Annexes to COM(2013)97 - Registered Traveller Programme - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2013)97 - Registered Traveller Programme. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2013)97  |
| date | February 28, 2013 |
HARMONISED APPLICATION FORM[40]
Application for a Registered
Traveller Programme
1. Surname (Family name) (x) || FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
2. Surname at birth (Earlier family name(s)) (x) || Date of application : Application number: Application lodged at □ Embassy/consulate □ CAC □ Border crossing point Name: File handled by : Supporting documents: □ Travel document □ Means of subsistence □ Invitation □ Means of transport □ Other : Decision: □ Refused □ Granted Valid: From Until
3. First name(s) (Given name(s)) (x)
4. Date of birth (day-month-year) || 5. Place of birth 5a. Country of birth || 6.Current nationality 6a. Nationality at birth, if different:
7. Gender □ Male □ Female □ Unspecified || 8. Civil status □ Single □ Married □ Separated □ Divorced □ Widow(er) □ Other (please specify)
9. In the case of minors: Surname, first name, address (if different from applicant´s) and nationality of parental authority/legal guardian
10. Type of travel document □ Ordinary passport □ Diplomatic passport □ Service passport □ Official passport □ Special passport □ Other travel document (please specify)
11. Number of travel document || 12. Date of issue || 13. Valid until || 14. Issued by
15. Applicant’s home address and e-mail address || Telephone number(s)
16. Residence in a country other than the country of current nationality □ No □ Yes. Residence permit or equivalent ______No.______________Valid until
* 17. Current occupation and length of employment
* 18. Employer and employer’s address and telephone number. For students, name and address of educational establishment.
19. Main purposes of the journeys: □ Tourism □ Business □ Visit of family or friends □ Cultural □ Sports □ Official visit □ Medical reasons □ Study □ Other (please specify)
* The fields marked with * shall not be filled in by family members of EU, EEA or CH citizens (spouse, child or dependent ascendant) while exercising their right to free movement. Family members of EU, EEA or CH citizens shall present documents to prove this relationship and fill in fields no 25 and 26.
(x) Fields 1-3 shall be filled in accordance with the data in the travel document.
20. Valid Schengen visa □ No______________ □ Yes. Date(s) of validity from ___________________ to Visa's identification number: ||
21.Fingerprints collected previously for the purpose of applying for a Registered Traveller Programme □ No [……………………………….] □ Yes. […………………………………….] Date, if known
*22. Surname and first name of the inviting person(s) in the Member State(s). If not applicable, name of hotel(s) or temporary accommodation(s) in the Member State(s) ||
Address and e-mail address of inviting person(s)/hotel(s)/temporary accommodation(s) || Telephone and telefax ||
*23. Name and address of inviting company/organisation || Telephone and telefax of company/organisation ||
Surname, first name, address, telephone, telefax, and e-mail address of contact person in company/organisation ||
||
*24. Cost of travelling and living during the applicant's stay is covered ||
□ by the applicant himself/herself Means of support □ Cash □ Traveller's cheques □ Credit Card □ Pre-paid accommodation □ Pre-paid transport □ Other (please specify) || □ by a sponsor (host, company, organisation), please specify [… …] □ referred to in field 18 or 19 [….…] □ other (please specify) Means of support □ Cash □ Accommodation provided □ All expenses covered during the stay(s) □ Pre-paid transport □ Other (please specify) ||
||
25. Personal data of the family member who is a EU, EEA or CH citizen ||
Surname || First name(s) ||
Date of birth || Nationality || Number of travel document or ID card ||
Address || Telephone || e-mail address ||
26. Family relationship with an EU, EEA or CH citizen □ spouse □ child □ grandchild □ dependent ascendant ||
27. Place and date || 28. Signature (for minors, signature of parental authority/legal guardian) ||
I am aware that the RTP application fee is not refunded under any circumstances.
I am aware of the need to have an adequate travel medical insurance for my first stay and any subsequent visits to the territory of Member States.
I am aware of and consent to the following: the collection of the data required by this application form and the taking of fingerprints, if applicable, are mandatory for the examination of the Registered Traveller Programme (RTP) application. Any personal data concerning me which appear on the RTP application form, as well as my fingerprints will be supplied to the relevant authorities of the Member States and processed by those authorities, for the purposes of a decision on my RTP application.
Such data as well as data concerning the decision taken on my application or a decision whether to revoke or extend access to the RTP will be entered into, and stored in the Central Repository for a maximum period of five years, during which it will be accessible to the competent visa or border authorities. The authority of the Member State responsible for processing the data is: [(…)].
