ANNEX I
Central Financing and Contracting Unit
Twinning Contract
PHARE 2004/016-772.05.01.02
PHARE RO 04 IB/FI 08
Advancing the administrative capacity and application of the acquis in the competition and state aid area, coherent with the MS status at the date of accession
|Name of Beneficiary (Member State partner): | |
| |Italian Competition Authority together with Department of |
| |Trade and Industry, UK |
| | |
TWINNING CONTRACT
EXTERNAL ACTIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
PHARE 2004/016-772.05.01.02, RO04/IB/FI 08
The Central Financing and Contracting Unit, 44 Mircea Voda bd, Sector 3, Bucharest, Romania, ("the Contracting Authority"), represented by Ms Carmen Rosu, Director
("the Contracting Authority")
of the one part,
and
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, Piazza G. Verdi, 6/a
Roma, Italy, represented by Mr. Antonio Catricala, Chairman, who entrusts the implementation of the present Contract for his part to Mr. Alberto Heimler, Head of the Directorate for International Relations and Studies, who will act as the Italian Project Leader, ("the Member State Partner" - MSP),
and
Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate (within Department of Trade and Industry), 1 Victoria Street, London, United Kingdom, represented by Mr. David Saunders, Director of Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate (CCP), who entrusts the implementation of the present Contract for his part to Mr. Graham Branton, Director of State Aid Policy within the CCP, who will act as the British Co-ordinator, ("the Member State Partner" - MSP).
of the other part,
have agreed as follows:
Special Conditions
Article 1 – Purpose
1.1 The purpose of this contract is the award of a grant, consisting of reimbursement of expenditures, by the Contracting Authority for the implementation of the Action entitled: “Advancing the administrative capacity and application of the acquis in the competition and state aid area, coherent with the MS status at the date of accession” ("the Action").
1.2 The Member State Partners (MSPs) will be awarded the grant on the terms and conditions set out in this contract, which consists of these special conditions ("Special Conditions") and the annexes, which the MSPs hereby declare it has noted and accepted.
1.3 The MSPs accept the grant and undertakes to carry out the Action under their own responsibility.
Article 2 - Implementation period of the Action
2.1 This contract shall enter into force upon the date of notification by the Delegation of the European Commission in Romania of the contract signed by all parties.
2.2 Implementation of the Action shall begin on the date mentioned in article 2.1:
2.3 The Action's implementation period, as laid down in Annex I, is 14 months.
Article 3 - Financing the Action
3.1 The total cost of the Action eligible for financing by the Contracting Authority is estimated at 895,944,30 Euro Phare budget , as set out in Annex III.
3.2 The Contracting Authority undertakes to finance a maximum of Euro 895,944,30 Euro. The final amount shall be established in accordance with Article 17 of Annex II except where Annex VII applies. The Action is co-financed as per Annex III by the Final Recipient of the Action, namely the Competition Council.
Article 4 - Technical and financial reporting and payment arrangements
4.1 Article 15.1, the following will apply:
First instalment of pre-financing (80% of the part of the forecast budget for the first 12 months of implementation financed by the Contracting Authority: € 582.097,30
Interim payment: € 201.572,57
Forecast final payment (minimum 10 % , € 87.074,43 subject to the provisions of Annex II)
Article 5 - Contact addresses
Any communication relating to this contract must be in writing, state the number and title of the Action and be sent to the following addresses:
For the Contracting Authority
Ms Carmen Rosu
Director
Central Finance and Contracting Unit
Ministry of Finance
Address: 44 Mircea Voda bd, Sector 3, Bucharest, Romania
Phone: +40 21 326.87.03
Fax: +40 21 326.87.30
Email: carmenrosu@cfcu.ro
A copy of the reports referred to in Article 4.1 must be sent to the European Commission Delegation in charge of monitoring the Action, at the following address:
Jonathan Scheele
Head of Delegation
Delegation of the European Commission
18 – 20, Jules Michelet St., Bucharest 010463
Romania
Phone: +40 21 203.54.95
Fax: +40 21 230.24.53
E-mail: codrina.carnu@cec.eu.int
For the Member State Partner - ITALY
Mr Alberto Heimler , Project leader
Head of the Directorate for International Relations and Studies,
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato,
Piazza G. Verdi, 6/a
00198 Roma, Italy
Phone: +39.06.85.82.18.43
Fax: +39.06.85.82.13.76
email: alberto.heimler@agcm.it
For the Member State Partner –UK
Mr. Graham Branton,
Director of State Aid Policy within the CCP,
British Co-ordinator
Department of Trade and Industry – Consumer and Competition Policy Department
1 Victoria Street, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0) 2072155012
Fax: +44 (0) 2072154468
email: graham.branton@dti..uk
For the Final Recipient of the Action
Ms Doina Tudoran, Director for International Relations and European Integration
Project Leader
Romanian Competition Council (RCC),
1 Piata Presei Libere, Bucharest
Romania
Phone: +40 21 317 11 58
Fax: +40 21 318 26 11
Email: doina.tudoran@consiliulconcurentei.ro
Article 6 – Annexes
6.1 The following documents are annexed to these Special Conditions and form an integral part of the contract:
Annex I: Description of the Action (including Work Plan)
Annex II: General Conditions applicable to European Community-financed grant contracts for external Actions
Annex III: Budget for the Action (including co-financing part by the Final Recipient of the Action)
Annex IV: Contract-award procedures
Annex V: Standard request for payment and financial identification form
Annex VI: Model audit certificate
Annex VII: Special Financial Annex
Annex VIII: Mandate
6.2 In the event of conflict between the provisions of the Annexes and those of the Special Conditions, the.4 of the General Conditions (Extension of the deadline for submission of the final report) shall not apply.
7.2.2 By derogation of Article 7.1 of General Conditions all rights to any work done by RTAs in the performance of their duties become the property of the beneficiary country in question. The MSP and the Commission will be permitted to use the results of the work elsewhere by permission of the beneficiary country. Permission may only be refused where the proposed use is liable to prejudice the interests of the beneficiary country or the European Union, or where it is for commercial purposes.
7.2.3 By derogation from Article 9.2 of the General Conditions, changes to the Twinning work plan and budget shall be governed by the procedure spelled out in Special Financial Annex VII.
7.2.4 By derogation from Article 12.1 of the General conditions, either party (BC or MS) may terminate the Twinning Contract at any time by giving three months notice in writing to the other party, after having informed the Commission and the administrative office thereof. Failure of a party to fulfil any of its obligations under the Twinning Contract entitles the other party to terminate the Twinning Contract stating the grounds. If such a failure occurs, or for any other duly substantiated external reason, the Commission (PHARE and equivalent preaccession instruments before EDIS) or the administrative office after agreement with the Commission (PHARE and equivalent pre-accession instruments under EDIS) may also halt funding of the project by giving three months’ notice in writing to the BC and MSP.
7.2.5. By derogation from Articles 13.3 and 13.4 of the General Conditions (Annex II), the following procedure for settlement of disputes shall apply: The Parties shall endeavour to settle amicably any dispute or complaint relating to the interpretation, application or fulfillment of this Twinning Contract, including its existence, validity or termination. In default of amicable settlement, any Party may refer the matter to arbitration in accordance with the Permanent Court of Arbitration Optional Rules for Arbitration Involving International Organisations and States in force at the date of this Agreement. The language to be used in the arbitral proceedings shall be English, French or German. The appointing authority shall be the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities following a written request submitted by either Party. The Arbitrator’s decision shall be binding on all Parties and there shall be no appeal.
7.2.6 Eligible costs encountered by the MSP for this Twinning contract are defined in Annex VII. As such, if discrepancies appear between Article 14.2 of the General Conditions and Annex VII, the latter shall prevail.
7.2.7 Articles 14.4 and 14.5 of the General Conditions shall not apply.
7.2.8 The audit certificate of Article 15.6 is only required for the final payment. The auditor will be designated in accordance with the regulation prevailing for the MSP. The auditor will be duly notified to the Contracting Authority before the end of the contract.
7.2.9 By derogation from article 1.4 of the General Conditions (Annex II) the Commission shall not endorse the Twinning Contracts relating to Twinning projects implemented in those beneficiary countries operating under the Extended Decentralised Implementation System.
Done at [.........] in five originals in the English language, one for each of the signatories.
For the Member State Partner - Italy For the Contracting Authority
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e Ms. Carmen Rosu
del Mercato Director CFCU
Mr. Alberto Heimler, Project Authorising Officer
Project Leader
Head of the Directorate for International Relations
and Studies
[signature]
[date]
Endorsed for financing by the European Community
Mr Jonathan Scheele
Head of Dleegation
[signature]
[date]
ANNEX I
TWINNING WORKPLAN
The Administration of Romania (hereinafter referred to as the Beneficiary Country ) represented by the Competition Council represented by Mr. Mihai Berinde, President of the Competition Council, who entrusts the implementation of the present Contract for his part to Ms. Doina Ion Tudoran, who will act as the Romanian Project Leader
of the one part,
And the Administration of Italy (hereinafter referred to as the Member State) represented by Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, represented by Mr. Antonio Catricalà, President of the Italian Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, who entrusts the implementation of the present Covenant for his part to Mr. Alberto Heimler, Head of the Directorate for International Relations and Studies within the AGCM, who will act as the Italian Senior Project Leader, ("the Member State Partner" - MSP).
and
The Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate (within Department of Trade and Industry), represented by Mr. David Saunders, Director of Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate (CCP), who entrusts the implementation of the present Covenant for his part to Mr. Graham Branton, Director of State Aid Policy within the CCP, who will act as the British Co-ordinator, ("the Member State Partner" - MSP).
of the other part
HAVE AGREED THE FOLLOWING WORK PLAN WHICH THEY UNDERTAKE TO IMPLEMENT JOINTLY:
ARTICLE 1. BACKGROUND
1. 1. Beneficiary Country policy developments in the sector
Currently, the Romanian legislative framework on antitrust and state aid is substantially in line with the acquis, but recent Community developments require some further transposition. The Competition Law of Romania, law no. 21/1996, entered into force on February 1st, 1997 and was amended several times as reflected in the consolidated version published in the O.G. of Romania, Part I, no. 742 of August 16th, 2005.
The most important changes to the Romanian competition law have been the following:
- abolishing the requirement for individual notifications under the "block exemptions"
- increase the turnover threshold triggering the obligation to notify mergers.
- eliminating the discriminating regime for the regies autonomes and State owned undertakings as compared to other undertakings by the abolition of article 6, letter e) and article 7(4) (amendments made in November 2004).
In the same spirit of harmonization with the EU acquis, the Competition Council (CC) - has adopted a set of secondary legislation (Regulations and Guidelines).
As a result of these amendments, the Romanian Competition Law is fully in line with the main antitrust Community principles as regards restrictive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and merger control. Only very recent Community developments require some further transposition.
The substantial provisions of the law are applicable to all undertakings, defined as "individuals or legal entities - Romanian or foreign - irrespective of nationality or citizenship", of their organization or the nature of their social capital. The Law also applies to central and local public administration bodies to the extent in which they intervene on the market, directly or indirectly affecting the competition.
The Competition Law applies to anti-competitive practices by private commercial operators and state-owned enterprises, including commercial companies where the State is a major shareholder. The Law also applies to anti-competitive practices by central and local public administration authorities. The Law does not prohibit an undertaking from becoming dominant, but only that a dominant position be achieved via a merger, or that a dominant firm abuses of its position. Article 5 of the Law prohibits restrictive agreements, association decisions and concerted practices. The Competition Council may grant, by decision, an exemption for individual cases of agreements, association decisions or concerted practices, and establish (by regulations/guidelines) exemptions for certain categories of agreements, association decisions or concerted practices.
With the entering into force of EC Regulation 1/2003, Romanian undertakings need to quickly become acquainted with the process of self evaluation of agreements (legal exception principle). To this end it is the duty of the Competition Council to prepare the Romanian economy to the new legal environment and, more in general, to increase the awareness of the business and legal community, public institutions, universities and they public at large about the importance of respecting competition provisions.
In the 2005 Comprehensive Monitoring Report, the European Commission states that “Romania is generally meeting the commitments and requirements arising from the accession negotiations in the anti-trust area and is expected to be in a position to implement the acquis in this area as of accession. In completing preparations for membership, Romania must continue to develop a track record of enforcement of the anti-trust legislation.
Romania must increase efforts to meet the commitments and requirements arising from the accession negotiations in the state aid area. In order to complete preparations for membership, Romania must maintain continued efforts to develop the Competition Council’s enforcement record and to improve the quality of state aid decisions, notably with regard to the proper assessment of aid measures. In order to reach a satisfactory enforcement level, it is furthermore crucial that the Competition Council continues with the assessment of existing aid measures.
Finally, Romania has to ensure that all state aid projects become subject to a strict state aid control by the Competition Council. Major continued efforts are therefore required to ensure ex-ante notification of all new aid measures in relation to restructuring cases, payment deferrals and measures in connection with privatisation.”
In the Annex to the 2005 Comprehensive Monitoring Report, the EC further recommends:
• “To ensure effective control by the Competition Council (the Romanian Competition Authority) of any potential State aid, including in relation to State aid foreseen by means of deferrals of payments to the State budget of fiscal or social liabilities or deferrals of liabilities related to energy supply.
• To strengthen the State aid enforcement record without delay and to ensure a satisfactory enforcement record in the areas of both anti-trust and State aid thereafter.
• To fully respect the commitment not to grant or pay any State aid to the steel mills covered by the National Restructuring Strategy from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2008 and to fully respect the State aid amounts and the conditions regarding capacity reductions to be decided in the context of Protocol 2 on ECSC products to the Europe Agreement.
• To continue devoting adequate financial means and sufficient and adequately qualified human resources to the Competition Council.”
1. 2. Beneficiary institutions and other parties involved
Competition Council
The main beneficiary of the Project is the Romanian Competition Council together with its territorial inspectorates. The Competition Council administers the laws on competition and on State aid.
In recent years the Competition Council continued to develop its antitrust enforcement record, increasing the number of decisions adopted and imposing a significantly increased volume of fines, including record fines for a cement cartel. While a more rigorous policy with respect to fines has been put in place, the Competition Council must continue its active role, both as regards enforcement activities and competition advocacy, to ensure that the process of liberalization of the economy continues and that markets are progressively opened up.
The specialized directorates of the Competition Council responsible for antitrust enforcement are the:
• Consumer goods Directorate
• Services Directorate
• Industry and Energy Directorate
The State Aid Department has the following structure:
- State Aid Authorization Directorate
- State Aid Monitoring, Reporting and Control Directorate
The other directorates of the Competition Council that will also benefit from this Project are:
- Directorate for International Relations and European Integration
- Directorate for Synthesis and Research
- Legal Directorate
Furthermore 41 territorial inspectorates, functioning within each of the 41 counties of Romania, and coordinated by the CC Territorial Directorate are entrusted with powers in both State aid and antitrust matters.
In the area of State aid, legislative alignment is also complete. Romania’s State Aid Law was further amended, clarifying the definition of state aid in line with the Community concept and reinforcing the provisions on the obligatory recovery of incompatible aid. Furthermore, many implementing rules have been issued or amended, notably including the December 2004 regulation on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty. As regards enforcement activities, in order to improve the quality of the Competition Council’s state aid enforcement record, a pre-consultation mechanism was established in September 2004, whereby the European Commission offers advice on draft decisions before their final adoption. This has resulted in a noticeable improvement in the quality of these decisions. Further improvement in the quality of the Competition Council’s assessment of aid measures and their analysis is necessary. Furthermore, attention needs to be given to following up the actual implementation of decisions.
Measures have been taken to ensure greater respect for the ex-ante notification obligation. The Competition Council initiated an inter-ministerial working group on state aid issues, and the Romanian Government set up a high level inter-ministerial task force to support the work of the Competition Council by ensuring that all state aid plans of all Ministries are notified and that existing schemes are also scrutinized. Continued efforts are required to ensure ex-ante notification of all new aid measures in particular in relation to restructuring cases, payment deferrals and measures in connection with privatization. Knowledge and respect of state aid rules among aid granting authorities need to be further developed.
As concerns the State aid filed, the Competition Council responsibilities cover all elements of the ex-ante and ex-post control of the State support measures. Thus, the Competition Council authorises the State aid, following the ex-ante notifications submitted by various grantors, and ensures their inventorying, monitoring and report.
Furthermore, the position of the Competition Council vis-à-vis the State aid grantors was effectively enhanced, giving powers to:
▪ analyse all draft normative acts that contain possible State aid measures;
▪ propose amendments to the normative acts containing State aid measures;
▪ control the State aids granted by laws, Government Ordinances, Government Decisions etc.;
▪ monitor the application of all the conditions settled in the State aid decisions.
RCC staff, who will be involved in the management and implementation of the project:
1. Romanian Project Leader, Director of International Relations and European Integration Directorate, tel. 0040 21 3171158, fax 0040 21 3181126,
e-mail: doina.tudoran@consiliulconcurentei.ro
2. Counterpart on antitrust: Mr. Dan Pencu, Assistant Director of Industry and Energy Directorate
3. Counterpart on State Aid: Mr. Daniel Diaconescu, Director of the State Aid Reporting, Monitoring and Inventorying Directorate
The decisions of the Competition Council on antitrust and state aid can be appealed in front of the Bucharest Court of Appeal and the High Court of Cassation and Justice. Furthermore antitrust and State aid cases originating from private litigation can be heard in front of the Bucharest Court of Appeal and the High Court of Cassation. It is therefore very important that also judges (including young magistrates from the National Institute of Magistracy) be trained on the best practice application of the EU rules. These institutions can therefore directly benefit from the Project and indeed a number of specific dedicated activities have been envisioned.
Other bodies can indirectly benefit from the Project. These may include:
Lawyer’s associations and private law companies
National Regulatory Authorities
Business associations
State aid grantors
Mass media
Universities and academic institutes
NGOs
1. 3. Parallel or related projects in the field
In the period July 2001 – October 2002 the Competition Council and the Competition Office benefited of assistance through Phare Program no. RO99.06.02. which contained the Twinning component - “Effective enforcement of competition and State aid policy”, and an Investment Component.
On antitrust the Twinning project concentrated on the revision of the existing Romanian legislation and on the adoption of new regulations in line with most recent EC developments, particularly in the area of horizontal and vertical agreements. These regulations aimed inter alia at streamlining the enforcement process, reducing notification requirements and increasing the focus of the enforcement action on the most harmful antitrust violations.
On State aid matters, the Twinning Project focused on the evaluation of existing Romanian secondary legislation and on its adaptation to the acquis communautaire; adoption of new regulations in line with the new EC law changes; besides, support to the accession negotiations between Romania and the European Union with regard to State aid provisions.
Finally the Twinning Project aimed at strengthening the enforcement record of the Competition Council and Competition Office through a greater emphasis on the most harmful antitrust infringements, increase the competition advocacy reports to other parts of the Government, reinforce the specialized knowledge and experience of their staff in the application of State aid rules, raise the awareness of other state institutions (especially the State aid grantors) and of the concerned public (especially the business community) with regard to State aid issues.
During October 2003 – September 2005, the Competition Council benefited of assistance through the Phare Programme 2002/000-586.04.02. on the following components:
The Twinning Project no. RO/02/IB/FI/02, which covered aspects related to:
completing the legislative framework, ensuring a proper enforcement through a solid training on the newly transposed and/or amended legislation for the competition and state aid experts of the Competition Council and for the staff of the state aid grantors and regulatory agencies, creation and improvement of data bases and development of an internal IT network; finding solutions for the provisional closure of the Chapter 6 of negotiations in 2004; developing a competition and state aid culture in Romania; designing a simplified RIA mechanism. One of the side results of the Project was the creation of a national network of institutions/experts (ministries, regulatory national agencies, universities, economic research institutions, national organizations and associations from the legal and business environment, the members of parliamentary commissions etc.) for the promotion of competition and state aid rules, legislation and discipline.
The Technical Assistance and the Investment components provided for the development of an internal IT network of the Competition Council, the acquisition of IT equipment, software and licenses and the creation of a common database system. The database, which is fully operational since July 2005, includes information on relevant markets and State aids monitoring the EU experiences in the area of enforcement.
The major achievements of the 2004 Phare Project have been:
Closure of the negotiations for Chapter 6 in December 2004
Recognition of the status of a “functioning market economy” by the EC in October 2004
Publication of the manual of State aid law in Romania
Publication of a number of documents setting up the major strategies to be followed by the Council in order to strengthen its antitrust enforcement activities.
Strong improvements in the quality of decisions in antitrust and in State aid.
In the period 2004/2005 the Competition Council started a project of cooperation with the British DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) on State aid. In particular the DTI granted assistance in specific issues, such as: State aid for film industry and culture, regional aids, draft Regulation on State aid for promoting culture.
Starting with June 2005, a UK State aid expert assisted the Competition Council as to fulfil EU commitments related to state aid enforcement. His job was to be involved in all issues related to the enforcement of State aid legislation, including ways to improve analysis in State aid decisions and to strengthen state aid control over fiscal aid measures. The British expert also gave direct advises to State aid related departments of the Competition Council on the following matters:
- state aid for restructuring in the privatisation process;
- state aid for services of general economic interest;
- state aid for restructuring in the coal sector;
- monitoring, keeping and reporting state aids;
- reporting state aid to the European Commission.
The bilateral cooperation project between the Competition Council and the DTI will end in April 2006.
With TAIEX assistance, the Competition Council benefited of a series of one-week missions from a German State aid expert. His missions started in July 2005 and ended in March 2006. His work consisted of permanent and direct assistance in elaborating draft decisions in State aid field and advises to the Competition Council in defining its future role after accession.
During September – December 2005, a Technical Assistance Programme financed by the German „Funds for Specialists” was developed at the Competition Council. The Programme was focused on the same objectives as of the previous Twinning (no. RO/02/IB/FI/02), in order to ensure a continuity in receiving support from the experts responsible with the State aid Component.
ARTICLE 2. ACQUIS COMMUNAUTAIRE - PROJECT FICHE FIELD OF COOPERATION WITH THE EU PHARE
List of Community provisions on State aid and antitrust that still needs to be transposed into Romanian legislation:
1. Commission Directive no. 723 of 25 June 1980 on the transparency of financial relations between Member State and public undertakings as well as on financial transparency within certain undertakings (80/723/EEC) (OJ L 195, 29.07.1980, p. 35)
2. Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest
(notified under document number C(2005) 2673) (2005/842/EC) (OJ L 312/2005)
3. Community framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (2005/C 297/04) (OJ C 297/2005)
4. Commission Notice of 13 December 2005 on the rules for access to the Commission file in cases pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty, Articles 53, 54 and 57 of the EEA Agreement and Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004
The following guidelines on antitrust have been recently adopted by the Competition Council and published in the Official Gazette:
1. The Regulation modifying and completing the Regulation on the organization, functioning and procedure of the Competition Council, published in the Official Gazette no. 822/7.09.2004;
2. The Guidelines on informal guidance relating to novel questions concerning Articles 5 and 6 of the Competition Law that arise in individual cases (guidance letters), published in O.G. nr. 356/27.04.2005
3. The Guidelines for the completion of point V c) of the Guidelines for the individualization of sanctions for the offences stipulated in article 56 of the Competition Law no. 21/1996, published in O.G. no. 409/16.05.2005;
4. The Guidelines on handling by the Competition Council the complaints concerning the provisions of articles 5 and 6 of the Competition Law, with further amendments and completions, published in the O.G. no. 472/03.06.2005.
5. The Guidelines on the application of article 5 of the Competition Law no. 21/1996 to technology transfer agreements, published in O.G. no. 659/25.07.2005.
6. The Guidelines on the application of article 5 (2) of the Competition Law no. 21/1996, published in O.G. no. 598/11.07.2005.
The following State aid regulations and guidelines have been recently adopted by the Competition Council and published in the Official Gazette of Romania:
1. The Regulation on State aid for research and development (published in O.G. no. 850/16.09.2004)
2. The Regulation on the form, content and other details of the complaints concerning alleged unlawful State aid published in O.G. no. 897/01.10.2004.
3. The Regulation on State aid granted to shipbuilding (published in O.G. no. 953/18.10. 2004)
4. The Regulation on State aid in the form of compensations granted to certain undertakings to which the carrying out of services of general economic interest was entrusted (published in O.G. no. 1048/12.11. 2004)
5. The Regulation on the State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty, published in the O.G. no. 1215/17.12. 2004.
6. The Regulation on the individualization of sanctions for the offences stipulated in the Law no. 143/1999 on State aid, published in O.G. nr. 64/19.01.2005.
7. The Regulation on the form, content and other details of a State aid notification published in O.G. nr. 82/25.01.2005.
8. The Guidelines on the interest rate to be applied when recovering and reimbursing the unlawful and prohibited State aid, published in O.G. no. 253/25.03.2005.
9. The Regulation on the investigation procedure in the State aid field, published in O.G. no. 257/28.03.2005.
10. The consolidated version of the Regulation on State aid for training, published in O.G. no. 257/28.03.2005.
11. The Regulation on rescuing and restructuring aid and aid for closure in steel sector, published in O.G. no. 269/31.03.2005.
12. The Guidelines on qualifying the undertakings as SMEs, published in O.G. no. 314/14.04.2005.
In addition, in order to fully harmonize the State aid secondary legislation with the Community rules, the Competition Council modified and completed some Regulation and Guidelines, as follows:
1) The Regulation modifying the Regulation on the form, content and other details of a State aid notification (published in O.G. no. 847/16.09.2004).
2) The Regulation modifying and completing the Regulation on regional State aid (published in O.G. no. 847/16.09.2004).
3) The Guidelines modifying the Guidelines on the authorization of State aids for air transport (published in O.G. no. 847/16.09.2004)
4) The Regulation modifying and completing the Regulation on State aid for employment drafted on the base of Law no. 143/1999 on State aid and published in O.G. no. 847/16.09. 2004.
5) The Regulation modifying and completing the Multisectoral Regulation on regional State aid for large investments projects, published in O.G. no. 850/16.09. 2004.
6) The Guidelines modifying and completing the Guidelines on State aid and risk capital (published in O.G. no. 850/16.09.2004).
7) The Regulation modifying the Regulation on State aid for SMEs published in O.G. no. 850/16.09.2004.
8) The Regulation modifying and completing the Regulation on State aid for coal industry, published in O.G nr. 55/17.01.2005.
