title: 2012/580/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in, respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/213

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010
   (2012/580/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

               —

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

               —

               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 (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (3), and in particular Article 19 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 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 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 Transport and Tourism (A7-0137/2012),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2010;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 52.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1.

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

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2012
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in, respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

                  —

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

                  —

                  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 (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (3), and in particular Article 19 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 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Rule 77 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 Transport and Tourism (A7-0137/2012),

                  A.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency (‘the Agency’) for the financial year 2010 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

                  B.

                  whereas on 10 May 2011 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the Agency discharge for implementation of its budget for the financial year 2009 (5), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                              —

                              called on the Agency to consider making a Gantt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities, with a view to indicating in a concise form the amount of time spent by each staff member on a project and encouraging an approach geared towards achieving results; calls, accordingly, on the Agency to inform the discharge authority of the steps taken by the Agency in that respect;

                              —

                              urged the Agency to correctly apply procurement procedures but welcomed the fact that in its 2009 Annual Activity Report (AAR) the Agency included a specific Annex on negotiated procedures, in order to inform the budgetary authority,

                  C.

                  whereas the budget of the Agency for the financial year 2010 was EUR 54 400 000 compared to EUR 53 300 000 in 2009, which was an increase of 6,1 %; whereas the contribution of the Union to the budget of the Agency for 2010 was EUR 31 949 360 compared to EUR 24 435 000 in 2009 (6), which represents an increase of 30,75 %,

         Budget and Financial Management

                  1.

                  Acknowledges from the Agency that it received EUR 54 400 000 in commitment appropriations and EUR 50 600 000 in payment appropriations; takes note that this is an increase of 11,21 % in commitment appropriations, but a decrease of 5,33 % in payment appropriations compared to 2009;

                  2.

                  Notes from the Agency’s Report on Budgetary and Financial Management that, in 2010, the Agency had a budget execution rate of 98 % in terms of committed appropriations and of 89 % in terms of payment appropriations; notes also that, compared to 2009, the Agency’s budget execution rates increased for both commitment appropriations (+ 4 %) and payment appropriations (+ 8 %); calls on the Agency to take the necessary action to further improve its budget implementation and to keep the discharge authority regularly informed on this matter;

         Carry-overs

                  3.

                  Notes from the Agency’s Report on Budgetary and Financial Management that the amount of appropriations carried over from 2010 to 2011 to cover unpaid commitments at year-end amounted to EUR 1 214 272,92; understands from the Agency that this level of carry-overs is 43 % lower compared to 2009; calls nevertheless on the Agency to take further action to decrease its carry-overs and respect the principle of annuality;

                  4.

                  Regrets that the Court of Auditors did not mention the Agency’s appropriations carried over and cancelled in its report on the annual accounts of the Agency for the financial year 2010;

         ‘A posteriori’ commitments

                  5.

                  Acknowledges that following the request of the Parliament the Agency has included in its 2010 AAR specific information on a posteriori commitments (i.e. legal commitments that were entered into before the corresponding budgetary commitments were made); notes the Agency’s efforts to reduce a posteriori commitments (from more than 20 in 2007 to 5 in 2010); but is concerned that such commitments are an infringement of Article 62(1) of the framework Financial Regulation and that the Agency has perpetuated this deficiency since 2006;

         Procurement procedure

                  6.

                  Acknowledges from the Agency’s AAR that the Legal and Financial Affairs unit dealt with a total of 54 procurement procedures in 2010;

                  7.

                  Urges the Agency to correctly apply procurement procedures and ensure adequate data on planned public procurement in its Annual Work Programme (AWP); in particular, considers it a matter of concern that the AWP does not explicitly disclose all information referred to in the Financial Regulation and its implementing rules; reminds the Agency that if a financing decision on planned operational procurement is not adequately supported by underlying data then this may call into question the validity of the Agency’s decision; notes from the Agency that as from 2011, a specific annex has been introduced in the Final Work programme, with an indication of the global budgetary envelope reserved for the procurements during the year, an indicative number of the contracts and indicative timeframes grouped per activities;

                  8.

                  Calls on the Agency to ensure accurate and timely reporting on negotiated procedures to the Administrative Board; acknowledges, in fact, that the Agency’s negotiated procedures, which should be used under strictly defined conditions, are not necessarily reported to the Administrative Board;

         Human resources

                  9.

                  Is concerned that the independence of the Accounting Officer of the Agency was reported to be at risk in 2010; notes, in fact, that:

                              —

                              his appointment was still at ‘interim’ at the beginning of the year;

                              —

                              his responsibilities were not formally defined; and

                              —

                              the evaluation of the performance of his duties was made by the Agency’s Executive Director without any involvement of the Administrative Board;

                  10.

                  Welcomes the decision of the Administrative Board of 14 June 2010 to formalise the appointment of the Accounting Officer of the Agency; notes the decision of the Administrative Board of 10 November 2011 amending the general provision for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations that clarifies the role of the Administrative Board towards the Accounting Officer;

                  11.

                  Underlines nevertheless that weaknesses remain with regard to the Accounting Officer, notably concerning the definition of his responsibilities and the evaluation of the performance of his duties; notes that the Agency has taken actions to remedy the earlier reported situation;

         Performance

                  12.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Agency adopted in March 2010 its five-year multiannual work programme; notes also that the 2010 Annual Report of the Agency reports for each operational activity the input, outcome of its activity and, for comparison, each entry also provides the planned input and output, as stated in the agency Work Programme for 2010;

                  13.

                  Regrets that in its annual report for 2010 the Court of Auditors did not make any reference to Agency’s budget transfers; considers that the high number of budget transfers in the Agency was a matter of concern for the Parliament during the previous years (49 in 2009, 52 in 2008 and 32 in 2007); asks, therefore, the Court of Auditors to inform immediately the discharge authority of the situation as regards transfers in 2010;

                  14.

                  Reiterates its call to the Agency to consider making a Gantt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities, in order to indicate in a concise form the amount of time spent by each staff member on a project and encourage an approach geared towards achieving results; calls, accordingly, on the Agency to inform the discharge authority of the concrete steps taken;

                  15.

                  Draws attention to the new tasks assigned to the Agency in the proposal for a regulation amending its founding Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002; calls on the Commission to increase the resources allocated to the Agency and on the Agency to manage those resources soundly and effectively so as to properly fulfil the new responsibilities entrusted to it on the basis of that Regulation;

         Internal audit

                  16.