I am aware that I have the right to obtain in any of the Member States notification of the data relating to me recorded in the Central Repository and of the Member State which transmitted the data, and to request that data relating to me which are inaccurate be corrected and that data relating to me processed unlawfully be deleted. At my express request, the authority examining my application will inform me of the manner in which I may exercise my right to check the personal data concerning me and have them corrected or deleted, including the related remedies according to the national law of the State concerned. The supervisory authority of that Member State [contact details] will hear claims concerning the protection of personal data.
I declare that to the best of my knowledge all particulars supplied by me are correct and complete. I am aware that any false statements will lead to my application being rejected or to the revocation of access already granted to the RTP and may also render me liable to prosecution under the law of the Member State which deals with the application.
I undertake to leave the territory of the Member States in due time.
Place and date || Signature (for minors, signature of parental authority/legal guardian):
ANNEX II
NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
The supporting documents, referred to in Article 9, to be submitted by a registered traveller applicant may include the following:
1. Documentation relating to the purpose of the journeys
(1) for business trips:
(a) an invitation from a company or an authority to attend meetings, conferences or events connected with trade, industry or work;
(b) other documents which show the existence of trade relations or relations for work purposes;
(c) documents proving the business activities of the company;
(d) documents proving the applicant's employment [status][situation] in the company.
(2) for journeys undertaken for the purposes of study or other types of training:
(a) a certificate of enrolment at a teaching institute for the purposes of attending vocational or theoretical courses in the framework of basic and further training;
(b) student cards or certificates of the courses to be attended.
(3) for journeys undertaken for the purposes of tourism or for private reasons:
(a) documents relating to lodging(s):
(i) an invitation from the host if staying with one;
(ii) document from the establishment providing lodging or any other appropriate document indicating the accommodation envisaged;
(b) documents relating to the itinerary:
(i) confirmation of the bookings done during the last year or any other appropriate document indicating the envisaged and/or done journey(s).
(4) for journeys undertaken for political, scientific, cultural, sports or religious events or other reasons:
(a) invitation(s), enrolments or programmes stating (wherever possible) the name of the host organisation and the length of stay(s) or any other appropriate document indicating the purpose of the visit(s).
(5) for journeys of members of official delegations who, following an official invitation, addressed to the government of the third country concerned, participate in meetings, consultations, negotiations or exchange programmes, as well as in events held in the territory of a Member State by intergovernmental organisations:
(a) a letter issued by an authority of the third country concerned confirming that the applicant is a member of the official delegation travelling to a Member State to participate in the aforementioned events, accompanied by a copy of the official invitation(s).
2. Documentation allowing for the assessment of the applicant's intention to leave the territory of the Member States
(a) proof of financial means in the country of residence;
(b) proof of employment: bank statements;
(c) proof of real estate property;
(d) proof of integration into the country of residence: family ties; professional status.
3. Documentation in relation to the applicant's family situation
(a) parental consent (when a minor does not travel with parents);
(b) proof of family ties with the host/inviting person;
(c) residence permit.
ANNEX III
REGISTRATION FEE
1. Applicants shall pay a registration fee of 20 EUR.
2. If the RTP application is examined at the same time with the multiple-entry visa application, the applicant shall pay a fee of 10 EUR.
ANNEX IV
STANDARD FORM FOR NOTIFYING AND MOTIVATING REFUSAL OR REVOCATION AN ACCESS TO A REGISTERED TRAVELLER PROGRAMME[41]
___________
__________________________________________________________________________
REFUSAL/REVOCATION
Ms/Mr _______________________________,
The ________________ Embassy/Consulate-General/Consulate/Common Application Centre in _________ ______;
The border authority of the ____________________[name of the border crossing point and country].
has/have
examined your application;
examined your access to the Registered Traveller Programme, number: __________, granted:_______________ [date/month/year].
Access to the RTP has been refused Access to the RTP has been revoked
This decision is based on the following reason(s):
1. you do not have a valid residence permit/a residence card if applicable or a visa as required in accordance with the Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of March 2001
2. a false/counterfeited/forged travel document was presented
3. you do not proof the need or justify the intention to travel frequently and/or regularly;
4. justification of the purpose and conditions of the intended stay(s) was not provided
5. you have not proved your economic situation in the country of origin or residence or you have not provided proof of sufficient means of subsistence, for the duration of the intended stay(s) or for the return to the country of origin or residence or you are not in a position to acquire such means lawfully
6. you have previously exceeded the maximum duration of authorised stay in the territory of the Member States and you do not prove your integrity and reliability
7. an alert has been issued in the SIS for the purpose of refusing entry by ……………… (indication of Member State)
8. one or more Member State(s) consider you to be a threat to public policy, internal security, public health as defined in Article 2 point 19 of the Schengen Borders Code or the international relations of one or more of the Member States
9. the information submitted regarding the justification of the purpose and conditions of the intended stay was not reliable
10. your intention to leave the territory of the Member States in due time could not be ascertained
11. revocation was requested by the Registered Traveller[42].
