title: Decision (EU, Euratom) 2016/1465 of the European Parliament of 28 April 2016 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency) for the financial year 2014

text:
               14.9.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 246/124

         DECISION (EU, EURATOM) 2016/1465 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 28 April 2016
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency) for the financial year 2014
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

               —

               having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2014 (1),

               —

               having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2014 (COM(2015) 377 — C8-0199/2015) (2),

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency) for the financial year 2014 (3),

               —

               having regard to the Commission’s report on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2013 financial year (COM(2015) 505), and to the accompanying Commission staff working documents (SWD(2015) 194, SWD(2015) 195),

               —

               having regard to the Commission’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2014 (COM(2015) 441), and to the accompanying Commission staff working document (SWD(2015) 170),

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency) for the financial year 2014, together with the Agency’s reply (4),

               —

               having regard to the statement of assurance (5) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2014, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2016 on discharge to be given to the executive agencies in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2014 (05585/2016 — C8-0040/2016),

               —

               having regard to Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

               —

               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 (6) and in particular Articles 62, 164, 165 and 166 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (7), and in particular Article 14(3) thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1653/2004 of 21 September 2004 on a standard financial regulation for the executive agencies pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (8), and in particular the first and second paragraphs of Article 66 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Implementing Decision 2013/770/EU of 17 December 2013 establishing the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency and repealing Decision 2004/858/EC (9),

               —

               having regard to Commission Implementing Decision 2014/927/EU of 17 December 2014 amending Implementing Decision 2013/770/EU in order to transform the ‘Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency’ into the ‘Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency’ (10),

               —

               having regard to Rule 93 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinions of the other committees concerned (A8-0140/2016),

               A.

               whereas, under Article 17(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the Commission is to execute the budget and manage programmes and, pursuant to Article 317 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, is to implement the budget in cooperation with the Member States, on its own responsibility, having regard to the principles of sound financial management;

               1.

               Grants the Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2014;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution forming an integral part of the decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2014, Section III — Commission and executive agencies, and in its resolution of 28 April 2016 on the Court of Auditors’ special reports in the context of the Commission discharge for the financial year 2014 (11);

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this decision, the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2014, Section III — Commission and the resolution forming an integral part of those decisions, to the Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (formerly the Consumers, Health and Food Executive 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 L 51, 20.2.2014.

      (2)  OJ C 377, 13.11.2015, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ C 367, 5.11.2015, p. 2.

      (4)  OJ C 409, 9.12.2015, p. 56.

      (5)  OJ C 377, 13.11.2015, p. 146.

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

      (7)  OJ L 11, 16.1.2003, p. 1.

      (8)  OJ L 297, 22.9.2004, p. 6.

      (9)  OJ L 341, 18.12.2013, p. 69.

      (10)  OJ L 363, 18.12.2014, p. 183.

      (11)  Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2016)0148 (see page 91 of this Official Journal).


title: Council Decision 2014/198/CFSP of 10 March2014 on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement betweenthe European Union and the United Republic of Tanzania on the conditionsof transfer of suspected pirates and associated seized property from theEuropean Union-led naval force to the United Republic of Tanzania

text:
               11.4.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 108/1

         COUNCIL DECISION 2014/198/CFSP
   of 10 March 2014
   on the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the European Union and the United Republic of Tanzania on the conditions of transfer of suspected pirates and associated seized property from the European Union-led naval force to the United Republic of Tanzania
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 37 thereof, in conjunction with Article 218(5) and (6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 2 June 2008, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 1816 (2008) calling upon all States to cooperate in determining jurisdiction, and in the investigation and prosecution of persons responsible for acts of piracy and armed robbery off the coast of Somalia. Those provisions were reaffirmed by subsequent UNSC Resolutions.

               (2)

               On 10 November 2008, the Council adopted Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP (1) providing for a European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (‘operation “Atalanta”’).

               (3)

               Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP provides that persons suspected of intending to commit, committing or having committed acts of piracy or armed robbery in Somali territorial waters, who are arrested and detained with a view to their prosecution, and property used to carry out such acts of piracy or armed robbery may be transferred to a third State which wishes to exercise its jurisdiction over the aforementioned persons and property, provided that the conditions for the transfer have been agreed with that third State in a manner consistent with relevant international law, notably international law on human rights, in order to guarantee in particular that no one is subjected to the death penalty, to torture or to any cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

               (4)

               Following the adoption of a Decision by the Council on 22 March 2010 authorising the opening of negotiations, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy in accordance with Article 37 of the Treaty on European Union negotiated an Agreement between the European Union and the United Republic of Tanzania on the conditions of transfer of suspected pirates and associated seized property from the European Union-led naval force to the United Republic of Tanzania (‘the Agreement’).

