title: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/122 of 23 January 2017 concerning the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council to contracts awarded for activities related to peat production in Finland (notified under document C(2017) 237) (Text with EEA relevance. )

text:
               25.1.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 19/33

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2017/122
   of 23 January 2017
   concerning the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council to contracts awarded for activities related to peat production in Finland

         (notified under document C(2017) 237)

   (Only the Finnish and Swedish texts are authentic)
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (1) and in particular Article 30(5) thereof,
   Having regard to Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (2) and in particular Article 35(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the request submitted by Vapo Oy,
   After consulting the Advisory Committee for Public Contracts,
   Whereas:
   1.   FACTS

   1.1.   The Request

               (1)

               On 2 February 2016, the Commission received from Vapo Oy (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Vapo’ or ‘the Applicant’) a request pursuant to Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Request’).

               (2)

               Vapo is a public undertaking, where the Finnish State holds 50,1 % of the shares and 49,9 % are held by Suomen Energiavarat Oy, a company owned by municipal energy companies and electricity cooperatives.

               (3)

               The Request concerns activities relating to production of peat in Finland.

               (4)

               The Request was accompanied by a statement of the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (hereinafter referred to as NCA), dated 2 November 2015. The Commission considers that document does not qualify as a reasoned and substantiated opinion in the sense of the second paragraph of Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU, since it is a simple statement that the conditions mentioned are met without providing any arguments in the support of that statement (3).

               (5)

               The Commission requested additional information to the Applicant by emails of 10 March 2016, 2 June 2016, 6 July 2016, 8 July 2016 and 23 September 2016. The replies to the request for information were transmitted by emails, by the Applicant, on 6 April 2016, 16 June 2016, 26 August 2016 and 30 September 2016.

               (6)

               In parallel, on 7 June 2016 the Commission requested additional information from the Finnish authorities. The reply was transmitted by the Finnish authorities, by email of 26 September 2016. The conclusions therein were based on a survey carried out by the Finnish NCA on 24 customers of Vapo, eight of its competitors and on information received from the association of peat producers. Respondents were asked about their use of fuels, ability to switch the fuels, the impact of a hypothetical change in the price of fuel, the economically viable transport distances, the fuel prices, the barriers to entering the market, the procurement process for peat bogs, and the evolution of the peat and wood fuel markets over the next few years.

         1.2.   Production of peat in Finland

               (7)

               Peat is a highly organic material found in damp regions and composed of partially decayed vegetable matter: it is cut and dried for use as fuel. In Finland peat is mainly used for electricity generation and district heating. In total, peat represents 4 % of the total generation fuel mix in 2014 in Finland (4).

               (8)

               Finland has a total surface of 9 million hectares of peat bogs, out of which 1,2 million ha is suitable for peat production (5). However less than 10 % of the area suitable for peat production is actually used for production (6). The location of active production is determined by the competitive situation, given the relatively short viable economically viable transportation distance of peat of only 150 km (7).

               (9)

               Finland has around 23 million hectares of forest, and it is an important supplier of forest products to global markets (8).

               (10)

               Peat and wood fuels are used as fuels in approximately 400 power and heating plants across Finland.

               (11)

               Vapo is the sole peat producer active on the entire national territory. Finland has also a number of regional producers and about 300 local producers, and some of the bigger power plants have their own areas for peat production.

               (12)

               Wood fuels are supplied by five national producers, 79 forest management associations and hundreds of local producers (9).

         2.   LEGAL FRAMEWORK

               (13)

               Directive 2014/25/EU applies to the award of contracts for the pursuit of activities related to exploitation of a geographical area for the purpose of extracting coal or other solid fuels, unless this activity is exempted pursuant to Article 34 of that Directive.

               (14)

               Pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU, contracts intended to enable the performance of an activity to which that Directive applies are not to be subject to that Directive if, in the Member State in which it is carried out, the activity is directly exposed to competition on markets to which access is not restricted.

               (15)

               Direct exposure to competition is assessed on the basis of objective criteria, taking account of the specific characteristics of the sector concerned. Access is deemed to be unrestricted if the Member State has implemented and applied the relevant Union legislation opening a given sector or a part of it. That legislation is listed in Annex III to Directive 2014/25/EU. However for extraction of coal and other solid fuels, that annex does not list any relevant legislation liberalising this sector. Consequently, free access to the market cannot be presumed, and it has to be demonstrated de facto and de jure.

               (16)

               This Decision is without prejudice to the application of the rules on competition and other fields of Union law. In particular, the criteria and the methodology used to assess direct exposure to competition under Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU are not necessarily identical to those used to perform an assessment under Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty or Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (10). This point was upheld also by the Court in a recent judgement (11).

         3.   ASSESSMENT

   3.1.   Free access to the market

               (17)

               Since free access to the market cannot be presumed, it has to be demonstrated de facto and de jure.

               (18)

               The Applicant argues that there are no legal restrictions regarding access to the peat market. Peat production requires an environmental permit but this cannot be deemed to restrict access to the market. Moreover, there are no special or exclusive rights attached to peat production.

               (19)

               An examination of the legal provisions applicable to issuing licenses for peat production, in Finland, shows that such licences are currently granted on non-discriminatory basis. In order to start peat production, an environmental permit is needed. Although the process of obtaining such permit may be very lengthy (from one to four years), the procedure for granting the permit, and the criteria for granting it are the same for all market operators, therefore, this cannot be deemed to restrict access to the market from a public procurement perspective. For the purposes of this decision, the possibility to obtain a licence for production of peat could be considered, de jure, free.

               (20)

               A significant part of the peat land suitable for peat production has not been used yet (12). The Applicant also argues that the number of peat producers has grown in the recent years (13), which would support the argument that the access to the market is free de facto.

               (21)

               The free access of this activity was confirmed by the Finnish authorities (14).

               (22)

               In view of the above, for the purposes of evaluating the conditions laid down in Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU and without prejudice to competition law, or the application of any other field of EU law, the access to the market for exploitation of a geographical area for the purposes of extracting peat, can be considered free de facto and de jure.

         3.2.   Direct exposure to competition

               (23)

               Direct exposure to competition should be evaluated on the basis of various indicators, none of which are, per se, decisive. In respect of the markets concerned by this decision, the market share of the main players on a given market constitutes one criterion which should be taken into account. Given the characteristics of the markets concerned, further criteria may also be taken into account.

               (24)

               Moreover, such definition, as seen above, does not in any way prejudge the application of Articles 101 and/or 102 of the Treaty and merger control rules under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 as well as of all the applicable Regulations and Commission's notices and guidelines related to the enforcement of Union competition rules, including the relevant provisions regarding market definition and market shares calculation.

               (25)

               The aim of this Decision is to establish whether the services concerned by the Request are exposed to such a level of competition for public procurement purposes (in markets to which access is not restricted within the meaning of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU) which will ensure that, also in the absence of the discipline brought about by the detailed procurement rules set out in Directive 2014/25/EU, procurement for the pursuit of the activities concerned will be carried out in a transparent, non-discriminatory manner based on criteria allowing purchasers to identify the solution which overall is the economically most advantageous one.

               (26)

               Vapo is the only contracting entity active in the peat market in Finland, thus the only entity subject to the Union public procurement rules. In this context it is important to keep in mind that the companies which are not subject to the public procurement procedures, when acting on these markets, have the possibility to bring competitive pressure on the Applicant.

         3.2.1   Relevant product market

               (27)

               The Request covers production and wholesale of peat. The producers extract and process peat and sell it directly to different plants without intermediaries. When considering competition in the market for production of peat, regard must be had to the links between production and first sale/wholesale distribution of the peat extracted. For the purposes of this decision, and without prejudice to application of other EU law, the production and wholesale of peat will be considered together in the same product market.

               (28)

               The Applicant argues that peat belongs to the same relevant market as, at least wood fuels (i.e. forest chips and forest industry by-products). Vapo is active in both markets for peat and wood, but its sales are mainly of peat.

               (29)

               Previous practice (15) of the Finnish NCA considered that peat and wood belong to separate product markets, but left the definition open. The differentiation in market definition for peat and wood was based on the following arguments: the high investment costs involved in switching/changing the technology, different technical qualities of peat and wood, shortages in the wood supply, lack of a specific market price for wood fuels and long-term agreements. The Commission assessed the current situation of the market, by evaluating the pertinence of the arguments above.