Remarks:
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Comments: The person concerned may appeal against the decision to refuse or revoke access to a Registered Traveller Programme as provided for in national law and in Article 47(1) of the Charter. The person concerned receives a copy of this document (each Member State must indicate the references to the national law and the procedure relating to the right of appeal (including the competent authority to whom an appeal can be lodged, as well as the time-limit for lodging such an appeal).
Date and stamp of embassy/consulate-general/consulate/border authority/of other competent authorities.
Signature of person concerned[43]
ANNEX V
ANNUAL STATISTICS ON REGISTERED TRAVELLER PROGRAMME
Data to be submitted to the Agency within the deadline set out in Article 18 for each border crossing point and each location where individual Member States grant access to the RTP:
– Total of access applied
– Total of access granted
– Total of access refused
– Total of access revoked
– Total of access applied, granted, refused, revoked or extended for third country nationals holding a visa
– Total of access applied, granted, refused, revoked or extended for third country nationals without a visa
– Average time of enrolment
– Processing time at the border crossing point
– Central Repository availability rate
– Error rates e.g. FTE, false match etc.
General rules for the submission of data:
– The data for the complete previous year shall be compiled in one single file.
– The data shall be provided using the common template (provided by the Agency).
– Data shall be available for the individual border crossing points and the individual locations where the Member State concerned examine applications for the RTP and grouped by third country.
In case a data is neither available nor relevant for one particular category and a third country, Member States shall leave the cell empty (and not entering “0” (zero), “N.A.” (non applicable) or any other value).
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR PROPOSALS
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
1.4. Objective(s)
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.6. Duration and financial impact
1.7. Management method(s) envisaged
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
2.2. Management and control system
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR PROPOSALS
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Registered Traveller Programme (RTP) subject to the adoption by the Legislative Authority of the proposal establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa (COM(2011)750) and subject to the adoption by the Legislative Authority of the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (COM(2011)398) and a sufficient level of resources being available under the expenditure ceiling of the pertinent budget heading.
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure[44]
Policy area: Area of Home Affairs (title 18)
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
x The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
¨ The proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action[45]
¨ 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 Stockholm Programme agreed by the European Council in December 2009 reaffirmed the potential for a Registered Traveller Programme (RTP) with the aim to facilitate legal access to the territory of Member States. The proposal to set up an RTP was therefore included in the Action Plan implementing the Stockholm programme. The financing of the development of the Smart Borders package is one of the priorities of the Internal Security Fund (ISF)[46].
1.4.2. Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Specific objectives No. 1 "System Development" and No. 2 "System Operations"
The objective of the RTP and the token-Central Repository system is to facilitate the crossing of the European Union external borders by frequent, pre-vetted third-country travellers.
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
Activities: Solidarity – External borders, return, visa policy and free movement of people (chapter 18.02)
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
By exploiting new technologies the RTP will decrease the time and costs of border crossings for Registered Travellers and will increase the throughput capacity of border crossing points thus giving Member States a new tool to manage their passenger flows efficiently and cost-effectively. Border checks of Registered Travellers should not take more than 20-40 seconds on average.
Furthermore, the RTP will free up border control resources by 25% from checking cross border movements of frequent and pre-vetted travellers and will enable better focus on checking higher risk travellers.
1.4.4. Indicators of results and impact
Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
During the development
After the approval of the draft proposal and the adoption of the technical specifications the technical system will be developed by an external contractor. The development of the systems will take place at central and national level under the overall coordination of the IT Agency. The IT Agency will define an overall governance framework in cooperation with all the stakeholders. As usual in the development of such systems an overall Project Management Plan, together with a Quality Assurance Plan will be defined at the beginning of the project. They should include dashboards that will include specific indicators related in particular to
The overall project status
the timely development according to the agreed schedule (milestones),
the risk management,
the management of resources ( human and financial) according to the agreed allocations
the organisational readiness
…
Once the system is operational
Number of persons in the programme by category (visa required/visa exempt) and by grounds of access requested (business persons/students/workers etc);
Number of persons whose access to the RTP is revoked or refused;
Average time of enrolment at the border crossing point and at the consulate;
Time needed for RTs to cross an external border;
System availability;
Error rates e.g. false hits, Failure to Enrol Rate (FTE) and False Acceptance Rate (FAR);
Number of complaints by individuals to the national Supervisory Authority (data protection authority);
Number of complaints lodged against the authorities on wrong decisions and/or discrimination;
The throughput capacity of border crossing point increased by XX per cent;
Border guard resources replaced/made available by the RTP to focus on checking higher risk travellers and/or carrying out other relevant tasks.
