title: Council Recommendation of  14 March 2006  concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) for the financial year 2004

text:
               18.3.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 81/9

      COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

   of 14 March 2006
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) for the financial year 2004
   (2006/220/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to the Third ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 8 December 1984,
   Having regard to Internal Agreement 86/126/EEC on the financing and administration of Community aid (1), and in particular Article 29(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 11 November 1986 applicable to the Sixth European Development Fund (Sixth EDF) (2), and in particular Articles 66 to 73 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the Sixth EDF as at 31 December 2004 and the Court of Auditors' report concerning the financial year 2004 together with the Commission's replies (3),
   Whereas pursuant to Article 29(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Sixth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council;
   Whereas the overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Sixth EDF during the financial year 2004 has been satisfactory,
   HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the Sixth EDF for the financial year 2004.

      Done at Brussels, 14 March 2006.

            For the Council

            The President

         K.-H. GRASSER

      (1)  OJ L 86, 31.3.1986, p. 210. Agreement as last amended by Council Decision 86/281/EEC (OJ L 178, 2.7.1986, p. 13).

      (2)  OJ L 325, 20.11.1986, p. 42.

      (3)  OJ C 301, 30.11.2005, p. 249.


title: Council Recommendation of 11 July 2017 on the 2017 National Reform Programme of the Czech Republic and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Convergence Programme of the Czech Republic

text:
               9.8.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 261/12

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 11 July 2017
   on the 2017 National Reform Programme of the Czech Republic and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Convergence Programme of the Czech Republic
   (2017/C 261/03)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1), and in particular Article 9(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 16 November 2016, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2017 European Semester for economic policy coordination. The priorities of the Annual Growth Survey were endorsed by the European Council on 9-10 March 2017. On 16 November 2016, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it did not identify the Czech Republic as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out.

               (2)

               The 2017 country report for the Czech Republic was published on 22 February 2017. It assessed the Czech Republic’s progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Council on 12 July 2016, the follow-up given to the country-specific recommendations adopted in previous years and the Czech Republic’s progress towards its national Europe 2020 targets. The Commission’s analysis leads it to conclude that the Czech Republic is not experiencing macroeconomic imbalances.

               (3)

               The Czech Republic submitted its 2017 National Reform Programme on 25 April 2017 and its 2017 Convergence Programme on 28 April 2017. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (4)

               Relevant country-specific recommendations have been addressed in the programming of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) for the 2014-2020 period. As provided for in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), where it is necessary to support the implementation of relevant Council recommendations, the Commission may request a Member State to review and propose amendments to its Partnership Agreement and relevant programmes. The Commission has provided further details on how it would make use of that provision in guidelines on the application of the measures linking effectiveness of the ESI Funds to sound economic governance.

               (5)

               The Czech Republic is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact. In its 2017 Convergence Programme, the Government plans for a budgetary surplus in headline terms over 2016-2020. The medium-term budgetary objective — a structural deficit of 1,0 % of GDP — continues to be met with a margin throughout the programme period. According to the 2017 Convergence Programme, the general government debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to gradually decline to 32,7 % in 2020. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning those budgetary projections is plausible. While risks to the achievement of budgetary targets seem broadly balanced, the pronounced contraction in public investment in 2016 — linked to the start of a new Union funds cycle — could entail a stronger-than-expected rebound of public investment in 2017. Based on the Commission 2017 spring forecast, the structural balance is forecast to decline to around 0 % of GDP in 2017 and -0,2 % of GDP in 2018, remaining above the medium-term budgetary objective. Overall, the Council is of the opinion that Czech Republic is projected to comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact in 2017 and 2018.

               (6)

               The Czech Republic continues to show medium fiscal sustainability risks in the long term. These are derived primarily from the projected impact of age-related public spending, in particular in the areas of healthcare and pensions. The projected increase in long-term spending on healthcare is a matter of concern, both in terms of the governance and the cost-effectiveness of the healthcare system, which relies heavily on more expensive inpatient care. Some measures are currently at various stages of implementation, but results are not yet tangible. Recently adopted or planned measures to amend the pension system may, if implemented, worsen public finances in the long term. Firstly, the Parliament adopted legislation giving the Government the power to adjust the pension indexation mechanism more flexibly. The Parliament is also discussing proposals to cap the statutory retirement age at 65 and establish a mechanism for regularly reviewing the pensionable age. Further changes, such as a more generous pension indexation formula and differentiated social insurance rates depending on the number of children, are currently also being discussed.

               (7)

               The fiscal responsibility law that was adopted by the Parliament in January 2017 aims to address the main shortcomings of the Czech Republic’s fiscal framework, since it was recently evaluated as one of the weakest in the Union. However, an independent fiscal council to oversee the implementation of the rules has yet to be appointed. Furthermore, implementing the newly introduced measures will be crucial in making the fiscal framework more effective and stable.

               (8)

               The Czech Republic faces challenges in preventing corruption as well as inefficiencies in public procurement. While a number of measures in the Government’s anti-corruption programme have been implemented and other reforms are pending, in practice corruption is not prosecuted systematically. In general, the Czech public procurement practice still lacks sufficient competition, which is reflected by the high number of single-bid procedures and direct awards, in particular in the IT sector. Inefficiencies in training support and the absence of aggregated purchasing structures and competence centres hamper professionalisation and make it harder to achieve good value for money in public procurement. Very limited use of quality as an award criterion is also symptomatic in this respect. The transition to e-procurement is still facing major challenges. These include the need to improve the state-owned e-procurement platform ‘National Electronic Tool’ and to clarify the conditions for continued use of private platforms that are already active on the Czech e-procurement market.

               (9)

               The business environment in the Czech Republic is weighed down by a heavy regulatory burden and numerous administrative barriers, in particular permitting procedures and tax regulation. In September 2016, the Government presented an amendment to the Construction Act and related legislation, with the aim of accelerating and streamlining the procedure for granting building permits by integrating the environmental impact assessment into it. The amendment is currently under parliamentary scrutiny. Tax compliance costs for businesses continue to be above the Union average. Shortcomings also include frequent amendments to the Tax Code. Addressing tax non-compliance remains a priority for the Czech authorities; however there is no strong focus on simplification. A yet-to-be-presented income tax law aims at simplifying the Tax Code, but a draft is not yet available.

               (10)

               The use of e-government services in the Czech Republic is one of the lowest in the Union, but has increased from 2015. The Czech authorities have taken steps to improve the availability of e-government services, but many are still in progress and some individual measures have not yet been initiated. Responsibility for the roll-out of services is spread over several ministries and stakeholders perceive limited cross-sector cooperation.

               (11)

               R & D intensity has increased significantly in recent years, but this is not being matched by corresponding improvements in the quality of R & D outcomes. Reforms to the governance of the R & D system are being pursued, but have not been yet fully implemented. The Government approved a new evaluation methodology (Metodika 17+) in February 2017, which intends to strengthen the mechanisms related to the allocation of funding for basic and applied research. A series of measures is being taken to facilitate stronger links between academia and businesses, building on the structuring effect of the national innovation platforms.

