5.6.2008 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 146/19 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 10 April 2008 on the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research organisations (notified under document number C(2008) 1329) (Text with EEA relevance) (2008/416/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 165 thereof, Whereas: (1) When relaunching the Lisbon Strategy in 2005, the Heads of State or Government stressed the key role that better links between public research organisations, including universities, and industry can play in facilitating the circulation and use of ideas in a dynamic knowledge society and in enhancing competitiveness and welfare. (2) An effort should be made to better convert knowledge into socioeconomic benefits. Therefore, public research organisations need to disseminate and to more effectively exploit publicly funded research results with a view to translating them into new products and services. Means to realise this include in particular academia-industry collaborations — collaborative or contract research conducted or funded jointly with the private sector — licensing and the creation of spin-offs. (3) Effectively exploiting publicly funded research results depends on the proper management of intellectual property (i.e. knowledge in the broadest sense, encompassing e.g. inventions, software, databases and micro-organisms, whether or not they are protected by legal instruments such as patents), on the development of an entrepreneurial culture and associated skills within public research organisations, as well as on better communication and interaction between the public and private sector. (4) The active engagement of public research organisations in intellectual property management and knowledge transfer is essential for generating socioeconomic benefits, and for attracting students, scientists and further research funding. (5) Member States have in recent years taken initiatives to facilitate knowledge transfer at national level, but significant discrepancies between national regulatory frameworks, policies and practices, as well as varying standards in the management of intellectual property within public research organisations, prevent or hamper transnational knowledge transfer across Europe and the realisation of the European Research Area. (6) Following the 2007 Commission Communication (1), setting out approaches for a common European framework for knowledge transfer, the European Council therefore invited the Commission, in June 2007, to develop guidance on the management of intellectual property by public research organisations in the form of a Recommendation to Member States. (7) This Recommendation seeks to provide Member States and their regions with policy guidelines for the development or updating of national guidelines and frameworks, and public research organisations with a Code of Practice, in order to improve the way public research organisations manage intellectual property and knowledge transfer. (8) Collaboration in the field of research and development as well as knowledge transfer activities between the Community and third countries should be based on clear and uniform recommendations and practices that ensure equitable and fair access to intellectual property generated through international research collaborations, to the mutual benefit of all partners involved. The attached Code of Practice should be used as a reference in that context. (9) A number of good practices have been identified that should help Member States to implement this Recommendation. It is for each Member State to choose the procedures and practices best designed to ensure that the principles of this Recommendation are followed, having regard to what would be most effective in the context of that Member State, since practices that are effective in one Member State may not be as effective in another. Existing guidance provided at Community and OECD level should also be taken into account. (10) The Commission and the Member States should monitor the implementation of this Recommendation and its impact, and foster the exchange of good practices regarding knowledge transfer, HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT MEMBER STATES SHOULD: 1. ensure that all public research organisations define knowledge transfer as a strategic mission; 2. encourage public research organisations to establish and publicise policies and procedures for the management of intellectual property in line with the Code of Practice set out in Annex I; 3. support the development of knowledge transfer capacity and skills in public research organisations, as well as measures to raise the awareness and skills of students — in particular in the area of science and technology — regarding intellectual property, knowledge transfer and entrepreneurship; 4. promote the broad dissemination of knowledge created with public funds, by taking steps to encourage open access to research results, while enabling, where appropriate, the related intellectual property to be protected; 5. cooperate and take steps to improve the coherence of their respective ownership regimes as regards intellectual property rights in such a way as to facilitate cross-border collaborations and knowledge transfer in the field of research and development; 6. use the principles outlined in this Recommendation as a basis for introducing or adapting national guidelines and legislation concerning the management of intellectual property and knowledge transfer by public research organisations, as well as for concluding agreements concerning research cooperation with third countries, or for any other measures to promote knowledge transfer, or when creating new related policies or funding schemes, while observing State aid rules; 7. take steps to ensure the widest possible implementation of the Code of Practice, whether directly or through the rules laid down by national and regional research funding bodies; 8. ensure equitable and fair treatment of participants from Member States and third countries in international research projects regarding the ownership of and access to intellectual property rights, to the mutual benefit of all partners involved; 9. designate a national contact point, the tasks of which should include the coordination of measures regarding knowledge transfer between public research organisations and the private sector, including tackling transnational issues, in liaison with similar contact points in other Member States; 10. examine and make use of the best practices set out in Annex II, taking into account the national context; 11. inform the Commission by 15 July 2010 and every two years thereafter of measures taken on the basis of this Recommendation, as well as their impact. Done at Brussels, 10 April 2008. For the Commission Janez POTOČNIK Member of the Commission (1) COM(2007) 182. ANNEX I Code of Practice for universities and other public research organisations concerning the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities This Code of Practice consists of three main sets of principles. The principles for an internal intellectual property (hereinafter IP) policy constitute the basic set of principles which public research organisations should implement in order to effectively manage the intellectual property resulting from their — own or collaborative — activities in the field of research and development. The principles for a knowledge transfer (hereinafter KT) policy complement those relating to IP policy by focusing more specifically on the active transfer and exploitation of such intellectual property, regardless of whether or not it is protected by IP rights. The principles for collaborative and contract research are meant to concern all kinds of research activities conducted or funded jointly by a public research organisation and the private sector, including in particular collaborative research (where all parties carry out R&D tasks) and contract research (where R&D is contracted out to a public research organisation by a private company). Principles for an internal intellectual property policy 1. Develop an IP policy as part of the long-term strategy and mission of the public research organisation, and publicise it internally and externally, while establishing a single responsible contact point. 2. That policy should provide clear rules for staff and students regarding in particular the disclosure of new ideas with potential commercial interest, the ownership of research results, record keeping, the management of conflicts of interest and engagement with third parties. 3. Promote the identification, exploitation and, where appropriate, protection of intellectual property, in line with the strategy and mission of the public research organisation and with a view to maximising socioeconomic benefits. To this end, different strategies may be adopted — possibly differentiated in the respective scientific/technical areas — for instance the ‘public domain’ approach or the ‘open innovation’ approach. 4. Provide appropriate incentives to ensure that all relevant staff play an active role in the implementation of the IP policy. Such incentives should not only be of a financial nature but should also promote career progression, by considering intellectual property and knowledge transfer aspects in appraisal procedures, in addition to academic criteria. 5. Consider the creation of coherent portfolios of intellectual property by the public research organisation — e.g. in specific technological areas — and, where appropriate, the setting-up of patent/IP pools including intellectual property of other public research organisations. This could ease exploitation, through critical mass and reduced transaction costs for third parties. 6. Raise awareness and basic skills regarding intellectual property and knowledge transfer through training actions for students as well as research staff, and ensure that the staff responsible for the management of IP/KT have the required skills and receive adequate training. 7. Develop and publicise a publication/dissemination policy promoting the broad dissemination of research and development results (e.g. through open access publication), while accepting possible delay where the protection of intellectual property is envisaged, although this should be kept to a minimum. Principles for a knowledge transfer policy 8. In order to promote the use of publicly funded research results and maximise their socioeconomic impact, consider all types of possible exploitation mechanisms (such as licensing or spin-off creation) and all possible exploitation partners (such as spin-offs or existing companies, other public research organisations, investors, or innovation support services or agencies), and select the most appropriate ones. 9. While proactive IP/KT policy may generate additional revenues for the public research organisation, this should not be considered the prime objective. 10. Ensure that the public research organisation has access to or possesses professional knowledge transfer services including legal, financial, commercial as well as intellectual property protection and enforcement advisors, in addition to staff with technical background. 11. Develop and publicise a licensing policy, in order to harmonise practices within the public research organisation and ensure fairness in all deals. In particular, transfers of ownership of intellectual property owned by the public research organisation and the granting of exclusive licences (1) should be carefully assessed, especially with respect to non-European third parties. Licences for exploitation purposes should involve adequate compensation, financial or otherwise. 12. Develop and publicise a policy for the creation of spin-offs, allowing and encouraging the public research organisation’s staff to engage in the creation of spin-offs where appropriate, and clarifying long-term relations between spin-offs and the public research organisation. 