                  Acknowledges that the Agency still has to implement 15 ‘very important’ recommendations from the Internal Audit Service; is concerned that the implementation of 8 of these recommendations has been delayed by 6-12 months, while one has been rejected; notes that the first 11 ‘very important’ recommendations concern the legal and financial decision-making process, the human resources management and the internal control standards; notes also that the rejected recommendation concerns the responsibility for the performance evaluation of the Accounting Officer; urges, therefore, the Agency to explain to the discharge authority the reasons behind this rejection and calls on the Agency to take action on the delayed recommendations;

                  17.

                  Notes the Agency’s initiative of sharing an Internal Audit function (Internal Audit Capability-IAC) with the Community Fisheries Control Agency;

                  18.

                  Acknowledges in particular that the IAC provided internal consultancy regarding internal control issues such as:

                              —

                              the development of the Business Continuity Plan for maritime applications;

                              —

                              the development of the Business Continuity Plan for support activities;

                              —

                              the procedure for Registration of Exceptions;

                        notes the Agency’s statement that the Business Continuity Plan for maritime applications, the Business Continuity Plan for support activities and the procedure for Registration of Exceptions have been adopted;

                  19.

                  Draws attention to its recommendations from previous discharge reports, as set out in the Annex to this resolution;

                  20.

                  Refers the Agency to, and urges it to comply with, the Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on the 2009 discharge: performance, financial management and control of EU agencies (7);

                  21.

                  Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its resolution of 10 May 2012 (8) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

         (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 52.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1.

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

         (5)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 181.

         (6)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010, p. 615.

         (7)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 269.

         (8)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0164 (see page 388 of this Official Journal).

      ANNEX

         EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RECOMMENDATIONS OVER PAST YEARS

                  European Maritime Safety Agency

                  2006

                  2007

                  2008

                  2009

                  Performance

                  n.a.

                              —

                              Incorrect budget presentation

                              —

                              The Agency failed to prepare a multiannual work programme and its annual work programme was not related to its commitment budget

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators, as well as to make a Gannt diagram→promoting a result-oriented approach

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set out a diachronic analysis of operations carried out in this and the previous years

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to consider making a Gannt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to set out a comparison of the operations that were carried out during the year for which the discharge is to be granted and during the previous financial year

                  Budgetary and financial management

                  The procedures for establishing the budget and the establishment plan were not sufficiently rigorous→ inadequate planning of staff recruitment and incorrect budget presentation

                              —

                              The budgetary principle of accuracy was not strictly observed

                              —

                              Some contracts allowed for 100 % pre-financing: this practice is not in line with the principles of sound financial management

                              —

                              Incorrect budget presentation: for differentiated appropriations, the budget did not include the schedule of payments due in subsequent financial years to meet budget commitments entered into earlier financial year

                              —

                              Legal commitments were entered into before the corresponding budgetary commitments

                              —

                              The procedures for establishing the budget were not sufficiently rigorous→high number of budgetary transfers (32 in 2007)

                              —

                              Weaknesses in the planning and monitoring of the payment appropriations for operational activities (EUR 7 500 000 have been cancelled)

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to step up its training and communication efforts in order to avoid situations in which legal commitments are entered before the corresponding budgetary commitments were made

                              —

                              Calls on the Commission to examine ways to ensuring that the principle of needs-based cash management is implemented

                              —

                              Court of Auditors noted the high number of budget transfers in 2009, urges the Agency to improve its planning and monitoring in order to reduce the number of budget transfers

                              —

                              Urges the Agency to correctly apply procurement procedures

                  Human resources

                  n.a.

                              —

                              Transparency issues in the recruitment procedures: for the audited recruitment procedures, the selection criteria and the threshold scores for passing to the next stage of competitions were not decided upon before the evaluation process started

                              —

                              Calls on improving human resources strategy→ transparency issues (see Internal audit)

                              —

                              Notes deficiencies in staff selection procedures, urges the Agency to redress the present weaknesses

                  Internal audit

                  n.a.

                  n.a.

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to take steps to fulfil 7 out of 32 recommendations made by the Internal Audit Service → i.e. the adoption of the Staff Regulation Implementing Rules regarding the recruitment of temporary staff in accordance with the Staff Regulations; the controls in the selection procedure to ensure more transparency and equal treatment of candidates; the development of a career planning strategy

                              —

                              Calls on the Agency to rapidly implement the IAS very important recommendations, stresses in particular:

                                          —

                                          provide strategic planning and monitor the Agency’s stakeholders with an overview of the residual oil pollution risks;

                                          —

                                          comply with administrative procedures;

                                          —

                                          analyse possible options for equipment management and evaluation of their financial and operational impact;

                                          —

                                          document vessels mobilisation decisions;

                              —

                              Notes that the IAS recommendations which still need to be implemented by the Agency include establishing;

                                          —

                                          an internal risk assessment;

                                          —

                                          an inventory of existing internal procedures;

                                          —

                                          a roadmap for the development and implementation of the remaining procedures;

                                          —

                                          a record of the exceptions procedures; and

                                          —

                                          a review of the internal control system


title: 2013/296/EU: Council Decision of 13 May 2013 on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas#Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas

text:
               20.6.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 168/1

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 13 May 2013
   on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas
   (2013/296/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 77(2)(a), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a), thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In accordance with Council Decision 2012/353/EU (1), the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas (‘the Agreement’) was signed on 27 June 2012 subject to its conclusion.

               (2)

               The Agreement should be approved.

               (3)

               This Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis
                   (2); the United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

               (4)

               This Decision constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland’s request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis
                   (3); Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

               (5)

               In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.
   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council shall designate the person empowered to proceed, on behalf of the European Union, to the notification provided for in Article 2 of the Agreement, in order to express the consent of the European Union to be bound by the Agreement (4).
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 13 May 2013.

            For the Council

            The President

         S. COVENEY

      (1)  OJ L 174, 4.7.2012, p. 4.

      (2)  OJ L 131, 1.6.2000, p. 43.

      (3)  OJ L 64, 7.3.2002, p. 20.

      (4)  The date of entry into force of the Agreement will be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by the General Secretariat of the Council.

         AGREEMENT

      between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova amending the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas
      THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      and
      THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA,
      hereinafter referred to as ‘the Parties’,
      HAVING REGARD to the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas which entered into force on 1 January 2008,
      DESIRING to further facilitate people-to-people contacts,
      RECOGNISING the importance of the introduction of a visa-free travel regime for the citizens of the Republic of Moldova in due course, provided that the conditions for well-managed and secure mobility are in place,
      TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the Protocol on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union and the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and confirming that the provisions of this Agreement do not apply to the United Kingdom and Ireland,
      TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and confirming that the provisions of this Agreement do not apply to Denmark,
      HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
      Article 1
      The Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Moldova on the facilitation of the issuance of visas, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement’, shall be amended in accordance with the provisions of this Article:

                  (1)

                  In the title, the word ‘Community’ shall be replaced by the word ‘Union’.