               (12)

               Educational outcomes are generally good, but basic skills have deteriorated. Performance is strongly influenced by students’ socioeconomic backgrounds. The low educational outcomes of disadvantaged groups, in particular the Roma community, are a clear concern. It is estimated that a very large proportion of Roma children leave school early. A significant number of legislative and administrative measures have been taken to promote inclusive education and are now beginning to be implemented. These are expected to help reduce the gap in educational attainment and achievement between Roma and non-Roma children. The Parliament adopted amendments to the Education Act in March 2016, extending compulsory education to the last year of pre-school education and ensuring that younger children are entitled to a place in a kindergarten. Nevertheless, inequalities in the education system represent a barrier to improving the quality of human capital and also hamper labour market outcomes later in life. Increased requirements of teachers and an ageing teacher population mean that the attractiveness of the teaching profession remains a challenge. This is due in part to comparatively low pay, although salaries have increased in recent years. A new career system for teachers and pedagogical staff, developed to increase the attractiveness of the profession, was finally approved by the Government after several postponements. Continuous professional development opportunities for teachers are being developed with significant support from Union funds, in particular professional development activities related to teaching mixed groups and inclusive education. The higher education reform was adopted by the Parliament in January 2016 and its results need to be monitored. A reform of the funding system of higher education institutions is also planned.

               (13)

               The unemployment rate in the Czech Republic continues to fall. The tightening labour market conditions are making it more difficult for employers to recruit workers. There is still some potential to offset the shortages by mobilising under-represented groups, such as women with young children, low-skilled workers and members of the Roma community. Increasing the outreach and activation capacities of public employment services, together with appropriate and well-targeted active labour market policies and individualised services, would help boost the participation of untapped groups. The labour market participation of women with young children is hampered by a persistent lack of affordable and quality childcare services, in particular for children up to 3 years old, by long parental leave entitlements, by the limited use of flexible working-time arrangements by both parents and by a low take-up of parental leave by fathers. Some measures have been taken in recent years to address these issues. However, labour market outcomes for low-skilled workers are notably weaker than for all other groups. The Parliament is currently discussing the legislative framework for social housing, which is expected to set national standards and target groups.

               (14)

               In the context of the 2017 European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of the Czech Republic’s economic policy and published it in the 2017 country report. It has also assessed the 2017 Convergence Programme, the 2017 National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to the Czech Republic in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in the Czech Republic, but also their compliance with Union rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the Union’s overall economic governance by providing Union-level input into future national decisions.

               (15)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the 2017 Convergence Programme and is of the opinion (4) that the Czech Republic is expected to comply with the Stability and Growth Pact,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the Czech Republic take action in 2017 and 2018 to:

               1.

               Ensure the long-term sustainability of public finances, in view of the ageing population. Increase the effectiveness of public spending, in particular by fighting corruption and inefficient practices in public procurement.

               2.

               Remove obstacles to growth, in particular by streamlining procedures for granting building permits and further reducing the administrative burden on businesses, by rolling out key e-government services, by improving the quality of R & D and by fostering employment of underrepresented groups.

      Done at Brussels, 11 July 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         T. TÕNISTE

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25).

      (3)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

      (4)  Under Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.


title: Commission recommendation No 117/78/ECSC of 18 January 1978 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain types of haematite pig iron originating in Canada

text:
24. 1 . 78                          Official Journal of the European Communities                               No L 19 / 1
                                                              I
                                           (Acts whose publication is obligatory)
                            COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION No 117 / 78 / ECSC
                                                     of 18 January 1978
               imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain types of haema
                                          tite pig iron originating in Canada
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN                                   Whereas, with regard to injury to the industry
COMMUNITIES,                                                     concerned, the evidence submitted to the Commis
                                                                 sion shows that, on the one hand, imports into the
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European            Community of the products originating in Canada
Coal and Steel Community, and in partcular Articles              have risen from 103 000 tonnes in 1975 to 87 000
74 and 86 thereof,                                               tonnes in the first six months of 1977 and that, as a
                                                                 result, they have been able to acquire, in the whole of
Having regard to Commission recommendation                       the Community, a market share of about 40 % , and
77/329 /ECSC on protection against dumping or the                that, on the other hand, the Community iron and
granting of bounties or subsidies by countries which             steel industry is in a crisis situation characterized by a
are not members of the European Coal and Steel
                                                                 reduction of about 25 % in the production of haema
Community (•), as amended by recommendation No
                                                                 tite pig iron between 1975 and 1977 and that as a
3004/77/ECSC (2), and in particular Articles 15 and 19
thereof,                                                         result, the Community iron and steel industry
                                                                 recorded a reduction in profits or losses in most of the
Having heard the opinions expressed within the Advi             firms concerned ;
sory Committee provided for by recommendation
77/ 329 / ECSC,
                                                                 Whereas the import prices of deliveries originating in
Whereas the Commission has received a complaint,                 Canada are lower than the already low prices of the
submitted in the name of the relevant Community                  Community producers and thus accentuate the depres
industry, setting out evidence as to the existence of            sion of Community prices thereby causing material
dumping of certain types of haematite pig iron origi            injury to the Community industry or a major part of
nating in Canada and material injury resulting there            it ;
from ;
Whereas the Commission has published basis
prices (3) based on the lowest normal prices or costs of         Whereas immediate action has been requested by a
production in the supplying countries where normal               Member State :
conditions of competition prevail, including the costs
of transport, insurance and customs duties ;
Whereas the prices of imports into the Community of              Whereas, in the serious conditions being experienced
the products which are the subject of the complaint              by the Community steel industry, the interests of the
have been compared with these basis prices ;                     Community require immediate action ;
Whereas a preliminary examination of the matter
based on this comparison shows that these products               Whereas it is for the Commission, without prejudice
are offered for import within the Community (the                 to the results of the investigation opened in accor
British market) at prices lower than the basis prices            dance with Article 1 1 of recommendation 77/329/
and that dumping has taken place, the margin of                  ECSC, to decide promptly to apply provisional
which is constituted by this undercutting ;                      measures consisting of the imposition of a provisional
                                                                 anti-dumping duty on imports of the products
(») OJ No L 114, 5. 5. 1977, p. 6.                               concerned originating in Canada the rate of which
(2) OJ No L 352, 31 . 12. 1977, p. 13 .
(3) cf. Communication from the Commission of 31                  corresponds to the difference between the basis prices
    December 1977 concerning the basis prices of certain         published by the Commission for this product and its
    steel products, OJ No L 353, 31 . 12. 1977, p. 1 .           price on importation into the Community,
 ---pagebreak--- No L 19 /2                        Official Journal of the European Communities                             24. 1 . 78
MAKES THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION :                         tional upon the deposit ot security tor the amount of
                                                             the provisional duty.
                       Article 1
                                                                                Article 3
1 . A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby
imposed on the following products originating in            This recommendation shall be notified to the Member
Canada :                                                     States .
— haematite pig iron and cast iron containing less           It shall enter into force for each Member State on the
    than 0.1 % by weight of manganese,                       date of its publication in the Official Journal of the
— Common Customs Tariff subheading ex 73.01 B,               European Communities.
— NIMEXE code 73.01-27 .
                                                             Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 18 of
2. The amount of this duty shall be equal to the             recommendation 77/329/ECSC, it shall apply until
amount by which the effective price (basic price plus        the entry into force of an Act of the Commission
extras) established by contract, free frontier duty-paid,    either adopting definitive measures or extending the
is lower than the effective price (basic price plus          provisional duty, and in any event for a maximum
extras) published by the Commission for these                period of three months.
products .
3. The provisions in force for the collection of              Done at Brussels, 18 January 1978 .
customs duty shall apply to the collection of this duty.
                                                                                For the Commission
                        Article 2
                                                                                Wilhelm HAFERKAMP
The entry of the products described in Article 1 for
 consumption within the Community shall be condi                                            Vice-President


title: 2012/148/EU: Commission Recommendation of 9 March 2012 on preparations for the roll-out of smart metering systems

text:
               13.3.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 73/9

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
   of 9 March 2012
   on preparations for the roll-out of smart metering systems
   (2012/148/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Smart grids mark a new development on the path towards greater consumer empowerment, greater integration of renewable energy sources into the grid and higher energy efficiency and make a considerable contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to job creation and technological development in the Union.

