criteria are vs criteria is

Some examples from the web:

• The criteria are currently under discussion.
• The criteria are set at levels that promote the labelling of personal computers that have a lower environmental impact.
• The criteria are set out in Annex II, section R1.
• The criteria are dealt with separately in a new article.
• The criteria are simple, well known and undisputed.
• The individual criteria are strictly interpreted and applied.
• Today these criteria are really out of date.
• Evidently the criteria are changed according to the expediency of the moment.
• These three criteria are further explained below.
• These two criteria are cumulative and both compulsory.
• If these criteria are not satisfied, there is still horizontal Objective 3.
• Its budget is limited and its eligibility criteria are restrictive.
• Political reform and meeting the Copenhagen criteria are absolute priorities.
• The Copenhagen criteria are being adhered to.
• The clearly identified commercial criteria are widely debated here.
• The above criteria are established in Annex III.
• Euro banknotes not meeting these criteria are unfit.
• The criteria are those included in these Directives.
• The Altmark criteria are not met.
• These general eligibility criteria are uniform throughout the euro area.

Some examples from the web:

• The fulfillment of the above criteria is monitored on a regular basis.
• One of the criteria is absorption capacity.
• One of these criteria is that the undertakings must carry out 'traditional' activities.
• For biocides and colouring agents compliance with the criteria is required regardless of their concentration.
• I agree and have already told Parliament that harmonisation of the application of the criteria is an important objective.
• This is not surprising, since in many cases the economic foundation of the criteria is very questionable.
• If the course for meeting the criteria is long, let it be so.
• The most appropriate and effective way of establishing such criteria is through the committee procedure laid down in the existing directive.
• The Court's overall assessment for each of these five criteria is given in the chart below.
• In such cases, the means of verification of compliance with those criteria is the EMAS registration or ISO 14001 certification.
• According to the French authorities, compliance with these criteria is sufficient, albeit not necessary, to rule out the existence of any advantage.
• The criteria is a starting point.
• The notion of award criteria is central to this Directive.
• However, the number of firms potentially eligible under such criteria is relevant.
• For this selection a number of criteria is laid down in this Annex.
• Moreover, it is of vital importance that the development of criteria is based on scientific evidence.
• The second criteria is that the regional approach should be followed.
• Of course, it is evident that meeting the criteria is essential for accession.
• The first set of criteria is inspired by the principle of prudence.
• The question of renewing the assessment criteria is therefore crucial.