      Technological changes

               (30)

               The Applicant argues that one of the most significant changes compared to the time of the previous decisions by the Finnish NCA relate to the changes in the plant's burning technology which resulted in an increase of wood fuel consumption, and a decrease of peat consumption. It particular, the Applicant argues that it is nowadays possible to combust peat and wood, practically in all heating plants in Finland. This lead to an increase of consumption of wood fuels in the past 15 years (16).

               (31)

               The Finnish NCA confirmed that over the past few years peat has been facing an increasing competitive pressure from wood (17). The Finnish NCA observed that energy producers carried out investment in multi-fuel plants, which can use peat, wood and even coal, in order to allow their maximum of flexibility vis-à-vis different market conditions as well as environmental and taxation policies.

               (32)

               The 20 largest peat-users (18) in Finland are currently all using peat fuel along with wood and also with coal (for plants situated along the coast) (19).

               (33)

               Out of the 400 power and heating plants using peat and wood, only less than 20 small heating plants are using peat alone (20). However, the consumption of these plants is marginal (21).

      Technical qualities of peat and wood

               (34)

               As regards the technical differences, the Commission notes that nowadays technically efficient burning can be achieved by adding chemicals together with wood.

               (35)

               It is noted that using only wood increases the corrosion of the boiler and a minimum percentage of peat (which is naturally sulphurous), coal or chemicals such as sulphur or lime are usually added in the combustion process to prevent corrosion. The optimised percentage of fuel peat needed varies significantly, depending on the plant technology, on the planned emission, and it ranges between 0 and 60 % (22).

               (36)

               The Commission queried (23) the Applicant with regards to the seasonal patterns in the supply mix of peat and wood during a year, more precisely whether customers had to use de facto only peat or only wood. The Applicant explained (24) that the consumption of peat is the highest from January to March, while in the summer the consumption is low as the fuel is not needed for heating. The Applicant used as example the situation of 2015 when temperatures were very low (25) and district heating plants used more peat and oil instead of wood. However, the volumes replaced were marginal in the overall consumption.

      Wood fuel availability

               (37)

               As regards shortages of wood, the Applicant argues that the current situation is completely different from the one at the time of the previous NCA decisions, as the operators invested in wood harvesting machinery which led to a substantial increase of the market for wood (26).

               (38)

               According to the Request (27) the availability of alternative fuels to peat is good. In the north and the east of Finland wood fuels are readily available, while in the southern and western areas the availability of domestic wood fuels may limit the increase of the use of wood chips in the future (28). The alternative fuels used are coal (on the coastal regions), wood imported from Russia and gas (where gas pipelines are located). Although demand may exceed supply of wood, this is only on a temporary basis (29).

               (39)

               Finnish NCA indicated that ‘Today the markets for both forest chips and by-products of the forest industry have become more commercialised and have strengthened their position in comparison with peat.’ (30)

               (40)

               According to the data publicly available (31), the time series on energy sources for electricity generation show a steady increase in respect of wood fuel consumption and a decrease in respect of peat, in particular from 2010 onwards.

      Fuel pricing

               (41)

               Finland benefits from operating aid schemes (32) for forest-chip-fired power plants, which aim to increase renewable energy generation by incentivising a fuel switch from peat to biomass.

               (42)

               The EU 2020 target of energy from renewable sources for Finland is 38 %. The share of energy from renewable sources in the gross final consumption of energy in Finland increased from 28,5 % in 2005 to 36,8 % in 2013 (33).

               (43)

               The Applicant confirms (34) that all of its main customers are eligible for the abovementioned aid.

               (44)

               The amendment of the aid level imposed by the Government (35) came into force on 1 March 2016. According to this act, the maximum subsidy level of the electricity produced by forest chips was increased from EUR 15,90 per MWh to EUR 18 per MWh.

               (45)

               In Finland, energy taxes are levied on electricity, coal, natural gas, fuel peat, tall oil and liquid fuels. According to the latest legislation (36), the new tax on fuel peat is EUR 1,90 per MWh, decreasing from 3,40 EUR per MWh. This new tax came into force on 1 March 2016 as well.

               (46)

               The use of peat and other fossil fuels, as opposed to the use of wood, in the energy sector is subject to the CO2 emission tax. At the time of the previous NCA decision (37), the emission tax was not in force. The introduction of this tax prompted large investments in new multi-fuel plants and in the conversion of old plants in such a way that they can use both wood and other fossil fuels.

               (47)

               The Applicant argues (38) that considering all taxes for peat and aid for wood, the comparison of peat fuel cost to customer (including peat tax and CO2 emission rights cost) and wood fuel cost, shows that both wood fuels and peat fuel have comparable costs to the customer, with wood still cheaper than peat.

               (48)

               The Finnish authorities confirmed (39), that, in the course of the survey carried out among Vapo's customers and competitors ‘many respondents mentioned that, in practice, the final cost to the customers is currently the same for peat and wood, due to the levels of aid, tax and emission allowances in force’.

      Long-term contracts

               (49)

               At the time of the previous NCA decisions, there were shortages of peat supplies and wood fuel was not an alternative to such a degree than it is today. In order to secure adequate amounts of supplies, the customers were willing to conclude long-term contracts.

               (50)

               Vapo operates currently on the basis of framework agreements with its customers. These frameworks are typically valid for more than one year, but the prices and the amounts of supplies are agreed annually or for a shorter period of time, based on the market situation. Vapo has no exclusive distribution contracts and all its customers have a possibility to procure peat from other producers. Thus, in spite of existing framework agreements customers are not bound to long-term commitments to purchase from Vapo.

               (51)

               Having due regard to the current situation of the market for peat and wood, as described in recitals 27 to 50 and also in the light of the current State aid scheme for wood it appears that the peat fuel is facing significant competitive pressure from, inter alia, wood fuel.

               (52)

               In view of the above, for the purposes of evaluating the conditions laid down in Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU and without prejudice to competition law, or the application of any other EU law, the Commission considers that peat fuel and wood fuel (forest chips and forest industry by-products) are currently competing against each other.

         3.2.2.   Relevant geographic market

               (53)

               According to the Applicant the relevant market covers the national territory of Finland. The Applicant, as well as other peat and wood producers is active in Finland.

               (54)

               Previous decision (40) of the NCA found that the geographical market for peat was national in scope. The same conclusion is upheld by the Finnish authorities, in the letter of 26 September 2016 (41).

               (55)

               Peat fuel is typically produced as near as possible to the location of the customer. Typically, supplies to one customer are usually delivered from tens of different locations of peat bogs (42). The economically viable maximum transportation distance was estimated by the Applicant at around 150 km for peat fuel, 50 km for wood chips and 150 km for wood by-products.

               (56)

               Following the market survey carried out by the NCA in 2016, the economically viable distance for transportation was estimated at160 km for peat, 110 km for wood chips and 155 km for wood by-products (43).

               (57)

               The Applicant argues that within the economically viable supply area of a plant using peat or wood fuel, there are several peat bogs or sources of wood and, conversely, that peat and wood operators sell their fuel products to different plants. The same arguments were used by the NCA in previous decision (44), when defining the geographic market as national.

               (58)

               The Commission notes that for the 20 largest peat users in Finland are all using peat fuel along with wood and also with coal, and each of them have more than one supplier of peat and wood, and a high number of potential suppliers within the economically viable transportation radius.

               (59)

               The Finnish NCA maintains (45) that, compared to the situation of the previous decision of the NCA of 2001, the situation of the geographical market does not appear to have changed, hence the geographic market can be defined as national in scope.

               (60)

               In view of the above, for the purposes of evaluating the conditions laid down in Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU and without prejudice to competition law, or the application of any other Union law, Commission does not need to conclude on the precise scope of the geographic market, as in any situation, the result of the assessment of the competitive situation would be the same.

         3.2.3.   Competitive assessment

               (61)

               It is considered that, in respect of the market for peat and wood, one indicator for the degree of competition on national markets is the total market share of the biggest three producers. This is in line with Commission precedents (46).

               (62)

               The market share of the biggest three producers, in terms of values of sales was of […] (47) % in 2012, […] % in 2013 and […] % in 2014 (48). Vapo Oy is the first market player in this market, but its market shares were decreasing in the last years ([…] in 2012; […] in 2013 and […] in 2014).