               (2)

               In accordance with Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC (1) and Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC (2), Member States are required to ensure the implementation of smart metering systems that assist the active participation of consumers in the electricity supply and gas supply markets and implementation of those metering systems may be subject to an economic assessment of all the long-term costs and benefits to the market and the individual consumer or which form of smart metering is economically reasonable and cost-effective and which timeframe is feasible for their deployment.

               (3)

               The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 12 April 2011 on ‘Smart grids: from innovation to deployment’ (3) announces a number of measures, including monitoring Member States’ progress, establishing guidelines on key performance indicators and guidelines to define a methodology for the Member States’ plans for implementation of smart metering systems, along with cost-benefit analyses.

               (4)

               The Digital Agenda for Europe lists a set of appropriate measures, in particular on data protection in the Union, on network and information security, on cyber attacks and on functionalities for smart grids and metering. Member States, in collaboration with industry, the Commission and other stakeholders, should take appropriate measures to ensure a coherent approach.

               (5)

               One of the key tasks and preconditions for using smart metering systems is to find appropriate technical and legal solutions which safeguard protection of personal data as a fundamental right under Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Member States and stakeholders should ensure, especially in the initial phase of the roll-out of smart meters, that smart metering system applications are monitored and that fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals are respected.

               (6)

               Smart metering systems allow processing of data, including predominantly personal data. Moreover, the deployment of smart grids and smart metering systems should allow suppliers and network operators to evolve from a broad view of energy behaviour to detailed information on the energy behaviour of individual end-consumers.

               (7)

               The rights and obligations provided for by Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (4) and by Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (5) are fully applicable to smart metering which processes personal data, in particular in the use of publicly available electronic communications services for contractual and commercial relations with customers.

               (8)

               The opinions of the Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data set up in accordance Article 29 of Directive 95/46/EC provide guidance for identifying and developing ‘best available techniques’ to safeguard personal data and guarantee data security when data are processed in smart metering systems and smart grids.

               (9)

               In the light of the potential for deployment of smart grids, particular attention should be paid to security and protection of the personal data processed by smart metering systems. In this respect, data protection impact assessments should make it possible to identify from the start data protection risks in smart grid developments.

               (10)

               Data protection and information security features should be built into smart metering systems before they are rolled out and used extensively. Such features can effectively improve consumers’ control over the processing of personal data.

               (11)

               Member States should cooperate with industry and civil society stakeholders, in particular with national data protection authorities, to stimulate and support introduction of the ‘security and data protection by design’ principle at an early stage in the development of smart grids, particularly for the roll-out of smart metering systems.

               (12)

               Any party processing personal data in the context of smart metering systems should take all reasonable steps to ensure that data cannot be traced to an identified or identifiable person by any means likely to be used by either the network operator or any other third party, unless the data are processed in compliance with the applicable principles and legal rules on data protection.

               (13)

               The Commission Communication of 2 May 2007 on ‘Promoting data protection by privacy enhancing technologies (PETs)’ (6) sets out clear measures to achieve the goals of minimising the processing of personal data and using anonymous or pseudonymous data wherever possible by supporting the development of PETs and use thereof by data controllers and individuals.

               (14)

               A template developed at Union level for conducting data protection impact assessments will ensure that the provisions of this Recommendation are followed coherently across Member States.

               (15)

               An assessment of the data protection impact carried out by the operator and stakeholders prior to the roll-out of smart metering systems will provide the information necessary in order to take appropriate protective measures. Such measures should be monitored and reviewed throughout the lifetime of the smart meter.

               (16)

               In accordance with Directive 2009/72/EC, Member States are expected to complete, by 3 September 2012, a cost-benefit assessment of the roll-out of smart metering systems. Pursuant to the Communication from the Commission of 12 April 2011, the Commission considers it important to lay down criteria, a template and more general guidelines that would improve the depth and comparability of analyses. As suggested by the Smart Grid Task Force (7), the criteria should use quantifiable indicators.

               (17)

               Member States, in collaboration with industry, the Commission and other stakeholders, should take appropriate measures to disseminate information about and raise awareness of the potential benefits and risks associated with use of smart metering technology.

               (18)

               In this respect, Member States, in collaboration with industry, civil society associations and other stakeholders, should identify and disseminate examples of good practice in smart metering applications and take appropriate measures — such as large-scale pilot projects — to increase public awareness, as a prerequisite for wider take-up of this technology.

               (19)

               Establishment of a set of recommended functional requirements would enable Member States to achieve an optimum level of cost-efficiency in their roll-out plans more easily and simultaneously. Setting the same requirements would also provide regulators, the metering industry, network operators and suppliers with some indication of the approaches most likely to be taken in this sector.

               (20)

               Based on the guidelines of good practice defined by the European Regulators’ Group for Electricity and Gas (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ERGEG’) (8) and on the analysis of the first cost-benefit assessments communicated by Member States, the Commission sees benefit in recommending to Member States and regulators a set of common minimum functionalities for smart meters.

               (21)

               After consulting the European Data Protection Supervisor,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   I.   DATA PROTECTION AND SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS

               1.

               This section provides guidance to Member States on the design and operation of smart grids and smart metering systems ensuring the fundamental right to protection of personal data.

               2.

               This section also provides guidance on measures to be taken for the deployment of smart metering applications in order to ensure that national legislation implementing Directive 95/46/EC is, where applicable, respected when such technologies are deployed.

      Definitions

               3.

               Member States are invited to take note of the following definitions:

                           (a)

                           ‘smart grid’ (9) means an upgraded energy network to which two-way digital communication between the supplier and consumer, smart metering and monitoring and control systems have been added;

                           (b)

                           ‘smart metering system’ means an electronic system that can measure energy consumption, adding more information than a conventional meter, and can transmit and receive data using a form of electronic communication (10);

                           (c)

                           ‘data protection impact assessment’ means a systematic process for evaluating the potential impact of risks where processing operations are likely to present specific risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects by virtue of their nature, their scope or their purposes to be to carried by the controller or processor or the processor acting on the controller’s behalf;

                           (d)

                           ‘data protection by design’ requires to implement, having regard to the state of the art and the cost of implementation, both at the time of the determination of the means for processing and at the time of the processing itself, appropriate technical and organisational measures and procedures in such a way that the processing will meet the requirements of Directive 95/46/EC and ensure the protection of the rights of the data subject;

                           (e)

                           ‘data protection by default’ requires to implement mechanisms for ensuring that, by default, only those personal data are processed which are necessary for each specific purpose of the processing and are especially not collected or retained beyond the minimum necessary for those purposes, both in terms of the amount of the data and the time of their storage;

                           (f)

                           ‘best available techniques’ refer to the most effective and advanced stage in the development of activities and their methods of operation, which indicate the practical suitability of particular techniques for providing in principle the basis for complying with the EU data protection framework. They are designed to prevent or mitigate risks on privacy, personal data and security.

      Data protection impact assessments

               4.

