilian crisis management operation and/or of the forces contributed to an EU military crisis management operation by the Republic of Serbia shall be governed by the agreement on the status of forces/mission, if concluded, between the European Union and the State(s) in which the operation is conducted.
      2.   The status of personnel contributed to headquarters or command elements located outside the State(s) in which the EU crisis management operation takes place, shall be governed by arrangements between the headquarters and command elements concerned and the Republic of Serbia.
      3.   Without prejudice to the agreement on the status of forces/mission referred to in paragraph 1, the Republic of Serbia shall exercise jurisdiction over its personnel participating in the EU crisis management operation.
      4.   The Republic of Serbia shall be responsible for answering any claims linked to the participation in an EU crisis management operation, from or concerning any of its personnel. The Republic of Serbia shall be responsible for bringing any action, in particular legal or disciplinary, against any of its personnel in accordance with its laws and regulations.
      5.   The Republic of Serbia undertakes to make a declaration as regards the waiver of claims against any State participating in an EU crisis management operation in which the Republic of Serbia participates, and to do so when signing this Agreement.
      6.   The European Union undertakes to ensure that European Union Member States make a declaration as regards the waiver of claims, for any future participation of the Republic of Serbia in an EU crisis management operation, and to do so when signing this Agreement
      Article 4
      Classified information
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall take appropriate measures to ensure that EU classified information is protected in accordance with the EU Council’s security regulations, contained in Council Decision 2001/264/EC of 19 March 2001 adopting the Council’s security regulations (1) and in accordance with further guidance issued by competent authorities, including the EU Operation Commander concerning an EU military crisis management operation or by the EU Head of Mission concerning an EU civilian crisis management operation.
      2.   Where the EU and the Republic of Serbia have concluded an agreement on security procedures for the exchange of classified information, the provisions of such an agreement shall apply in the context of an EU crisis management operation.
      SECTION II

         PROVISIONS ON PARTICIPATION IN CIVILIAN CRISIS MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS

      Article 5
      Personnel seconded to an EU civilian crisis management operation
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall ensure that its personnel seconded to the EU civilian crisis management operation undertake their mission in accordance with:

                  (a)

                  the Council Decision and subsequent amendments as referred to in Article 2(1);

                  (b)

                  the Operation Plan;

                  (c)

                  implementing measures.

            2.   The Republic of Serbia shall inform in due time the EU civilian crisis management operation Head of Mission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Council of any change to its contribution to the EU civilian crisis management operation.
      3.   Personnel seconded to the EU civilian crisis management operation shall undergo a medical examination, vaccination and be certified medically fit for duty by a competent authority from the Republic of Serbia. Personnel seconded to the EU civilian crisis management operation shall produce a copy of this certification.
      Article 6
      Chain of command
      1.   Personnel seconded by the Republic of Serbia shall carry out their duties and conduct themselves solely with the interests of the EU civilian crisis management operation in mind.
      2.   All personnel shall remain under the full command of their national authorities.
      3.   National authorities shall transfer operational control to the European Union.
      4.   The Head of Mission shall assume responsibility and exercise command and control of the EU civilian crisis management operation at theatre level.
      5.   The Head of Mission shall lead the EU civilian crisis management operation and assume its day-to-day management.
      6.   The Republic of Serbia shall have the same rights and obligations in terms of day-to-day management of the operation as European Union Member States taking part in the operation, in accordance with the legal instruments referred to in Article 2(1).
      7.   The EU civilian crisis management operation Head of Mission shall be responsible for disciplinary control over EU civilian crisis management operation personnel. Where required, disciplinary action shall be taken by the national authority concerned.
      8.   A National Contingent Point of Contact (‘NPC’) shall be appointed by the Republic of Serbia to represent its national contingent in the operation. The NPC shall report to the EU civilian crisis management operation Head of Mission on national matters and shall be responsible for day-to-day contingent discipline.
      9.   The decision to end the operation shall be taken by the European Union, following consultation with the Republic of Serbia if it is still contributing to the EU civilian crisis management operation at the date of termination of the operation.
      Article 7
      Financial aspects
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall assume all the costs associated with its participation in the operation apart from the running costs, as set out in the operational budget of the operation. This shall be without prejudice to Article 8.
      2.   In case of death, injury, loss or damage to natural or legal persons from the State(s) in which the operation is conducted, the Republic of Serbia shall, once its liability has been established, pay compensation under the conditions foreseen in the applicable status of mission agreement referred to in Article 3(1).
      Article 8
      Contribution to operational budget
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall contribute to the financing of the budget of the EU civilian crisis management operation.
      2.   The financial contribution of the Republic of Serbia to the operational budget shall be calculated on the basis of either of the following formulae, whichever produces the lower amount:

                  (a)

                  the share of the reference amount which corresponds proportionately to the ratio of the Republic of Serbia’s GNI to the total GNIs of all States contributing to the operational budget of the operation; or

                  (b)

                  the share of the reference amount for the operational budget which corresponds proportionately to the ratio of the number of personnel from the Republic of Serbia participating in the operation to the total number of personnel of all States participating in the operation.

            3.   Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, the Republic of Serbia shall not make any contribution towards the financing of per diem allowances paid to personnel of the European Union Member States.
      4.   Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the European Union shall, in principle, exempt the Republic of Serbia from financial contributions to a particular EU civilian crisis management operation when:

                  (a)

                  the European Union decides that the Republic of Serbia provides a significant contribution which is essential for the operation; or

                  (b)

                  the Republic of Serbia has a GNI per capita which does not exceed that of any Member State of the European Union.

            5.   An arrangement on the payment of the contributions of the Republic of Serbia to the operational budget of the EU civilian crisis management operation shall be signed between the EU civilian crisis management operation Head of Mission and the relevant administrative services of the Republic of Serbia. That arrangement shall include, inter alia, the following provisions:

                  (a)

                  the amount concerned;

                  (b)

                  the arrangements for payment of the financial contribution;

                  (c)

                  the auditing procedure.

            SECTION III

         PROVISIONS ON PARTICIPATION IN MILITARY CRISIS MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS

      Article 9
      Participation in an EU military crisis management operation
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall ensure that its forces and personnel participating in an EU military crisis management operation undertake their mission in accordance with:

                  (a)

                  the Council Decision and subsequent amendments as referred to in Article 2(1);

                  (b)

                  the Operation Plan;

                  (c)

                  implementing measures.

            2.   Personnel seconded by the Republic of Serbia shall carry out their duties and conduct themselves solely with the interest of the EU military crisis management operation in mind.
      3.   The Republic of Serbia shall inform the EU Operation Commander in due time of any change to its participation in the operation.
      Article 10
      Chain of command
      1.   All forces and personnel participating in the EU military crisis management operation shall remain under the full command of their national authorities.
      2.   National authorities shall transfer the Operational and Tactical command and/or control of their forces and personnel to the EU Operation Commander, who is entitled to delegate his authority.
      3.   The Republic of Serbia shall have the same rights and obligations in terms of the day-to-day management of the operation as participating European Union Member States.
      4.   The EU Operation Commander may, following consultations with the Republic of Serbia, at any time request the withdrawal of the Republic of Serbia’s contribution.
      5.   A Senior Military Representative (SMR) shall be appointed by the Republic of Serbia to represent the Serbian contingent in the EU military crisis management operation. The SMR shall consult with the EU Force Commander on all matters affecting the operation and shall be responsible for the day-to-day discipline of the Serbian contingent.
      Article 11
      Financial aspects
      1.   Without prejudice to Article 12, the Republic of Serbia shall assume all the costs associated with its participation in the operation unless the costs are subject to common funding as provided for in the legal instruments referred to in Article 2(1), as well as in Council Decision 2008/975/CFSP of 18 December 2008 establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (Athena) (2).
      2.   In case of death, injury, loss or damage to natural or legal persons from the State(s) in which the operation is conducted, the Republic of Serbia shall, once its liability has been established, pay compensation under the conditions foreseen in the applicable status of forces agreement referred to in Article 3(1).
      Article 12
      Contribution to the common costs
      1.   The Republic of Serbia shall contribute to the financing of the common costs of the EU military crisis management operation.
      2.   The financial contribution of the Republic of Serbia to the common costs shall be calculated on the basis of either of the following two formulae, whichever produces the lower amount:

                  (a)

                  the share of the common costs which corresponds proportionately to the ratio of the Republic of Serbia’s GNI to the total GNIs of all States contributing to the common costs of the operation; or

                  (b)

                  the share of the common costs which corresponds proportionately to the ratio of the number of personnel from the Republic of Serbia participating in the operation to the total number of personnel of all States participating in the operation.
                  Where the formula under point (b) of paragraph 2 is used and the Republic of Serbia contributes personnel only to the Operation or Force Headquarters, the ratio used shall be that of its personnel to that of the total number of the respective headquarters personnel. In other cases, the ratio shall be that of all personnel contributed by the Republic of Serbia to that of the total personnel of the operation.

            3.   Notwithstanding paragraph 1, the European Union shall, in principle, exempt the Republic of Serbia from financial contributions to the common costs of a particular EU military crisis management operation when:

                  (a)

                  the European Union decides that the Republic of Serbia provides a significant contribution to assets and/or capabilities which are essential for the operation; or

                  (b)

                  the Republic of Serbia has a GNI per capita which does not exceed that of any Member State of the European Union.

            4.   An arrangement shall be concluded between the Administrator provided for in Decision 2008/975/CFSP and the competent administrative authorities of the Republic of Serbia. This arrangement shall include, inter alia, provisions on:

                  (a)

                  the amount concerned;

                  (b)

                  the arrangements for payment of the financial contribution;

                  (c)

                  the auditing procedure.

            SECTION IV

         FINAL PROVISIONS

      Article 13
      Implementing arrangements
      Without prejudice to the provisions of Articles 8(5) and 12(4), any necessary technical and administrative arrangements in pursuance of the implementation of this Agreement shall be concluded between the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and the appropriate authorities of the Republic of Serbia.
      Article 14
      Non-compliance
      Should one of the Parties fail to comply with its obligations under this Agreement, the other Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by serving notice of one month.
      Article 15
      Dispute settlement
      Disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall be settled by diplomatic means between the Parties.
      Article 16
      Entry into force
      1.   This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the first month after the Parties have notified each other of the completion of the internal procedures necessary for this purpose.
      2.   This Agreement shall be provisionally applied from the date of signature.
      3.   This Agreement shall be subject to regular review.
      4.   This Agreement may be amended on the basis of a mutual written agreement between the Parties.
      5.   This Agreement may be denounced by either Party by written notice of denunciation given to the other Party. Such denunciation shall take effect six months after receipt of notification by the other Party.

         Done at Belgrade, this eighth day of June in the year 2011 in two copies, each in the English language.

            For the European Union

            For the Republic of Serbia

         (1)  OJ L 101, 11.4.2001, p. 1.

         (2)  OJ L 345, 23.12.2008, p. 96.

         TEXT FOR DECLARATIONS

            Text for the EU Member States:

         ‘The EU Member States applying an EU Council Decision on an EU crisis management operation in which the Republic of Serbia participates will endeavour, insofar as their internal legal systems so permit, to waive as far as possible claims against the Republic of Serbia for injury, death of their personnel, or damage to, or loss of, any assets owned by themselves and used by the EU crisis management operation if such injury, death, damage or loss:

                     —

                     was caused by personnel from the Republic of Serbia in the execution of their duties in connection with the EU crisis management operation, except in case of gross negligence or wilful misconduct,

                     —

                     or arose from the use of any assets owned by the Republic of Serbia, provided that the assets were used in connection with the operation and except in case of gross negligence or wilful misconduct of EU crisis management operation personnel from the Republic of Serbia using those assets.’.