               (63)

               The analysis of the competitive situation at the level of each of the 20 largest consumers shows that Vapo market shares range between […] and […] (49) with two exceptions (50), while Vapo accounts overall for […] (51) of all deliveries to those 20 largest customers.

               (64)

               The fact that the market share of Vapo in the deliveries to the largest clients is higher than the overall market share calculated at national level, may suggest that Vapo might not be able to use its market position in relation to the small customers.

               (65)

               Even considering hypothetically an alternative scenario where Finland is divided into four regional supply areas (north, east, west and south), the result of the assessment remains largely the same, Vapo's market shares (52) ranging between […] and […] (53).

               (66)

               As explained in recital 50, the Applicant sells peat and wood, on the basis of framework agreements with his clients, for which the quantities to be delivered and the prices are agreed annually or at shorter intervals. The largest 20 peat-users in Finland (54), which are located throughout the country, are all using peat along with wood and sometimes with coal. All plants have more than one supplier of peat and wood, and the Applicant does not have any exclusive contracts.

               (67)

               As regards switching, it can be observed that changes in plant technology, applicable taxes on peat and subsidies for wood led to a decrease in peat consumption. The Applicant lost a number of peat customers which have switched to fuels provided by other suppliers, while other customers have reduced their demand of peat from the Applicant.

               (68)

               There have been a number of entries (55) into the market for peat in the last years; however this number is limited due to the decreased demand for peat.

               (69)

               The Finnish Government promotes the use of wood fuel consumption for energy. The tax level of fuel peat was lowered, but at the same time the subsidy for wood fuels was increased, which shows the intention of the Government to keep the domestic fuel peat and wood fuel competitive against each other. Wood is already the most used source of energy; its use is increasing from 2000 onwards, while the respective share of peat is decreasing.

               (70)

               As explained in recitals 41 to 48, the final cost to the customer, which includes fuel tax, emission allowances (for peat) and subsidies (for wood) are comparable, with wood being, on average, cheaper than peat.

               (71)

               The Commission takes note that the current competitive pressure on peat in essentially driven by the regulatory framework in place (peat fuel tax, CO2 emission tax, and subsidy for wood chips), and that changes to those policies may modify the market dynamics between peat and wood, their ability to compete against one another and the overall competitive pressure on Vapo.

         4.   CONCLUSIONS

               (72)

               In respect of the production and wholesale of peat, the situation can thus be summarised as follows: the aggregate market shares of the three largest competitors are low, the customers have the possibility to switch from peat to wood and other fuels.

               (73)

               In view of the factors examined in recitals 23 to 71, the condition of direct exposure to competition laid down in Article 34(1) of Directive 2014/25/EU should be considered to be met in respect of production and wholesale of peat in Finland.

               (74)

               Furthermore, since the condition of unrestricted access to the market is deemed to be met, Directive 2014/25/EU should not apply when contracting entities award contracts intended to enable production and wholesale of peat to be carried out in Finland nor when they organise design contests for the pursuit of such an activity in that geographical area.

               (75)

               This Decision is based on the legal and factual situation as of February 2016 to October 2016 as it appears from the information submitted by the Applicant and by Finnish authorities. It may be revised, should the conditions for the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU be no longer met, following significant changes in the legal or factual situation.

               (76)

               The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Advisory Committee for Public Contracts,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Directive 2014/25/EU shall not apply to contracts awarded by contracting entities and intended to enable production and wholesale of peat to be carried out in Finland.
   Article 2
   This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Finland.

      Done at Brussels, 23 January 2017.

            For the Commission

         Elżbieta BIEŃKOWSKA

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 134, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243.

      (3)  According to this opinion, the NCA ‘sees no particular reason to oppose the granting of an exemption from the public procurement rules’. However the NCA opinion does not substantiate the conclusions therein. In particular, the opinion does not include any reference to the first condition for exemption: the free access to the market and does not conclude on a current precise definition of the relevant product market or the geographic market.

      (4)  National Report 2016 to the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators and to the European Commission, p. 35.

      (5)  Applicant's letter of 26 August 2016, p. 6.

      (6)  Applicant's letter of 26 August 2016, pp. 6 and 7.

      (7)  Request, Section 3.2, p. 12.

      (8)  ‘Forest Finland in brief’ http://www.metla.fi/metinfo/tilasto/julkaisut/muut/Forest-Finland_2013.pdf

      (9)  Section 5.1 of the Request, p. 13.

      (10)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1).

      (11)  Österreichische Post AG v Commission, T-463/14, EU:T:2016:243, paragraph 28.

      (12)  See footnote 6.

      (13)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, last paragraph, p. 3 and first three paragraphs, p. 4.

      (14)  Finnish authorities' letter of 26 September 2016, page 3.

      (15)  Decision No 267/61/94 of 5 September 2000, Decision No 021/81/2000 of 8 March 2001, pp. 5, 7, 8.

      (16)  According to the Applicant's submission of 22 January 2016, page 2, para. 2; Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, page 5, last but one and last paragraph.

      (17)  Finnish authorities' letter of 26 September 2016, p. 2

      (18)  Accounting for 56 % of the total peat consumption in 2014.

      (19)  Request, Section 3.1, p. 9.

      (20)  Applicant's letter of 6 April 2016, p. 14.

      (21)  Less than 1 % of the total peat consumption.

      (22)  Finnish authorities' letter of 26 September 2016, p. 2; Applicant's letter of 30 September 2016, page 2.

      (23)  Commission letter of 2 June 2016, p. 3.

      (24)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 10.

      (25)  Temperatures below minus 20 degrees, which lasted for three weeks.

      (26)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, page 1.

      (27)  Request, Section 3.2, p. 13.

      (28)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 7.

      (29)  See footnote 28.

      (30)  Finnish authorities' letter of 26 September 2016, p. 2.

      (31)  Statistics Finland http://pxweb2.stat.fi/sahkoiset_julkaisut/energia2015/html/engl0002.htm

      (32)  State aid SA.42218(2015/N) Finland — Operating aid for forest-chip-fired power plants; C(2016) 976; State aid SA.31204(2011/N) Finland — Operating aid for small wood-fired CHP-plants and forest-chip power plants; C(2011) 1950 (OJ C 153, 24.5.2011, p. 2).

      (33)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:4f8722ce-1347-11e5-8817-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_2&format=PDF, p. 2.

      (34)  Applicant's letter of 26 August 2016, p. 5.

      (35)  Government Decree on the Production Subsidy for Electricity Produced from Renewable Energy Sources.

      (36)  Act Amending the Appendix of the Act on Excise Tax on Electricity and Certain Fuels (1724/2015)

      (37)  NCA Decision No 021/81/00, 8 March 2001.

      (38)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 13.

      (39)  Finnish authorities' letter of 26 September 2016, p. 2.

      (40)  Decision No 021/81/2000 of 8 March 2001, p. 9.

      (41)  Letter of the Finnish authorities of 26 September 2016, p. 3.

      (42)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 12.

      (43)  See footnote 41.

      (44)  See footnote 40.

      (45)  Letter of the Finnish authorities of 26 September 2016, p. 3 and opinion of the NCA of 2 November 2011, p. 3.

      (46)  Commission Implementing Decision 2011/306/EU of 20 May 2011 establishing that Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors is not applicable to the bituminous coal mining in the Czech Republic (OJ L 137, 25.5.2011, p. 55).

      (47)  […] confidential information.

      (48)  Request, p. 15 and 17.

      (49)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 6.

      (50)  These two exceptions are not problematic, as in one case the plant is in the same location as other plants where Vapo has low market shares, and the other one is one of the smallest plants.

      (51)  Market shares based on 2014 data.

      (52)  Market shares based on 2013 data.

      (53)  Applicant's letter of 6 April 2016, p. 13.

      (54)  The 20 largest customers of peat account for 56 % of the total consumption of peat.

      (55)  Applicant's letter of 16 June 2016, p. 3.


title: 2006/41/EC: Council Decision of  24 January 2006  providing macro-financial assistance to Georgia

text:
               28.1.2006

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 25/28

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 24 January 2006
   providing macro-financial assistance to Georgia
   (2006/41/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 308 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By Decision 97/787/EC (2) the Council provided exceptional financial assistance for Armenia and Georgia in the form of long-term loans and grants.