13. Establish clear principles regarding the sharing of financial returns from knowledge transfer revenues between the public research organisation, the department and the inventors. 14. Monitor intellectual property protection and knowledge transfer activities and related achievements, and publicise these regularly. The research results of the public research organisation, any related expertise and intellectual property rights should be made more visible to the private sector, in order to promote their exploitation. Principles regarding collaborative and contract research (2) 15. The rules governing collaborative and contract research activities should be compatible with the mission of each party. They should take into account the level of private funding and be in accordance with the objectives of the research activities, in particular to maximise the commercial and socioeconomic impact of the research, to support the public research organisation’s objective to attract private research funding, to maintain an intellectual property position that allows further academic and collaborative research, and avoid impeding the dissemination of the R&D results. 16. IP-related issues should be clarified at management level and as early as possible in the research project, ideally before it starts. IP-related issues include allocation of the ownership of intellectual property which is generated in the framework of the project (hereinafter foreground), identification of the intellectual property which is possessed by the parties before starting the project (hereinafter background) and which is necessary for project execution or exploitation purposes, access rights (3) to foreground and background for these purposes, and the sharing of revenues. 17. In a collaborative research project, ownership of the foreground should stay with the party that has generated it, but can be allocated to the different parties on the basis of a contractual agreement concluded in advance, adequately reflecting the parties' respective interests, tasks and financial or other contributions to the project. In the case of contract research the foreground generated by the public research organisation is owned by the private sector party. The ownership of background should not be affected by the project. 18. Access rights (3) should be clarified by the parties as early as possible in the research project, ideally before it starts. Where necessary for the purpose of conducting the research project, or for the exploitation of foreground of a party, access rights to other parties' foreground and background should be available, under conditions which should adequately reflect the parties' respective interests, tasks, and financial and other contributions to the project. (1) With regard to R&D results having several possible application fields, exclusive licences granted without any limitation to a specific field of use should be avoided. Moreover, as a rule, the PRO should reserve adequate rights to facilitate dissemination and further research. (2) When a PRO engages in contract or collaborative research with an industrial partner, the Commission will automatically (i.e. without any notification requirement) consider that no indirect State aid is granted to the industrial partner through the PRO if the conditions set out in the Community Framework for State aid for R&D&I (OJ C 323, 30.12.2006, in particular points 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 thereof) are fulfilled. (3) Access rights refer to rights granted by the parties to each other, as opposed to licences to third parties. They should determine which parties can use which pieces of foreground/background, for research purposes and/or for exploitation purposes, and on what conditions. ANNEX II Identified practices of public authorities that facilitate the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities by universities and other public research organisations Knowledge transfer as a strategic mission of public research organisations 1. Knowledge transfer between universities and industry is made a permanent political and operational priority for all public research funding bodies within a Member State, at both national and regional level. 2. The subject clearly falls within the responsibility of a ministry, which is charged with coordinating knowledge transfer promotion initiatives with other ministries. 3. Each ministry and regional government body that carries out knowledge transfer activities designates an official responsible for monitoring their impact. They meet regularly in order to exchange information and discuss ways to improve knowledge transfer. Policies for managing intellectual property 4. The proper management of intellectual property resulting from public funding is promoted, requiring that it be carried out according to established principles taking into account the legitimate interests of industry (e.g. temporary confidentiality constraints). 5. Research policy promotes reliance on the private sector to help identify technological needs and to foster private investment in research and encourage the exploitation of publicly funded research results. Knowledge transfer capacities and skills 6. Sufficient resources and incentives are available to public research organisations and their staff to engage in knowledge transfer activities. 7. Measures are taken to ensure the availability and facilitate the recruitment of trained staff (such as technology transfer officers) by public research organisations. 8. A set of model contracts is made available, as well as a decision-making tool helping the most appropriate model contract to be selected, depending on a number of parameters. 9. Before establishing new mechanisms to promote knowledge transfer (such as mobility or funding schemes), relevant stakeholder groups, including SMEs and large industry as well as public research organisations, are consulted. 10. The pooling of resources between public research organisations at local or regional level is promoted where these do not have the critical mass of research spending to justify having their own knowledge transfer office or intellectual property manager. 11. Programmes supporting research spin-offs are launched, incorporating entrepreneurship training and featuring strong interaction of public research organisations with local incubators, financiers, business support agencies, etc. 12. Government funding is made available to support knowledge transfer and business engagement at public research organisations, including through hiring experts. Coherence in transnational cooperation 13. In order to promote transnational knowledge transfer and facilitate cooperation with parties from other countries, the owner of intellectual property from publicly funded research is defined by clear rules and this information, together with any funding conditions which may affect the transfer of knowledge, is made easily available. Institutional ownership — as opposed to the ‘professor's privilege’ regime — is considered the default legal regime for intellectual property ownership at public research organisations in most EU Member States. 14. When signing international research cooperation agreements, the terms and conditions relating to projects funded under both countries' schemes provide all participants with similar rights, especially as regards access to intellectual property rights and related use restrictions. Dissemination of knowledge 15. Open access is implemented by public research funding bodies with regard to peer reviewed scientific publications resulting from publicly funded research. 16. Open access to research data is promoted, in line with the OECD Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding, taking into account restrictions linked to commercial exploitation. 17. Archival facilities for research results (such as Internet-based repositories) are developed with public funding in connection with open access policies. Monitoring implementation 18. The necessary mechanisms are put in place to monitor and review progress made by national public research organisations in knowledge transfer activities, e.g. through annual reports of the individual public research organisations. This information, together with best practices, is also made available to other Member States.

Summary: The management of intellectual property by universities and public research organisations The management of intellectual property by universities and public research organisations SUMMARY OF: Recommendation 2008/416/EC on the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research organisations WHAT IS THE AIM OF THE RECOMMENDATION? It aims to improve intellectual property (IP) management and knowledge transfer by universities and public research organisations (PROs) in EU countries. In this recommendation, the European Commission encourages EU countries to introduce policies or guidelines to ensure that publicly-funded scientific research results are used commercially or for further research, to encourage the uptake of innovations. KEY POINTS Universities and PROs should manage their intellectual property to facilitate knowledge transfer, in particular by the granting of licences and the creation of spin-off companies. In order to improve IP management and knowledge by European universities and PROs, this recommendation establishes a number of principles that EU countries are asked to folowwhen preparing their guidelines or rules. In accordance with these principles, the Commission urges EU countries to: make knowledge transfer a priority for universities and PROs; invite universities and PROs to prepare and implement measures regarding intellectual property management in line with the Code of Practice set out in Annex I of the recommendation; encourage the development of capacities and skills in intellectual property, knowledge transfer and entrepreneurial culture within universities and PROs; enable the dissemination of publicly-funded research results, whilst ensuring that intellectual property is adequately protected; cooperate with a view to improving the consistency of their respective schemes with regard to intellectual property, to facilitate collaboration and knowledge transfer on an international level in research and development; use the principles set out in this recommendation as a basis to prepare or adapt guidelines and policies on IP management, knowledge transfer or new funding schemes, or to conclude cooperation agreements with non-EU countries in the field of research; monitor the implementation of the Code of Practice; guarantee equitable and fair treatment for international research projects in terms of intellectual property rights, in the mutual interest of all partners concerned; designate a national contact responsible for the coordination of measures regarding knowledge transfer between public research organisations and the private sector; examine and make use of the best practices set out in Annex II of the recommendation, taking into account the national context; inform the Commission by 15 July 2010 and every 2 years thereafter of measures adopted on the basis of this recommendation, as well as their impact. The Code of Practice for universities and other PROs proposes operational principles for PROs and universities to use when defining or revising their institutional policies. Universities should, in particular, encourage publicly-funded research results to be used and disseminated, whilst allowing intellectual property to be protected. BACKGROUND This recommendation is one of the five strategic initiatives planned by the Commission in 2008 following on from its Green Paper aimed at creating a genuine European Research Area. It is also based on the Commission’s 2007 communication on knowledge transfer. For more information, see: European Research Area (European Commission). MAIN DOCUMENT Commission Recommendation 2008/416/EC of 10 April 2008 on the management of intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities and Code of Practice for universities and other public research organisations (OJ L 146, 5.6.2008, pp. 19–24) last update 16.05.2018