               (5)

               The Agreement should be approved,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Agreement between the European Union and the United Republic of Tanzania on the conditions of transfer of suspected pirates and associated seized property from the European Union-led naval force to the United Republic of Tanzania (‘the Agreement’) 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 is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in order to bind the Union.
   Article 3
   The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Union, give the notification provided for in Article 11(1) of the Agreement (2).
   Article 4
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 10 March 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         I. VROUTSIS

      (1)  Council Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP of 10 November 2008 on a European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (OJ L 301, 12.11.2008, p. 33).

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


Avis juridique important

|

41998D0018

The Schengen acquis - Decision of the Executive Committee of 23 June 1998 on measures to be taken in respect of countries posing problems with regard to the issue of documents required for expulsion from the Schengen territory (SCH/Com-ex (98) 18 rev.)

Official Journal L 239 , 22/09/2000 P. 0197 - 0198

DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEof 23 June 1998on measures to be taken in respect of countries posing problems with regard to the issue of documents required for expulsion from the Schengen territory(SCH/Com-ex (98)18 rev.)THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,Having regard to Article 132 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement,Having regard to Article 23 of the abovementioned Convention,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:The measures to be taken vis-à-vis countries posing problems with regard to the issue of documents required for expulsion from the Schengen territory shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in the document annexed hereto.Ostend, 23 June 1998.The ChairmanL. TobbackSubject: Measures to be taken in respect of countries posing problems with regard to the issue of documents required for expulsion from the Schengen territorySCH/II-Read (98)2 rev. 2The Belgian Presidency has, on several occasions (the Executive Committee meeting on 15 December 1997 in Vienna, the Central Group meetings on 14 January 1998 in Bruges and on 23 February 1998 in Luxembourg), expressed its willingness to find solutions to the problems related to the readmission of illegal foreign nationals.This specifically concerns difficulties encountered in the area of repatriation, due to a lack of cooperation from foreign consulates in the Schengen capitals in issuing a laissez-passer. Although initial steps to find solutions are currently being contemplated at national level, a joint Schengen approach to this problem might result in more effective solutions.One of the approaches favoured by Belgium is as follows: a Schengen State finds that it is experiencing serious difficulties in obtaining a laissez-passer to repatriate illegal foreign nationals. The Schengen State informs its ambassador in the country concerned and instructs him/her to draw up the measures to be taken locally together with Schengen colleagues.The Schengen ambassadors might, in the first instance, make contact with the local authorities to alert them to the problem of readmitting their nationals and to make arrangements for ad hoc solutions. The advantage of taking action at local level is that a country's national authorities are sometimes better placed to negotiate the readmission of their nationals than its consular staff in the Schengen capitals.The Readmission Subgroup will be informed of any "local action" taken. The Central Group will inform the Executive Committee of any action taken and the outcome of this action.Should such contact not produce results, it would be necessary to use other means, undoubtedly of a more binding nature, to raise awareness of the problem, for instance, policy on issuing visas. These measures will be examined within the Subgroup on Visas.Each Schengen State shall retain the right to decide whether or not it wants to use any retaliatory measures proposed.


Avis juridique important

|

32001B0445

2001/445/EC,ECSC,Euratom: Decision of the European Parliament of 4 April 2001 closing the accounts in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1999 financial year (Commission)

Official Journal L 160 , 15/06/2001 P. 0022 - 0024

Decision of the European Parliamentof 4 April 2001closing the accounts in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1999 financial year (Commission)(2001/445/EC, ECSC, Euratom)THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,Having regard to the budget of the European Union for the 1999 financial year,Having regard to the consolidated revenue and expenditure account and balance sheet for the 1999 financial year (SEC(2000) 537 - C5-0310/2000, SEC(2000) 538 - C5-0311/2000, SEC(2000)1624 - C5-0313/2000)(1),Having regard to the annual report concerning the 1999 financial year and the special reports of the Court of Auditors and the Institutions' replies (C5-0617/2000)(2),Having regard to the Statement of Assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 248 of the EC Treaty (C5-0617/2000),Having regard to the Council recommendation of 12 March 2001 (C5-0127/2001),Having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty, Article 78g of the ECSC Treaty and Article 180b of the EAEC Treaty,Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977, and in particular Article 89 thereof,Having regard to Rule 93 and Annex V of its Rules of Procedure,Having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinions of the interested committees (A5-0113/2001),Whereas:A. Pursuant to Article 275 of the EC Treaty responsibility for drawing up the revenue and expenditure account lies with the Commission,1. Notes that the revenue and expenditure for the 1999 financial year amounted to:>TABLE>2. Notes that total revenue is broken down as follows:>TABLE>3. Notes that total expenditure is broken down as follows:>TABLE>4. Notes the following consolidated balance sheet drawn up by the Commission:ASSETS>TABLE>LIABILITIES>TABLE>5. Is concerned that the failure to draw up comprehensive financial statements indicates a lack of adequate data checks, management supervision and budget procedures; calls on the Commission to introduce an effective accounting system to allow anomalies to be discovered in good time; asks the Commission to introduce procedures to enable each Directorate-General and delegation to draw up interim aggregate financial statements every six months; notes that, under the reform programme, the system will be fully operational by 2003;6. Recalls that the Court of Auditors, in the context of its Statement of Assurance, is of the opinion that the accounts reflect reliably the Communities' revenue and expenditure and the financial statement at the end of the year, but as in previous years, has voiced reservations regarding the effect of a number of errors and weaknesses on the consolidated revenue and expenditure account, including:(a) a net understatement of fixed assets of around EUR 240 million, as buildings of the European Parliament and European Court of Justice are not included and inconsistencies in the treatment of depreciation between, and even within, different Commission Directorates-General,(b) an understatement of short-term amounts receivable from Member States, in the area of own resources and EAGGF Guarantee Section debtors,(c) a material understatement of sundry debtors, essentially sums paid to various intermediate bodies but not yet transferred to final recipients,(d) the inaccurate and inadequate presentation of information on advances and payments on account at 31 December 1999, as a result of incorrect recording by the authorising officers and technical problems linked to the introduction of SINCOM2,(e) the understatement of commitments by some EUR 2600 million,(f) the overstatement of commitments still to be settled by some EUR 940 million, since they are maintained in the accounts although they no longer represent an obligation to make further payments owing to poor monitoring by various Commission departments,(g) the overstatement of potential receivable amounts;7. Approves the closure of the accounts for the implementation of the general budget for the 1999 financial year;8. Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank and to have it published in the Official Journal (L series).The Secretary-GeneralJulian PriestleyThe PresidentNicole Fontaine(1) OJ C 343, 1.12.2000.(2) OJ C 342, 1.12.2000.