               (2)

               By Decision 2000/244/EC the Council provided exceptional financial assistance for Tajikistan and extended the implementation period of the assistance to Armenia and Georgia until 2004.

               (3)

               In case of Georgia, the objectives of the assistance have not been fully met, owing to an unsatisfactory economic policy environment in the country during most of the implementation period.

               (4)

               Therefore, only EUR 31,5 million of the total grant component of EUR 65 million for Georgia was committed and paid under the exceptional financial assistance.

               (5)

               The present authorities of Georgia are committed to economic stabilisation and structural reforms, supported by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through a three-year arrangement under the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) which was approved on 4 June 2004 for a total amount of SDR 98 million. Subsequently, the Paris Club creditors agreed on 21 July 2004 to a restructuring of Georgia’s bilateral official debt on the Houston terms.

               (6)

               The new Government of Georgia also received strong support from the international community at the donors’ conference held in Brussels on 16 June 2004.

               (7)

               The World Bank approved in June 2004 a USD 24 million Reform Support Credit, and will continue its assistance to Georgia under a new Country Partnership Strategy in the form of Poverty Reduction Support Operations.

               (8)

               The Georgian authorities have expressed their intention to pursue early debt repayments to the Community with a view to improving debt sustainability.

               (9)

               As EU-Georgia relations are developing within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy, which is expected to lead to deeper economic integration, Community support for the government’s economic reform programme is considered appropriate.

               (10)

               Making available an amount equivalent to the uncommitted grant component of the exceptional financial assistance, which would support the country’s economic reforms and help reduce external indebtedness, is an appropriate contribution by the Community to the implementation of poverty reduction and growth strategies in Georgia.

               (11)

               In order to ensure efficient protection of the Community’s financial interests in connection with the present macro-financial assistance, it is necessary to provide for appropriate measures by Georgia in relation to the prevention of and the fight against fraud, corruption and any other irregularities linked to this assistance, as well as for controls by the Commission and audits by the Court of Auditors.

               (12)

               The Commission services, with the support of duly mandated external experts, carried out in October 2004 an operational assessment of the financial circuits and administrative procedures at the Ministry of Finance of Georgia and the National Bank of Georgia to ascertain the existence of a framework for sound financial management.

               (13)

               The release of this grant assistance is without prejudice to the powers of the budgetary authority.

               (14)

               The Commission has consulted the Economic and Financial Committee before submitting its proposal.

               (15)

               The Treaty provides for no powers, other than those of Article 308 thereof, for the adoption of this Decision,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   1.   The Community shall make available to Georgia macro-financial assistance in the form of straight grants up to a maximum amount of EUR 33,5 million with a view to supporting economic reforms and helping the country improve debt sustainability.
   2.   This Community macro-financial assistance shall be managed by the Commission in consultation with the Economic and Financial Committee and in a manner fully consistent with the agreements reached between the IMF and Georgia.
   3.   The Community macro-financial assistance shall be made available for two years starting from the first day after the entry into force of this Decision. However, if circumstances so require, the Commission, after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee, may decide to extend the availability period by a maximum of one year.
   Article 2
   1.   The Commission shall be empowered to agree with the authorities of Georgia, after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee, the economic policy and financial conditions attached to this assistance, to be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. These conditions shall be consistent with the agreements reached between the IMF and Georgia.
   2.   During the implementation of the Community assistance, the Commission shall monitor the soundness of Georgia’s financial circuits, administrative procedures and internal and external control mechanisms which are relevant to this Community macro-financial assistance.
   3.   The Commission shall verify at regular intervals that the government’s economic policies are in accordance with the objectives of this assistance and that the agreed economic policy and financial conditions are being fulfilled.
   Article 3
   1.   The grant amount shall be made available to Georgia in at least two instalments insofar as its net debtor position towards the Community has been reduced, as a rule, by at least a similar amount.
   2.   The first grant instalment shall be released on the basis of a satisfactory implementation of the economic programme supported by the IMF under the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility.
   The second and any further instalments shall be released on the basis of a satisfactory implementation of the IMF-supported economic programme and any other measures laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding referred to in Article 2(1), and not before three months have elapsed since the release of the previous instalment.
   3.   The funds shall be paid to the National Bank of Georgia. The final recipient of the funds will be the Ministry of Finance of Georgia.
   Article 4
   The implementation of this assistance shall take place in accordance with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (3) and its implementing rules. In particular, the Memorandum of Understanding referred to in Article 2(1) shall provide for appropriate measures by Georgia in relation to the prevention of and the fight against fraud, corruption and any other irregularities linked to this assistance. It shall also provide for controls by the Commission, including the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), with the right to perform on-the-spot checks and inspections, and for audits by the Court of Auditors, where appropriate, to be carried out on the spot.
   Article 5
   At least once a year, before September, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report including an evaluation of the implementation of this Decision in the previous year.
   Article 6
   This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 24 January 2006.

            For the Council

            The President

         K.-H. GRASSER

      (1)  Opinion delivered on 15.12.2005 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

      (2)  OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 37. Decision as amended by Decision 2000/244/EC (OJ L 77, 28.3.2000, p. 11).

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.


title: Council Decision of 12 July 2011 on the signing and conclusion of the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union

text:
               20.7.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 189/1

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 12 July 2011
   on the signing and conclusion of the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union
   (2011/433/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 219(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Council Decision of 13 April 2011 on the arrangements for the negotiation of a Monetary Agreement with the French Republic, acting for the benefit of the French overseas collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy, and in particular Article 4 thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By European Council Decision 2010/718/EU of 29 October 2010 amending the status with regard to the European Union of the island of Saint-Barthélemy (1), the island of Saint-Barthélemy is to cease to be an outermost region of the Union with effect from 1 January 2012 and is to have the status of an overseas country or territory, as referred to in Part Four of the Treaty, as from that date. The French Republic has undertaken to conclude the agreements necessary to ensure that the interests of the Union are preserved when this amendment takes place.

               (2)

               The French Republic has informed the institutions of the Union of its intention to retain the euro as the sole currency in Saint-Barthélemy. A monetary agreement should therefore be concluded.

               (3)

               On 13 April 2011 the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate with the French Republic, acting for the benefit of the French overseas collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy, and to fully associate the European Central Bank with the negotiations and to seek its agreement on issues falling within its fields of competence, with a view to concluding a monetary agreement. On 30 May 2011, the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union (‘the Agreement’) was initialled.

               (4)

               The Agreement should be signed and concluded,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   1.   The Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union (‘the Agreement’) is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.
   2.   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement to bind the Union.
   Article 3
   The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 11 of the Agreement.
   Article 4
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 12 July 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         J. VINCENT-ROSTOWSKI

      (1)  OJ L 325, 9.12.2010, p. 4.

      MONETARY AGREEMENT
      between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union
      THE EUROPEAN UNION, represented by the European Commission,
      and
      THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, acting for the benefit of the island of Saint-Barthélemy,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  Saint-Barthélemy is an integral part of the French Republic but will no longer be part of the European Union as from 1 January 2012, in accordance with European Council Decision 2010/718/EU of 29 October 2010 amending the status with regard to the European Union of the island of Saint-Barthélemy (1);

                  (2)

                  The French Republic would like Saint-Barthélemy to retain the same currency as that of metropolitan France and to this end will continue to grant exclusive legal tender status in the territory of Saint-Barthélemy to euro banknotes and coins issued by the Eurosystem and the Member States that have adopted the euro;

                  (3)

                  It is necessary to ensure the continuing application in Saint-Barthélemy of existing and future provisions of European Union law necessary for the functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, in order, in particular, to ensure the unity of the Eurosystem’s monetary policy, equalise conditions of competition between financial institutions located in the euro area and prevent fraud and counterfeiting of cash and non-cash means of payment and money laundering;

                  (4)

                  This Agreement is concluded with a Member State acting for the benefit of a non-sovereign entity and, therefore, does not provide for the right to mint coinage. Currency issues and banking and financial law fall within the field of competence of the French State. In matters related to the proper functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, the legislative and statutory provisions of French law apply automatically to Saint-Barthélemy by virtue of its status,

            HAVE AGREED ON THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS:
      Article 1
      The euro shall remain the currency of Saint-Barthélemy.
      Article 2
      The French Republic shall continue to grant legal tender status to euro-denominated banknotes and coins in Saint-Barthélemy.
      Article 3
      1.   The French Republic shall continue to apply in Saint-Barthélemy the European Union legal acts and rules necessary for the functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union in the following fields:

                  (a)

                  euro banknotes and coins;

                  (b)

                  preventing fraud and counterfeiting of cash and non-cash means of payment;

                  (c)

                  medals and tokens;

                  (d)

                  measures necessary for the use of the euro as a single currency adopted on the basis of Article 133 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

                  (e)

                  banking and financial legislation, including the legal acts adopted by the European Central Bank;

                  (f)

                  preventing money laundering;

                  (g)

                  statistical reporting requirements established by the Eurosystem.

