Annexes to COM(2016)272 - Establishment of 'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints (recast) - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2016)272 - Establishment of 'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints (recast). |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2016)272  |
| date | May 4, 2016 |
Data format and fingerprint form
Data format for the exchange of fingerprint data
The following format is prescribed for the exchange of fingerprint data:
ANSI/NIST-ITL 1a-1997, Ver.3, June 2001 (INT-1) and any future further developments of this standard.
Norm for Member State identification letters
The following ISO norm will apply: ISO 3166 - 2 letters code.
I ^ 603/2013 (adapted) ANNEX II
Repealed Regulations (referred to in Article 45)
Council Regulation (EC) (OJ L 316, 15.12.2000,
No 2725/2000 p. 1.)
Council Regulation (EC) No 407/2002 (OJ L 62, 5.3.2002 p. 1.)
^ 603/2013 (adapted)
ANNEX III
Correlation table
Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 Article 1(1)
This Regulation Article 1(1)
Article 1(2), first subparagraph, points (a) and (b)
Article 3(1)(a)
subparagraph, point (c)
), second subparagraph
Article 1(3) Article 2(1)(a)
Article 3(4) Article 1(3)
Article 2(1)(b) to (e)
Article 2(1)(a) to (d)
Article 3(1) Article 3(2)
Article 2(1)(e) to (j)
Article 3(3)
Article 3(3)(a) to (e)
Article 3(4)
Article 8(1)(a) to (e) Article 8(1)(f) to (i)
Article 4(1)
Article 9(1) and Article 3(5)
Article 4(2)
Article 4(3) Article 4(4)
Article 9(3) Article 9(4)
Article 4(5)
Article 9(5)
Article 4(6)
(a) to (f)
Article 25(4)
Article 11, points (a) to (f)
| — | Article 11, points (g) to (k) |
| Article 5(1), points (g) and (h) | — |
| Article 6 | Article 12 |
| Article 7 | Article 13 |
| Article 8 | Article 14 |
| Article 9 | Article 15 |
| Article 10 | Article 16 |
| Article 11(1) to (3) | Article 17(1) to (3) |
| Article 11(4) | Article 17(5) |
| Article 11(5) Article 12 | Article 17(4) Article 18 |
| Article 13 | Article 23 |
| Article 14 | — |
| Article 15 | Article 27 |
| Article 16 | Article 28(1) and (2) |
| — | Article 28(3) |
| Article 17 | Article 37 |
| Article 18 | Article 29(1), (2), (4) to (10) and (12) to (15) |
| — | Article 29(3) and (11) |
| Article 19 | Article 30 |
| — | Articles 31 to 36 |
| Article 20 | — |
| Article 21 | Article 39(1) and (2) |
| Article 22 | — |
| Article 23 | — |
| Article 24(1) and (2) | Article 40(1) and (2) |
| — | Article 40(3) to (8) | ||
| Article 25 | Article 41 | ||
| Article 26 | Article 42 | ||
| — | Articles 43 to 45 | ||
| Article 27 | Article 46 | ||
| Regulation 407/2002/EC | This Regulation | ||
| Article 2 | Article 24 | ||
| Article 3 | Article 25(1) to (3) | ||
| — Article 4 | Article 25(4) and (5) Article 26 | ||
| Article 5(1) | Article 3(3) | ||
| Annex I | Annex I | ||
| Annex II | — |
f
ANNEX
Correlation Table
| Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 | This Regulation |
| Article 1(1) | Article 1(1)(a) and (b) |
| Article 1(2) | Article 1(1)(c) |
| Article 1(3) | - |
| - | Article 1(3) |
| - | Article 2(1) to (4) |
| Article 2(1), introductory wording | Article 3(1), introductory wording |
| Article 2(1)(a) and (b) | Article 3(1)(a) and (b) |
| - | Article 3(1)(c) |
| Article 2(1)(c) | Article 3(1)(d) |
| Article 2(1)(d) | Article 3(1)(e) |
| Article 2(1)(e) | Article 3(1)(f) |
| Article 2(1)(f) | Article 3(1)(g) |
| Article 2(1)(g) | Article 3(1)(h) |
| Article 2(1)(h) | Article 3(1)(i) |
| Article 2(1)(i) | Article 3(1)(j) |
| Article 2(1)(j) | Article 3(1)(k) |
| Article 2(1)(k) | Article 3(1)(l) |
| Article 2(1)(l) | Article 3(1)(m) |
