This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52014TA1210(11)
Report on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency, for the financial year 2013 together with the Agency’s replies
Report on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency, for the financial year 2013 together with the Agency’s replies
Report on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency, for the financial year 2013 together with the Agency’s replies
OJ C 442, 10.12.2014, p. 93–101
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
10.12.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 442/93 |
REPORT
on the annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency, for the financial year 2013 together with the Agency’s replies
(2014/C 442/11)
INTRODUCTION
1. |
The European Aviation Safety Agency (hereinafter ‘the Agency’, aka ‘EASA’), which is located in Cologne, was established by Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009 (2). The Agency has been given specific regulatory and executive tasks in the field of aviation safety (3). |
INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF THE STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE
2. |
The audit approach taken by the Court comprises analytical audit procedures, direct testing of transactions and an assessment of key controls of the Agency’s supervisory and control systems. This is supplemented by evidence provided by the work of other auditors (where relevant) and an analysis of management representations. |
STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE
The management’s responsibility
The auditor’s responsibility
Opinion on the reliability of the accounts
Opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the accounts
|
10. |
The comments which follow do not call the Court’s opinions into question. |
COMMENTS ON THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF TRANSACTIONS
11. |
In 2012 EASA selected 14 National Aviation Authorities (NAAs) and 10 ‘Qualified Entities’ (QEs) through procurement procedures to outsource part of its certification activities (9). Expenditure for such outsourced certification activities amounted to some 22 million euro in 2013. The process of allocating specific certification tasks to NAAs and QEs and the criteria to be used are described in specific guidelines established by the Agency (10)..However, the transparency of outsourcing could be improved through better documentation of the allocation processes, including the assessments made on the basis of the criteria set in the guidelines. This is also the case for the allocation of the many other low-value contracts to bidders. |
COMMENTS ON BUDGETARY MANAGEMENT
12. |
The overall level of appropriations committed was high at 98 %. Although the Agency reduced further the overall level of carry-overs of committed appropriations from 10,1 million euro (11 %) in 2012 to 7,2 million euro (8 %) in 2013, carry-overs of committed appropriations for title III were high at 3,4 million euro (42 %). Although this is partly justified by the multiannual nature of the Agency’s operations and the carry-overs included in the Court’s sample were duly justified, such a high level is at odds with the budgetary principle of annuality. |
OTHER COMMENTS
13. |
The Agency became operational in 2004 and has, to date, worked on the basis of correspondence and exchanges with the host Member State. However, a comprehensive headquarters agreement between the Agency and the Member State has not been signed. Such an agreement would promote transparency in respect of the conditions under which the Agency and its staff operate. |
FOLLOW-UP OF PREVIOUS YEARS’ COMMENTS
14. |
An overview of the corrective action taken in response to the Court's comments from previous years is provided in Annex I. |
This Report was adopted by Chamber IV, headed by Mr Milan Martin CVIKL, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 1 July 2014.
For the Court of Auditors
Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA
President
(2) OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 51.
(3) Annex II summarises the Agency’s competences and activities. It is presented for information purposes.
(4) These include the balance sheet and the economic outturn account, the cash flow table, the statement of changes in net assets and a summary of the significant accounting policies and other explanatory notes.
(5) These comprise the budgetary outturn account and the annex to the budgetary outturn account.
(6) Articles 39 and 50 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 (OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42).
(7) The accounting rules adopted by the Commission’s accounting officer are derived from the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the International Federation of Accountants or, where relevant, the International Accounting Standards (IAS)/International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.
(8) Article 107 of Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013.
(9) At the end of May 2014, 3 contracts with QEs had been terminated and consequently there were 14 active contracts with NAAs and 7 with QEs.
(10) ‘Guidelines for the allocation of certification tasks to National Aviation Authorities and Qualified Entities’, EASA Management Board Decision 01-2011.
ANNEX I
Follow-up of previous years’ comments
Year |
Court's comment |
Status of corrective action (Completed/Ongoing/Outstanding/N/A) |
2011 |
At the end of 2011, the Agency held bank balances of 55 million euro (2010: 49 million euro) at one bank only. There was no treasury policy in place to limit this risk while gaining appropriate investment returns. |
Completed |
2012 |
The Agency established a standard procedure for ex ante verifications. However, the related checklists were not completed and documentation justifying the validation of expenditure was not always available (1). |
Completed |
2012 |
A methodology for ex post verifications was approved in 2009. Although the Agency made further developments in its implementation, room for improvement still exists in the following areas: there is still no annual planning of verifications, the sample of transactions to be checked is not risk-based and the methodology does not cover public procurement procedures. |
Completed |
2012 |
The overall level of appropriations committed was 95 %, varying between 96 % for title I (staff expenditure), 95 % for title II (administrative expenditure) and 89 % for title III (operational expenditure). However, carry-overs of committed appropriations were high for title III at 46 %. Although this is partly justified by the multiannual nature of the Agency’s operations and the carry-overs included in the Court’s sample were duly justified, such a high level is at odds with the budgetary principle of annuality. |
N/A |
2012 |
In one of the audited recruitment procedures, the selected candidate did not meet the Staff Regulations’ requirements as regards university degrees or equivalent professional training. |
N/A |
(1) Timesheets to justify services charged on a man/days basis did not exist.