                  (2)

                  In Article 2(1) and (2) and in Article 3 point (e), the word ‘Community’ shall be replaced by the words ‘European Union’.

                  (3)

                  Article 4 paragraph 1 shall be amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              Point (d) shall be replaced by the following:

                                          ‘(d)

                                          for drivers conducting international cargo and passenger transportation services to the territories of the Member States in vehicles registered in the Republic of Moldova:

                                                      —

                                                      a written request from the national association of carriers of the Republic of Moldova providing for international road transportation, stating the purpose, itinerary, duration and frequency of the trips;’;

                              (b)

                              Point (f) shall be replaced by the following:

                                          ‘(f)

                                          for journalists and the technical crew accompanying them in a professional capacity:

                                                      —

                                                      certificate or other document issued by a professional organisation or the applicant’s employer proving that the person concerned is a qualified journalist and stating that the purpose of the journey is to carry out journalistic work or proving that the person is a member of the technical crew accompanying the journalist in a professional capacity;’;

                              (c)

                              Point (k) shall be replaced by the following:

                                          ‘(k)

                                          for close relatives – spouse, children (including adopted children), parents (including custodians), grandparents and grandchildren – visiting citizens of the Republic of Moldova legally residing in the territory of the Member States, or citizens of the European Union residing in the territory of the Member State of which they are nationals:

                                                      —

                                                      a written request from the host person;’;

                              (d)

                              The following point shall be added:

                                          ‘(p)

                                          for participants in official European Union cross-border cooperation programmes, such as under the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI):

                                                      —

                                                      a written request by the host organisation.’.

                  (4)

                  In Article 5, paragraphs 1 to 3 shall be replaced by the following:
                  ‘1.   Diplomatic missions and consular posts of the Member States shall issue multiple-entry visas with a term of validity of five years to the following categories of persons:

                              (a)

                              members of national and regional Governments and Parliaments, of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court if they are not exempted from the visa requirement by this Agreement, in the exercise of their duties;

                              (b)

                              permanent members of official delegations who, following an official invitation addressed to the Republic of Moldova, are to participate regularly in meetings, consultations, negotiations or exchange programs, as well as in events held in the territory of the Member States by intergovernmental organisations;

                              (c)

                              spouses and children (including adopted children), who are under the age of 21 or are dependent, and parents (including custodians) visiting citizens of the Republic of Moldova legally residing in the territory of the Member States or citizens of the European Union residing in the territory of the Member State of which they are nationals;

                              (d)

                              business people and representatives of business organisations who regularly travel to the Member States;

                              (e)

                              journalists and the technical crew accompanying them in a professional capacity.

                        By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where the need or the intention to travel frequently or regularly is manifestly limited to a shorter period, the term of validity of the multiple-entry visa shall be limited to that period, in particular where

                              —

                              in the case of the persons referred to in point (a), the term of office,

                              —

                              in the case of the persons referred to in point (b), the term of the validity of the status as a permanent member of an official delegation,

                              —

                              in the case of the persons referred to in point (c), the period of validity of the authorisation for legal residence of citizens of the Republic of Moldova legally residing in the European Union,

                              —

                              in the case of the persons referred to in point (d), the term of validity of the status as a representative of the business organisation or the work contract, or

                              —

                              in the case of the persons referred to in point (e), the work contract

                        is less than five years.
                  2.   Diplomatic missions and consular posts of the Member States shall issue multiple-entry visas with a term of validity of one year to the following categories of persons, provided that during the previous year they have obtained at least one visa, have made use of it in accordance with the laws on entry and stay of the visited State:

                              (a)

                              members of official delegations who, following an official invitation addressed to the Republic of Moldova, are to participate regularly in meetings, consultations, negotiations or exchange programs, as well as in events held in the territory of the Member States by intergovernmental organisations;

                              (b)

                              representatives of civil society organisations travelling regularly to Member States for the purposes of educational training, seminars or conferences, including in the framework of exchange programmes;

                              (c)

                              members of the professions participating in international exhibitions, conferences, symposia, seminars or other similar events who regularly travel to the Member States;

                              (d)

                              drivers conducting international cargo and passenger transportation services to the territories of the Member States in vehicles registered in the Republic of Moldova;

                              (e)

                              members of train, refrigerator and locomotive crews in international trains travelling to the territories of the Member States;

                              (f)

                              persons participating in scientific, cultural and artistic activities, including university and other exchange programs, who regularly travel to the Member States;

                              (g)

                              students and post-graduate students who regularly travel for the purposes of study or educational training, including in the framework of exchange programmes;

                              (h)

                              participants in international sports events and persons accompanying them in a professional capacity;

                              (i)

                              participants in official exchange programmes organised by twin cities or other localities;

                              (j)

                              participants in official European Union cross-border cooperation programmes, such as under the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI).

                        By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where the need or the intention to travel frequently or regularly is manifestly limited to a shorter period, the term of validity of the multiple-entry visa shall be limited to that period.
                  3.   Diplomatic missions and consular posts of the Member States shall issue multiple-entry visas with a term of validity of a minimum of two years and a maximum of five years to the categories of persons referred to in paragraph 2, provided that during the previous two years they have made use of the one year multiple-entry visas in accordance with the laws on entry and stay of the visited State unless the need or the intention to travel frequently or regularly is manifestly limited to a shorter period, in which case the term of validity of the multiple-entry visa shall be limited to that period.’.

                  (5)

                  Article 6 shall be amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              In paragraph 2,

                                          (i)

                                          the introductory words shall be replaced by the following:
                                          ‘2.   Without prejudice to paragraph 4 fees for processing the visa application are waived for the following categories of persons:’;

                                          (ii)

                                          in point (a), the following words shall be added:
                                          ‘or citizens of the European Union residing in the territory of the Member State of which they are nationals’;

                                          (iii)

                                          in point (j), the following words shall be added:
                                          ‘and the technical crew accompanying them in a professional capacity’;

                                          (iv)

                                          the following points shall be added:

                                                      ‘(p)

                                                      participants aged 25 years or less in seminars, conferences, sports, cultural or educational events, organised by non profit organisations;

                                                      (q)

                                                      representatives of civil society organisations undertaking trips for purposes of educational training, seminars, conferences, including in the framework of exchange programmes;

                                                      (r)

                                                      participants in official European Union cross-border cooperation programmes, such as under the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI).’;

                                          (v)

                                          the following subparagraph shall be added:
                                          ‘The first subparagraph shall apply also where the purpose of the journey is transit.’;

                              (b)

                              The following paragraph shall be added:
                              ‘4.   If a Member State cooperates with an external service provider in view of issuing a visa the external service provider may charge a service fee. This fee shall be proportionate to the costs incurred by the external service provider while performing its tasks and shall not exceed EUR 30. The Member States shall maintain the possibility for all applicants to lodge their applications directly at their consulates. The external service provider shall conduct its operations in accordance with the Visa Code and in full respect of Moldovan legislation.’.