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative 1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term
There are some 700 millions border crossings every year at the external border crossing points (land, sea, air). Taking into account that border crossing at the largest and busiest border crossing points have been increasing and will continue to do so in the future, doing nothing at the EU level would mean that third-country nationals' border crossings could not be facilitated except those specifically mentioned in the Schengen Borders Code and the Local Border Traffic Regulation meaning that thorough checks would be applicable for third-country nationals and no access to Automated Border Control systems could be given for them. Several Member States already face issues in managing queues. These Member States would have no other solution than hiring more staff and rebuilding infrastructure; any future increase in travel flows would lead to more problems of this kind.
Therefore, the RTP is needed for facilitating Registered Travellers border crossings, for releasing border guard resources and for introducing person centric approach to border checks.
1.5.2. Added value of EU involvement
The need for intervention at European level is clear. No Member State alone is able to build up an RTP providing facilitated border checks across the Member States. The RTP needs to be implemented at all EU external border crossing points and will have positive implications on the border guard resources of all Member States, allowing for an efficient use of these resources.
The RTP proposal ensures that the EU has a common approach to the RTP based on common legislation and thus it guarantees that rules continue to be the same at all Schengen borders. For third-country national travellers, this means that the RTP is available to them at all Schengen border crossing points without separate vetting. In other words, a person vetted by one Member State may benefit from facilitation when crossing the external borders of any other Member State. Without common rules this would not be possible, i.e. without EU involvement the RTP would not meet its objectives.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
The experience with the development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) and of the Visa Information System (VIS) showed the following lessons:
1) As a possible safeguard against cost overruns and delays resulting from changing requirements, any new information system in the area of freedom, security and justice, particularly if it involves a large-scale IT system, will not be developed before the underlying legal instruments setting out its purpose, scope, functions and technical details have been definitely adopted.
2) It proved difficult to fund the national developments for Member States that have not foreseen the respective activities in their multi-annual programming or lack precision in their programming in the framework of the External Border Fund (EBF). Therefore, it is now proposed to include these development costs in the proposal.
1.5.4. Coherence and possible synergy with other relevant instruments
This proposal should be seen as part of the continuous development of the Integrated Border Management Strategy of the European Union, and in particular the Smart Borders Communication[47], as well as in conjunction with the ISF borders proposal[48], as part of the MFF. The legislative financial statement attached to the amended Commission proposal for the Agency[49] covers the costs for the existing IT systems EURODAC, SIS II, VIS but not for the future border management systems that are not yet entrusted to the Agency via a legal framework. Therefore, in the annex to the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the multi-annual financial framework for the years 2014-2020[50], under heading 3 "Security and Citizenship" it is foreseen to cover the existing IT systems in the rubrique 'IT systems' (822 mio €) and the future border management systems in the rubrique 'Internal Security' (1.1 mio € out of 4.648 mio €). Within the Commission DG HOME is the Directorate General responsible for the establishment of an area of free movement in which persons can cross internal borders without being submitted to border checks and external borders are controlled and managed coherently at the EU level. The RTP is fully coherent with EU border policy: security and prevention of irregular immigration is not diminished during the border crossing, while the EU's openness to the world and its capacity to facilitate cross-border people-to-eople contacts, trade and cultural exchange is boosted. Furthermore, it is coherent with the Community Code on Visas (810/2009) and the VIS Regulation (767/2008). Amendment of the Schengen Borders Code is needed to give access for third-country nationals to fully automated border control systems.
Technical synergies can be found with the Visa Information System. There will also be synergies with the EES, as the EES will register the entry and exit of the registered travellers and monitor the permitted duration of stay within the Schengen area. Without the EES fully automated border crossings could not be implemented for the registered travellers.
In addition, there is no risk of an overlap with similar initiatives carried out in other DGs.
1.6. Duration and financial impact
¨ Proposal/initiative of limited duration
– ¨ Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
– ¨Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY
x Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration
– Preparatory period from 2013 to 2015 (establishment of the legal framework)
– Development period from 2015 to 2017,
– followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Management mode(s) envisaged[51]
x Centralised direct management by the Commission
x Centralised indirect management with the delegation of implementation tasks to:
– ¨ executive agencies
– x bodies set up by the Communities[52]
– ¨ 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.
Comments
The proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa for the period 2014-2020 (COM(2011)750), foresees the financing of the development of the Registered Traveller Programme in its Article 15. In accordance with Articles 58 1c) and 60 of the new Financial Regulation (centralised indirect management) the implementing tasks of the abovementioned financial programme will be delegated to the IT Agency.