ANNEX II
European Aviation Safety Agency (Cologne)
Competences and activities
Areas of Union competence deriving from the Treaty (Article 100 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) |
The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may lay down appropriate provisions for sea and air transport. They shall act after consulting the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. |
||||||||||||
Competences of the Agency (The Agency's powers as defined in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (the ‘Basic Regulation’)) |
Objectives
Tasks
|
||||||||||||
Governance |
Management Board Composition: consisting of one representative of each Member State and one representative of the Commission, Tasks The tasks of the Management Board are described in the Basic regulation and are, for example:
Executive Director Manages the Agency and is appointed by the Management Board on a proposal from the Commission. The Board of Appeal Decides on appeals against the Agency's decisions in accordance with Article 44 of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 in certain respects such as certification, fees & charges and investigation of undertakings. External audit European Court of Auditors. Discharge authority European Parliament, acting on a recommendation by the Council. |
||||||||||||
Resources made available to the Agency in 2013 (2012) |
Final Budget Total budget: 151,2(150,2) million euro, including:
Staff as at 31 December 2013 692 (634) temporary staff in the establishment plan Posts occupied: 647 (612) Post occupied by other staff Total: 100 (74,6) of which contract staff: 85 (63,3); seconded national experts: 15 (11,3); special advisors: 0 (0) Total temporary staff: 648 (1) (613) Filled posts subsidy-financed: 219 (2) (216) Filled posts fee-financed: 429 (2) (396) |
||||||||||||
Products and services in 2013 (2012) |
Opinions 12 Opinions Rulemaking Decisions 28 Decisions related to: Certification specifications (8); Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance Material (20) Additional deliverables in 2013 (which will lead to Rules in the forthcoming years) 32 Terms of Reference (ToRs), 26 Notices of Proposed Amendment (NPAs), 24 Comment Response Document (CRDs) International Cooperation 12 Working Arrangements. 2 modifications of Appendices to a Working Arrangement 2 Rulemaking cooperation arrangements with EASA bilateral partners Support for the negotiations of the EU — Ukraine Common Aviation Area Agreement (agreement was initialled in 2013) 10 recommendations provided on International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) State Letters. BASA (Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement) Support for the ratification process of the BASA EU-Brazil and the process for the development of the relevant instruments required for the practical implementation of the Agreement. Support for the implementation of the EU — US Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA), including for the preparation of the board meetings, and the annual Flight Standards meeting with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Support to the European Commission for the development of new Annexes to the EU-US BASA (Flight Crew Licensing, Flight Simulation Training Devices, Pilot Training Organisations) Certification decisions at 31 December 2013 Type Certificates/Restricted Type Certificates (TCs/RTCs): 11 (3) Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs): 688 Airworthiness Directives (ADs): 382 Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC): 82 European Technical Standard Order Authorisation (ETSOA): 214 Major changes/Major repairs/TC New Derivatives: 1 017 Minor changes/Minor repairs: 643 Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM): 318 Approval of flight conditions (PTF): 457 Flight Simulation Training Devices (FSTD): 311 Approval of Design organisations (AP and Alternative Procedures to DOA (AP-DOA): 550 Approval of Maintenance organisations (bilateral) (4): 1 544 Approval of Maintenance organisations (foreign) (4): 328 Approval of Maintenance training organisations (4): 52 Approval of Manufacturing (4): 23 Approval of Flight Crew Licencing Organisations (4): 15 Approval of ATM/ANS Organisations (4): 3 Standardisation inspections (number of inspections by type) at 31 December 2013 In the field of Airworthiness (AIR): 22 In the field of Operations (OPS): 16 In the field of flight crew licensing (FCL): 16 In the field of medical flight crew licensing (MED): 12 In the field of flight simulation training devices (FSTD): 9 In the field of Air Traffic Management/Air Navigation Services (ANS): 14 In the field of Safety Assessment of Foreign Aircraft (SAFA): 13 |
||||||||||||
(1) Two structural part-time pilots occupy one post.
(2) The split of filled posts between fee-financed and subsidy-financed may change subject to possible revision of the cost-accounting allocation keys as of 31 December 2013.
(3) Only those TCs/RTCs are counted which were issued for a new design type. TCs issued as a result of grandfathering, transfer or administrative re-issuance are excluded.
(4) The organisation approval activity is subdivided into a main surveillance activity of already approved organisations (with a renewal every 2/3 years) and an activity linked to new approvals. The data supplied concern the total number of approvals on 31 December 2013.
Source: Annex supplied by the Agency.
THE AGENCY’S REPLIES
11. |
In the frame of a better control of the certification activities outsourced to National Aviation Authorities (NAA) and potentially qualified entities (QE), the certification directorate (C) together with the finance directorate (F) will implement in 2014 a simple means to record that the selection of the provider for any given outsourcing purchase order has been made and optimised in accordance with the criteria of Annex 1 to ED decision 2011/056/F. As regards shortlisting of candidates for low-value contracts the Agency will systematically consider the ECA’s comment in selecting invitees and documenting it accordingly as relevant. |
12. |
The Agency would like to highlight that great efforts have already been made to reduce the level of title III carry-overs and this is already reflected in the significant decrease compared to the previous year: i.e. 6,2 million euro in 2012 compared to 3,4 million euro in 2013. During 2013 some appropriations had to be held back in case 2011 salary adjustments and were reassigned during the year to high priorities projects (rulemaking and safety research projects). This inhibited commitments early in the year resulting in a substantial impact on the level of carry overs at year end. |
13. |
As the EASA has already experienced some unclarities concerning our relations with our host state due to the absence of a proper seat agreement, the EASA acknowledges the recommendation and will work closely with the EU Council, Parliament and Commission, to establish a proper headquarters agreement. Such agreement should — apart from promoting transparency of relations with the host Member State — ensure that the host State takes all necessary measures to facilitate the unimpeded exercise by the Agency of its legal mandate as well as clarifying the relations between national judicial authorities and the Agency. |