title: Council Decision of 10 February 2012 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

text:
               24.2.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 55/1

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 10 February 2012
   appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training
   2012/C 55/01
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),
   Having regard to the nomination submitted to the Council by the Commission in the category of Employees’ representatives,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By its Decision of 14 September 2009 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2009 to 17 September 2012.

               (2)

               A member's seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Employees’ representatives has become vacant as a result of the resignation of Mr Aleksi KALENIUS,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   The following person is hereby appointed as a member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of the term of office, which runs until 17 September 2012:

      REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYEES’ ORGANISATIONS:

               FINLAND

               Mr Erkki LAUKKANEN
               Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions SAK,
               Confederation of Salaried Employees STTK,
               Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland AKAVA

      Done at Brussels, 10 February 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. ANTORINI

      (1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ C 226, 19.9.2009, p. 2.


title: Commission Decision (EU) 2017/126 of 24 January 2017 amending Decision 2013/448/EU as regards the establishment of a uniform cross-sectoral correction factor in accordance with Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (Text with EEA relevance. )

text:
               25.1.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 19/93

         COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2017/126
   of 24 January 2017
   amending Decision 2013/448/EU as regards the establishment of a uniform cross-sectoral correction factor in accordance with Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (1), and in particular Article 10a(5) thereof,
   Having regard to Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) and in particular Article 15(3) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC sets a maximum annual amount of allowances constituting the basis for calculating allocations free of charge to installations not covered by Article 10a(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC. This amount is the sum of two elements respectively described in points (a) and (b) of Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC.

               (2)

               In order to ensure that this maximum annual amount of allowances is not exceeded, a cross-sectoral correction factor is applied if necessary, reducing in a uniform manner the allocations for all installations eligible to receive free allowances.

               (3)

               In accordance with Article 15(3) of Decision 2011/278/EU, the Commission determines the cross-sectoral correction factor by comparing the limit set by Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC with the sum of the preliminary total annual amounts of free allocations for all installations covered by Directive 2003/87/EC in the territory of Member States.

               (4)

               The Commission determined in Decision 2013/448/EU (3) a uniform cross-sectoral correction factor, presented in Article 4 thereof and Annex II thereto.

               (5)

               The Court of Justice in its judgment of 28 April 2016 regarding the joint cases C-191/14, C-192/14, C-295/14, C-389/14 and C-391/14 to C-393/14 found that the Commission, when establishing the maximum annual amount of allowances in accordance with point (b) of Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC should not have taken into account emissions resulting from the activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC as from 2013 in so far as those emissions were generated by installations covered by the emissions trading system prior to that date. As a consequence, the Court concluded that the Commission did not determine the maximum annual amount of allowances in accordance with the requirements of point (b) of Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC and that the uniform cross-correction factor laid down in Article 4 of, and Annex II to Decision 2013/448/EU was also contrary to that provision. Article 4 of and Annex II to Decision 2013/448/EU were thus invalidated by the Court.

               (6)

               In order to implement this judgment, the Commission is required to recalculate the maximum annual amount of allowances for installations eligible to receive allocations free of charge with respect to the requirements of point (b) of Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC and as a consequence, the uniform cross-sectoral correction factor is to be amended accordingly.

