(1)

Solidarity is a fundamental value of the Union and there is potential for further developing means of expressing solidarity of Union citizens with people in third countries vulnerable to or affected by man-made crises or natural disasters. Moreover, the Union as a whole is the world's largest humanitarian aid donor, providing almost 50 % of global humanitarian aid.

(2)

Volunteering is a concrete and visible expression of solidarity allowing individuals to dedicate their knowledge, skills and time to the service of fellow human beings, without pecuniary motivation.

(3)

There is a need to further develop solidarity with victims of crises and disasters in third countries as well as to raise both awareness levels and visibility of humanitarian aid and volunteering in general among the Union's citizens.

(4)

The Union's vision of humanitarian aid, including a common objective, principles and good practice and a common framework to deliver the Union's humanitarian aid, is set out in the Joint Statement by the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting with the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission entitled ‘The European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid’ (2). The European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid underlines the Union's firm commitment to a needs-based approach as well as to upholding and promoting the fundamental humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence. The actions of the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (‘the EU Aid Volunteers initiative’) should be guided by the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid.

(5)

The Union's humanitarian aid is delivered in situations where other instruments related to development cooperation, crisis management and civil protection may operate. The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should work in a coherent and complementary manner and avoid overlaps with relevant Union policies and instruments, in particular with the Union's humanitarian aid policy, development cooperation policy and the Union Civil Protection Mechanism established by Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), the Emergency Response Coordination Centre established by that Decision and with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the EU Delegations in order to coordinate the Union's response to humanitarian crises in third countries.

(6)

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should contribute to efforts to strengthen the Union's capacity to provide needs-based humanitarian assistance and to strengthen the capacity and resilience of vulnerable or disaster-affected communities in third countries. It is furthermore important to foster cooperation with relevant international organisations and other humanitarian partners and local and regional actors. That cooperation should be pursued in accordance with the actions undertaken by the United Nations, in order to support the central and overall coordinating role of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA).

(7)

The number, scope and complexity of humanitarian crises worldwide, both natural and man-made, have increased significantly over the years and that trend is likely to continue, leading to a rising demand on humanitarian actors to provide an immediate, effective, efficient and coherent response and to support third country local communities in order to make them less vulnerable and to strengthen their resilience to disasters.

(8)

Volunteers can contribute to strengthening the Union's capacity to provide needs-based and principled humanitarian aid and contribute to enhancing the effectiveness of the humanitarian sector when they are adequately selected, trained and prepared for deployment so as to ensure that they have the necessary skills and competences to help people in need in the most effective way, provided that they can count on sufficient on-site support and supervision.

(9)

Volunteering schemes exist in Europe and worldwide focusing on third country deployment. These are often national schemes which focus mainly or exclusively on development projects. The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should, therefore, add value by providing opportunities for volunteers to jointly contribute to humanitarian aid operations, thus reinforcing active European citizenship. The EU Aid Volunteers initiative can also add value by fostering transnational cooperation of organisations participating in the implementation of the actions under the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, thereby improving international relations, projecting a positive image of the Union in the world and fostering interest in pan-European humanitarian projects.

(10)

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should be cost-effective, should complement existing national and international voluntary schemes without duplicating them, and should be focused on addressing concrete needs and gaps in the humanitarian field.

(11)

As highlighted in the Commission Communication of 23 November 2010 entitled ‘How to express EU citizens' solidarity through volunteering: First reflections on a European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps’, there are gaps in the current landscape of humanitarian volunteering which the EU Aid Volunteers initiative can fill with the volunteers with the right profiles deployed at the right time to the right place. This could be achieved notably through providing European standards and procedures on identification and selection of humanitarian volunteers, commonly agreed benchmarks for training and preparation of humanitarian volunteers for deployment, a database of potential volunteers who are identified based on the needs in the field, and opportunities for volunteers to contribute to humanitarian operations not only by deployment but also through back-office support and online-volunteering activities.

(12)

Appropriate training, as well as the security and safety of the volunteers should remain of paramount importance and be subject to regular exchange of information, including with Member States. EU Aid Volunteers should not be deployed to operations conducted in the theatre of international and non-international armed conflicts.

(13)

The Union carries out its humanitarian aid operations based on needs and in partnership with implementing organisations. Those organisations should play a significant role in implementing the EU Aid Volunteers initiative in order to ensure ownership by the actors in the field and to maximise the potential uptake of the actions under that initiative. The Union should entrust such organisations notably with the identification, selection, preparation and deployment of EU Aid Volunteers, as well as with follow-up during and after assignments, in accordance with standards and procedures established by the Commission. The Commission should, where appropriate, be able to draw upon successfully trained and prepared volunteers for deployment to its field offices for support tasks.

(14)

The Commission Communication of 25 October 2011 entitled ‘A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility’ states that private companies can play an important role and contribute to the Union's humanitarian operations, in particular through employee volunteering.

(15)

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should help Europeans of all ages to demonstrate active European citizenship. The initiative should thus contribute to promoting volunteering across the Union and to the personal development and intercultural awareness of participating volunteers, thereby improving their competences and employability in the global economy.

(16)

The Union's principles of equal opportunities and non-discrimination suggest that Union citizens and long-term residents in the Union of all walks of life and age should be able to engage as active citizens. Given the specific challenges of the humanitarian context, EU Aid Volunteers should have a minimum age of 18 years and could represent a wide diversity of profiles and generations, including experts and skilled retirees.

(17)

A clear legal status is a crucial precondition for volunteers to participate in deployment in countries outside the Union. The terms of deployment of the volunteers should be defined contractually, including standards for protection and safety of the volunteers, responsibilities of the sending and hosting organisations, insurance coverage, coverage of subsistence, accommodation and other relevant expenses. Volunteers' deployment in third countries should be subject to adequate safety and security arrangements.

(18)

The recommendations contained in the Policy Agenda for Volunteering in Europe and the work of European and international volunteering organisations and the United Nations Volunteers programme should, where relevant, be taken into account in the actions under the EU Aid Volunteers initiative.

(19)

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should support needs-based actions aimed at strengthening the hosting organisations' capacity for humanitarian aid in third countries in order to enhance local preparedness and response to humanitarian crises and to ensure the effective and sustainable impact of the EU Aid Volunteers' work on the ground through disaster risk management, preparedness and response, coaching, training in volunteer management, and other relevant areas.