23.6.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 163/17 COUNCIL DECISION of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities’ own resources (2007/436/EC, Euratom) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 269 thereof, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 173 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1), Having regard to the opinion of the Court of Auditors (2), Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (3), Whereas: (1) The European Council meeting in Brussels on 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded, inter alia, that the own resources arrangements should be guided by the overall objective of equity. Those arrangements should therefore ensure, in line with the relevant conclusions of the 1984 Fontainebleau European Council, that no Member State sustains a budgetary burden which is excessive in relation to its relative prosperity. It is therefore appropriate to introduce provisions covering specific Member States. (2) The Communities’ own resources system must ensure adequate resources for the orderly development of the Communities’ policies, subject to the need for strict budgetary discipline. (3) For the purposes of this Decision, gross national income (GNI) should be defined as annual GNI at market prices as provided by the Commission in application of the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community (hereinafter referred to as the ESA 95) in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 (4). (4) In view of the changeover from ESA 79 to ESA 95 for budgetary and own resources purposes, and in order to maintain unchanged the amount of financial resources put at the disposal of the Communities the Commission recalculated, in accordance with Article 3(1) and 3(2) of Council Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom of 29 September 2000 on the system of the European Communities’ own resources (5), the ceiling of own resources and the ceiling for appropriations for commitments, expressed to two decimal places, on the basis of the formula in that Article. The Commission communicated the new ceilings to the Council and the European Parliament on 28 December 2001. The ceiling of own resources was set at 1,24 % of the total GNIs of the Member States at market prices and a ceiling of 1,31 % of the total GNIs of the Member States was set for appropriations for commitments. The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that these ceilings should be maintained at their current levels. (5) In order to maintain unchanged the amount of financial resources put at the disposal of the Communities, it is appropriate to adapt those ceilings expressed in per cent of GNI in case of modifications to the ESA 95 which entail a significant change in the level of GNI. (6) Following the implementation in European Union law of the agreements concluded during the Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations there is no longer any material difference between agricultural duties and customs duties. It is therefore appropriate to remove this distinction from the field of the general budget of the European Union. (7) In the interests of transparency and simplicity, the European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that the uniform rate of call of the Value Added Tax (VAT) resource shall be fixed at 0,30 %. (8) The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden shall benefit from reduced VAT rates of call during the period 2007-2013 and that the Netherlands and Sweden shall benefit from gross reductions in their annual GNI-based contributions during the same period. (9) The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that the correction mechanism in favour of the United Kingdom shall remain, along with the reduced financing of the correction benefiting Germany, Austria, Sweden and the Netherlands. However, after a phasing-in period between 2009 and 2011, the United Kingdom shall participate fully in the financing of the costs of enlargement, except for agricultural direct payments and market-related expenditure, and that part of rural development expenditure originating from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee Section. The calculation of the correction in favour of the United Kingdom shall therefore be adjusted by progressively excluding expenditure allocated to Member States which have acceded to the EU after 30 April 2004, except for the agricultural and rural development expenditure mentioned above. The additional contribution of the United Kingdom resulting from the reduction in allocated expenditure shall not exceed EU-10,5 billion in 2004 prices during the period 2007-2013. In the event of further enlargement before 2013, except for the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, the amount will be adjusted accordingly. (10) The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that point (f) of the second paragraph of Article 4 of Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom regarding the exclusion of the annual pre-accession expenditure in acceding countries from the calculation of the correction in favour of the United Kingdom shall cease to apply at the end of 2013. (11) The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 invited the Commission to undertake a full, wide-ranging review covering all aspects of EU spending, including the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and of resources, including the United Kingdom rebate, and to report in 2008/2009. (12) Provisions should be laid down to cover the changeover from the system laid down by Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom to that introduced by this Decision. (13) The European Council of 15 and 16 December 2005 concluded that this Decision shall take effect on 1 January 2007, HAS LAID DOWN THESE PROVISIONS, WHICH IT RECOMMENDS TO THE MEMBER STATES FOR ADOPTION: Article 1 The Communities shall be allocated own resources in accordance with the rules laid down in the following Articles in order to ensure, in accordance with Article 269 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (hereinafter referred to as the EC Treaty) and Article 173 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (hereinafter referred to as the Euratom Treaty), the financing of the general budget of the European Union. The general budget of the European Union shall, without prejudice to other revenue, be financed wholly from the Communities’ own resources. Article 2 1. Revenue from the following shall constitute own resources entered in the general budget of the European Union: (a) levies, premiums, additional or compensatory amounts, additional amounts or factors, Common Customs Tariff duties and other duties established or to be established by the institutions of the Communities in respect of trade with non-member countries, customs duties on products under the expired Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community as well as contributions and other duties provided for within the framework of the common organisation of the markets in sugar; (b) without prejudice to the second subparagraph of paragraph 4, the application of a uniform rate valid for all Member States to the harmonised VAT assessment bases determined according to Community rules. The assessment base to be taken into account for this purpose shall not exceed 50 % of GNI for each Member State, as defined in paragraph 7; (c) without prejudice to the second subparagraph of paragraph 5, the application of a uniform rate — to be determined pursuant to the budgetary procedure in the light of the total of all other revenue — to the sum of all the Member States’ GNIs. 2. Revenue deriving from any new charges introduced within the framework of a common policy, in accordance with the EC Treaty or the Euratom Treaty, provided that the procedure laid down in Article 269 of the EC Treaty or in Article 173 of the Euratom Treaty has been followed, shall also constitute own resources entered in the general budget of the European Union. 3. Member States shall retain, by way of collection costs, 25 % of the amounts referred to in paragraph 1(a). 4. The uniform rate referred to in paragraph 1(b) shall be fixed at 0,30 %. For the period 2007-2013 only, the rate of call of the VAT resource for Austria shall be fixed at 0,225 %, for Germany at 0,15 % and for the Netherlands and Sweden at 0,10 %. 5. The uniform rate referred to in paragraph 1(c) shall apply to the GNI of each Member State. For the period 2007-2013 only, the Netherlands shall benefit from a gross reduction in its annual GNI contribution of EUR 605 million and Sweden from a gross reduction in its annual GNI contribution of EUR 150 million, measured in 2004 prices. These amounts shall be adjusted to current prices by applying the most recent GDP deflator for the EU expressed in euro, as provided by the Commission, which is available when the preliminary draft budget is drawn up. These gross reductions shall be granted after the calculation of the correction in favour of the United Kingdom and its financing referred to in Articles 4 and 5 of this Decision and shall have no impact thereupon. 6. If, at the beginning of the financial year, the budget has not been adopted, the existing VAT and GNI rates of call shall remain applicable until the entry into force of the new rates. 7. For the purposes of this Decision, GNI shall mean GNI for the year at market prices as provided by the Commission in application of the ESA 95 in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2223/96. Should modifications to the ESA 95 result in significant changes in the GNI as provided by the Commission, the Council, acting unanimously on a proposal of the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, shall decide whether these modifications shall apply for the purposes of this Decision. Article 3 1. The total amount of own resources allocated to the Communities to cover annual appropriations for payments shall not exceed 1,24 % of the sum of all the Member States’ GNIs. 2. The total annual amount of appropriations for commitments entered in the general budget of the European Union shall not exceed 1,31 % of the sum of all the Member States’ GNIs. An orderly ratio between appropriations for commitments and appropriations for payments shall be maintained to guarantee their compatibility and to enable the ceiling pursuant to paragraph 1 to be respected in subsequent years. 