| - | Article 3(1)(n) |
| - | Article 3(1)(0) |
| Article 2(2), (3) and (4) | Article 3(2), (3) and (4) |
| Article 3(1) to (4) | Article 4(1) to (4) |
Article 4(1), first and second subparagraph
Article 4(1), third subparagraph
Article 4(2)
Article 4(3)
Article 4(4)
Article 5
Article 6
Article 7
Article 8(1)(a) to(i)
-
Article 8(2)
-
Article 9(1)
Article 9(2)
Article 9(3)
Article 9(4)
Article 9(5)
-
Article 10(a) and (b)
Article 10(c)
Article 10(d)
Article 10 (e)
Article 11(a)
Article 11(b)
Article 11(c)
Article 11(d)
Article 4(5) Article 5(1) Article 5(2) Article 5(3) Article 5(4) Article 5(5) Article 6 Article 7 Article 8
Article 9(1)(a) to (i) Article 9(1)j) and (h) Article 9(2) Article 9(3) Article 10(1) Article 10(2)
Article 10(6) Article 11(a) and (b) Article 11(c) Article 11(d) Article 11(e) Article 12(a) Article 12(b) Article 12(c) Article 12(d)
Article 11(f) Article 11(g) Article 11(h) Article 11(i) Article 11(j) Article 11 (k)
Article 12 Article 13 Article 14(1) Article 14(2) Article 14(2)(a) Article 14(2)(b) Article 14(2)(c) Article 14(2)(d) Article 14(2)(e) Article 14(2)(f) Article 14(2)(g)
Article 12 (f) Article 12(g) Article 12(h) Article 12(i) Article 12(j) Article 12(k) Article 12(l) Article 12(m) Article 12(n) Article 12(0) Article 12(p) Article (q) Article 12(r) Article 12(s)
Article 13(1) Article 13(2) Article 13(2)(a) Article 13(2)(b) Article 13(2)(c) Article 13(2)(d) Article 13(2)(e) Article 13(2)(f) Article 13(2)(g) Article 13(2)(h) Article 13(2)(i)
Article 14(3) Article 14(4) Article 14(5)
Article 15 Article 16 Article 17(1) Article 17(1)(a) Article 17(1)(b) Article 17(1(c) Article 17(2)
Article 13(2)(k) Article 13(2)(l) Article 13(2)(m) Article 13(3) Article 13(4) Article 13(5) Article 13(6) Article 13(7)
Article 14(1)
Article 14(2) Article 14(2)(a) Article 14(2)(b) Article 14(2)(c) Article 14(2)(d) Article 14(2)(e) Article 14(2)(f) Article 14(2)(g) Article 14(2)(h) Article 14(2)(i) Article 14(2)(j) Article 14(2)(k)
Article 17(3) Article 17(4) Article 17(5)
Article 18(1) Article 18(2) Article 19(3)
Article 19(1) Article 19(2) Article 19(3) Article 19(4) -Article 20(1)
Article 14(2)(m) Article 14(3) Article 14(4) Article 14(5) Article 14(6) Article 15(1) Article 15(2) Article 15(3) Article 15(4) Article 16(1) to (5) Article 17(1) Article 17(2) Article 17(3) Article 17(4) Article 18(1) Article 18(2) Article 19(1) Article 19(2) Article 19(3) Article 19(4) Article 19(5) Article 20(1) Article 20(2) Article 20(3) Article 20(4) Article 20(5) Article 21(1)
Article 20(2) Article 21(1)(a) to (c) Article 21(2) Article 21(3) Article 22(1) Article 22(2) Article 23(1)(a) to (e) Article 23(2) Article 23(3) Article 23(4)(1)to (c) Article 24 Article 25(1) to (5) -
Article 26 Article 27 Article 28 Article 29(1) to (e)
Article 29(2) Article 29(3) Article 29(4) to (15)
Article 21(2) Article 22(1)(a) to (c) Article 22(2) Article 22(3) Article 23(1) Article 23(2) Article 24(1)(a) to (e) Article 24(2) Article 24(3) Article 24(4)(1) to (c) Article 25 Article 26(1) to (6) Article 26(6) Article 27 Article 28 Article 29 Article 30 (1) to (e) Article 30(1)(f) Article 30(1)(g) Article 30(2) Article 30(3) -
Article 31(1) Article 31(2) Article 31(3) Article 31(4) Article 31(5)
Article 30 Article 31 Article 32 Article 33(1) Article 33(2) Article 33(3) Article 33(4) Article 33(5) Article 34(1) Article 34(2)(a) to (k) -
Article 34(3) Article 34(4) Article 35(1) Article 35(2) Article 35(3)
Article 36(1) Article 36(2)(a) to (h) Article 36 (3) Article 37 Article 38
Article 31(7) Article 31(8) Article 32 Article 33 Article 34 Article 35(1) Article 35(2) Article 35(3) Article 35(4) -