During the 2015-2017 period, all development activities will be entrusted to the IT Agency through a delegation agreement. This will cover the development part of all strands of the project, i.e. Central system, Member States systems, networks and infrastructure in Member States.
In 2017, at the time of the mid term review, it is envisaged to transfer remaining credits from the 587.000 Mio € to the IT Agency line for operation and maintenance costs of the central system and of the network and to national programmes for operation and maintenance costs of national systems including infrastructure costs (see table below). The Legislative Financial Statement will be revised accordingly by the end of 2016.
Blocks || Management mode || 2015 || 2016 || 2017 || 2018 || 2019 || 2020
Development Central System || Indirect centralised || X || X || X || || ||
Development Member States || Indirect centralised || X || X || X || || ||
Maintenance Central System || Indirect centralised || || || X || X || X || X
Maintenance National Systems || Indirect centralised || || || X || X || X || X
Network (1) || Indirect centralised || X || X || X || X || X || X
Infrastructure Member States || Indirect centralised || X || X || X || X || X || X
(1) network development in 2015-2017, network operations in 2017-2020
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES 2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The rules on monitoring and evaluation of the RTP are foreseen in Article 63 of the RTP proposal.
Article 63
Monitoring and evaluation
1. The Agency shall ensure that procedures are in place to monitor the functioning of the central repository against objectives relating to output, cost-effectiveness, security and quality of service.
2. For the purposes of technical maintenance, the Agency shall have access to the necessary information relating to the processing operations performed in the Central Repository.
3. Two years after the RTP is brought into operation and every two years thereafter, the Agency shall submit to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, a report on the technical functioning of the RTP including the security thereof.
4. Three years after the RTP is brought into operation and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the RTP. This overall evaluation shall include an examination of results achieved against objectives and an assessment of the continuing validity of the underlying rationale, the application of this Regulation in respect of the RTP, the security of the RTP, the implementation of the collection and use of biometric data, compliance with data protection rules and the organisation of the procedures related to applications and issuance of tokens. .The Commission shall transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council. The report shall be accompanied, where necessary, by appropriate proposals to amend this Regulation.
5. Member States shall provide the Agency and the Commission with the information necessary to draft the reports referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 according to the quantitative parameters predefined by the Agency and the Commission respectively.
6. The Agency shall provide the Commission with the information necessary to produce the overall evaluations referred to in paragraph 4.
2.2. Management and control system 2.2.1. Risk(s) identified
1) Difficulties with the technical development of the system
Member States have technically different national IT systems. Furthermore, border control processes may differ according to the local circumstances (available space at the border crossing point, travel flows, etc.). The RTP needs to be integrated into national IT architecture and the national border control processes. Additionally, the development of the national components of the system needs to be fully aligned with central requirements. There are two main risks identified in this area:
a) The risk that technical and legal aspects of the RTP may be implemented in different ways by different Member States, due to insufficient coordination between the central and national sides.
b) The risk of inconsistency in how this future system is used depending on how Member States implement the RTP into the existing border control processes.
2) Difficulties with the timely development of the system
From the experience gained during the development of the VIS and the SIS II, it can be anticipated that a crucial factor for a successful implementation of the RTP will be the timely development of the system by an external contractor. As a center of excellence in the field of development and management of large-scale IT systems, the IT Agency will also be responsible for the award and management of contracts, in particular for sub-contracting the development of the system. There are several risks related to the use of an external contractor for this development work:
a) in particular, the risk that the contractor fails to allocate sufficient resources to the project or that it designs and develops a system that is not state-of-the-art;
b) the risk that administrative techniques and methods to handle large-scale IT projects are not fully respected as a way of reducing costs by the contractor;
c) finally, in the current economic crisis, the risk of the contractor facing financial difficulties for reasons external to this project cannot be entirely excluded.
2.2.2. Control method(s) envisaged
1) The Agency is meant to become a center of excellence in the field of development and management of large-scale IT systems. It shall be entrusted with the development and the operations of the central part of the system including uniform interfaces in the Member States. This solution should allow to avoid most of the drawbacks that the Commission met when developing the SIS II and the VIS.
During the development phase (2015-2017), the Commission will keep the overall responsibility, as the project will be developed via indirect central management. The Agency will be responsible for the technical and financial management, notably the award and management of contracts. The delegation agreement will cover the central part via procurements and the national part via grants. According to Article 40 of the Implementing Rules, the Commission will conclude an Agreement laying down the detailed arrangements for the management and control of funds and the protection of the financial interests of the Commission. Such agreement will include the provisions set out in paragraph 2 of Article 40. It will thus enable the Commission to manage the risks described in 2.2.1.