3. Should modifications to the ESA 95 result in significant changes in the GNI that apply for the purposes of this Decision, the ceilings for payments and commitments as determined in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be recalculated by the Commission on the basis of the following formula: where t is the latest full year for which data according to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1287/2003 of 15 July 2003 on the harmonisation of gross national income at market prices (GNI Regulation) (6) is available. Article 4 1. The United Kingdom shall be granted a correction in respect of budgetary imbalances. This correction shall be established by: (a) calculating the difference, in the preceding financial year, between: — the percentage share of the United Kingdom in the sum of uncapped VAT assessment bases, and — the percentage share of the United Kingdom in total allocated expenditure; (b) multiplying the difference thus obtained by total allocated expenditure; (c) multiplying the result under (b) by 0,66; (d) subtracting from the result under (c) the effects arising for the United Kingdom from the changeover to capped VAT and the payments referred to in Article 2(1)(c), namely the difference between: — what the United Kingdom would have had to pay for the amounts financed by the resources referred to in Article 2(1)(b) and (c), if the uniform rate had been applied to non-capped VAT bases, and — the payments of the United Kingdom pursuant to Article 2(1)(b) and (c); (e) subtracting from the result under (d) the net gains of the United Kingdom resulting from the increase in the percentage of resources referred to in Article 2(1)(a) retained by Member States to cover collection and related costs; (f) calculating, at the time of each enlargement of the EU, an adjustment to the result under (e) so as to reduce the compensation, thereby ensuring that expenditure which is unabated before enlargement remains so after enlargement. This adjustment shall be made by reducing total allocated expenditure by an amount equivalent to the annual pre-accession expenditure in the acceding countries. All amounts so calculated shall be carried forward to subsequent years and shall be adjusted annually by applying the latest available GDP deflator for the EU expressed in euro, as provided by the Commission. This point shall cease to apply as from the correction to be budgeted for the first time in 2014; (g) adjusting the calculation, by reducing total allocated expenditure by total allocated expenditure in Member States that have acceded to the EU after 30 April 2004, except for agricultural direct payments and market-related expenditure as well as that part of rural development expenditure originating from the EAGGF, Guarantee Section. This reduction shall be phased in progressively according to the schedule below: United Kingdom correction to be budgeted for the first time in the year Percentage of enlargement-related expenditure (as defined above) to be excluded from the calculation of the correction in favour of the United Kingdom 2009 20 2010 70 2011 100 2. During the period 2007-2013 the additional contribution of the United Kingdom resulting from the reduction of allocated expenditure referred to in paragraph (1)(g) shall not exceed EU-10,5 billion, measured in 2004 prices. Each year, the Commission services shall verify whether the cumulated adjustment of the correction exceeds this amount. For the purpose of this calculation, amounts in current prices shall be converted into 2004 prices by applying the latest available GDP deflator for the EU expressed in euro, as provided by the Commission. If the ceiling of EU-10,5 billion is exceeded, the United Kingdom’s contribution shall be reduced accordingly. In the event of further enlargement before 2013, the ceiling of EU-10,5 billion shall be adjusted upwards accordingly. Article 5 1. The cost of the correction shall be borne by the other Member States in accordance with the following arrangements: (a) the distribution of the cost shall first be calculated by reference to each Member State’s share of the payments referred to in Article 2(1)(c), the United Kingdom being excluded and without taking account of the gross reductions in the GNI-based contributions of the Netherlands and Sweden referred to in Article 2(5); (b) it shall then be adjusted in such a way as to restrict the financing share of Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden to one fourth of their normal share resulting from this calculation. 2. The correction shall be granted to the United Kingdom by a reduction in its payments resulting from the application of Article 2(1)(c). The costs borne by the other Member States shall be added to their payments resulting from the application for each Member State of Article 2(1)(c). 3. The Commission shall perform the calculations required for the application of Article 2(5), Article 4 and this Article. 4. If, at the beginning of the financial year, the budget has not been adopted, the correction granted to the United Kingdom and the costs borne by the other Member States as entered in the last budget finally adopted shall remain applicable. Article 6 The revenue referred to in Article 2 shall be used without distinction to finance all expenditure entered in the general budget of the European Union. Article 7 Any surplus of the Communities’ revenue over total actual expenditure during a financial year shall be carried over to the following financial year. Article 8 1. The Communities’ own resources referred to in Article 2(1)(a) shall be collected by the Member States in accordance with the national provisions imposed by law, regulation or administrative action, which shall, where appropriate, be adapted to meet the requirements of Community rules. The Commission shall examine at regular intervals the national provisions communicated to it by the Member States, transmit to the Member States the adjustments it deems necessary in order to ensure that they comply with Community rules and report to the budgetary authority. Member States shall make the resources provided for in Article 2(1)(a), (b) and (c) available to the Commission. 2. The Council shall, in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 279(2) of the EC Treaty and Article 183 of the Euratom Treaty, adopt the provisions necessary to apply this Decision and to make possible the inspection of the collection, the making available to the Commission and payment of the revenue referred to in Articles 2 and 5. Article 9 In the framework of the full, wide-ranging review covering all aspects of EU spending, including the CAP, and of resources, including the United Kingdom rebate, on which it shall report in 2008/2009, the Commission shall undertake a general review of the own resources system. Article 10 1. Subject to paragraph 2, Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom shall be repealed as of 1 January 2007. Any references to the Council Decision of 21 April 1970 on the replacement of financial contributions from Member States by the Communities’ own resources (7), to Council Decision 85/257/EEC, Euratom of 7 May 1985 on the Communities’ system of own resources (8), to Council Decision 88/376/EEC, Euratom of 24 June 1988 on the system of the Communities’ own resources (9), to Council Decision 94/728/EC, Euratom of 31 October 1994 on the system of the European Communities’ own resources (10) or to Decision 2000/597/EC, Euratom shall be construed as references to this Decision. 2. Articles 2, 4 and 5 of Decisions 88/376/EEC, Euratom, 94/728/EC, Euratom and 2000/597/EC, Euratom shall continue to apply to the calculation and adjustment of revenue accruing from the application of a uniform rate valid for all Member States to the VAT base determined in a uniform manner and limited between 50 % and 55 % of the GNP or GNI of each Member State, depending on the relevant year, and to the calculation of the correction of budgetary imbalances granted to the United Kingdom for the years 1988 to 2006. 3. Member States shall continue to retain, by way of collection costs, 10 % of the amounts referred to in Article 2(1)(a) which should have been made available by the Member States before 28 February 2001 in accordance with the applicable Community rules. Article 11 Member States shall be notified of this Decision by the Secretary-General of the Council. Member States shall notify the Secretary-General of the Council without delay of the completion of the procedures for the adoption of this Decision in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. This Decision shall enter into force on the first day of the month following receipt of the last of the notifications referred to in the second subparagraph. It shall take effect on 1 January 2007. Article 12 This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Luxembourg, 7 June 2007. For the Council The President M. GLOS (1) Opinion delivered on 4 July 2006 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (2) OJ C 203, 25.8.2006, p. 50. (3) OJ C 309, 16.12.2006, p. 103. (4) OJ L 310, 30.11.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1267/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 180, 18.7.2003, p. 1). (5) OJ L 253, 7.10.2000, p. 42. (6) OJ L 181, 19.7.2003, p. 1. (7) OJ L 94, 28.4.1970, p. 19. (8) OJ L 128, 14.5.1985, p. 15. (9) OJ L 185, 15.7.1988, p. 24. (10) OJ L 293, 12.11.1994, p. 9.

Summary: System of own resources System of own resources The own resources decision lays down the basic provisions for financing the European Union (EU) budget. ACT Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities’ own resources SUMMARY The operation of the European Union (EU) relies on a balanced budget that is financed entirely by own resources. The own resources ceiling is maintained at 1.23 % of all the Member States’ gross national income (GNI). There are three categories of own resources: traditional own resources, the own resource based on value added tax (VAT) and the own resource based on gross national income (GNI). Other revenue sources include taxes paid by officials, fines imposed on firms by the Union and interest on late payments. Traditional own resources Traditional own resources consist of customs duties and levies on sugar production within the Union. Member States may retain, by way of collection costs, 25 % of the amounts raised. VAT resource A uniform rate of 0.30 % is collected on the harmonised VAT base of each Member State. The VAT base is limited to 50 % of each country’s gross national income (GNI). The aim of this rule is to prevent poorer Member States from having to pay a disproportionate amount. Resource based on GNI A uniform percentage is taken on the gross national income (GNI) of each EU Member State. This is used to finance the part of the EU budget that is not covered by the other own resources and other revenue sources. The aim is to balance revenue and expenditure. Corrections in favour of certain Member States Corrections are based on the principle whereby any Member State sustaining a budgetary burden which is excessive in relation to its relative prosperity is likely to benefit from a correction when the time comes. The countries currently benefiting from this type of measure are the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, Netherlands and Sweden. Collection of own resources The method for collecting own resources is determined by national provisions that are examined regularly by the Commission. The Member States inform the Commission of any anomalies having a financial impact with respect to collection. Modification to the EU system of own resources In June 2011, the Commission submitted a draft decision of the Council on the system of resources of the European Union for 2014-20. The decision, which was adopted by the Council in May 2014, will only enter into force when ratified by all Member States. However, once in force, it will apply retroactively with effect from 1 January 2014. REFERENCES Act Entry into force - Expiry date Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal of the European Union Decision No 2007/436/EC, Euratom 1.1.2007 - OJ L 163 of 23.6.2007 RELATED ACTS Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1287/2003 of 15 July 2003 on the harmonisation of gross national income at market prices (GNI Regulation) (OJ L 181, 19.7.2003). Commission Decision 97/245/EC, Euratom of 20 March 1997 laying down the arrangements for the transmission of information to the Commission by the Member States under the Communities’ own resources system (OJ L 97, 12.4.1997). Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89 of 29 May 1989 on the definitive uniform arrangements for the collection of own resources accruing from value added tax (OJ L 155, 7.6.1989). Proposal for a Council regulation on the methods and procedure for making available the own resource based on the value added tax (COM(2011) 737 final - Not published in the Official Journal). This proposal, which should repeal and replace Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89, sets out to define the method to be used by Member States to calculate the new VAT own resource and the procedures for its availability to the EU budget. Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Seventh Report under Article 12 of Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89 on VAT collection and control procedures (COM(2014) 69 final - Not published in the Official Journal). Council Decision 2014/335/EU, Euratom of 26 May 2014 on the system of own resources of the European Union (OJ L 168, 7.6.2014). Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 608/2014 of 26 May 2014 laying down implementing measures for the system of own resources of the European Union (OJ L 168, 7.6.2014). Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 609/2014 of 26 May 2014 on the methods and procedure for making available the traditional, VAT and GNI-based own resources and on the measures to meet cash requirements (recast) (OJ L 168, 7.6.2014). Last updated: 11.06.2014