(20)

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative should, where relevant, aim to contribute to strengthening the gender perspective in Union humanitarian aid policy, promoting adequate humanitarian responses to the specific needs of women and men of all ages. Special attention should be paid to cooperation with women's groups and networks in order to promote the participation and leadership of women in humanitarian aid and to draw on their capacities and expertise to contribute to recovery, peace-building, disaster risk reduction and building resilience of affected communities.

(21)

This Regulation lays down, for the entire duration of the financial period, a financial envelope which is to constitute the prime reference amount, within the meaning of point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (4), for the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budgetary procedure.

(22)

The allocation of financial assistance should be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/ 2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5). Due to the specific nature of the actions under the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, it is appropriate to provide that financial assistance may be awarded to natural persons and legal persons governed by public or private law. It is also important to ensure that the rules of that Regulation are respected, in particular regarding the principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness laid down therein.

(23)

Improving implementation and quality of spending should constitute guiding principles for achievement of the objectives of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, while ensuring optimal use of financial resources.

(24)

The financial interests of the Union should be protected through proportionate measures throughout the expenditure cycle, including the prevention, detection and investigation of irregularities, the recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where appropriate, penalties. Appropriate measures should be taken to prevent irregularities and fraud and the necessary steps taken to recover funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used in accordance with Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (6), Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 (7) and Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (8).

(25)

Participation of third countries, in particular acceding countries, candidate countries, potential candidates, partner countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy and European Free Trade Association countries, should be possible on the basis of cooperation agreements.

(26)

Participating volunteers and organisations implementing the actions under the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, from cooperating countries, should also adhere to and advocate respect for the principles set out in the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid, with emphasis on the protection of the ‘humanitarian space’.

(27)

In order to allow for continuous feedback and improvement and to increase the flexibility and efficiency of their adoption, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of provisions relating to the standards for selection, management and deployment of EU Aid Volunteers, the amendment of the performance indicators and the thematic priorities and the adjustment of the percentages for allocation of the financial envelope for implementation of this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

(28)

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (9). The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of the procedures for selection, management and deployment of EU Aid Volunteers, the certification mechanism, the training programme and the annual work programme of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative.

(29)

This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles which are recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

(30)

The processing of personal data which is carried out within the framework of this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary and proportionate for the purposes of ensuring the smooth running of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative. Any processing of personal data by the Commission will be governed by Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (10). Any processing of personal data by organisations implementing the actions under the EU Aid Volunteers initiative, legally established in the Union, will be governed by Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (11).

(31)

The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and delivered an opinion on 23 November 2012 (12).

(32)

It is appropriate to align the period of application of this Regulation with the Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (13). Therefore, this Regulation should apply as from 1 January 2014,

(1)

A high general level of safety should be ensured in civil aviation in the Union and every effort should be made to reduce the number of accidents and incidents with a view to ensuring public confidence in aviation transport.

(2)

The rate of fatal accidents in civil aviation has remained fairly constant over the last decade. Nevertheless, the number of accidents could rise over the decades to come, due to an increase in air traffic and an increase in the technical complexity of aircraft.

(3)

Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) aims to prevent accidents by facilitating the prompt holding of efficient and high-quality safety investigations. This Regulation should not interfere with the process of accident and incident investigations managed by national safety investigation authorities as defined in Regulation (EU) No 996/2010. In the event of an accident or a serious incident, notification of the occurrence is also subject to Regulation (EU) No 996/2010.

(4)

Existing legislative acts of the Union, in particular Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and its implementing regulations, impose obligations on certain organisations to establish occurrence reporting systems in the context of their safety management systems. Compliance with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and its implementing regulations should not exempt organisations from compliance with this Regulation. Likewise, compliance with this Regulation should not exempt organisations from compliance with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 and its implementing regulations. However, this should not give rise to two parallel reporting systems, and Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, its implementing regulations, and this Regulation should be seen as complementary.

(5)

Experience has shown that accidents are often preceded by safety-related incidents and deficiencies revealing the existence of safety hazards. Safety information is therefore an important resource for the detection of potential safety hazards. In addition, whilst the ability to learn from an accident is crucial, purely reactive systems have been found to be of limited use in continuing to bring forward improvements. Reactive systems should therefore be complemented by proactive systems which use other types of safety information to make effective improvements in aviation safety. The Union, its Member States, the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘the Agency’) and organisations should contribute to the improvement of aviation safety through the introduction of more proactive and evidence based safety systems which focus on accident prevention based on the analysis of all relevant safety information, including information on civil aviation occurrences.

(6)

In order to improve aviation safety, relevant civil aviation safety information should be reported, collected, stored, protected, exchanged, disseminated and analysed, and appropriate safety action should be taken on the basis of the information collected. This proactive and evidence-based approach should be implemented by the relevant aviation safety authorities of Member States, by organisations as part of their safety management system and by the Agency.

(7)

The imposition on organisations of occurrence reporting obligations should be proportionate to the size of the organisation concerned and the scope of its activity. It should therefore be possible, in particular for smaller organisations, to decide to join or merge functions related to occurrence handling within the organisation, to share occurrence reporting tasks with other organisations of the same nature or to outsource the collection, evaluation, processing, analysis and storage of details of occurrences to specialised entities approved by the competent authorities of the Member States. Such entities should comply with the protection and confidentiality principles established by this Regulation. The outsourcing organisation should maintain appropriate control of the outsourced tasks and should be ultimately accountable and responsible for the application of the requirements prescribed by this Regulation.

(8)

It is necessary to ensure that front-line aviation professionals report occurrences that pose a significant risk to aviation safety. Voluntary reporting systems should complement the mandatory reporting systems, and both should allow individuals to report details of aviation safety-related occurrences. Mandatory and voluntary reporting systems should be set up within organisations, the Agency and competent authorities of the Member States. The information collected should be transferred to the authority competent for appropriate monitoring in order to enhance aviation safety. Organisations should analyse those occurrences that could have an impact on safety, in order to identify safety hazards and take any appropriate corrective or preventive action. Organisations should send the preliminary results of their analyses to the competent authority of their Member States or to the Agency and should also send them the final results if those results identify an actual or potential aviation safety risk. The competent authorities of the Member States and the Agency should put in place a similar procedure for those occurrences that have been directly submitted to them and should adequately monitor the organisation's assessment and any corrective or preventive action taken.

(9)

Various categories of staff working or otherwise engaged in civil aviation witness events which are of relevance to accident prevention. They should therefore have access to tools enabling them to report such events, and their protection should be guaranteed. In order to encourage staff to report occurrences and enable them to appreciate more fully the positive impact which occurrence reporting has on air safety, they should be regularly informed about action taken under occurrence reporting systems.