                  (6)

                  The following Article shall be inserted:
                  ‘Article 6a
                  Lodging of an application without the presence of the applicant
                  Member States consulates may waive the requirement to appear in person, when the applicant is known to them for his integrity and reliability, unless the applicant is required to appear in person for the collection of biometric identifiers.’.

                  (7)

                  Article 8 shall be replaced by the following:
                  ‘Article 8
                  Departure in the case of lost or stolen documents
                  Citizens of the European Union and citizens of the Republic of Moldova who have lost their identity documents, or from whom those documents have been stolen while staying in the territory of the Republic of Moldova or of the Member States, may leave the territory of the Republic of Moldova or of the Member States on the basis of valid identity documents entitling them to cross the border issued by diplomatic missions or consular posts of the Member States or of the Republic of Moldova without any visa or other authorisation.’.

                  (8)

                  Article 10 shall be amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              The title shall be replaced by the following:

                                 ‘Diplomatic and service passports’;

                              (b)

                              Paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following:
                              ‘2.   Citizens of the Republic of Moldova, holders of valid biometric service passports can enter, leave and transit through the territories of the Member States without visas.’;

                              (c)

                              The following paragraph shall be added:
                              ‘3.   Persons mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2 may stay in the territories of the Member States for a period not exceeding 90 days per period of 180 days.’.

                  (9)

                  Article 12(1) shall be amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              In the first sentence, the word ‘Community’ shall be replaced by the word ‘Union’;

                              (b)

                              In the second sentence, the word ‘Community’ shall be replaced by the words ‘European Union’ and the words ‘Commission of the European Communities’ by the words ‘European Commission’.

                  (10)

                  Article 13 shall be amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              The existing paragraph shall be numbered as paragraph 1;

                              (b)

                              The following paragraph shall be added:
                              ‘2.   The provisions of bilateral Agreements or arrangements between individual Member States and the Republic of Moldova concluded before the entry into force of this Agreement providing for the exemption of the holders of non-biometric service passports from the visa requirement shall continue to apply without prejudice to the right of the Member States concerned or the Republic of Moldova to denounce or suspend these bilateral agreements or arrangements.’.

                  (11)

                  In Article 14, the following first paragraph shall be inserted:
                  ‘The Republic of Moldova may only reintroduce the visa requirement for citizens or certain categories of citizens of all Member States and not for citizens or certain categories of citizens of individual Member States.’.

            Article 2
      This Agreement shall be ratified or approved by the Parties in accordance with their respective procedures and shall enter into force on the first day of the second month following the date on which the last Party notifies the other that the procedures referred to above have been completed.

         Done at Brussels on the twenty-seventh day of June in the year two thousand and twelve, in duplicate in the official languages of the Parties, each of these texts being equally authentic.

            За Европейския съюз
            Por la Unión Europea
            Za Evropskou unii
            For Den Europæiske Union
            Für die Europäische Union
            Euroopa Liidu nimel
            Για την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση
            For the European Union
            Pour l'Union européenne
            Per l'Unione europea
            Eiropas Savienības vārdā –
            Europos Sąjungos vardu
            Az Európai Unió részéről
            Għall-Unjoni Ewropea
            Voor de Europese Unie
            W imieniu Unii Europejskiej
            Pela União Europeia
            Pentru Uniunea Europeană
            Za Európsku úniu
            Za Evropsko unijo
            Euroopan unionin puolesta
            För Europeiska unionen
            Pentru Uniunea Europeană

            3a Република Молдова
            Por la República de Moldavia
            Za Moldavskou republiku
            For Republikken Moldova
            Für die Republik Moldau
            Moldova Vabariigi nimel
            Για τη Δημοκρατία της Μολδαβίας
            For the Republic of Moldova
            Pour la République de Moldavie
            Per la Repubblica moldova
            Moldovas Republikas vārdā –
            Moldovos Respublikos vardu
            A Moldovai Köztársaság részéről
            Għar-Repubblika tal-Moldova
            Voor de Republiek Moldavië
            W imieniu Republiki Mołdawii
            Pela República da Moldova
            Pentru Republica Moldova
            Za Moldavskú republiku
            Za Republiko Moldavijo
            Moldovan tasavallan puolesta
            För Republiken Moldavien
            Pentru Republica Moldova

         JOINT DECLARATION ON COOPERATION ON TRAVEL DOCUMENTS
         The Parties agree that the Joint Committee established pursuant to Article 12 of the Agreement, when monitoring the implementation of the Agreement, should evaluate the impact of the level of security of the respective travel documents on the functioning of the Agreement. To that end, the Parties agree to regularly inform each other about the measures taken for avoiding the proliferation of travel documents, developing the technical aspects of travel document security as well as regarding the personalisation process of the issuance of travel documents.

         EUROPEAN UNION DECLARATION ON DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED WHEN APPLYING FOR SHORT-STAY VISAS
         The European Union will establish a harmonised list of supporting documents, in accordance with Article 48 paragraph 1 lit. a of the Visa Code, in order to ensure that applicants from the Republic of Moldova are required to submit, in principle, the same supporting documents. The European Union will inform the Republic of Moldova in the Committee, when such a list has been established. The European Union will also inform the citizens of the Republic of Moldova in accordance with Article 47 paragraph 1 lit. a of the Visa Code.

         EUROPEAN UNION DECLARATION ON COOPERATION WITH EXTERNAL SERVICE PROVIDERS
         The European Union commits itself to outsource the reception of visa applications only as a last resort, when there are particular circumstances or reasons relating to the local situation, such as where the high number of applicants does not allow the collection of applications and of data to be organised in a timely manner and in decent conditions; or it is not possible to ensure a good territorial coverage of the third country concerned in any other way; and where other forms of cooperation prove not to be appropriate for the Member State concerned.