23.12.2008 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 345/75 COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection (Text with EEA relevance) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 308 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank (2), Whereas: (1) In June 2004 the European Council asked for the preparation of an overall strategy to protect critical infrastructures. In response, on 20 October 2004, the Commission adopted a Communication on critical infrastructure protection in the fight against terrorism which put forward suggestions as to what would enhance European prevention of, preparedness for and response to terrorist attacks involving critical infrastructures. (2) On 17 November 2005 the Commission adopted a Green Paper on a European programme for critical infrastructure protection which provided policy options on the establishment of the programme and the Critical Infrastructure Warning Information Network. The responses received to the Green Paper emphasised the added value of a Community framework concerning critical infrastructure protection. The need to increase the critical infrastructure protection capability in Europe and to help reduce vulnerabilities concerning critical infrastructures was acknowledged. The importance of the key principles of subsidiarity, proportionality and complementarity, as well as of stakeholder dialogue was emphasised. (3) In December 2005 the Justice and Home Affairs Council called upon the Commission to make a proposal for a European programme for critical infrastructure protection (‘EPCIP’) and decided that it should be based on an all-hazards approach while countering threats from terrorism as a priority. Under this approach, man-made, technological threats and natural disasters should be taken into account in the critical infrastructure protection process, but the threat of terrorism should be given priority. (4) In April 2007 the Council adopted conclusions on the EPCIP in which it reiterated that it was the ultimate responsibility of the Member States to manage arrangements for the protection of critical infrastructures within their national borders while welcoming the efforts of the Commission to develop a European procedure for the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures (‘ECIs’) and the assessment of the need to improve their protection. (5) This Directive constitutes a first step in a step-by-step approach to identify and designate ECIs and assess the need to improve their protection. As such, this Directive concentrates on the energy and transport sectors and should be reviewed with a view to assessing its impact and the need to include other sectors within its scope, inter alia, the information and communication technology (‘ICT’) sector. (6) The primary and ultimate responsibility for protecting ECIs falls on the Member States and the owners/operators of such infrastructures. (7) There are a certain number of critical infrastructures in the Community, the disruption or destruction of which would have significant cross-border impacts. This may include transboundary cross-sector effects resulting from interdependencies between interconnected infrastructures. Such ECIs should be identified and designated by means of a common procedure. The evaluation of security requirements for such infrastructures should be done under a common minimum approach. Bilateral schemes for cooperation between Member States in the field of critical infrastructure protection constitute a well-established and efficient means of dealing with transboundary critical infrastructures. EPCIP should build on such cooperation. Information pertaining to the designation of a particular infrastructure as an ECI should be classified at an appropriate level in accordance with existing Community and Member State legislation. (8) Since various sectors have particular experience, expertise and requirements concerning critical infrastructure protection, a Community approach to critical infrastructure protection should be developed and implemented taking into account sector specificities and existing sector based measures including those already existing at Community, national or regional level, and where relevant cross-border mutual aid agreements between owners/operators of critical infrastructures already in place. Given the very significant private sector involvement in overseeing and managing risks, business continuity planning and post-disaster recovery, a Community approach needs to encourage full private sector involvement. (9) In terms of the energy sector and in particular the methods of electricity generation and transmission (in respect of supply of electricity), it is understood that where deemed appropriate, electricity generation may include electricity transmission parts of nuclear power plants, but exclude the specifically nuclear elements covered by relevant nuclear legislation including treaties and Community law. (10) This Directive complements existing sectoral measures at Community level and in the Member States. Where Community mechanisms are already in place, they should continue to be used and will contribute to the overall implementation of this Directive. Duplication of, or contradiction between, different acts or provisions should be avoided. (11) Operator security plans (‘OSPs’) or equivalent measures comprising an identification of important assets, a risk assessment and the identification, selection and prioritisation of counter measures and procedures should be in place in all designated ECIs. With a view to avoiding unnecessary work and duplication, each Member State should first assess whether the owners/operators of designated ECIs possess relevant OSPs or similar measures. Where such plans do not exist, each Member State should take the necessary steps to make sure that appropriate measures are put in place. It is up to each Member State to decide on the most appropriate form of action with regard to the establishment of OSPs. (12) Measures, principles, guidelines, including Community measures as well as bilateral and/or multilateral cooperation schemes that provide for a plan similar or equivalent to an OSP or provide for a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent, should be deemed to satisfy the requirements of this Directive in relation to the OSP or the Security Liaison Officer respectively. (13) Security Liaison Officers should be identified for all designated ECIs in order to facilitate cooperation and communication with relevant national critical infrastructure protection authorities. With a view to avoiding unnecessary work and duplication, each Member State should first assess whether the owners/operators of designated ECIs already possess a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent. Where such a Security Liaison Officer does not exist, each Member State should take the necessary steps to make sure that appropriate measures are put in place. It is up to each Member State to decide on the most appropriate form of action with regard to the designation of Security Liaison Officers. (14) The efficient identification of risks, threats and vulnerabilities in the particular sectors requires communication both between owners/operators of ECIs and the Member States, and between the Member States and the Commission. Each Member State should collect information concerning ECIs located within its territory. The Commission should receive generic information from the Member States concerning risks, threats and vulnerabilities in sectors where ECIs were identified, including where relevant information on possible improvements in the ECIs and cross-sector dependencies, which could be the basis for the development of specific proposals by the Commission on improving the protection of ECIs, where necessary. (15) In order to facilitate improvements in the protection of ECIs, common methodologies may be developed for the identification and classification of risks, threats and vulnerabilities to infrastructure assets. (16) Owners/operators of ECIs should be given access primarily through relevant Member State authorities to best practices and methodologies concerning critical infrastructure protection. (17) Effective protection of ECIs requires communication, coordination, and cooperation at national and Community level. This is best achieved through the nomination of European critical infrastructure protection contact points (‘ECIP contact points’) in each Member State, who should coordinate European critical infrastructure protection issues internally, as well as with other Member States and the Commission. (18) In order to develop European critical infrastructure protection activities in areas which require a degree of confidentiality, it is appropriate to ensure a coherent and secure information exchange in the framework of this Directive. It is important that the rules of confidentiality according to applicable national law or Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (3) are observed with regard to specific facts about critical infrastructure assets, which could be used to plan and act with a view to causing unacceptable consequences for critical infrastructure installations. Classified information should be protected in accordance with relevant Community and Member State legislation. Each Member State and the Commission should respect the relevant security classification given by the originator of a document. (19) Information sharing regarding ECIs should take place in an environment of trust and security. The sharing of information requires a relationship of trust such that companies and organisations know that their sensitive and confidential data will be sufficiently protected. (20) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely the creation of a procedure for the identification and designation of ECIs, and a common approach to the assessment of the need to improve the protection of such infrastructures, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. (21) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Subject matter This Directive establishes a procedure for the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures (‘ECIs’), and a common approach to the assessment of the need to improve the protection of such infrastructures in order to contribute to the protection of people. Article 2 Definitions For the purpose of this Directive: (a) ‘critical infrastructure’ means an asset, system or part thereof located in Member States which is essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social well-being of people, and the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact in a Member State as a result of the failure to maintain those functions; (b) ‘European critical infrastructure’ or ‘ECI’ means critical infrastructure located in Member States the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact on at least two Member States. The significance of the impact shall be assessed in terms of cross-cutting criteria. This includes effects resulting from cross-sector dependencies on other