Article 36(1) Article 36(2)(a) to (k) Article 36(2)(1) to (n) Article 36(3) Article 36(4) Article 37(1) Article 37(2) Article 37(3) Article 37(4) Article 38(1) Article 38(2) Article 38(3) Article 39(1) Article 39(2)(a) to (h) Article 39(3) Article 40 -
Article 40(1) Article 40(2) Article 40(3) Article 40(4) Article 40(5) Article 40(6) Article 40(7) Article 40(8) -
Article 41 Article 42 Article 43 Article 44 Article 45 Article 46 Annex I Annex II Annex III
Article 42(1) Article 42(2) Article 42(3) Article 42(4) Article 42(5) Article 42(6) Article 42(7) Article 42(8) Article 42(9) Article 43 Article 44 Article 45 -
Article 46 Article 47 Annex I -Annex II
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the establishment of Eurodac for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of [Regulation (EU) No 604/2013] establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, for identifying an irregular third-country national or stateless person and on requests for the comparison with Eurodac data by Member States' law enforcement authorities and Europol for law enforcement purposes (recast)
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned in the ABM/ABB structure46
Policy area: Migration and Home Affairs (title 18) Activity: Asylum and Migration
1.3. Nature of the proposal/initiative
D The proposal/initiative relates to a new action
D The proposal/initiative relates to a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action
H The proposal/initiative relates to the extension of an existing action
D The proposal/initiative relates to an action redirected towards a new action
1.4. Objective(s)
1.4.1. The Commissions multiannual strategic objective(s) targeted by the proposal/initiative
In the European Agenda on Migration (COM(2015)240 final) the Commission announced that it will have to evaluate the Dublin system and determine whether a revision of the legal parameters of Dublin will be needed to achieve a fairer distribution of asylum seekers in Europe. The Commission also proposed to look into the possibility of adding additional biometric identifiers to EURODAC, such a facial images and the use of facial recognition software.
The refugee crisis has exposed significant structural weaknesses and shortcomings in the design and implementation of European asylum and migration policy, including the Dublin and EURODAC systems, which prompted calls for reform.
On 6 April in its Communication "Towards a reform of the Common European Asylum System and enhancing legal avenues to Europe" (COM(2016) 197 final) the Commission considered it a priority to bring forward a reform of the Dublin Regulation and establish a sustainable and fair system for determining the Member State responsible for asylum seekers ensuring a high degree of solidarity and a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States by proposing a corrective allocation mechanism.
As part of this, the Commission considered that EURODAC should be reinforced to reflect changes to the Dublin mechanism and to make sure that it continues to provide the
46
fingerprint evidence it needs to function. It was also considered that EURODAC could contribute to the fight against irregular migration by storing fingerprint data under all categories and allowing comparisons to be made with all stored data for that purpose.
1.4.2. Specific objective(s) and ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned
DG HOME AMP Specific objective No 1: To strengthen and develop all aspects of the Common European Asylum System, including its external dimension.
ABM/ABB activity(ies) concerned: Activity 18 03: Asylum and Migration.