         EUROPEAN UNION DECLARATION ON FACILITATIONS FOR FAMILY MEMBERS
         The European Union takes note of the suggestion of the Republic of Moldova to give a wider definition to the notion of family members that should benefit from visa facilitation as well as of the importance that the Republic of Moldova attaches to the simplification of movement of this category of persons.
         In order to ease the mobility of an extended number of persons which have family links (in particular sisters and brothers and their children) with citizens of the Republic of Moldova legally residing in the territories of Member States or with citizens of the European Union residing in the territory of the Member State of which they are nationals, the European Union invites the Member States’ consular offices to make full use of the existing possibilities in the Visa Code for facilitating the issuance of visas to this category of persons, including in particular, the simplification of documentary evidence requested for the applicants, exemptions from handling fees and, where appropriate, the issuing of multiple-entry visas.

         JOINT DECLARATION CONCERNING SWITZERLAND AND LIECHTENSTEIN
         The Parties take note of the close relationship between the Union and Switzerland and Liechtenstein, particularly by virtue of the Agreement of 26 October 2004 concerning the association of these countries with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis.
         In such circumstances, it is desirable that the authorities of Switzerland and Liechtenstein and the Republic of Moldova conclude, without delay, bilateral agreements on the facilitation of the issuance of short-stay visas in similar terms as the amended Agreement.


title: 2013/618/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011#Resolution of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/345

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011
   (2013/618/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05755/2013 – C7-0040/2013),

               —

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

               —

               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 (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 72/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the ENIAC Joint Undertaking (4), and in particular Article 11(4) 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 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0105/2013),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2011;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 6, 10.1.2013, p. 18.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 21.

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

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 17 April 2013
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the ENIAC Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05755/2013 – C7-0040/2013),

                  —

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

                  —

                  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 (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 72/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the ENIAC Joint Undertaking (4), and in particular Article 11(4) 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 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0105/2013),

                  A.

                  whereas the ENIAC Joint Undertaking (‘the Joint Undertaking’) was set up in 20 December 2007 for a period of 10 years to define and implement a ‘research agenda’ for the development of key competences for nanoelectronics across different application areas;

                  B.

                  whereas the Joint Undertaking was granted its financial autonomy in July 2010;

                  C.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011 are reliable;

                  D.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors has delivered a qualified opinion on the legality and the regularity of the transactions underlying the Joint Undertaking’s accounts;

                  E.

                  whereas the maximum contribution for the period of 10 years from the Union to the Joint Undertaking is EUR 450 000 000 to be paid from the budget of the Seventh Research Framework Programme.

         Budgetary and financial management

                  1.

                  Takes note that the Joint Undertaking’s 2011 final budget included commitment and payment appropriations amounting to EUR 66 000 000 and EUR 35 000 000 respectively and that the utilisation rates were 97 % for commitment appropriations and 48 % for payment appropriations respectively; notes furthermore that out of the EUR 63,6 million commitment appropriations available for operational activities, EUR 20,1 million was implemented as a global commitment for the first 2011 call for proposals and EUR 42,2 million was implemented as a global commitment for the second 2011 call for proposals; calls for a detailed progress report on those shortcomings which makes specific proposals for a gradual improvement in utilisation rates;

                  2.

                  Regrets that the Joint Undertaking’s appropriations, which should have been implemented by the end of 2010 and appropriations which should have been implemented by the end of 2011, were decommitted in January 2012 and that the unused global commitment of EUR 2,8 million on the operational activities budget line for 2010 with a final date of implementation of 31 December 2011 was not decommitted; takes note that the Joint Undertakings have been taken actions to avoid any future recurrence defining a detailed procedure for managing the year end closure and setting hard deadlines;

                  3.

                  Is concerned that annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking received a qualified opinion from the Court of Auditors on the legality and the regularity of the transactions underlying those accounts on the grounds that the Joint Undertaking was not in a position to assess whether the ex post audit strategy provides sufficient assurance with respect to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions; reiterates that the Joint Undertaking should reinforce without delay the quality of its ex ante controls in particular for the grant management, requests that the discharge authority is informed of the results of the following ex post audit processes conducted by the Joint Undertaking; expects that the Court through its independent audits will be in position to provide the discharge authority with its own opinion on the effectiveness of the Joint Undertaking’s ex post audit strategy;

                  4.

                  Recalls that the Joint Undertaking adopted an ex post audit strategy in 2010 that is key to assessing the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions and that its implementation started in 2011; notes that the audit of project cost claims has been delegated to the National Funding Authorities (NFAs) of the Member States; however the administrative agreements signed with the NFAs do not include the practical arrangements for those audits; notes furthermore that the Joint Undertaking had not received sufficient information relating to the audit strategies of the NFAs; deplores the fact that no ex post audits had been carried out by the NFAs on the grants paid up to the end of 2011 and invites the Joint Undertaking to inform the discharge authority on the follow up actions taken;

         Calls for proposals

                  5.

                  Takes note that the calls for proposals duly organised in 2008, 2009 and 2010 resulted in signed grant agreements totalling EUR 107,9 million, which represent 25 % of the maximum Union contribution to the Joint Undertaking for research activities, and that in 2011, two calls for proposals were launched amounting to EUR 62,3 million; notes that in 2012, two more calls for proposals were launched amounting to EUR 84,5 million and that during 2013, calls for proposals with a budget of EUR 185,3 million (42 %) would have to be launched in order to fully use the available Union contribution of EUR 440 000 000; calls on the Joint Undertaking to make the best possible use of the resources that have been allocated for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Nanoelectronics;

         Internal control systems

                  6.

                  Reiterates its call that the Joint Undertaking should fully implement its internal controls and financial information systems; notes this triggered significant errors and delays in the financial reporting that were corrected before the adoption of the final accounts;

                  7.

                  Takes note that the Accounting Officer of the Joint Undertaking validated the financial and accounting systems (ABAC and SAP); notes, however, that the underlying business processes were not validated, in particular the one providing financial information about the validation and payment of the cost claims received from the national authorities were not validated during 2011; asks the Joint Undertaking to inform the discharge authority about the state of validation of the underlying business processes;

         Internal Audit

                  8.

                  Takes note that the Joint Undertaking’s Financial Rules have not yet been amended to include the provision of the Framework Regulation referring to the powers of the Commission’s internal auditor; notes, however, that in 2011, the Commission’s Internal Audit Service carried out a risk assessment exercise and that based on the results of the risk assessment, the strategic audit plan for 2012-2014 was presented to the Governing Board for adoption on 22 November 2011; recalls that at the end of 2011 the Joint Undertaking had not yet set up its internal audit capability but that Joint Undertaking decided in 2012 to assign a member of Its own staff to the IAC function;

         ENIAC Member States’ contribution

                  9.

