This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Memos, guidance and guidelines on record creation'.


 
 
Council of the European Union 
General Secretariat 
 
Directorate-General Communication and Document Management 
Directorate Document Management 
Transparency and Access to Documents Unit  
 
 
TRAINING ON TRANSPARENCY, ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS  
AND THE ARCHIVES 
 
(8 July 2016) 
 
 
 

 
EXERCISE: 
 
"HARM TEST" ANALYSIS  
 
 
JL 00-HN-73 
Tel. +32 (0)2 281 6710 -xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx.xx 
 


 
 
COUNCIL OF 
 Brussels, 27 September 2010 
THE EUROPEAN UNION 
 
13986/10 
 

 
 
LIMITE 
 
 

JAI 766 
DATAPROTECT 68 

EXERCISE: 
 
AVIATION 137 
"HARM TEST" ANALYSIS 
RELEX 792 
 

 
NOTE 
from: 
Presidency 
to: 
Coreper/Council 
prev. docs: 
13931/10 JAI 761 USA 108 DATAPROTECT 64 AVIATION 128 RELEX 785 
13932/10 JAI 762 AUS 14 DATAPROTECT 65 AVIATION 129 RELEX 786 
13933/10 JAI 763 CDN 12 DATAPROTECT 66 AVIATION 130 RELEX 787 
13954/10 JAI 764 DATAPROTECT 67 AVIATION 134 RELEX 789 
Subject: 
EU external strategy on Passenger Name Record (PNR) data 
- Handling of draft negotiation mandates for PNR Agreements with Canada, the 
United States of America and Australia 
 
 
The European Union (and the European Community) has signed 
Harm test: 
three agreements providing for the processing and transfer of 
 
Passenger Name Record (PNR) data by air carriers to the authorities 
 
of third countries: Canada1, the United States of America2 and 
 
Australia3. The latter two Agreements are being applied on a 
Conclusion: 
provisional basis, but have not yet been concluded. 
 
 
                                                 
1 
OJ L 91, 29.3.2006, p. 53, OJ L 91, 29.3.2006, p. 49 and OJ L 82, 21.3.2006, p. 15.  
2  
OJ L 204, 4.8.2007, p. 16. The Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the 
processing and transfer of Passenger Name Record (PNR) data by air carriers to the United States Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS) was signed on 23 and 26 July 2007, subject to its conclusion at a later date. It is 
applied provisionally as from 26 July 2007. 
3 
OJ L 213, 8.8.2008 p. 49. The Agreement between the European Union and Australia on the processing and 
transfer of European Union-sourced passenger name record (PNR) data by air carriers to the Australian Customs 
Service was signed on 30 June 2008, subject to its conclusion at a later date. It is applied provisionally as from 
30 June 2008. 
13986/10 
 
GS/np 

 
DG H 2B 
LIMITE   EN 

 
On 18 December 2009, the Commission submitted to the Council a 
Harm test: 
proposal for a Decision on the conclusion of the latter two 
 
Agreements. On 25 January 2010, the Council, in accordance with 
 
Article 218(6) TFEU, decided to forward the draft decisions on 
 
conclusion as well as the text of both Agreements to the European 
Conclusion: 
Parliament for its consent.  
 
 
On 5 May 2010, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the  Harm test: 
launch of negotiations for passenger name record (PNR) Agreements 
 
with the United States, Australia and Canada.1  In this resolution, the 
 
Parliament decides to postpone the vote on the request for consent on   
the agreements with the US and Australia until the Commission “has 
 
explored the options for arrangements for the use of PNR that are in 
 
line with EU law and meet the concerns expressed by Parliament in 
Conclusion: 
earlier resolutions on PNR”; 
 
 
The Parliament also called for “a coherent approach on the use of 
Harm test: 
PNR data for law enforcement and security purposes, establishing a 
 
single set of principles to serve as a basis for agreements with third 
 
countries” and invited the Commission to present a proposal for such   
a single model and a draft mandate for negotiations with third 
 
countries. The Commission Communication “On the global approach   
to transfers of Passenger Name Record (PNR) data to third 
Conclusion: 
countries”2 meets this call. 
 