In the context of the mid-term review (foreseen in 2017 in the framework of the Internal Security Fund, Article 15 of the Horizontal Regulation) the management mode will be re-examined.
2) In order to avoid delays at national level, an efficient governance between all stakeholders is foreseen. The Commission has proposed in the draft Regulation that an Advisory Group composed of Member States national experts shall provide the Agency with the expertise related to the RTP/EES. This advisory group shall meet on a regular basis on the system implementation and to share gathered experience and provide advice to the Management Board of the Agency. Furthermore, the Commission intends to recommend to Member States to set up a national project infrastructure / project group for both the technical and the operational development including a reliable communication infrastructure with single points of contact.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures.
The measures foreseen to combat fraud are laid down in Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 which provides as follows:
1. In order to combat fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities, Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 shall apply.
2. The Agency shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement concerning internal investigations by the European Anti‑fraud Office (OLAF) and shall issue, without delay, the appropriate provisions applicable to all the employees of the Agency.
3. The decisions concerning funding and the implementing agreements and instruments resulting from them shall explicitly stipulate that the Court of Auditors and OLAF may carry out, if necessary, on‑the‑spot checks among the recipients of the Agency's funding and the agents responsible for allocating it.
In accordance with this provision, the decision of the Management Board of the European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice concerning the terms and conditions for internal investigations in relation to the prevention of fraud, corruption and any illegal activity detrimental to the Union's interests was adopted on 28 June 2012.
Moreover, DG HOME is currently drafting its fraud prevention and detection strategy.
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected
Via the delegation agreement the Agency will be entrusted with the task to set up the appropriate tools at the level of its local financial systems in order to guarantee an efficient monitoring, follow-up and reporting of the costs linked to the implementation of the RTP in compliance with Article 60 of the new Financial Regulation. It will take the appropriate measures, in order to be able to report whatever the final budget nomenclature will be.
· 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 [Description………………………...……….] || DA/ ([53]) || from EFTA[54] countries || from candidate countries[55] || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 21(2)(b) of the Financial Regulation
|| [XX.YY.YY.YY] || DA/ || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO || YES/NO
· New budget lines requested
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Heading of multiannual financial framework || Budget line || Type of expenditure || Contribution
Number [Heading……………………………………..] || Diff./non-diff. || from EFTA countries || from candidate countries || from third countries || within the meaning of Article 21(2)(b) of the Financial Regulation
3 || [18.02.CC] ISF borders || DA/ || NO || NO || YES || NO
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure 3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
The table below covers annual costs for Member States and central system, as well as development and operational costs. The costs for automated border control gates will be borne by the Member States.
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 3 || Security and Citizenship
DG: HOME || || || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017[56] || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Following years || TOTAL
Ÿ Operational appropriations || || || || || || || ||
Number of budget line 18.02.CC || Commitments || (1) || 137.674 || 34.836 || 167.402 || 82.362 || 82.363 || 82.363 || || 587.000
Payments || (2) || 68.837 || 93.222 || 145.148 || 101.198 || 88.013 || 68.585 || 21.996 || 587.000
Number of budget line || Commitments || (1a) || || || || || || || ||
Payments || (2a) || || || || || || || ||
Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelop of specific programs[57] || || || || || || || ||
Number of budget line || || (3) || || || || || || || ||
TOTAL appropriations for DG HOME || Commitments || =1+1a +3 || 137.674 || 34.836 || 167.402 || 82.362 || 82.363 || 82.363 || || 587.000
Payments || =2+2a +3 || 68.837 || 93.222 || 145.148 || 101.198 || 88.013 || 68.585 || 21.996 || 587.000
Ÿ TOTAL operational appropriations || Commitments || (4) || || || || || || ||
Payments || (5) || || || || || || ||
Ÿ TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelop of specific programs || (6) || || || || || || ||
TOTAL appropriations under HEADING <….> of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || =4+ 6 || || || || || || ||
Payments || =5+ 6 || || || || || || ||
If more than one heading is affected by the proposal / initiative:
Ÿ TOTAL operational appropriations || Commitments || (4) || || || || || || ||
Payments || (5) || || || || || || ||
Ÿ TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelop of specific programs || (6) || || || || || || ||
TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 4 of the multiannual financial framework (Reference amount) || Commitments || =4+ 6 || || || || || || ||
Payments || =5+ 6 || || || || || || ||
Heading of multiannual financial framework: || 5 || " Administrative expenditure "
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
|| || || Year 2013 || Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Following years || TOTAL
DG: HOME || || || ||
Ÿ Human resources || 0.254 || 0.254 || 0.254 || 0.190 || 0.190 || 0.190 || 0.191 || 0.191 || || 1.715
Ÿ Other administrative expenditure || 0.201 || 0.201 || 0.201 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || || 1.602
TOTAL DG HOME || Appropriations || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.391 || 0.391 || || 3.317
TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || (Total commitments = Total payments) || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.391 || 0.391 || || 3.317
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
|| || || Year 2013 || Year 2014 || Year 2015[58] || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Following years || TOTAL
TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework || Commitments || 0.455 || 0.455 || 138.129 || 35.226 || 167.793 || 82.753 || 82.753 || 82.753 || || 590.317
Payments || 0.455 || 0.455 || 69.292 || 93.613 || 145.539 || 101.589 || 88.403 || 68.975 || 21.996 || 590.317
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.