               The data protection impact assessment should describe the envisaged processing operations, an assessment of the risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the measures envisaged to address the risks, safeguards, security measures and mechanisms to ensure the protection of personal data and to demonstrate compliance with Directive 95/46/EC, taking into account the rights and legitimate interests of data subjects and persons concerned.

               5.

               In order to guarantee protection of personal data throughout the Union, Member States should adopt and apply the data protection impact assessment template to be developed by the Commission and submitted to the Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data for its opinion within 12 months of publication of this Recommendation in the Official Journal of the European Union.

               6.

               When implementing this template, Member States should take into account the advice of the Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data.

               7.

               Member States should ensure that network operators and operators of smart metering systems, in line with their other obligations under Directive 95/46/EC, take the appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure protection of personal data.

               8.

               Member States should ensure that the entity processing personal data consults the Data Protection Supervisory Authority referred to in Article 28 of Directive 95/46/EC on the data protection impact assessment, prior to processing. This should allow the Authority to assess the compliance of the processing and, in particular, the risks for the protection of personal data of the data subject and the related safeguards.

               9.

               Member States should make sure that once the template for data protection impact assessments, as provided for in point 5, has been adopted, network operators implement the points 7 and 8 in accordance with it.

      Data protection by design and data protection by default settings

               10.

               Member States should strongly encourage network operators to incorporate data protection by design and data protection by default settings in deployment of smart grids and smart metering.

               11.

               Data protection by design and data protection by default settings should be incorporated in the methodologies of parties involved in development of smart grids when personal data are processed.

               12.

               Data protection by design should be implemented at legislative level (through legislation that has to be compliant with data protection laws) at technical level (by setting appropriate requirements in smart grid standards to ensure that infrastructure is fully consistent with the data protection laws) and organisational level (relating to processing).

               13.

               Data protection by default should be implemented so that the most data protection friendly option is provided to the customer as a default configuration.

               14.

               Member States should encourage European standardisation organisations to give preference to smart grid reference architectures based on data protection by design and on data protection by default.

               15.

               For the purposes of optimising transparency and the individual’s trust, Member States should encourage use of appropriate privacy certification mechanisms and data protection seals and marks, provided by independent parties.

               16.

               Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 8(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights require justifying any interference with the right to the protection of personal data. The legitimacy of interference must be assessed on a case-by-case basis in the light of the cumulative criteria of legality, necessity, legitimacy and proportionality. Any processing of personal data which interferes with the fundamental right to the protection of personal data within the smart grid and smart metering system therefore has to be necessary and proportional for it to be considered fully in compliance with the Charter.

               17.

               In order to mitigate the risks on personal data and security, Member States, in collaboration with industry, the Commission and other stakeholders, should support the determination of best available techniques for each common minimum functional requirement listed in point 42 of the Recommendation.

      Data protection measures

               18.

               When deciding the range of information allowed for processing within smart grids, Member States should take all necessary measures to impose, as much as possible, use of data rendered anonymous in such a way that the individual is no longer identifiable. In cases where personal data are to be collected, processed and stored, Member States should ensure that the data are appropriate and relevant. Data collection should be limited to the minimum necessary for the purposes for which data are processed and data should be kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data are processed.

               19.

               Processing of personal data by or within a smart metering system should be legitimate in accordance with one or more of the grounds listed in Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC. The opinion of the Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data on smart metering (11) should be taken into account.

               20.

               The processing of personal data by third parties offering value-added energy services should also be lawful and based on one or more of the six grounds for legitimate processing listed in Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC. Where consent is chosen as the ground for processing, the consent of the data subject should be freely given, specific, informed and explicit and be given separately for each value-added service. The data subject should have the right to withdraw his or her consent at any time. The withdrawal of consent should not affect the lawfulness of the processing based on consent before the withdrawal.

               21.

               Member States should clearly determine the roles and responsibilities of data controllers and data processors. They should be compatible with their respective obligations set out in Directive 95/46/EC.

               22.

               Member States should perform an analysis prior to launching processing operations, in order to determine to which extent suppliers and network operators need to store personal data for the purposes of maintaining and operating the smart grid and for billing. This analysis should allow Member States to determine, inter alia, if the periods for the storage of personal data currently set in national law are no longer than necessary for the purposes of operating smart grids. This must include mechanisms to ensure that the time limits set for the erasure of personal data and for a periodic review of the need to store personal data are observed.

               23.

               For the purpose of this analysis, each Member State should particularly take into account the following principles: the principle of data minimisation, the principle of transparency — by ensuring that the end consumer is informed in a user-friendly and intelligible form using clear and plain language, of the purposes, timing, circumstances, collection, storage and all other processing of personal data, and the principle of empowerment of the individual — by ensuring that the measures taken safeguard the individual’s rights.

      Data security

               24.

               Member States should ensure that personal data security is designed in at an early stage as part of the architecture of the network, within a data protection by design process. This should encompass measures to protect personal data against accidental or unlawful destruction or accidental loss and to prevent any unlawful forms of processing, in particular any unauthorised disclosure, dissemination, access to or alteration of personal data.

               25.

               The use of encrypted channels is recommended as it is one of the most effective technical means against misuse.

               26.

               Member States should take into account that all present and future components of smart grids ensure compliance with all the ‘security-relevant’ standards developed by European standardisation organisations, including the smart grid information security essential requirements in the Commission’s standardisation mandate M/490. The international security standards should also be taken into account, in particular the ISO/IEC 27000 series (‘ISMS family of standards’).

               27.

               Member States should ensure that network operators identify security risks and the appropriate security measures to guarantee the adequate level of security and resilience of the smart metering systems. In this regard, network operators, in cooperation with national competent authorities and civil society organisations, should apply existing standards, guidelines and schemes and where not available develop a new one. Relevant guidelines published by the European Network Information and Security Agency (ENISA) should also be taken into account.

               28.

               Member States should ensure that in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/58/EC, in the event of a personal data breach, the controller notifies without undue delay (preferably not later than 24 hours after the breach has been established) the supervisory authority and the data subject, if the breach is likely to have an adverse effect on protection of his or her personal data.

      Information and transparency on smart metering

               29.

               Without prejudice to the obligations of data controllers, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC Member States should require that network operators develop and publish an accurate and clear information policy for each of their applications. The policy should include at least the items mentioned in Articles 10 and 11 of Directive 95/46/EC.
               Where personal data relating to a data subject are collected, the controller should also provide the data subject with at least the following information:

                           (a)

                           the identity and the contact details of the controller and of the controller’s representative and of the data protection officer, if any;

                           (b)

                           the purposes of the processing for which the personal data are intended, including the terms and general conditions and the legitimate interests pursued by the controller if the processing is based on Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC;

                           (c)

                           the period for which the personal data will be stored;

                           (d)

                           the right to ask the controller for access to and rectification or erasure of the personal data concerning the data subject or to object to the processing of such personal data;

                           (e)

                           the right to lodge a complaint with the supervisory authority referred to in Article 28 of Directive 95/46/EC and the contact details of the supervisory authority;

                           (f)

                           the recipients or categories of recipients of the personal data;

                           (g)

                           any further information necessary to guarantee fair processing in respect of the data subject, having regard to the specific circumstances in which the personal data are collected.

         II.   METHODOLOGY FOR THE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE LONG-TERM COSTS AND BENEFITS FOR THE ROLL-OUT OF SMART METERING SYSTEMS

               30.

               This section provides guidance to Member States along with a framework for cost-benefit analysis as a foundation for conducting a consistent, credible and transparent economic assessment of the long-term costs and benefits of the roll-out of smart metering.

