Day notes held by DG AGRI, document archival policy

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS made this Informationsfreiheit request to Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Die Antwort auf diese Anfrage ist lange im Rückstand. Nach gesetzlicher Vorschrift sollte Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung Ihnen inzwischen unter allen Umständen geantwortet haben. (Details). Sie können sich beschweren, indem sie Interne Prüfung beantragen .

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Dear Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI),

Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting documents which contain the following information:

A. DAY NOTES HELD BY DG AGRI

Article 16 of Annex 2 of the Commission Decision of 15/11/2005 C(2005)4416 amending its Rules of Procedure (2005/960/EC, Euratom) ‘RULES GIVING EFFECT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE’ reads:

“Rules giving effect to Article 16:
Information concerning decisions adopted

Day notes relating to decisions adopted by written procedure and by empowerment procedure shall be produced and circulated by the Secretary-General within 24 hours of their approval.

Day notes relating to decisions adopted by delegation procedure and by subdelegation procedure shall be made available in computerised form. ”

I would appreciate if DG AGRI would provide me copies of the day notes it holds pursuant to the above provision:

1. The earliest day note of year 2006, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

2. The latest day note of year 2006, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

3. The earliest day note of year 2007, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

4. The latest day note of year 2007, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

5. The earliest day note of year 2008, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

6. The latest day note of year 2008, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

7. The earliest day note of year 2009, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

8. The latest day note of year 2009, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

9. The earliest day note of year 2010, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

10. The latest day note of year 2010, as indicated by the date the day note was drawn up, concerning a DG AGRI Commission Decision adopted by the written procedure of the Commission’s rule of procedure.

B. DG AGRI DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS HOLDING COPIES OF DAY NOTES – DG AGRI ARCHIVAL POLICY OF DEPARTMENTAL DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Presumably, the day notes whose copies DG AGRI holds/held are/were kept in DG AGRI electronic document management systems (hereafter ‘the document systems’).

The word ‘archival’ in the combined terms of ‘archival policy’ and ‘archival of documents’ as regards the DG AGRI departmental document management systems refers to moving from on-line storage (where access to an identified document is nearly instantaneous, or a matter of less than a minute) to secondary storage or backup storage (where access to an identified document takes from minutes to several hours).

The notion of ‘DG AGRI electronic document management systems’ is about a functional and logical organisation of documents, and does not necessarily mean a stand-alone system operated by DG AGRI. It may well refer to a Commission-wide electronic document management system, in which DG AGRI ‘held’ documents appear to an official as distinct and held in different ‘locations’ in relation to those of another Directorate-General.

I would appreciate if DG AGRI would provide me with copies of the following documents:

11. The backup and archival policy of ‘the document systems’ in the period 1/1/2006 to 31/10/2010.

12. A sample report, or equivalent, generated by ‘the document system’ as regards an archival of documents stored in that system 2007.

It worth noting that the requested documents under #11 and #12 above are likely to be held by the DG AGRI informatics unit(s) and sector(s).

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Drosos,

We refer to your e-mail dated 25/10/2013 in which you make a request for
access to documents.

For the first part of your request related DAY NOTES HELD BY DG AGRI, we
would like to inform you that DG AGRI does not receive copies of the day
notes created by SG. For this reason, we are unable to handle your
application. Therefore, we invite you to send your request to SG at the
address: [1][email address].

Please note that the description given in your application does not enable
to identify concrete documents which would correspond to your request. For
this reason, we invite you to provide us with more detailed information on
the documents which you seek to obtain, such as the decisions of DG AGRI
with which the day notes are related, references, dates or periods during
which the documents would have been produced, etc…

If you need assistance in clarifying or specifying your application, you
can contact:

 

·         by email: [email address]

·         by telephone: (+32) (0) 2 29 60997

The handling of your application will start running when we receive the
requested clarifications.

For your information, some day notes are published at the Register of the
Commission documents:

[2]http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/...

In order to search the day notes, please introduce the year you wish, as
type of document choose SEC and in the title you put "notes".

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Vassiliki ANAGNOSTOU
Access to documents coordinator
European Commission
DG Agriculture and Rural Development
Unit K.2

L130 4/70
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 29 598 94
[3][email address]

 

Zitate anzeigen

Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Drosos,

We refer to your e-mail dated 25/10/2013 in which you make a request for
access to documents.