(10)

The hazards and risk associated with complex motor-powered aircraft are very different from those associated with other types of aircraft. Therefore, while the entire aviation sector should be covered by this Regulation, the obligations imposed by it should be proportionate to the sphere of activity and the complexity of different types of aircraft. Accordingly, information collected on occurrences involving aircraft other than complex motor-powered ones should be subject to simplified reporting obligations which are better suited to that branch of aviation.

(11)

The development of other means of collecting safety information in addition to the systems required by this Regulation should be encouraged, with a view to collecting further information which could contribute to the improvement of aviation safety. Where organisations have existing and well-functioning safety information collection systems, they should be allowed to continue to use those systems alongside the systems to be established for the purpose of this Regulation.

(12)

Safety investigation authorities and any entity entrusted with regulating civil aviation safety within the Union should have full access to details of occurrences collected and occurrence reports stored by their Member States, in order to decide which incidents require a safety investigation, as well as to identify where lessons can be learned in the interest of aviation safety and to fulfil their oversight obligations.

(13)

It is essential to have high-quality and complete data, as analysis and trends derived from inaccurate data may show misleading results and may lead to effort being focused on inappropriate action. In addition, such inaccurate data may lead to a loss of confidence in the information produced by occurrence reporting schemes. In order to ensure the quality of occurrence reports, and to facilitate their completeness, they should contain certain minimum information, which may vary depending on the occurrence category. In addition, procedures should be implemented for checking the quality of information and avoiding inconsistency between an occurrence report and the details of the occurrence that were initially collected. Moreover, with the support of the Commission, adequate guidance material should be developed, notably to ensure the quality and to facilitate the completeness of data as well as the consistent and uniform integration of data into databases. Workshops should also be organised, notably by the Commission, to provide necessary support.

(14)

The Commission should develop a common European risk classification scheme to ensure the identification of any rapid action needed when looking at high-risk individual safety occurrences. That scheme should also enable key risk areas to be identified from aggregated information. Such a scheme should help the relevant entities in their assessment of occurrences and in determining where best to focus their efforts. A common European risk classification scheme should facilitate an integrated and harmonised approach to risk management across the European aviation system and thus enable organisations, Member States, the Commission and the Agency to focus on safety improvement efforts in a harmonised manner.

(15)

A common European risk classification scheme should also both enable key risk areas within the Union to be identified on the basis of aggregated information from a European perspective and support the work done in the area of the European Aviation Safety Programme and the European Aviation Safety Plan. Appropriate support should be given by the Commission to ensure consistent and uniform risk classification across Member States.

(16)

To facilitate information exchange, occurrence reports should be stored in databases which should be compatible with the European Coordination Centre for Aircraft Incident Reporting Systems (ECCAIRS) (the software used by all Member States and by the European Central Repository to store occurrence reports) and with the ADREP taxonomy (the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) taxonomy, also used for the ECCAIRS software). The Agency and the Commission should provide technical support for the interoperability of the systems.

(17)

Organisations should store occurrence reports derived from details of occurrences collected under the mandatory and, where applicable, the voluntary reporting systems in one or more databases. It should be possible for the complexity of the database to be proportionate to the size of the organisation concerned and/or its significance with respect to the objectives of this Regulation, and it should at least consist of a data file containing common mandatory data fields and, where applicable, specific mandatory data fields.

(18)

An occurrence involving an aircraft registered in a Member State or operated by an organisation established in a Member State should be reported even if it happened outside the territory of that Member State.

(19)

Information on occurrences should be exchanged within the Union to enhance the detection of actual or potential hazards. This information exchange should also enable Member States to have access to all information on occurrences which occur on their territory or in their airspace but which are reported to another Member State. It should also allow the Agency to obtain precise information about occurrences and access to all occurrence reports collected in the Union in order, where necessary, to take corrective action to counteract a risk identified in the Union. This information exchange should enable the competent authorities of the Member States to obtain precise information about occurrences in their airspace and, where necessary, to take corrective action to counteract a risk identified on their territory.

(20)

The objective of the exchange of information on occurrences should be the prevention of aviation accidents and incidents. It should not be used to attribute blame or liability or to establish benchmarks for safety performance.

(21)

The most efficient way to ensure the exchange of large quantities of safety information between the Member States, the Commission and the Agency is through the European Central Repository, provided that the Member States, the Commission and the Agency have full access to it.

(22)

All safety-related information derived from occurrence reports collected in the Union should be transferred in the European Central Repository in a timely manner. This should include the collection of information on incidents but also information on accidents and serious incidents investigated pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 996/2010.

(23)

This Regulation should apply to information on occurrences which is stored in the databases of organisations, Member States or the Agency.

(24)

All safety-related information contained in the European Central Repository should be available to entities entrusted with regulating civil aviation safety within the Union, including the Agency, and to the authorities responsible for investigating accidents and incidents within the Union.

(25)

It should be possible for interested parties to request access to certain information contained in the European Central Repository, subject to the rules concerning the confidentiality of such information and the anonymity of the persons involved.

(26)

As national points of contact have the best knowledge of interested parties established in a given Member State, it should be for each national point of contact to deal with requests from interested parties established in the territory of its own Member State. The Commission should deal with requests from interested parties from third countries or from international organisations.

(27)

Information contained in occurrence reports should be analysed, and safety risks identified. Any appropriate consequent action for improving aviation safety should be identified and implemented in a timely manner. Information on the analysis and follow-up of occurrences should be disseminated within organisations, competent authorities of the Member States and the Agency, since providing feedback on occurrences that have been reported incentivises individuals to report occurrences. Where applicable and when possible, information on the analysis and follow-up of occurrences should also be provided to individuals who have directly reported occurrences to the competent authorities of the Member States or to the Agency. Such feedback should comply with the rules on confidentiality and protection of the reporter and the persons mentioned in occurrence reports pursuant to this Regulation.