types of infrastructure; (c) ‘risk analysis’ means consideration of relevant threat scenarios, in order to assess the vulnerability and the potential impact of disruption or destruction of critical infrastructure; (d) ‘sensitive critical infrastructure protection related information’ means facts about a critical infrastructure, which if disclosed could be used to plan and act with a view to causing disruption or destruction of critical infrastructure installations; (e) ‘protection’ means all activities aimed at ensuring the functionality, continuity and integrity of critical infrastructures in order to deter, mitigate and neutralise a threat, risk or vulnerability; (f) ‘owners/operators of ECIs’ means those entities responsible for investments in, and/or day-to-day operation of, a particular asset, system or part thereof designated as an ECI under this Directive. Article 3 Identification of ECIs 1. Pursuant to the procedure provided in Annex III, each Member State shall identify potential ECIs which both satisfy the cross-cutting and sectoral criteria and meet the definitions set out in Article 2(a) and (b). The Commission may assist Member States at their request to identify potential ECIs. The Commission may draw the attention of the relevant Member States to the existence of potential critical infrastructures which may be deemed to satisfy the requirements for designation as an ECI. Each Member State and the Commission shall continue on an ongoing basis the process of identifying potential ECIs. 2. The cross-cutting criteria referred to in paragraph 1 shall comprise the following: (a) casualties criterion (assessed in terms of the potential number of fatalities or injuries); (b) economic effects criterion (assessed in terms of the significance of economic loss and/or degradation of products or services; including potential environmental effects); (c) public effects criterion (assessed in terms of the impact on public confidence, physical suffering and disruption of daily life; including the loss of essential services). The cross-cutting criteria thresholds shall be based on the severity of the impact of the disruption or destruction of a particular infrastructure. The precise thresholds applicable to the cross-cutting criteria shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the Member States concerned by a particular critical infrastructure. Each Member State shall inform the Commission on an annual basis of the number of infrastructures per sector for which discussions were held concerning the cross-cutting criteria thresholds. The sectoral criteria shall take into account the characteristics of individual ECI sectors. The Commission together with the Member States shall develop guidelines for the application of the cross-cutting and sectoral criteria and approximate thresholds to be used to identify ECIs. The criteria shall be classified. The use of such guidelines shall be optional for the Member States. 3. The sectors to be used for the purposes of implementing this Directive shall be the energy and transport sectors. The subsectors are identified in Annex I. If deemed appropriate and in conjunction with the review of this Directive as laid down in Article 11, subsequent sectors to be used for the purpose of implementing this Directive may be identified. Priority shall be given to the ICT sector. Article 4 Designation of ECIs 1. Each Member State shall inform the other Member States which may be significantly affected by a potential ECI about its identity and the reasons for designating it as a potential ECI. 2. Each Member State on whose territory a potential ECI is located shall engage in bilateral and/or multilateral discussions with the other Member States which may be significantly affected by the potential ECI. The Commission may participate in these discussions but shall not have access to detailed information which would allow for the unequivocal identification of a particular infrastructure. A Member State that has reason to believe that it may be significantly affected by the potential ECI, but has not been identified as such by the Member State on whose territory the potential ECI is located, may inform the Commission about its wish to be engaged in bilateral and/or multilateral discussions on this issue. The Commission shall without delay communicate this wish to the Member State on whose territory the potential ECI is located and endeavour to facilitate agreement between the parties. 3. The Member State on whose territory a potential ECI is located shall designate it as an ECI following an agreement between that Member State and those Member States that may be significantly affected. The acceptance of the Member State on whose territory the infrastructure to be designated as an ECI is located, shall be required. 4. The Member State on whose territory a designated ECI is located shall inform the Commission on an annual basis of the number of designated ECIs per sector and of the number of Member States dependent on each designated ECI. Only those Member States that may be significantly affected by an ECI shall know its identity. 5. The Member States on whose territory an ECI is located shall inform the owner/operator of the infrastructure concerning its designation as an ECI. Information concerning the designation of an infrastructure as an ECI shall be classified at an appropriate level. 6. The process of identifying and designating ECIs pursuant to Article 3 and this Article shall be completed by 12 January 2011 and reviewed on a regular basis. Article 5 Operator security plans 1. The operator security plan (‘OSP’) procedure shall identify the critical infrastructure assets of the ECI and which security solutions exist or are being implemented for their protection. The minimum content to be addressed by an ECI OSP procedure is set out in Annex II. 2. Each Member State shall assess whether each designated ECI located on its territory possesses an OSP or has in place equivalent measures addressing the issues identified in Annex II. If a Member State finds that such an OSP or equivalent exists and is updated regularly, no further implementation action shall be necessary. 3. If a Member State finds that such an OSP or equivalent has not been prepared, it shall ensure by any measures deemed appropriate, that the OSP or equivalent is prepared addressing the issues identified in Annex II. Each Member State shall ensure that the OSP or equivalent is in place and is reviewed regularly within one year following designation of the critical infrastructure as an ECI. This period may be extended in exceptional circumstances, by agreement with the Member State authority and with a notification to the Commission. 4. In a case where supervisory or oversight arrangements already exist in relation to an ECI such arrangements are not affected by this Article and the relevant Member State authority referred to in this Article shall be the supervisor under those existing arrangements. 5. Compliance with measures including Community measures which in a particular sector require, or refer to a need to have, a plan similar or equivalent to an OSP and oversight by the relevant authority of such a plan, is deemed to satisfy all the requirements of Member States under, or adopted pursuant to, this Article. The guidelines for application referred to in Article 3(2) shall contain an indicative list of such measures. Article 6 Security Liaison Officers 1. The Security Liaison Officer shall function as the point of contact for security related issues between the owner/operator of the ECI and the relevant Member State authority. 2. Each Member State shall assess whether each designated ECI located on its territory possesses a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent. If a Member State finds that such a Security Liaison Officer is in place or an equivalent exists, no further implementation action shall be necessary. 3. If a Member State finds that a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent does not exist in relation to a designated ECI, it shall ensure by any measures deemed appropriate, that such a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent is designated. 4. Each Member State shall implement an appropriate communication mechanism between the relevant Member State authority and the Security Liaison Officer or equivalent with the objective of exchanging relevant information concerning identified risks and threats in relation to the ECI concerned. This communication mechanism shall be without prejudice to national requirements concerning access to sensitive and classified information. 5. Compliance with measures including Community measures which in a particular sector require, or refer to a need to have, a Security Liaison Officer or equivalent, is deemed to satisfy all the requirements of Member States in, or adopted pursuant to, this Article. The guidelines for application referred to in Article 3(2) shall contain an indicative list of such measures. Article 7 Reporting 1. Each Member State shall conduct a threat assessment in relation to ECI subsectors within one year following the designation of critical infrastructure on its territory as an ECI within those subsectors. 2. Each Member State shall report every two years to the Commission generic data on a summary basis on the types of risks, threats and vulnerabilities encountered per ECI sector in which an ECI has been designated pursuant to Article 4 and is located on its territory. A common template for these reports may be developed by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States. Each report shall be classified at an appropriate level as deemed necessary by the originating Member State. 3. Based on the reports referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission and the Member States shall assess on a sectoral basis whether further protection measures at Community level should be considered for ECIs. This process shall be undertaken in conjunction with the review of this Directive as laid down in Article 11. 4. Common methodological guidelines for carrying out risk analyses in respect of ECIs may be developed by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States. The use of such guidelines shall be optional for the Member States. Article 8 Commission support for ECIs The Commission shall support, through the relevant Member State authority, the owners/operators of designated ECIs by providing access to available best practices and methodologies as well as support training and the exchange of information on new technical developments related to critical infrastructure protection. Article 9 Sensitive European critical infrastructure protection-related information 1. Any person handling classified information pursuant to this Directive on behalf of a Member State or the Commission shall have an appropriate level of security vetting. Member States, the Commission and relevant supervisory bodies shall ensure that sensitive European critical infrastructure protection-related information submitted to the Member States or to the Commission is not used for any purpose other than the protection of critical infrastructures. 2. This Article shall also apply to non-written information exchanged during meetings at which sensitive subjects are discussed. Article 10 European critical infrastructure protection contact points 1. Each Member State shall appoint a European critical infrastructure protection contact point (‘ECIP contact point’). 2. ECIP contact points shall coordinate European critical infrastructure protection issues within the Member State, with other Member States and with the Commission. The appointment of an ECIP contact point does not preclude other authorities in a Member State from being involved in European critical infrastructure protection issues. Article 11 Review A review of this Directive shall begin on 12 January 2012. Article 12 Implementation Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with this Directive by 12 January 2011. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof and communicate the text of those measures and their correlation with this Directive. When they are adopted by Member States, these measures shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States. Article 13 Entry into force This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 14 Addressees This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 8 December 2008. For the Council The President B. KOUCHNER (1) Opinion of 10 July 2007 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (2) OJ C 116, 26.5.2007, p. 1. (3) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43. ANNEX I List of ECI sectors Sector Subsector I Energy 1. Electricity Infrastructures and facilities for generation and transmission of electricity in respect of supply electricity 2. Oil Oil production, refining, treatment, storage and transmission by pipelines 3. Gas Gas production, refining, treatment, storage and transmission by pipelines LNG terminals II Transport 4. Road transport 5. Rail transport 6. Air transport 7. Inland waterways transport 8. Ocean and short-sea shipping and ports The identification by the Member States of critical infrastructures which may be designated as ECIs is undertaken pursuant to Article 3. Therefore the list of ECI sectors in itself does not generate a generic obligation to designate an ECI in each sector. ANNEX II ECI OSP PROCEDURE The OSP will identify critical infrastructure assets and which security solutions exist or are being implemented for their protection. The ECI OSP procedure will cover at least: 1. identification of important assets; 2. conducting a risk analysis based on major threat scenarios, vulnerability of each asset, and potential impact; and 3. identification, selection and prioritisation of counter-measures and procedures with a distinction between: — permanent security measures, which identify indispensable security investments and means which are relevant to be employed at all times. This heading will include information concerning general measures such as technical measures (including installation of detection, access control, protection and prevention means); organisational measures (including procedures for alerts and crisis management); control and verification measures; communication; awareness raising and training; and security of information systems, — graduated security measures, which can be activated according to varying risk and threat levels. ANNEX III Procedure for the identification by the Member States of critical infrastructures which may be designated as an ECI pursuant to Article 3 Article 3 requires each Member State to identify the critical infrastructures which may be designated as an ECI. This procedure shall be implemented by each Member State through the following series of consecutive steps. A potential ECI which does not satisfy the requirements of one of the following sequential steps is considered to be ‘non-ECI’ and is excluded from the procedure. A potential ECI which does satisfy the requirements shall be subjected to the next steps of this procedure. Step 1 Each Member State shall apply the sectoral criteria in order to make a first selection of critical infrastructures within a sector. Step 2 Each Member State shall apply the definition of critical infrastructure pursuant to Article 2(a) to the potential ECI identified under step 1. The significance of the impact will be determined either by using national methods for identifying critical infrastructures or with reference to the cross-cutting criteria, at an appropriate national level. For infrastructure providing an essential service, the availability of alternatives, and the duration of disruption/recovery will be taken into account. Step 3 Each Member State shall apply the transboundary element of the definition of ECI pursuant to Article 2(b) to the potential ECI that has passed the first two steps of this procedure. A potential ECI which does satisfy the definition will follow the next step of the procedure. For infrastructure providing an essential service, the availability of alternatives, and the duration of disruption/recovery will be taken into account. Step 4 Each Member State shall apply the cross-cutting criteria to the remaining potential ECIs. The cross-cutting criteria shall take into account: the severity of impact; and, for infrastructure providing an essential service, the availability of alternatives; and the duration of disruption/recovery. A potential ECI which does not satisfy the cross-cutting criteria will not be considered to be an ECI. A potential ECI which has passed through this procedure shall only be communicated to the Member States which may be significantly affected by the potential ECI.

Summary: Protecting critical infrastructure Protecting critical infrastructure SUMMARY OF: Directive 2008/114/EC — identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and assessment of the need to improve their protection WHAT IS THE AIM OF THE DIRECTIVE? It establishes a European Union (EU) process for identifying and designating European critical infrastructures* (ECIs), and sets out an approach for improving their protection. KEY POINTS Identification and designation of ECIs EU countries go through a process of identifying potential ECIs, with the help of the European Commission if required. When identifying potential ECIs, they should use: cross-cutting criteria such as possible casualties, economic effects and effect on the public; and sectoral criteria specific to the type of ECI. EU countries go through a cooperative designation process (e.g. discussions with other EU countries) for potential ECIs located on their territory. EU countries regularly review the identification and designation of ECIs. The directive applies only to the energy and transport sectors (see Annex I of the directive). In time, other sectors may be added to its scope. Operator security plans EU countries ensure that an operator security plan (OSP) is in place for each ECI. The purpose of the OSP process is to identify the critical assets of the ECI, as well as the existing security solutions for protecting them. Security liaison officers EU countries ensure that a security liaison officer is designated for each ECI. The officer serves as the contact point between the owner/operator of the ECI and the EU country’s authority concerned. Reporting EU countries conduct threat assessments in relation to ECIs within 1 year following the designation of critical infrastructure. EU countries report general data to the Commission on the types of risks, threats and vulnerabilities every 2 years. FROM WHEN DOES THE DIRECTIVE APPLY? It has applied since 12 January 2009. EU countries had to incorporate it into national law by 12 January 2011. BACKGROUND National authorities are predominantly responsible for the protection of critical infrastructure. However, disruptions to critical infrastructure can be felt across national borders. That is why an EU dimension to help manage these risks is needed. In 2007, the Council of the EU adopted conclusions on a European programme for critical infrastructure protection (EPCIF). This programme aims to improve the protection of critical infrastructures against all types of threats and hazards. Following a review of Directive 2008/114/EC, the Commission, in 2013, set out a new approach towards implementing the European programme for critical infrastructure protection. This aims at building common tools and a common approach in the EU to critical infrastructure protection and resilience, taking better account of interdependencies between critical infrastructures, industry and state actors. For more information, see: ‘ Critical infrastructure ’ on the European Commission's website. * KEY TERMS Critical infrastructure: assets or systems essential for the maintenance of vital social functions, health, safety, security, and economic or social wellbeing of people. European critical infrastructure (ECI) is critical infrastructure in EU countries whose disruption or destruction would have a significant impact on at least 2 EU countries (e.g. electricity power plants or oil transmission pipelines). MAIN DOCUMENT Council Directive 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection (OJ L 345, 23.12.2008, pp. 75–82) RELATED DOCUMENTS Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Critical Infrastructure Protection in the fight against terrorism (COM(2004) 702 final, 20.10.2004) Green Paper on a European programme for critical infrastructure protection (COM(2005) 576 final, 17.11.2005) Communication from the Commission on a European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (COM(2006) 786 final, 12.12.2006) Commission Staff Working Document on a new approach to the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection: Making European Critical Infrastructures more secure (SWD(2013) 318 final, 28.8.2013) last update 14.11.2016


26.6.2008 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 165/41 COUNCIL JOINT ACTION 2008/487/CFSP of 23 June 2008 in support of the universalisation and implementation of the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, in the framework of the European Security Strategy THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 14 thereof, Whereas: (1) On 12 December 2003, the European Council adopted the European Security Strategy, which calls for an international order based on effective multilateralism. The European Security Strategy acknowledges the United Nations Charter as the fundamental framework for international relations. Strengthening the United Nations and helping to equip it to fulfil its responsibilities and to act effectively is a priority of the European Union. (2) United Nations General Assembly Resolution 51/45 of 10 December 1996 urged all States to pursue vigorously an effective, legally binding international agreement to ban the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel landmines. (3) The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (‘the Convention’) was opened for signature on 3 December 1997 and entered into force on 1 March 1999. It constitutes a comprehensive international instrument to deal with all matters related to anti-personnel landmines, including their use, production and trade, victim assistance, mine clearance and stockpile destruction. (4) In December 2004, the States Parties to the Convention adopted the Nairobi Action Plan 2005-2009 and agreed to various understandings regarding the universalisation and implementation of the Convention in all its aspects. (5) In December 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 62/41 on the implementation of the Convention, inviting all States that have not signed it to accede without delay, urging all States that have signed but not ratified the Convention to ratify it without delay and urging all States, where in a position to do so, to promote adherence to the Convention through bilateral, sub-regional, regional and multilateral contacts, outreach, seminars and other means, HAS ADOPTED THIS JOINT ACTION: Article 1 1. With a view to supporting the implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (the Convention) in line with United Nations General Assembly Resolution 62/41, the European Union (EU) shall pursue the following objectives: (a) promotion of the universalisation of the Convention and support for the preparation of the Second Review Conference of the Convention in 2009; (b) support for full implementation of the Convention by States Parties. 