For the second part of your request related to DG AGRI ARCHIVAL POLICY OF
DEPARTMENTAL DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, the description given in your
application does not enable us to identify concrete documents which would
correspond to your request.

 

We therefore invite you, to provide us with more detailed information on
the documents which you seek to obtain, such as references, dates or
periods during which the documents would have been produced, persons or
bodies who drafted the documents etc…

If you need assistance in clarifying or specifying your application, you
can contact us:

·         by email to: [1][email address]

·         by telephone to: (+32) (0) 2 29 59894

The handling of your application will start running when we receive the
requested clarifications.

Thank you in advance for your understanding.

Yours faithfully,

 

Vassiliki ANAGNOSTOU
Access to documents coordinator
European Commission
DG Agriculture and Rural Development
Unit K.2

L130 4/70
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 29 598 94
[2][email address]

 

Zitate anzeigen

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Dear Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI),

I refer to the DG AGRI initial response of 30 October, which was set out in terms of two distinct emails, one about the day notes http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/day_n... and another one about the archival policy and plans http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/day_n....

The initial response does not indicate a GestDem reference number, which seems to be a departure from the norm of every other Directorate-General and the Transparency Unit. By definition, a registration of an application in an administrative procedure entails the assignment of a unique reference number.

I would therefore be obliged if DG AGRI would promptly notify me the GestDem reference number and the Ares reference number of the DG AGRI initial response. Such reference numbers may be quoted in future correspondence within the framework of one of more administrative procedures.

The DG AGRI reply "For the first part of your request related DAY NOTES HELD BY DG AGRI, we would like to inform you that DG AGRI does not receive copies of the day notes created by SG." essentially states that a provision of the Commission's rule of procedures has been disregarded for over five years, which is in itself most astonishing. In a separate application the undersigned will apply for the release of all documents prescribing that Article 16 of Annex 2 of the Commission Decision of 15/11/2005 C(2005)4416 was to be disregarded.

Turning to the requests under points 11 and 12, from the framing and wording of the DG AGRI initial response it is inferred that DG AGRI did not take into consideration, first, that the requests are about the "The backup and archival policy", and second that the applicant had suggested that the DG AGRI Informatics Unit would probably hold the requested documents. It seems that the K.2 has completely overlooked the "backup" aspect of the request.

It is respectfully submitted that if the K.2 Unit would have consulted the Informatics Unit, then the latter Unit would most probably have identified what types of documents fall under the scope of the least two requests.

It is recalled that article 6(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 reads:

If an application is not sufficiently precise, the institution shall ask the applicant to clarify the application and shall assist the applicant in doing so, for example, by providing information on the use of the public registers of documents.

In the applicant's view, requests (11) and (12) are defined with a precision enabling DG AGRI to identify candidate documents for release, perhaps after consultations between the K.2 Unit and the DG AGRI Informatics Unit. The K.2 Unit might also ask the Secretariat-General and DG DIGIT Units tasked with the Document Management in the Commission about what kind of documents belong to the type "The backup and archival policy of ‘the document systems’".

Requesting an applicant to identify with more precision "The backup and archival policy of ‘the document systems’..." instead of carrying out a more thorough search for documents along the above lines shifts the 'burden' of identifying concrete documents form the administrative department to the applicant.

Notwithstanding the above considerations the applicant suggests that the documents under requests (11) and (12) are held by the DG AGRI Units and Sectors tasked with Informatics and Document Management. The time-period is stated in the last two requests.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Mail Delivery System,

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

[email address]
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<[email address]>:
host s-dc-edg007-q.mail.ec.europa.eu [147.67.249.3]:
550 5.7.1 Email rejected. Your IP address 46.182.104.58 is blacklisted using SPAMCOP. Details:
Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?46.182.1....

Zitate anzeigen

Sent a follow up to Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung again.

Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

Mr Drosos,

We refer to your e-mail dated 05/11/2013.

I would like to inform you that your requests of 25/10/2013 were not registered in Gestdem because the description given in them does not enable us to identify concrete documents which would correspond to your requests. According our internal rules (COMMISSION DECISION of 5 December 2001 C (2001) 3714): "If an application is imprecise, as referred to in Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, the Commission shall invite the applicant to provide additional information making it possible to identify the documents requested; the deadline for reply shall run only from the time when the Commission has this information."

The registration of your request will be made as soon as we receive the clarifications requested.