(28)

This Regulation should assist Member States, the Agency and organisations in managing aviation safety risks. The safety management systems of organisations are complemented by the safety management systems of the Member States and of the Agency. While organisations manage safety risks associated with their specific activities, the competent authorities of the Member States and the Agency manage safety risks for the aviation systems of, respectively, entire Member States and of the Union as a whole, addressing common safety risks for aviation in the Member State concerned or at Union level. The responsibilities of the Agency and of the competent authorities of the Member States should not exonerate organisations from their direct responsibilities in managing safety inherent in the products and in the services they provide. For that purpose, organisations should collect and analyse information on occurrences in order to identify and mitigate hazards associated with their activities. They should also assess associated safety risks and allocate resources to take prompt and appropriate safety risk mitigation measures. The overall process should be monitored by the relevant competent authority, which should, when necessary, require that additional action be taken to ensure that the safety deficiencies are correctly addressed. On the other hand, the competent authorities of the Member States and the Agency should complement the safety management systems of the organisations at Member State and European levels respectively.

(29)

When determining the action to be included within their State Safety Programme and State Safety Plan, and in order to ensure that the action is evidence-based, Member States should use the information derived from the occurrence reports that have been collected and from their analysis. State Safety Programmes and State Safety Plans are complemented at European level by the European Aviation Safety Programme and the European Aviation Safety Plan.

(30)

Since the objective of aviation safety improvement cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States because reporting systems operated by Member States in isolation are less efficient than a coordinated network with exchange of information allowing identification of possible safety problems and key risk areas at Union level, analysis at national level should be complemented by analysis and follow-up at Union level in order to ensure better prevention of aviation accidents and incidents. This Union-level task should be carried out by a network of aviation safety analysts in coordination with the Agency and the Commission. It should be possible for that network to decide, by consensus, to invite observers to their meetings, including industry employees or representatives.

(31)

The European Aviation Safety Programme and the European Aviation Safety Plan should benefit in particular from the work of the network of aviation safety analysts for the purpose of determining what action needs to be implemented at Union level from an evidence-based perspective.

(32)

The general public should be provided with general aggregated information on the level of aviation safety in Member States and in the Union. That information should cover, in particular, trends and analysis deriving from the implementation of this Regulation by the Member States, as well as information in an aggregated form on the content of the European Central Repository, and may be provided by publishing safety performance indicators (SPI).

(33)

The civil aviation safety system is established on the basis of feedback and lessons learned from accidents and incidents. Occurrence reporting and the use of occurrence information for the improvement of safety depend on a relationship of trust between the reporter and the entity in charge of the collection and assessment of the information. This requires strict application of rules on confidentiality. The purpose of protecting safety information from inappropriate use, and of limiting access to the European Central Repository solely to interested parties participating in the improvement of civil aviation safety, is to ensure the continuing availability of safety information so that appropriate and timely preventive action can be taken and aviation safety improved. In this context, sensitive safety information should be protected in an appropriate way and its collection should be ensured by guaranteeing its confidentiality, protecting its source and ensuring the confidence of staff working in civil aviation in occurrence reporting systems. Appropriate measures should be put in place to ensure that information collected through occurrence reporting schemes is kept confidential and that access to the European Central Repository is restricted. National rules on freedom of information should take into account the necessary confidentiality of such information. The information collected should be adequately protected from unauthorised use or disclosure. It should be used strictly for the purpose of maintaining or improving aviation safety and should not be used to attribute blame or liability.

(34)

In order to ensure the confidence of employees or contracted personnel in the occurrence reporting system of the organisation, the information contained in occurrence reports should be protected appropriately and should not be used for purposes other than maintaining or improving aviation safety. The internal ‘just culture’ rules adopted by organisations pursuant to this Regulation should contribute in particular to the achievement of this objective. In addition, the limitation of the transmission of personal details, or of information allowing the identification of the reporter or of the other persons mentioned in occurrence reports, by a clear separation between the departments handling occurrence reports and the rest of the organisation, may be an efficient way to achieve this objective.

(35)

A reporter or a person mentioned in occurrence reports should be adequately protected. In this context, occurrence reports should be disidentified and details relating to the identity of the reporter and of the persons mentioned in occurrence reports should not be entered into databases.

(36)

In addition, the civil aviation system should promote a ‘safety culture’ facilitating the spontaneous reporting of occurrences and thereby advancing the principle of a ‘just culture’. ‘Just culture’ is an essential element of a broader ‘safety culture’, which forms the basis of a robust safety management system. An environment embracing ‘safety culture’ principles should not prevent action being taken where necessary to maintain or improve the level of aviation safety.

(37)

A ‘just culture’ should encourage individuals to report safety-related information. It should not, however, absolve individuals of their normal responsibilities. In this context, employees and contracted personnel should not be subject to any prejudice on the basis of information provided pursuant to this Regulation, except in cases of wilful misconduct or where there has been manifest, severe and serious disregard with respect to an obvious risk and profound failure of professional responsibility to take such care as is evidently required in the circumstances, causing foreseeable damage to a person or to property, or seriously compromising the level of aviation safety.

(38)

In order to encourage reporting of occurrences, it should be appropriate to protect not only reporters, but also persons mentioned in the occurrence reports concerned. However, such protection should not exonerate those persons from their reporting obligations under this Regulation. In particular, in a situation where a person is mentioned in an occurrence report and has himself or herself the obligation to report that same occurrence, and intentionally fails to report it, then that person should lose his or her protection and face penalties in application of this Regulation.

(39)

Without prejudice to national criminal law and the proper administration of justice, it is important to clearly demarcate the extent of the protection of the reporter and other persons mentioned in occurrence reports from prejudice or prosecution.

(40)

In order to enhance the confidence of individuals in the system, the handling of occurrence reports should be organised in such a way as to appropriately safeguard the confidentiality of the identity of the reporter and other persons mentioned in occurrence reports with regard to fostering a ‘just culture’. The aim, wherever possible, should be to enable an independent occurrence handling system to be established.

(41)

Staff of organisations, of the competent authorities of the Member States and of the Agency who are involved in the evaluation, processing or analysis of occurrences have a significant role to play in the identification of safety hazards and safety deficiencies. Experience shows that when occurrences are analysed with the benefit of hindsight following an accident, the analysis leads to the identification of risks and deficiencies that might otherwise not have been identified. It is possible, therefore, that the persons involved in the evaluation, processing or analysis of occurrences may fear potential consequences in terms of prosecution before judicial authorities. Without prejudice to national criminal law and the proper administration of justice, Member States should not institute proceedings against persons who, in the competent authorities of the Member States, are involved in the evaluation, processing or analysis of occurrences in respect of decisions taken as part of their duties which subsequently, and with the benefit of hindsight, prove to have been erroneous or ineffective but which, when they were taken and on the basis of the information available at that time, were proportional and appropriate.