9) The Regulation modifying and completing the Regulation on State aid for SMEs published in O.G. no. 127/09.02.2005
ARTICLE 3. MANDATORY RESULTS (OUTPUTS)
| |Intervention logic |Benchmarks |Sources of information |Assumptions (external to |
| | | | |project) |
|Overall |· Fulfilling all the required conditions regarding the | The acquis communautaire on state aid and competition fully |- Annual Reports on the | |
|Objective |legal framework, institutional organisation and job |taken over in the Romanian legislation by January 1, 2007 |activity of the CC | |
| |qualifications for the national institutions involved in |Number of State aid experts from line ministries trained for |- minutes of the | |
| |competition protection and state aid control to allow them to|improving the quality of notifications (approx. 35 experts by|interministerial working | |
| |apply correctly the anti-trust and state aid rules and to |January 1, 2007) |groups on competition and | |
| |prepare them for their operation as future Member State’s |Normative acts with possible anticompetitive impact or |State aid | |
| |institutions at the date of accession |containing possible state aid measure assessed during the |- EC regular reports on the | |
| |· Promoting the competition and state aid rules and |Interministerial working groups (increased with 50 % in |progress made by Romania in | |
| |discipline that have to be observed by the state |comparison with 2004) |the accession period. | |
| |institutions, market operators and the legal environment not|Number of CC staff trained on the application of the |-Twinning Quarterly Reports | |
| |only after the date of accession, but also to a large extent |Regulation 1/2003 (approx. 100 persons by January 1, 2007) | | |
| |before the date of accession, according to the obligations |Number of training sessions with the participation of | | |
| |under the Europe Agreement and the negotiation process |representatives of sector regulators (10), line ministries | | |
| | |(12) and judiciary (25) | | |
| Project Purpose |· The improvement of the anti-trust and state aid |Number of CC experts familiarized with the new rules and | |1. Commitment and strong |
| |enforcement record of the Romanian Competition Council by |discipline in the field after the date of accession and | |interest by the |
| |strengthening its capability to apply correctly the relevant |consequences of non-observing them (approx. 100 competition | |target groups in the |
| |competition and state aid rules. |experts and 110 state aid experts by January 1, 2007) | |activities of the Project |
| |· Strengthening the Competition Council’s |CC decisions evaluated as correct by the Commission in 80% of| |2. Effective co-operation |
| |administrative capacity in relation with an efficient |cases | |with other |
| |anti-trust regime and state aid control and reinforcing the |20 advocacy activities on promoting the competition and State| |institutions (National |
| |legal reasoning and quality of its decisions |aid rules addressed to the legal and institutional | |Court, line ministries, |
| |· Raising the awareness of the business, legal and |environment | |Regulatory Authorities, |
| |institutional environment with respect to the new competition| | |public authorities, business|
| |and state aid rules and discipline that must be observed | | |community, judiciary system |
| |after the date of accession. | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| |Intervention logic |Benchmarks |Sources of information |Assumptions (external to |
| | | | |project) |
| Component A – Antitrust |
| | Subcomponent 1- evaluation of the legislative framework | Romanian legislative framework in competition field fully | Official Gazette of Romania|1. Commitment and strong |
| |A.1. Romanian legislative framework fully harmonized with the|harmonized with the acquis communautaire by October 2006 | |interest by the |
| |acquis communautaire | | |target groups in the |
| | | | |activities of the Project |
| | | | |2. Effective co-operation |
| | | | |with other |
| | | | |institutions (National |
| | | | |Court, line ministries, |
| | | | |Regulatory Authorities, |
| | | | |public authorities, business|
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
|Mandatory Results |Subcomponent 2 – improvement of the administrative capacity |Internal structure and operation of the Competition Council | - Annual Reports on the |1. Commitment and strong |
| |A.2. Administrative capacity of the Competition Council (and |ready to be integrated into the EU Competition Network by |activity of the CC |interest by the |
| |national courts in what concerns the enforcement of |December 2006. Competition Council’s experts and judges |EC regular report on the |target groups in the |
| |competition rules) adapted and prepared to work according to |(approximately 120 people), both at central and territorial |progress made by Romania in |activities of the Project |
| |the EU requirements in terms of internal organization, job |level, trained in the enforcement of antitrust rules by |the accession period. |2. Effective co-operation |
| |qualification and data base for an efficient application of |October 2007 |- Twinning Quarterly Reports|with other |
| |the competition rules, specialized training of the | | |institutions (National |
| |competition experts, qualitative decision making process and | | |Court, line ministries, |
| |efficient enforcement record. | | |Regulatory Authorities, |
| | | | |public authorities, business|
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
|(Components) |A.3. The antitrust enforcement record of the Romanian |the number and the relevance of cases increased. the | - Annual Reports on the | |
| |Competition Council improved, including the quality of |structure of the decisions of the Competition Council |activity of the CC | |
| |decisions, in terms of economic and legal reasoning |(description of the relevant market, adequate description of |EC regular report on the | |
| | | the conduct/effect, adequate legal/economic reasoning in the|progress made by Romania in | |
| | |motivation) improved |the accession period. | |
| | | |- Twinning Quarterly Reports| |
| |Intervention logic |Benchmarks |Sources of information |Assumptions (external to |
| | | | |project) |
| Subcomponent 3 - Advocacy |
| |A.4. Companies and the judiciary aware of the new | Companies and the judiciary aware of the new requirements in|CC website | |
| |requirements in the competition after the date of accession, |the competition after the date of accession, especially of |Press releases | |
| |especially of the consequences of non-observing the |the consequences of non-observing the competition rules and |Twinning Reports | |
| |competition rules and the requirements of self-regulation |the requirements of self-regulation by October 2007. | | |
| |(Regulation 1/2003 on the implementation of the rules on | | | |
| |competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty); | | | |
| |A.5. National and international reputation of the Romanian | Information on the activity and latest achievements of the | CC website | |
| |Competition Council improved by advocacy events addressed to |Competition Council disseminated by 7 advocacy events by |Press releases | |
| |wider national and international audience |October 2007 |Twinning Reports | |
|Activities Component A – Antitrust |
|Subcomponent 1- evaluation of the legislative framework |
| | | | | |
| |A.1.1 Evaluation of the remaining areas of existing | 1 month (10 working days through STE missions and permanent | Quarterly Reports |1. Commitment and strong |
| |legislation in the competition field in view of change for a |assistance by RTA) |Official Gazette of Romania |interest by the |
| |complete harmonization with the latest developments in the EU|Romanian legislation in the competition field fully | |target groups in the |
| |competition acquis and transposition of the latest |harmonizad with the latest developments in the EU aqcuis by | |activities of the Project |
| |developments of the EU acquis in the national competition |October 2006. | |2. Effective co-operation |
| |legislation, in connection with the evaluation and the | | |with other |
| |calendar periodically settled by the CC. | | |institutions (National |
| |Elaboration of new procedural rules for enforcement of the | | |Court, line ministries, |
| |competition law | | |Regulatory Authorities, |
| | | | |public authorities, business|
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
| Subcomponent 2 – improvement of the administrative capacity in Antitrust enforcement |
| |A.2.1 Training on the job for CC experts | 35 working days by STE for training on the job 45 experts | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| | |in depth trained on case handling, market surveys, by July |filled in by participants | |
| | |2007. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | | |STE Reports | |
| |A.2.2 4 Informal workshops in Bucharest for the staff of the |4 seminars of 1 day each for training the CC staff on | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |Competition Council (training in Bucharest), |Community antitrust and merger control enforcement practice |filled in by participants | |
| | |Bucharest |Quarterly Reports | |
| |A.2.3 8 workshops on county level for CC inspectors and | 8 two-days workshops for the local judges and the CC staff | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |judges |local inspectorates in different Romanian cities, chosen as |filled in by participants | |
| | |to cover the 14 counties where Courts of Appeal exist. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |25 experts/workshop from local inspectorates trained in | | |
| | |antitrust issues by October 2007. | | |
| |A.2.4 1 Study visit in Brussels (and Bruges) for 7 CC | One study visit of 5 working days to Brussels focusing on | Report drafted by Romanian | |
| |experts |the last developments and new EU approach in the competition |participants and information| |
| | |area |disseminated to other | |
| | | |experts concerned | |
| |A.2.5 |One BC expert in antitrust trained by 3 months internship in |Report drafted by Ro | |
| |1 three months internship c/o the EC |Brussels c/o the European Commission DG Comp |participant and information | |
| | | |disseminated to other | |
| | | |experts concerned | |
| |A.2.6 1 Study visit in Rome c/o the Italian competition | One study visit of 5 working days in Rome to ICA and to | Report drafted by Romanian | |
| |authority and Courts for 4 CC officials (high ranked |other institutions, for 4 representatives of the Competition |participants and information| |
| |officials, directors, competition inspectors) and 4 judges |Council (high ranked officials, directors, competition |disseminated to other | |
| | |inspectors) and 4 Romanian judges dealing with competition |experts concerned | |
| | |cases | | |
| |A.2.7 1 Study visit in Rome c/o the Italian competition |One 5 working days study visit for 6 CC competition experts | Report drafted by Romanian | |
| |authority for transfer of information on how a competition |in order to prepare the administrative capacity of the |participants and information| |
| |authority is functioning within the EU competition network |Competition Council to operate within the EU structures after|disseminated to other | |
| | |the date of accession and Adaptation of the internal |experts concerned | |
| | |structure and operation of the Competition Council in order | | |
| | |to integrate it into the EU Competition Network. | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| Subcomponent 3 – Advocacy |
| |A.3.1 Drafting of concrete proposals to be adopted by the |10 working days STE mission Concrete proposals in order to | STE Reports |1. Commitment and strong |
| |Competition Council in order to strengthen its role in the |foster implementation of Regulatory Impact Analysis drafted. |Quarterly Reports |interest by the |
| |RIA implementation | |Documents containing |target groups in the |
| | | |proposals on RIA |activities of the Project |
| | | |implementation |2. Effective co-operation |
| | | | |with other |
| | | | |institutions (National |
| | | | |Court, line ministries, |
| | | | |Regulatory Authorities, |
| | | | |public authorities, business|
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
| |A.3.2. 4 Workshops on the RIA system for training Romanian |4 two-days workshops in Bucharest for training on how to | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |experts |examine legal acts in order to detect provisions that may |filled in by participants | |
| | |have an anticompetitive impact on markets and consequently, |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |training on drafting of advisory opinions to the | | |
| | |Government/Parliament, in order to ensure that competition | | |
| | |principles are taken into account by the Romanian Legislator | | |
| | |by January 2007 | | |
| | |For at least 15 - 20 CC officials; and civil servants and/or | | |
| | |politicians. | | |
| |A.3.3 2 Lectures in Bucharest on the special developments in| 2 lectures of one-day each in Bucharest on the special | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |the competition area |developments in the competition area for 30 participant |filled in by participants | |
| | |representing market operators and public authorities, |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |judiciary system, the academic environment, journalists, | | |
| | |consumers’ associations, liberal professions’ representatives| | |
| | |by April 2007 | | |
| |A.3.4 3 round tables (in Bucharest) with Romanian judges and| 3 round tables of one-day each in Bucharest on the special | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |magistrates dealing with competition cases (opened also to CC|developments (such as: private enforcement, modernization |filled in by participants | |
| |legal experts) |package) in the competition area for at least 15 judges/round|Quarterly Reports | |
| | |table by December 2006 | | |
| |A.3.5 One round table (in Bucharest) with Romanian lawyers | One day round table in Bucharest at CC premises/ UAR for at | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |dealing with competition cases (opened also to CC legal |least 15 lawyers and 10 CC legal experts on how to better |filled in by participants | |
| |experts) |observe the antitrust rules by September 2007 |Quarterly Reports | |
| |A.3.6 1 Conference outside Bucharest in cooperation with | One day Conference for raising awareness amongst 60 | Press releases | |
| |Neighbouring Competition Authorities |high-ranked officials from foreign authorities, local |CC website | |
| | |inspectors, judges, undertakings, prefects, lawyers in |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |Constanta or Mangalia or Giurgiu, (with Bulgaria); Oradea | | |
| | |(with Hungary); Iasi (with Moldavia); Suceava (with Ukraine);| | |
| | |Timisoara (with Serbia) by November 2007 | | |
| |Intervention logic |Benchmarks |Sources of information |Assumptions (external to |
| | | | |project) |
| Component B – State Aid |
|Mandatory |Subcomponent B1 - Continued Development of the State Aid | | |- date of accession will be |
|Results |Legal Framework | | |2007 |
|(Components) | | | |- Commitment and strong |
| | | | |interest by the target |
| | | | |groups in the activities of |
| | | | |the Project |
| | | | |- Effective co-operation |
| | | | |with other institutions |
| | | | |(National Court, line |
| | | | |ministries, Regulatory |
| | | | |Authorities, public |
| | | | |authorities, business |
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
| |· New secondary state aid rules drafted in accordance with | Romanian legislative framework in the State aid field fully | Official Gazette of | |
| |the latest developments of the acquis communautaire in the |harmonized with the acquis communautaire and improved |Romania | |
| |state aid area and approved by RCC and improved capacity for |capacity of State aid experts to apply the relevant rules by |Quarterly Reports | |
| |updating of domestic legislation post-Accession |September 2006. | | |
| |· structures and systems developed for monitoring ECJ | 10 working days STE missions. Design and delivery of ECJ | Quarterly Reports | |
| |judgments and Commission decisions to facilitate the constant|case judgement and European Commission policy monitoring IT |STE Reports | |
| |upgrading of Competition Council analysis and policy. |based system. 30 RCC experts will be fully trained on all | | |
| | |aspects of the system by February 2007. | | |
| |· Improved capacity for legal analysis of existing and new | 5 working days STE missions. 20 RCC lawyers will be coached | Quarterly Reports | |
| |state aid schemes to ensure their compatibility with the EC |via informal lectures to be better able to interpret and |STE Reports | |
| |state aid rules and for legal input to policy-making. |transpose European Commission legisaltion and provide legal | | |
| | |imput as regards state aid policy development by September | | |
| | |2006 | | |
| |· Effective national legal framework for recovery of aid | 10 working days STE missions Presentation, following a full | Quarterly Reports | |
| |implemented |review of the existing legal framework, of a document setting|STE Reports | |
| | |out recommendations identifying changes to be made that will | | |
| | |improve the existing framework by March 2007. | | |
|Subcomponent B.2 - Strengthening the Enforcement and Administrative Capacity of the Competition Council and Relevant Institutions in Relation to State Aid |
| |· BC able to vigorously apply the law pre-Accession and | Visible and tangible improvement in the RCC state aid | Quarterly Reports | |
| |authoritatively advise all arms of Romanian Government on how|enforcement record. Discontinuation of the pre-consultation |EC regular report on the | |
| |to apply the State aid rules and ensure that high quality |mechanism and delivery of high quality notifications by RCC. |progress made by Romania in | |
| |notifications of aid to the European Commission are made | |the accession period. | |
| |where necessary, after Accession. | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| |· Scrutiny (and, if necessary, adaptation) performed on the| Delivery (the officials of the RCC) of the list of “so | Quarterly Reports | |
| |aid measures. |called applicable after measures” – i.e aid measures that |Document containing list to | |
| | |will remain in force after the date of accession and the |be submitted to Commission | |
| | |continued scrutiny of such measures thereafter December 2006 | | |
| |· Notifying procedure corresponding to EU practice | state aid notification templates, forms and guidelines to be| Quarterly Reports | |
| |established. |followed by all aid granting bodies and institutions and |Minutes of the | |
| | |consistent with European Commission rules, regulations and |interministerial working | |
| | |practice drafted and approved by RCC by December 2006 |group on state aid | |
| | | |CC website | |
| |· Block Exemption Regulations applied properly as from | guidelines, templates and forms for assistance in the | Quarterly Reports | |
| |Accession. |application by aid granting authorities of the Block | | |
| | |Exemption Regulations consistent with European Commission | | |
| | |practice by December 2006 drafted and approved by RCC | | |
| |· Systems put in place to ensure that the State aid rules | 20 working days STE missions. Delivery of informal workshops| Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |are applied in full to structural funds programmes |to RCC official and Management Authorities as concerns the |filled in by participants | |
| | |establishment of procedures and protocols for identifying and|Quarterly Reports | |
| | |handling state aid issues within structural fund programmes |STE Reports | |
| | |by September 2007. | | |
| | |. | | |
| |· Procedures established which ensure that all arms of | 20 working days STE missions.Delivery of state aid strategy | Quarterly Reports | |
| |Romanian Government consult best avilable expertise on State |document to all relevant line ministries setting out |STE Reports | |
| |aid matters and can only approach the Commission in Brussels |procedure for state aid “best practice” and the reinforcing, | | |
| |through a single portal. |through national legislation the preeminence of the RCC as | | |
| | |the single portal to the European Commission on state aid | | |
| | |issues January 2007 | | |
| |· BC equipped to respond effectively to complaints and | 2 working days STE missions for RCC state aid officials in | Quarterly Reports | |
| |fulfill its State aid monitoring and reporting role with |Bucharest focusing on the establishment of an IT based system|STE Reports | |
| |effective systems in place to track and report on aid |for tracking, monitoring and handling complaints, consistent| | |
| |granted, including a more proactive attitude towards non |with the RCC’s post accession role and fully intergrated into| | |
| |notified aid. |the Commssion’s existing structures. April 2007 | | |
| |· Knowledge management system defined and key elements in |10 working days STE missions. Presentation of review document| Quarterly Reports | |
| |place. |setting out recommendations for the adoption (including |STE Reports | |
| | |design) of fully operational knowledge management system able| | |
| | |to integrate within RCC existing IT structures August 2007 | | |
| Subcomponent B. 3 - State Aid Advocacy and Communication |
| |· Awareness amongst the judiciary and companies of the new| 4 working days STE missions. 4 bespoke seminars (round | Quarterly Reports | |
| |requirements of the EU State aid control system after the |tables) 1 day each to members of the Romanian judiciary in |STE Reports | |
| |date of accession raised, |Bucharest focusing on special developments in state aid | | |
| | |jurisprudence, including private enforcement issues, | | |
| | |consequences of non-observance – at least 15 judges by | | |
| | |November 2007 | | |
| |· An ongoing national state aid communication strategy | A national state aid communication strategy document drafted| Quarterly Reports | |
| |within the Competition Council with (and amongst) relevant |and approved by RCC. The document will set out a “joined up | | |
| |line ministries and aid granting authorities put in place |approach” to state aid policy development and application | | |
| | |amongst the main line ministries and RCC June 2007 | | |
| |· Key non-governmental multipliers of information such as | 1 working day STE mission (lecture) in Bucharest to | Quarterly Reports | |
| |journalists and academics aware of State aid issues and |multipliers of information , i.e. journalists, academia |STE Reports | |
| |starting to comment on State aid matters within informed |economists etc, focusing on state aid principles, application| | |
| |Romanian circles. |and the consequenes of non-observeance of the rules, as well| | |
| | |as the role of European Commission and national authorities | | |
| | |by September 2007. | | |
|SUB-COMPONENT B.1: |
| Continued Development of the State Aid Legal Framework |
| Activities |Activity B.1.1: Assistance for the review and elaboration (as| 5 working days STE mission. Romanian legislation in the | STE Reports |- date of accession will be |
| |required) of Romanian secondary legislation with a view to |State aid field fully harmonizad with the latest developments|Quarterly Reports |2007 |
| |ensuring continued harmonization with the EC acquis. MS |in the EU acquis by September 2006. |Documents containing |- Commitment and strong |
| |experts will work with Romanian experts to review and help | |proposals |interest by the target |
| |make proposals for amendments. | | |groups in the activities of |
| | | | |the Project |
| | | | |- Effective co-operation |
| | | | |with other institutions |
| | | | |(National Court, line |
| | | | |ministries, Regulatory |
| | | | |Authorities, public |
| | | | |authorities, business |
| | | | |community, judiciary system |
| |Activity B.1.2 Design of systems for monitoring changes in |MTE, 2 STEs missions of 5 working days. System designed and | STE and MTE Reports | |
| |European state aid legislation and jurisprudence and |operational for monitoring the changes in European state aid |Quarterly Reports | |
| |processes for communicating the implications of such change |legislation and jurisprudence by February 2007. |Documents containing | |
| |to interested policymakers and other stakeholders. Coaching | |proposed systems | |
| |for staff responsible for implementing these systems. | | | |
| |Activity B.1.3 Assistance for improving the systems for | MTE, 2 STEs missions of 5 working days each. Systems for | STE and MTE Reports | |
| |recovery of illegal aid |recovery of illegal aid improved by March 2007. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | | |Documents containing | |
| | | |proposed systems | |
| SUB-COMPONENT B.2: Strengthening the Enforcement and Administrative Capacity of the Competition Council and Relevant Institutions in Relation to State Aid |
| Activities |Activity B.2.1. Training on the job for Competition Council | 40 State aid experts trained on the job and assisted on day | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |experts |– to – day issues by RTA, MTE and 4 STEs missions by October |filled in by participants | |
| | |2007. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | | |STE and MTE reports | |
| |Activity B.2.2. 1 two-days Seminar on State Aid Regulatory |2 day Seminar provided by RTA and STE for the development of | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |Impact Assessment in Bucharest |a State aid RIA system addressed to 30 participants |filled in by participants | |
| | |(Competition Council, representatives of the line ministries,|Quarterly Reports | |
| | |Governmental agencies, State aid grantors) by January 2007. |STE reports | |
| |Activity B.2.3. 2 informal workshops of one-day each for | 20 BC experts and representatives of State aid grantors | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |improving the State Aid Annual Report and Inventory |trained for the improvement of the state aid annual report |filled in by participants | |
| | |and inventory, through 2 Workshops of 1 day provided by RTA, |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |MTE and STEs, by March 2007. |STE reports | |
| |Activity B.2.4. 2 informal workshops for the Competition | 20 BC experts trained for the improvement of the evaluation | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |Council experts for improving the overall assessment of the |of the State aid notifications, through 2 Workshops of 1 day |filled in by participants | |
| |notifications submitted by the State aid grantors |each. (RTA, MTE and STEs), by March 2007. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | | |STE, MTE reports | |
| |Activity B.2.5. 8 Seminars for the Competition Council local | 8 Workshops of 2 days each provided by RTA, MTE and STEs. | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |inspectorates |30 participants/seminar trained and aware of state aid |filled in by participants | |
| | |principles, rules and application (CC local experts, local |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |aid grantors and relevant line ministries in the regions |STE reports | |
| | |covering 8 counties of Romania by November 2007. | | |
| |Activity B.2.6. Assistance for knowledge management systems | Assistance provided by 2 STEs missions. Knowledge | STE Reports | |
| |reviewed to ensure that CC State aid experts share experience|management systems reviewed to ensure that CC State aid |Quarterly Reports | |
| |of cases, to ensure consistency in advice given and to ensure|experts share experience of cases, to ensure consistency in |Documents containing | |
| |that a “corporate memory” is developed to retain expertise |advice given, by August 2007. |proposed systems | |
| |when key members of staff move. | | | |
| |Activity B.2.7 1 Study visit at European Commission for 5 CC | 5 CC officials and 2 judges aware of the EU dimension of | Report drafted by Ro | |
| |officials and 2 judges |State aid control and knowledge gained on the last EC State |participants and information| |
| | |aid developments through 5 day Working visit at the EC, by |disseminated to all actors | |
| | |July 2007 |involved | |
| |Activity B.2.8 1 Study visit in London c/o the UK Department | 6 CC officials and 2 judges aware of the best UK practice | Report drafted by Ro | |
| |of Trade and Industry for 8 persons: 6 CC officials (high |developed by the relevant the State aid institutions. 5 day |participants and information| |
| |rank officials, directors, State aid experts) of the |Working visit at the EC, by November 2006 |disseminated to all actors | |
| |Competition Council and 2 representatives of the State aid | |involved | |
| |grantors | | | |
| SUBCOMPONENT B. 3 State Aid Advocacy and Communication |
| Activities |Activity B.3.1 4 Seminars for judiciary environment | 4 one day Seminars provided by RTA, MTE and STEs. Romanian | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| | |judiciary aware of the State aid rules, private enforcement |filled in by participants | |
| | |of the rules and ECJ jurisprudence in the area of state aid |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |(20 participants/seminar) by November 2007 |STE and MTE reports | |
| |Activity B.3.2. 1 Lecture focussing on raising awareness |1 Lecture of one day provided by RTA and STE. Romanian | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |amongst the business and legal communities, of state aid |business and legal communities aware of state aid general |filled in by participants | |
| |general principles, enforcement and the consequences of |principles, enforcement and the consequences of |Quarterly Reports | |
| |non-observance of those rules |non-observance of those rules. Improved awareness of the |STE reports | |
| | |practical effect of State aid discipline in Romanian business| | |
| | |circles (20 participants) by June 2007. | | |
| |Activity B.3.3. 1 Lecture for engaging non-Governmental | 1 Lecture of one day provided by RTA and STE. Academic | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |multipliers of information around the country to take an |environment, journalists (business-focused), publishers and |filled in by participants | |
| |interest in the theory and practice of State aid control. |civil society informed on the last State aid developments. |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |Creation of a forum for discussion of State aid matters. |STE reports | |
| | |Inclusion of State aid and competition matters in some | | |
| | |University curricula (20 participants) by September 2007. | | |
| |Intervention logic |Benchmarks |Sources of information |Assumptions (external to |
| | | | |project) |
| Component C – Common Activities |
|Activities | | | | |
| |Activity C.1.1 3 Conferences in Bucharest (opening, | 1 Kick-off meeting and 1 Closing conference. Governmental |Press releases | |
| |closing, for celebrating 10 years of Competition in |institutions; diplomats; journalists; judges; business associations; |CC website | |
| |Romania) |Universities; media and public at large aware and informed on the |Quarterly Reports | |
| | |objectives and results of the Twinning Project. | | |
| | |1 Conference for celebrating “10 years of Competition in Romania”. | | |
| | |March 2007 | | |
| | |Participants: approx. 200 persons: CC officials; EC representatives; | | |
| | |NCA officials; line ministries. Other governmental institutions; | | |
| | |diplomats; journalists; judges; business associations; Universities; | | |
| | |media and public at large. | | |
| |Activity C.1.2 2 Sessions outside Bucharest for | 2 Sessions of 2 days each for training of trainers. 20 CC experts | Evaluation Questionaire | |
| |training of trainers on public speaking, negotiating|trained by RTA and STEs on how to best negotiate and present the CC |filled in by participants | |
| |and lobbying skills, improvement of the managerial |position in public meetings, by December 2006 |Quarterly Reports | |
| |skills of CC officials | |STE reports | |
| |Activity C.1.3 Producing and disseminating items on | Items on competition and State aid advocacy and project visibility | Leaflets, information | |
| |competition and State aid advocacy and project |elaborated, produced and disseminated amongst the interested parties.|bulletins, Reports | |
| |visibility |Information materials fit for purpose and adjusted to the different | | |
| | |levels of need of different groups. This activity will be developed | | |
| | |throughout the entire duration of the Project. | | |
ARTICLE 4. TASKS (COMPONENTS)
Activity A.0. - Project Start-up - Setting up offices and project systems
Task 0.1. Kick-off meeting
A kick-off meeting will take place with the participation of all members of the Project Steering Committee.
Method: All the members of the Steering Committee will meet to kick-off the project.
MS input: MS Project Leaders and the RTAs
BC input: The BC Project Leader, RTA Counterparts and the other Members of the Steering Committee
Other resources:
Interpretation-1 working day
Task 0.2. Meeting with all staff concerned
A meeting of the MS PL and RTA with all the relevant CC staff will be organised after the kick-off meeting
Method: The MS Project Leaders and the RTAs will meet all relevant BC staff to discuss operative and substantial issues related to project’s activities and objectives.
MS input: The MS Project Leader and the RTA will participate in this meeting
BC input: The BC Project Leader, the RTA counterparts, the other Members of the Steering Committee and other CC staff, responsible for and involved in the management and implementation of Project activities will participate in the meeting.
COMPONENT A – COMPETITION
Component A Competition is divided in three sub-components as follows:
SUB-COMPONENT 1. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Completion and improvement of the Romanian legislative framework in the competition field
SUB-COMPONENT 2. ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY
Improvement of the Competition Council administrative capacity in the enforcement of the competition legislation
SUB-COMPONENT 3. STRENGTHENING THE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ROLE OF THE COMPETITION COUNCIL
Improving the role of the Competition Council as an advocate for competition oriented reform and as a leading Authority in the Region.
SUB - COMPONENT 1. LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Results: Romanian legislative framework fully harmonized with the acquis Communautaire
Overview:
This sub-component will provide support for transposing the latest developments of the acquis communautaire in the antitrust field into national legislation and for introducing all relevant changes in secondary legislation. In particular, it will focus on:
a) Transposition of the latest developments of the competition acquis into national legislation (taking primarily into account the Modernization package introduced by Regulation 1/2003 and the changes in the merger control regime introduced by Regulation 139/2004);
b) Changing the procedural rules for the operation of the Competition Council in order to guarantee an effective application of Regulation 1/2003 after the date of accession.