            2.   The French Republic shall undertake to cooperate fully with Europol in the territory of Saint-Barthélemy as regards the prevention of fraud and counterfeiting of means of payment and preventing and combating money laundering.
      Article 4
      The measures taken by the competent French authorities to transpose the acts adopted by the European Union — including those of the European Central Bank — in the fields mentioned in Article 3(1) shall apply automatically and under the same conditions in Saint-Barthélemy.
      Article 5
      Those European Union acts adopted in the fields mentioned in Article 3(1) — including those of the European Central Bank — that are directly applicable in the Member States shall apply automatically and under the same conditions in Saint-Barthélemy.
      Article 6
      Credit institutions and, as applicable, other financial institutions authorised to carry out operations in Saint-Barthélemy shall have access to interbank settlement and payment systems and to securities settlement systems in the euro area under the same conditions as those applied to institutions located in metropolitan France.
      Article 7
      Every two years the French Republic shall present a report to the Commission and the European Central Bank on the application in Saint-Barthélemy of the European Union legal acts and rules covered by this Agreement. The report includes, in particular, a list of the directly applicable European Union acts, including those of the European Central Bank, that apply automatically to Saint-Barthélemy by virtue of Article 5. The first report will be communicated by the end of 2012.
      Article 8
      1.   A joint committee shall be convened when needed. It shall be chaired by the Commission and composed of representatives of the European Union and of the French Republic.
      2.   The European Union delegation shall be headed by the Commission and include representatives of the European Central Bank.
      3.   The joint committee shall meet at the request of one of the members of the delegation of the European Union or of the French Republic in order to examine any problems that might arise from the application of this Agreement.
      Article 9
      The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have exclusive competence for settling any dispute between the parties that may arise from the application of this Agreement and that has not been settled within the joint committee.
      Article 10
      The European Union or the French Republic may terminate this Agreement subject to one year’s notice.
      Article 11
      This Agreement shall enter into force on 1 January 2012 after the parties have notified each other of the completion of their own ratification procedures.
      Article 12
      This Agreement is drawn up in duplicate in English and French, both texts being equally authentic.

         Done at Brussels on the twelfth day of July in the year two thousand and eleven.

               For the European Union,

               For the French Republic,

         (1)  OJ L 325, 9.12.2010, p. 4.


title: 2012/561/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/139

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds for the financial year 2010
   (2012/561/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the Commission’s report on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2009 financial year (COM(2011) 736) and to the Commission staff working documents accompanying that report (SEC(2011) 1350 and SEC(2011) 1351),

               —

               having regard to the financial statements and revenue and expenditure accounts of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds for the financial year 2010 (COM(2011) 471 – C7-0273/2011),

               —

               having regard to the Commission’s annual report of 27 April 2011 on the financial management of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds in 2010,

               —

               having regard to the financial information on the European Development Funds (COM(2011) 334),

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ annual report on the activities funded by the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds in respect of the financial year 2010, together with the Commission’s replies (1) and to the Court of Auditors’ special reports,

               —

               having regard to the statement of assurance (2) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendations of 21 February 2012 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Funds for the financial year 2010 (05458/2012 - C7-0047/2012, 05459/2012 - C7-0048/2012, 05460/2012 - C7-0049/2012),

               —

               having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (3) and revised in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (4),

               —

               having regard to Council Decision 2001/822/EC of 27 November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Community (‘Overseas Association Decision’) (5), amended by Council Decision 2007/249/EC (6),

               —

               having regard to Article 33 of the Internal Agreement of 20 December 1995, between the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of the Community aid under the Second Financial Protocol to the fourth ACP-EC Convention (7),

               —

               having regard to Article 32 of the Internal Agreement of 18 September 2000, between Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing and administration of Community aid under the Financial Protocol to the Partnership Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Community and its Member States signed in Cotonou (Benin) on 23 June 2000, and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies (8),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Article 74 of the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to development finance cooperation under the fourth ACP-EC Convention (9),

               —

               having regard to Article 119 of the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the ninth European Development Fund (10),

               —

               having regard to Article 142 of Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund (11),

               —

               having regard to Rules 76 and 77, third indent of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A7-0100/2012),

               1.

               Notes that the final annual accounts of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds are as shown in Table 2 of the Court of Auditors’ annual report;

               2.

               Approves the closure of the accounts of the eighth, ninth and 10th European Development Funds for the financial year 2010;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 326, 10.11.2011, p. 251.

      (2)  OJ C 326, 10.11.2011, p. 262.

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

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

      (5)  OJ L 314, 30.11.2001, p. 1 and OJ L 324, 7.12.2001, p. 1.

      (6)  OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 33.

      (7)  OJ L 156, 29.5.1998, p. 108.

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

      (9)  OJ L 191, 7.7.1998, p. 53.

      (10)  OJ L 83, 1.4.2003, p. 1.

      (11)  OJ L 78, 19.3.2008, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

32001D0055

2001/55/EC: Council Decision of 22 December 2000 on the signing and the provisional application of the Agreement on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Croatia initialled in Brussels on 8 November 2000

Official Journal L 025 , 26/01/2001 P. 0001 - 0001

Council Decisionof 22 December 2000on the signing and the provisional application of the Agreement on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Croatia initialled in Brussels on 8 November 2000(2001/55/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community and in particular Article 133 thereof, in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300 (2) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Whereas:(1) The Commission has negotiated on behalf of the Community an Agreement on trade in textile products with the Republic of Croatia.(2) The Agreement was initialled on 8 November 2000.(3) Subject to its possible conclusion at a later date, the Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Community.(4) It is appropriate to apply this Agreement on a provisional basis as from 1 January 2001 pending the completion of the relevant procedures for its formal conclusion, subject to reciprocity.HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1Subject to a possible conclusion at a later date, the President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the persons empowered to sign on behalf of the Community the Agreement on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Croatia.Article 2Subject to reciprocity, the Agreement referred to in Article 1 shall be applied on a provisional basis as from 1 January 2001 pending the completion of the procedures for its conclusion.The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.Done at Brussels, 22 December 2000.For the CouncilC. PierretThe President


title: 2009/432/EC: Council Decision of 4 November 2008 on the signing, on behalf of the Community and its Member States, of the Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part

text:
               9.6.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 144/20

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 4 November 2008
   on the signing, on behalf of the Community and its Member States, of the Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part
   (2009/432/EC)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 80(2) in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) and the first subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the 2005 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 6(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Agreement on Maritime Transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement’, was signed in Brussels on 6 December 2002 and entered into force on 1 March 2008 (1).

               (2)

               The Commission was authorised by the Council on 23 October 2006 to negotiate a Protocol with China amending the Agreement in order to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union.

               (3)

               The Protocol was initialled by both sides on 28 February 2008.

               (4)

               The Protocol should therefore be signed, subject to its conclusion after completion of the necessary constitutional and institutional procedures,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The signing of the Protocol amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part, is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, subject to the Council Decision concerning the conclusion of the said Protocol.
   The text of the Protocol is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person or persons empowered to sign the Protocol, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, subject to its conclusion.