(42)

Employees and contracted personnel should have the opportunity to report breaches of the principles delimiting their protection as established by this Regulation, and should not be penalised for so doing. Member States should define the consequences for those who infringe the principles of protection of the reporter and of other persons mentioned in occurrence reports and should adopt remedies or impose penalties as appropriate.

(43)

Individuals may be discouraged from reporting occurrences by the fear of self-incrimination and the potential consequences in terms of prosecution before judicial authorities. The objectives of this Regulation can be achieved without interfering unduly with the justice systems of the Member States. It is therefore appropriate to provide that unpremeditated or inadvertent infringements of the law that come to the attention of the authorities of the Members States solely through reporting pursuant to this Regulation should not be the subject of disciplinary, administrative or legal proceedings, unless where otherwise provided by applicable national criminal law. However, the rights of third parties to institute civil proceedings should not be covered by this prohibition and should be subject only to national law.

(44)

Nevertheless, in the context of developing a ‘just culture’ environment, Member States should retain the option of extending the prohibition on using occurrence reports as evidence against reporters in administrative and disciplinary proceedings to civil or criminal proceedings.

(45)

In addition, the cooperation between safety authorities and judicial authorities should be enhanced and formalised by means of advance arrangements between themselves which should respect the balance between the various public interests at stake and which should in particular cover, for example, access to and the use of occurrence reports contained in the national databases.

(46)

To support the increased responsibilities of the Agency under this Regulation, it should be given sufficient resources to enable it to carry out the additional tasks assigned to it.

(47)

In order to supplement or amend this Regulation, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

(48)

In applying this Regulation, the Commission should consult the Agency and the network of aviation safety analysts referred to herein.

(49)

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5).

(50)

The rules on data processing and the protection of individuals as laid down in Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) and in Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7) should be fully respected in the application of this Regulation. The rules on access to data as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (8) should be fully respected in the application of this Regulation except as regards the dissemination of data and information contained in the European Central Repository, which are protected under stricter access rules laid down in this Regulation.

(51)

Penalties should, in particular, be applicable against any person who or entity which, contrary to this Regulation, misuses information protected by this Regulation; acts in a prejudicial manner against the reporter or other persons mentioned in occurrence reports, except in cases where the exemptions laid down in this Regulation apply; does not establish an environment appropriate for allowing the collection of details of occurrences; does not analyse the information collected; does not act to address any safety or potential safety deficiencies detected; or does not share the information collected in application of this Regulation.

(52)

Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the establishment of common rules in the field of occurrence reporting in civil aviation, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of its Union-wide scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(53)

Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(54)

Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (9), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1321/2007 (10) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1330/2007 (11) should therefore be repealed.

(55)

The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and delivered an opinion on 10 April 2013 (12),

(1)

‘reporter’ means a natural person who reports an occurrence or other safety-related information pursuant to this Regulation;

(2)

‘aircraft’ means any machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air other than the reactions of the air against the earth's surface;

(3)

‘incident’ means an incident within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 996/2010;

(4)

‘serious incident’ means a serious incident within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 996/2010;

(5)

‘accident’ means an accident within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 996/2010;

(6)

‘disidentified information’ means information arising from occurrence reports from which all personal data such as names or addresses of natural persons have been removed;

(7)

‘occurrence’ means any safety-related event which endangers or which, if not corrected or addressed, could endanger an aircraft, its occupants or any other person and includes in particular an accident or serious incident;

(8)

‘organisation’ means any organisation providing aviation products and/or which employs, contracts or uses the services of persons required to report occurrences in accordance with Article 4(6);

(9)

‘anonymisation’ means the removal from occurrence reports of all personal details relating to the reporter and to the persons mentioned in occurrence reports and any details, including the name of the organisation(s) involved in the occurrence, which may reveal the identity of the reporter or of a third party or lead to that information being inferred from the occurrence report;

(10)

‘hazard’ means a situation or an object with the potential to cause death or injury to a person, damage to equipment or a structure, loss of material, or a reduction of ability to perform a prescribed function;

(11)

‘safety investigation authority’ means the permanent national civil aviation safety investigation authority conducting or supervising safety investigations as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 996/2010;

(12)

‘just culture’ means a culture in which front-line operators or other persons are not punished for actions, omissions or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience and training, but in which gross negligence, wilful violations and destructive acts are not tolerated;

(13)

‘point of contact’ means:

(14)

‘interested party’ means any natural or legal person or any official body, whether or not having its own legal personality, that is in a position to participate in the improvement of aviation safety by having access to information on occurrences exchanged by the Member States and which falls within one of the categories of interested parties set out in Annex II;

(15)

‘State Safety Programme’ means an integrated set of legal acts and activities aimed at managing civil aviation safety in a Member State;

(16)

‘European Aviation Safety Plan’ means safety issues assessment and the related action plan at European level;

(17)

‘European Aviation Safety Programme’ means the integrated set of regulations at Union level, together with the activities and processes used to jointly manage the safety of civil aviation at European level;

(18)

‘safety management system’ means a systematic approach to managing aviation safety including the necessary organisational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures, and includes any management system that, independently or integrated with other management systems of the organisation, addresses the management of safety.

(a)

update the list of mandatory data fields in occurrence reports laid down in Annex I where, in the light of experience gained in the application of this Regulation, changes prove necessary in order to improve aviation safety;

(b)

update the request for European Central Repository information form provided in Annex III, to take account of experience gained and of new developments;

(c)

align any of the Annexes with the ECCAIRS software and the ADREP taxonomy, as well as with legal acts adopted by the Union and with international agreements.

(1)

Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) was an Earth monitoring initiative led by the Union and carried out in partnership with the Member States and the European Space Agency (ESA). The origins of GMES date back to May 1998, when institutions involved in the development of space activities in Europe made a joint declaration known as the ‘Baveno Manifesto’. The Manifesto called for a long-term commitment to the development of space-based environmental monitoring services, making use of, and further developing, European skills and technologies. In 2005, the Union made the strategic choice of developing jointly with ESA an independent European Earth observation capacity to deliver services in the environmental and security fields.

(2)

Building on that initiative, Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) established the European Earth monitoring programme (GMES) and the rules for the implementation of its initial operations.

(3)

While the programme set up under Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 should continue under the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020, established by Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (4), the acronym ‘GMES’ should be replaced by the name of ‘Copernicus’ in order to facilitate the communication with the public at large. The Commission has registered the trademark so that it can be used by the Union institutions and licensed to other interested users, in particular the providers of core services.