            Text for the Republic of Serbia:

         ‘The Republic of Serbia applying an EU Council Decision on an EU crisis management operation will endeavour, insofar as its internal legal system so permit, to waive as far as possible claims against any other State participating in the EU crisis management operation for injury, death of its personnel, or damage to, or loss of, any assets owned by itself and used by the EU crisis management operation if such injury, death, damage or loss:

                     —

                     was caused by personnel in the execution of their duties in connection with the EU crisis management operation, except in case of gross negligence or wilful misconduct,

                     —

                     or arose from the use of any assets owned by States participating in the EU crisis management operation, provided that the assets were used in connection with the operation and except in case of gross negligence or wilful misconduct of EU crisis management operation personnel using those assets.’.


title: 2012/570/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/175

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010
   (2012/570/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and in particular Article 60 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0124/2012),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2010;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 21.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2012
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

                  —

                  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency, and in particular Article 60 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0124/2012),

                  A.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘the Agency’) for the financial year 2010 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

                  B.

                  whereas on 10 May 2011 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the Agency discharge for implementation of its budget for the financial year 2009 (5), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                              —

                              urged the Agency to implement an activity-based structure for the operational budget in order to establish a clear link between the work programme and the financial forecasts and improve performance monitoring and reporting,

                              —

                              drew attention to the fact that once again the Agency carried forward to 2010 a high level of appropriations for operating expenditure,

                              —

                              requested that a report be attached to each year’s budget on the unspent appropriations carried over from previous years, explaining why those monies have not been used and how and when they will be used,

                              —

                              noted deficiencies in staff selection procedures which put at risk the transparency of those procedures,

                  C.

                  whereas the Agency is financed by fees and charges and a contribution from the Union,

                  D.

                  whereas the budget of the Agency for the financial year 2010 was EUR 137 200 000 compared to EUR 122 200 000 in 2009, which was an increase of 12,27 %; whereas the contribution of the Union to the budget of the Agency for 2010 was EUR 34 197 000 (6), which represents an increase of 0,87 % compared to 2009,

         Budget and financial management

                  1.

                  Recalls that two-thirds of the Agency’s budget comes from fees and charges paid by the industry, one third comes from Union subsidies, and the initial Union contribution to the Agency for 2010 amounted to EUR 32 879 000; notes however that EUR 1 318 000, coming from the recovery of surplus, was added to that amount which, as a result, makes a total Union contribution of EUR 34 197 000;

                  2.

                  Notes that the Agency’s budget increased by 61 % from EUR 85 200 000 to EUR 137 200 000 from 2007 to 2010 while staff numbers rose from 333 to 524;

                  3.

                  Notes that under Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 593/2007 of 31 May 2007 on the fees and charges levied by the European Aviation Safety Agency (7) the revenues from fees constitute assigned revenues which can be carried over by the Agency as long as they have not been used; notes that industry receipts may be related to more than one financial year; notes that the reserve that can be used during the subsequent years is adjusted based on the budget result for the year; notes that the amount of the reserve decreased over the last two years from EUR 29 000 000 at the end of 2008 to EUR 21 000 000 at the end of 2010;

                  4.

                  Notes from its final annual accounts for the financial year 2010 that the Agency used only non-differentiated appropriations and that as a result the commitment appropriations were equal to the payment appropriations; notes moreover that the overall budget implementation rate was 99,51 % for the 2010 appropriations;

                  5.

                  Calls on the Agency to further take adequate measures in order to avoid deficiencies that put at risk the transparency of the procurement process as well as the principle of sound financial management;

         Accounting

                  6.

                  Ascertains from its final annual accounts that in 2010 the Agency changed its revenue recognition method from a cost-based method to a method based on the straight-line method proposed in EC Accounting Rule number 4;

                  7.