Activity A.1.1
Drafting of the relevant legal provisions so as to complete the harmonization of existing Romanian legislation with the latest developments in the EU competition acquis (regulation 1/2003 and Regulation 139/2004). Drafting the relevant changes of the procedural rules so as to ensure the effective participation of the Competition Council to the European Competition Network after accession.
Method
The twinning experts will coordinate the activity of a working group of Council officials that will evaluate the needed amendments of the Romanian competition law and draft the relevant legal provisions. As for procedures, the working group will identify the relevant rules that have to be harmonised for the Competition Council to become a full member of the ECN right after accession. Duration 1 months (beginning in month x)
Location: Bucharest
MS input: 10 working days of STEs from AGCM and/or OFT
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
SUB - COMPONENT 2. ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY IN ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT
Results:
1. administrative capacity of the Competition Council (and national courts in what concerns the enforcement of competition rules) adapted and prepared to work according to the EU requirements in terms of internal organization, job qualification and data base for an efficient application of the competition rules, specialized training of the competition experts, qualitative decision making process and efficient enforcement record.
2. Improvement of the anti-trust enforcement record of the Romanian Competition Council, including the improvement of the quality of decisions, in terms of economic and legal reasoning
Overview
This subcomponent will provide support for preparing the administrative capacity of the Competition Council to operate within the EU structures after the date of accession by:
a) Adapting the internal structure and operation of the Competition Council in order to integrate it into the EU Competition Network (structure, internal procedure, electronic system and data base).
b) Training of Competition Council’s experts (approximately 150 people) and of judges (approximately 120 people), both at central and territorial level, in the enforcement of antitrust rules, in order to be better able to apply Regulation 1/2003 and the subsequent EU legislation in the framework of the European Competition Network – allocation of cases, exchange of information with other members of the ECN, cooperation with national courts, structural remedies, inspections at company’s premises and in the homes of the managers; the concept of effect on the trade, application of Article 81(3) etc.
Methods:
For a) (adapting CC internal structure and operation in order to integrate it into the ECN)
and b) (training of CC’ experts and judges in the enforcement of antitrust rules), the training will be delivered mainly in the form of case handling and specialized seminars at central and territorial level for competition experts, legal experts and judges (from the Bucharest’s Court of Appeal and the High Court of Justice and Cassation and the territorial courts).
Additionally, there will be some internships and/or study visits at the Member States’ national competition authorities and National Courts and at the European Commission and the European Courts.
Activity A.2.1
Training on the job for CC experts
Method
STE missions for training on the job
Focus on:
- quality of CC’s decisions in the competition field (economic and legal reasoning);
- enforcement of competition in key markets: support in developing market surveys and in detecting anticompetitive practices;
- application of new competition rules;
- topics to be discussed with public authorities’ representatives in the framework of the “inter ministerial working group on competition” monthly organized by CC.
MS STEs with specific expertise and experience will give advice to the Romanian competition inspectors on particular cases being dealt with by the Competition Council.
In this context, MS STEs will also identify the case law precedents of the EC Commission and ECJ relevant to support the case-handling activity of CC and will advise the CC inspectors on how to apply these precedents to their current cases.
The CC will inform in advance the RTA and the MS Project Leader of the relevant sectors and topics to be discussed and will provide background information on the cases in the form of short summary.
Location: CC premises
MS input: STEs will be selected, as appropriate depending on the specific topic addressed, among the Italian experts from AGCM and UK experts from OFT and the Competition Commission (see attached CVs)
Other resources:
• interpretation - working days
• Duration: 7 one-week STE missions for training on the job CC experts
• CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.2.2 (in relation with A.2.1.)
4 Informal workshops in Bucharest for the staff of the Competition Council
Method: lectures mainly addressed to CC competition inspectors and to be delivered by the STEs who come in the framework of activity A.2.1.
The main focus will be on training the CC staff on Community antitrust and merger control enforcement practice (collective dominance, abusive conduct, structural and behavioural remedies in the context of antitrust and merger proceedings, methods for surprise inspections, including forensic).
Duration: 4 days
Location: CC premises
MS input: The same STEs who come in the framework of Activity A.2.1
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Other resources:
• interpretation - 4 working days
• no air tickets needed (the same from A.2.1 will be used)
Activity A.2.3
8 workshops on county level for CC inspectors and judges
Method: 2 workshops during the same week for the local judges and the staff of the Competition Council local inspectorates in different Romanian cities, chosen as to cover the 14 counties where Courts of Appeal exist (outside Bucharest: Alba Iulia, Timisoara, Oradea, Craiova, Pitesti, Brasov, Cluj, Targu Mures, Suceava, Constanta, Galati, Ploiesti, Iasi, Bacau). Focus on modernisation package and on case studies (especially cases regarding “key” markets and public procurement cases).
Duration: 2 days/ workshop
MS input: one STE (possibly this STE will work for one week, being guest speaker to two workshops), RTA
BS input: one Romanian expert from Bucharest (to be part of the Panel)
Participants:
- 1st day of workshop: Competition Council’s inspectors; business environment; representatives of consumers’ associations; academia; journalists; experts from the Prefect’s office.
- 2nd day of workshop (case study oriented): Competition Council’s local inspectors (approximately 100 people trained) and judges at local level (approximately 100 Romanian magistrates trained); experts from Prefect’s office.
Other resources
• interpretation - 32 working days
• training materials
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate and the Local Inspectorates.
Activity A.2.4
1 Study visit in Brussels (and Bruges) for 7 CC experts
Method
The participants will make a 5 working day study visit to Brussels c/o the European Commission DG Comp; EP commissions; Romanian and MS’ missions to the European Union; international law firm specialized in antitrust; College of Europe (Bruges). The study visit will focus on the last developments and new EU approach in the competition area.
Duration: one week (5 working days)
MS input: RTA
Participants: 7 CC experts
Other resources
• interpretation - 5 working days
• per diem CC experts ( 7 x 7 = 49)
Participation to study visit is strictly limited to the beneficiary staff having a direct and active role in the implementation of the project and only in relation with its objectives and activities. Most study visits will have a highly technical content and be directed to operational staff, with at least 50% participants coming from the territorial (decentralized) units wherever these exist.
For any study visit, the partners will present at least four weeks in advance a letter to the TM in the EC Delegation, indicating the detailed purpose (technical content) and schedule (meetings, departments etc) of the visit, the criteria for selecting the participants and the detailed list of these, with name, function, role in the project. The EC Delegation will formulate any comments or objections within the five working days following confirmation of receipt. No reaction from EC Delegation after the confirmation of receipt is deemed as no objections and the study visit can be organised. Participation of any other than the one approved by ECD , can be financed out of other sources than EU Phare funds, providing there is a previous agreement of the two Project Leaders."
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.2.5
1 three months internship c/o the EC
for one CC expert in antitrust
Method
one CC expert in antitrust will make 3months internship in Brussels c/o the European Commission DG Comp. The internship will focus on the last developments and new EU approach (especially Regulation 1/2003, Regulation 139/2004) as regards agreements, dominant position and merger control and on the European integration process in the competition area.
The Romanian expert will benefit of first-hand experience of EU experts in different types of cases from different economic sectors and his/her skills in applying the new EU antitrust rules will improve.
Duration: 3 months
MS input: RTA
Participants: one CC expert
Other resources
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity A.2.6
1 Study visit in Rome c/o the Italian competition authority (ICA) and Courts for 4 CC officials (high ranked officials, directors, competition inspectors) of the Competition Council and 4 Romanian judges
Method
The participants will make a 5 working day study visit to ICA and to other institutions in Rome (such as Council of State; Regional Administrative Tribunal; “Avvocatura dello Stato”; Department of juridical and legislative affairs – Presidency of Council of Ministers; Telecom Authority; International Law firms) to share experience with their Italian colleagues on:
- applying national and EC competition rules to regulated sectors;
- investigations carried out by ICA involving telecommunications, public utilities, media, etc.
- issues related to judicial review of competition cases
Duration: one week (5 working days)
MS input: RTA
Participants: 4 representatives (high ranked officials, directors, competition inspectors) of the Competition Council and 4 judges from the High Court of Justice and Cassation and Bucharest Court of Appeal.
Other resources
• interpretation - 5 working days
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Participation to study visit is strictly limited to the beneficiary staff having a direct and active role in the implementation of the project and only in relation with its objectives and activities. Most study visits will have a highly technical content and be directed to operational staff, with at least 50% participants coming from the territorial (decentralized) units wherever these exist.
For any study visit, the partners will present at least four weeks in advance a letter to the TM in the EC Delegation, indicating the detailed purpose (technical content) and schedule (meetings, departments etc) of the visit, the criteria for selecting the participants and the detailed list of these, with name, function, role in the project. The EC Delegation will formulate any comments or objections within the five working days following confirmation of receipt. No reaction from EC Delegation after the confirmation of receipt is deemed as no objections and the study visit can be organised. Participation of any other than the one approved by ECD, can be financed out of other sources than EU Phare funds, providing there is a previous agreement of the two Project Leaders."
Activity A.2.7.
1 Study visit in Rome c/o the Italian competition authority for transfer of information on how a competition authority is functioning within the EU competition network
Method
Focus on:
• Support for preparing the administrative capacity of the Competition Council to operate within the EU structures after the date of accession;
• Adaptation of the internal structure and operation of the Competition Council in order to integrate it into the EU Competition Network (structure, internal procedure, electronic system and data base).
Duration: one week (5 working days)
MS input: RTA
Participants: 6 CC competition experts from each Department involved (possibly as it follows: 3 experts from the Competition Department, 1 from Legal Department, one from Research Department and one from the International Relations Department)
Other resources
• interpretation - 5 working days
• per diem CC experts
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Participation to study visit is strictly limited to the beneficiary staff having a direct and active role in the implementation of the project and only in relation with its objectives and activities. Most study visits will have a highly technical content and be directed to operational staff, with at least 50% participants coming from the territorial (decentralized) units wherever these exist.
For any study visit, the partners will present at least four weeks in advance a letter to the TM in the EC Delegation, indicating the detailed purpose (technical content) and schedule (meetings, departments etc) of the visit, the criteria for selecting the participants and the detailed list of these, with name, function, role in the project. The EC Delegation will formulate any comments or objections within the five working days following confirmation of receipt. No reaction from EC Delegation after the confirmation of receipt is deemed as no objections and the study visit can be organised. Participation of any other than the one approved by ECD, can be financed out of other sources than EU Phare funds, providing there is a previous agreement of the two Project Leaders."
SUB - COMPONENT 3. STRENGTHENING THE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ROLE OF THE ROMANIAN COMPETITION COUNCIL
Results:
a) Improving and developing the Regulatory impact analysis (RIA) system that has been designed and implemented in the previous Twinning Project between Italy and Romania (2002 Phare Program) in order to ensure that competition principles are taken into account by the Romanian Legislator.
b) Improving the competition advocacy functions of the Competition Council, by organizing events in order to enhance public authorities and the public awareness of the benefits originating from antitrust enforcement and from competition oriented reform.;
c) Improving the role the Romanian Competition Council plays in the international community
Overview
The improvement of the RIA system will be pursued by: 1) Elaborating concrete proposals to be adopted by the Competition Council in order to strengthen its role in the framework of RIA and in drafting advisory opinions to the Legislator; 2) Training of Romanian experts by organising workshops in Romania and study visits and/or exchange of view with other Member States.
The subcomponent will also strengthen the Competition Council capacity to foster competition oriented reform with the Romanian legislator. Furthermore the subcomponent will strengthen the reputation of the Competition Council as an advocate for competition with respect of public authorities and the public at large, by organizing conferences, workshops, seminars and preparing special publications.
In addition, the subcomponent will support the Romanian Competition Council in improving its international reputation within the Region and in international organizations and networks.
Activity A.3.1.
Drafting of concrete proposals to be adopted by the Competition Council in order to strengthen its role in the RIA implementation
Method:
• Working discussions with the CC representatives and other public officials responsible for Regulatory Impact Analysis
• Drafting of concrete proposals taking into account best practises in Europe.
Duration: 2 weeks (10 working days)
MS input: one mission of one STE (from DAGL or Agcm)
Other resources
• Interpretation -0 working days
• translation
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.3.2
4 Workshops on the RIA system for training Romanian experts
Method:
a) training on how to examine legal acts in order to detect provisions that may have an anticompetitive impact on markets;
b) consequently, training on drafting of advisory opinions to the Government/Parliament, in order to ensure that competition principles are taken into account by the Romanian Legislator
Duration: 2 days each workshop
MS input: one STE (to be selected from DAGL and/or from UK OFT experts)
Participants: at least 15 - 20 CC officials; Ministries’ representatives; relevant Parliament commissions’ representatives; representatives from the legislative Council and the Economic and Social Council
Other resources
• interpretation - 8 working days (two interpreters for each workshop)
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.3.3
2 Lectures in Bucharest on recent developments in the competition area
Method
The topics of the lectures will mainly focus on:
- benefits originating from private enforcement of competition rules,
- network industries and regulatory authorities,
- competition problems in public procurement (possibly in cooperation with the new Romanian Authority for Public Procurement),
- competition problems in the liberal professions.
Duration: one day/ lecture
Possible locations: National Istitute of Magistracy (NIM); University of Bucharest - School of Journalism; Business Associations or CC premises
MS input: one STE, RTA
Participants: market operators and public authorities, judges, academics, journalists, consumers’ associations, liberal professions
Other resources
• interpretation - 4 working days
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.3.4
3 round tables (in Bucharest) with Romanian judges and magistrates dealing with competition cases (opened also to CC legal experts)
Method
Focus on:
- substantive and procedural aspects of cooperation between NCAs, national courts, the European Court of Justice, and the European Commission;
- decentralised application of antitrust legislation;
- private enforcement of competition rules;
- competition problems in the Romanian public procurement procedures ;
Duration: one day
Possible Location: CC premises/ National Istitute of Magistracy (NIM)
MS input: one STE (Magistrate or AGCM expert), RTA
Participants: at least 15 judges
Other resources
• interpretation - 3 working days
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.3.5
1 round table (in Bucharest) with Romanian lawyers dealing with competition cases (opened also to CC legal experts)
Method
Focus on:
- exchange of opinions on interpretation of Romanian competition legislation and on CC procedures (ex: notification of economic concentrations; application of leniency policy; abuse of economic dependence)
- the application of the new EC competition rules in Romania (the modernization package; EC Regulation 139/2004, etc.);
- decentralised application of antitrust legislation;
- private enforcement of competition rules;
Duration: one day
Possible Location: CC premises/ UAR
MS input: one STE (Magistrate or AGCM expert), RTA
Participants: at least 15 lawyers
Other resources
• interpretation - 1working day
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate and Research and Synthesis Directorate.
Activity A.3.6
One Conference outside Bucharest
(Possibly in cooperation with some of the neighbouring Competition Authorities of Bulgaria, Hungary, Moldavia, Ukraine, Serbia)
Objectives
a) promoting bilateral and multilateral cooperation, best practices in the region, and exchange of views on common issues concerning the enforcement of competition rules
b) raising CC’s international visibility in Eastern Europe
Method: as follow-up of the conference celebrating 10 years and of the bilateral memorandum of understanding (when they are in force), one conference will be organised in one border city. the president of the border competition authority together with other representatives will be invited.
Duration: one day
Possible locations: Constanta or Mangalia or Giurgiu, (with Bulgaria); Oradea (with Hungary); Iasi (with Moldavia); Suceava (with Ukraine); Timisoara (with Serbia)
MS input: STE; RTA
CC input: CC President; local inspectorates
Participants: high-ranked officials from foreign authorities, local inspectors, judges, undertakings, prefects, lawyers
Other resources
Interpretation - 2 working days
COMPONENT B: STATE AID
Vision
The objective of the State aid component of the Project is to advance the administrative capacity and application of the acquis in this area, coherent with MS status at the date of accession.
By the end of the Project Romania will be as effective in implementing EU State aids discipline as the better-performing, existing Member States. Romania will be mainstreamed within the EU on this issue.
In particular, Romania will have:
• Up-to-date State aid legislation and systems to facilitate future adjustment to European legal change
• An effective centre of excellence within Romania able to advise all arms of Romanian Government on how to apply the State aid rules and to ensure high quality notifications of aid to the European Commission where necessary;
• An effective single route of communication with the European Commission on State aids casework, enabling Romania to respond effectively to complaints, enforce State aid discipline and fulfil its monitoring role;
• An effective means of agreeing and delivering State aids policy advice within an EU environment, reconciling the views of different Ministries, speaking with a single voice in Brussels and ensuring domestic policy is informed by State aid realities and constraints;
• Improved awareness of the importance of State aid discipline and of State aid law within business, legal, economic, judicial and relevant academic communities in Romania
• An ongoing, pro-active programme for boosting State aid awareness across Government in Romania, including a functioning network of State aids experts across all relevant Departments and regions;
Objectives
The overall objectives (drawn from the Project fiche) of this component of the Project are as follows:
• Strengthen the Competition Council’s capacity for legal reasoning in State aid cases and the quality of its decision-making, consistent with the acquis;
• Strengthen the enforcement capacity of the Competition Council in relation to State aid;
• Improve the administrative capacity of the Competition Council and Romanian courts to apply State aid rules after Accession especially in terms of internal organization, databases and systems, qualified staff, effective decision-making and efficient enforcement;
• Raise awareness amongst State aid-granting public bodies and in the judiciary of State aid requirements post-accession and the consequences of failure to observe the rules correctly.
Priorities
In view of the envisaged date of accession, priorities have been identified in the light of the “2005 Comprehensive Monitoring Report” of the European Commission and the results and recommendations of the previous twinning project on State aid. They are largely aimed at bridging the outstanding gaps, which have been underlined in these two documents.
Accordingly priority is given to the strengthening of legal reasoning and of the capability to apply correctly the relevant State aid rules, leading to an improved quality of decision-making on aid measures.
Completion of the inventory of so called “applicable after” schemes is also a priority together with a more proactive attitude towards non-notified, and potentially incompatible, aid and improvement of enforcement against illegal aid requiring recovery. These are areas of intervention to be tackled straightaway, aiming at positively affecting the European Commission’s perception of Romania’s performance.
State aid advocacy, both public and private, in Bucharest and in the Country, is also an important part of the activity to be carried out, with a view to increased consciousness of EU State aid rules across Romanian society.
The expected outcome is firstly to confirm that the safeguard clause on the competition chapter is not to be applied.
But the project is also about preparing Romania for the task of coping with State aid constraints, developing policy around them and implementing State aid discipline after
Accession. This requires the training of relevant staff and that processes be in place across Romanian Government such that State aids expertise is drawn on at appropriate times.
The outcome should be to reinforce the capability of the Competition Council and of Romania as a whole to act from the date of accession as a competent and mature MS in the field of State aid control.
For the accomplishment of the upper stated priorities, one MTE will assist the RTA and STEs for a duration of 3 months during the Project development.
Method: MTE using his vast knowledge and experience of State aid matters will give an important input and knowledge in supporting the RTA and STEs when necessary regarding all appropriate aspects as identified in the Workplan.
Activities to fulfil all the objectives are divided into three sub-components as follows:
SUB-COMPONENT 1. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Continued development of the State Aid legal framework
SUB-COMPONENT 2. ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY
Improvement of the CC (and national courts) administrative capacity and training activities for the enforcement of the State aid legislation
SUB-COMPONENT 3. State Aid advocacy - raising state aid awareness and communication
Campaign in Bucharest and in the country addressed to the relevant line ministries, judiciary system, universities for increasing awareness of state aid rules
SUB-COMPONENT B.1:
Continued Development of the State Aid Legal Framework
Results:
• Drafting of new secondary state aid rules in accordance with the latest developments of the acquis communautaire in the state aid area.
• Improved capacity for updating of domestic legislation post-Accession
• Development of structures and systems for monitoring ECJ judgments and Commission decisions to facilitate the constant upgrading of Competition Council analysis and policy.
• Improved capacity for legal analysis of existing and new state aid schemes to ensure their compatibility with the EC state aid rules and for legal input to policy-making.
• Effective national legal framework for recovery of aid
Activity B.1.1:
Assistance for the review and elaboration (as required) of Romanian secondary legislation with a view to ensuring continued harmonization with the EC acquis. MS experts will work with Romanian experts to review and help make proposals for amendments.
Target Groups: Competition Council
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: RTA, 1 STE will identify and coach experts from the Competition Council in interpretation of the State aid acquis and in translating European legal change into domestic Romanian law.
Benchmarks/deliverables: Existing legislation reviewed for ongoing compliance with the acquis and recommendations for any updates submitted to the relevant ministries and granting authorities. Key staff identified to lead this activity post-Accession and coached to improve their capacity.
MS input: 1 STE - (see Annex A for the list of experts) RTA
Duration: 1 STE mission of 5 working days (during the first 4 months of the Project)
Translation:
Interpretation:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.1.2
Design of systems for monitoring changes in European state aid legislation and jurisprudence and processes for communicating the implications of such change to interested policymakers and other stakeholders. Coaching for staff responsible for implementing these systems.
Target Groups: state aid experts of the Competition Council
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: RTA, MTE, 2 STEs will review existing systems, make recommendations and coach experts from the Competition Council to implement best practice.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Improved monitoring, interpretation and dissemination of ECJ and European Commission decisions on State aid within the Competition Council and amongst relevant line ministries and aid granting authorities.
MS input: RTA, MTE, 2 STEs (see Annex A for the list of experts) RTA
Duration: 2 STEs missions of 5 working days each (during the first 4 months of the Project)
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.1.3
Assistance for improving the systems for recovery of illegal aid (linked with B.1.3)
Target Groups: Competition Council
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: Review existing legal framework for recovery of aid and procedures for invoking them and make recommendations on improvements which might be made.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Recommendations on improving Romanian legal system for aid recovery (if necessary) and advice on procedures for invoking that system
MS input: RTA, MTE, 2 STEs (see Annex A for the list of experts).
Duration: 2 STEs missions of 5 working days each (during the first 4 months of the Project)
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
SUB-COMPONENT B.2:
Strengthening the Enforcement and Administrative Capacity of the Competition Council and Relevant Institutions in Relation to State Aid
Results:
• CC is an effective centre of excellence within Romania able to vigorously apply the law pre-Accession and authoritatively advise all arms of Romanian Government on how to apply the State aid rules and ensure that high quality notifications of aid to the European Commission are made where necessary, after Accession.
• Scrutiny (and, if necessary, adaptation) performed on the aid measures which will remain in force after accession (so called “applicable after” measures).
• Notifying procedure corresponding to EU practice established, including the adoption of electronic notification in line with current EU practice and training for other Ministries and regional authorities on when and how to notify.
• Block Exemption Regulations (aid exempted from notification but to be communicated to the Commission in due form) applied properly as from Accession.
• Systems put in place to ensure that the State aid rules are applied in full to structural funds programmes
• Procedures established which ensure that all arms of Romanian Government consult best avilable expertise on State aid matters and can only approach the Commission in Brussels through a single portal.
• An effective process established for agreeing and delivering State aids policy advice within the EU environment, reconciling the views of different Ministries, speaking with a single voice in Brussels and ensuring domestic Romanian policy is informed by State aid realities and constraints.
• CC equipped to respond effectively to complaints and fulfill its State aid monitoring and reporting role with effective systems in place to track and report on aid granted, including a more proactive attitude towards non notified aid.
• Knowledge management system defined and key elements in place.
Activity B.2.1.
Training on the job for Competition Council experts, in order to:
• assist in assessment of cases, including scrutiny of “applicable after” measures
• explore the complexities of State aid assessment, including in areas rarely encountered in the past in Romania, but which may arise in future;
• advise on drafting and enforcing negative aid decisions and enforcing recovery of illegal aid;
• expose CC experts to best practice in drafting notifications to the European Commission and provide advice on how to optimally interact with the Commission thereafter;
• improve use of legal analysis in state aid cases and establish best practice for collaboration between case advisers/handlers and CC lawyers;
• explain how the State aid rules should be applied to expenditure in Romania under the EU Structural Funds;
• offer advice on handling enquiries from around Government post-Accession
• boost the capability, status and confidence of lawyers within the CC in relation to case-handling and policy work
• review, advice and training related to CC systems for handling complaints and uncovering “hidden” non-notified aid and for monitoring and reporting on State aid. On the job advice and workshops for CC staff on improving of the state aid annual report and inventory.
Target Group: Competition Council
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: RTA, MTE, 4 STEs will provide advice on cases, offer training on areas of particular complexity, using case studies to highlight best practice in State aid assessment Benchmarks/Deliverables: Ongoing assistance from RTA and from MTE.
MS input: RTA, MTE and 4 STEs (see Annex A for the list of experts) – throughout duration of the Project.
Duration: 4 STEs missions of 5 working days each (20 working days)
Translation:
Interpretation:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.2.2.
1 two-days Seminar on State Aid Regulatory Impact Assessment in Bucharest
The seminar will focus on giving advice and assistance in developing a state aid Regulatory Impact Assessment system (RIA).
Target Groups: Competition Council, representatives of the line ministries, Governmental agencies, State aid grantors
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: RTA and STE with specific knowledge and experience will coach Competition Council experts in the development of a state aid RIA system.
Day 1: CC experts
Day 2: officials from line ministries, Governmental agencies, State aid grantors
MS input: 1 STE will provide 1 workshop of 2 working days
Duration: 1 STE mission of 2working days
Translation:
Interpretation required: 2 interpreters x 1 working day
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.2.3.
2 informal workshops of one-day each for improving the State Aid Annual Report and Inventory
The workshops will focus on assisting the CC experts and the representatives of State aid grantors for the improvement of the state aid annual report and inventory: development of a spreadsheet form for reporting on aid by grantors and beneficiaries of state aid
Target Group: Competition Council, representatives of the State aid grantors
Location: Bucharest
Duration: 2 x 1 working day each = 2 working days
Methodology: RTA, MTE, STEs with specific knowledge and experience, via bespoke seminars.
MS input: 2 STEs x 1 working day each, MTE
Duration: 2 STE missions of 1working day each
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Interpretation required:
Translation:
Activity B.2.4.
2 informal workshops for the Competition Council experts for improving the overall assessment of the notifications submitted by the State aid grantors
The workshops will focus on assisting the CC experts for the improvement of the evaluation of the notifications sent by state aid grantors, before submitting them to the European Commission.
Target Group: Competition Council, representatives of the State aid grantors
Location: Bucharest
Duration: 2 STEs missions of 1 working day each = 2 working days, MTE
Methodology: RTA, MTE, STEs with specific knowledge and experience via bespoke seminars.
MS input: 2 STEs, MTE
Interpretation required:
Translation:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.2.5.
8 Seminars for the Competition Council local inspectorates
Delivery of training to CC local experts, local aid grantors and relevant line ministries in the regions (covering 8 counties of Romania) on basic state aid principles, rules and application. The training will be designed to build up familiarity and confidence amongst officials when handling potential state aid issues on how to recognise potential State aid, use of the Block Exemptions, when to consult the CC, monitoring and inventorising aid and how to draft notifications to the CC and then the European Commission when necessary.
Target Group: CC local experts, officials from aid grantor and line ministries and local administrations.
Locality: county level, 8 cities with Court of Appeal
Methodology: RTA, STEs experts with knowledge and experience will deliver workshops and seminars.
Duration: 2 working days each seminar
- 1st day of seminar: Competition Council’s inspectors; business environment; consumers; academia; journalists; experts from the Prefect’s office
- 2nd day of seminar (case study - oriented): Competition Council’s local inspectors (approximately 100 people trained)
MS input: RTA, MTE, 4 STEs – 8 x 2 working days = 16 working days
Interpretation required: 2 interpreters x 16 working days = 32 working days
Translations:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate, Territorial Monitoring Directorate and Local Inspectorates.