               (7)

               The recalculation of the amount of allowances referred to in Article 10a(5) point (b) of Directive 2003/87/EC was carried out following the same methodology, using the same data as for the initial calculation in 2013. In line with the Court's judgment, whereas the Commission had initially considered emissions generated by installations covered by the EU ETS before 1 January 2013 resulting from the activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC only as from 2013, these had to be removed from the calculation of the maximum annual amount of allowances as defined by Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC.

               (8)

               The Commission used as starting point the initial official submissions from Member States. The Commission then consulted Member States on their submission of emissions data and whenever necessary, requested additional clarifications. In accordance with Article 10a(5), only installations for which verified emissions were submitted by the Member States were taken into account.

               (9)

               The Commission then removed installations from the calculation where they carried out activities covered by Directive 2003/87/EC only as from 2013 but were already part of the emissions trading system before 2013. Emissions from installations which had been opted-in by Member States in accordance with Article 24 of Directive 2003/87/EC prior to 2013 were removed as well.

               (10)

               Installations affected between the date of the initial data collection and 2013, either by structural changes such as mergers, splits or closures or by technical changes so that they no longer met the relevant thresholds set out in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC were still taken into account in the recalculation exercise as these changes could not have been anticipated at the date of the data collection. Installations excluded from the system pursuant to Article 27 of Directive 2003/87/EC were also taken into account in the recalculation for the same reason.

               (11)

               Changes correcting mistakes in Member States' National Implementing Measures for the period 2013-2020 and implemented by end 2016 were taken into account in the recalculation exercise, because the correct values should have been in place already at the time of the original calculation of the cross-sectoral correction factor.

               (12)

               In its judgment of 28 April 2016, the Court explicitly limited the temporal effects of the declaration of invalidity of Article 4 of and Annex II to Decision 2013/448/EU, so that, first, the judgment does not produce effects until 10 months following the date of the delivery of this judgment. The cross-sectoral correction factor laid down in Decision 2013/448/EU is thus invalid as of 1 March 2017. Second, measures adopted until that date on the basis of the invalidated provisions cannot be called into question.

               (13)

               In accordance with the judgment of the Court stressing the overriding considerations of legal certainty, measures by Member States on allocations of allowances for the period 2013-2020 and any subsequent changes and additions to these taken until the entry into force of this decision remain valid. The cross-sectoral correction factor determined in this Decision is to be applied in decisions adopted as of 1 March 2017 creating or modifying allocation entitlements and involving for their determination the application of the cross-sectoral correction factor,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Decision 2013/448/EU is hereby amended as follows:

               1.

               Article 4 shall be replaced by the following:
               ‘Article 4
               The uniform cross-sectoral correction factor referred to in Article 10a(5) of Directive 2003/87/EC and determined in accordance with Article 15(3) of Decision 2011/278/EU is set out in Annex II to this Decision.’

               2.

               Annex II shall be replaced by the text appearing in the Annex to this Decision.

         Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on 1 March 2017.

      Done at Brussels, 24 January 2017.

            For the Commission

            The President

         Jean-Claude JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32.

      (2)  OJ L 130, 17.5.2011, p. 1.

      (3)  Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 240, 7.9.2013, p. 27).

      ANNEX
      Annex II to Decision 2013/448/EU shall be replaced by the following:

            ‘ANNEX II
            The cross-sectoral correction factor values applying to allocations free of charge to installations not covered by Article 10a(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC for the years 2013-2020 are the following:

                        Year

                        Cross-sectoral correction factor

                        2013

                        89,207101 %

                        2014

                        87,657727 %

                        2015

                        86,090119 %

                        2016

                        84,506152 %

                        2017

                        82,905108 %

                        2018

                        81,288476 %

                        2019

                        79,651677 %

                        2020

                        78,009186 %’


Avis juridique important

|

31991D0392

91/392/EEC: Commission Decision of 21 June 1991 accepting undertakings given in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes originating in Turkey, and terminating the investigation