2. In order to achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph 1, the EU shall undertake the following projects: (a) organisation of up to six regional or sub-regional seminars aimed at increasing accession to and ratification of the Convention and preparing for the second Review Conference in 2009; (b) provision of continuous technical advice and up to 25 targeted technical assistance visits to States Parties with a view to making recommendations on the full implementation of the Convention. A detailed description of these projects is set out in the Annex. Article 2 1. The Presidency, assisted by the Secretary-General of the Council/High Representative for the CFSP (SG/HR), shall be responsible for the implementation of this Joint Action. The Commission shall be fully associated. 2. The technical implementation of the projects referred to in Article 1(2) shall be carried out by the Implementation Support Unit of the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (ISU/GICHD). It shall perform this task under the control of the SG/HR, assisting the Presidency. For this purpose, the SG/HR shall enter into the necessary arrangements with the ISU/GICHD. 3. The Presidency, the SG/HR and the Commission shall keep each other regularly informed about the projects, in accordance with their respective competences. Article 3 1. The financial reference amount for the implementation of the projects referred to in Article 1(2) shall be EUR 1 070 000, to be funded from the general budget of the European Union. 2. The expenditure financed by the amount stipulated in paragraph 1 shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the European Union. 3. The Commission shall supervise the proper management of the expenditure referred to in paragraph 2, which shall take the form of a grant. For this purpose, it shall conclude a financing agreement with the GICHD. The financing agreement shall stipulate that the ISU/GICHD is to ensure visibility of the EU contribution, appropriate to its size. 4. The Commission shall endeavour to conclude the financing agreement referred to in paragraph 3 as soon as possible after the entry into force of this Joint Action. It shall inform the Council of any difficulties in that process and of the date of conclusion of the financing agreement. Article 4 The Presidency, assisted by the SG/HR, shall report to the Council on the implementation of this Joint Action on the basis of regular reports prepared by the ISU/GICHD. These reports shall form the basis for the evaluation by the Council. The Commission shall be fully associated. It shall provide information on the financial aspects of the implementation of this Joint Action. Article 5 This Joint Action shall enter into force on the date of its adoption. It shall expire 21 months after the date of conclusion of the financing agreement referred to in Article 3(3) or six months after the date of its adoption if no financing agreement has been concluded within that period. Article 6 This Joint Action shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Luxembourg, 23 June 2008. For the Council The President I. JARC ANNEX 1. Objectives The overall objectives of this Joint Action are the promotion of the universalisation of the Convention, support for full implementation of the Convention by States Parties and support for the preparations for the Second Review Conference which will take place in 2009. Maximum synergy will be ensured with other relevant EU financial instruments. 2. Projects 2.1. Promotion of the universalisation and implementation of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, and preparation of the 2009 Review Conference. 2.1.1. Project objective To promote adherence to the Convention through regional and sub-regional seminars and to support the preparations for the Second Review Conference. 2.1.2. Project description Up to six regional or sub-regional workshops will be organised to prepare for the Second Review Conference and to encourage further universalisation of the Convention. 2.1.3. Project results Increased membership of the Convention and renewed global interest in the importance of the objectives of and the obligations resulting from ratification of the Convention, as well as a better understanding of the needs of future States Parties concerning anti-personnel landmine programmes. Better preparation of the Second Review Conference which will take place in 2009, through enhanced regional input and networking. 2.1.4. Seminar venues The ISU/GICHD will present a list of potential venues for the regional seminars which will then be endorsed by the Presidency, assisted by the SG/HR in consultation with the competent Council bodies. The criteria used for choosing the venues for the seminars will include the willingness and commitment of a relevant State in a particular region to host a seminar, the level of commitment to the Convention by States in the region and, if relevant, the commitment of a relevant regional or sub-regional organisation. 2.1.5. Project beneficiaries States party and not party to the Convention in the regions where the seminars will be organised. 2.2. Support for the full implementation of the Convention 2.2.1. Project objective To assist States Parties in implementing the provisions of the Convention. 2.2.2. Project description To assist States Parties to the Convention which are in the process of fulfilling their obligations resulting from it. Technical assistance visits will be organised to States Parties with a view to assessing the national response to the obligations resulting from the Convention and to providing support in line with other relevant ongoing programmes and/or activities, the findings of the Nairobi Summit and the findings of the annual progress reports. 2.2.3. Project results — Enhanced knowledge of the implementation efforts made at national level which may lead to further action by the EU, — provision of advice and recommendations on technical requirements necessary to fulfil obligations under the Convention, — development of relevant national plans in line with obligations under the Convention. 2.2.4. Project beneficiaries States Parties will be invited to request assistance. A decision will be made on the basis of the degree to which requesting States Parties have compiled the necessary background information prior to engagement, taken meaningful steps to support a visit by technical experts and shown readiness to make full use of the information acquired as a result of the exercise. The selection of beneficiaries will take into account the respecting of the commitments made by potential beneficiaries in the area of demining and stockpile destruction in the framework of the deadlines established at the Convention meetings. The ISU/GICHD will present a final list of beneficiaries which will then be endorsed by the Presidency, assisted by the SG/HR in consultation with the competent Council bodies. 3. Duration The total duration for the implementation of this Joint Action is 21 months. 4. Implementing entity The Presidency, assisted by the SG/HR, is responsible for the implementation and supervision of this Joint Action. The Presidency will entrust the technical implementation to ISU/GICHD. The ISU/GICHD will ensure the visibility of the EU contribution, appropriate to its size. 5. Reporting The ISU/GICHD will prepare detailed reports following each of the planned seminars and the technical assistance visits.

Summary: Convention on the prohibition of anti-personnel mines and on their destruction Convention on the prohibition of anti-personnel mines and on their destruction SUMMARY OF: Joint Action 2008/487/CFSP — 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction Decision (CFSP) 2017/1428 supporting the implementation of the Maputo Action Plan WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE JOINT ACTION AND THE DECISION? The joint action aims to support the implementation of the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) through certain specific actions. The EU’s support for the convention was based on the 2003 EU Security Strategy (replaced in the meantime by the EU's Global Strategy). The decision supports the Maputo action plan for the implementation of the APMBC between 2014 and 2019 and sets out a number of objectives to help achieve this. KEY POINTS Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention Over 80% of UN Member States are States parties i.e. have ratified the convention. The US, Russia and China are not parties. All EU countries are States parties. States parties agree not to: use anti-personnel (AP) mines*;develop, produce, acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer AP mines;assist, encourage or induce in any way anyone to engage in an activity prohibited by the convention. States parties must destroy all stockpiles of AP mines within 4 years and clear mined areas under their jurisdiction or control within 10 years. The EU joint action set out 2 objectives: promote the convention to those countries that have not yet become parties (known as ‘universalisation’); support its full implementation by those countries that have become parties. To achieve these objectives, the joint action foresees 2 types of action: organise seminars on a regional or sub-regional basis to encourage countries to become parties to the convention; provide technical advice and assistance visits to countries to help with full implementation. Maputo action plan 2014-2019 The action plan aims to tackle 3 main issues concerning the implementation of the APMBC: the universalisation of the convention; ensuring the compliance of those states parties that have not cleared their stockpiles or cleared their existing mines; the rights of mine victims and their integration into national policies and laws on disability rights. States parties agreed to promote universalisation and to implement their remaining obligations. The EU supports a number of projects to help to achieve these objectives, on the basis of the 2017 Council decision, including: mine clearance — including helping and strengthening planning in up to 5 countries with forthcoming clearance deadlines; victim assistance — support the integration of victim assistance programmes in wider national policies; universalisation — support the presidency of the convention and a high-level task force to engage with non-signatory countries; stockpile destruction. Financial support Nearly all of the most severely affected countries benefit from financial support. These countries include Chad, Colombia, Croatia, Iraq, Lao PDR (People's Democratic Republic), Lebanon, Libya, Myanmar, Syria and Ukraine. Between 2012 and 2016, the EU and EU countries provided over €600 million of support. Demining activities are supported through a number of EU external action instruments including: Development Cooperation Instrument Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace European Development Fund. FROM WHEN DO THE JOINT ACTION AND THE DECISION APPLY? The joint action has applied since 23 June 2008 and the decision since 4 August 2017. BACKGROUND For more information, see: Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (AP Mine Ban Convention website) Anti-Personnel Landmines, Small Arms and Light Weapons (European Commission). KEY TERMS Anti-personnel mines: a mine designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person and that will incapacitate, injure or kill one or more persons. MAIN DOCUMENTS Council Joint Action 2008/487/CFSP of 23 June 2008 in support of the universalisation and implementation of the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, in the framework of the European Security Strategy (OJ L 165, 26.6.2008, pp. 41-44) Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1428 of 4 August 2017 in support of the implementation of the Maputo Action Plan for the implementation of the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (OJ L 204, 5.8.2017, pp. 101-109) RELATED DOCUMENTS Council Decision 2012/700/CFSP of 13 November 2012 in the framework of the European Security Strategy in support of the implementation of the Cartagena Action Plan 2010-2014, adopted by the States Parties to the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (OJ L 314, 14.11.2012, pp. 40-46) last update 18.07.2018