Activity B.2.6.
Assistance for knowledge management systems reviewed to ensure that CC State aid experts share experience of cases, to ensure consistency in decisions made and advice given and to ensure that a “corporate memory” is developed to retain expertise when key members of staff move.
Target Group: Competition Council
Location: Bucharest
Methodology: Review exercise performed by STEs with relevant experience. Recommendations and help with implementation.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Design and recommendations for adoption within CC of a modern knowledge management system. Assistance with implementation.
MS input: 2 STEs (see Annex A for the list of experts)
Duration: 2 STEs missions x 5 working days each
Translations:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.2.7
1 Study visit at European Commission for 5 CC officials and 2 judges
(c/o the European Commission DG Comp; EP commissions; international law firm specialized in State aid law; College of Europe, Bruges)
Duration: one week (5 working days)
Participants: 5 CC officials and 2 judges
Target Groups: 5 CC officials and 2 judges.
Location: Belgium, Bruxelles
Methodology: discussions on the work of Member State representations to the EU in relation to State aid, a series of meetings at DG Competition, a visit to the European Parliament and presentations by international lawyers on their State aid work.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Improved awareness of the EU dimension of State aid control MS input: RTA/MTE – 5 working days
Translation:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Participation to study visit is strictly limited to the beneficiary staff having a direct and active role in the implementation of the project and only in relation with its objectives and activities. Most study visits will have a highly technical content and be directed to operational staff, with at least 50% participants coming from the territorial (decentralized) units wherever these exist.
For any study visit, the partners will present at least four weeks in advance a letter to the TM in the EC Delegation, indicating the detailed purpose (technical content) and schedule (meetings, departments etc) of the visit, the criteria for selecting the participants and the detailed list of these, with name, function, role in the project. The EC Delegation will formulate any comments or objections within the five working days following confirmation of receipt. No reaction from EC Delegation after the confirmation of receipt is deemed as no objections and the study visit can be organised. Participation of any other than the one approved by ECD, can be financed out of other sources than EU Phare funds, providing there is a previous agreement of the two Project Leaders."
Activity B.2.8
1 Study visit in London c/o the UK Department of Trade and Industry for 8 persons: 6 CC officials (high rank officials, directors, State aid experts) of the Competition Council and 2 representatives of the State aid grantors
Methodology: discussions with DTI on its State aid control activities and how it interacts with and tries to influence the European Commission. Also there will be meetings with aid grantors from a range of UK ministries, a meeting with the Confederation of British Industry on industry’s approach to State aid control and a day in Birmingham hearing about State aid issues in relation to Structural Fund spending and seeing some EU funded projects.
Duration: one week (5 working days)
Participants: 8 persons: 6 representatives (high rank officials, directors, competition inspectors) of the Competition Council and 2 representatives of the State aid grantors
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Improved awareness of the EU dimension of State aid control and exposure to UK ways of thinking about State aid control.
MS input: RTA/MTE – 5 working days
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Participation to study visit is strictly limited to the beneficiary staff having a direct and active role in the implementation of the project and only in relation with its objectives and activities. Most study visits will have a highly technical content and be directed to operational staff, with at least 50% participants coming from the territorial (decentralized) units wherever these exist.
For any study visit, the partners will present at least four weeks in advance a letter to the TM in the EC Delegation, indicating the detailed purpose (technical content) and schedule (meetings, departments etc) of the visit, the criteria for selecting the participants and the detailed list of these, with name, function, role in the project. The EC Delegation will formulate any comments or objections within the five working days following confirmation of receipt. No reaction from EC Delegation after the confirmation of receipt is deemed as no objections and the study visit can be organised. Participation of any other than the one approved by ECD, can be financed out of other sources than EU Phare funds, providing there is a previous agreement of the two Project Leaders."
SUBCOMPONENT B. 3
State Aid Advocacy and Communication
Results:
• Raise awareness amongst the judiciary and companies of the new requirements of the EU State aid control system after the date of accession, especially the consequences of the notification obligation not being observed.
• Greater awareness amongst the business public regarding state aid policy
• Existence of an ongoing national state aid communication strategy within the Competition Council with (and amongst) relevant line ministries and aid granting authorities.
• Key non-governmental multipliers of information such as journalists and academics aware of State aid issues and starting to comment on State aid matters within informed Romanian circles.
Activity B.3.1
4 Seminars for judiciary
Target Group: Judiciary environment (judges from the Bucharest Court of Appeal, High Court of Cassation and Justice)
Location : Bucharest
Methodology : Development and delivery of bespoke training activities to members of the Romanian judiciary concerning the State aid rules, private enforcement of the rules and ECJ jurisprudence in the area of state aid.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: 4 one day Seminars provided by RTA, MTEs and STEs. Romanian judiciary aware of the State aid rules, private enforcement of the rules and ECJ jurisprudence in the area of state aid.
MS input: RTA, MTE, 4 STEs x 1 day seminar (see Annex A for the list of experts)
Interpretation required: 2 interpreters x 4 working days
Duration: 4 STEs missions of 1 working day each
Translation:
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity B.3.2.
1 Lecture focussing on raising awareness amongst the business and legal communities, of state aid general principles, enforcement and the consequences of non-observance of those rules, both in terms of European Commission action and private enforcement. Awareness of the application of the rules will be further embedded by the use of examples relating to horizontal and sectoral interests.
Target Groups: Business and private lawyers
Duration: STE mission of 1 working day
Location: Bucharest
Methodology : 1 lecture provided by RTA and STE
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Improved awareness of the practical effect of State aid discipline in Romanian business circles
MS input: RTA, 1 STE x 1 working day (see Annex A for the list of experts)
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Interpretation required: 2 interpreters x 1 working day
Translation:
Activity B.3.3.
1 Lecture for engaging non-Governmental multipliers of information around the country to take an interest in the theory and practice of State aid control.
Target Groups: Academics (especially economists, lawyers and political scientists), journalists (business-focused), publishers and civil society.
Location: Bucharest
Duration: STE mission of 1 working day
Methodology : 1 lecture provided by RTA and STE
Benchmarks/deliverables: Creation of a forum for discussion of State aid matters.
Inclusion of State aid and competition matters in some University curricula
MS input: RTA, 1 STE (see Annex A for the list of experts)
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
COMPONENT C - COMMON ACTIVITIES
This component contains the activities to be jointly implemented by the two components of the project, Component A – Antitrust and Component B – State Aid.
Activity C.1.1
3 Conferences in Bucharest (opening, closing, for celebrating 10 years of Competition in Romania)
Duration: 1 day/Conference
MS input: Italian and British PLs and RTAs
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Participants: approx. 200 persons: CC officials; EC representatives; NCA officials; line ministries. Other governmental institutions; diplomats; journalists; judges; business associations; Universities; the press
Benchmarks/deliverables:
a) 1 Kick-off meeting and 1 Closing conference. Governmental institutions; diplomats; journalists; judges; business associations; Universities; media and public at large aware and informed on the objectives and results of the Twinning Project.
b) 1 Conference for celebrating “10 years of Competition in Romania”.
Duration: STE mission of 1 working day
Interpretation required: 2 interpreters x 3 working days
Activity C.1.2
2 Sessions outside Bucharest for training of trainers on public speaking, negotiating and lobbying skills, improvement of the managerial skills of CC officials
MS input: 1 STE/ session (to be selected from Formez and UK experts)
Participants: at least 20 CC officials/session
• 10 Competitions Department
• 10 State Aid Department
• 10 Legal, Research and International Relations Departments
• 20 representatives from local inspectorates
Duration: 2 STEs mission of 2 working days each = 4 working days
Benchmarks/deliverables: 2 Sessions of 2 days each for training of trainers. At least 20 CC experts trained by RTA and STEs on how to best negotiate and present the CC position in public meetings.
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Activity C.1.3
Producing and disseminating items on competition and State aid advocacy and project visibility
Producing and disseminating items on competition and State aid advocacy and project visibility
Assistance in the production and dissemination of literature/material for publicity on State aid and project visibility;
Assistance in the enhancement of the CC web-site so that it provides useful guidance for any party interested in State aid issues and clear information on where to go for more information
Support for the writing of guidelines on horizontal mergers and on abuse of dominance type infringements. – Manual, leaflet
Up-date of the Manual on State Aid Law in Romania; other leaflets
Target Groups: CC experts, State aid grantors, national Regulatory Authorities, judiciary, media, public authorities, business communities, public at large
Location : Nationwide publicity
Methodology : News-sheets, articles in press and journals, CC web-site, CC leaflet, brochures etc.
Benchmarks/Deliverables: Items on competition and State aid advocacy and project visibility elaborated, produced and disseminated amongst the interested parties. Information materials fit for purpose and adjusted to the different levels of need of different groups.
MS input: RTAs, MTE, STEs
CC input: Competition Council experts within International Relations Directorate, State Aid Directorates, Antitrust Directorates, Juridical Directorate, Research and Synthesis Directorate and Territorial Monitoring Directorate.
Results: leaflets; booklets; newsletters; reports, manual
ARTICLE 5. SCHEDULE
|Project Month |
|Sub-Component 1 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK |
|Activity A.1.1Evaluation |
|of legal framework |
|Sub-Component 1 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK |
|Activity B.1.1. |
|Assistance for the review and elaboration (as required) of Romanian secondary legislation (1 WEEK) |
|Activity C.1.1. |x |
|3 Conferences in Bucharest | |
|Date: from (month/year) |September 1984 |
|to (month/year) |July 1985 |
|Degree(s) or Diploma obtained: |Masters in European Law (Distinction) |
|Institution: |London School of Economics |
|Date: from (month/year) |September 1981 |
|to (month/year) |July 1984 |
|Degree(s) or Diploma obtained: |Honours Degree in Law |
7. Language Skills
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|English |Mother Tongue |Mother Tongue |Mother Tongue |
|French |Fluent |Fluent |Very Good |
8. Membership of professional and other bodies:
9. Other skills: (e.g. computer literacy, etc. ) Public speaking and training awards for excellence
10. Present position: Director, State aids policy, Competition and Consumer Policy Directorate, DTI London
11. Years with the Department: 4.5
12. Key qualifications: (relevant to the program)
1. European Law studies, including courses on EC competition law at ULB.
2. 15 years of experience working on European law and policy issues in Brussels, including provision of advice to major EU companies on competition and state aids issues.
3. Two years working in the DTI state aids unit, advising on state aids risks for a variety of potential grant awards around the UK and helping to notify and seek approval for a range of UK aid schemes.
4. Experience of devising and delivering complex training programmes, especially using case studies, on a range of European law subjects including competition and state aids.
13. Specific Eastern Countries experience:
.
|Date: from (month/year) |Country |
|to (month/year) | |
|1989 - 1996 |Editor of and leading contributor to three editions of the Deloitte & Touche Guides to |
| |doing business in a variety of CEECs including Hungary, Poland, Czech and Slovak |
| |Republics, Bulgaria, Russia and the Baltic States |
|1991 |Manager of Deloitte & Touche survey of factors affecting business investment in CEECs |
|1993 |Project Manager of PHARE-funded study on the factors affecting the potential supply of |
| |venture capital in the Czech and Slovak Republics |
|1994 |Consultant for US AID project on the development of business representative organisations |
| |and export promotion bodies in Albania |
|2000 |Project for major UK utility on the implementation of the PHARE, SAPARD and ISPA |
| |programmes for environmental improvements in the Czech Republic |
|2001 - 2002 |Hosting of missions from Bulgaria, Cyprus and Estonia visiting the UK to improve |
| |understanding of state aid issues and procedures |
|2004-2005 |Short-term expert for DTI twinning project on State aids with Bulgaria. Delivered training|
| |workshops and advice on specific cases for Bulgarian CPC and Ministry of Finance and |
| |training for Bulgarian lawyers and judges, plus advice on systems for controlling State |
| |aid. |
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: from (month/year) |August 1985 |
|to (month/year) |- July 1988 |
|Location: |Brussels |
|Company: |Stanbrook and Hooper European Lawyers |
|Position: |Researcher and Legal Advisor |
|Description: |Support to lawyers on cases involving European trade and competition law. Advice on single|
| |market programme and its constituent parts. Creation of database for monitoring of changes|
| |in European law. |
|Date: from (month/year) |July 1988 |
|to (month/year) |- May 1990 |
|Location: |Brussels |
|Company: |KPMG EC Centre |
|Position: |Manager |
|Description: |Multiple projects to analyse the business impact of changes in European law deriving from |
| |the Single Market programme and from European trade and competition law developments and |
| |to train business representatives on the implications for their companies. |
|Date: from (month/year) |May 1990 |
|to (month/year) |- September 2000 |
|Location: |Brussels |
|Company: |Deloitte & Touche Europe Services |
|Position: |Senior Manager then Director |
|Description: |Creation of business guides for doing business in CEECs. Help in establishing Deloitte & |
| |Touche offices in the region. Projects for business and public sector clients advising on |
| |EU law, grant schemes and policy change. Projects for the European Commission involving |
| |research on implementation of EU policies and WTO agreements. Management of the Team |
| |Europe Info Service for DG Education and Culture. |
|Date: from (month/year) |February 2001 |
|to (month/year) |- present |
|Location: |London |
|Company: |Department of Trade and Industry |
|Position: |Assistant Director then Director |
|Description: |Until November 2002 advice across all arms of UK government on state aid. Notification and|
| |clearance of aid schemes with the European Commission. Development of UK policy for state |
| |aid reform. |
| | |
| |November 2002 to March 2005, development of enhanced policy for business relations with |
| |the UK pharmaceutical and biotechnology sector. |
| | |
| |From March 2005, Director of State aid policy |
Romanian Project Leader
CURRICULUM VITAE
Mrs. Tudoran
1. Family name: ION TUDORAN
2. First names: DOINA
3. Date of birth: January 5, 1959
4. Nationality: Romanian
5. Civil status: married
6. Education:
|Institution |Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest |
|Date: from(month/year): |1979-1983 |
|to (month/year) | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) |BS in Management |
|Obtained: | |
7. Language skills: (increasing competence from 1 to 5)
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|English |5 |5 |5 |
|French |4 |4 |4 |
|Spanish |4 |4 |4 |
8. Membership in professional bodies:
9. Other skills: Windows, Word, working with INTERNET
10. Present position: Director of Directorate for International Aspects, Romanian Competition Council
11. Years within the organisation: 4
12. Key qualifications: Experience in the field of Romanian and European Competition and State Aid Law
13. Specific Countries experience: -
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: from |1983-1987 |
|(month/year) | |
|to (month/year) | |
|Location |Bucharest |
|Company |Ministry of Light Industry |
|Position |Economist |
|Description |Responsible of price analyses |
| | |
|Date: from |1987-1996 |
|(month/year) | |
|to (month/year) | |
|Location |Bucharest |
|Company |Ministry of Finances |
|Position |Economist, Head of Department |
|Description |Economist within Competition Directorate |
| | |
|Date: from |1996 – present |
|(month/year) | |
|to (month/year) | |
|Location |Bucharest |
|Company |Competition Council |
|Position |Director for International Relations and European Integration |
|Description |Attributions in the field of pre-accesion preparation in competition and state aid area |
15. Other Relevant Information: -
16. Contact Address in Romania:
Competition Council, Piata Presei Libere, no. 1, Sector 1, Bucharest, ROMANIA
Tel: +(40 21) 405 44 33
Fax: +(40 21) 318 2611
E-mail: doina.tudoran@consiliulconcurentei.ro
Resident Twining Advisor (Antitrust)
CURRICULUM VITAE
1. Family name: La Torre
2. First name: Aurelio
3. Date and place of birth: Messina, November 11, 1966
4. Nationality: Italian
5. Civil status: single
6. Education:
|Institution | |
|Date: | |
|1985-1989 |University of Messina (Italy), Faculty of Political Science |
| | |
| |Sorbonne University, Paris (France) - Faculty of Law, Centre de |
|2-7 1990 |Recherches Européennes et Communautaires |
| | |
| |Ecole Nationale d’Administration (E.N.A.) - Paris (France) |
| | |
|6.1992-7.1992 |College d’Europe, Bruges (Belgium) |
| | |
| |University of Messina (Italy), Faculty of Law |
|9.1990-6. 1991 | |
| | |
|10.1989-2003 | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) | |
| |Degree in Political Science (110/110 cum laude); thesis on "The |
|1989 |dominant position in the daily press". |
| | |
| |Certificates released by Sorbonne University on examination |
|1990 |passed in European studies |
| | |
| |Diploma (Master) in Advanced European Studies; thesis on |
| |"L'exécution du droit communautaire en Italie et la loi du 9 mars|
|1991 |1989". |
| | |
| |Certificate of participation in internship c/o Ecôle Nationale |
| |de l’Administration (E.N.A.). |
| | |
|1992 |Degree in Law (110/110 cum laude); thesis on "The powers of the |
| |Italian Antitrust Authority and the administrative regulation of |
| |the market". |
| | |
|2003 | |
| | |
7. Language skills: (increasing competence from 1 to 5)
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|Italian (native) |5 |5 |5 |
|English |5 |5 |5 |
|Romanian |5 |5 |4 |
|French |5 |5 |4 |
|Spanish |5 |4 |3 |
|Portuguese |3 |2 |2 |
|German |3 |1 |2 |
|Greek |2 |1 |2 |
|Bulgarian |2 |1 |1 |
8. Membership in professional bodies:
1997 Qualification as a Chartered Accountant.
2005 Founding member of the Romanian Association of professionals in the competition field (“Asociatia Profesionistilor din domeniul Concurentei”)
9. Other skills:
Computer literacy (Microsoft office, Internet, Power Point, Excel, Lotus Notes, and others).
10. Present position
Director c/o the Prime Minister`s Office – Department of Public Administration (Dipartimento della Funzione Pubblica)
11. Years of professional experience: 13
(within the last organization: three years and a half)
12. Key qualifications (relevant to the programme):
• Pre Accession Advisor in Romania for a Twinning project PHARE between November 2003-September 2005. Previously National expert for a PHARE Twinning project in Romania (from October 2001 to October 2002).
• Specialized in EC law and international studies.
• Various teaching experiences in competition, public administration and European integration topics.
• Working since November 2002 as Director-Head of Unit c/o the Department of Public Administration (Prime Minister’s Office) with competencies in the field of innovation in the Public Administration.
• Worked from 1997 until 2001 as administrator within the Italian Antitrust Authority both in the Legal Office and in the Investigative Directorate General.
• Researching and working in Italy, France, and Belgium on EC and competition issues since 1989. Publications on the implementation of EC law in Italy.
• Accustomed to work in an international environment.
• Good aptitude for foreign languages.
13. Specific experience in international activities:
|Country |Date: from (month/year) to (month/year) |Name and brief description of the project |
|Romania |Since November 2003 |PHARE Twinning Project on competition – |
| | |Pre-Accession Advisor |
|Bulgaria |February 2005 – April 2005 |PHARE Twinning Project on Competition: 2 |
| | |one-week working missions |
|Romania |10 and 11 June 2003 |PHARE Twinning Project on Reform of Romanian |
| | |Public Administration - Short-term expert |
|Italy (Rome)/ Federation Bosnia Herzegovina- |March 2003-May 2003 |Master in State Management and Humanitarian |
|Montenegro | |Affairs-lecturer |
|Romania |December 2002 – June 2003 |PHARE Twinning Project on Competition and |
| | |State Aid (RO/2002/000-586.04.02): drafting |
| | |and developing the Twinning Covenant for the |
| | |Competition component as appointed PAA |
| | |(Pre-Accession Advisor). |
|France - Paris (OECD) |14-15 November 2002 |Italian representative at the Conference on |
| | |Public Governance organized by OECD (PUMA|
| | |Public Management Committee) with National |
| | |representatives |
|Romania |October 2001 - October 2002 |PHARE Twinning Project on competition - |
| | |National expert |
|Belgium – Brussels (EU) |4 two days meetings organized between |Italian representative at hearings organized |
| |2000-2001 |by EU- DG Competition with MS representatives|
|Belgium – Brussels (EU) |Two meetings organized during 1997 |EU Accounting Advisory Forum: technical |
| | |advisor of the Italian representative |
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: |Since December 2001 |
|Location |Rome |
|Institution |Prime Minister’s Office - Department of Public Function |
|Position |Director |
|Description |Administrative reforms policy for the Public administration both at central and local |
| |level; legal drafting. |
|Date: from |10. 2001-10.2002 |
|to (month/year) | |
|Location |Bucharest – Palace of Parliament |
|Institution |Romanian Antitrust Authorities (Romanian Competition Council and Romanian Competition |
| |Office) |
|Position |National expert for the PHARE Twinning Project on competition |
|Description |Revision of the Romanian legal framework in competition and state aid field and |
| |implementation of training activities aimed at facilitating the process for accession to |
| |the European Union. |
|Date: |6.1997-9.2001 |
|Location |Rome |
|Institution |Italian Antitrust Authority |
|Position |Administrator |
|Description |Legal Office: formulated the requested legal advice, analyzed the submitted legal cases, |
| |and monitored the E.C. activity concerning the competition policy. |
| |Investigation Units: investigated and analyzed the competition-limiting allegations and |
| |the related cases, worked to notify the Italian Parliament and Government of the possible|
| |dangers to a properly-working competition and free market. Involved in many unannounced |
| |inspections. |
|Date: |9.1996-5.1997 |
|Location |Rome |
|Institution |National Society of Graduate Accountants, Research Institute |
|Position |Researcher |
|Description |Worked as a Researcher in the International Economic Law field, coordinated and |
| |supervised the legal department of the Institute. |
| |Worked as Technical advisor of the Italian delegate (prof. Matteo Caratozzolo) at the EC |
| |Accounting Advisory Forum. |
| |Member of the National Committee for the Study of Arbitration. |
|Date: |9.1992-7.1993 and period 1994-96 |
|Location |Messina |
|Institution |University of Messina – Institute of private law |
|Position |Researcher |
|Description |Worked as a researcher coordinated and supervised by professor S. Ciccarello c/o the |
| |department of Industrial law. |
15. Other Relevant Information
• 25.05.2005 Rapporteur for antitrust in a meeting organised by the Romanian Prime Minister and the Romania Government in the framework of Romania`s future accession to EU
• 11.05.2005 Rapporteur for antitrust in occasion of the round table organised for the visit in Romania of the Commissioner for Competition, Mrs. Neelie Kroes
• 28.02.2004 Rapporteur for antitrust in a meeting organised by the Romanian Prime Minister and the Romania Government in order to evaluate the priorities for the negotiation process
• Contributed to the organization and implementation of the cooperation project on “Competition policy in the Balkan countries”. This project, funded by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, lasts for one year (March 2005-March 2006) and is based on an initiative of the Italian Competition Authority.
• Appointed by the Ministry of Public Function (January, 2003) as member of the working group on the project “The exchange of innovation in the Public Administration between Europe and Mediterranean regions”.
Publications and working documents in competition field:
Publications:
1989 - La posizione dominante nella stampa quotidiana
casa ed.Edas, Messina
1991 - L’exècution du droit communautaire en Italie
casa ed.Edas, Messina
1993 - La disciplina comunitaria della concorrenza nel trasporto aereo
casa ed.Edas, Messina
1997 - L’indagine dell’Antitrust su Ordini e Collegi professionali
in “Il Manuale del professionista” casa ed. IPSOA, Torino
2004 – Strategy for fostering competition in public procurement in Romania
in Profilul: Concurenta (number 2/2004, Bucharest)
2005 - Strategy for implementing Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) in Romania
in Profilul: Concurenta (number 3/2005, Bucharest)
2005 - Italian support on antitrust field through PHARE Twinning Project
in Profilul: Concurenta (number 3/2005, Bucharest)
Working documents
(Conceived and drafted in the framework of the Phare Twinning Project “Further Development of Competition Authorites’ Capacity to Implement the Competition and State Aid acquis communautaire to EU Standards of application”, Bucharest):
1. Romanian legislative framework in competition: analysis of the changes occurred (2004)
2. Enforcement record of the Romanian Competition Council: decisions, investigation activities and fines (2004)
3 .Administrative capacity of the Romanian Competition Council: internal organization and human resources (2004)
4. Guidelines for a more pro-active use of ex-officio investigations focused on the most serious infringements of competition (2004)
5. Markets of special relevance for the enforcement of competition policy in Romania (2004)
6. Guidelines on how to detect anticompetitive practices (2004)
7. Guidelines on how to conduct unannounced inspections (2004)
8. Developing an international relations strategy for the Romanian Competition Council (2004)
9. Strategy for fostering competition in public procurements in Romania (2005)
10. Suggestions for improving the Website of the Romanian Competition Council (2004)
11. Strategy for promoting a competition culture in Romania (2004)
12. Glossary of Antitrust terms (2004)
13. Strategy for an open and competitive selection of the Romanian civil servants (2005)
14. Future Challenges for Competition Policy in Romania (2005)
16. Contact Address in the Member State, including telephone, fax and e-mail
Resident Twining Advisor (State Aid)
CURRICULUM VITAE
1. Family name: EMERUWA
2. First Name: John
3. Date of Birth: 14 November 1962
4. Nationality: British
5. Civil Status: Married
6. Education:
|Institute: |University of Southampton |
|Date: from (month/year) |October 1987 |
|to (month/year) |July 1988 |
|Degrees(s) or Diploma |LLM (International Trade) |
|obtained | |
|Institute: |University of South .W. England |
|Date: from (month/year) |Oct 1984 |
|to (month/year) |June 1987 |
|Degree(s) or Diploma |B.A. Hons – Law & Political Economics |
|obtained | |
7. Language Skills
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|English |Mother Tongue |Mother Tongue |Mother Tongue |
|French |Basic |Basic |n/a |
8. Membership of professional and other bodies: Lawyer - Member of the Bar of England and Wales.
9. Other Skills: IT skills – Windows, Word, Excel.
10. Present position: Assistant Director, State aids Policy Unit – Competition and Consumer Policy Directorate, DTI London.
11. Years with the Department: 14
12. Key qualification (relevant to the program)
1. 4 years experience working within the field of state aid providing advice and guidance to national, regional and local government agencies on related issues; coordinate and advise on complaint cases and formal Commission investigations; develop and deliver training strategies and awareness raising activities to government agencies and the wider communities; provide advice concerning European Commission notification requirements (liaising with UK representation in Brussels) and the implementation of Commission legislation into domestic law.
2. Special advisor to the Romanian Competition Council in Bucharest. Provision of advice relating to state aid legislation and policy development; developing and delivering training to Competition Council staff and other Ministries concerning EU notification requirements; develop communication strategy to improve and strengthen co-ordination between Ministries and regional aid grantors.