      Done at Brussels, 4 November 2008.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. LAGARDE

      (1)  OJ L 46, 21.2.2008, p. 25.
    ---documentbreak---

               9.6.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 144/21

         PROTOCOL
   amending the Agreement on maritime transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part
   THE KINGDOM OF BELGIUM,
   THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA,
   THE CZECH REPUBLIC,
   THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK,
   THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY,
   THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA,
   IRELAND,
   THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC,
   THE KINGDOM OF SPAIN,
   THE FRENCH REPUBLIC,
   THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC,
   THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS,
   THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA,
   THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA,
   THE GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBOURG,
   THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY,
   MALTA,
   THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS,
   THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA,
   THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND,
   THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC,
   ROMANIA,
   THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA,
   THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC,
   THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND,
   THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN,
   THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND,
   hereinafter referred to as the ‘Member States’, represented by the Council of the European Union, and
   THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Community’, represented by the Council of the European Union,
   of the one part, and
   THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA,
   of the other part,
   HAVING REGARD TO the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union and thereby to the Community on 1 January 2007,
   HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The Republic of Bulgaria and Romania shall be Parties to the Agreement on Maritime Transport between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, of the other part, signed in Brussels on 6 December 2002 and entered into force on 1 March 2008 (hereinafter called ‘the Agreement’).
   Article 2
   The texts of the Agreement in the Bulgarian and Romanian languages, which are attached to this Protocol, shall become authentic under the same conditions as the other language versions drawn up in accordance with Article 14 of the Agreement.
   Article 3
   The Contracting Parties shall notify each other on the accomplishment of the internal legal procedures for the entry into force of this Protocol. This Protocol shall enter into force on the date of receipt of the last written notification.
   Article 4
   This Protocol is drawn up at Brussels, on the thirty-first day of March in the year two thousand and nine, in duplicate, in the Bulgarian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak, Slovenian, Spanish, Swedish and Chinese languages, each of these texts being equally authentic.

         За държавите-членки
         Por los Estados miembros
         Za členské státy
         For medlemsstaterne
         Für die Mitgliedstaaten
         Liikmesriikide nimel
         Για τα κράτη μέλη
         For the Member States
         Pour les États membres
         Per gli Stati membri
         Dalībvalstu vārdā
         Valstybių narių vardu
         A tagállamok részéről
         Għall-Istati Membri
         Voor de lidstaten
         W imieniu państw członkowskich
         Pelos Estados-Membros
         Pentru statele membre
         Za členské štáty
         Za države članice
         Jäsenvaltioiden puolesta
         På medlemsstaternas vägnar

         За Европейската общност
         Por la Comunidad Europea
         Za Evropské společenství
         For Det Europæiske Fællesskab
         Für die Europäische Gemeinschaft
         Euroopa Ühenduse nimel
         Για την Ευρωπαϊκή Κοινότητα
         For the European Community
         Pour la Communauté européenne
         Per la Comunità europea
         Eiropas Kopienas vārdā
         Europos bendrijos vardu
         Az Európai Közösség részéről
         Għall-Komunità Ewropea
         Voor de Europese Gemeenschap
         W imieniu Wspólnoty Europejskiej
         Pela Comunidade Europeia
         Pentru Comunitatea Europeană
         Za Európske spoločenstvo
         Za Evropsko skupnost
         Euroopan yhteisön puolesta
         På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar

         За правителството на Китайската народна република
         Por el Gobierno de la República Popular China
         Za vládu Čínské lidové republiky
         For Folkerepublikken Kinas regering
         Im Namen der Regierung der Volksrepublik China
         Hiina Rahvavabariigi valitsuse nimel
         Για την κυβέρνηση της Λαϊκής Δημοκρατίας της Κίνας
         For the Government of the People's Republic of China
         Pour la gouvernement de la République populaire de Chine
         Per il Governo della Repubblica popolare cinese
         Kīnas Tautas Republikas vārdā
         Kinijos Liaudies Respublikos Vyriausybės vardu
         A Ķīnas Népköztársaság kormánya részéről
         Għall-Gvern tar-Repubblika Popolari taċ-Ċina
         Voor de regering van de Volksrepubliek China
         W imieniu rządu Chińskiej Republiki Ludowej
         Pelo Governo da República Popular da China
         Pentru Guvernul Republicii Populare Chineze
         Za vládu Čínskej l'udovej republiky
         Za Vlado Ljudske republike Kitajske
         Kiinan kansantasavallan hallituksen puolesta
         På Folkrepubliken Kinas regerings vägnar


title: Decision of the General Court of 5 April 2017 on judicial vacations

text:
               29.5.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 168/4

         DECISION OF THE GENERAL COURT
   of 5 April 2017
   on judicial vacations
   (2017/C 168/03)
   THE GENERAL COURT,
   Having regard to Article 41(2) of the Rules of Procedure,
   HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

      Article 1

   For the judicial year beginning on 1 September 2017, the dates of the judicial vacations within the meaning of Article 41(2) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure are as follows:

               —

               Christmas 2017: from Monday 18 December 2017 to Sunday 7 January 2018 inclusive,

               —

               Easter 2018: from Monday 26 March 2018 to Sunday 8 April 2018 inclusive,

               —

               Summer 2018: from Monday 16 July 2018 to Friday 31 August 2018 inclusive.

      Article 2

   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Luxembourg, 5 April 2017.

         E. COULON

            Registrar

         M. JAEGER

            President


Important legal notice

|

52004DP0004

European Parliament decision on the numerical strength of the interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committees

Official Journal 140 E , 09/06/2005 P. 0049 - 0049

		P6_TA(2004)0004Numerical strength of interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committeesEuropean Parliament decision on the numerical strength of the interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committeesThe European Parliament,- having regard to Rule 188 of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to its decision of 10 March 2004 on the number of interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committees [1],1. decides that the numerical strength of the parliamentary delegations shall be as follows:D01 | Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 17 members |D02 | Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Serbia and Montenegro (including Kosovo): | 15 members |D03 | Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee: | 31 members |D04 | Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee: | 16 members |D05 | Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee: | 14 members |D06 | Delegation for relations with Belarus: | 15 members |D07 | Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia: | 19 members |D08 | Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees: | 18 members |D09 | Delegation for relations with Israel: | 20 members |D10 | Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council: | 20 members |D11 | Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (including Libya): | 20 members |D12 | Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries: | 20 members |D13 | Delegation for relations with the Gulf States, including Yemen: | 18 members |D14 | Delegation for relations with Iran: | 19 members |D15 | Delegation for relations with the United States: | 34 members |D16 | Delegation for relations with Canada: | 16 members |D17 | Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America: | 22 members |D18 | Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community: | 17 members |D19 | Delegation for relations with Mercosur: | 25 members |D20 | Delegation for relations with Japan: | 24 members |D21 | Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China: | 32 members |D22 | Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC): | 22 members |D23 | Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN): | 19 members |D24 | Delegation for relations with the Korean Peninsula: | 15 members |D25 | Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand: | 20 members |D26 | Delegation for relations with South Africa: | 14 members |D27 | Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly: | 10 members |DM01 | Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 25 members |DM02 | Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 25 members |DM03 | Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 15 members |DM04 | Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 13 members |DM05 | Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 25 members |DM06 | Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 14 members |DM07 | Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee: | 15 members |ACP | Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly: | 77 members |Euromed | Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly: | 45 members |[1] P5_TA(2004)0166.--------------------------------------------------


Avis juridique important

|

31980D0317

80/317/EEC, Euratom: Council Decision of 13 March 1980 adopting a research programme to be implemented by the Joint Research Centre for the European Atomic Energy Community and for the European Economic Community (1980 to 1983)

Official Journal L 072 , 18/03/1980 P. 0011 - 0017 Greek special edition: Chapter 12 Volume 2 P. 0036