Concerning the day notes, as indicated in our previous message I confirm that Day Notes are not addressed to our DG. Since 2013 you can find day notes in the public Register of the Commission documents accessible to all at the following link:
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/...

However, the Notes from 2006 cannot be retrieved via this tool. In this case I would re-direct you to SG as they are in charge of the register:
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/...

Please note that we already consulted the IT unit of DG AGRI since we received your request on 25/10/2013 who informed us that the request was unclear. DG AGRI uses the document management system of the Commission that is managed centrally. The local IT unit of DG AGRI is not in charge of that system nor its backup.

For your information, DG AGRI complies with the general rules of the archiving policy of the Commission:
http://ec.europa.eu/archival-policy/docs...

http://ec.europa.eu/archival-policy/docs...

We invite you once more to provide us with more detailed information on the documents which you seek to obtain, such as references, dates or periods during which the documents would have been produced, persons or bodies who drafted the documents etc…

If you need assistance in clarifying or specifying your application, you can contact:

• by email: [email address]
• by telephone: (+32) (0) 2 29 59894

Yours faithfully,

Vassiliki ANAGNOSTOU
Access to documents coordinator

European Commission
DG Agriculture and Rural Development
Unit K.2

L130 4/70
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 29 598 94
[email address]

Zitate anzeigen

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Dear Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI),

Thank you for the email of 13 November. The applicant has appreciated the additional information and the clarifications of the DG AGRI K.2 Unit

The following sections set out the applicant’s observations on the K.2 Unit last email, and define precisely the requested documents. The applicant has respectfully taken issue with the letter and spirit of some of the K.2 Unit positions.

I. DG AGRI K.2 UNIT NOVELTIES IN THE INTERPRETATION OF EU LAW ON THE PUBLIC’S ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS HELD BY THE COMMISSION

In so far it can be inferred from the email of 13/11/2013, it appears that the DG AGRI K.2 Unit has some kind of its own interpretation of Regulation 1049/2001, Commission Decision 937/2001 (Official Journal 29/12/2001, L345 page 94), the case-law of the Courts of the Union on Regulation 1049/2001, and the internal Guidelines of the Secretariat-General.

The K.2 Unit statement “According our internal rules (COMMISSION DECISION of 5 December 2001 C (2001) 3714 (…)” is manifestly erroneous in so far it has referred to ‘internal rules’. The ‘internal rules’ are in fact the rules laid down in Commission Decision 937/2001, which were duly adopted pursuant to article 18(1) of Regulation 1049/2001. Put differently, Decision 937/2001 lays down a rule of law.

The K.2 Unit has apparently relied on the third paragraph of article 2 of Commission Decision 937/2001 to ‘justify’ its ‘measure’ not to attribute a GestDem reference number, disregarding, apparently, the following two fundamental legal provisions:

1. Article 7(1) of Regulation 1049/2001 reads “An application for access to a document shall be handled promptly. An acknowledgement of receipt shall be sent to the
applicant. Within 15 working days from registration of the application (…)”

2. The second paragraph of article 3 of Decision 937/2001 that reads “The acknowledgement of receipt and the answer shall be sent in writing, where appropriate, by electronic means”.

It also defies common sense to argue that a GestDem reference number is to be attributed AFTER an administrative department has conferred with an applicant pursuant to article 6(3) of Regulation 1049/2001. Such an interpretation would result in the attribution of a GestDem reference number being dependant on the diligence of an administrative department in understanding what are the requested documents.

That the Secretariat-General has not adopted the ‘practice’ of DG AGRI in attributing GestDem reference numbers is indicative of the ‘innovations’ of the DG AGRI K.2 Unit in how to handle the first stage of the administrative procedure under Regulation 1049/2001. Contrary to the DG AGRI K.2 practice, the Secretariat-General promptly attributes a GestDem reference number and informs applicants accordingly, without waiting for consultations pursuant to article 6(3) of Regulation 1049/2001.

The applicant could have lodged the very same application with the Secretariat-General, in which case a GestDem reference would have been attributed promptly. The Secretariat-General would have transferred the application to DG AGRI to provide the initial response in accordance to article 10 of Decision 937/2001. Concerning an application for which DG AGRI is to provide the initial response, according to the implied DG AGRI K.2 logic the prompt attribution of a GestDem reference number depends on whether the applicant lodges the application with the Secretariat-General or DG AGRI. It is evident that such logic is contrary to the principle of sound administration. Consequently, there can be no question that the attribution of a GestDem reference number may be deferred until all article 6(3) consultations with an applicant have been fruitful in precisely identifying the requested documents.