Official Journal L 209 , 31/07/1991 P. 0037 - 0041

COMMISSION DECISION  of 21 June 1991  accepting undertakings given in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes originating in Turkey, and terminating the investigation  (91/392/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,  Having regard to Article 47 of the Additional Protocol to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement (2),  After consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for in the above Regulation,  Whereas:  A. PROCEDURE  (1) In December 1989 the Commission received a complaint lodged by the Association of the Italian asbestos cement pipes producers (Uniontubi) on behalf of the producers representing the whole production in Italy of this product. The complaint contained  evidence of dumping of the product concerned originating in Turkey and of injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding. The Commission accordingly announced, by a notice published in the Official  Journal of the European Communities (3), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes falling within CN code ex 6811 30 00 originating in Turkey and subsequently commenced an investigation.  (2) The Commission officially so advised the exporter and importer known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting country and the complainant Italian producers and gave the parties concerned the opportunity to answer the questionnaires  addressed to them, to make known their views in writing and to request a hearing.  (3) The Italian producers, the exporter and the importer returned the questionnaires to the Commission duly completed. The exporter made its views known in writing. The complainant and the exporter requested and were granted hearings.  (4) The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed necessary for the purpose of establishing the facts and carried out investigations at the premises of the following companies:  Community producers:  - Fibronit SRL - Italy,  - Tecnotubi SPA - Italy,  - Nuova Sacelit SPA - Italy.  Exporter:  - Elyafli cimento sanayi ve ticaret AS - Turkey.  Importer:  - Società del gres ing. sala SPA - Italy.  (5) The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 March 1989 to 28 February 1990 (investigation period).  B. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY  (6) The Italian producers on behalf of which the complaint was lodged sold almost all of their production of the products in question in Italy. The demand in Italy for these products was not to any substantial degree supplied by producers located  elsewhere in the Community. In addition, imports into the Community of the products concerned originating in Turkey allegedly being dumped and causing injury were concentrated on the Italian market.  Given the above exceptional circumstances, pursuant to Article 4 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, the Community is, for the production in question, divided into two different competitive markets which are the domestic Italian market and the  extra-Italy Community market. Consequently, the producers within each of these two markets are regarded as a Community industry.  Therefore, the Community industry allegedly being injured refers to that represented by the Italian market which is the only one concerned by this proceeding.  C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION  (i) Description of the product  (7) The products which are the subject of the investigation are asbestos cement pipes and were imported under two categories, sewer pipes for sewerage and pressure pipes of a kind used for drinking water and irrigation, with joints and rubber rings.  Within each of these two categories, there is a wide range of product types depending on the class and diameter of the pipe. These differences are outweighed by the fact that all pipes have the same basic physical characteristics. All types are  manufactured using the same technology and on the same equipment. Raw materials used for all types are identical. Therefore, all pipes can be considered as one single product for the purpose of this proceeding.  (ii) Like product  (8) The Commission verified that the pipes produced in Italy use the same basic technology as those exported from Turkey and are alike in their essential physical and technical characteristics as well as in their uses.  D. DUMPING  (i) Normal Value  (9) In all cases, normal value was determined on a monthly basis to take account of the high inflation rate in Turkey. Of the two categories of pipe imported into Italy, sewer and pressure pipes, only the latter was sold on the domestic market of the  exporting country during the investigation period. As a result, normal value was established on a different basis for each of the two categories of the product concerned.  (10) With regard to pressure pipes, normal value was generally established on the basis of the weighted average domestic prices of comparable product types sold in sufficient quantities for each month of the investigation period and in the ordinary  course of trade. These domestic prices were net of all discounts and rebates actually granted where were found to be directly linked to the sales under consideration.  (11) For all sewer pipes which, as indicated, were not sold in the Turkish market during the investigation period, as well as for certain types of pressure pipes exported in a particular month but not domestically sold in that month, normal value was  established on the basis of the constructed value, i. e. cost of production plus a reasonable profit margin.  Different monthly constructed normal values were determined for each category of pipe. This was done by adding to the cost of production, on the basis of all costs, a reasonable amount for selling, administrative and general expenses and profit  calculated by reference to the expenses incurred and the profit realized by the Turkish exporter concerned on sales of pressure pipes on its domestic market.  (ii) Export prices  (12) Export prices were determined on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for the products sold for export to Italy.  On this basis, export prices were established for representative product types and transactions covering nearly 80 % of total sales made to the independent customer in Italy during the investigation period.  (iii) Comparison  (13) The monthly normal values per product type were compared with export prices for the corresponding type on a transaction-by-transaction basis. All comparisons were made at ex-works level.  