 
                                                 
1  
P7_TA(2010)0144. 
2  
13954/10 JAI 764 DATAPROTECT 67 AVIATION 134 RELEX 789. 
13986/10 
 
GS/np 

 
DG H 2B 
LIMITE   EN 

 
On 23 September 2010, the Council received three recommendations 
Harm test: 
from the Commission to authorise the opening of negotiations for 
 
Agreements between the European Union and Australia, Canada and 
 
the United States of America for the transfer and use of Passenger 
 
Name Record (PNR) data to prevent and combat terrorism and other 
 
serious transnational crime1
 
 
 
 
Conclusion: 
 
 
The Presidency intends to have the adoption of these three 
Harm test: 
negotiation mandates handled by Coreper, with the assistance of the 
 
JHA Counsellors. 
 
 
 
 
Conclusion: 
 
 
                                                 
1  
13931/10 JAI 761 USA 108 DATAPROTECT 64 AVIATION 128 RELEX 785; 13932/10 
JAI 762 AUS 14 DATAPROTECT 65 AVIATION 129 RELEX 786; 13933/10 JAI 763 
CDN 12 DATAPROTECT 66 AVIATION 130 RELEX 787. 
 
13986/10 
 
GS/np 

 
DG H 2B 
LIMITE   EN 

 
Before starting an in-depth discussion on the content of the draft 
Harm test: 
negotiation mandates, the Presidency would like to submit the 
 
following questions regarding the handling of these files to the 
 
Council: 
 
1) 
The Commission Communication states that all PNR 
 
Agreements with third countries should respect certain general 
 
criteria. It also underlines that “[i]n the interest of ensuring an 
 
as uniform as possible treatment of passengers and reducing the   
costs on the industry, it is important that the content and 
 
standards of future agreements with third countries are as 
 
similar as possible”. The content of the proposed negotiating 
 
directives is identical for the three recommendations. In the 
 
same vein, the Presidency submits that the Council should act 
 
in a consistent manner regarding the content of the three draft 
 
negotiation mandates: any amendment to the negotiating 
 
directives should be made to all three negotiation mandates so 
 
that the content of the negotiating directives to be adopted with 
 
regard to each of the three countries will be identical. This does   
not detract from the fact that during the negotiations, the 
 
Commission may have to differentiate the wording of the three 
 
Agreements as a result of the different legal and institutional 
 
setup of the countries concerned. The Presidency proposes that 
 
the Council adopt the three negotiation mandates at the same 
Conclusion: 
time. 
 
 
13986/10 
 
GS/np 

 
DG H 2B 
LIMITE   EN 

 
2) 
The Presidency proposes that the Council give clear indications  Harm test: 
to the Commission as to the order in which the negotiations 
 
with the three countries are to be handled. In this regard the 
 
Presidency sees two major approaches: 
 
a)  Starting and conducting the negotiations with all three 
 
countries at the same time.  
 
b) Bearing in mind the particularly sensitive nature of the 
 
negotiations with the United States and the fact that the EP’s   
criticism has been especially aimed at the current EU-US 
 
PNR Agreement, the negotiations with the US should be 
 
handled as a matter of priority before entering into 
 
negotiations with Australia and Canada with which the 
 
current Agreements are considered as very data-protection-
 
friendly. In that context, it may, however, be necessary to 
 
consider whether to handle the negotiations with the United 
 
States concurrently with negotiations with Canada, as the 
 
adequacy decision underlying the latter Agreement has 
 
expired. 
 
 
Conclusion: 
The Presidency invites delegations to express their views on the 
 
above mentioned approaches. 
 
 
Harm test: 
Final conclusion:  
 
 
_________________ 
13986/10 
 
GS/np 

 
DG H 2B 
LIMITE   EN