In conclusion, the DG AGRI K.2 Unit practice to attribute a GestDem reference number after an applicant has either ‘clarified’ his/her request(s) or provided more information enabling a precise identification of the documents runs contrary to Union law and the practice of the Secretariat-General.

II. DAY NOTES

The K.2 Unit stated that day notes are not ‘addressed’ to DG AGRI. Indeed, neither DG AGRI nor any other Directorate-General is the addressee of a day note. By definition, a day note is an autonomous document. Similarly, Commission Decision C(2001) 3714 is also an autonomous document.

By stating that day notes are not ‘addressed’ to DG AGRI, the K.2 Unit has impliedly attempted to explain why DG AGRI does not hold copies of day notes in the period 2006-2010. Yet, DG AGRI not being an addressee of a day note does not, per se, mean that the Secretariat-General has not circulated day notes to DG AGRI pursuant to article 16 of Annex 2 of Commission Decision C(2005)4416.

In fact, DG AGRI not holding copies of day notes concerning proposals tabled by DG AGRI and duly adopted by the written procedure in the period 2006-2010 is most astonishing, as the Commission’s rules of procedure expressly prescribe that the Secretariat-General will promptly circulate the day notes within 24 hours of being properly drawn up. For such kind of Decisions under the responsibility of DG AGRI, this provision means that the Secretariat-General had in the period 2006-2010 an absolute obligation to dispatch to DG AGRI a copy of the duly signed day note, as prescribed by the rules of procedure.

The K.2 Unit kind explanations about day notes of year 2013, and their availability on-line, are immaterial to the present application.

It is pointed out that the K.2 Unit reliance on Decision 937/2001 to justify the non-attribution so far of a GestDem reference number – which is erroneous anyway - is highly inconsistent with the disregard of the aforesaid article 16 over a period of four years. It indicates that DG AGRI – as an administrative department - has an inclination to observe the provisions of Union law ‘a-la-carte’, which is in itself highly incompatible with the Commission being the guardian of the Treaties.

It must thus be concluded that the DG AGRI reply of 13/11/2013 is an implied total, wholly unjustified, refusal to release the requested day notes of the period 2006-2010, of which DG AGRI ought to hold copies according to the Commission’s rules of procedure.

In the event DG AGRI does not indeed hold copies of the requested day notes, then this would amount to a gross disregard of the provisions of article 16 of Annex 2 Commission Decision of 15/11/2005 C(2005) 4416 by both DG AGRI and the Secretariat-General. There is dichotomy about such a disregard; either the administrative departments adopted the practice silently (i.e. not informing the College) or documents were indeed drawn up about the disregard. In the latter event, the Commission services would be obliged to release those documents pursuant to Regulation 1049/2001. In the event no documents would be released, then it must be presumed that the non-circulation of day notes was a silent decision of the administrative departments. In both alternatives, the disregard of article 16 of Annex 2 would call into question the practices of the Secretariat-General, and will directly undermine legal certainty as to what exactly have been Commission Decisions adopted by the written procedure in the period 2006-2010.

III. PRECISE DEFINITION OF DOCUMENTS, REQUESTS 11 & 12

The particular requests concerns documents drawn up by DG AGRI. Even though the statement of the K.2 Unit “For your information, DG AGRI complies with the general rules of the archiving policy of the Commission” is informative and appreciated, nonetheless it does not state that DG AGRI does not hold the requested documents.

In the application of 25 October 2013, under the heading “B. DG AGRI DOCUMENT …
SYSTEM” the applicant stated his presumption that copies of day notes were kept in an ‘electronic document management system’. He then went of to say “The notion of ‘DG AGRI electronic document management systems’ is about a functional and logical organisation of documents (….)” .

The K.2 Unit email of 13/11/2013 has invited again the applicant to define with precision the requested documents. For the purposes of being constructive and moving forward the applicant will reword requests under (11) and (12), placing them in a crystal-clear context, defining in precise terms the requested documents.

The following nine (9) Commission Decisions – for which DG AGRI had been the responsible service - were adopted by the written procedure.