****( 1 ) OJ NO C 110 , 3 . 5 . 1979 , P . 4 .  ( 2 ) OJ NO C 140 , 5 . 6 . 1979 , P . 83 .  ( 3 ) OJ NO C 297 , 28 . 11 . 1979 , P . 9 .  ( 4 ) OJ NO C 7 , 29 . 1 . 1974 , P . 2 .  ( 5 ) OJ NO L 16 , 20 . 1 . 1971 , P . 13 .  ( 1 ) OJ NO L 200 , 8 . 8 . 1977 , P . 4 .  ( 2 ) OJ NO L 356 , 31 . 12 . 1977 , P . 1 .  ( 3 ) OJ NO L 255 , 20 . 9 . 1974 , P . 1 .        COUNCIL DECISION   OF 13 MARCH 1980   ADOPTING A RESEARCH PROGRAMME TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE FOR THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY AND FOR THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ( 1980 TO 1983 )  ( 80/317/EEC , EURATOM )   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN   COMMUNITIES ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 7 THEREOF ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 235 THEREOF ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE PROPOSAL FROM THE COMMISSION ( 1 ) PRESENTED AFTER CONSULTATION , WITH REGARD TO NUCLEAR PROJECTS , OF THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  ( 2 ),   HAVING REGARD TO THE OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE ( 3 ),   WHEREAS , IN THE CONTEXT OF THE COMMON POLICY RELATING TO THE FIELD OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY , THE MULTIANNUAL RESEARCH PROGRAMME IS ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL MEANS WHEREBY THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE SAFETY AND DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY AND TO THE ACQUISITION AND THE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION IN THE NUCLEAR FIELD ;   WHEREAS ARTICLE 2 OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ASSIGNS TO THE COMMUNITY INTER ALIA THE TASK OF PROMOTING THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY A HARMONIOUS DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES , A CONTINUOUS AND BALANCED EXPANSION AND AN INCREASE IN STABILITY ; WHEREAS THE OBJECTIVES PURSUED BY THE COMMUNITY ' S ACTIVITIES TO THIS END ARE SET OUT IN ARTICLE 3 OF THE SAID TREATY ;   WHEREAS THE NON-NUCLEAR PROJECTS PROVIDED FOR BY THIS DECISION APPEAR NECESSARY FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF THESE OBJECTIVES ;   WHEREAS THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY HAS NOT PROVIDED THE SPECIFIC POWERS REQUIRED FOR THIS PURPOSE ;   WHEREAS ON 14 JANUARY 1974 THE COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE COORDINATION OF NATIONAL POLICIES AND THE DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY ACTIONS IN THE FIELD OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ( 4 );   WHEREAS THE PROGRAMME WAS DRAWN UP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF 17 DECEMBER 1970 CONCERNING THE PROCEDURES FOR ADOPTING RESEARCH AND TRAINING PROGRAMMES  ( 5 );   WHEREAS THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT HAS UNDERTAKEN TO TAKE OVER UNTIL 31 DECEMBER 1980 THE ESSOR COMPLEX , MADE AVAILABLE TO IT BY THE COMMISSION , WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 6 ( C ) OF THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY ;   WHEREAS IT IS IN THE COMMON INTEREST TO FURTHER EXPERIMENTS IN REACTOR SAFETY , AND THE ESSOR PLANT MAY BE UTILIZED TO THIS END ;   WHEREAS ARTICLE 3 OF DECISION 77/488/EEC , EURATOM ( 1 ) PROVIDES FOR A REVIEW OF THE PROGRAMME DURING ITS THIRD YEAR WHICH MAY LEAD TO THE ADOPTION OF A NEW FOUR-YEAR PROGRAMME  ( 1980 TO 1983 ) WITH 1980 CONSTITUTING A YEAR COMMON TO BOTH PROGRAMMES ; WHEREAS DECISION 77/488/EEC , EURATOM , SHOULD THEREFORE BE REPEALED ;   WHEREAS , AS A RESULT OF SUCH REPEAL , 100 MILLION EUROPEAN UNITS OF ACCOUNT ASSIGNED TO THE PRECEDING PROGRAMME WILL REMAIN AVAILABLE ; WHEREAS THIS AMOUNT SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO THE NEW PROGRAMME ; WHEREAS SUCH A STEP MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF EXPENDITURE COMMITMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE NEW PROGRAMME ,   HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :   ARTICLE 1   A RESEARCH PROGRAMME , AS PRESENTED IN ANNEXES A , B AND C , IS HEREBY ADOPTED FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS , AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1980 .   ARTICLE 2   THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE COMMITMENTS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAMME DEFINED IN ANNEX A AND THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF STAFF ARE FIXED AT 510.87 MILLION EUROPEAN UNITS OF ACCOUNT , INCLUDING THE AMOUNTS REFERRED TO IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 6 , AND 2 260 RESPECTIVELY . THE INDICATIVE BREAKDOWN OF FUNDS AND STAFF IS GIVEN IN ANNEX B . A SCALE OF FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MEMBER STATES FOR THE SUPPLEMENTARY RESEARCH AND TRAINING PROGRAMME OF THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY IS SET OUT IN ANNEX C .   THE EUROPEAN UNIT OF ACCOUNT SHALL BE THAT DEFINED IN ARTICLE 10 OF THE FINANCIAL REGULATION OF 21 DECEMBER 1977 APPLICABLE TO THE GENERAL BUDGET OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES  ( 2 ).   ARTICLE 3   THE PROGRAMME SHALL BE REVIEWED DURING ITS THIRD YEAR . SUCH REVIEW MAY LEAD TO A COUNCIL DECISION ON A NEW FOUR-YEAR PROGRAMME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE .   ARTICLE 4   THE DISSEMINATION OF THE INFORMATION RESULTING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NON-NUCLEAR PARTS OF THE PROGRAMME SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL REGULATION  ( EEC ) NO 2380/74 OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1974 ADOPTING PROVISIONS FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION RELATING TO RESEARCH PROGRAMMES FOR THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ( 3 ).   ARTICLE 5   THE COMMISSION SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME AND , TO THIS END , SHALL CALL UPON THE SERVICES OF THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE .   ARTICLE 6   DECISION 77/488/EEC , EURATOM , IS HEREBY REPEALED WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JANUARY 1980 .   HOWEVER , AMOUNTS WHICH ARE AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION UNDER THE RELEVANT HEADINGS IN THE 1977 , 1978 , 1979 AND 1980 BUDGETS , AND WHICH ON 1 JANUARY 1980 HAVE NOT YET BEEN COMMITTED OR WHICH HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BUT NOT YET PAID , MAY BE USED FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE PRESENT PROGRAMME .   DONE AT BRUSSELS , 13 MARCH 1980 .   FOR THE COUNCIL   THE PRESIDENT   G . ZAMBERLETTI ****    ANNEX A   RESEARCH PROGRAMME ( 1980 TO 1983 )   A . NUCLEAR SAFETY AND THE FUEL CYCLE ( JOINT PROGRAMME )   A.1 . REACTOR SAFETY ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING 11 PROJECTS :   -  PROJECT LOBI : STUDY OF LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENTS IN LIGHT-WATER REACTORS ,   -  PROJECT SUPER-SARA : AN IN-PILE EXPERIMENT ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR FUEL IN THE EVENT OF LOSS OF COOLANT ,   -  PROJECT LWR PRIMARY CIRCUIT INTEGRITY : EARLY DETECTION OF FAULTS IN LIGHT-WATER REACTOR VESSELS ,   -  FAST-BREEDER FUEL SUB-ASSEMBLY THERMOHYDRAULICS ,   -  MECHANICAL TESTS OF FAST-BREEDER STRUCTURAL MATERIALS ,   -  DEVELOPMENT OF FAST-BREEDER HYPOTHETICAL ACCIDENT CODES ,   -  PROJECT PAHR : STUDY OF THE EVACUATION OF RESIDUAL HEAT IN A FAST-BREEDER MOLTEN CORE ,   -  PROJECT PAHR IN-PILE ,   -  STUDY OF FUEL-COOLANT INTERACTION UNDER ACCIDENT CONDITIONS ,   -  STUDY OF THE BEHAVIOUR OF STRUCTURES AND CONTAINMENTS SUBJECTED TO ACCIDENTAL STRESSES ,   -  ANALYSIS OF RELIABILITY , RISK ASSESSMENT AND DATA BANK .   A.2 . PLUTONIUM FUELS AND ACTINIDE RESEARCH ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING THREE PROJECTS :   -  UTILIZATION LIMITS OF PLUTONIUM FUELS ,   -  SAFETY OF ACTINIDE CYCLE ,   -  ACTINIDE RESEARCH .   A.3 . SAFETY OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR PROJECTS :   -  RISK EVALUATION ,   -  PROTECTIVE BARRIERS ,   -  ACTINIDE SEPARATION ,   -  ACTINIDE MONITORING .   