               31.

               The economic assessment should follow the guidelines set out in the Annex and should always include the following four steps:

                           —

                           tailoring to local conditions,

                           —

                           cost-benefit analysis (hereinafter referred to as ‘CBA’),

                           —

                           sensitivity analysis,

                           —

                           performance assessment, externalities and social impact.

      Tailoring to local conditions

               32.

               When carrying out the economic assessment of the roll-out of smart metering, Member States or any competent authority that they designate should examine and take into consideration, where available, appropriate pilot programmes that have already implemented smart metering systems. They should also consult, where possible, actual field performance data and pertinent ‘real-life’ experience, in order to fine-tune their assumptions on technology choices and to optimise the associated costs and benefits and consumer engagement, both in terms of public awareness and use of smart metering systems.

               33.

               In order to perform the cost-benefit analysis, Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure that a minimum of two forecast scenarios are considered, one of them being ‘business as usual’ (‘do nothing and nothing happens’). In the case of electricity, the second scenario should be in line with the obligation imposed in Directive 2009/72/EC of an 80 % roll-out of smart metering by 2020 and should consider the set of common minimum functionalities laid down in Section III of this Recommendation. It is recommended to explore additional alternative scenarios. Such scenarios should also take into account synergies between existing and future energy-saving measures along with other forms of feedback and advice to consumers, especially the introduction of frequent billing or cost statements based on actual consumption rather than flat rates or estimated consumption. Member States should consider in their alternative scenarios the positive role that clear consumer information and price transparency, as well as competition on the manufacturers’ and providers’ side may have in the roll-out of smart metering.

               34.

               When setting the conditions and deciding on the hypotheses for running the different scenarios, the Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure that they conduct timely consultations on this subject with the national regulatory authorities and with promoters and enforcers of the roll-out of smart metering — which in most Member States are the distribution system operators — and with the owners of relevant pilot projects, where available.

               35.

               As regards, and during, the process of setting the framework conditions, Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure that all the appropriate communication infrastructure technologies, architectures and measures needed to guarantee interoperability and compliance with the available Union’s or international standards and best practices are taken into consideration. Furthermore, Member States or any competent authority that they designate should ensure that the assumptions underpinning the analysis are adapted to local circumstances, bearing in mind parameters such as geographical coverage, electricity demand, peak load and micro- and macroeconomic conditions. Section 2 of the Annex to this Recommendation contains a list of the parameters which the Member States should ensure are used in this operation.

      Cost-benefit analysis (CBA)

               36.

               The Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure that the CBA follows the supporting guidelines and the step-by-step methodological framework (the ‘seven CBA steps’) laid down in the Annex to this Recommendation. Furthermore, Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure a reasonable, transparent and well-documented calculation of all the expected costs and benefits in accordance with the logical sequential process proposed for estimating them. Costs that might potentially be incurred by the consumer through the roll-out of smart metering systems should be explicitly indicated in the CBA and set into comparison with long-term potential benefits for the consumers. In Annex I, tables 4 and 5 propose a non-exhaustive list of elements to be included in the CBA.

      Sensitivity analysis

               37.

               The Member States or any competent authority they designate should identify critical variables for the sensitivity analysis and report the magnitude of the variable range (minimum and maximum values of the critical variables identified) for the positive roll-out conditions where benefits exceed costs, as obtained from the sensitivity analyses they have performed. In addition, their analysis might also include the volatility responsiveness and possible control measures to keep the value of the variable within the desired range.

      Performance assessment, externalities and social impact

               38.

               When assessing the merits of deployment, externalities (such as on environment or health), the impact of public policy measures and social benefits expected from the roll-out of smart metering, the Member States or any competent authority they designate should ensure that appropriate weighting factors, complementing the quantitative results of the previous steps of the CBA, are taken into account.
               The Annex to this Recommendation provides a list of references for other related benefits.

         III.   COMMON MINIMUM FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SMART METERING SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRICITY

               39.

               This section is based on best practice from early CBAs for smart metering of electricity carried out in 11 Member States. It provides guidance on measures to be taken to ensure that Member States make due use of appropriate interoperability and standards for smart metering systems currently being developed under Mandates M/441, M/468 and M/490 and of best practice.

               40.

               Member States are provided with guidance on a set of common minimum functional requirements for smart metering of electricity that would enable them to identify common means of achieving cost-efficiencies in their roll-out plans. This could in turn serve Member States, metering suppliers and network operators as a common basis for their own cost-benefit analyses and investments to facilitate the procurement associated with roll-out and provide regulators with European reference definitions.

               41.

               This section also provides guidance on provisions to secure consumer benefits and contribute to increases in energy efficiency. It should facilitate the linking of smart metering systems with standardised interfaces equipped with consumer oriented tools that combine consumption data and cost information, encouraging consumer interest in energy saving actions and response to demand. This approach should be fully taken into account when analysing the costs and benefits of the roll-out of smart metering of electricity in line with Union legislation.

      Common minimum functional requirements

               42.

               Every smart metering system for electricity should offer at least all the functionalities listed below.

                           For the customer:

                                       (a)

                                       Provide readings directly to the customer and any third party designated by the consumer. This functionality is essential in a smart metering system, as direct consumer feedback is essential to ensure energy savings on the demand side. There is a significant consensus on provision of standardised interfaces which would enable energy management solutions in ‘real time’, such as home automation, and different demand response schemes and facilitate secure delivery of data directly to the customer. Accurate, user-friendly and timely readings provided directly from the interface of customer’s choice to the customer and any third party designated by the consumer are strongly recommended since they are the key to running demand response services, taking ‘online’ energy-saving decisions and effective integration of distributed energy resources. In order to stimulate energy saving, Member States are strongly recommended to ensure that final customers using smart metering systems are equipped with a standardised interface which provides visualised individual consumption data to the consumer.

                                       (b)

                                       Update the readings referred to in point (a) frequently enough to allow the information to be used to achieve energy savings. This functionality relates purely to the demand side, namely the end customer. If consumers are to rely on the information provided by the system, they need to see the information responding to their action. The rate has to be adapted to the response time of the energy-consuming or energy-producing products. The general consensus is that an update rate of every 15 minutes is needed at least. Further developments and new energy services are likely to lead to faster communications. It is also recommended that the smart metering system should be able to store customer consumption data for a reasonable time in order to allow the customer and any third party designated by the consumer to consult and retrieve data on past consumption. This should make it possible to calculate costs related to consumption.

                           For the metering operator:

                                       (c)

                                       Allow remote reading of meters by the operator. This functionality relates to the supply side (metering operators). There is a broad consensus that this is a key functionality.

                                       (d)

                                       Provide two-way communication between the smart metering system and external networks for maintenance and control of the metering system. This functionality relates to metering. There is a broad consensus that this is a key functionality.

                                       (e)

                                       Allow readings to be taken frequently enough for the information to be used for network planning. This functionality relates to both the demand side and the supply side.

                           For commercial aspects of energy supply:

                                       (f)

                                       Support advanced tariff systems. This functionality relates to both the demand side and the supply side. Smart metering systems should include advance tariff structures, time-of-use registers and remote tariff control. This should help consumers and network operators to achieve energy efficiencies and save costs by reducing the peaks in energy demand. This functionality, together with functionalities referred to in points (a) and (b), is a key driving force for empowering the consumer and for improving the energy efficiency of the supply system. It is strongly recommended that the smart metering system allows automatic transfer of information about advanced tariffs options to the final customers, e.g. via standardised interface mentioned under (a).