                  Understands from the Agency that the change was made to improve accuracy and transparency on how the revenue earned is based and to take account of the 2009 Court of Auditors’ recommendation to apply a method reflecting more accurately the amount of revenue allocated to a financial year;

                  8.

                  Acknowledges from the Annual Activity Report of the Agency that the Enterprise Resource Planning system was further enhanced and systematically used for all types of financial transactions and for the year-end closing;

         Procurement procedure

                  9.

                  Notes from its AAR that 23 high value tendering procedures covering both operational and administrative needs were managed throughout 2010, that 20 of them were finalised and 29 high value contracts signed with a value of approximately EUR 14 000 000; notes in addition that 428 contracts were signed following the low value procurement procedures totalling approximately EUR 1 650 000;

                  10.

                  Acknowledges, in particular, from the Court of Auditors that, for two large procurement procedures, the evaluation method did not allow tenders offering the best financial bid to achieve the highest price score; notes from the Agency that these two procurement procedures refer to:

                              —

                              the renewal of a four-year cleaning services contract amounting to EUR 1 000 000,

                              —

                              a Framework Contract of a maximum of four years for studies on aircraft engine certification requirements and standards with a maximum value of EUR 2 500 000 for which the awarded contractor did not complete all cost elements in its application,

                        notes that the Agency replied that no negative impact on the outcome was to be reported and will nevertheless take into account the considerations of the Court and in the future address the risk identified through paying even more attention to financial evaluation formulas;

         Human resources

                  11.

                  Notes that, once more, the discharge authority found deficiencies in staff selection procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures; acknowledges from the Court of Auditors that there was no evidence that thresholds for being invited to interview or being put on the reserve list had been defined before the examination of the applications started; notes that this could be to cover up a situation of nepotism or conflict of interest; asks that everything be done in order to avoid conflicts of interest; calls on the Commission to ensure that the Agency applies Union rules correctly; stresses the importance of transparency in procurement and staff selection procedures;

                  12.

                  Notes that the Agency did not inform the discharge authority of the actions taken to make the selection procedures of its experts/staff more transparent as requested in 2009, although understands that the matter was addressed in 2010 after the Court of Auditors once again underlined the issue in its report; stresses, once more, that the impact of these deficiencies is even more crucial when considering that the objectives of the Agency are as follows: issuing certification specifications, taking decisions regarding airworthiness and environmental certification and conducting standardisation inspections of the competent authorities in the Member States;

                  13.

                  Notes the Agency’s reply to the Court that its guidelines for panel members indicate clearly the minimum threshold which candidates have to meet in order to be invited for interviews (50 %) or to be put on the reserve list (65 %) but that it reserves its right to decide on what constitutes a maximum reasonable number of candidates to be invited according to their merit ranking;

                  14.

                  Reminds the Agency of the importance of ensuring adequate training and qualification criteria for inspection teams and team leaders; calls on the Agency to take concrete steps and inform the discharge authority thereof;

                  15.

                  Notes that, from 2009 to 2010, the Agency’s staff numbers rose from 509 to 578, including temporary and contracting agents;

         Conflict of interest

                  16.

                  Notes that the Agency’s technical staff members need to be commonly recruited from national aviation authorities and the aviation industry; understands that the staff members must have sufficient and up-to-date technical experience of working in the field of aviation to perform a technical check of documents demonstrating compliance for the purposes of ensuring an adequate level of aviation safety as requested by the applicable Union legislation; is concerned however that this situation could cause conflicts of interest if a staff member recruited from an aircraft manufacturer works and takes decisions at the Agency on the certification of the aircraft he/she used to work on while employed by the manufacturer and, if not detected and adequately managed, could result in a conflict of interest situation; recognises however that the Agency has put in place a certification procedure where impartiality of the decision-making process is guaranteed through the collegiality of the technical assessments and the decision-making process itself; also understands that the Agency is in the process of setting up an Agency-wide policy in the area of codes of conduct including identification, prevention, monitoring and dealing with the consequences of potential conflict of interest cases which will help the Agency to further improve the identification and handling of conflict of interests situations in such a way that aviation safety is not put at risk at any time;

                  17.