(4)

The Copernicus programme (Copernicus) is based on a partnership between the Union, ESA and the Member States. Hence, it should build on existing European and national capacities and should complement them by new assets developed in common. In order to implement this approach, the Commission should endeavour to maintain a dialogue with ESA and Member States owning relevant space and in situ assets.

(5)

In order to attain its objectives, Copernicus should ensure an autonomous Union capacity for spaceborne observations and provide operational services in the field of the environment, civil protection and civil security, fully respecting national mandates on official warnings. It should also make use of the available contributing missions and in situ data provided mainly by the Member States. To the greatest extent possible, Copernicus should make use of capacities for spaceborne observations and services of Member States. Copernicus should also make use of the capacities of commercial initiatives in Europe, thereby also contributing to the development of a viable commercial space sector in Europe. In addition, systems to optimise the transmission of data should be promoted to further enhance capabilities in response to growing user demand for near real-time data.

(6)

To promote and facilitate the use of Earth observation technologies both by local authorities and by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), dedicated networks for Copernicus data distribution, including national and regional bodies, should be promoted.

(7)

The objective of Copernicus should be to provide accurate and reliable information in the field of the environment and security, tailored to the needs of users and supporting other Union policies, in particular relating to the internal market, transport, environment, energy, civil protection and civil security, cooperation with third countries and humanitarian aid.

(8)

Copernicus should be considered as a European contribution to building the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) developed within the framework of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO).

(9)

Copernicus should be implemented consistently with other relevant Union instruments and actions, in particular with environmental and climate change actions, and instruments in the field of security, protection of personal data, competitiveness and innovation, cohesion, research, transport, competition and international cooperation, and with the European satellite navigation systems (Galileo and EGNOS). Copernicus data should be compliant with Member States' spatial reference data as well as with implementing rules and technical guidelines of the infrastructure for spatial information in the Union established by Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5). Copernicus should also complement the Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS), as referred to in the Commission Communication of 1 February 2008 entitled: Towards a Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS), and Union activities in the field of emergency response. Copernicus should be implemented in accordance with the objectives of Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) on the re-use of public sector information, in particular transparency, the creation of conditions conducive to the development of services, and contributing to economic growth and job creation. Copernicus data and Copernicus information should be available freely and openly to support the Digital Agenda for Europe, as referred to in the Commission Communication of 26 August 2010 entitled: A Digital Agenda for Europe.

(10)

Copernicus is a programme to be delivered under the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (the ‘Europe 2020 strategy’). It should benefit a wide range of Union policies and contribute to reaching the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, in particular by developing an effective space policy to provide the tools to address some of the key global challenges and meet the targets on climate change and energy sustainability. Copernicus should also support the implementation of the European space policy and support the growth of European markets for space-based data and services.

(11)

Copernicus should also benefit from the results provided by Horizon 2020, established by Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7), in particular through its activities in research and innovation for future Earth Observation technologies and applications using remote sensing, airborne and in situ technologies and data to respond to the major societal challenges. The Commission should ensure appropriate synergy, transparency and clarity regarding the different aspects of Copernicus.

(12)

The evolution of the Copernicus space component should be based on an analysis of options to meet evolving user needs, including procurement from national/public missions and commercial providers in Europe, specification of new dedicated missions, international agreements ensuring access to non-European missions, and the European Earth observation market.

(13)

For the sake of clarity and in order to facilitate cost control, the maximum amount allocated by the Union to implement the Copernicus activities should be broken down into various categories. Nonetheless, in the interest of flexibility and to ensure the smooth running of Copernicus, the Commission should be able to re-allocate funds from one category to another.

(14)

The provision of operational services depends on the good functioning, continued availability and safety of the Copernicus space component. The increasing risk of collision with other satellites and space debris is a serious threat to the Copernicus space component. Therefore, the Copernicus activities should include the protection of the Copernicus space component and its operations, including during the launch of satellites. In this respect, a proportionate contribution to the costs of services capable of providing such protection could be financed by the budget allocated to Copernicus insofar as possible following rigorous cost management and full compliance with the maximum amount of EUR 26,5 million in current prices established in this Regulation. Such contribution should be used only for the provision of data and services and not for the purchase of infrastructure.

(15)

With a view to improving the implementation of Copernicus and its long-term planning, the Commission should adopt an annual work programme, including an implementation plan of the actions required to meet the objectives of Copernicus. That implementation plan should be forward-looking and should describe the actions needed to implement Copernicus taking into account evolving user needs and technological developments.

(16)

The implementation of the Copernicus service component should be based on technical specifications given the complexity and resources allocated to Copernicus. This would also facilitate the public uptake of services as users would be able to anticipate the availability and evolution of services as well as cooperation with Member States and other parties. Therefore, the Commission should adopt and update, as necessary, technical specifications for all Copernicus services addressing aspects such as scope, architecture, technical service portfolios, indicative cost break-down and planning, performance levels, space and in situ data access needs, evolution, standards, archiving and dissemination of data.

(17)

The implementation of the Copernicus space component should be based on technical specifications given the complexity and resources allocated to Copernicus. Therefore, the Commission should adopt and update, as necessary, technical specifications detailing the activities to be supported under the Copernicus space component and their indicative cost break-down and planning. Since Copernicus should build on investments made by the Union, ESA and Member States in the context of the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security, the activities under the Copernicus space component should take into consideration, where appropriate, elements of the ESA Long-Term Scenario (LTS) which is a document prepared and updated by ESA, establishing an overall framework for the Copernicus space component.

(18)

Copernicus should be user-driven, thus requiring the continuous, effective involvement of users, particularly regarding the definition and validation of service requirements.

(19)

The international dimension of Copernicus is of particular relevance in the exchange of data and information, as well as in access to observation infrastructure. Such exchange is more cost-efficient than data-buy schemes and strengthens the global dimension of Copernicus.

(20)

The European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement and the Framework Agreements with candidate countries and potential candidates provide for participation by those countries in Union programmes. Participation by other third countries and international organisations should be made possible by the conclusion of international agreements to that effect.

(21)

Member States, third countries and international organisations should be free to contribute to the programmes on the basis of appropriate agreements.

(22)

The Commission should have overall responsibility for Copernicus. It should define the priorities and ensure the overall coordination and supervision of Copernicus. That should also include special efforts leading to raising public awareness about the importance of space programmes for European citizens. It should provide the European Parliament and the Council with all relevant information pertaining to Copernicus in a timely manner.