                                       (g)

                                       Allow remote on/off control of the supply and/or flow or power limitation. This functionality relates to both the demand side and the supply side. It provides additional protection for the consumer by allowing grading in the limitations. It speeds up processes such as when moving home — the old supply can be disconnected and the new supply connected quickly and simply. It is needed for handling technical grid emergencies. It may, however, introduce additional security risks which need to be minimised.

                           For security and data protection:

                                       (h)

                                       Provide secure data communications. This functionality relates to both the demand side and the supply side. High levels of security are essential for all communications between the meter and the operator. This applies both to direct communications with the meter and to any messages passed via the meter to or from any appliances or controls on the consumer’s premises. For local communications within the consumer’s premises, both privacy and data protection are required.

                                       (i)

                                       Fraud prevention and detection. This functionality relates to the supply side: security and safety in the case of access. The strong consensus shows the importance attached to this functionality. This is necessary to protect the consumer, for example from hacking access, and not just for fraud prevention.

                           For distributed generation:

                                       (j)

                                       Provide import/export and reactive metering. This functionality relates to both the demand side and the supply side. Most countries are providing the functionalities necessary to allow renewable and local micro-generation, thus future-proofing meter installation. It is recommended that this function should be installed by default and activated/disabled in accordance with the wishes and needs of the consumer.

      Follow-up

               43.

               Member States should take all necessary measures to follow this Recommendation and to draw it to the attention of all stakeholders involved in designing and operating smart grid applications within the Union.

               44.

               Member States should report to the Commission by 3 September 2012 on the results of their cost-benefit analysis regarding the roll-out of smart metering systems and on the measures and plans they have adopted in relation to this Recommendation.

               45.

               The Commission intends to assess, in the light of this Recommendation, the economic appraisals reported on the roll-out of smart metering.

      Addressees

               46.

               This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States and to any competent authority they designate to be involved in the economic assessment of smart metering systems.

      Done at Brussels, 9 March 2012.

            For the Commission

         Günther OETTINGER

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 211, 14.8.2009, p. 55.

      (2)  OJ L 211, 14.8.2009, p. 94.

      (3)  COM(2011) 202 final.

      (4)  OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.

      (5)  OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.

      (6)  COM(2007) 228 final.

      (7)  http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/smartgrids/taskforce_en.htm

      (8)  ERGEG Guidelines of Good Practice (GGP) on regulatory aspects of smart meters for electricity and gas (Ref. E10-RMF-29-05).

      (9)  The European Smart Grid Task Force defines smart grids as energy networks that can efficiently integrate the behaviour of all users connected to them in order to ensure an economically efficient, sustainable power system with low losses and high quality and security of supply and safety: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/smartgrids/doc/expert_group1.pdf

      (10)  Interpretative note on Directive 2009/72/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and Directive 2009/73/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas — Retail markets, p. 7.

      (11)  Opinion No 183 of the Article 29 Working Party on smart metering, April 2011.

      ANNEX

         Guidelines on the methodology for the economic assessment of the long-term costs and benefits of the roll-out of smart metering in accordance with Annex I to Directives 2009/72/EC and 2009/73/EC

      1.   REFERENCES

                  1.1.

                  European Commission — Joint Research Centre Institute for Energy and Transport (2012). ‘Guidelines for conducting a cost-benefit analysis of smart grid projects’, available at: http://ses.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

                  1.2.

                  European Commission — Joint Research Centre Institute for Energy and Transport (2012). ‘Guidelines for cost-benefit analysis of smart metering deployment’, available at: http://ses.jrc.ec.europa.eu/

                  1.3.

                  European Regulators’ Group for Electricity and Gas. ‘Final Guidelines of Good Practice on Regulatory Aspects of Smart Metering for Electricity and Gas’, February 2011, Ref.: E10-RMF-29-05 http://www.smartgridscre.fr/media/documents/ERGEG_Guidelines_of_good_practice.pdf

                  1.4.

                  European Commission Task Force for Smart Grids (2010), Expert Group 3: Roles and responsibilities of actors involved in smart grids deployment, ‘Merit deployment matrix’ available at: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/gas_electricity/smartgrids/doc/expert_group3_annex.xls

                  1.5.

                  Proposal for a Directive on energy efficiency and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC [COM(2011) 370 final, 22 June 2011]

                  1.6.

                  SEC(2011) 288 final — Commission Staff Working Document ‘Impact Assessment’ accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘A roadmap for moving to a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050’ (COM(2011) 112 final) (SEC(2011) 289 final)

            2.   NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF VARIABLES/DATA TO BE SET/COLLECTED IN THE CASE OF ELECTRICITY

                  Variables/data to be set/collected

                  Unit

                  Projected variation of energy consumption

                  %

                  Projected variation of energy prices

                  %

                  Peak load transfer

                  %

                  Electricity losses at transmission and distribution level

                  %

                  Estimated non-supplied minutes

                  Number of minutes

                  Value of lost load; value of supply

                  EUR/kWh

                  Discount rate

                  %

                  Hardware costs (e.g. smart meter, GPRS/PLC modem, etc.)

                  EUR

                  Number of smart metering systems to be installed

                  Number of smart meters

                  Installation costs for smart metering system

                  EUR

                  Life expectancy of smart metering system

                  Number of years

                  Meter reading costs

                  EUR/year

                  Telecommunication success rate

                  %

                  Inflation rate

                  %

                  Cost reduction associated with technology maturity

                  %

                  Implementation schedule

                  Number of smart meters/year

                  Percentage of meters placed in rural v urban areas

                  %

                  Carbon costs

                  EUR/tonne

            3.   FLOW-CHART OF STEPS TO PERFORM COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

      In cases where the analysis permits the calculation of costs and benefits of resulting changes to carbon emissions, it is recommended that the analysis considers the carbon prices projected both in the Commission reference and decarbonisation scenarios (1).
      4.   NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF COSTS TO CONSIDER FOR THE ROLL-OUT OF SMART METERING SYSTEMS IN THE CASE OF ELECTRICITY

                  General category

                  Type of cost to be tracked for roll-out and to be estimated for the baseline

                  CAPEX

                  Investment in the smart metering systems

                  Investment in IT

                  Investment in communications

                  Investment in in-home displays (if applicable)

                  Generation

                  Transmission

                  Distribution

                  Avoided investment in conventional meters (negative cost, to be added to the list of benefits)

                  OPEX

                  IT maintenance costs

                  Network management and front-end costs

                  Communication/data transfer costs (inc. GPRS, radio communications, etc.)