1. C(2006)5/F of 12/1/2006
2. C(2006)6889/F of 22/12/2006
3. C(2007)239/F of 31/01/2007
4. C(2007)6897/F of 21/12/2007
5. C(2008)554/F of 18/2/2008
6. C(2008)8864/F of 19/12/2008
7. C(2009)150/F of 28/1/2009
8. C(2009)10613/F of 18/12/2009
9. C(2010)139/F1 of 20/1/2010

For each of the above nine Decisions, there is a ‘document management system’ in which a scanned copy of the duly signed proposal of DG AGRI to the College to adopt by the written procedure is/was stored. Presumably, the signatory of the proposal has been a Member of the Commission. The term ‘document management system’ is used in a broad sense and does not necessarily refers to a logical ‘system’ implemented in Documentum (the Commission-wide document management platform); it may well be a shared ‘folder’ in a computer server, or a shared folder in a Microsoft Exchange server, or even shared drive of a PC.

In the event no scanned copy of a duly signed proposal is held by DG AGRI, then the term ‘document management system’ refers to the ‘system’ holding the last version of the DG AGRI proposal tabled to the College. The term is used in the broad sense of the preceding paragraph.

The term ‘document management system’ is defined as the computer system in which the aforesaid scanned copy, or the last version of the DG AGRI proposal, is/was held.

Having regard to the definition of the term ‘document management system’ requests (11) and (12) are thus be defined as follows:

11. The backup and archival policy of ‘the document management system’ in the
period from 1/1/2006 to 31/3/2010.

12. A sample report, or equivalent, generated by ‘the document management system’ as regards an archival of documents stored in that system 2007.

IV. REWORDING OF REQUESTS (1) – (9)

The term ‘copy’ hereunder refers either to a copy of a day note duly signed by the Secretary-General, or a certified copy of a day note bearing a serial number and the name of an authorised official (who is the custodian of the original and duly signed day note).

Requests (1) to (9) are worded as follows:

1. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2006)5/F of 12/1/2006

2. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2006)6889/F of 22/12/2006

3. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2007)239/F of 31/01/2007

4. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2007)6897/F of 21/12/2007
5. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2008)554/F of 18/2/2008

6. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2008)8864/F of 19/12/2008

7. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2009)150/F of 28/1/2009

8. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2009)10613/F of 18/12/2009

9. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2010)139/F1 of 20/1/2010

Request under (10) is withdrawn.

V. REITERATION OF REQUEST TO ATTRIBUTE A GESTDEM REFERENCE NUMBER

The applicant respectfully reiterates his request that DG AGRI attribute a GestDem reference number without further delays.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    Picture Device Independent Bitmap 1.jpg

    1K Download

Dear Mr. Drosos,
 
We refer to your e-mail dated 13/11/2013.  We hereby acknowledge receipt
of your application for access to documents registered on 02/12/2013 under
the following reference numbers :
 
- GESTDEM 2013/6036 (for the documents of DG AGRI - III. PRECISE
DEFINITION OF DOCUMENTS, REQUESTS 11 & 12);
- GESTDEM 2013/6037 (for the documents of SG - IV. REWORDING OF REQUESTS
(1) – (9)).
 
In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to
European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, your application
will be handled within 15 working days. The time limit will expire on
23/12/2013.  In case this time limit needs to be extended, you will be
informed in due course.
 
Yours faithfully,
 
BLURIOT-PUEBLA Madeleine
Cellule 'Accès aux documents'
 
European Commission
SG/B/5 - Transparence

BERL 05/330
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 296 09 97
[1][email address]
 
 

Zitate anzeigen

Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

9 Attachments

Dear Mr. Drosos,
 
Subject:        Your application for access to documents – Ref GestDem No
6037/2013
Thank you for your e-mail, requesting access to documents under Regulation
No 1049/2001 (1) regarding public access to European Parliament, Council
and Commission documents.
 
The documents you have requested access to (documents of SG - IV.
REWORDING OF REQUESTS (1) – (9)) are:
1. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2006)5/F
of 12/1/2006
2. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision
C(2006)6889/F of 22/12/2006
3. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2007)239/F
of 31/01/2007
4. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision
C(2007)6897/F of 21/12/2007
5. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2008)554/F
of 18/2/2008
6. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision
C(2008)8864/F of 19/12/2008
7. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision C(2009)150/F
of 28/1/2009
8. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision
C(2009)10613/F of 18/12/2009
9. A copy of day note held by DG AGRI concerning the Decision
C(2010)139/F1 of 20/1/2010
 
We would like to call your attention on the fact that, not all the
decisions mentioned in your list, were adopted by written procedure.
 