                  Takes note that for the first five calls for proposals, the financial contribution from ENIAC Member States amounted to 1,55 times the Union financial contribution against the Joint Undertaking’s statutory principle that the financial contributions from ENIAC Member States are to amount in total to at least 1,8 times the Union financial contribution, while the Joint Undertaking’s grants can reach a maximum of 16,7 % of the total eligible costs of the projects;

                  10.

                  Condemns the fact that Greece is using Union structural funds to cover its national contributions to the Greek beneficiaries of the ENIAC projects instead of providing national funding, condemns the fact that the Joint Undertaking acknowledged the continuation of Greek participation in ENIAC projects but provides no funding to the Greek beneficiaries as an expenditure co-financed by Union structural funds shall not receive assistance from another Union financial instrument in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (6); requests that the Commission inform the discharge authority on the legality of this situation as soon as possible;

         Annual activity report

                  11.

                  Takes note that the annual activity report provides information on the results of the operations of the Joint Undertaking; however, it does not include an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the internal control system and contains the following weaknesses:

                              —

                              Lack of information on the implementation of the ex-post audit strategy, which is not sufficient to conclude whether this key control is functioning effectively, and should have led to a reservation;

                              —

                              No information on the partial validation of the financial and accounting systems by the accounting officer is provided;

                              —

                              The control weaknesses identified as regards the accounting and financial reporting did not lead to a reservation in the annual activity report;

         Other management matters

                  12.

                  Notes that in 2011, the Joint Undertaking set up a Business Continuity Plan and made progress on the formalisation of the IT security policies but further work is required to finalise the Disaster Recovery Plan;

                  13.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Host State Agreement between the Joint Undertaking and the Belgian authorities concerning office accommodation, privileges and immunities and other support to be provided was signed on 3 February 2012;

         Other issues

         Possible merger with Artemis

                  14.

                  Considers that cost benefit analysis of a merger with Artemis should be undertaken and that Parliament should be notified about the results of this assessment. This report should highlight the possible advantages and disadvantages of such a merger;

                  15.

                  Reiterates its invitation for the Court of Auditors to provide, within a reasonable deadline, a special report to Parliament on common issues which occur due to the nature of the joint undertakings, and which should be addressed by the joint undertakings together with their partners in order to ensure their added value and efficient execution of Union research, technological development and demonstration programmes; notes, furthermore, that that report should include an assessment of the effectiveness of the joint undertakings’ establishment and structure.

         (1)  OJ C 6, 10.1.2013, p. 18.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 21.

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

         (6)  OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 25.


title: 2010/700/EU: Council Decision of 21 October 2010 on the position to be taken by the European Union within the Association Council set up by the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part, with regard to the adoption of provisions on the coordination of social security systems#Draft — Decision No …/… of the Association Council set up by the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part, of … with regard to the provisions on the coordination of social security systems contained in the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement

text:
               23.11.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 306/21

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 21 October 2010
   on the position to be taken by the European Union within the Association Council set up by the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part, with regard to the adoption of provisions on the coordination of social security systems
   (2010/700/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 79(2)(b) in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 65 of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part (1) (‘the Agreement’), provides that the Association Council shall, by decision, adopt the appropriate provisions to implement the objectives set out in Article 64 of the Agreement.

               (2)

               Objective 2.3.3, first indent, of the EU-Israel Action Plan adopted by the Association Council in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy on 11 April 2005 calls for the adoption by the Association Council of a decision implementing Article 65 of the Agreement.

               (3)

               In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol (No 22) on the Position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it nor subject to its application.

               (4)

               In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol (No 21) on the Position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, those Member States are not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and are not bound by it or subject to its application,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The position to be taken by the European Union within the Association Council set up by the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part (‘the Agreement’), concerning the implementation of Article 64 of the Agreement, shall be based on the draft decision of the Association Council attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Luxembourg, 21 October 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         J. MILQUET

      (1)  OJ L 147, 21.6.2000, p. 3.

      Draft
      DECISION No …/… OF THE ASSOCIATION COUNCIL
      set up by the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part,
      of …
      with regard to the provisions on the coordination of social security systems contained in the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement
      THE ASSOCIATION COUNCIL,
      Having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part (1), and in particular Article 65 thereof,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  Article 64 of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part (‘the Agreement’), provides for the coordination of the social security systems of Israel and the Member States and lays down the principles for such coordination.

                  (2)

                  Article 65 of the Agreement provides that the Association Council shall adopt a decision implementing the objectives set out in Article 64.

                  (3)

                  Objective 2.3.3, first indent, of the EU-Israel Action Plan, as adopted by the Association Council in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy on 11 April 2005, calls for the adoption of a decision implementing Article 65 of the Agreement.

                  (4)

                  With regard to the application of the non-discrimination principle, this Decision should not give any additional rights arising from certain facts or events occurring on the territory of the other Contracting Party, where such facts or events are not taken into account under the legislation of the first Contracting Party, other than the right to export certain benefits.

                  (5)

                  In applying this Decision, the right of Israeli workers to family benefits should be subject to the condition that their family members legally reside with these workers in the Member State where the workers are employed. This Decision should not give any entitlement to family benefits with respect to members of their family who reside in another state, for instance Israel.

                  (6)

                  Council Regulation (EC) No 859/2003 (2) already extends the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 to nationals of third countries who are not already covered by those provisions solely on the grounds of their nationality. Regulation (EC) No 859/2003 already covers the principle of aggregation of insurance periods acquired by Israeli workers in the various Member States regarding entitlement to certain benefits, as set out in the first indent of Article 64(1) of the Agreement.

                  (7)

                  It might be necessary to lay down special provisions which correspond to the specific characteristics of the legislation of Israel, in order to facilitate the application of the coordination rules.

                  (8)

                  To ensure the smooth functioning of the coordination of the social security systems of the Member States and of Israel, it is necessary to provide for specific provisions regarding the cooperation between the Member States and Israel as well as between the person concerned and the institution of the competent state.