                  Scenario management costs

                  Replacement/failure of smart metering systems (incremental)

                  Revenue reductions (e.g. through more efficient consumption)

                  Generation

                  Distribution

                  Transmission

                  Meter reading

                  Call centre/customer care

                  Training costs (e.g. customer care personnel and installation personnel)

                  Reliability

                  Restoration costs

                  Environmental

                  Emission costs (CO2 control equipment, operation and emission permits)

                  Energy security

                  Cost of fossil fuels consumed to generate power

                  Cost of fossil fuels for transportation and operation

                  Other

                  Cost of consumer engagement programmes

                  Sunk costs of previously installed (traditional) meters

            5.   NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF FORMULAE FOR QUANTIFICATION OF BENEFITS IN THE CASE OF ELECTRICITY

                  Benefit

                  Sub-benefit

                  Monetisation calculation

                  Reduction in meter reading and operations costs

                  Reduced meter operations costs

                  Value (EUR) = [Estimated cost reductions with remote meter operations (EUR/year)] Roll-out – [Estimated cost reductions with remote meter operations (EUR/year) × Communications failure rate (%/100)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced meter reading costs

                  Value (EUR) = [cost with local meter readings (EUR)]Baseline – [Estimated cost of obtaining local ‘disperse’ meter readings (EUR)]Roll-out scenario

                  Where:
                  [cost with local meter readings (EUR)]Baseline= number of clients in LV (2) × Historical meter reading cost/client/year (EUR)
                  [Estimated cost of obtaining local ‘disperse’ meter readings (EUR)]Roll-out scenario= [number of clients in LV × % of clients not included in the roll-out × Average disperse reading cost per client (EUR/client)] + [number of clients in LV × % of clients included in the roll-out × Communications failure rate (%) × Average disperse reading cost per client (EUR/number of clients)

                  Reduced billing costs

                  Value (EUR) = [number of clients in LV × Billing cost/client/year (EUR)]Baseline – [number of clients in LV × Billing cost/client/year (EUR)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced call centre/customer care costs

                  Value (EUR) = [number of clients in LV × Customer care cost/client/year (EUR)]Baseline – [number of clients in LV × Customer care cost/client/year (EUR)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduction in operational and maintenance costs

                  Reduced maintenance costs of assets

                  Value (EUR) = [Direct costs relating to maintenance of assets(EUR/year)]Baseline – [Direct costs relating to maintenance of assets (EUR/year)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced costs of equipment breakdowns

                  Value (EUR) = [Cost of equipment breakdowns (EUR/year)]Baseline – [Cost of equipment breakdowns (EUR/year)]Roll-out scenario

                  Deferred/avoided distribution capacity investments

                  Deferred distribution capacity investments due to asset remuneration

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support growing capacity (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years) × Remuneration rate on investment (%/100)

                  Deferred distribution capacity investments due to asset amortisation

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support growing capacity (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years) × number of years capacity asset amortisation

                  Deferred/avoided transmission capacity investments

                  Deferred transmission capacity investments due to asset remuneration

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support growing capacity (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years) × Remuneration rate on investment (%/100)

                  Deferred transmission capacity investments due to asset amortisation

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support growing capacity (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years) × number of years capacity asset amortisation

                  Deferred/avoided generation capacity investments

                  Deferred generation investments for peak load plants

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support peak load generation (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years)

                  Deferred generation investments for spinning reserves

                  Value (EUR) = Annual investment to support spinning reserve generation (EUR/year) × Time deferred (number of years)

                  Reduction of technical losses of electricity

                  Reduced technical losses of electricity

                  Value (EUR) = Reduced losses via energy efficiency (EUR/year) + Reduced losses via voltage control (EUR/year) + Reduced losses at transmission level (EUR/year)

                  Electricity cost savings

                  Consumption reduction

                  Value (EUR) = Energy rate (EUR/MWh) × Total energy consumption at LV (MWh) × Estimated % of consumption reduction with roll-out (%/100)

                  Peak load transfer

                  Value (EUR) = Wholesale margin difference between peak and non-peak generation margin (EUR/MWh) × % Peak load transfer (%/100) × Total energy consumption at LV (MWh)

                  Reduction of commercial losses

                  Reduced electricity theft

                  Value (EUR) = % of clients with energy theft (%/100) × Estimated average price value of energy load not recorded/client/year (EUR) × Total number of clients LV (number of clients)

                  Recovered revenue relating to ‘contracted power’ fraud

                  Value (EUR) = % of clients with ‘contracted power fraud’ (%/100) × Estimated price value of contracted power not paid/client/year (EUR) × Total number of clients LV (number of clients)

                  Recovered revenue relating to incremental ‘contracted power’

                  Value (EUR) = % of clients requesting incremental contracted power after smart metering system installation (%/100) × Average estimated value of recovered revenue due to incremental contracted power (EUR) × Total number of clients LV (number of clients)

                  Reduction of outage times (thanks to advanced monitoring and real-time network information)

                  Value of service

                  Value (EUR) = Total energy consumed MV (3) + LV (MWh)/minutes per year (number/year) × Average non-supplied minutes/year (number/year) × Value of lost load (EUR/MWh) × % Decrease in outage time (%/100)

                  Reduced cost of client indemnification

                  Value (EUR) = Average annual client indemnifications (EUR) × % Reduction of client compensations

                  Reduction of CO2 emissions

                  Reduced CO2 emissions due to reduced line losses

                  Value (EUR) = [Line losses (MWh) × CO2 content (tonnes/MWh) × Value of CO2 (EUR/tonne)]Baseline –
                  [Line losses (MWh) × CO2 content (tonnes/MWh) × Value of CO2 (EUR/tonne)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced CO2 emissions due to wider spread of low-carbon generation sources (as a consequence of the roll-out of smart metering)

                  Value (EUR) = [CO2 emissions (tonnes) × Value of CO2 (EUR/tonne)] Baseline – [CO2 emissions (tonnes) × Value of CO2 (EUR/tonne)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced CO2 emissions due to truck rolls of field personnel

                  Value (EUR) = Avoided number litres of fuel (number) × Cost per litre of fuel (EUR)

                  Reduced fuel usage due to truck rolls of field personnel

                  Value (EUR) = Avoided number litres of fuel (number) × Cost per litre of fuel (EUR)

                  Reduction of air pollution (Particulate Matters, NOx, SO2)

                  Reduced air pollutants emissions due to reduced line losses

                  For each pollutant:
                  Value (EUR) = [Line losses (MWh) × air pollutant content (unit/MWh) × cost of air pollutant (EUR/unit)] Baseline –
                  Line losses (MWh) × air pollutant content (unit/MWh) × cost of air pollutant (EUR/unit)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced air pollutants emissions due to wider diffusion of low carbon generation sources (as a consequence of the roll-out of smart metering)

                  For each pollutant:
                  Value (EUR) = [air pollutant Emissions (unit) × cost of air pollutant(EUR/unit)] Baseline – [air pollutant Emissions (unit) × cost of air pollutant(EUR/unit)]Roll-out scenario

                  Reduced air pollutants emissions due to truck rolls of field personnel

                  Value (EUR) = Avoided number litre of fuel (number) × Cost per litre of fuel avoided (EUR)

         Note: For the ‘cost of air pollutants’ (particulate matters, NOx, SO2), it is recommended to consult the Clean Vehicles Directive – Directive 2009/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles (4), and the ‘CAFÉ’ (Clean Air For Europe) air quality benefits’ quantification process.

         (1)  Annex 7.10 to Commission Staff Working Document SEC(2011) 288 final — ‘Impact Assessment’: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SEC:2011:0288:FIN:EN:PDF

         (2)  Low voltage.

         (3)  Medium voltage.

         (4)  OJ L 120, 15.5.2009, p. 5.


title: Council Recommendation of 12 February 2008 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Ninth EDF) for the financial year 2006

text:
               15.2.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 41/24

      COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

   of 12 February 2008
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Ninth EDF) for the financial year 2006
   (2008/118/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and amended in Luxembourg (Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) on 25 June 2005 (2),
   Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid under the Financial Protocol to ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (3) setting up, amongst others, the Ninth European Development Fund (Ninth EDF), and in particular Article 32(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the 9th European Development Fund (4), and in particular Articles 96 to 103 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the Ninth EDF as at 31 December 2006 and the Court of Auditors’ report concerning the financial year 2006 together with the Commission’s replies (5),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Ninth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

               (2)

               The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Ninth EDF during the financial year 2006 has been satisfactory,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the Ninth EDF for the financial year 2006.