For the purpose of a fair comparison between normal values and export prices, account was taken where appropriate of differences affecting price comparability, such as differences in import charges and in selling expenses resulting from sales made under  different conditions and terms of sale, where claims of a direct relationship between these differences and the sales under consideration could be satisfactorily demonstrated. Accordingly, adjustments were made for differences in import charges borne by  materials physically incorporated in the like product when destined for consumption in Turkey and not collected in respect of the product exported to Italy. Allowance was also made for differences in transport, insurance, handling, loading and ancillary  costs, payment terms, warranty expenses and technical assistance expenses.  (iv) Dumping margins  (14) This comparison revealed the existence of dumping in respect of imports into Italy of certain asbestos cement pipes originating in Turkey on the part of the only Turkish exporter concerned, the margin of dumping being equal to the amount by which  the normal value as established exceeds the price for export to Italy.  The margins of dumping varied according to the product type, and expressed as a percentage of the free-at-Italian-border export prices, on a weighted average basis during the investigation period amounted to 5,12 %.  E. INJURY  (15) The evidence available to the Commission shows that imports into Italy of certain asbestos cement pipes originating in Turkey, which were not present on the Italian market in 1986 and 1987, increased from 3 300 tonnes in the period from March 1988  to February 1989 to 7 300 tonnes during the investigation period (March 1989 to February 1990). The development of these imports, assessed in the light of that on the Italian consumption over the same periods, led to an 8,1 % share of the Italian market  held by imports from Turkey during the investigation period.  (16) Resale prices into Italy of the imported product from Turkey were significantly below the average prices practised by the Italian producers during the investigation period. The Commission established price undercutting by comparing, at the same  level of trade (CIF delivered to Italian customer), resale prices into Italy of the importe product with prices charged by Italian producers for similar representative product types. The margins of undercutting found varied, depending on the product  type, up to a maximum of 15,3 % and amounted on a weighted average basis to 8,7 %.  (17) The low level of import prices forced the Italian producers to sell the product on the Italian market at prices which either did not allow, in some cases, a reasonable profit to be made, or, in most cases, did not cover the Italian producers' costs  of production. The prices of these imports not only denied the Italian producers price increases which normally would have occurred during 1988 and 1989 to keep in line with the evolution of costs of production, but obliged the Italian producers to  decrease their prices since the end of 1988 in an attempt to maintain their market shares.  (18) As far as the situation of the Italian industry is concerned, account had to be taken of the following factors:  (a) although production and domestic sales of the product concerned by the Italian producers increased respectively by 21 % and 24,2 % during the investigation period when compared to the previous 12 months, these increases have to be measured against a  growth in Italian consumption of 31 % over the same period. As a result, the share of the Italian market held by the Italian producers declined from 81,7 % in the period from March 1988 to February 1989 to 77,6 % during the investigation period;  (b) the presence on the Italian market of the low-priced imports concerned prevented the Italian producers from taking greater advantage of the increase in consumption and, therefore, to improve the rate of capacity utilization which, during the  investigation period reached, on average, the very low level of 54 %. The combined by these imports on the Italian industry has been a general decrease in profitability in 1988, a decrease in market share in 1989 and losses suffered by all Italian  producers in the same year.    (19) On the basis of the relevant economic factors referred to above, it appears that the situation of the Italian industry has been adversely affected. This is especially demonstrated by a loss of market share and profitability. In these circumstances,  it is concluded that the Italian industry has been suffering material injury.  F. CAUSATION OF INJURY  (20) As far as the causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury is concerned, the Commission found that there is a clear parallelism and simultaneity between the increase in the volume of dumped imports from Turkey and the  deterioration of the financial situation of the Italian producers. The arrival and rapid penetration of the low-priced Turkish exports to the Italian market also corresponds with the decrease in the market presence of the Italian producers.  (21) The Commission has examined whether the injury suffered by the Italian industry has been caused by factors other than the dumped imports such as imports from other countries or the low capacity utilization prevailing in the Italian market during  the last years.  (22) It was found that the market share of imports into Italy from other third countries decreased from 17,3 % in the period from March 1987 to February 1988 to 11,6 % in the following 12 months and to 8,8 % during the investigation period. This  substantial decline in market share leads the Commission to consider that imports from other third countries did not have any injurious effect on the Italian industry. Moreover, there has been no indication that these imports have been made at dumped  prices.  (23) Imports into Italy originating in other Community countries led to market shares increasing from 1,4 % in the period from March 1987 to February 1988 to 1,9 % in the following 12 months and reached 5,5 % during the investigation period. However, it  was found that these imports have been made at prices higher than those charged by the Italian producers and were concentrated in certain segments of the Italian market. Therefore, they are not likely to explain the Italian producers' price erosion and  loss of market share and profitability.  (24) The substantial overcapacity shown by most of the Italian producers during the last years existed already before imports from Turkey first entered the Italian market. In that sense the precarious financial situation of the Italian industry may also  have been influenced by the low capacity utilization which characterized the Italian industry in that period. However, it clearly appears that the presence of the dumped imports prevented the Italian producers from further increases in production and  sales and thus from higher utilization of capacity which would have occurred had greater advantage of the increase in Italian consumption since 1987 been taken.  (25) Consideration was also given to the effect on the Italian industry in recent years of environmental problems posed by products containing asbestos which are being progressively replaced by alternative products. However, the Commission has concluded  that this situation mainly represents a threat to the future of the production of asbestos cement pipes insofar as some of their uses are concerned and did not significantly affect the injurious impact of the dumped imports originating in Turkey.  (26) In view of the increase in the Italian market share held by the dumped imports originating in Turkey and their adverse effect on the situation of the Italian producers, the Commission concludes that these imports, taken in isolation, caused  material injury to the Italian industry. As already indicated, this conclusion does not imply that all ascertained difficulties of the Italian industry should necessarily be imputed to this cause, rather than to overcapacity of most of the Italian  producers or to environmental disadvantages of the product concerned. However, according to Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, it is possible to attribute to the exporter concerned responsibility for the injury caused by dumping even if this  injury is merely aprt of more extensive injury attributable to other factors. Article 4 only required that other possible casual factors of injury should not be ascribed to the dumped imports.  G. COMMUNITY INTEREST  (27) In assessing whether it is in the interest of the Community to take measures against the dumped imports, the Commission has noted that one of the Italian producers ceased to exist at the end of 1989, the financial situation of the remaining  producers in Italy is strongly deteriorating and the Italian market has been rapidly penetrated by the imports concerned. Should this trend continue, it could lead to a further worsening of the situation of the Italian industry concerned so impeding its  ongoing restructuring and thus putting its survival at risk.  The Commission concludes that it is therefore in the interest of the Community to take measures in order to eliminate the injurious effects on the Italian producers of the dumped imports concerned.  H. PROTECTIVE MEASURES  (28) The Commission considers, as discussed in recital 26 above, that it is inappropriate to impute the totality of the ascertained injury suffered by the Italian producers to dumped Turkish imports. These imports have, of course, affected indicators  such as the price erosion and the losses incurred by the Italian industry in 1989, but the interpretation - and above all the quantification - of this effect is imprecise, owing to the presence of other factors operating at the same time and especially  to the overcapacity shown by the majority of the Italian producers.  (29) In order to avoid this difficulty, the Commission considers that injury should only be measured in terms of the price undercutting found for the prices of the imported product. When this undercutting, which is determined at a resale price level in  recital 16 above, is expressed at the cif Italian border level, a weighted average margin of 9,35 % is arrived at. This individual threshold thus found represents the price increase at the Italian border necessary to remove the injury defined in terms  of undercutting.  However, since the dumping margin established in this proceeding is lower than the injury threshold of 9,35 % it is considered appropriate, so as to eliminate as far as possible the injurious effect of the dumped imports, that the protective measures to  be taken correspond to the dumping margin found.  I. PRICE UNDERTAKING  (30) The Turkish exporter concerned was informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to take protective measures. Since the Community industry has been interpreted in this proceeding as referring to the  producers in Italy only, the exporter in Turkey was given the opportunity to offer a price undertaking in respect of the Italian market in accordance with Article 13 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88. Taking such opportunity the exporter concerned has  offered a price undertaking which the Commission regards as acceptable, considering that the effect of this undertaking will be to increase the prices of the product concerend to an extent sufficient to eliminate the margin of dumping found. In  addition, it appears that correct operation of the undertaking can be effectively monitored.  Moreover, the Commission notes that in case of violation of this price undertaking it can impose a provisional duty in respect of the Community as a whole, and the Council a subsequent definitive duty based on the facts established in the present  investigation and without carrying out new investigations concerning dumping and injury resulting therefrom.  (31) Objections to this course were raised in the Advisory Committee by one Member State. Therefore, in conformity with the provisions of Articles 9 (1) and 10 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, the Commission submitted to the Council a report on the  results of the consultation, together with a proposal that the undertakings be accepted and the investigation be terminated. As the Council has not decided otherwise within one month, the Commission can adopt the present Decision.  (32) The Commission has notified the EEC-Turkey Association Council that the interests of the Community call for immediate action. Moreover, the Commission has applied to the Association Council that it address recommendations to the person or persons  with whom abovementioned practices originate for the purpose of putting an end to them,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The undertaking offered by Elyafli cimento sanayi ve tecaret AS - Istanbul, Turkey in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes falling within CN code ex 6811 30 00 and originating in  Turkey is hereby accepted.  Article 2  The investigation in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain asbestos cement pipes originating in Turkey is hereby terminated. Done at Brussels, 21 June 1991. For the Commission  Frans ANDRIESSEN  Vice-President   (1) OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. (2) OJ No L 293, 29. 12. 1972, p. 3. (3) OJ No C 63, 13. 3. 1990, p. 4.