Specific objective No 1: Eurodac functional system evolution
Specific objective No 2: Eurodac database capacity upgrade
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
The proposal will aim to enhance the identification of irregular third-country nationals within the EU as well as to ensure the effective implementation of the revised Dublin Regulation by providing fingerprint evidence to determine the Member State responsible for examining an application of international protection.
This proposal aims to assist Member States to ensure that an applicant for international protection will have their application examined by a single Member State and will reduce the scope of abuse of the asylum system by deterring “asylum shopping” within the EU.
Member States will also benefit from being able to identify irregular third-country nationals illegally staying in the EU by storing their personal data and indicating the first country through which they entered or where they may also been staying illegally. The information stored at EU level will in turn assist a Member State to re-document a third-country national with a view to returning them to their country of origin or a third-country to which they will be readmitted.
Many applicants for international protection and third-country nationals arriving irregularly to the European Union travel with families and in many cases with very young children. Being able to identify these children with the help of fingerprints and facial images will help to identify them in cases where they are separated from their families by allowing a Member State to follow up a line of inquiry where a fingerprint match indicates that they were present in another Member State. It would also strengthen the protection of unaccompanied minors who do not always formally seek international protection and who abscond from care institutions or child social services to which their care has been assigned. Under the current legal and technical framework their identity cannot be established. Thus the EURODAC system could be used to register children from third-countries where they are found undocumented within the EU to help keep track of them and prevent them from ending up in scenarios of exploitation.
1.4.4. Indicators of results and impact
Specify the indicators for monitoring implementation of the proposal/initiative.
During the upgrading of the Central System
After the approval of the draft proposal and the adoption of the technical specifications the recast EURODAC Central System will be upgraded in terms of capacity and througput for transmission from the Member States’ National Access Points. eu-LISA will coordinate the project management of upgrading the Central System and the national systems at EU level and the integration of the National Uniform Interface (NUI) carried out by Member States at national level.
Specific Objective: Ready for operations when the amended Dublin Regulation will go live.
Indicator: In order to go live, eu-LISA has notified the successful completion of a comprehensive test of the EURODAC Central System which shall be conducted by the Agency together with the Member States.
Once the new Central System is operational
Once the EURODAC system is operational eu-LISA shall ensure that systems are in place to monitor the functioning of the system against objectives. At the end of each year eu-
on the activities of the Central System, including on its technical functioning and security. The annual report shall include information on the management and performance of Eurodac against pre-defined quantitative indicators for its objectives.
By 2020, eu-LISA should conduct a study on the technical feasibility of adding facial recognition software to the Central System that ensures reliable and accurate results following a comparison of facial image data.
By 20 July 2018 and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of Eurodac, examining the results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, including whether law enforcement access has led to indirect discrimination against persons covered by this Regulation, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale and any implications for future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council.
Each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of the comparison of fingerprint data with EURODAC data for law enforcement purposes, containing statistics on the number of requests made and hits received.
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term
(1) Determining the Member State responsible under the amended Dublin Regulation proposal.
(2) Control the identity of irregular third-country nationals to and within the EU for the purposes of re-documentation and return and identifying vulnerable third-country nationals such as children who often fall victim to smuggling.
(3) The fight against international criminality, terrorism and other security threats is reinforced.
1.5.2. Added value of EU involvement
No Member State alone is able to cope on its own with irregular immigration or deal with all the asylum applications made within the EU. As has been witnessed in the EU for many years, a person may gain entry to the EU via the external borders, but not declare themselves at a designated border crossing point. This has been the case in particular in 2014-2015 where over one million irregular migrants arrived to the EU via the Central and Southern Mediterranean routes. Similarly, 2015 witnessed onward movements from those countries situated at the external borders to other Member States. The monitoring of compliance with EU rules and procedures such as the Dublin procedure therefore cannot be done by Member States acting alone. In an area without internal borders, action against irregular immigration should be undertaken in common. Considering all this, the EU is better placed than Member States to take the appropriate measures.