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 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || TOTAL ||
||
Type of output[59] || Average cost of the ouput || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Number of ouputs || Cost || Total number of ouputs || Total cost ||
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1[60]: System Development (Central and National) || || || || || || ||
- Output || 1 || 137.674 || 1 || 34.836 || 1 || 50.356 || || || || || || || 1 || 222.866 ||
Sub-total for specific objective N° 1[61] || || 137.674 || || 34.836 || || 50.356 || || || || || || || || 222.866 ||
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2: System Operations (Central and National) || || || || || || ||
- Output || || || || || 1 || 117.047 || 1 || 82.362 || 1 || 82.362 || 1 || 82.363 || 1 || 364.134 ||
Sub-total for specific objective N° 2[62] || || || || || || 117.047 || || 82.362 || || 82.362 || || 82.363 || || 364.134 ||
TOTAL COST || 1 || 137.674 || 1 || 34.836 || 2 || 167.403 || 1 || 82.362 || 1 || 82.362 || 1 || 82.363 || 2 || 587.000 ||
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 2013 || Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || TOTAL
HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || || || || || || || || ||
Human resources || 0.254 || 0.254 || 0.254 || 0.190 || 0.190 || 0.190 || 0.191 || 0.191 || 1.715
Other administrative expenditure || 0.201 || 0.201 || 0.201 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 0.200 || 1.602
Subtotal HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.391 || 0.391 || 3.317
Outside HEADING 5[63] of the multiannual financial framework || || || || || || || || ||
Human resources || || || || || || || || ||
Other expenditure of an administrative nature || || || || || || || || ||
Subtotal outside HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework || || || || || || || || ||
TOTAL || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.455 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.390 || 0.391 || 0.391 || 3.317
3.2.3.2. Estimated requirements of human resources
– ¨ The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources
– x The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:
Estimate to be expressed in full time equivalnet units (or at most to one decimal place)
|| Year 2013 || Year 2014 || Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020
· Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary agents)
XX 01 01 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) || 2 || 2 || 2 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5
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)[64]
XX 01 02 01 (CA, INT, SNE from the "global envelope") || || || || || || || ||
XX 01 02 02 (CA, INT, JED, LA and SNE in the delegations) || || || || || || || ||
XX 01 04 yy [65] || - at Headquarters[66] || || || || || || || ||
- 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 || 2 || 2 || 2 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5 || 1,5
XX is the policy area or budget title concerned.
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary agents || 2 during preparatory period from 2013 to 2015: 1 administrator for the legislative negotiation, coordination of tasks with the Agency and supervision of the delegation agreement 0,5 administrator for supervision of financial activities and expertise on border control and technical matters 0,5 assistant for administrative and financial activities 1,5 during development period from 2016 to 2020 1 administrator for the follow-up of the delegation agreement (reports, preparaiton comitology, validation functional and technical specifications, supervision financial activities and coordination Agency), as well as expertise on border control and technical matters 0,5 assistant for administrative and financial activities
External personnel || 0
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
– x Proposal/initiative is compatible with the current and the next 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[67].
Explain what is required, specifying the headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding amounts.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
– x The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties
– ¨ The proposal/initiative provides
Appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
|| Year N || Year N+1 || Year N+2 || Year N+3 || … enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) || Total
Specify the co-financing body || || || || || || || ||
TOTAL appropriations cofinanced || || || || || || || ||
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
– ¨ Proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
– x Proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
– ¨ on own resources
– x on miscellaneous revenue
EUR million (to 3 decimal places)
Budget revenue line: || Appropriations available for the ongoing budget exercise || Impact of the proposal/initiative[68]
Year 2015 || Year 2016 || Year 2017 || Year 2018 || Year 2019 || Year 2020 || Following years
Article 6313 || || 4,188 || 5,672 || 8,832 || 6,157 || 5,355 || 4,173 || 1,338
For miscellaneous assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
18.02.CC ISF borders
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
The budget shall include a contribution from countries associated with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis and the Eurodac related measures as laid down in the respective agreements. The estimates provided are purely indicative and are based on recent calculations for revenues for the implementation of the Schengen acquis from the States that currently contribute (Iceland, Norway and Switzerland) to the general budget of the European Union (consumed payments) an annual sum for the relevant financial year, calculated in accordance with its gross domestic product as a percentage of the gross domestic product of all the participating States. The calculation is based on June 2012 figures from EUROSTAT which are subject to considerable variation depending on the economic situation of the participating States.