(23)

In the implementation of Copernicus, the Commission should rely, where appropriate, on European intergovernmental organisations with whom it has already established partnerships, in particular ESA for the technical coordination of the Copernicus space component, the definition of its architecture, the development and procurement of space assets, data access and the operation of dedicated missions. In addition, the Commission should also rely on the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) for the operation of dedicated missions in accordance with its expertise and mandate.

(24)

Taking into account the partnership dimension of Copernicus and in order to avoid duplication of technical expertise, the implementation of Copernicus should be delegated to entities with the appropriate technical and professional capacity. Such entities should be encouraged to open the execution of those tasks to competition up to an adequate level in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (8) (‘the Financial Regulation’).

(25)

Copernicus should include a service component ensuring delivery of information in atmosphere monitoring, marine environment monitoring, land monitoring, climate change, emergency management and security. In particular, Copernicus should deliver information on the state of the atmosphere including at the local, national, European and global scale; information on the state of the oceans, including through the setting-up of a dedicated European grouping for marine monitoring; information in support of land monitoring supporting the implementation of local, national and European policies; information in support of climate change adaptation and mitigation; geospatial information in support of emergency management, including through prevention activities, and civil security including support for the Union's external action. The Commission should identify appropriate contractual arrangements fostering the sustainability of service provision.

(26)

In the implementation of Copernicus service component, the Commission may rely, where duly justified by the special nature of the action and specific expertise, on competent entities, such as the European Environment Agency, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX), the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) and the European Union Satellite Centre (SATCEN), the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), other relevant European agencies, groupings or consortia of national bodies, or any relevant body potentially eligible for a delegation in accordance with the Financial Regulation. The choice of the entity should take due account of the cost efficiency of entrusting those tasks and the impact on the entity's governance structure and on its financial and human resources.

(27)

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the Commission has been actively involved in the GMES initiative and in the implementation of the GMES initial operations established under Regulation (EU) No 911/2010. The Commission should continue relying on the JRC's scientific and technical support for the implementation of Copernicus.

(28)

Public procurement of the entities entrusted with the implementation of Copernicus should be compatible with Union rules or equivalent international standards, to the extent allowable by the provisions on public contracts in the Financial Regulation. Specific adjustments necessary to these rules, as well as the arrangements for the prolongation of the existing contracts, should be defined in the corresponding delegation agreements. It should aim, first and foremost, to obtain best value for money, control costs, mitigate risks, improve efficiency and reduce reliance on a single supplier. Open access and fair competition throughout the supply chain and the balanced offering of participation opportunities to industry at all levels, including, in particular, new entrants and SMEs, should be ensured. Possible abuse of dominant position and of long-term reliance on single suppliers should be avoided. In order to mitigate programme risks, to avoid reliance on a single source of supply and to ensure better overall control of Copernicus and its costs and schedule, multiple sourcing should be pursued, wherever appropriate. Moreover, the development of European industry should be preserved and promoted in all areas relating to Earth observation, in accordance with international agreements to which the Union is Part.

(29)

The risk of poor contract performance or of non-performance should be mitigated as much as possible. To that end, contractors should demonstrate the sustainability of their contractual performance with respect to the commitments undertaken and the duration of the contract. Therefore, contracting authorities should, wherever appropriate, specify requirements relating to the reliability of supplies and of the provision of services. In addition, in the case of the purchase of goods and services of a sensitive nature, contracting authorities may subject such purchase to specific requirements, particularly with a view to ensuring security of information. Union industries should be permitted to rely on non-Union sources for certain components and services where substantial advantages are demonstrated in terms of quality and costs, taking account, however, of the strategic nature of Copernicus and of Union security and export control requirements. Advantage should be taken of public sector investment and industrial experience and competence, while ensuring that the rules on competitive tendering are not contravened.

(30)

In order to better evaluate the total cost of a product, service or work being tendered, including its long term operational cost, the total cost over the useful lifecycle of the product, service or work being tendered should be taken into account wherever appropriate during the procurement, by using a cost effectiveness approach such as lifecycle costing when pursuing procurement based on the criterion of the most economically advantageous tender award. For that purpose, the contracting authority should make sure that the methodology intended to compute the costs for the useful lifecycle of a product, service or work is expressly mentioned in the contract documents or the contract notice and that it allows the accuracy of the information supplied by the tenderers to be verified.

(31)

The contracting authority should be able to restore a level playing-field when one or more companies have, prior to a call for tenders, privileged information on the activities associated with the call for tender. It should be possible to award a contract in the form of a conditional stage-payment contract, introduce an amendment, under certain conditions, in the context of its performance, or even impose a minimum level of subcontracting. Finally, due to the technological uncertainties that are a feature of Copernicus, contract prices cannot always be forecast accurately and it is therefore desirable to conclude contracts in a specific form that do not stipulate a firm fixed price and include clauses to safeguard the financial interests of the Union.

(32)

With a view to keeping Copernicus in its maximum amount by reducing to the largest extent technical and schedule risks and their associated cost and ensuring sustained reliability of supply, Copernicus should make maximum use of prior public sector financial and infrastructure investments as well as of the industrial experience and competence acquired through such investments in GMES. This should be particularly true for what concerns the recurrent space and ground segment components developed by ESA and its Participating States in the context of the GMES Space Component optional programme with a financial participation of the Union. In the latter case use of the negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice or its equivalent should be duly considered by the contracting authority.

(33)

In order to achieve the objectives of Copernicus on a sustainable basis, it is necessary to coordinate the activities of the various partners involved in Copernicus, and to develop, establish and operate a service and observation capacity meeting the demands of users. In this context, a committee (the Copernicus Committee) should assist the Commission in ensuring the coordination of contributions to Copernicus by the Union, the Member States and inter-governmental organisations as well as coordination with the private sector, making the best use of existing capacities and identifying gaps to be addressed at Union level. It should also assist the Commission in monitoring the coherent implementation of Copernicus. As sound public governance requires uniform management of Copernicus, faster decision-making and equal access to information, representatives of entities entrusted with budget implementation tasks should be able to take part as observers in the work of the Copernicus Committee. For the same reasons, representatives of third countries and international organisations who have concluded an international agreement with the Union should be able to take part in the work of the Copernicus Committee subject to security constraints and as provided for in the terms of such agreement. Such representatives should not be entitled to take part in the Copernicus Committee voting procedures.

(34)

The work of the entities to which the Commission has delegated implementation tasks should also be measured against performance indicators. This would provide the European Parliament and the Council with an indication of the progress of the Copernicus operations and Copernicus implementation.