The use of the three existing EU large-scale IT systems (SIS, VIS and Eurodac) brings benefits to border management. Better information on cross border movements of third country nationals at EU level would help establish a factual basis to develop and adapt the EU migration policy. Therefore, an amendment of the EURODAC Regulation is also required in order to add an additional purpose thereto, namely allow access for the purpose of controlling illegal migration to and secondary movements of irregular migrants within
the EU. This objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States on their own, since such amendment can only be proposed by the Commission.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
The main lessons learnt from upgrading the Central System following the adoption of the first recast EURODAC Regulation48 was the importance of early project management by Member States and ensuring that the project of upgrading the national connection was managed against milestones. Even though a rigid project management schedule was set by eu-LISA for both upgrading the Central System and Member States national connections, a number of Member States failed or risked connecting to the Central System by 20 July 2015 (two years after adoption of the Regulation).
In the Lessons Learnt workshop following the upgrading of the Central System in 2015, Member States also flagged that a roll-out phase was needed for the next upgrade of the Central System to ensure that all Member States could manage to connect to the Central System on time.
Alternative solutions were found for those Member States that were late to connect to the Central System in 2015. These included eu-LISA lending a National Access Point/ Fingerprint Image Transmission (NAP/FIT) solution to one Member State that was used for testing simulations by the Agency, because the Member State in question had failed to secure the necessary funding to begin their procurement procedure shortly after the adoption of the EURODAC Regulation. Two other Member States had to resort to using an ‘in-house’ solution for their connection before installing their procured NAP/FIT solutions.
The use of a Framework Contract to provide functionalities and provision of maintenance services for the EURODAC system was established by eu-LISA and an external Contractor. Many Member States used this framework contract to procure a standardised NAP/FIT solution, which was deemed to have made savings and avoided the need for national procurement procedures. A framework contract of this sort should be considered again for the future upgrade.
1.5.4. Compatibility and possible synergy with other appropriate instruments
This proposal should be seen as part of the continuous development of the Dublin Regulation49, the Commission’s Communication "Towards a reform of the Common European Asylum System and enhancing legal avenues to Europe"50, and in particular the Commission’s Communication on Stronger and Smarter Information Systems for Borders and Security51, as well as in conjunction with the ISF borders52, as part of the MFF and the establishing Regulation of eu-LISA53.
50
52
53
OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p.1
Regulation (Eu) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the
criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for
international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person
(recast). OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p31.
COM(2016) 197 final.
COM(2016) 205 final
Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as
part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa and
repealing Decision No 574/2007/EC, OJ L150, 20.5.2014, p.143
Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011
48
49
51
Within the Commission DG HOME is the Directorate General responsible for the establishment of EURODAC.
development and operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice other than those referred to in paragraph 2, only if so provided by relevant legislative instruments…", OJ L
1.6. Duration and financial impact
D Proposal/initiative of limited duration
- D Proposal/initiative in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
- D Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY \Zi Proposal/initiative of unlimited duration
- Implementation with a start-up period from 2017 to 2020,
- followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Management mode(s) planned54
\Zi Direct management by the Commission through
- H by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;
- D executive agencies
D Shared management with the Member States
\Zi Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:
D international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
Dthe EIB and the European Investment Fund;
\Zi bodies referred to in Articles 208 and 209;
D public law bodies;
D bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that they provide adequate financial guarantees;
D bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the implementation of a public-private partnership and that provide adequate financial guarantees;
D persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
Comments
The Commission will be responsible for the overall management of the action and eu-LISA will be responsible for the development, operation and maintenance of the system.
54
2. MANAGEMENTMEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The rules on monitoring and evaluation of the Eurodac system are foreseen in Article 40 of the proposal:
Annual report: monitoring and evaluation
1. eu-LISA shall submit to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the European Data Protection Supervisor an annual report on the activities of the Central System, including on its technical functioning and security. The annual report shall include information on the management and performance of Eurodac against pre-defined quantitative indicators for the objectives referred to in paragraph 2.
2. eu-LISA shall ensure that procedures are in place to monitor the functioning of the Central System against objectives relating to output, cost-effectiveness and quality of service.
3. For the purposes of technical maintenance, reporting and statistics, eu-LISA shall have access to the necessary information relating to the processing operations performed in the Central System.