3. Experience of public speaking and delivering training relating to state aid matters.
13. Specific Eastern Countries experience:
|Date: from (month/year) |Country |
|to (month/year) | |
|June 2005 - ongoing |Romania - Special Advisor to Romanian Competition Council. |
13. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: from (month/year) |August 1989 |
|to ( month/year) |- Sept 1991 |
|Location: |London |
|Company: |Chambers of Judge John Lloyd QC |
|Position: |Junior Barrister |
|Description |Provide advice on commercial litigation; |
| |research support to senior lawyers and |
| |provide legal representation in court. |
|Date : from (month/year) |October 1991 |
|to (month/year) |- August 2002 |
|Location : |London |
|Company : |Department of Trade and Industry |
|Position : |SeniorLegal Advsior (Government Legal |
| |Service) |
|Description |Provision of legal advice and assistance |
| |relating to the enforcement of company |
| |and commercial legislation and financial |
| |services. Provide advice to and |
| |coordination of investigation teams |
| |investigating London Stock Exchange |
| |Listing Rules. |
|Date : from (month/year) |September 2002 - present |
|to (month/year) | |
|Location : |London |
|Company : |Department ofTrade and Industry |
|Position : |Assistant Director |
|Description |Provision of advice to UK Departments |
| |Concerning state aid, including the |
| |notification of individual aid and |
| |schemes for Commission clearance |
RTA Counterparts in Romania
CURRICULUM VITAE
RTA Counter Part on State Aid
1. Family name: DIACONESCU
2. First name: DANIEL
3. Date of birth: March 20, 1957, Bucharest, Romania
4. Nationality: Romanian
5. Civil status: Married with one child
6. Education:
|Institution |National School of Political Studies and Public Administration, |
| |Bucharest, Romania |
|Date : |September 2005/July 2006 |
|from (month/year) to (month/year) : | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) obtained : |Master in European Public Space |
|Institution |The Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, Commerce |
| |Faculty |
|Date : |September 1979/June 1984 |
|from (month/year) to (month/year) : | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) obtained : |Economist |
7. Language skills: (Marks 1 to 5 for competence, where 5 is the highest):
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|Romanian (mother tongue) |5 |5 |5 |
|English |5 |5 |5 |
|French |3 |4 |2 |
8. Membership of professional bodies:
9. Other skills (e.g. Computer literacy, etc...): P.C. World, Excel, Outlook Express, Internet, Fax and Copy machine, Driving licence.
10. Present position: Director –State Aid Reporting, Monitoring and Control Directorate
11. Years within the firm: 9 years
12. Key qualifications:
- Project Leader on Phare 2002 Twinning Programm;
- European Commission DG Comp. June 1998, Stage on competition matters;
- Government of Romania, Department for European Integration, Sept 1997, Training Project Management PHARE Programmes.
13. Specific eastern countries experience:
|Country |Date : from (month/year) to (month/year) |
|In Romania, Hungary, Slovenia, FR of Yugoslavia, Belgium,Turkey, |From 1997 up to 2006 over 30 seminars and workshops on |
|organised by: | |
|OECD |competition and state aid policy |
|Several Thematic Meetings of the Regional Flagship Initiative | |
|“Competition Law and Policy in SEE” under Stability Pact for SEE | |
|TAIEX - European Commission |competition and state aid policy |
|ERA – Academy of European Law - Germany |competition and state aid policy |
|Federal Ministry of Economy - Germany |competition and state aid policy |
|Federal Ministry of Finance – Germany |competition and state aid policy |
|FTC and DOJ – USA |competition and state aid policy |
|Ministry for Foreign Affairs - Denmark |competition and state aid policy |
|Gide Loyrette Nouel - France |competition and state aid policy |
|DG Comp - European Commission |accession negociations on chapter 6 Comp. |
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: from (month/year) to |August 1978 |
|(month/year) |August 1990 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |CONFEX State Foreign Trade Company |
|Position |Economist |
|Description |Export contracts for readymade garments |
| | |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |September1990 |
|(month/year) |September 1991 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |MARCO Private Foreign Trade Company |
|Position |Deputy Director |
|Description |Export – import contracts of general goods |
| | |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |October 1991 |
|(month/year) |February 1994 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |MEDIACORD Private Foreign Trade Company |
|Position |Director |
|Description |Representative of CHEM TREND – Denmark, part of CASTROL |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |March 1994 |
|(month/year) |April 1995 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |TELEFONICA ROMANIA Spanish Romanian JV for mobile telephony |
|Position |Economist |
|Description |Sales Department |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |May 1995 |
|(month/year) |January 1996 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |INTERPRO Advertising Company, part of Graffiti International Group |
|Position |Economist |
|Description |Sales Department |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |February 1996 |
|(month/year) |March 1997 |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |ASIT Ion Tiriac Insurance Company |
|Position |Economist |
|Description |Sales Department |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to |April 1997 |
|(month/year) |Present |
|Location |Bucharest, Romania |
|Company |Competition Council |
|Position |Head of Department / Director |
|Description |European integration and International relations / State aid |
| | |
15. Others (e.g. Publications):
- Articles in Newsletter Profile Competition, no. 2/2004, no. 1,2,3,4/2005, no.1/2006.- Other relevant professional experience: I have been abroad for business or official missions in:
- IRAQ in 1985, 1986, 1987,(Representative of Ministry of Light Industry at Romanian Embassy in Baghdad),
- JAPAN in 1988 and 1989,
- BELGIUM in 1998,
- PORTUGAL in 1999 and 2000,
- BULGARIA in 2001,
- HUNGARY in 2001,
- SLOVENIA in 2001,
- F. R. YUGOSLAVIA in 2002,
- HUNGARY in 2002,
- SLOVENIA in 2003,
- TURKEY in 2003,
- BELGIUM in 2004,
- GERMANY and BELGIUM in 2004.
16. Contact Address in the Member State:
Office: Free Press House (Casa Presei Libere) Piata Presei Libere, no. 1, Entrance D, 5th Floor, Sector 1, Code 013701, Bucharest, ROMANIA
Tel/Fax: ++(40 21) 31 82 602
E-mail: daniel.diaconescu@consiliulconcurentei.ro
CURRICULUM VITAE
RTA Counter Part on Antitrust
1. Family name: PENCU
2. First name: DAN IOAN
3. Date of birth: 23 March 1973
4. Nationality: Romanian
5. Civil status: Married
8. Education:
|Institution |Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest |
|Date : |October 1992 – July 1997 |
|from (month/year) to (month/year) : | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) obtained : |BA in Economics |
|Institution |National School of Political Studies and Public Administration |
|Date : |October 2004 – July 2006 |
|from (month/year) to (month/year) : | |
|Degree(s) or Diploma(s) obtained : |On going |
9. Language skills: (Marks 1 to 5 for competence, where 5 is the highest):
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|German (mother tongue) | | | |
|Czech | | | |
|English |5 |3 |4 |
8. Membership of professional bodies:
9. Other skills (e.g. Computer literacy, etc...):
10. Present position: Deputy Director, Industry and Energy Directorate
11. Years within the firm: 8
12. Key qualifications:
13. Specific eastern countries experience:
|Country |Date : from (month/year) to (month/year) |
| | |
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date: from (month/year) to | |
|(month/year) | |
|Location | |
|Company | |
|Position | |
|Description | |
| | |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to | |
|(month/year) | |
|Location | |
|Company | |
|Position | |
|Description | |
| | |
| | |
|Date : from (month/year) to | |
|(month/year) | |
|Location | |
|Company | |
|Position | |
|Description | |
| | |
| | |
15. Others (e.g. Publications): articles for “Competition Profile” Review
16. Contact Address in the Member State: dan.pencu@consiliulconcurentei.ro
Key STEs from the MS (Component Leaders).
|European |
|curriculum vitae |
|format |
| |
|[pic] |
|Personal information |
|Name | |PERINI Giorgio |
|Address 1 | |4 Drève des Renards – 1180 BRUSSELS - BELGIUM |
|Telephone | |0032-2-2996135 |
|Fax | |0032-2-2969814 |
|E-mail | |Giorgio.perini@cec.eu.int |
|Address 2 | |1/G Aurisina – 34011 Duino Aurisina (TRIESTE) - ITALY |
| | | |
|Nationality | |Italian |
|Date of birth | | 05, 05,1954] |
|Work experience |
|• Dates (from – to) | | December 2001 onwards |
|• Name and address of employer | |European Commission – DG Competition – Directorate G – Units G2 (horizontal State aid schemes) and |
| | |G3 (R&D, innovation and risk capital) |
| | |200, Rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels |
|• Type of business or sector | |International Organization – Competition policy |
|• Occupation or position held | |Seconded national expert |
|• Main activities and responsibilities, | |Legal and economic analysis and advice on State aid cases, both notified by Member States and on |
|according to the job profile attributed | |Commission’s own initiative, in order to ascertain the character of aid and its prospective |
|by the European Commission | |compatibility with the common market. |
| | |Contacts with notifying bodies, beneficiaries and third interested parties. |
| | |Drafting of decisions on the assessed cases to be adopted by the Commission, proposal to the |
| | |Commissioner of the line to be taken where a formal investigation procedure or a final decision on |
| | |the former is to be taken. |
| | |Looking after decisions, delivering legal advice at any step of them, until their adoption, and, |
| | |afterwards, until the possible recovery of illegal aid and/or the decision being challenged before |
| | |the court, contributing, in the latter case, from an economic point of view, to the defense of the |
| | |Commission. |
| | |Looking after economic activity and public interventions within the MS and draw statistics and |
| | |reports. |
|• Dates (from – to) | |November 2000 – November 2001 |
|• Name and address of employer | |European Commission – DG Competition – Directorate G – Unit G2 “horizontal State aid schemes” |
| | |200, Rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels |
|• Type of business or sector | |International Organization – Competition policy |
|• Occupation or position held | |Auxiliary agent (grade A I/2) |
|• Main activities and responsibilities | |As described above |
|• Dates (from – to) | |July- September 1999 |
|• Name and address of employer | |European Commission – DG Competition – Directorate G – Unit G1 « Regional State aid » |
| | |200, Rue de la Loi, B-1049 Brussels |
|• Type of business or sector | |International Organization – Competition policy |
|• Occupation or position held | |Atypical on-the-job training (stagiaire) |
|• Main activities and responsibilities | |On-the-job training on the enforcement of competition policy by the European Commission |
|• Dates (from – to) | |January 1984 onwards |
|• Name and address of employer | |Friuli Venezia Giulia Region - Italy |
|• Type of business or sector | |Territorial public body – level NUTS II |
|• Occupation or position held | |Official at the European Affairs Directorate, |
|• Main activities and responsibilities | |since July 1998 and until November 2000 (save the three month period since July until September 1999) |
| | |in charge of the implementation of Community competition law, either for regional and national issues.|
| | |In particular in charge of design, notification and follow up of new State aid measures, and |
| | |adaptation of existing ones through the adoption of appropriate measures, included negotiation with |
| | |the European Commission on the latter |
|Education and training |
|• Year obtained | |Academic year 1983-84 |
|• Name and type of organisation providing| |University of Trieste – department of Political Sciences - Italy |
|education and training | | |
|• Principal subjects/occupational | |All relevant subjects for the diplomatic career as history, diplomatic history, economics, |
|skills covered | |international and Community law, languages, and many others |
|• Title of qualification awarded | | “graduate classes for the diplomatic career” diploma |
|• Level in national classification | |“corso di perfezionamento post-laurea” (post-graduate diploma) |
|other details | |exams for the Italian diplomatic career (Italian Ministry for Foreign Affairs) succeeded in 1985 (but |
| | |not recruited because of lack of places) |
|• Year obtained | |Academic year 1981-82 |
|• Name and type of organisation providing | |University of Trieste - Italy |
|education and training | | |
|• Principal subjects/occupational | |Political sciences with economic orientation; thesis on “deprived areas within high developed regions in |
|skills covered | |Italy: the case of Val di Taro” |
|• Title of qualification awarded | |Degree in “political sciences” (mark 110/110) |
|• Level in national classification | |“Laurea lunga” (second level of university degrees, according to the university education rules in force at|
| | |present ) |
|Personal skills |
|and competences |
|Mother tongue | | ITALIAN |
|Other languages |
| | |FRENCH |
|• Reading skills | |Excellent |
|• Writing skills | |Very good |
|• Verbal skills | |Very good |
| | |ENGLISH |
|• Reading skills | |Excellent |
|• Writing skills | |Very good |
|• Verbal skills | |Very good |
| | |SPANISH |
|• Reading skills | |Very good |
|• Writing skills | |basic |
|• Verbal skills | |basic |
|Technical skills | |Competent with most Microsoft computer programmes |
|and competences | | |
|ADditional information | | |
| | |Publications |
| | |“procedural rules and “complete notification” in the Commission’s practice” which is a chapter of the book |
| | |“public subsidation of Undertakings and regional competences” , published by Giuffré – Italy, 2003 |
| | |“1998-2002: five roaring years for State aid”, constituting the introduction of the book “State aid; a |
| | |practical guide for officials” published by the university of Trieste together with Friuli Venezia giulia |
| | |region |
| | |“More than 40% of aid intensity for investments in solar photovoltaic energy”, article published in Number |
| | |2 (summer) 2004, p.102, of the “Competition Policy newletter”, published three times a year by the |
| | |Competition Directorate General of the European Commission (also available on line on the DG COMP website)|
| | |summary of case C60/2003, the same constituting the subject of the above mentioned article, also published |
| | |in the “annual report on the European Union Competition Policy- 2003”, translated in all the languages of |
| | |the EU, at points 449-450 (p.90) |
| | |“No export aid outside the EU to large firms”, article published in number 2 (summer) 2005, p.69 of the |
| | |“Competition Policy newletter” (also available on line on the DG COMP website) |
| | |three more summaries concerning as many State aid cases to be published in the next “annual report on the |
| | |European Union Competition Policy” for 2004 |
| | |Training delivered in the Competition field |
| | |several presentations and training classes given all over the duration of my mandate at the Commission, on |
| | |competition subjects both in the framework of the activities of the Education and Culture Directorate |
| | |general of the European Commission and directly to Italian Regions, Chambers of Commerce, Italian |
| | |Universities, Bar Associations |
| | |among others, in particular a class given at the University of Naples, in the framework of the “Robert |
| | |Schuman Actions of the European Commission” high European training for national judges and lawyers on the |
| | |subject “Articles 88 and 89 of the EC Treaty, in particular Art.88, par.3, last sentence’s direct |
| | |application” |
| | |speeches delivered in particular to the Association of the Italian Chambers of Commerce on the subject “the|
| | |State aid issue; a constraint to be turned into a chance” and to a section of the Italian Bar Association |
| | |on “A proactive competition policy for a competitive EU, the new regulating framework of Antitrust, |
| | |Mergers and State aid in the enlarged Europe” and “Regional policy and competition policy, the new |
| | |programming period of the structural funds (2007-2013) |
| | |lecture given February 2005, within DG Competition classes for newcomer officials, on SMEs and training |
| | |block exemption regulations |
Paolo SABA
Senior Administrator
Italian Competition Authority
Piazza Verdi, 6/A - 00198 - Rome
Tel. +39 06 85821 365
Fax +39 06 85452 365
EM: paolo.saba@agcm.it
WORK EXPERIENCE
March '91 - Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
Directorate for Research and Institutional Relationships
Past and current duties include the drafting of official documents in the area of regulatory reform and competition advocacy, participation in the drafting and adoption of the most recent legislative reforms of EU competition rules (e.g. Regulation 1/2003 and new ECMR), participation in Advisory Committees, drafting of the Italian CA’s comments on proposed EC regulations and notices, delivery of technical assistance in competition law and policy to transition and developing economies, participation in competition policy events of various international organisations (OECD, UNCTAD, WTO, etc.)
Jan '98 - June '00 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Competition Law and Policy Division
Administrator in charge of co-operation and technical assistance activities with non-Member countries. Responsible for organising and leading workshops and training seminars for competition officials from transition and emerging market economies, as well as for providing comments and advice to these countries on draft competition legislation, implementing regulations and guidelines.
Jan '96 - Aug '97 Commission of the European Communities
Directorate-General for Competition – Merger Task Force
As a detached national expert he has worked on the review of several merger transactions falling under the EC Merger Regulation. Duties involved legal and economic analysis of proposed mergers, market investigations, drafting of Commission’s decisions, negotiation of undertakings and monitoring of compliance with the relevant administrative procedures.
EDUCATION
Sept '89 - March '90 University of York (UK)
Postgraduate courses in economics (micro and macro-economics, public sector economics, quantitative methods)
July '84 Degree in Law, Rome University
FOREIGN LANGUAGES
English and French
CURRICULUM VITAE
Proposed Position: Short-Term Expert
1. Family name: GREGORY
1. First names: Ian Jeffrey
2. Date of birth: 22 September 1965
3. Nationality: British
4. Civil Status: Married, 2 daughters
5. Education:
|Institution: |Imperial College, London |
|Date: |1998-1999 |
|Degree obtained: |MBA |
|Institution: |Lincoln College, Oxford University |
|Date: |1984-87 |
|Degrees obtained: |BA Hons 1st Class Modern History |
| |Open Exhibition 1985 and 1986 |
| |MA Oxon |
|Other skills |Proficient in use of Microsoft packages |
| |Experienced presenter, including training and advocacy for competition |
| |and consumer regime |
| |Heavily involved in DTI corporate services : accommodation and flexible|
| |working, Investors in People |
| |In addition to year’s secondment with Esso, have undertaken weeks in |
| |business with Exemplas, Allen and Overy and Ford |
7. Language skills (5=high, 1=low):
|Language |Reading |Speaking |Writing |
|English |5 |5 |5 |
|French |2 |2 |1 |
|German |1 |1 |1 |
8. Present position: Director, Competition Regulation and Markets, Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate, Department of Trade and Industry
9. Years with the firm: 13 years with DTI, 5 years prior to that with Department of Energy
10. Key qualifications (relevant to the programme): Wide range of postings across Energy and DTI. Currently responsible for UK competition framework and utility regulation policy. Previous Civil Service experience includes sponsorship and reform of UK nuclear industry, in particular BNFL and UKAEA; UK merger control, UK electricity privatisation and government finance. Also seconded out to Esso UK a year working on competitive gas markets.. Key skill sets and knowledge/experience in competition, energy and government finance.
11. Specific Eastern countries experience (including the CIS) :
|Country |Date |
| Responsible for several UK nuclear industry contributors to EU |2001-3 |
|programme for assisting FSU and Eastern European manage their | |
|historic nuclear programmes and liabilities | |
14. Professional Experience Record:
|Date |2004-present |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |Director, Competition, Regulation and Markets |
|Description |Responsible for UK competition framework and policy, including possible legislative change |
| |Responsible for policy on utility and sectoral regulation, including new consumer representation arrangements|
| |Better Regulation agenda across consumer and competition policy |
| |Consumer protection policy in specific areas including travel and timeshare |
|Date |2001-3 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |Director, Nuclear Business Relations |
|Description |Sponsorship and reform of UK nuclear industry, specifically British Nuclear Fuels plc, UK Atomic Energy |
| |Authority, and Nirex (waste management body) |
| |Undertook 2003 strategic review of BNFL leading to decisions to sell off profitable assets |
| |Management of annual UKAEA budget of £300m |
| |UK policy on nuclear R&D including fusion research, which involved negotiating EU budget under Framework 5 |
| |Decommissioning and radioactive waste management policy |
|Date |1999-2001 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |Deputy Director, UK mergers |
|Description |UK merger control (pre Enterprise Act 2002, when Ministers still took final decisions on merger control) – |
| |key cases included BskyB/Man Utd, Interbrew/Bass, Lloyds TSB/Abbey National |
| |Reform of UK merger regime |
| | |
|Date |1998-99 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |MBA, Imperial College, London |
| |Dissertation on “Performance Management in UK Trade Policy”. |
| | |
|Date |1996-1998 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |Assistant Director, Running costs, Finance and Resource Management |
|Description |Designed and operated a new regime for controlling and monitoring DTI running costs (annual budget £400m) |
| |Undertook Comprehensive Spending Review of DTI. |
| | |
|Date |1995-1996 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI/Esso |
|Position |Policy advisor, Esso UK Natural Gas Department |
|Description |A year working for Esso on industrial secondment, worked on developing commercial opportunities for Esso UK |
| |in competitive gas market; I developed a good understanding of what makes business tick and the “bottom line”|
| | |
|Date |1992-1995 |
|Location |London |
|Company |DTI |
|Position |Assistant Director, Electricity and Nuclear Fuels |
|Description |Sponsorship of Nuclear Electric plc (UK nuclear generator) |
| |Completion of Sizewell B to time and budget (£2.5bn) |
| |Conducted 1994 review of nuclear power, which resulted in decision to privatise Nuclear Electric as British |
| |Energy |
| | |
|Date |1987-1992 |
|Location |London |
|Company |Department of Energy |
|Position |Fast Stream Civil Servant |
|Description |Variety of posts across the Department, including Private Secretary to Minister for Oil, Gas and Renewables, |
| |in charge of flotation logistics for electricity privatisation 1990-91, and internal finance. |
Curriculum Vitae: Ian William Hutton- Short Term Expert
CHAMBERS ADDRESS
Monckton Chambers
4 Raymond Buildings
Grays Inn
London WC1R 5BP
Chambers Telephone: 020 7405 7211
Direct Line: 020 74686356
Email: ihutton@monckton.co.uk
DATE OF BIRTH:
22 October 1962
QUALIFICATIONS:
‘A’ Levels
Computer Science
Economics
Law
1st Degree
Bachelor of Laws with First Class Honours, awarded by Nottingham Law School (1991-1994). Subjects studied: Core subjects, European Business Law, Revenue Law, Public International Law, Evidence
Postgraduate Qualifications
Bar Vocational Course, Nottingham Law School (1997-98). Optional subjects: Commercial Law, Advanced Civil Litigation. Grade: Very Competent
PhD: Doctoral research into cross-border asset tracing, with specific reference to the conflict of laws aspects of international civil fraud litigation. Undertaken at the Centre of Advanced Litigation, Nottingham Law School (1994-1998). Supervisors: Professor Peter Jones, Dean, Nottingham Law School; Professor Peter Kunzlik, Head of Research, Nottingham Law School; Mr. Ian Taylor, Former Head of Litigation, Freshfields Solicitors
PRIZES AND SCHOLARSHIPS:
The Toller, Hales and Collcutt Prize: Awarded to the best second year law student at Nottingham Law School
The Nottingham Law School Prize: Awarded to the law student who achieves the highest overall degree classification at Nottingham Law School
The Ede and Ravenscroft Prize: Awarded to the best student in Nottingham Trent University’s Faculty of Law, Economics and Social Science
Benefactor’s Scholarship: Awarded by Middle Temple (1994) (declined)
Hardwicke Scholarship: Awarded by Lincoln’s Inn (1997)
Bar European Group
Conference Scholarship: Awarded by the Bar European Group (1999)
EMPLOYMENT
1998 – Present
Tenant at Monckton Chambers, Grays Inn (Chambers of Ken Parker QC and Paul Lasok QC)
Teacher of Advanced Litigation on Nottingham Law School’s LLM in Advanced Litigation
Teacher of Competition Law at Nottingham Law School
Teacher of Tax Law at the London Schoolof Economics
Editor, The Litigator, Sweet & Maxwell
PUBLICATIONS:
Editorships:
The Litigator, Sweet & Maxwell, 1997-1998
Books and Digests:
Co-author with Dr Paul Lasok QC of Atkin’s Court Forms: European Procedure. Published by Butterworths
Co-author with Mr Raymond Hill, tax chapter: Butterworths’ Law of the Internet
Co-author with Dr Paul Lasok QC of VAT and Ecommerce Digest for Tottel Publishing
Articles:
“Lawyers Don’t Surf?: The Internet, What, Why, How” [1995] The Litigator, 328
“The English Court’s Power to Grant Mareva Relief in Support of an Action Underway Before a Foreign Court” [1995] Nottingham Law Journal, Volume Four, Part Two, 218
“Electronic Cash - Welcome to the Future” (1995) New Law Journal, Volume 145, No. 6723, 1810
“Principle or Tradition” [1996] The Litigator, 52
“Extending Common Law Tracing” [1996] The Litigator, 312
Book Review: The Lawyer’s Guide to the Internet - Delia Venables [1996] Nottingham Law Journal, Volume Five, Part One, 116
“Restitution: A Litigator’s Guide” [1997] The Litigator, 160
Book Review: Digital Cash - The Legal Implications - Chris Reed and Lars Davis [1997] Nottingham Law Journal, Volume Six, Part One, 155
“Still Not Surfing: An Internet Update.” [1997] The Litigator, 250
Case note on Clough v. Tameside & Glossop Health Authority, [1998] Health Risk Review, April 17
“Enforcing the Competition Act 1998” Co-authored with George Peretz. Solicitor’s Journal, March 2000
Numerous other Articles for the Tax and Competition journals
Regular contributor to Simons Tax Intelligence
Conference Papers:
“Relying on Human Rights in the Domestic Courts Through EC Law.” – co-authored with Kenneth Parker QC. Justice Conference on EC law and Competition –1998
“Corporate Immigration within the European Community” – co-authored with Christopher Vadja QC. Lecture to the Bar European Group –1999
“Recent Developments in UK and EU e-commerce legislation” - Hawksmere Group, September 2000
“Recent Developments in Competition Law” - CLT 2004
“Tax and Ecommerce” - Tolleys 2004
“Competition Law and International Agreements” – CLT, 2004
“Contract law and Tax” - Tolleys 2005
“VAT and Contract Law” - CLT 2005
AREAS OF PRACTICE: COMPETITION LAW
Has advised on all aspects of competition law including distribution agreements, intellectual property, licensing agreements, abuse and media related issues. Also advised on State Aid and mergers (both UK and EU).
Spent eight months on secondment with the British Broadcasting Corporation, advising exclusively on competition matters (both with regard to the BBC’s public service remit and its commercial activities). Subsequently advised the BBC on State Aid matters.
PRESENT AND RECENT CASES:
Everwine (Court of Appeal)
Telewest v. Customs and Excise (Court of Appeal)
Lex (House of Lords)
R v. Lincoln Crown Court (Robin Watchorn) (Court of Appeal)
Sanders and others v. The Commission of the European Communities (Court of First Instance of the EU)
Bond House, Optigen, Fulcrum, representing the United Kingdom in the European Court of Justice
6.2 Material Resources
The BC (Romanian Competition Council) commits itself to cover the costs of the following provisions:
- Adequately equipped office space for both RTAs and their assistants for the entire duration of their secondment;
- Adequate conditions for the STEs to perform their work while on mission to the BC;
- Training and conference venues, costs of catering (if any), as well as presentation and interpretation equipment.
6.3 Indicative Budget
The total budget, as documented in the detailed breakdown of costs in Annex III to the Twinning Contract, is Euro 1,195,944.3:
- Phare funds: Euro 895.944,30;
- National Co-financing: Euro 300,000.
ARTICLE 7- MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING
7.1. Language
The official language of the project will be English. All formal communication regarding the project, including all reports will be produced in the agreed language.
The STE inputs will be produced in English and will be translated into the BC language. Adequate provision has been made in the budget for this purpose.
7.2. Project Steering Committee
At quarterly intervals, the Project Leaders, the RTAs and where applicable, representatives of the administrative office and/or the EC Delegation will meet to discuss the progress of the project, verify the achievement of the outputs and mandatory results and discuss actions to be undertaken in the following quarter. The Project Steering Committee will also discuss the draft of the quarterly report submitted to it before the regular meetings, suggesting integrations and/or corrections.
The responsibility for the organization of the Project Steering Committee meeting lies with both Project Leaders.
7.3 Reporting
Every three months, the MS Project Leader in co-operation with the BC Project Leader will submit interim quarterly reports to the respective institution identified in section 6.4 to the Twinning manual. Each report will cover a three months period calculated from the date of notification of endorsement / signature of the contract.
The interim quarterly reports will be prepared and distributed in draft in advance to all the participants of the meetings of the Project Steering Committee. The final version, incorporating any modifications agreed during the Steering Committee meeting, will be prepared and distributed after the meeting of the Steering Committee. The template of the report is detailed in Annex C4 to the Twinning manual.
The first report will be due in the fourth month counting from the date of notification of endorsement / signature of the Twinning contract.
The MS Project Leader shall submit the final report no later than three months after the implementation period as defined in article 2 of the General Conditions of the Twinning Contract.
The final report will be accompanied by an audit certificate.