                  Calls on the Agency to take duly into consideration the professional background of its staff members in order to avoid any conflict of interest; is of the opinion that the Agency’s conflicts of interest policy should set out to which extent and under which conditions an Agency employee can be involved in the certification of an aircraft on which they worked prior to joining the Agency;

                  18.

                  Calls on the Agency to adopt effective processes that duly address potential cases of allegations of conflicts of interest within the Agency; also calls on the Agency to publish on its website the declaration of interests and professional background of its experts, management staff, Management Board members and of any other persons whose activities are related to the certification process; indicates that the Agency should follow the OECD guidelines in the area of conflicts of interest;

                  19.

                  Noting that the Agency is involved in decisions of vital importance for all citizens and taking into account its exposure due to its importance to the industry, the discharge authority is looking forward to receiving and discussing the findings and recommendations from the Special Report on conflict of interest situations to be released by the Court of Auditors before the end of June 2012;

         Performance

                  20.

                  Calls on the Agency to further implement the existing activity-based structure for the operational budget in order to establish a clear link between the work programme and the financial forecasts and further improve performance monitoring and reporting;

                  21.

                  Calls on the Agency to make a Gantt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities where relevant; stresses also how important it is for the Agency to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators in its programming as it has done in its Annual Work Programme and in its AAR since 2008;

         Internal control

                  22.

                  Notes from its AAR that the Agency consolidated its Integrated Management System in 2010 including the concept of ‘internal control’, which aims at ensuring that the risks are correctly mitigated, in order to enhance the Agency’s ability to achieve operational, quality, compliance or financial objectives;

                  23.

                  Notes that, in December 2010, the Agency’s Integrated Management System achieved certification against the internationally recognised ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management Standard;

         Standardisation inspections process

                  24.

                  Calls on the Agency to further improve the documentation of inspection planning and inspection programming; reminds the Agency of the importance of documenting the risk assessment and criteria used when establishing its inspection planning in order to justify its internal decision-making process for cases presenting significant deficiencies affecting Union citizens’ safety;

                  25.

                  Calls moreover the Agency to further improve its effectiveness in managing key safety concerns by:

                              —

                              monitoring information,

                              —

                              reducing the length of the reporting and implementing time-frame,

                              —

                              documenting the decision-making process between the Agency and the Commission,

                              —

                              adequately mitigating the risks of any potential conflict of interest situation;

                  26.

                  Calls moreover on the Agency to classify, monitor and follow up its inspection findings classified as ‘Observations’; takes note from the Agency that it has developed an operating procedure to define those findings and to communicate them to the Commission; calls therefore on the Agency to inform the discharge authority on the action taken;

         Internal audit

                  27.

                  Acknowledges that several ‘very important’ recommendations from the Internal Audit Service (IAS) aimed at reducing outstanding risks to the Agency are still open and are currently under review by the IAS;

                  28.

                  Notes in particular that in 2010 the IAS performed an audit on the Standardisation Inspection Process in order to assess and provide an independent assurance on the internal control system related to the standardisation inspection process in the Agency, the purpose of which is to monitor the application of relevant Union Regulations by the national aviation authorities and report to the Commission; also notes that the Agency has already developed a corrective action plan which was agreed by the IAS and already provided to the IAS for its review evidence of implementation regarding the recommendations set out in paragraphs 25 to 27 of this report;

                  29.

                  Calls in this respect on the Agency to further:

                              —

                              document its risk assessments after its annual inspection programmes and inspection visit,

                              —

                              improve the monitoring of and reporting on the significant deficiencies which raise safety concerns,

                              —

                              follow-up and monitor its observations after inspection visits;

                  30.

                  Draws attention to its recommendations from previous discharge reports, as set out in the Annex to this resolution;

                  31.