[1] COM(2008) 69 final.
[2] OJ C 115/1, 4.5.2010.
[3] COM(2011) 680 final.
[4] OJ L 105, 13.4.2006.
[5] OJ L 158, 30.4.2004; Directive 2004/38/EC.
[6] OJ L 405, 30.12.2006
[7] In the context of a RTP, a token is a physical device given to the authorised user to prove his/her access granted to the RTP electronically. The token acts like an electronic key to access something, in this case to the automated gate. Technical specifications will determine whether only a bar code is used or a chip in which the unique identifier (application number) is stored.
[8] OJ L 286, 1.11.2011.
[9] SEC(2008) 153.
[10] SWD(2013) 50.
[11] Impact assessment can be found from the following web page: http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/ia_carried_out/cia_2013_en.htm
[12] Subject to the adoption by the Legislative Authority of the proposal establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visas (COM(2011) 750 final) and subject to the adoption by the Legislative Authority of the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (COM(2011)398) and a sufficient level of resources being available under the expenditure ceiling of the pertinent budget heading.
[13] OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.
[14] OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.
[15] OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19.
[16] OJ C , , p. .
[17] OJ C , , p. .
[18] OJ C , , p. .
[19] COM(2008) 69 final, 13.2.2008.
[20] COM(2009) 262 final, 10.6.2009.
[21] OJ L 286, 1.11.2011, p 1.
[22] OJ L 158, 29.4.2004, p. 77
[23] OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
[24] OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
[25] OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p.13
[26] OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43.
[27] OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20.
[28] OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 36.
[29] OJ L 176, 10.7.1999, p. 31.
[30] OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 52.
[31] OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 1.
[32] OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 21.
[33] OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 19.
[34] OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p 60.
[35] OJ L 105, 13.4.2006, p 1.
[36] OJ L 243, 15.9.2009, p 1.
[37] OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1.
[38] Article 47(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
[39] Article 47(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
[40] No logo is required for Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
[41] No logo is required for Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
[42] Revocation on this reason is not subject to the right of appeal.
[43] If required by national law.
[44] ABM: Activity-Based Management – ABB: Activity-Based Budgeting.
[45] As referred to in Article 49(6)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
[46] Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa (COM(2011)750.
[47] Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – Smart Borders – options and the way ahead (COM(2011)680.
[48] Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa (COM(2011)750.
[49] COM(2010)93 of 19 March 2010.
[50] COM(2011)398 of 29 June 2011.
[51] 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
[52] As referred to in Article 185 of the Financial Regulation.
[53] DA= Differentiated appropriations / DNA= Non-Differentiated Appropriations
[54] EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
[55] Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidate countries from the Western Balkans.
[56] The variation of costs and especially the high costs in 2015 in 2017 can be explained as follows: At the beginning of the development period, in 2015, commitments for the development will be made (one-time costs to cover three years of hardware, software and contractor costs). At the end of the development period, in 2017, the required commitments for the operations will be made. Costs for the administration of hardware and software vary depending on the period.
[57] 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.
[58] Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative start
[59] Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
[60] As described in Section 1.4.2. "Specific objective(s)…"
[61] This amount includes for the central development in particular the network infrastructure, required hardware and software licenses and costs for the external contractor to develop the central system. For the national development it also includes the costs for the required hardware and software licenses as well as external contractual development
[62] This amount covers the required costs to keep the central system up and running, in particular the running of the network, the maintenance of the central system by an external contractor and the required hardware and software licenses. For the national operations, it covers the required costs for the running the national systems, in particular licenses for hardware and software, incident management, and costs for required external contractors.
[63] 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.
[64] CA= Contract Agent; INT= agency staff ("Intérimaire"); JED= "Jeune Expert en Délégation" (Young Experts in Delegations); LA= Local Agent; SNE= Seconded National Expert;
[65] Under the ceiling for external personnel from operational appropriations (former "BA" lines).
[66] Essentially for Structural Funds, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and European Fisheries Fund (EFF).
[67] See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional Agreement.
[68] 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.