For the administration of the Member State
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
Mr. Alberto Heimler,
Head of the Directorate for International Relations and Studies
[signature]
[date]
For the administration of the BC
Romanian Competition Council
Mihai Berinde,
President
[signature]
[date]
Work plan to be initialed by the administrative office
ANNEX II
General Conditions applicable to European Community-financed grant contracts for external actions
CONTENTS
General and administrative provisions
|Article 1 - General obligations |2 |
|Article 2 - Obligation to provide information and financial and technical reports |3 |
|Article 3 – Liability |4 |
|Article 4 - Conflict of interests |4 |
|Article 5 – Confidentiality |5 |
|Article 6 – Visibility |5 |
|Article 7 - Ownership/use of results and equipment |5 |
|Article 8 - Evaluation of the Action |6 |
|Article 9 - Amendment of the Contract |6 |
|Article 10 – Assignment |7 |
|Article 11 - Implementation period of the Action, extension, suspension, force majeure and end date | |
| |7 |
|Article 12 - Termination of the Contract |8 |
|Article 13 - Applicable law and dispute settlement |9 |
| | |
|Financial provisions | |
|Article 14 - Eligible costs |10 |
|Article 15 - Payment and interest on late payment |11 |
|Article 16 - Accounts and technical and financial checks |15 |
|Article 17 - Final amount of financing by the Contracting Authority |16 |
|Article 18 – Recovery |17 |
GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Article 1 – General OBLIGATIONS
1.1. The Beneficiary shall implement the Action under his own responsibility and in accordance with the Description of the Action in Annex I with a view to achieving the objectives laid down therein.
1.2. The Beneficiary shall implement the Action with the requisite care, efficiency, transparency and diligence, in line with best practice in the field concerned and in compliance with this Contract.
For this purpose the Beneficiary shall mobilize all the financial, human and material resources required for full implementation of the Action as specified in the Description of the Action.
1.3. The Beneficiary shall act alone or in partnership with one or more NGOs or other bodies identified in the Description of the Action. He may subcontract a limited portion of the Action (works and services). The bulk of the Action must, however, be undertaken by the Beneficiary and, where applicable, his partners.
If implementation of the Action involves the conclusion of contracts by the Beneficiary, the contract-award procedures and rules of nationality and origin set out in Annex IV shall apply.
The Contracting Authority does not acknowledge any contractual link between itself and the Beneficiary’s partner(s) or subcontractors. The Beneficiary alone shall be accountable to the Contracting Authority for the implementation of the Action. He shall undertake that the conditions applicable to him under Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 14, 16 and 17 shall also apply to his partners, and those applicable under Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 16 to all his contractors. He shall include provisions to that effect as appropriate in his contracts with them.
1.4. The Beneficiary and the Contracting Authority are the only parties (the “Parties”) to this Contract. Where the European Commission is not the Contracting Authority, it is not Party to this Contract, which confers on it only the rights and obligations explicitly mentioned therein. Nevertheless it shall endorse the Contract to ensure the financing of the Contracting Authority's grant from the European Communities’ budget[1], and the provisions in this Contract on visibility shall apply accordingly.
Article 2 - Obligation to provide information and financial and technical reports
2.1. The Beneficiary must provide the Contracting Authority with all required information on the implementation of the Action. To that end, the Beneficiary must draw up interim reports and a final report. These reports shall consist of a technical section and a financial section. They shall cover the Action as a whole, regardless of which part of it is financed by the Contracting Authority. The Contracting Authority may request additional information at any time and that information must be supplied within 30 days of the request.
2.2. Each interim report must provide a full account of all aspects of the Action’s implementation for the period covered. The report shall be laid out in such a way as to allow comparison between on the one hand the objective(s), the means proposed, the results expected in the Description of the Action and the budget details for the Action and on the other hand the means employed, the costs incurred and the results obtained (using the indicators of achievement provided for in the Description of the Action). The report shall include a statement of the beneficiary’s, and as the case may be each partner’s, outlay for the period covered and a work plan the next phase of the Action's implementation.
2.3. The final report shall in addition contain a detailed description of the conditions in which the Action was carried out, information on the steps taken to ensure the visibility of EU financing, information with which to evaluate the Action's impact, the proof of the transfers of ownership referred to in Art 7.3 and a final statement of all the eligible costs of the Action, plus a full summary statement of the Action's income and expenditure and payments received.
2.4. The reports shall be drafted in the language of the Contract. They shall be submitted to the Contracting Authority at the following intervals:
A. if payments are made in accordance with option 1 or option 3 of Article 15.1: a single final report shall be forwarded no later than three months after the implementation period as defined in Article 2 of the Special Conditions;
B. if payments are made in accordance with option 2 of Article 15.1:
– an interim report must accompany every request for payment;
– the final report shall be forwarded no later than three months after the implementation period as defined in Article 2 of the Special Conditions.
The deadline for submission of the final report is extended to six months where the Contracting Authority is a service at the headquarters of the European Commission.
2.5. The Special Conditions may stipulate that the Beneficiary must supply an extra copy of the reports for the European Commission Delegation in charge of monitoring the Action.
2.6. If the Beneficiary fails to supply the Contracting Authority with a final report by the final report deadline laid down in Article 2.4 and fails to furnish an acceptable and sufficient written explanation of the reasons why he is unable to comply with this obligation, the Contracting Authority may terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 12.2 a) and recover the amounts already paid and not substantiated.
Furthermore, where payments are made in accordance with option 2 of Article 15.1 and the Beneficiary fails to present an interim report and a request for payment by the end of each twelve-month period following the date laid down in Article 2.2 of the Special Conditions, the Beneficiary must inform the Contracting Authority of the reasons why he is unable to do so, and provide a summary of progress in the Action. If the Beneficiary fails to comply with this obligation, the Contracting Authority may terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 12.2 a) and recover the amounts already paid and not substantiated.
Article 3 – Liability
3.1. The Contracting Authority cannot under any circumstances or for any reason whatsoever be held liable for damage or injury sustained by the staff or property of the Beneficiary while the Action is being carried out. The Contracting Authority cannot therefore accept any claim for compensation or increases in payment in connection with such damage or injury.
3.2. The Beneficiary shall assume sole liability towards third parties, including liability for damage or injury of any kind sustained by them while the Action is being carried out. The Beneficiary shall discharge the Contracting Authority of all liability arising from any claim or action brought as a result of an infringement by the Beneficiary or the Beneficiary’s employees or individuals for whom those employees are responsible of rules or regulations, or as a result of violation of a third party’s rights.
Article 4 - Conflict of interests
The Beneficiary undertakes to take all necessary precautions to avoid conflicts of interests and shall inform the Contracting Authority without delay of any situation constituting or likely to lead to any such conflict.
There is a conflict of interests where the impartial and objective exercise of the functions of any person under this Contract is compromised for reasons involving family, emotional life, political or national affinity, economic interest or any other shared interest with another person.
Article 5 – Confidentiality
Subject to Article 16, the Contracting Authority and the Beneficiary undertake to preserve the confidentiality of any document, information or other material communicated to them in confidence until at least seven years after the final payment. Where the European Commission is not the Contracting Authority it shall still have access to all documents communicated to the Contracting Authority and will maintain the same confidentiality.
Article 6 – Visibility
6.1. Unless the European Commission agrees or requests otherwise, the Beneficiary must take all necessary steps to publicize the fact that the European Union has financed or co-financed the Action. Such measures must comply with the relevant rules on the visibility of external actions laid down and published by the Commission.
6.2. In particular, the Beneficiary shall mention the Action and the European Union’s financial contribution in information given to the final recipients of the Action, in its internal and annual reports, and in any dealings with the media. It shall display the EU logo wherever appropriate.
6.3. Any notice or publication by the Beneficiary concerning the Action, including those given at a conference or seminar, must specify that the Action has received EU funding. Any publication by the Beneficiary, in whatever form and by whatever medium, including the internet, must include the following statement: “This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of < Beneficiary’s name > and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.“
6.4. The Beneficiary authorizes the Contracting Authority and the European Commission to publish his name and address, the purpose of the grant, the maximum amount of the grant and rate of funding of the Action's eligible costs, as laid down in the Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions. A derogation from publication of this information may be granted if it could endanger the Beneficiary or harm his commercial interests.
Article 7 - Ownership/use of results and equipment
7.1. Ownership of, and title and intellectual and industrial property rights to, the Action's results, reports and other documents relating to it shall be vested in the Beneficiary.
7.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 7.1 and subject to Article 5, the Beneficiary grants the Contracting Authority (and the European Commission where it is not the Contracting Authority) the right to use freely and as it sees fit all documents deriving from the Action, whatever their form, provided it does not thereby breach existing industrial and intellectual property rights.
7.3. By the end of the implementation of the Action, the equipment, vehicles and supplies paid for by the Budget for the Action must be transferred to any local partners of the Beneficiary or the final recipients of the Action. Copies of the title transfers must be attached to the final report.
Article 8 - Evaluation of the Action
8.1. If the Commission carries out an interim or ex post evaluation, the Beneficiary shall undertake to provide it and/or the persons authorized by it with any document or information which will assist with the evaluation, and grant them the access rights described in Article 16.2.
8.2. If either Party (or the European Commission) carries out or commissions an evaluation in the course of the Action, it must provide the other Party and the European Commission (or the Parties) with a copy of the evaluation report.
Article 9 - Amendment of the Contract
9.1. Any amendment to the Contract, including the annexes thereto, must be set out in writing in an addendum.
If an amendment is requested by the Beneficiary, he must submit that request to the Contracting Authority one month before the date on which the amendment should enter into force, unless there are special circumstances duly substantiated by the Beneficiary and accepted by the Contracting Authority.
9.2. However, where the amendment does not affect the basic purpose of the Action and the financial impact is limited to a transfer within the same budget heading, or a transfer between budget headings involving a variation of 15% or less of the amount originally entered under each relevant heading for eligible costs, the Beneficiary may apply the amendment and inform the Contracting Authority accordingly in writing. This method may not be used to amend the heading for administrative costs.
Changes of address, changes of bank account and changes of auditor may simply be notified, although this does not stop the Contracting Authority from opposing the Beneficiary’s choice of bank account or auditor.
The Contracting Authority reserves the right to require that the auditor referred to in Article 7.1 of the Special Conditions be replaced if considerations which were unknown when the Contract was signed cast doubt on the auditor’s independence or professional standards.
9.3. An addendum may not have the purpose or the effect of making changes to the Contract that would call into question the grant award decision or be contrary to the equal treatment of applicants. The maximum grant referred to in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions may not be increased.
Article 10 – Assignment
The Contract and the payments attached to it may not be transferred or assigned to a third party in any manner whatsoever without the prior written consent of the Contracting Authority.
Article 11 - Implementation period of the Action, extension, suspension, force majeure and end date
11.1. The implementation period of the Action is laid down in Article 2 of the Special Conditions. The Beneficiary must inform the Contracting Authority without delay of any circumstances likely to hamper or delay the implementation of the Action. The Beneficiary may request an extension of the Action’s implementation period no later than one month before it ends. The request must be accompanied by all the supporting evidence needed for its appraisal.
11.2. The Beneficiary may suspend implementation of all or part of the Action if circumstances (chiefly force majeure) make it too difficult or dangerous to continue. The Beneficiary must inform the Contracting Authority without delay and provide all the necessary details. Each Party may terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 12.1. If the Contract is not terminated, the Beneficiary shall endeavor to minimize the time of its suspension and shall resume implementation once circumstances allow, and shall inform the Contracting Authority accordingly.
11.3. The Contracting Authority may request the Beneficiary to suspend implementation of all or part of the Action if circumstances (chiefly force majeure) make it too difficult or dangerous to continue. Each Party may terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 12.1. If the Contract is not terminated, the Beneficiary shall endeavor to minimize the time of its suspension and shall resume implementation once circumstances allow, with the prior written approval of the Contracting Authority.
11.4. The implementation period of the Action shall be extended by a period equivalent to the length of suspension, without prejudice to amendments to the Contract that may be necessary to adapt the Action to the new implementing conditions.
11.5. Force majeure shall mean any unforeseeable exceptional situation or event beyond the parties’ control which prevents either of them from fulfilling any of their contractual obligations, is not attributable to error or negligence on their part (or the part of their contractors, agents or employees), and proves insurmountable in spite of all due diligence. Defects in equipment or material or delays in making them available, labour disputes, strikes or financial difficulties cannot be invoked as force majeure. A Party shall not be held in breach of its contractual obligations if it is prevented from fulfilling them by force majeure. Without prejudice to Articles 12.2 and 12.3, the Party faced with force majeure shall inform the other Party without delay, stating the nature, probable duration and foreseeable effects of the problem, and take any measure to minimize possible damage.
11.6. The payment obligations of the European Community under this Contract shall end 18 months after the implementation period laid down in Article 2 of the Special Conditions, unless the Contract is terminated under Article 12.
The Contracting Authority shall notify the Beneficiary of any postponement of the end date.
Article 12 - Termination of the Contract
12.1. If a Party believes that the Contract can no longer be executed effectively or appropriately, it shall consult the other Party. Failing agreement on a solution, either Party may terminate the Contract by serving two months’ written notice, without being required to pay compensation.
12.2. The Contracting Authority may terminate the Contract, without giving notice and without paying compensation of any kind, where the Beneficiary:
a) fails, without justification, to fulfill any of the obligations incumbent on him and, after being given notice by letter to comply with those obligations, still fails to do so or to furnish a satisfactory explanation within 30 days of sending of the letter;
b) is bankrupt or being wound up, is having its affairs administered by the courts, has entered into an arrangement with creditors, has suspended business activities, is the subject of proceedings concerning those matters or is in any analogous situation arising from a similar procedure provided for in national legislation or regulations;
c) has been convicted of an offence concerning professional conduct by a judgment which has the force of res judicata or is guilty of grave professional misconduct proven by any justified means;
d) engages in any act of fraud or corruption or is involved in a criminal organization or any other illegal activity detrimental to the Communities’ financial interests: this also applies to the partners, contractors and agents of the Beneficiary;
e) changes legal personality, unless an addendum recording that fact is drawn up;
f) does not comply with Articles 4, 10 and 16;
g) makes false or incomplete statements to obtain the grant provided for in the Contract or provides reports that do not reflect reality.
12.3. In the event of termination the Beneficiary shall be entitled to payment of the grant only for the part of the Action carried out, excluding costs connected with current commitments that would be implemented after termination. For this purpose the Beneficiary shall introduce a payment request and a final report in accordance with Article 2.
12.4. However, in the event of wrongful termination of the Contract by the Beneficiary under Article 12.1 and in the cases specified in Article 12.2 d), e) and g), the Contracting Authority may request full or partial repayment of sums already paid from the grant, in proportion to the gravity of the failings in question and after allowing the Beneficiary to submit his observations.
12.5. Prior to, or instead of, terminating the Contract as provided for in this Article, the Contracting Authority may suspend payments as a precautionary measure without prior notice.
12.6. This Contract shall be terminated automatically if it has not given rise to any payment within three years of its signature.
Article 13 - Applicable law and dispute settlement
13.1. This Contract shall be governed by the law of the Contracting Authority or, where the Contracting Authority is the European Commission, by Belgian law.
13.2. The Parties shall do everything possible to settle amicably any dispute arising between them during implementation of this Contract. To that end, they shall communicate their positions and any solution that they consider possible in writing, and meet each other at either’s request. A Party must reply to a request for an amicable settlement within 30 days. Once this period has expired, or if the attempt to reach amicable settlement has not produced agreement within 120 days of the first request, each Party may notify the other that it considers the procedure to have failed.
13.3. In the event of failure to reach an amicable agreement, the dispute may by common agreement of the Parties be submitted to the conciliation of the European Commission if it is not the Contracting Authority. If no settlement is reached within 120 days of the opening of the conciliation procedure, each Party may notify the other that it considers the procedure to have failed.
13.4. In the event of failure of the above procedures, each Party may submit the dispute to the courts of the country of the Contracting Authority, or to the Brussels courts where the Contracting Authority is the European Commission.
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Article 14 - Eligible costs
14.1. To be considered eligible as direct costs of the Action, costs must:
– be necessary for carrying out the Action, be provided for in the Contract and comply with the principles of sound financial management, in particular value for money and cost-effectiveness;
– have actually been incurred by the Beneficiary or his partners during the implementation period of the Action as defined in Article 2 of the Special Conditions, whatever the time of actual disbursement by the Beneficiary or a partner; this does not affect the eligibility of costs of the final audit;
– be recorded in the accounts or tax documents of the Beneficiary or his partners and be identifiable, verifiable and backed by originals of supporting evidence.
14.2. Subject to the above and where relevant to the provisions of Annex IV being respected, the following direct costs shall be eligible:
– the cost of staff assigned to the Action, corresponding to actual salaries plus social security charges and other remuneration-related costs; salaries and costs must not exceed those normally borne by the Beneficiary or his partners, as the case may be;
– travel and subsistence costs for staff taking part in the Action, provided they do not exceed those normally borne by the Beneficiary or his partners, as the case may be. Any flat-rate reimbursement must not exceed the scales approved annually by the European Commission;
– purchase costs for equipment (new or used) and services, provided they correspond to market rates;
– costs of consumables and supplies;
– subcontracting expenditure;
– costs deriving directly from the requirements of the Contract (dissemination of information, evaluation specific to the Action, audits, translation, reproduction, insurance, etc.) including financial service costs (in particular the cost of transfers and financial guarantees);
14.3. The following costs shall not be considered eligible:
– debts and provisions for losses or debts;
– interest owed;
– items already financed in another framework;
– purchases of land or buildings, except where necessary for the direct implementation of the Action, in which case ownership must be transferred to the final recipients at the end of the Action;
– currency exchange losses;
– taxes, including VAT, unless the Beneficiary (or, where applicable, his partners) cannot reclaim and the applicable regulations authorize coverage of taxes.
14.4. A lump sum not exceeding 7% of the direct eligible costs of the Action may be claimed as indirect costs to cover the administrative overheads incurred by the Beneficiary for the Action.
Indirect costs are eligible provided that they do not include costs assigned to another heading of the Contract budget.
Indirect costs are ineligible if the Beneficiary receives in other respects an operating grant from the European Commission.
This Article 14.4 does not apply in the case of an operating grant.
14.5. Any contributions in kind made by the Beneficiary or his partners, which must be listed separately at Annex III, do not represent actual expenditure and are not eligible costs. They may not be treated as co-financing by the Beneficiary.
However, the Beneficiary undertakes to make such contributions as stipulated in the Description of the Action.
Article 15 - Payment and interest on late payment
15.1. Payment procedures are set out in Article 4 of the Special Conditions and correspond to one of the three options below:
Option 1: Actions with an implementation period not exceeding 12 months or where the
financing provided by the Contracting Authority does not exceed EUR 100 000
The Contracting Authority will pay the grant to the Beneficiary in the following manner:
• pre-financing of 80% of the sum referred to in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions within 45 days of receipt by the Contracting Authority of :
– the Contract signed by both parties,
– a request for payment conforming to the model attached at Annex V, and
– a financial guarantee if required under Article 15.7;
• the balance within 45 days of the Contracting Authority approving the final report in accordance with Article 15.2, accompanied by a request for payment of the balance conforming to the model in Annex V.
Option 2: Actions with an implementation period of more than 12 months and where the financing provided by the Contracting Authority is more than EUR 100 000
The Contracting Authority shall pay the grant to the Beneficiary in the following manner:
• an initial pre-financing installment of 80% of that part of the estimated budget for the first 12 months financed by the Contracting Authority, as specified in Article 4 of the Special Conditions, within 45 days of receipt by the Contracting Authority of :
– the Contract signed by both Parties,
– a request for payment conforming to the model in Annex V, and
– a financial guarantee if required under Article 15.7;
• further pre-financing installments of the amount specified in Article 4 of the Special Conditions within 45 days of the Contracting Authority approving an interim report in accordance with Article 15.2, accompanied by:
– a request for payment conforming to the model in Annex V,
– an audit report if required under Article 15.6,
– a financial guarantee if required under Article 15.7;
• the balance within 45 days of the Contracting Authority approving the final report in accordance with Article 15.2, accompanied by:
– a request for payment of the balance conforming to the model in Annex V,
– an audit report in accordance with Article 15.6.
Further pre-financing may only be given if the part of the expenditure actually incurred which is financed by the Contracting Authority (by applying the percentage set out in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions) stands at 70% at least of the previous payment (and at 100% of any previous payments) as attested in the corresponding interim report and, where applicable, in an audit report as specified in Article 15.6. The sum total of pre-financing under the Contract may not exceed 90% of the amount referred to in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions.
Option 3: All Actions
The grant shall be paid to the Beneficiary by the Contracting Authority in one payment within 45 days of the Contracting Authority approving the final report in accordance with Article 15.2, accompanied by:
– a request for payment of the balance conforming to the model in Annex V,
– an audit report if required under Article 15.6.
15.2. Any report shall be considered approved if there is no written reply from the Contracting Authority within 45 days of its receipt accompanied by the required documents.
The Contracting Authority may suspend the time-limit for approval of a report by notifying the Beneficiary that the report cannot be approved and that it finds it necessary to carry out additional checks. In such cases, the Contracting Authority may request clarification, alteration or additional information, which must be produced within 30 days of the request. The time-limit starts running again on the date the required information is received.
Reports shall be presented in accordance with Article 2.
15.3. The time-limit of 45 days for payment referred to in Article 15.1 above shall expire on the date on which the Contracting Authority’s account is debited. Without prejudice to Article 12.5, the Contracting Authority may suspend this time-limit by notifying the Beneficiary that the request for payment is inadmissible, either because the amount in question is not due or because proper supporting documents have not been supplied or it thinks it necessary to conduct further checks, including on-the-spot checks, to make sure that the expenditure is eligible. The time-limit for payment shall start running again on the date on which a correctly formulated request for payment is recorded.
15.4. Once the time-limit referred to above has expired, the Beneficiary – unless the Beneficiary is a government department or public body in a Community Member State - may, within two months of receipt of the late payment, claim default interest:
– at the rediscount rate applied by the central bank of the country of the Contracting Authority if payments are in the currency of that country;
– at the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing transactions in euro, as published in the Official Journal of the European Union, C series, if payments are in euro,
on the first day of the month in which the time-limit expired, plus three and a half percentage points. The interest shall be payable for the time elapsed between the expiry of the payment deadline (exclusive) and the date on which the Contracting Authority's account is debited (inclusive). This interest is not considered income for the purposes of Article 17.3. Any partial payments shall first cover the default interest thus established.
15.5. All references to days in this article 15 are to calendar days.
15.6. An external audit of the Action's accounts, produced by an approved auditor who is a member of an internationally recognized supervisory body for statutory auditing, shall be attached to:
– any request for a further pre-financing payment if the sum total of the earlier and the new pre-financing payments exceeds EUR 750 000;
– any request for payment of the balance in the case of a grant of more than EUR
100 000;
– any payment request of over EUR 75 000 for the financial year, in the case of an operating grant.
In an audit certificate conforming to the model in Annex VI the auditor certifies that the submitted accounts (income and expenditure) are accurate, reliable and justified by adequate supporting documents, and identifies the eligible expenditure incurred in accordance with the Contract.
The amounts that the audit report certifies as incurred in conformity with the Contract shall be deducted from the sum total of pre-financing under the Contract (clearance).
Where the Beneficiary is a government department or a public body of a Member State of the European Community, the Contracting Authority may exempt it from the audit requirement.
15.7. If the sum total of pre-financing under the Contract is more than 80% of the Contract amount, its payment must be fully covered by a financial guarantee. Where the Beneficiary is a non governmental organization, such guarantee is requested if the sum total of pre-financing under the Contract is more than EUR 1 million or 90% of the Contract amount. The financial guarantee must be denominated in euro and provided by an approved bank or financial institution established in one of the Member States of the European Community and conforming to the model in Annex VII. This guarantee shall remain in force until its release by the Contracting Authority when the total amount of pre-financing under the Contract is once again less than EUR 1 million or after payment of the balance. This provision shall not apply if the Beneficiary is a government department or public body of a European Community Member State.
15.8. The payments owed by the Contracting Authority shall be made to the Action-specific bank account or sub-account referred to in the financial identification form in Annex V, which identifies the funds paid by the Contracting Authority.
15.9. The Contracting Authority shall make payments in the currency of the country to which it belongs or in euro, in accordance with the Special Conditions. In the latter case, any conversion into euro of the real costs borne in other currencies shall be done at the rate published in InforEuro for the month in which the expenditure is incurred, unless otherwise provided in the Special Conditions.
In the event of an exceptional exchange-rate fluctuation, the Parties shall consult each other with a view to restructuring the Action in order to lessen the impact of such a fluctuation. Where necessary, the Contracting Authority may take additional measures.
15.10. Any interest or equivalent benefits accruing from pre-financing paid by the Contracting Authority to the Beneficiary shall be mentioned in the interim and final reports and refunded to the Contracting Authority at its request, in accordance with Article 18. They are not taken into account when calculating the sum total of pre-financing under the Contract.
Article 16 - Accounts and technical and financial checks
16.1. The Beneficiary shall keep accurate and regular records and accounts of the implementation of the Action using a dedicated double-entry book-keeping system as part of or as an adjunct to the Beneficiary’s own accounts. This dedicated system shall be run in accordance with the procedures dictated by professional practice. Separate accounts must be kept for each Action, detailing all income and expenditure. They must provide precise details of interest accruing on funds paid by the Contracting Authority.
16.2. The Beneficiary will allow the European Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Court of Auditors to verify, by examining the documents or by means of on-the-spot checks, the implementation of the Action and conduct a full audit, if necessary, on the basis of supporting documents for the accounts, accounting documents and any other document relevant to the financing of the Action. These inspections may take place up to 7 years after the payment of the balance.
Furthermore, the Beneficiary will allow the European Anti-Fraud Office to carry out checks and verification on the spot in accordance with the procedures set out in the European Community legislation for the protection of the financial interests of the European Communities against fraud and other irregularities.
To this end, the Beneficiary undertakes to give appropriate access to staff or agents of the European Commission, of the European Anti-Fraud Office and of the European Court of Auditors to the sites and locations at which the Action is implemented, including its information systems, as well as all documents and databases concerning the technical and financial management of the Action and to take all steps to facilitate their work. Access given to agents of the European Commission, European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Court of Auditors shall be on the basis of confidentiality with respect to third parties, without prejudice to the obligations of public law to which they are subject. Documents must be easily accessible and filed so as to facilitate their examination and the Beneficiary must inform the Contracting Authority of their precise location.
16.3. The documents referred to in Article 16.2 include:
A. Works, supplies and services
– bids from suppliers;
– contracts and order forms;
– invoices and proofs of payment or settled invoices; if supplies come from the Beneficiary's stocks, invoices shall reflect the price paid at the time of purchase. A copy of the purchase invoice must be attached;
– for fuel and oil the Beneficiary shall keep a summary list of the distance covered, the average consumption of the vehicles used, fuel costs and maintenance costs.
B. Staff costs:
– a statement of expenditure on local staff recruited on fixed-term contracts, with details of remuneration paid, duly substantiated by the person in charge locally, broken down into gross salary, social security charges, insurance and net salary;
– a statement of expenditure on expatriate and/or European-based staff (if the Action is implemented in Europe) per month of actual work; expenditure will be assessed on the basis of unit prices per verifiable block of time worked and broken down into gross salary, social security charges, insurance and net salary.
16.4. The Contractor guarantees that the rights of the European Commission, of the European Anti-Fraud Office and of the European Court of Auditors to carry out audits, checks and verification will be equally applicable, under the same conditions and according to the same rules as those set out in this Article 16, to the Beneficiary's partners and contractors.
Article 17 - Final amount of financing by the Contracting Authority
17.1. The total amount to be paid by the Contracting Authority to the Beneficiary may not exceed the maximum grant laid down in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions, even if the total of actual eligible expenditure exceeds the estimated total budget set out in Annex III.