      Done at Brussels, 12 February 2008.

            For the Council

            The President

         A. BAJUK

      (1)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

      (2)  OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4.

      (3)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 355.

      (4)  OJ L 83, 1.4.2003, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ C 259, 31.10.2007, p. 1.


title: Commission Recommendation of 28 October 2009 facilitating the release of the digital dividend in the European Union (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               24.11.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/24

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 28 October 2009
   facilitating the release of the digital dividend in the European Union
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2009/848/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 211 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Council, in its Conclusions of 12 June 2008, invited the Commission to prepare a coherent basis for the coordinated usage of spectrum released as a result of the switch-over from analogue to digital broadcasting (the digital dividend), on a non-exclusive, non-mandatory basis. This should include notably the technical aspects, the cost analysis and the socioeconomic impact of different options and the regulatory conditions for accessing spectrum.

               (2)

               The European Parliament, in its Resolution of 24 September 2008 on reaping the full benefits of the digital dividend in Europe: a common approach to the use of the spectrum released by the digital switchover (1), also underlined the potential benefits of a coordinated approach to the usage of spectrum in the European Union in terms of economies of scale, the development of interoperable wireless services and the avoidance of fragmentation leading to suboptimal use of that scarce resource. Therefore, the Parliament called for active cooperation between Member States to overcome national obstacles for the efficient (re)allocation of the digital dividend.

               (3)

               In its earlier Conclusions of 1 December 2005, the Council had already invited Member States to complete switchover by 2012 as far as possible.

               (4)

               Under the electronic communications regulatory framework, Member States should encourage efficient use and ensure effective management of radio spectrum. In combination with the principle of better regulation, this implies that radio spectrum must be allocated in such a way as to bring the highest benefit to society in cultural, economic and social terms. However, in light of the diverse national contexts and legacy situations, this principle must be applied gradually and with sufficient flexibility.

               (5)

               The potential social and economic benefits from future services that will operate in the digital dividend cannot be fully realised as long as the radio spectrum previously or currently used for analogue broadcasting is not released. Moreover, digital terrestrial television technology is increasingly available for users and consumers at affordable prices. Several Member States have already switched off analogue broadcasting technologies and several others have decided to ensure that all broadcasting uses digital technology by 2012.

               (6)

               It is therefore essential to ensure a coherent policy at European level regarding the transition to digital technology and the switch-off of analogue broadcasting, so that this can be completed as quickly as possible in line with the early plans of certain Member States. Where state subsidies are provided to this end, this should be in accordance with state aid rules.

               (7)

               The current economic crisis has underlined the urgency of making sufficient radio spectrum available for the development of high-speed wireless infrastructure to provide broadband services, in order to create productivity gains and cost savings in the broader economy. This is in line with the goals of the Economic Recovery Plan, endorsed by the European Council meeting of 12 December 2008, which sets a target of 100 % broadband coverage to be achieved between 2010 and 2013. As stressed in the Competitiveness Council Key Issues Paper of March 2009, this can only be completely achieved by using wireless technologies, for example in rural areas where wired infrastructure is impractical. Timely switch-off of analogue broadcasting is therefore vital to ensure that the new services made possible using the radio spectrum released by the digital dividend, will effectively contribute to the EU’s economic recovery efforts.

               (8)

               International agreements, including those reached at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Regional Radiocommunication Conference (RRC-06) in June 2006 and the ITU World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-07) in November 2007, have already concluded on the allocation of part of the digital dividend frequencies, the 790-862 MHz sub-band, on a co-primary basis to mobile services in addition to broadcasting and fixed services as from 2015, or even before that date subject, where necessary, to technical coordination with other countries. Moreover, several Member States have already announced that they are planning or actively considering opening up the 790-862 MHz sub-band to services other than high-power terrestrial broadcasting.

               (9)

               In the light of these developments, there is an urgent need to develop a coordinated approach to the digital dividend in the European Union in order to avoid a fragmented situation emerging among Member States. Otherwise the establishment of a single market for services and equipment will be hampered, the related economies of scale will be lost and the digital dividend will not be able to contribute effectively to economic recovery at EU level. In addition, to help to achieve this goal, the Commission could provide assistance to Member States in their negotiations with non-EU countries on a bilateral or multilateral basis.

               (10)

               The Radio Spectrum Policy Group, in its Opinion of 18 September 2009 on the digital dividend, recommended that the European Commission acts no later than 31 October 2009 in order to minimise uncertainty at EU level regarding the ability of Member States to make available the 790-862 MHz sub-band, so as to promote growth, competition and innovation in the provision of electronic communications networks and services. It also encouraged Member States that are making available the 790-862 MHz sub-band for new and/or enhanced electronic communications networks and services to apply, in particular, the principles of service and technology neutrality under conditions which ensure that broadcasting services are not adversely impacted.

               (11)

               Studies on the socioeconomic aspects of a coordinated approach towards the digital dividend have shown significant social and economic benefits in coordinating at EU level the allocation of a part of the digital dividend for new uses such as broadband services in rural areas and more generally for reducing the broadband gap arising from the lack of availability of these services.

               (12)

               For these reasons, the Commission plans to adopt within the coming months a Decision setting the harmonised technical requirements for the future use of the 790-862 MHz sub-band for low- and medium-power electronic communications networks. This technical implementing measure should be adopted with the assistance of the Radio Spectrum Committee pursuant to Article 4 of the Radio Spectrum Decision (2). The harmonised technical conditions would have to be applied by a Member State only if and when that Member State decides to open the band for services other than broadcasting.

               (13)

               In order to prepare this technical harmonisation, the Commission mandated the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (the CEPT) to define technical conditions applicable to the 790-862 MHz sub-band which are optimised for, but not limited to, wireless fixed and/or mobile communications networks. As a result, the CEPT has provided the Commission with several reports which contain the least restrictive technical conditions and associated guidance, to be applied to base stations and terminal stations operating in the 790-862 MHz sub-band, in order to manage the risk of harmful interference.

               (14)

               As the further development of the 790-862 MHz sub-band for high-power broadcasting in one Member State could severely impede the use of part of the digital dividend spectrum for potential new uses in neighbouring Member States due to the fact that high-power signals travel over long distances and can cause harmful interference, Member States, while not being obliged to withdraw high power broadcasting transmitters or to open up the sub-band to electronic communications services, should facilitate future reorganisation of the sub-band to allow, on the long term, optimum use by low- and medium-power electronic communications services.

               (15)

               It is therefore essential that Member States refrain from introducing national measures that would compromise the implementation of Community acts applying to the same band, in particular any technical harmonisation measure for new electronic communications services to be deployed in the 790-862 MHz sub-band,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

               1.

               That Member States should take all the measures necessary to ensure that all terrestrial television broadcasting services use digital transmission technology and cease using analogue transmission technology on their territory by 1 January 2012.

               2.

               That Member States should support regulatory efforts towards harmonised conditions of use in the Community of the 790-862 MHz sub-band for electronic communications services other than, and in addition to, broadcasting services, and refrain from any action that might hinder or impede the deployment of such communications services in that sub-band.

               3.

               This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 28 October 2009.

            For the Commission

         Viviane REDING

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  2008/2099(INI).

      (2)  Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 1).