3a. By [2020] eu-LISA shall conduct a study on the technical feasibility of adding facial recognition software to the Central System for the purposes of comparing facial images. The study shall evaluate the reliability and accuracy of the results produced from facial recognition software for the purposes of EURODAC and shall make any necessary recommendations prior to the introduction of the facial recognition technology to the Central System.
4. By XX/XX/XX and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of Eurodac, examining the results achieved against objectives and the impact on fundamental rights, including whether law enforcement access has led to indirect discrimination against persons covered by this Regulation, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale and any implications for future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation to the European Parliament and the Council.
5. Member States shall provide eu-LISA and the Commission with the information necessary to draft the annual report referred to in paragraph 1.
6. eu-LISA, Member States and Europol shall provide the Commission with the information necessary to draft the overall evaluation provided for in paragraph 4. This information shall not jeopardise working methods or include information that reveals sources, staff members or investigations of the designated authorities.
7. While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reports on the effectiveness of the comparison of fingerprint data with Eurodac data for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on:
— the exact purpose of the comparison, including the type of terrorist offence or serious criminal offence,
— grounds given for reasonable suspicion,
— the reasonable grounds given not to conduct comparison with other Member States under Decision 2008/615/JHA, in accordance with Article 20(1) of this Regulation,
— number of requests for comparison,
— the number and type of cases which have ended in successful identifications, and
— the need and use made of the exceptional case of urgency, including those cases where that urgency was not accepted by the ex post verification carried out by the verifying authority.
Member States' and Europol annual reports shall be transmitted to the Commission by 30 June of the subsequent year.
8. On the basis of Member States and Europol annual reports provided for in paragraph 7 and in addition to the overall evaluation provided for in paragraph 4, the Commission shall compile an annual report on law enforcement access to Eurodac and shall transmit it to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Data Protection Supervisor.
2.2. Management and control system
2.2.1. Risk(s) identified
The following risks are identified:
1) Difficulties for eu-LISA to manage the development of this system in parallel to development related to other more complicated systems (Entry-Exit system, AFIS for SIS II, VIS, …) taking place within the same time period.
2) The upgrade Eurodac needs to be integrated with the national IT systems which need to be fully aligned with central requirements. The discussions with Member States to ensure uniformity in the usage of the system may introduce delays in the development.
2.2.2. Control method(s) envisaged
The Agency’s accounts will be submitted for the approval of the Court of Auditors, and subject to the discharge procedure. The Commission’s Internal Audit Service will carry out audits in cooperation with the Agency's internal auditor.
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) 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 investigation sin relation to the prevention of fraud, corruption and any illegal activity detrimental to the Union's interests was adopted on 28 June 2012.
DG HOME's fraud prevention and detection strategy will apply.
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIALIMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) affected
• Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | Budget line | Type of expenditure | Contribution | |||
| Heading 3 - Security and Citizenship | Diff./Non-diff.55 | from EFTA countries 56 | from candidate countries57 | from third countries | within the meaning of Article 21(2)(b) of the Financial Regulation | |
| 3 | 18.0303 – European fingerprint database (Eurodac) | Diff. | NO | NO | NO | NO |
| 3 | 18.0207 – European Agnecy for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) | Diff. | NO | NO | YES* | NO |
* eu-LISA receives contributions from the countries associated with the Schengen Agreement (NO, IS, CH, LI)
55 56 57
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans.
3.2. Estimated impact on expenditure
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on expenditure
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | 3 | Security and Citizenship |
| eu-LISA | Year 201758 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | ||||
| Title 1: Staff expenditure | Commitments | (1) | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 1,072 | |||
| Payments | (2) | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 1,072 | ||||
| Title 2: Infrastructure and operating expenditure | Commitments | (1a) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Payments | (2a) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Title 3: Operational expenditure * | Commitments | (3a) | 11,330 | 11,870 | 5,600 | 0 | 28,800 | |||
| Payments | (3b) | 7,931 | 8,309 | 3,920 | 8,640 | 28,800 | ||||
| TOTAL appropriations for eu-LISA | Commitments | =1+ 1a +3a | 11,598 | 12,138 | 5,868 | 0,268 | 29,872 | |||
| Payments | =2+2a +3b | 8,199 | 8,577 | 4,188 | 8,908 | 29,872 |
* The Impact assessment performed by eu-LISA foresees a continuous increase of the traffic rates as during the last months of 2015 before the border close along the west Balkan route.