(35)

The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1159/2013 (9) has established the registration and licensing conditions for GMES users and has defined criteria for restricting access to GMES dedicated data and GMES service information.

(36)

The data and information produced in the framework of Copernicus should be made available on a full, open and free-of-charge basis subject to appropriate conditions and limitations, in order to promote their use and sharing, and to strengthen European Earth observation markets, in particular the downstream sector, thereby enabling growth and job creation.

(37)

The Commission should work with data providers to agree licensing conditions for third-party data to facilitate their use within Copernicus, in compliance with this Regulation and applicable third-party rights.

(38)

The access rights to Copernicus Sentinel data granted under the GMES Space Component Programme as approved by the ESA Programme Board on Earth Observation on 24 September 2013 should be taken into account.

(39)

Since Copernicus is a civil programme under civil control, priority should be given to the acquisition of data and the production of information, including high-resolution images, that do not constitute a risk or threat for the security of the Union or its Member States. However, as some Copernicus data and Copernicus information may require protection, to ensure the secure circulation of such information, within the scope of this Regulation, all participants in Copernicus should ensure a degree of protection of EU classified information equivalent to that provided by the rules on security as set out in the Annex to Commission Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom (10) and by the security rules of the Council set out in the Annexes to Council Decision 2013/488/EU (11).

(40)

As some Copernicus data and Copernicus information, including high-resolution images, may have an impact on the security of the Union or its Member States, in duly justified cases, the Council should be empowered to adopt the measures in order to deal with risks and threats to the security of the Union or its Member States.

(41)

The Union should be the owner of all tangible and intangible assets created or developed under Copernicus. In order to comply fully with any fundamental rights relating to ownership, the necessary arrangements should be made with existing owners. It should be understood that the provisions on ownership of intangible assets laid down in this Regulation do not cover intangible rights that are not transferable under relevant national laws. Such ownership by the Union should be without prejudice to the possibility for the Union, in accordance with this Regulation and where it is deemed appropriate on the basis of a case-by-case assessment, to make those assets available to third parties or to dispose of them. In particular, the Union should be able to transfer the ownership of, or license the intellectual property rights arising from, work under Copernicus in the interest of a strong uptake of Copernicus services by downstream users.

(42)

The financial interests of the Union should be protected through proportionate measures throughout the expenditure cycle, including the prevention, detection and investigation of irregularities, the recovery of funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where appropriate, administrative and financial penalties in accordance with the Financial Regulation.

(43)

Since Copernicus is a complex programme, the Commission should be assisted by independent experts from a broad constituency of stakeholders, including in particular experts nominated by Member States on security issues, representatives of relevant national entities responsible for space and Copernicus users, to provide it with the necessary technical and scientific expertise, as well as inter-disciplinary and cross-sectoral perspectives, taking account of relevant existing initiatives at Union, national and regional levels.

(44)

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation as regards the adoption of the annual work programme, the technical specifications for the service and space components, security aspects and the measures to promote the convergence of Member States in the use of Copernicus data and Copernicus information and their access to the technology and development in Earth Observation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (12).

(45)

Since Copernicus is user driven, it requires the continuous, effective involvement of users, particularly regarding the definition and validation of service requirements. In order to increase the value of users, their input should be actively sought through regular consultation with end-users from the public and private sectors. For that purpose, a working group (the ‘User Forum’) should be set up to assist the Copernicus Committee with the identification of user requirements, the verification of service compliance and the coordination of public sector users.

(46)

The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the data requirements necessary for the evolution of operational services, the conditions and procedures regarding access to, registration and use of Copernicus data and Copernicus information, the specific technical criteria necessary to prevent the disruption of Copernicus data and Copernicus information and the criteria for the restriction of acquisition or dissemination of Copernicus data and Copernicus information due to conflicting rights. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

(47)

The actions financed under this Regulation should be monitored and evaluated in order to allow for readjustments and new evolutions. In particular, the evaluation should assess the effects of the Copernicus data and Copernicus information policy on stakeholders, downstream users, the influence on business as well as on national and private investments in Earth observation infrastructures. The evaluation should also address the possible future involvement of relevant European agencies, such as the European GNSS Agency. In order to maximise the results and capitalise on the knowledge and expertise acquired through the implementation phases of Copernicus, new organisation models should be explored for future planning, ensuring long-term economic commitment.

(48)

Since the objective of this Regulation, namely the establishment of Copernicus, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States because it will also comprise pan-European capacity and depend on the coordinated provision of services throughout the Member States that needs to be coordinated at Union level, but can rather, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(49)

This Regulation lays down a financial envelope, which is to constitute the prime reference amount, within the meaning of point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (13), for the European Parliament and the Council during the annual budgetary procedure.

(50)

It is appropriate to align the period of funding of this Regulation with that provided for in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013. Therefore, this Regulation should apply from 1 January 2014.

(51)

It is also necessary to repeal Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 in order to establish an appropriate framework for governance and funding and to ensure a fully operational Copernicus. Any measure adopted on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 911/2010 should remain valid in order to ensure its continuity,

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) provides that Member States are to carry out farm structure surveys in 2010, 2013 and 2016. Member States are to receive a maximum financial contribution of 75 % from the Union towards the cost of carrying out those surveys, subject to defined maximum amounts.

(2)

In order to carry out the farm structure surveys and to satisfy the information requirements of the Union, considerable funding is required from Member States and from the Union.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008 laid down the financial envelope for the implementation of the programme of surveys, including for the management, maintenance and development of the database systems used within the Commission to process the data supplied by Member States, and fixed the amount for the period 2008-2013.

(4)

In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008, the amount for the period 2014-2018 should be fixed by the budgetary and legislative authority, on a proposal from the Commission, on the basis of the new financial framework for the period commencing in 2014.

(5)

The proposed financial envelope should only finance the carrying out of the Farm Structure Survey in 2016 and the related management, maintenance and development of the database systems used within the Commission to process the data supplied by Member States.

(6)

In view of the accession of Croatia and the need to conduct surveys on the structure of agricultural holdings in that Member State in 2016, a maximum Union contribution per survey should be fixed for Croatia since none was provided for in the Act of Accession.

(7)

The Standing Committee for Agricultural Statistics has been consulted.

(8)

Regulation (EC) No 1166/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

in Article 13, the following paragraph is added:

(2)

Article 14 is amended as follows:

(3)

the following Article is inserted:

(*2)  Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities' financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2).’ "