On this basis, I am pleased to grant you access to, and enclose copies of,
the requested documents:
 
1) SEC(2006) 37/4: day note concerning the adoption of Decision C(2006)5/F
of 12/1/2006 (adoption by written procedure)
 
 
2) SEC(2007)2/5: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2006)6889/F of 22/12/2006 (adoption by written procedure)
 
 
3) SEC(2007)131/3: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2007)239/F of 31/01/2007 (adoption by written procedure)
 
 
4) SEC(2008)4/5: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2007)6897/F of 21/12/2007 (adoption by empowerment procedure)
 
 
 
5) SEC(2008)238: day note concerning the adoption of Decision C(2008)554/F
of 18/2/2008 (adoption by written procedure)
 
 
6) SEC(2009)5/4: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2008)8864/F of 19/12/2008 (adoption by delegation procedure on
18/12/2008)
 
 
7) SEC(2009)96/2: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2009)150/F of 28/1/2009 (adoption by written procedure on 27/1/2009)
 
 
8) SEC(2010)5/5: day note concerning the adoption of Decision
C(2009)10613/F of 18/12/2009 (adoption by delegation procedure)
 
       
9) SEC(2010)45: day note concerning the adoption of Decision C(2010)139/F1
of 20/1/2010 (adoption by empowerment procedure on 18/1/2010)
 
+
 
 
Please be informed that all the attached day notes are electronic versions
of the original day notes, which have been deposited in the archives of
the Commission. These copies are extracted from the Commission's
electronic archive and fully reflect the content of the originals.
 
 
 
Yours sincerely,
For the Registry Director
Martine DEPREZ
European Commission
Secretariat General/Head of Unit  SG.A.1 (Registry)
Tel. +32 2 29 62236
_______________________________
(1) OJ L 145, 31.05.2001, page 43
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

EC ARES NOREPLY, Generaldirektion Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung

1 Attachment

Please find attached document Ares(2013)3782722 regarding "Access to documents request - Reply to Mr Drosos - No Gestdem 2013-6036" sent by Ms NAESAGER Lene on 20/12/2013.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: This e-mail was automatically generated by the European Commission's central mail registration system.
Replies by e-mail must be addressed to the original sender NAESAGER Lene (mailto:[email address]).
Remarque : Cet e-mail a été généré automatiquement par le système d'enregistrement central du courrier de la Commission européenne.
Toute réponse éventuelle par e-mail doit être adressée à l'expéditeur en personne, à savoir NAESAGER Lene (mailto:[email address]).

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS

Dear Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI),

Referring to the application Gestdem 2013-6036 this is a confirmatory application under articles 7 and 8 of Regulation 1049/2001. Pursuant to the Commission Decision 937/2001 it is to be handled by the Secretariat-General.

*
* *

Dear Secretariat-General,

I refer to the application Gestdem 2013-6036 submitted to DG AGRI on 25/10/2013 http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/day_n..., the further clarifications/re-framing of the application on 13/11/2013 http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/day_n..., and the DG AGRI initial reply of 20/12/2013 Ares(2013)3782722 http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/925/r....

The confirmatory application concerns the two requests:

11. The backup and archival policy of ‘the document management system’ in the period from 1/1/2006 to 31/3/2010.

12. A sample report, or equivalent, generated by ‘the document management system’ as regards an archival of documents stored in that system 2007.

According to the DG AGRI initial reply of 20/12/2013 Ares(2013)3782722, the documents at issue are not held by the DG AGRI simply because DG AGRI does not run the document management systems of the Commission. Presumably those systems are run by DG DIGIT.

The practical consequence of this particular arrangement of running/managing the document management systems at the Commission via-a-vis an application under Regulation 1049/2001 is either no documents will be released, or the scope of the application should be enlarged such as documents are released. Apparently, DG AGRI is of the former view.

A confirmatory application is hereby submitted for requests #11 and #12, which under the new information disclosed to the applicant on 20/12/2013 it concerns the entire Commission-wide of the 'document management system'.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Charilaos. DROSOS