                  (9)

                  Transitional provisions should be adopted to protect the persons covered by this Decision and to ensure that they do not lose rights as a result of its entry into force,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
      PART I

         GENERAL PROVISIONS

      Article 1
      Definitions
      1.   For the purposes of this Decision:

                  (a)

                  ‘Agreement’ means the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part;

                  (b)

                  ‘Regulation’ means Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (3), as applicable in the Member States of the European Union;

                  (c)

                  ‘implementing Regulation’ means Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems (4);

                  (d)

                  ‘Member State’ means a Member State of the European Union;

                  (e)

                  ‘worker’ means:

                              (i)

                              for the purposes of the legislation of a Member State, a person pursuing an activity as an employed person within the meaning of Article 1(a) of the Regulation;

                              (ii)

                              for the purposes of the legislation of Israel, a person pursuing an activity as an employed person within the meaning of that legislation;

                  (f)

                  ‘member of the family’ means:

                              (i)

                              for the purposes of the legislation of a Member State, a member of the family within the meaning of Article 1(i) of the Regulation;

                              (ii)

                              for the purposes of the legislation of Israel, a member of the family within the meaning of that legislation;

                  (g)

                  ‘legislation’ means:

                              (i)

                              in relation to the Member States, legislation within the meaning of Article 1(l) of the Regulation as applicable to the benefits covered by this Decision;

                              (ii)

                              in relation to Israel, the relevant legislation as applicable in Israel relating to the benefits covered by this Decision;

                  (h)

                  ‘benefits’ means:

                              —

                              old-age pensions,

                              —

                              survivors’ pensions,

                              —

                              pensions in respect of accidents at work and occupational diseases,

                              —

                              invalidity pensions,

                              —

                              family allowances;

                  (i)

                  ‘exportable benefits’ means:

                              (i)

                              in relation to the Member States:

                                          —

                                          old-age pensions,

                                          —

                                          survivors’ pensions,

                                          —

                                          pensions in respect of accidents at work and occupational diseases,

                                          —

                                          invalidity pensions,

                                    within the meaning of the Regulation, with the exception of special non-contributory cash benefits as listed in Annex X to the Regulation;

                              (ii)

                              in relation to Israel, the corresponding benefits provided under the legislation of Israel, with the exception of special non-contributory cash benefits as set out in Annex I to this Decision.

            2.   Other terms used in this Decision shall have the meaning which is assigned to them:

                  (a)

                  in relation to the Member States, in the Regulation and the implementing Regulation;

                  (b)

                  in relation to Israel, in the relevant legislation as applicable in Israel.

            Article 2
      Persons covered
      This Decision shall apply:

                  (a)

                  to workers who are Israeli nationals and who are or have been legally employed in the territory of a Member State and who are or have been subject to the legislation of one or more Member States, and their survivors;

                  (b)

                  to the members of the family of workers referred to in point (a) provided that these family members are or have been legally resident with the worker concerned while the worker is employed in a Member State;

                  (c)

                  to workers who are nationals of a Member State who are or have been legally employed in the territory of Israel and who are or have been subject to the legislation of Israel, and their survivors; and

                  (d)

                  to the members of the family of workers referred to in point (c) provided that these family members are or have been legally resident with the worker concerned while the worker is employed in Israel.

            Article 3
      Equality of treatment
      1.   Workers who are Israeli nationals and are legally employed in a Member State and any members of their families legally residing with them shall enjoy, with regard to the benefits within the meaning of Article 1(1)(h), treatment free from any discrimination based on nationality relative to nationals of the Member States in which those workers are employed.
      2.   Workers who are nationals of a Member State and are legally employed in Israel, and any members of their families legally residing with them, shall enjoy, with regard to the benefits within the meaning of Article 1(1)(h), treatment free from any discrimination based on nationality relative to Israeli nationals.
      PART II

         RELATIONS BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND ISRAEL

      Article 4
      Waiving of Residence Clauses
      1.   Exportable benefits within the meaning of Article 1(1)(i) to which the persons as referred to in Article 2(a) and (c) are entitled shall not be subject to any reduction, modification, suspension, withdrawal or confiscation by reason of the fact that the beneficiary is residing:

                  (i)

                  for the purpose of a benefit under the legislation of a Member State, within the territory of Israel; or

                  (ii)

                  for the purpose of a benefit under the legislation of Israel, within the territory of a Member State.

            2.   Family members of a worker as referred to in Article 2(b) are entitled to exportable benefits within the meaning of Article 1(1)(i) in the same way as the family members of a worker who is a national of the Member State concerned when these family members reside within the territory of Israel.
      3.   Family members of a worker as referred to in Article 2(d) are entitled to exportable benefits within the meaning of Article 1(1)(i) in the same way as the family members of a worker who is a national of Israel when these family members reside within the territory of a Member State.
      PART III

         MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

      Article 5
      Cooperation
      1.   The Member States and Israel shall communicate to each other all information regarding changes in their legislation which may affect the implementation of this Decision.
      2.   For the purposes of this Decision, the authorities and institutions of the Member States and of Israel shall lend one another their good offices and act as though implementing their own legislation. The administrative assistance given by the said authorities and institutions shall, as a rule, be free of charge. However, the competent authorities of the Member States and of Israel may agree to certain expenses being reimbursed.
      3.   The authorities and institutions of the Member States and of Israel may, for the purposes of this Decision, communicate directly with one another and with the persons involved or their representatives.
      4.   The institutions and persons covered by this Decision shall have a duty of mutual information and cooperation to ensure the correct implementation of this Decision.
      5.   The persons concerned must inform the institutions of the competent Member State or Israel, where the latter is the competent state, and of the Member State of residence or Israel, where the latter is the state of residence, as soon as possible of any change in their personal or family situation which affects their right to benefits under this Decision.
      6.   Failure to respect the obligation of information referred to in paragraph 5 may result in the application of proportionate measures in accordance with national law. Nevertheless, these measures shall be equivalent to those applicable to similar situations under domestic law and shall not make it impossible or excessively difficult in practice for claimants to exercise the rights conferred on them by this Decision.
      7.   The Member States and Israel may provide for national provisions that establish conditions for the verification of entitlement to benefits to take into account the fact that the beneficiaries are staying or residing outside the territory of the State where the debtor institution is located. Such provisions shall be proportionate, free from any discrimination based on nationality and in accordance with the principles of this Decision. Such provisions shall be notified to the Association Council.
      Article 6
      Administrative Checks and Medical Examinations
      1.   This Article shall apply to the persons as referred to in Article 2 and in receipt of exportable benefits as referred to in Article 1(1)(i), as well as to the institutions in charge of the implementation of this Decision.
      2.   Where a recipient or a claimant of benefits, or a member of his family, is staying or residing within the territory of a Member State when the debtor institution is located in Israel or in Israel when the debtor institution is located in a Member State, the medical examination shall be carried out, at the request of that institution, by the institution of the beneficiary’s place of stay or residence in accordance with the procedures laid down by the legislation applied by that institution.
      The debtor institution shall inform the institution of the place of stay or residence of any special requirements, if necessary, to be followed and points to be covered by the medical examination.
      The institution of the place of stay or residence shall forward a report to the debtor institution that requested the medical examination.
      The debtor institution shall reserve the right to have the beneficiary examined by a doctor of its choice, either in the territory where the recipient or claimant of benefit is staying or residing or in the country where the debtor institution is located. However, the beneficiary may be asked to return to the State of the debtor institution only if he or she is able to make the journey without prejudice to his health and the cost of travel and accommodation is paid for by the debtor institution.
      3.   Where a recipient or a claimant of benefits, or a member of his family, is staying or residing in the territory of a Member State when the debtor institution is located in Israel or in Israel when the debtor institution is located in a Member State, the administrative check shall, at the request of the debtor institution, be performed by the institution of the beneficiary’s place of stay or residence.
      The institution of the place of stay or residence shall forward a report to the debtor institution that requested the administrative check.
      The debtor institution shall reserve the right to have the situation of the beneficiary examined by a professional of its choice. However, the beneficiary may be asked to return to the State of the debtor institution only if he or she is able to make the journey without prejudice to his health and the cost of travel and accommodation is paid for by the debtor institution.
      4.   One or more Member States and Israel may agree on other administrative provisions, subject to their informing the Association Council thereof.
      5.   As an exception to the principle of free-of-charge mutual administrative assistance set out in Article 5(2) of this Decision, the effective amount of the expenses of the checks referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article shall be refunded to the institution which was requested to carry them out by the debtor institution which requested them.
      Article 7
      Application of Article 79 of the Agreement
      Article 79 of the Agreement shall apply in case either Party considers that the other Party has not complied with the obligations as laid down in Articles 5 and 6.
      Article 8
      Special provisions for the application of the legislation of Israel
      The Association Council may, if necessary, lay down special provisions for the application of the legislation of Israel in Annex II.
      Article 9
      Administrative procedures from existing bilateral agreements
      Administrative procedures contained in existing bilateral agreements between a Member State and Israel may continue to apply provided that those procedures do not adversely affect the rights or obligations of the persons concerned established by this Decision.
      Article 10
      Agreements supplementing the procedures for implementing this Decision
      One or more Member States and Israel may conclude agreements designed to supplement the administrative procedures for implementing this Decision, especially with regard to preventing and combating fraud and error.
      PART IV

         TRANSITIONAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS

      Article 11
      Transitional provisions
      1.   No rights shall be acquired pursuant to this Decision for the period before its date of entry into force.
      2.   Subject to paragraph 1, a right shall be acquired under this Decision even if it relates to a contingency arising before its date of entry into force.
      3.   Any benefit which has not been awarded or which has been suspended by reason of the nationality or place of residence of the person concerned shall, at the request of that person, be provided or resumed with effect from the date of entry into force of this Decision, provided that the rights for which benefits were previously provided have not given rise to a lump-sum payment.
      4.   If a request as referred to in paragraph 3 is submitted within 2 years from the date of entry into force of this Decision, the rights acquired in accordance with this Decision shall have effect from the date of entry into force of this Decision, and the legislation of any Member State or Israel concerning the forfeiture or limitation of rights may not be invoked against the persons concerned.
      5.   If a request as referred to in paragraph 3 is submitted after the expiry of the 2-year period following the date of entry into force of this Decision, rights not forfeited or not time-barred shall have effect from the date on which the request was submitted, subject to any more favourable provisions under the legislation of any Member State or Israel.
      Article 12
      Annexes to this Decision
      1.   The Annexes to this Decision constitute an integral part thereof.
      2.   At the request of Israel, the Annexes may be amended by a decision of the Association Council.
      Article 13
      Entry into force
      This Decision shall enter into force on the first day of the first month following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

         Done at …, …

               For the Association Council

               The President

         (1)  OJ L 147, 21.6.2000, p. 3.

         (2)  OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 166, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ L 284, 30.10.2009, p. 1.

         ANNEX I

            LIST OF ISRAELI SPECIAL NON-CONTRIBUTORY CASH BENEFITS

         …

         ANNEX II

            SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE LEGISLATION OF ISRAEL

         …


title: 2013/363/Euratom: Commission Decision of 17 May 2013 on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO)#Agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation

text:
               9.7.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 188/1

      COMMISSION DECISION

   of 17 May 2013
   on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO)
   (2013/363/Euratom)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 101, the second paragraph thereof,
   Having regard to the approval of the Council,
   Whereas:
   the Agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the KEDO should be concluded,
   HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   The Agreement between the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO) is hereby approved on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community. The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Commission or the Member of the Commission responsible for Energy are hereby authorised to sign the Agreement and to carry out all necessary steps for the entry into force of this Agreement to be concluded on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community.

      Done at Brussels, 17 May 2013.

            For the Commission

         Günther OETTINGER

            Member of the Commission

         AGREEMENT

      between the European Atomic Energy Community and the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation
      THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY,
      Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Community’, and
      THE KOREAN PENINSULA ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION,
      Hereinafter referred to as ‘KEDO’,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  KEDO was established pursuant to the Agreement of 9 March 1995 on the Establishment of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation, as amended on 19 September 1997, between the Governments of the Republic of Korea, Japan and the United States of America;

                  (2)

                  The fifth Agreement concluded between the Community and KEDO expired on 31 May 2012;

                  (3)

                  After its decision to terminate KEDO’s nuclear light water reactor project and the 2007 decision to fulfil the responsibilities of the Secretariat with a greatly reduced staff and minimal office facilities, KEDO’s Executive Board decided in 2011 to continue KEDO beyond 31 May 2012;

                  (4)

                  Both the Community and KEDO have expressed the wish to continue their cooperation with the objective of implementing the termination of the LWR project and an orderly winding up of KEDO;

            HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
      Article 1
      Application of the provisions of previous Agreement
      Unless otherwise specified in one of the articles here below, the provisions of the previous Agreement between the Community and KEDO, which expired on 31 May 2012, shall remain applicable under this Agreement.
      Article 2
      Community contribution
      There shall be no financial contribution from the Community to KEDO’s budget under this Agreement.
      Article 3
      Duration
      This Agreement will expire on 31 May 2013. It will be automatically renewed each year for a period of another year, unless a party notifies the other party that it wishes to terminate the Agreement at least one month before the date of expiry. It may also be terminated with immediate effect after withdrawal from KEDO by any of the other Members currently represented in the Executive Board. This Agreement will not be renewed beyond 31 May 2015.
      Article 4
      Entry into force
      This Agreement shall enter into force upon signature by the Community and KEDO and will take effect from 1 June 2012.

         Done at Brussels on the fourth day of July in the year two thousand and thirteen, in two originals.

               For the European Atomic Energy Community

            Günther OETTINGER

         Done at New Jersey on the twenty-fourth day of June in the year two thousand and thirteen, in two originals.

               For the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation

            David WALLACE