17.2. If the eligible costs at the end of the Action are less than the estimated total cost referred to in Article 3.1 of the Special Conditions, the Contracting Authority's contribution shall be limited to the amount obtained by applying the percentage laid down in Article 3.2 of the Special Conditions to the actual eligible costs approved by the Contracting Authority.
17.3. The Beneficiary accepts that the grant can under no circumstances result in a profit for himself and that it must be limited to the amount required to balance income and expenditure for the Action. Profit shall be defined as:
– In the case of a grant for an Action, a surplus of receipts over the costs of the Action in question when the request is made for payment of the balance. However, in the case of Actions designed specifically to strengthen the financial capacity of the Beneficiary, it is distribution to the members making up the beneficiary body of the surplus revenue resulting from its activity leading to their personal enrichment.
– In the case of an operating grant, a surplus balance on the operating budget of the Beneficiary.
These provisions shall not apply to study, research or training scholarships paid to natural persons, nor in the case of prizes awarded following contests.
17.4. In addition and without prejudice to the right to terminate the Contract in accordance with Article 12.2, the Contracting Authority may, by a duly reasoned decision, if the Action is not implemented or is implemented poorly, partially or late, reduce the grant initially provided for in line with the actual implementation of the Action on the terms laid down in this Contract.
Article 18 – Recovery
18.1. The Beneficiary undertakes to repay any amounts paid in excess of the final amount due to the Contracting Authority within 45 days of receiving a request to do so.
18.2. Should the Beneficiary fail to make repayment within the deadline set by the Contracting Authority, the Contracting Authority may (unless the Beneficiary is a government department or public body of a Member State of the Community) increase the amounts due by adding interest:
– at the rediscount rate applied by the central bank of the country of the Contracting Authority if payments are in the currency of that country;
– at the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing transactions in euro where payments are in euro,
on the first day of the month in which the time-limit expired, plus three and a half percentage points. The default interest shall be incurred over the time which elapses between the date of the payment deadline set by the Contracting Authority (exclusive), and the date on which payment is actually made (inclusive). Any partial payments shall first cover the interest thus established.
18.3. Amounts to be repaid to the Contracting Authority may be offset against amounts of any kind due to the Beneficiary. This shall not affect the Parties' right to agree on payment in installments.
4. Bank charges incurred by the repayment of amounts due to the Contracting Authority shall be borne entirely by the Beneficiary.
ANNEX III – attached to the Contract
ANNEX IV
CONTRACT AWARD PROCEDURES
Twinning projects are in general based on the transfer of public sector expertise and know-how to the beneficiary administration with a view to achieving a mandatory result. This entails that private sector input in the format of equipment or private sector services will only be required in exceptional cases, subject to due justification, and limited to €5.000 in the case of equipment (see section 5.10). Twinning projects are in other words self-contained projects centered around public sector co-operation.
• Private sector inputs are in principle tendered by the Member State partner, which applies the provisions of Annex IV (Contract Award procedures) to the Twinning contract.
• If the administrative office of a beneficiary country is asked to manage private sector inputs on behalf of the Member State partner, it will use the rules of the Practical Guide, or the respective procurement rules of the beneficiary country, in case these comply with European Community public procurement directives.
• MS Project Leaders may request the assistance of the administrative office to contract inputs. This may be appropriate, especially where the purchase entails VAT charges.
• When contracting private sector services, especially for translation and interpretation, MS Project Leaders are requested to seek value for money.
• If a RTA is asked to advice or participate in the preparation of implementation or tender procedure, he/she shall in general terms, work under the effective supervision of the Administrative Office, indicate any potential conflict of interest and shall, for instance, not be involved in both the preparation of the terms of reference and the proceedings of the evaluation committee.
ANNEX V
Request for payment for Twinning Contract
European Community external actions
[Date of the request for payment]
For the attention of
[address of the Contracting Authority]
[Financial unit indicated in the Contract][2]
Reference number of the Twinning Contract: ...
Title of the Twinning Contract: ...
Name and address of the Beneficiary: ...
Request for payment number: ...
Period covered by the request for payment: ...
Dear Sir/Madam,
I hereby request [a pre-financing payment/a further pre-financing payment/payment of the balance][3] under the Twinning Contract mentioned above.
The amount requested is [as indicated in Article 4(2) of the Special Conditions of the Contract/the following: ...].[4]
Please find attached the following supporting documents:
- signed Twinning Contract (for the first pre-financing payment)
- audit report if required by Article 15.6 of the General Conditions of the Contract
- financial guarantee if required by Article 15.7 of the General Conditions of the Contract
- technical and financial interim report (for further pre-financing payments)
- final implementation report (for payment of the balance).[5]
The amount certified by the audit report to be deducted from the sum total of pre-financing under the Twinning contract is the following: ...
The payment should be made to the following bank account: ...[6]
Yours faithfully,
[ signature ]
See the Excel file
[pic]
ANNEX VI
MODEL AUDIT CERTIFICATE
To be completed on the auditor's headed paper
[Date of audit certificate]
To
(c/o Central Finance and Contracting Agency)
Reference number of Twinning Project : …
Name and address of Member State administrative partner/ Project Leader : …
Period covered by the audit certificate: …
Dear Sir/Madam,
We have been appointed by the Member State Project leader of the Twinning Contract referred to above in order to certify the accounts for this twinning project in accordance with Section 7.3 of the Twinning manual. We confirm that we are a national institution for independent external auditing. OR We confirm that we belong to an internationally-recognised supervisory body for statutory auditing. We have conducted out our audit in accordance with international auditing standards and the provisions of the Contract.
We hereby certify that the twinning project's accounts (income and expenditure) are faithful, reliable and supported by the appropriate supporting documents and that eligible expenditure totalling (indicated in the annex to the certificate) has been in incurred in accordance with the provisions of the Contract.
< Attach to the audit certificate a schedule based on the Budget for the twinning project, setting out for each item the total amount certified at the date of the certificate. >
Payment of the following costs was requested but their amount is not certified in this certificate 1 :
|Description |Amount < EUR > | Reason for non certification |
| | | |
[Name and signature]
ANNEX VII
Special Financial Annex
1. The Project Budget
(Annex III to the Twinning Contract)
All Twinning contracts comprise a Twinning work plan, accompanied by a detailed budget, respectively annexes I and III to the Twinning contract. Expenditures listed in the budget must correspond to the activities listed in the Twinning work plan.
All activities foreseen in the framework of the Twinning project, irrespective of whether they are carried out under the responsibility of the BC or of the MS, should be listed. The only activities to which a sum is allocated in the budget are those for which financing is allowed from the EU programme, and those for which co-financing from the BC is provided.
Changes to a Twinning Contract
The work plan of a Twinning project needs to be prepared and agreed in detail before the twinning project is launched, in order to provide objective grounds for the funding requested. However, in practice, with many different activities taking place, a Twinning project is subject to all sorts of unforeseen events and may need to be adjusted in the course of implementation. A certain degree of flexibility is therefore necessary. There should be no change to the mandatory results defined in the work plan but the means of achieving these may be adapted to circumstances, with the activities initially planned being adjusted or replaced by others.
Twinning contract modifications can only be made within the period of implementation of the Contract. The modifications will only apply to subsequent implementation and cannot apply retroactively.
Referring to the budgetary changes, please note that the breakdown of costs in a Twinning budget (Annex III) follows the logic of the work plan (Annex I) (RTA, delivery of a seminar, expert mission on a particular topic, elaboration of training material, etc.). Each activity must be clearly identifiable and numbered as an individual budget line. In other terms, the budget must follow an activity based budget format and under normal circumstances any change in the work plan will entail a corresponding change in the budget. The Budgetary changes cannot affect the structure – definition of the budget, only its implementation.
The following principles generally valued for all grants must always apply:
• A twinning contract grant beneficiary’s request for grant contract modifications should not be automatically accepted by the Contracting Authority. Such requests must be properly substantiated. The Contracting Authority must examine the reasons given, and reject requests which have little or no substantiation.
• The modifications must not have the purpose or the effect of making such changes to the contract as would call into question the contract grant award decision or be contrary to the equal treatment of applicants.
• Twinning Grant contracts can only be modified within the lifetime of the contract; modifications cannot be made retroactively.
• The maximum amount of the contract grant cannot be increased.
• Any modification extending the performance period of the contract must be such that implementation and final payments can be completed before the expiry of the financing decision, and as the case may be of the execution period of the financing agreement under which the initial grant contract was financed.
Requests for contract modifications to grant contracts must be made (by one contracting party to the other) allowing at least 30 days for the addendum to be signed before the modifications are intended to enter into force.
Concerning budgetary changes the following principles apply:
• The overall budget for a Twinning project cannot be increased, and so an activity must be reduced or cancelled first in order to finance a new one;
• The unit costs (fees, daily allowances, etc.) must respect the rates set in this manual; redeployment of the budget may not have the purpose of increasing the fixed fees and rates;
• Each Twinning project must include a full-time Resident Twinning Advisor, resident in the BC for a minimum of 12 consecutive months. Transfers of budgetary resources may not jeopardise this requirement.
• Introduction of a new activity must be justified by showing that it will be of real use in achieving the mandatory results targeted by the Twinning Contract; the mere availability of funds (following savings under or cancellation of activities originally foreseen) is not sufficient to justify the financing of new activities. The budget should officially be reallocated before the new activity can be implemented. Activities implemented before being officially entered into the budget will not be financed. The notifications must be made by a secure means of communication, so that dispatch can be proven in the event of dispute.
The following changes to a Twinning contract require an addendum:
• the Acquis Communautaire related to the project (Article 2 of the Work plan)
• Mandatory results (Article 3 of the Work plan)
• MS administration involved in the Twinning project as mentioned in Article 5 of the Twinning Contract
• Legal duration (Article 2of the Twinning Contract)
• Definition of the mandatory results and the benchmarks to be achieved (Articles 3 and 4 of the Work plan). (Please note that for changes concerning the means used for implementation, the time schedule and dates, and the identity of most of the Member States’ short term experts present in the BC an addendum is not needed).
• Identity of the MS and BC Project Leaders, the RTA and the principal MS short-term experts (Article 6 of the Work plan)
• Interruption or termination of the Twinning contract before completion
• Suspending the funding or lifting the suspension of funding for a twinning project.
In Phare, including Transition Facility and CARDS, the binding of the Steering Committee at Headquarters shall be requested on the above mentioned proposed changes.
Specific budgetary changes through addenda:
The budgetary changes are summed up after each side letter. Once the total amount of modifications via side letters reaches of 10% of the total budget, any further modification (independent of its size) to the breakdown of costs (budget) should be done via an addendum to the Twinning Contract, including full approval of the two Project Leaders plus the AO (post EDIS) or CFCU and EC Delegation/EAR (prior to EDIS).
If an addendum to the Twinning Contract is requested, the following general principles must always be observed:
• There must be justified reasons for modifying a Twinning Contract. The Contracting Authority must examine the reasons given and reject requests which have little or no substantiation.
• Addenda to Twinning Contracts may only be made within the period of validity of the contract and cannot have retroactive effect.
• The purpose of the addendum must be closely related to the original objective of the Twinning Contract.
• Unit prices must be identical to those in the initial contract.
• Extension of the duration of the contract must allow for implementation and final payments to be completed before the EU financing decision covering the initial Twinning Contract.
Side letters (Administrative orders)
If the change sought does not concern one of the points listed in section 6.6.2, side letters (administrative orders) to contracts suffice where
• The change does not affect the basic purpose of the project
• Reallocation of appropriations are made within budget components
• For Phare and Cards: Reallocations of appropriations are made inside a budget component or between budget components for a cumulated amount under 10% of the total budget for the Twinning project. The budgetary changes are summed up after each side letter, as explained under Section 6.6.2.
The two Project Leaders (MS and BC) can autonomously and jointly decide on a side letter (administrative order), provided the principles under 6.6.1 as well as the Twinning rules are respected. They formalise the change in the form of a side letter (administrative order) to the Twinning Contract, which lays down the change. MS PL can delegate RTA to sign side letters on his/her behalf.
|Side Letters (Administrative |PHARE before EDIS |PHARE under EDIS |CARDS |MEDA/TACIS |
|Order)s to be notified to: | | | | |
|Commission - Delegation |X | |X |copy |
|Administrative Office |X |X |X (decentralised |X |
| | | |programmes) | |
The Twinning Contract is considered to have been changed on the date of the latest notification. Changes must be notified before their implementation, even if it is only the day before. A side letter (administrative order), is not an addendum in legal terms. Costs for changes notified after their implementation cannot be reimbursed.
Minor changes such as changes of address, changes of bank account and changes of auditor may simply be notified and signed by the two Project Leaders (Ms and BC), although this shall not affect the Contracting Authority’s right to question the signatory Member State’s choice of bank account or auditor.
|Region |Signatures of the Addenda |Addenda to be submitted |Who decides what? |Approval of the addendum |
| | |to: | | |
|PHARE |The addendum is drafted and signed by|The Addendum is |The EC Delegation is entitled to agree or refuse endorsement of addenda on behalf of |If the Commission agrees, the Delegation requests the written approval of |
|before EDIS |the signatories of the Twinning |submitted to the EC |the Commission. It must request a binding opinion from Commission Headquarters before |the CFCU / signature and notifies both Project Leaders with the text of |
| |Contract: the signatories of the |Delegation and the CFCU |agreeing addenda concerning: |their addendum bearing the signed acceptance of the CFCU and the |
| |Twinning Contract can delegate | |• interrupting or ending a Twinning Contract before completion. |Delegation. The addenda are drawn up in four copies: One for each |
| |authority to the Project Leaders to | |• Suspending the funding or lifting suspense of funding for a project |administrative partner, one for the Commission and one for the CFCU. The |
| |sign any addenda on their behalf. MS | |• changing the mandatory result targeted by the Twinning Contract, |addendum is considered as valid on the date of this notification. |
| |PL can delegate RTA to sign side | |• replacing the MS administration or mandated body initially responsible for the | |
| |letters on his/her behalf | |Twinning Contract, | |
| | | |• removing or adding partner MS, | |
| | | |• replacing the MS Project Leader, | |
| | | |• replacing an RTA. | |
| | | |• changing legal duration. | |
|PHARE under |The addendum is drafted and signed by|The Addendum is |The Administrative Office is entitled to agree or refuse endorsement of addenda. It |The Administrative Office sends to both Project Leaders the text of their |
|EDIS |the signatories of the Twinning |submitted to the |must request the binding opinion of the Commission Headquarters before agreeing |request bearing the signed acceptance of the Administartive Office. The |
| |Contract: the signatories of the |Administrative Office |addenda concerning: |addendum is considered as valid on the date of this notification |
| |Twinning Contract can delegate | |• interrupting or ending a Twinning Contract before completion. | |
| |authority to the Project Leaders to | |• Suspending the funding or lifting suspense of funding for a project | |
| |sign any addenda on their behalf. MS| |• changing the mandatory result targeted by the Twinning Contract, | |
| |PL can delegate RTA to sign side | |• replacing the MS administration or mandated body initially responsible for the | |
| |letters on his/her behalf | |Twinning Contract, | |
| | | |• removing or adding partner MS, | |
| | | |• replacing the MS Project Leader, | |
| | | |• replacing an RTA. | |
| | | |• changing legal duration. | |
3. Eligible costs
3.1. Preparatory costs
3.1.1. Reimbursement of Costs arising during the Preparation of the Twinning Contract and Twinning Work Plan / Budget
Only costs incurred by the designated main and junior partner MS Project Leaders and/or RTA (no other experts authorised) can be reimbursed in so far as they relate to a period of maximum six months starting as from the date of the official notification of selection issued to the selected Member State partners. Moreover, this reimbursement of preparatory costs can only take place if the finalised twinning contract is subsequently signed before the end of this 6 month’s period and if the aforementioned six months’ period falls within the validity of the relevant Financing Decision for the relevant EU Programme.
The Commission reserves the right to shorten the aforementioned maximum period of six months where specific circumstances require such a shortening.
Rates according to the staff category are chargeable, subject to the following ceilings:
|For Twinning Contracts up to and including 1 M€: up to 6 trips to the BC |
|Fees for up to 20 working days in the BC |
|Corresponding ‘project management costs’ compensation for work outside the BC |
|Per diem allowance for days in the BC |
|For Twinning Contracts over 1 M€: up to 9 trips to the BC |
|Fees for up to 30 working days in the BC |
|Corresponding ‘project management costs’ compensation for work outside the BC |
|Per diem allowance for days in the BC |
Actual payment is subject to notification of endorsement/signature of final approval of the Twinning Contract by the Commission/administrative office.
Costs may be reported as part of the first interim quarterly report for the Twinning project.
3.1.2. Training of RTAs
RTAs should be invited by the Commission to attend a two-day training seminar at the Commission Headquarters in Brussels. Costs for travel and per diems (according to the rules laid down in section 2.3 of this Annex) to attend this training must be included in the budget of the Twinning Contract (Annex III). This item may be charged either to inception costs, in addition to the ceilings for preparing the Twinning Contract (see above the preceding section) or to project implementation costs, depending on when the RTA attends the training. Attendance before taking up duties in the BC is preferable.
Actual payment is subject to notification of endorsement/signature of final approval of the Twinning Contract by the Commission/administrative office.
3.2. Reimbursement of Staff Cost
3.2.1. Staff Categories and rates of reimbursement
Employment status and corresponding rate of reimbursement
1. As a rule, MS experts (RTA and experts undertaking short and medium duration missions) will be civil servants ( see sections 5.3.1 and 5.4)
2. For RTAs emanating from a mandated body, the reimbursement of salary will be based on the person's actual salary plus non-wage labour costs, without any profit margin. For short and medium duration missions, please refer to section 5.4 for the respective rates.
3. Temporary public employees may exceptionally be hired by MS administrations or mandated bodies, if there are not enough civil servants available to act as experts in Twinning projects. These experts, temporarily recruited by the administration, may only act on its behalf provided they have the necessary experience and are not subject to any conflict of interests. The contract between such experts and the recruiting administration or mandated body must clearly integrate the expert into the contracting organisation, identify the person to whom they report and who is responsible for their backup, thus attributing full responsibility for the quality of their services.
If they are contracted by an administration, reimbursement for their remuneration will be the same as for a civil servant of comparable competence and seniority.
If a mandated body contracts them, reimbursement will be based on the rate for a comparable expert from the same body.
4. Recently retired experts (maximum two years ago) may be reactivated as temporary public agents, either by administrations or mandated bodies. Like non-statutory civil servants, they must be linked to the body responsible for a Twinning project by a contract. Reimbursement for their salary will be based on the above principles for temporary public employees.
Where national legislation provides for deduction of the pension amount from a public sector salary, the project will only reimburse actual salary expenditure of the contractor.
3.2.2. Remuneration of the Resident Twinning Advisor (RTA)
The RTA is remunerated by his/her home administration or mandated body in the MS concerned throughout the entire period of his/her secondment.
The payroll institution of the RTA is entitled to reimbursement of an amount equivalent to what s/he would have received, had s/he continued to work in his/her home administration (not abroad), including related and/or connected non-wage labor costs, plus an additional 6% of the whole amount to cover the extra cost of a replacement. The amount for reimbursement must be included in the budget, and must be based on verifiable evidence.
Private sector RTAs, i.e. selected experts who are not public sector employees, must have signed a fixed-term contract with an administration or mandated body in the MS, which seconds them to the Twinning project on the same terms as civil servants. If they are hired by an administration their remuneration must be aligned to that of civil servants of the same level and experience. If they are hired by a mandated body, their remuneration must be aligned to that of the permanent staff of the same level and experience. All their other costs will be covered by the project as though they were civil servants from the MS.
RTAs receive, where appropriate (and provided they have a rank equivalent to an university level and have a good knowledge of the Community working language (English, French or German) widely spoken in the administration of the BC) an additional flat-rate allowance equal to the difference between the gross annual salary (less family allowances) paid by his/her employer plus the subsistence allowance paid by the Commission and the basic salary payable to an official being equivalent to his/her rank.
RTAs receive additional allowances and reimbursement of costs including: a subsistence allowance, reimbursement for housing, health and accident insurance, school fees, travel and removal costs. These costs arising from the RTA's secondment, be they allowances or statutory reimbursements, are borne by EU funding according to a scale applying to all MS, as detailed in the following sections.
In addition, RTAs receive, throughout the period of their secondment, a subsistence allowance equal to 50% of the per diem rates in the BC. The applicable rates are fixed at the time of the signature of the Twinning Contract for its entire duration. They are not subject to revision during the lifetime of the project
All costs related to the RTA must be quantified and included in the project budget.
3.2.2.1. Housing
RTAs are expected to find housing and register with the authorities without assistance from the Commission. In practice, however, it is likely that RTAs will be able to obtain advice from their own embassies, Commission Delegations/Representations and the BC administrations for which they will be working.
RTAs are reimbursed for their housing expenses in BC within limits set in each BC. These limits are calculated on the basis of family size and average rent paid for equivalent housing for Commission staff on posting to the delegation in the relevant BC.
Hotel accommodation
For the period during which the permanently rented accommodation for the RTA is not yet accessible, s/he will be entitled to an additional per diem allowing for a stay in a hotel. Entitlement to this allowance is subject to the presentation of a hotel invoice.
RTAs are entitled to stay in hotel accommodation for up to 30 days, whilst looking for permanent accommodation. This period may be extended subject to prior approval by the administrative office/Commission.
During this period, the RTA receives his/her standard subsistence allowance, and will also receive an additional 100% per diem, which is intended to cover his/her hotel and living costs. Each person accompanying the RTA (i.e. spouse and dependent children) will receive a 50% per diem during this period to cover hotel and living costs. The claim for these extra per diem allowances must be substantiated by a hotel invoice.
Permanent accommodation
A single person or a couple is entitled to two bedrooms. For each child they are entitled to one additional room. Where a family includes more than two children, the need for the fifth and any subsequent bedrooms must be justified to the administrative office/Commission.
Prices in the BC will vary according to local market conditions, but RTAs are expected to seek value for money in the accommodation they select and to be reasonable in their expectations. The accommodation selected may be furnished or unfurnished, but the RTA may find there are considerable practical benefits in renting furnished accommodation.
The RTA will receive guidance as to the acceptable rental costs for different sizes of accommodation either from the Commission or from the administrative office. These guidelines will follow international standards and indicate the upper and lower margins (“bands”) of acceptable rents for the respective BC.
No prior approval for signing a contract within the indicated bands is required. RTAs should therefore select accommodation in accordance with these pre-approved rates. Rental amounts in excess of the approved “bands” will need to be separately justified and require prior approval from the administrative office/Commission. This will be granted only in exceptional circumstances. Housing costs will be reimbursed according to actual rental costs. The use of housing agencies is permitted; agency fees up to a maximum of two months’ rent will be reimbursed.
Only the basic rental cost is reimbursed. Rental deposits, household insurance and utilities costs such as water, telephone, gas, electricity, etc are the responsibility of the RTA, as are cleaning and other domestic services. No payments for accommodation can be made if the rental costs exceed the amounts indicated above and have not been approved by the administrative office/Commission. Nor will any retroactive payments be made. Reimbursements are based on receipts for actual payments.
3.2.2.2. Health Insurance
RTAs are obliged to contract insurance coverage, for themselves and their accompanying family members, for health care costs arising from accident or illness throughout the entire period of their secondment. The costs for such insurance are reimbursed by the project for up to €200.-/adult/month and €100/child/month. It is the responsibility of the MS Project Leader to ensure that the RTA is adequately insured.
Where there is a bilateral agreement for social security coverage between the MS of origin and the host BC, RTAs are obliged to make use of its provisions.
Complementary coverage for costs not covered under the bilateral agreement and for emergency repatriation in case of accident or severe illness may be charged to the project within the same ceilings as above.
Where there is no bilateral agreement on social security, the project will reimburse full coverage for health insurance covering care costs due to sickness or accident, including emergency repatriation within the limits as above.
The insurance coverage reimbursed by the project will not include capital indemnity in case of death or invalidity due to accident or illness. It is understood that such coverage is provided by the MS employer.
The following is a list of items recommended to be included in the policy:
full coverage for health care costs due to sickness and accident
(in-patient and emergency out-patient)
emergency repatriation from the country of the RTA’s assignment
transportation to the medical centre
sending of a doctor
emergency dental care costs
• in case of death, repatriation of the body to the country of origin.
3.2.2.3. Schooling fees
School fees eligible for reimbursement by the project are those incurred from the first year in which schooling would be available free of charge in the home country to the last year of the child’s secondary education, the duration of this period to be in accordance with the education system in the RTA’s home country. Fees will vary according to the age of the child. Childcare costs are not eligible for reimbursement. Schooling is defined as a minimum of 16 hours of teaching per week, for a minimum period of 3 consecutive months.
Fees eligible for reimbursement are the following: enrolment fees, exam fees, transport to and from school which is provided by the school and is itemised in the school fees, and the cost of books and other material required for participation in compulsory classes. Costs, which are not covered, include, for example, private transport to and from school, school meals, uniforms, after-school music or other extra-curricular classes and activities.
This means that where a school makes a separate charge for materials required in a compulsory class, including music, art or sports classes, these costs will be reimbursed, whereas the cost of non-compulsory school trips or after-school classes will not be met.
School fees will be reimbursed up to a ceiling of 12,000€ per child per academic year. Fees above this amount may be reimbursed on a case-by-case basis and require prior approval from the administrative office/Commission. Grounds for approval of higher fees might be: age of the child; comparable fees in international schools in the same city; lack of alternative educational options in the same city.
The RTA can claim reimbursement only for the school fees of a 'dependent child', i.e. his/her or his/her spouse’s legitimate, natural, adopted or foster child, who is actually being maintained by him/her and who moves with him/her to the country of his/her posting. This definition also applies to a child for whom an application for adoption has been lodged and the adoption procedure started. Boarding school fees in the country of origin may be charged only in very exceptional cases, and is subject to prior approval from the administrative office/Commission.
Reimbursement will be based on itemised bills.
The RTA must also provide the following information, in a document duly certified by the educational establishment in question:
- first name and family name of each child
- the sum incurred per child
- the date on which payment was made by the RTA
- the currency in which payment was made
- the relevant academic year and the period covered (month, term, semester)
3.2.2.4. Travel Costs
a) Personal travel costs to and from the BC at the beginning and at the end of the Twinning Project
RTAs will be reimbursed the cost of an economy air ticket for themselves and family members accompanying them on their mission, or a first class train ticket, whichever is more appropriate and economically advantageous. If the RTA travels by car, an official quote for one of these options must be obtained from a travel agency.
RTAs are entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses:
|(a) |for him/herself: |
| | |From his/her place of recruitment to his/her place of employment at the |
| | |Beginning of the period of secondment; |
| | |From his/her place of employment to his/her place of recruitment |
| | |at the end of the period of secondment. |
|(b) |for the spouse and dependent children |
| | |From the place of recruitment to the place of employment |
| | |when removal takes place; |
| | |From the place of employment to the place of recruitment |
| | |at the end of the period of secondment. |
For the purpose of these rules, the place of recruitment will be the place where the RTA performed his/her duties prior to secondment; the place of employment will be the place in which the BC administration to which s/he is assigned is located.
b) Annual leave
The RTA and accompanying family will be reimbursed the cost of an annual trip home. RTAs will be reimbursed the cost of a special economically priced return air ticket (standard economy ticket, if special economically priced ticket not available for the length of stay required) or train ticket for themselves and family members according to the same rules as described under the preceding section.
c) Monthly travel allowance
Only applicable if no removal of personal belongings or any other costs related to accompanying family members are charged to the project
If the RTA has moved without spouse and/or children, and has not been reimbursed for the removal of personal effects, household contents or personal vehicle to the BC, s/he will be entitled to an allowance amounting to the price of a return ticket for each month of his/her secondment.