A.4 . FISSILE MATERIALS CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR PROJECTS :   -  ACQUISITION OF DATA ON ACCOUNTANCY AND MATERIALS BALANCE EVALUATION ,   -  DEVELOPMENT OF MEASUREMENT METHODS AND INSTRUMENTATION AND OF METHODS FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE ISOTOPIC COMPOSITION OF IRRADIATED FUELS ,   -  CONTAINMENT AND SURVEILLANCE TECHNIQUES ,   -  STUDY OF SAFEGUARDS SYSTEMS FOR THE FUEL CYCLE AS A WHOLE .   B . NEW ENERGIES ( JOINT PROGRAMME )   B.1 . SOLAR ENERGY ( NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR PROJECTS :   -  EUROPEAN SOLAR TEST INSTALLATION ( ESTI ),   -  SOLAR ENERGY FOR HABITAT AND LOW-TEMPERATURE APPLICATIONS ,   -  SOLAR POWER PLANT MATERIALS ,   -  PHOTO-ELECTROCHEMICAL AND PHOTO-CHEMICAL CONVERSION .   B.2 . HYDROGEN PRODUCTION , ENERGY STORAGE AND TRANSPORT  ( NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING THREE PROJECTS :   -  THERMOCHEMICAL PRODUCTION OF HYDROGEN ,   -  ADVANCED STUDIES ON ENERGY CARRIERS ,   -  SYSTEMS STUDIES .   B.3 . THERMONUCLEAR FUSION TECHNOLOGY ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING FIVE PROJECTS :   -  CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ON FUSION REACTORS ,   -  BLANKET TECHNOLOGY STUDIES ,   -  STUDIES ON STRUCTURAL MATERIALS ,   -  STUDIES ON ADVANCED MATERIALS ,   -  OPERATION OF THE CYCLOTRON .   B.4 . HIGH-TEMPERATURE MATERIALS ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING THREE PROJECTS :   -  HIGH-TEMPERATURE MATERIALS INFORMATION CENTRE ,   -  MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING STUDIES ,   -  HIGH-TEMPERATURE MATERIALS DATA BANK .   C . STUDY AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ( JOINT PROGRAMME )   C.1 . PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ( NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING SIX PROJECTS :   -  PROJECT ECDIN ,   -  EXPOSURE TO CHEMICAL PRODUCTS , IN PARTICULAR INDOOR POLLUTION AND ORGANIC SUBSTANCES ,   -  ANALYSIS OF AIR QUALITY ,   -  ANALYSIS OF WATER QUALITY ,   -  HEAVY METALS POLLUTION AND HEALTH EFFECTS ,   -  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF CONVENTIONAL POWER PLANTS .   C.2 . REMOTE SENSING FROM SPACE ( NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO PROJECTS :   -  AGRICULTURE ,   -  PROTECTION OF THE SEA .   D . NUCLEAR MEASUREMENTS ( JOINT PROGRAMME )   D.1 . NUCLEAR MEASUREMENTS ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO PROJECTS :   -  MEASUREMENT OF NUCLEAR DATA ,   -  NUCLEAR REFERENCE MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES .   E . SPECIFIC SUPPORT FOR THE COMMISSION ' S SECTORAL ACTIVITIES ( JOINT PROGRAMME )   E.1 .  INFORMATICS ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   THE PROGRAMME CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING THREE PROJECTS :   -  DATA COMMUNICATION ,   -  EUROCOPI ,   -  EUROPEAN SHIELDING INFORMATION SERVICE ( ESIS ).   E.2 . SUPPORT TO SAFEGUARDS ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   E.3 . SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY BUREAU OF REFERENCES  ( NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   E.4 . TRAINING AND EDUCATION ( NUCLEAR AND NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   E.5 . UTILIZATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS ( NUCLEAR AND NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   E.6 . PROVISION OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES  ( NUCLEAR AND NON-NUCLEAR ACTIVITY )   F . OPERATION OF LARGE-SCALE INSTALLATIONS   SUPPLEMENTARY PROGRAMME   F.1 . OPERATION OF THE HFR REACTOR ( NUCLEAR ACTIVITY ) ****    ANNEX B    INDICATIVE BREAKDOWN OF STAFF AND FUNDS    //   // PROGRAMMES  //  EXPENDITURE COMMITMENTS  ( MILLION EUA ) //  TOTAL STAFF //  OF WHICH RESEARCH STAFF //  //   // A . NUCLEAR SAFETY AND THE FUEL CYCLE // 1 . REACTOR SAFETY //  151.30 ( 1 ) ( 2 ) //    716 //    308 // 2 . PLUTONIUM FUELS AND ACTINIDE RESEARCH //   56.35 //    207 // 117 // 3 . SAFETY OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS //   20.85 //    115 //    52 // 4 . FISSILE MATERIALS CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT //   20.50 //    112 //   55 //   // TOTAL //  249.00 //  1 150 //    532 //  // B . NEW ENERGIES // 1 . SOLAR ENERGY //   22.90 //    117 //    60 // 2 . HYDROGEN PRODUCTION , ENERGY STORAGE AND TRANSPORT // 14.10 //    79 //    40 // 3 . THERMONUCLEAR FUSION TECHNOLOGY //   26.10 //    124 //    60 // 4 . HIGH-TEMPERATURE MATERIALS //   14.90 //    63 //    38 //   // TOTAL //   78.00 //    383 //    198 //  // C . STUDY AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT // 1 . PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT //   33.90 //    174 //    90 // 2 . REMOTE SENSING FROM SPACE //   18.35 //    97 //    50 //   // TOTAL //   52.25 //    271 //    140 //  // D . NUCLEAR MEASUREMENTS //   43.20 //    184 //    108 //  // E . SPECIFIC SUPPORT TO THE COMMISSION // 1 . INFORMATICS //   13.83 //     69 //    34 // 2 . SUPPORT TO SAFEGUARDS //   5.90 //    25 //    13 // 3 . SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY BUREAU OF REFERENCES //   2.62 // 13 //     7 // 4 . TRAINING AND EDUCATION //   3.31 //    17 //     9 // 5 . UTILIZATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS //   1.74 //     8 //     1 // 6 . PROVISION OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERVICES //   8.80 // 52 //    27 //   // TOTAL //   36.20 //    184 //    91 //  // SUB-TOTAL //  458.65 //  // F . OPERATION OF LARGE-SCALE INSTALLATIONS // 1 . OPERATION OF THE HFR REACTOR //   52.22 //    88 //    41 //  // GRAND TOTAL //  510.87 ( 1 ) ( 2 ) //   2 260 ( 3 ) //  1 110 //  ( 1 ) INCLUDING A PROVISIONAL AMOUNT OF 6 770 000 EUA RESERVED FOR THE PAHR IN-PILE PROJECT .  ( 2 ) INCLUDING A PROVISIONAL AMOUNT OF 40 610 000 EUA FOR THE SECOND PHASE OF THE SUPER-SARA PROJECT .  ( 3 ) A MAXIMUM OF 20 STAFF IS ADDED TO THIS FIGURE IN 1980 ONLY CORRESPONDING TO THE DECREASE IN CENTRE STAFF PROVIDED FOR IN DECISION 77/488/EEC , EURATOM . ****    ANNEX C   SCALE OF FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MEMBER STATES FOR THE EURATOM SUPPLEMENTARY RESEARCH AND TRAINING PROGRAMME   FLAT-RATE SCALE   OPERATION AND UTILIZATION OF THE HFR REACTOR :   -  FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY:50 % ,  -  NETHERLANDS:50 % .


title: 2009/662/EC: Decision of the European Parliament of 23 April 2009 on the closure of the accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency for the financial year 2007

text:
               26.9.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 255/156

      DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

   of 23 April 2009
   on the closure of the accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency for the financial year 2007
   (2009/662/EC)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency for the financial year 2007 (1),

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the final annual accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency for the financial year 2007, together with the Agency’s replies (2),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 10 February 2009 (5588/2009 — C6-0060/2009),

               —

               having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 460/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 establishing a European Network and Information Security Agency (4), and in particular Article 17 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 71 of, and Annex V to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A6-0158/2009),

               1.

               Notes that the final annual accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency are as annexed to the Court of Auditors’ report;

               2.

               Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Network and Information Security Agency for the financial year 2007;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Executive Director of the European Network and Information Security Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Hans-Gert PÖTTERING

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 278, 31.10.2008, p. 23.

      (2)  OJ C 311, 5.12.2008, p. 13.

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.