* The potential costs for DubliNet upgrades and system operation are included in the Title 3 total.
58
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.
EN
100
EN
| Heading of multiannual financial framework | 5 | ‘Administrative expenditure’ |
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year 2017 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | ||||
| DG: Migration and Home Affairs | |||||||||
| • Human Resources | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 1,608 | ||||
| • Other administrative expenditure | |||||||||
| TOTAL DG Migration and Home Affairs | Appropriations | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 1,608 |
| TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 5 of the multiannual financial framework | (Total commitments = Total payments) | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 1,608 |
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year 201759 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | ||||
| TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 5 of the multiannual financial framework | Commitments | 12,000 | 12,540 | 6,270 | 0,670 | 31,480 | |||
| Payments | 8,601 | 8,979 | 4,590 | 9,310 | 31,480 |
There is no Europol related costs since Europol accesses Eurodac via the Dutch National Interface to Eurodac.
59
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.
EN
101
EN
3.2.2. Estimated impact on eu-LISA s appropriations
- D The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
- H The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Indicate objectives and outputs ■0 | Year 2017 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | TOTAL | |||||||||||
| OUTPUTS | |||||||||||||||||
| Type60 | Average cost | Cost | Cost | Cost | Cost | Cost | Cost | Cost | Total No | Total cost | |||||||
| SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 161 Eurodac functional system evolution | |||||||||||||||||
| - Output | Contractor * | 0,130 | 0,670 | 0 | 0 | 0,800 | |||||||||||
| Subtotal for specific objective No 1 | 0,130 | 0,670 | 0 | 0 | 0,800 | ||||||||||||
| SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 Eurodac database capacity upgrade | |||||||||||||||||
| - Output | Hardware, Software ** | 11,200 | 11,200 | 5,600 | 0 | 28,000 | |||||||||||
| Subtotal for specific objective No 2 | 11,200 | 11,200 | 5,600 | 0 | 28,000 | ||||||||||||
| TOTAL COST | 11,330 | 11,870 | 5,600 | 0 | 28,800 |
* All contractual costs for the functional updates are split between the first 2 years with the biggest part of the budget in the 2nd year (following acceptance)
** Capacity payments is split within the 3 years as 40%, 40%, 20%
60 Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
61 As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
EN
102
EN
3.2.3. Estimated impact on eu-LISA's human resources 3.2.3.1. Summary
- D The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an administrative nature
- H The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year
2017 62
Year
2018
Year
2019
Year
2020
Enter as many years as necessary to
show the duration of the impact (see
point 1.6)
TOTAL
| Officials (AD Grades) | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 1,072 | |||
| Officials (AST grades) | ||||||||
| Contract staff | ||||||||
| Temporary staff | ||||||||
| Seconded National Experts |
| TOTAL | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 0,268 | 1,072 |
Estimated impact on the staff (additional FTE) – establishment plan of eu-LISA
| Posts (establishment plan) | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
| Baseline - Communication63 | 115 | 113 | 113 | 113 |
| Additional posts | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Additional posts EES | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
| Total | 131 | 129 | 129 | 129 |
62 Year 2017 is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts.
63 COM(2013) 519 final: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the
Recruitment is planned for January 2017. All staff must be available as of early 2017 in order to allow starting the development in due time with a view of ensuring an entry into operations of Eurodac in 2017. The 2 new Temporary Agents (TAs) are needed to cover needs both for the project implementation as well as for operational support and maintenance after deployment to production. These resources will be used:
• To support the project implementation as project team members, including activities as: the definition of requirements and technical specifications, cooperation and support to MS during the implementation, updates of the Interface Control Document (ICD), the follow-up of the contractual deliveries, project testing activities (including MS test coordination), documentation delivery and updates etc.
• To support transition activities for putting the system into operations in cooperation with the contractor (releases follow-up, operational process updates, trainings (including MS training activities) etc.