                  Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its resolution of 10 May 2012 (8) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

         (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 21.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

         (5)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 140.

         (6)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010, p. 613.

         (7)  OJ L 140, 1.6.2007, p. 3.

         (8)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0164 (see page 388 of this Official Journal).

      ANNEX

         EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RECOMMENDATIONS OVER PAST YEARS

                  European Aviation Safety Agency

                  2006

                  2007

                  2008

                  2009

                  Performance

                  The Agency should carefully check the consistency of the expenditure forecasts: the Agency’s cost analysis system showed costs of about EUR 48 000 000 versus revenue of about EUR 35 000 000; insufficient programming

                  The Agency should carefully check the consistency of the expenditure forecasts that are to be presented for adoption by the budgetary authority

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set out a diachronic analysis of operations carried out in this and the previous years

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to make a Gantt diagram

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set SMART objective and RACER indicators

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to consider making a Gantt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities, with a view to indicating in a concise form the amount of time spent by each staff member on a project

                              —

                              Urges the Agency to implement an activity based structure for the operational budget in order to establish a clear link between the work programme and the financial forecasts and the improve performance monitoring and reporting

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set out a comparison of its operations that were carried out during the year for which discharge is to be granted and during the previous financial year

                  Fees and charges regulation

                  n.a.

                  The Agency should not confuse to use the former regulation on fee levied with the new one

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to establish a monitoring system at the level of certification projects

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to put forward a detailed plan to guarantee that the system of annual flat fees might not generate income which is significantly above the actual costs of the services rendered

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to improve its monitoring system for certification projects to make sure that, over the entire duration the fees levied do not deviate significantly from the actual cost

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to correctly estimate for the establishment of the 2010 financial statements, the accrued expenditure related to the management of certification tasks outsourced to national aviation authorities

                  Carry-over of appropriations/Procurement issues

                  The budgetary principle of annuality was not observed: contrary to its Financial Regulation, the Agency used its differentiated payment appropriations carried over from 2005 despite the fact that it had enough payment appropriations for 2006

                  Transparency issues on the award criteria and the financial evaluation method

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to remedy the enterprise resource planning system resulting from a delay in signing the service contract. (Calls on the Agency to present a much more realistic forecast to the Commission and the Parliament during the next years)

                              —

                              Calls on the Commission to examine ways of ensuring that the principle of needs-based cash management is implemented in full, in order to ensure that the Agency’s cash reserves are kept as low as possible

                              —

                              Agency carried forward to 2010 a high level of appropriations for operating expenditure (65 % from Title III, Operational Activities. The percentage of commitments carried forward is 13 %)

                              —

                              Calls for more accurate and timely management of contracts and for far more realistic forecasts to be presented to Parliament and Commission for the next financial year

                              —

                              Requests that a report be attached to each year’s budget on the unspent appropriations carried over from previous years explaining why those monies have not been used and how and when they will be used

                  Human resources

                  n.a.

                  Calls on the Agency to improve its recruitment and resource planning systems

                  Calls on the Agency to improove its recruitment and resource planning systems

                              —

                              Notes deficiencies in staff selection procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures. Court of Auditors reported that the decisions by the selection boards were insufficiently justified and documented since thresholds for being invited to interview or put on the reserve list were not defined in advance and minutes were missing

                              —

                              Urges the Agency to inform the discharge authority on the actions taken to redress this situation and make the selection procedures of its experts/staff more transparent

                  Internal audit

                  The Agency has not yet implemented an effective claim management system, possibly including interest on late payment

                  n.a.

                  Calls on the Agency to take steps to fulfil 13 (two are considered critical) out of 28 recommendations made by the Internal Audit Service → i.e. the recommendations concern the budgetary uncertainty, the absence of risk analysis, the absence of an appraisal and promotion policy, the cut-off procedure and a procedure for recording exceptions which have been closed

                  Acknowledges that the Agency has implemented 20 out of the 26 recommendations made by the IAS since 2006