This flat-rate payment will be based on the cost of a first-class rail fare or of a special economically priced air ticket, whichever is appropriate and economically more advantageous. The rate applied will be that in force on 1 January of the current year, quoted by a reputable travel agency.
Where a whole month is not worked, the amount will be calculated in proportion to the number of days worked.
The RTA is not entitled to an extra allowance for annual leave.
d) Proof of travel
Original proofs of travel must be provided according to national MS rules, as a matter of course in order for reimbursement to be made. The only two exceptions are
a) the monthly travel allowance for RTAs who do not claim any removal costs or costs for family members and
b) for travel by personal car and under the sole responsibility of the driver which is reimbursed according to the rules defined above.
3.2.2.5. Removal Costs
a) General provisions
The RTA may choose to travel with the minimum of personal belongings (no charge to the project), or charge the removal of a selection of personal effects (minimum secondment 1 year) or of his/her entire household contents (for secondments of minimum 2 years) to the project. S/he is responsible for organising his/her removal and should attempt to do so in the most economical way. The guidelines for removals presuppose one complete removal, rather than a series of smaller moves, which will be more costly. In all cases, the route selected must be the most common, most economical and shortest one.
It is the responsibility of the RTA to organise the removal so that storage costs in the BC are avoided. The project will not cover any costs arising from storage in customs warehouses. The RTA must, of course, respect the customs regulations of the host country, subject to some exemptions (see point 3.2.2.7).
b) Option 1: Removal of personal effects only (minimum secondment 1 year)
The RTA may charge to the project the costs of moving his/her personal effects (clothes, books, stereo equipment, microwave oven, washing machine, television, video etc) to the BC. S/he will be reimbursed for transport of freight up to the following limits (packaging weight is already included in the figures below):
RTA 780 kg
Spouse 390 kg
Each child 195 kg
The actual cost of transportation will be reimbursed. (See section on “quotes” below.) Note that quotes based on volume will not be accepted.
Any personal effects exceeding the above limits will be paid for by the RTA. This also applies to the insurance for the excess.
The costs for storage in the MS (transport to and from place of storage, insurance and rent) for furniture which is not moved may be charged to the project. This is limited to a maximum volume of 60m³. Two quotes from different carriers must be obtained. The actual cost of storage will be reimbursed. (See section on “quotes” below.) Any personal effects exceeding the above limit will be paid for by the RTA. This also applies to the insurance for the excess.
c) Option 2: Removal of complete household contents to the BC (minimum secondment 2 years)
An RTA, seconded for at least 2 years and for whom the distance between the place of recruitment and duty is at least 50km, may charge the costs for the removal of his/her household contents to the BC, i.e. his/her personal effects, plus household furniture and furnishings, to the project. The move must take place no later than six months after taking up duty.
In this case, s/he is entitled to reimbursement of the cost of transport of up to 60m³ of freight. The actual cost of transportation will be reimbursed. (See section on “quotes” below.) The quote should preferably be ‘door-to-door’.
d) Air vs. Surface Transport
The RTA may choose to send all or some of his/her belongings by surface transport, rather than by air, provided the resulting costs do not exceed air transport costs. S/he must obtain two quotes from different carriers. The route selected must be the most common, most economic and shortest one.
e) Cost of Excess Baggage
The costs for excess baggage up to 50kg, if this consists of books, papers, equipment etc. required for work purposes, may be charged to the project in connection with the first trip to the BC, when taking up duty, as well as at the end of the project.
f) Transport of Personal Vehicle
The project may reimburse the cost of surface transport of a personal vehicle which the RTA owns at the time of secondment. Two quotes must be obtained from carriers. These should preferably quote costs of door-to-door delivery, including insurance. It is the RTA’s sole responsibility to comply with any regulations associated with importing, exporting and registering a personal vehicle.
g) Quotes
In all cases (i.e. for removals of personal effects, household contents, personal vehicle and storage costs), the expert must obtain at least two quotes. These should preferably be for ‘door-to-door’ delivery.
h) Insurance
The project may cover ‘all risk’ insurance costs for the transport of personal effects, household contents, and vehicles, as well as for items in storage. Insurance may be contracted with the removal/storage firm, or directly with an insurance company. Premiums are limited as follows:
0.625% - 1.25% of the value of personal effects transported by air
1.25% - 2.5% of the value of personal effects transported by sea
1.25% - 2.5% of the value of a vehicle transported by road or sea
Where the RTA chooses to move his/her entire household contents, the maximum insured value authorised to be charged to the project is 150.000 Euro.
Note:
- The same terms apply to removals back to the home country; they must take place within three months of the end of the period of secondment.
- Costs resulting from any delay in the delivery of freight by any means will be the sole responsibility of the RTA.
- Any dispute between the RTA and a removal/storage company, regarding any aspect of removal/storage or payment, is the sole responsibility of the RTA.
3.2.2.6 Leave Entitlement
a) Basic Leave Entitlement
RTAs’ leave entitlement is aligned with that of National Experts seconded to the Commission.
All RTAs will be entitled to annual leave amounting to 2½ working days per month of completed service i.e. 30 days holiday per year.
b) Travelling Time Allowance
In addition, RTAs will receive an annual travelling time allowance according to the distance between their normal place of residence and their residence in the BC.
50 to 250 km 1 day
251 to 600 km 2 days
601 to 900 km 3 days
901 to 1400 km 4 days
1401 to 2000 km 5 days
over 2000 km 6 days
c) Public Holidays
In addition, RTAs will be entitled to take leave on public holidays. The public holidays will be the same as those, which are allowed for counterpart BC officials in the administration with which they work.
d) Special Leave
In addition, the RTA may, on demand, be accorded special leave:
marriage of the RTA 4 days
household removals of the RTA 2 days
serious illness of spouse or child 3 days
death of spouse or child 4 days
serious illness or death of close relative 2 days
birth or marriage of child 2 days.
e) Leave Authorisation
Leave authorisation must be obtained from the MS Project Leader in writing and in advance.
3.2.2.7 Fiscal situation of RTAs
The Resident Twinning Adviser must observe the national tax legislation of his/her home country with regard to income earned during the period of secondment in the beneficiary host country.
The possible exemptions from customs duties, import duties, taxes and other fiscal charges for the RTA are governed by the Financing Agreement for the project in question signed between the Commission and the BC.
3.2.3. Project Leader, Short & Medium Term Expert Inputs
3.2.3.1. Missions of civil servants
The EU will finance the cost of short and medium term MS missions in the framework of the project. The contribution of each short or medium term expert to project activities must be specified in the Twinning work plan.
Mission expenses (transport, per diem, etc) will be reimbursed in accordance with section 2.3. Visits of MS management and support staff to the BC cannot be separately covered by the project’s budget. The financial contribution of the EU programme to the staff costs of short and medium-term missions is 250€/day for civil servants or acting civil servants.
Missions of staff from mandated bodies:
Definition of three expert categories and their respective rates of reimbursement
Class 1 expert: Rate of reimbursement per day worked in BC: 250€
Personal experience in the implementation of institutional aspects targeted by the Twinning project: minimum 3 years, preferably 5 to 8 years
Class 2 senior expert: Rate of reimbursement per day worked in BC: 350€
Personal experience in the implementation of institutional aspects targeted by the Twinning project: minimum 8 years, preferably up to 15 years.
Capacity to demonstrate innovative approach by abstracting from own experience and adapting to the needs, constraints and culture of the beneficiary. Experience in co-operation with non-EU countries. Capacity to communicate in one of the Community languages widely spoken in the administration of the BC.
Class 3 special counsellor: Rate of reimbursement per day worked in BC: 450€
Personal experience in the implementation of institutional aspects targeted by the Twinning project: minimum 15 years, preferably up to 20 years.
In addition to the above and to the qualifications expected of senior experts, special counsellors will be past or present holders of a high-level post (junior minister, head of a government department or head or chairman of a public or private sector body with a record of government work, or equivalent).
Exception
Mandated bodies able to provide evidence that they cannot cover their staff’s real costs with the standard rates of reimbursement may apply for authorisation to charge up to a maximum of 100€ more for each category of experts. These rates must be reflected in the detailed budget and have been approved before presenting proposals to ensure full transparency. These requests must be supported by detailed documentary evidence on real salary costs.
Explanatory comments regarding classification of experts
For the purpose of classifying experts assigned to Twinning projects all factors will be considered together; a shortfall on one criterion may be offset by outstanding qualifications on another. In case of divergence of opinion, the Commission has the final say regarding expert classification.
Class 3 (special counsellors) is strictly reserved for individuals with exceptional experience, whose contribution to the Twinning project justifies the high rating and associated costs. In order to qualify a staff member as a Class 3 expert, not only the number of years of experience, but also the other requirements stated above must apply.
The working days invoiced will be equal to the days actually spent on co-operation (excluding travelling time and weekends). The per diems, on the other hand, will correspond to the number of nights spent in situ on the basis of the actual arrival and departure dates, adjusted to meet working requirements. If the use of a reduced rate air fare requires an additional overnight stay, the traveller is entitled to the corresponding per diem payment, provided it is not in excess of the saving on the air fare.
Inputs in the MS Home Administration or mandated body
For tasks performed outside the BC for the benefit of the Twinning project by MS civil servants or mandated body experts, the financial contribution to the home administration or mandated body will be the ‘Twinning Management Costs’ detailed under section 3.6 of this Annex.
3.3. Travel & Per Diem
3.3.1. Travel
• The basic rules for travel are: economy class air fare or first class train ticket, whichever is more appropriate and economically advantageous;
• Travel by car is reimbursed according to the basic rules above, except where neither air, nor rail transport is available or appropriate. In that case, it is reimbursed at a rate of 0.25 Euro/km, regardless of whether the car used is private or rented or a taxi. Where several experts jointly make use of a car, the reimbursement will be made only once.
• Travel costs are always considered to be reimbursable costs, estimated in the budget and invoiced at the actually incurred rate;
• The only exception is the monthly travel ticket allowance paid to RTAs under certain circumstances (see section 3.2.2.4.c of this Annex), which is calculated at the beginning of the project and is automatically paid monthly without proof of travel.
For travel by plane the cheapest possible tariff should be applied. If an overnight stay between a Saturday and Sunday is possible, the use of special economically priced tickets is mandatory. If the use of a reduced rate air fare requires an additional overnight stay, the traveller is entitled to the corresponding daily allowance payment (per diem), provided it is not in excess of the saving on the air fare. Where the use of a special economically priced ticket is not possible, a standard economy ticket should be used instead.
Transport to and from the airport is generally considered city transport and thus covered by the per diem allowance. Exception is granted for flight departures before 7.00 and arrivals after 22.00 hours, in which case a taxi fare may be charged separately. Where inter-city travel is required to reach the airport, the rules for travel by train apply.
City and airport transport is considered to be covered by the per diem allowance.
Local travel for the MS experts (RTA and short/medium duration missions) in the BC, but outside the capital, must be specified and budgeted separately. Whenever possible, the use of public transport is mandatory. If the only practical alternative is the use of a private or rented car, the indemnity as per above should be charged.
Short-term experts or RTAs travelling by car do so under their own responsibility. Reimbursement of costs is always based on the above rules.
Costs for travel by BC officials from their capitals to a MS or between MS, e.g. in the framework of study visits, may be eligible for funding under CARDS, TACIS and MEDA. The same applies to travel by BC staff within a MS, unless these costs fall under the per diem allowance.
3.3.2. Per Diem (for short term experts and RTAs on mission outside BC)
MS experts are entitled to an allowance (per diem) when operating in the BC. It is intended to cover hotel, food and local transportation costs (city and airport transfer). The current rate published by the Europe Aid Co-operation Office on their website () at the time of the mission applies. The rate can therefore vary over the lifetime of the project, depending on the moment when the mission takes place.
The basis for calculation of the number of per diems is the number of nights spent away from the home base (no half per diems). These rates are maximum rates, lower rates can be agreed with the MS.
BC staff travelling to a MS in the framework of a Twinning project are entitled to per diems according to the same rules.
3.4. Training and Seminars
3.4.1. Training in the BC
Eligible costs for training activity in the BC are mainly staff inputs by public officials and mandated body experts from MS. The provisions for short and medium term missions govern their expert fees. The cost of MS experts who will be working in the BC capital anyway, regardless of whether a specific seminar takes place or not, should not be entered in the seminar budget. This would apply, for example, to short-term experts who will be carrying out various tasks in the BC, one of which might be to speak at a seminar. S/he will not be entitled to additional fees or per diems, in excess of what has already been budgeted, for doing so. Other costs might relate to provision of:
1. training documentation;
2. interpretation (see section 3.7. of this annex);
3. transport for on-site visits, etc;
4. infrastructure facilities – in normal circumstances, it is expected that the BC will bear the costs for providing a suitable venue/equipment for training in the BC. In exceptional circumstances, where this is impossible, the respective EU programme will provide funding to cover fully justified expenses.
If any part of the training is sub-contracted to the private sector, the respective MS/administrative office will apply the relevant procurement procedures (see section 3.9. of this annex). If the training takes place in the BC, the BC will cover all costs, including transport and per diems for its own staff.
3.4.2. Study visits in the MS and Trainee/internships for BC officials in MS Partner Administration
When planning study visits in the MS partner administration, the twinning partners are urged to take into due account the following principles which may be further detailed by the Contracting Authority .
Some of these principles can be listed as follows :
• Cost effectiveness and sound financial management
• Direct link between the objectives laid down in the PF and the study visits planned
• Direct relevance for the participating BC officials and for the mandatory results of the Twinning project
• Adequate and intensive follow-up of the study visits
• Adequate evaluation by the BC participants and direct involvement of the BC participants in the activities undertaken in the framework of those study visits
Moreover, the MS Twinning partner may propose a limited number of administrative internships in its own administration for certain selected BC officials. Such an initiative may indeed contribute to the further reinforcement of the structural between the respective administrations involved in the Twinning project.
The BC covers the transport costs for staff from BC to MS for the purpose of participating in study visits and/or trainee/internships. For CARDS, TACIS and MEDA, those may be covered by the project budget. Daily allowances for BC trainees are eligible for funding through the project. They are intended to cover costs for food, overnight accommodation and local (in-town) transportation. For traineeships of more than 2 months the daily allowance rate is reduced by 30% as of the 3rd month.
Certain dedicated MS training institutions delivering intensive highly specialised training operate on a fee basis for any trainee; such fees may be charged to the project. If the fees include accommodation and/or meals the per diem paid to participants will be adapted accordingly. Costs for expert fees of MS experts accompanying ad hoc practical traineeships cannot be charged to the project separately, but are deemed to be included in the ‘Twinning Management Costs’ as detailed under section 3.5.
Other reimbursable costs incurred by the MS host administration must be detailed in the budget according to the same principles as for other training activities. Small incidental costs may be charged to the budget with a lump sum (maximum 10€ per trainee per day) and invoiced without supporting evidence.
3.5. ‘Twinning Management Costs’
The breakdown of costs (detailed in Annex III (Budget) to the Twinning Contract) may not include expert fees or other any fees for work performed outside the BC, no matter what its nature (e.g. preparation or follow-up of mission, accompaniment of study visit, delivery of seminar in MS, co-ordination, logistical management [accounts] overheads and other incidental costs).
In its place, and as a global contribution to the costs arising from the responsibility of preparing and implementing a Twinning project, the fee for short and medium-term expertise of any kind (including the Project Leader) delivered in the BC is increased by a compensation of 150% for Twinning management costs.
This amount is added to expert fees for each activity in the BC. The MS organisation in charge of the Twinning project may dispose of it for any costs arising in the MS in connection with the project and overhead costs.
Since Twinning Contracts are modelled on grant contracts, they are subject to the overall requirement that they may not yield a profit for the implementing MS partner (public administration or mandated body).
The twinning management costs compensation is invariably invoiced by and paid to the MS Project Leader in conjunction with the expert fees for short-term experts working in the BC. The Project Leader uses and distributes it as s/he sees fit.
Where several MS are involved in a project, the Project Leader may make available the full or a proportion of the “twinning management costs compensation” to the partner MS providing short term experts and recipient of the funds for their services. Generally, the lead MS Twinning partner will retain a proportion ranging from 10-20% of the “Twinning management costs compensation” to cover the additional costs for its leadership. It is important for the good implementation of the project that the consortium agreement between the lead MS and other MS partners lays down the precise modalities in this respect. The members of the consortium elaborate this agreement independently without any advice or interference from their BC partners or Commission services.
For every item in the budget concerning expert fees for work performed in the BC, the immediately following item in the same activity will be entitled ‘twinning management costs compensation’ and quantified at 150% of the preceding item. The amount in the budget is indicative and actual payment will be based on the real amount of fees for days actually worked in the BC.
3.6. Intangible supplies and provision of services
Such items as development of computer software, provision of documentation, translation of texts, private interpreters and similar fall under this category and should feature in the detailed breakdown of costs. (See section 3.9. For the provision of translation and interpretation refer to next section 3.7.).
3.7. Translation and Interpretation
Each of the 2 RTAs should have a full-time project assistant for the purposes of translation, interpretation on a daily basis and general project duties at his/her disposal. In most cases the costs for hiring an assistant have to be included in the project budget. Only in very exceptional cases should the requirement for an assistant be waived. Note that project assistants remunerated by the project may not have or recently (past 6 months) have had any contractual relation with the beneficiary administration.
The recruitment of a suitable project assistant may commence before signature of the Twinning Contract and particulars inserted in the Twinning work plan. A minimum of 3 candidates must be assessed/interviewed.
BC might want to consider ‘seconding’ the project assistant from their own administration rather than recruiting a new one. In that case, salary costs will not be covered by the Twinning Contract. The advantage of this solution is to have a project assistant with ‘in house’ knowledge rather than an outsider.
While it is presumed that the BC bears all its other own costs incurred in connection with the Twinning project, an exception can be made for costs for translation and interpretation. Costs for these services should be budgeted in relation to each activity for which they are required.
In the case of translation of legislation, Project Leaders must check with the relevant Translation Co-ordination Unit, whether the EU has already funded a translation.
Translation costs must be charged at the BC rate. Interpretation costs may be charged at the rate corresponding to the place of the event. For events scheduled to take place in the MS, it may be more advantageous to hire BC staff (even after taking into account travel and per diem costs). Project partners are strongly encouraged to seek value for money.
3.8. Equipment
3.8.1. Large Scale Equipment
Reference to equipment necessary for the implementation of the Twinning project must be mentioned in the Twinning work plan. However, it will not be financed by the Twinning budget.
It is the BC's responsibility to secure financing from a source of its choice. Procurement rules for such equipment will follow the rules of the relevant donor.
The BC's procurement procedures must, however, be reliable enough to ensure that the equipment is available when needed so as not to jeopardise the implementation of the Twinning project.
3.8.2. Office Equipment and supplies
From the day of the RTA’s arrival, the BC Twinning partner is entirely responsible for providing all office equipment to ensure effective working conditions for the project and, in particular, the RTA. The budget of Twinning projects cannot fund desktops, laptops, mobile, phones, faxes, scanners, CD-burners, etc.
In very exceptional cases and subject to due written justification, small items of essential supplies (e.g. small laboratory testing consumables or equipment) for a total cost of not more than 5000€ may be procured to ensure that the implementation of the project can proceed smoothly. The contracting Authority (the Commission in case of CARDS and TACIS) will assess the proposed expenditure restrictively, in light of its knowledge of the BC possibilities and on a case by case basis.
Any equipment purchased with project funds will become the property of the BC at the end of the project.
Purchases must be transparent and open to the purchase of goods of eligible origin under the respective EU programme.
3.9. Private Sector Inputs
3.9.1. Tendering, procurement and contracting
Twinning projects are in general based on the transfer of public sector expertise and know-how to the beneficiary administration with a view to achieving a mandatory result. This entails that private sector input in the format of equipment or private sector services will only be required in exceptional cases, subject to due justification, and limited to €5.000 in the case of equipment (see section 5.10). Twinning projects are in other words self-contained projects centred around public sector co-operation.
• Private sector inputs are in principle tendered by the MS partner, which applies the provisions of Annex IV ( Contract Award procedures) to the Twinning Contract.
• In the case of countries under the CARDS, TACIS and MEDA programme, for contracts part of the general project but outside Twinning contracts or contracts tendered by the Administrative Office the Practical Guide will always be applied.
• MS Project Leaders may request the assistance of the administrative office to contract inputs. This may be appropriate, especially where the purchase entails VAT charges.
• When contracting private sector services, especially for translation and interpretation, MS Project Leaders are requested to seek value for money.
3.9.2. Private Sector Sub-Contractors
Where a MS is otherwise unable to carry out an activity necessary to the implementation of the Twinning project and provides adequate certification to that effect, a Twinning Contract and Twinning work plan may provide for that activity to be subcontracted to the private sector. This might apply, for example, to software design, where private sector specialist input could be vital to the project’s success. MS are not allowed to subcontract key activities of the project, which are the prerogative of the public sector actors of the MS selected. All services that are to be contracted by the MS partner or the administrative office (see section 3.9.1) should be detailed in the project budget, with an annotation making clear by which authorities they will be contracted.
• The Project Leaders of the Twinning project must comply with the procedures set out (as explained under section 3.9.1) concerning the selection of sub-contractors, and in particular competitive tendering.
• The MS Project Leader must ensure that all supporting documents for invoices are kept for audit purposes.
4. Twinning Costs not covered by the EU
1. All Twinning projects will be co-financed by the BC. The direct and indirect cost of the BC administration, civil servants and national private experts working for the project is borne by that BC.
2. Under CARDS, MEDA and TACIS, the costs referred to section 3.3 are eligible for funding by the EU Programme
3. Costs for large scale equipment that is mentioned as a necessary element for the success of the project cannot be covered by the Twinning Contract budget (see section 3.8). The BC further provides the experts sent by the MS with the requisite facilities for professional use free of charge, which are thus not eligible for funding by the respective EU programme:
• adequately equipped office space,
• telephone,
• email services,
• fax,
• photocopiers,
• computer,
• internet access,
• secretarial support,
• access to information.
4. Costs for indirect taxes (VAT) cannot be covered by Community funds.
For VAT on expenses in the BC, some beneficiary countries have a mechanism in place with the local Ministry of Finance to address the issue. MS Twinning partners are advised to make careful enquiries before engaging in any purchases, which are likely to involve VAT costs or any other taxes.
EU funds will not be used to fund BC running costs. For the sake of long-term sustainability and in order to ensure that systems are established which are commensurate with BC future funding capacity, BCs are expected to commit their own resources to Twinning projects.
5. Expert fees or any other expenses for MS input performed outside the BC, since such costs are deemed to be covered by the twinning management cost compensation.
5. Reporting requirements
5.1. Reporting requirements
Proper project reporting is essential to ensure effective follow-up of project implementation, to properly evaluate the results and ensure high quality for the current and future projects.
The MS Project Leader must draw up Interim Quarterly Reports and a Final Report and he/she will be responsible for submitting them to the concerned authority. The BC Project Leader will be fully involved in this process and should be given adequate time to put forward comments. S/he must also co-sign each report before it is submitted.
These reports shall consist of a content section and a financial section. Reports will be drafted by the MS Project Leader and will be first submitted to the counterpart BC Project Leader for comments (if any) and co-signature prior to formal submission to the designated authority (see below). These reports will reflect not only the Project Leader’s own opinion on the progress of the Twinning project, but should also be based on and reflect the information contained in the reports provided to him/her by the RTA, the BC and other sources (i.e. short term experts, organisation of training and seminars, etc.) It is vital that the BC is fully involved in the preparation of each report, in order to ensure a comprehensive insight into project progress.
The reports should be submitted to:
|Reports to be submitted to: |PHARE before EDIS |PHARE |CARDS |MEDA/TACIS |
| | |(Trans.Facility) |(EAR where applicable) | |
| | |under EDIS | | |
|COMMISSION |X | |X |X1 |
|ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE |X |X1 |X |X1 |
| |(CFCU) | | | |
1: one copy should be sent at the same moment to the Commission.
• Reports must contain, as a minimum, the information detailed below. Reports must also be submitted on time as specified below. If minimum reporting requirements are not met, the designated authority as described above, reserves the right to review or suspend funding of a Twinning project (prior approval of this decision by the Commission is needed in all cases). Absence of feedback within 45 days of presentation of reports is considered to signify tacit approval.
Templates are provided in Annex C4 to this manual.
3 Interim Quarterly Reports
Throughout the entire Twinning project, at three-monthly intervals starting with the date of notification of signature/ endorsement, the Project Leaders will prepare interim quarterly reports. The first interim quarterly report will most often refer to less than three months’ actual project implementation, since the arrival of the RTA in the BC and the beginning of the work schedule rarely coincide with the date of notification.
Interim quarterly reports will be due during the month following the quarter under consideration. The first interim quarterly report will be due in the fourth month after the date on which partners are notified of endorsement/signature of the Twinning Contract.
The interim quarterly reports must:
1. Describe progress achieved in the implementation of the Twinning project during the period under consideration, making direct reference to the timetables and benchmarks as set out in the Twinning Work Plan and highlighting any previously unforeseen activities or activities that have been cancelled.
2. Update on the general environment for project implementation.
3. Update on the assumption and risks for project implementation.
4. Make an overall evaluation of the progress achieved, including an explicit judgement on the likelihood of fully completing the project within the remaining time scale and budget.
5. Provide Recommendations.
The financial part of the interim reports, must document the actual expenditure in relation to budgeted expenditure.
5.1.2 Final Report
The MS and BC Project Leaders will jointly prepare, co-sign and submit to the designated authority a final report.
The final report shall be forwarded no later than three months after the implementation period as defined in article 2 of the General Conditions of the Twinning Contract.
It will include:
• Executive summary of the Twinning project;
• Background information: Description of the original situation in the relevant area of the BC administration before the project, indicating the gaps that the project was to address. Listing of objectives, purpose and mandatory results of the project.
• Implementation process: developments outside the project and project developments;
• Achievement of mandatory results: If these have not been achieved, a detailed explanation must be given on the underlying reasons. An action plan to complete the project must be submitted;
• Analysis of the long-term impact of the project, its sustainable results and identification of potential relevant follow-up actions, if applicable;
• Information on the steps taken to ensure the visibility of EU financing;
• Conclusions, recommendations, including lessons to be learned for future Twinning projects.
• Proof of transfers of ownership (if applicable) and a final statement of all eligible costs of the Twinning project, plus a full summary statement of the Twinning project’s income and expenditure and payments received.
The final financial report must be accompanied by an audit certificate from a recognised, independent auditor, following the template in Annex VI to the Twinning Contract (see section 7.3).
If the MS fails to supply the Contracting Authority with a final report by the final report deadline as here above specified and fails to furnish an acceptable and sufficient written explanation of the reasons why it is unable to comply with this obligation, the Contracting Authority may terminate the Twinning Contract.
-----------------------
[1] Where a grant is financed by the European Development Fund, any mention of Community financing
must be understood as referring to European Development Fund financing.
[2] if the Contracting Authority is a headquarters service of the European Commission. Please do not forget to send a copy of this letter to the management unit and if appropriate to the Commission delegation mentioned in Article 5(1) of the Special Conditions of the Contract.
[3] Delete the two options which do not apply.
[4] Delete the option which does not apply.
[5] Delete the items which do not apply.
[6] Give the account number shown on the financial identification form annexed to the Contract.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- how do i sell stocks i own
- i ask or i asked
- synonyms for i believe or i think
- i choose or i chose
- i think i found the one
- i bet or i ll bet
- why did russia annex crimea
- humss cw mpig i 11 humss cw mpig i 12 humss cw mpig i 13
- i took a deep breath and listened to the old brag of my heart i am i am i am
- i feel like the things i should say are the things i can t say
- i have loved words and i have hated them and i hope i have made them right
- i looked and looked at her and i knew as clearly as i know th