• To support the longer term activities, definition of specifications, contractual preparations in case there is reengineering of the system (e.g. due to Image recognition) or in case the new Eurodac Maintenance in Working Order (MWO) contract will need to be amended to cover additional changes (from technical and budgetary perspective)
• To enforce the second level support following Entry into Operation (EiO), during continuous maintenance and operations.
It has to be noted that the two new resources (FTE TA) will act on top of the internal team capabilities which will be as well utilised for the project/contractual and financial follow-up/ operational activities. The use of TAs will provide adequate duration and continuity of the contracts to ensure business continuity and use of the same specialized people for operational support activities after the project conclusion. On top the operational support activities require access to Production environment that cannot be assigned to contractors or external staff.
3.2.3.2. Estimated requirements of human resources for the parent DG
- D The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
- HThe proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:
Estimate to be expressed in full amounts (or at most to one decimal place)
| Year 2017 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | |||
| • Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) | |||||||
| 18 01 01 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | |||
| XX 01 01 02 (Delegations) |
TOTAL
1,608
| XX 01 05 01 (Indirect research) | |||||||||
| 10 01 05 01 (Direct research) | |||||||||
| • External staff (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)64 | |||||||||
| XX 01 02 01 (AC, END, INT from the ‘global envelope’) | |||||||||
| XX 01 02 02 (AC, AL, END, INT and JED in the Delegations) | |||||||||
| XX 01 04 yf5 | - at Headquarters66 | ||||||||
| - in Delegations | |||||||||
| XX 01 05 02 (AC, END, INT – Indirect research) | |||||||||
| 10 01 05 02 (AC, END, INT – Direct research) | |||||||||
| Other budget lines (specify) | |||||||||
| TOTAL | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 0,402 | 1,608 |
18 is the policy area or budget title concerned.
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary staff
External staff
Various tasks in relation to Eurodac, e.g. in the context of Commission opinion on the annual work programme and monitoring of its implementation, supervision of the preparation of the Agency's budget and monitoring of its implementation, assisting the Agency in developing its activities in line with EU policies including by participating in experts meetings, etc.
Description of the calculation of cost for FTE units should be included in the Annex V, section 3.
65 66
AC = Contract Staff; AL = Local Staff; END = Seconded National Expert; INT = agency staff; JED =
Junior Experts in Delegations.
Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational appropriations (former ‘BA’ lines).
Mainly for the Structural Funds, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and
64
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
- \Zi The proposal/initiative is compatible the current multiannual financial framework. D The proposal/initiative will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the multiannual financial framework.
D The proposal/initiative requires application of the flexibility instrument or revision of the multiannual financial framework67.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
- H The proposal/initiative does not provide for co-financing by third parties.
- D The proposal/initiative provides for the co-financing estimated below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Year 2017 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | 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 co-financed |
See Articles 11 and 17 of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 laying down the
67
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
- D The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
- H The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
D on own resources
\Zi on miscellaneous revenue
EUR million (to three decimal places)
| Budget revenue line: | Appropriation s available for the current financial year | Impact of the proposal/initiative68 | ||||||
| Year 2017 | Year 2018 | Year 2019 | Year 2020 | Enter as many years as necessary to show the duration of the impact (see point 1.6) | ||||
| Article …………. | 0,492 | 0,516 | 0,243 | 0,536 |
For miscellaneous ‘assigned’ revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Specify the method for calculating the impact on revenue.
The budget shall include a contribution from countries associated with the Eurodac related measures as laid down in the respective agreements *. The estimates provided are purely indicative and are based on calculations for revenues for the implementation of the Eurodac system from the States that currently contribute 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 2015 figures from EUROSTAT which are subject to considerable variation depending on the economic situation of the participating States.
* Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway (OJ L 93, 3.4.2001, p. 40).
Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 5).
Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (OJ L 160 18.6.2011 p. 39)
Protocol between the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland (2006/0257 CNS, concluded on 24.10.2008, publication in OJ pending) and Protocol to the Agreement between the Community, Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State, Iceland and Norway (OJ L 93, 3.4.2001).
As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net
68