Avis juridique important

|

31984D0632

84/632/EEC: Commission Decision of 12 December 1984 accepting an undertaking and repealing the provisional duty in connection with the anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of certain shovels originating in Brazil and terminating the investigation

Official Journal L 330 , 18/12/1984 P. 0028 - 0029

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 12 December 1984  accepting an undertaking and repealing the provisional duty in connection with the anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of certain shovels originating in Brazil and terminating the investigation  (84/632/EEC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84 of 23 July 1984 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof,  After consultation within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the above Regulation,  Whereas:  A. Provisional action  (1) The Commission, by Regulation (EEC) No 2464/84 (2), imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain shovels originating in Brazil.  B. Subsequent procedure  (2) Following the imposition of the provisional anti-dumping duty, the exporter and the importer of the product concerned requested an opportunity to be heard by the Commission, which was granted. At this hearing the exporter and importer were given additional explanations concerning the basis on which the provisional duty had been imposed.  C. Dumping  (3) No new evidence on dumping has been received since the imposition of the provisional duty; therefore the Commission considers its findings on dumping as set out in Regulation (EEC) No 2464/84 to be definitive.  D. Injury  (4) No fresh evidence regarding injury to the Community industry has been submitted.  The Commission therefore confirms the conclusions on injury, reached in Regulation (EEC) No 2464/84.  E. Community interest  (5) In view of the serious difficulties facing the Community industry, the Commission has come to the conclusion that it is in the Community's interests that action be taken.  F. Undertaking  (6) An undertaking was offered by the exporter concerning its exports of shovels to the Community. The effect of the said undertaking will be to increase export prices to a level which eliminates the dumping.  (7) In these circumstances, the undertaking offered is considered acceptable and the investigation may, therefore, be terminated without the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty. Since, after the imposition of the provisional duty, no imports of shovels from Brazil below the undertaking prices have been made it is not necessary to definitively collect the provisional duty,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The undertaking given by Metalurgica Timboense S/A, Timbo-Santa Catarina, Brazil, in connection with the anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of shovels made of iron or steel originating in Brazil and falling within heading No ex 82.01 of the Common Customs Tariff, corresponding to NIMEXE code ex 82.01-10, is hereby accepted.  Article 2  The provisional duty imposed by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2464/84 is hereby repealed and the anti-dumping investigation referred to in Article 1 is terminated.  Done at Brussels, 12 December 1984.  For the Commission  Wilhelm HAFERKAMP  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 201, 30. 7. 1984, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 231, 29. 8. 1984, p. 29.


Avis juridique important

|

E1996C0226

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 226/96/COL of 4 December 1996 replacing Decision No 31/94/COL concerning additional guarantees relating to Aujeszky's disease for pigs destined to EFTA States or regions free of the disease as amended by Decision No 75/94/COL, in so far as these Decisions concern Norway

Official Journal L 078 , 20/03/1997 P. 0046 - 0051

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION No 226/96/COL of 4 December 1996 replacing Decision No 31/94/COL concerning additional guarantees relating to Aujeszky's disease for pigs destined to EFTA States or regions free of the disease as amended by Decision No 75/94/COL, in so far as these Decisions concern Norway THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 17 and Protocol 1 (4) (d) thereof,Having regard to the Act referred to in point 1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the Agreement on the European Economic Area on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine (Council Directive 64/432/EEC; hereinafter referred to as the 'Cattle and Swine Act`), and in particular Article 10 thereof,Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, and in particular Article 5 (2) (d) and Protocol 1, Article 1 (c) thereof,Whereas Norway, by EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 75/94/COL (1) amending Decision No 31/94/COL (2), was granted additional guarantees relating to Aujeszky's disease;Whereas these Decisions comprise, in addition to the guarantees thus granted to Norway, similar guarantees granted to Finland and Sweden;Whereas the Norwegian Government, while confirming that the material situation justifying Decision No 75/94/COL amending Decision No 31/94/COL is unchanged, has requested that the Decisions, in so far as they concern the additional guarantees granted to Norway, be replaced by a new decision, covering only the guarantees granted to Norway, alleging this to be necessary for the solution foreseen in ongoing negotiations with the European Union in the veterinary field;Whereas such a new decision would not in any way alter the material situation compared to what applies by virtue of Decision No 31/94/COL, as amended by Decision No 75/94/COL;Whereas there is accordingly no obstacle in granting the request made by the Norwegian Government;Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the EFTA Veterinary Committee assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:1. Decision No 31/94/COL concerning additional guarantees relating to Aujeszky's disease for pigs destined to EFTA States or regions free of the disease, as amended by Decision No 75/94/COL, shall be replaced by the text in the Annex hereto, in so far as these Decisions concern Norway.2. This Decision shall enter into force on 9 December 1996.3. This Decision is addressed to the EFTA States.4. This Decision shall be authentic in the English language.Done at Brussels, 4 December 1996.For the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityBjörn FRIÐFINNSSONCollege Member(1) OJ No L 247, 22. 9. 1994, p. 52.(2) OJ No L 138, 2. 6. 1994, p. 43.ANNEX '1. Pigs intended for breeding coming from other EFTA States or EC Member States or regions thereof and destined for EFTA States or regions thereof where vaccination for Aujeszky's disease is not permitted, listed in Annex I, must fulfil the following conditions:1.1. Aujeszky's disease must be compulsorily notifiable in the EFTA State and the EC Member State of origin;1.2. no clinical, pathological or serological evidence of Aujeszky's disease must have been recorded in the herd of origin for the past 12 months;1.3. if vaccine for Aujeszky's disease has been used on the herd of origin, only a g1 deleted vaccine shall have been used for the past 12 months;1.4. the pigs must have been held in isolation in accommodation approved by the competent authority such that no direct or indirect contact with other pigs shall have been possible for at least 30 days prior to movement;1.5. the pigs must not have been vaccinated;1.6. the pigs must have been subjected to an Elisa test for the presence of g1 antibodies in accordance with Annex II to this Decision, taken at least 21 days after entry into isolation, with negative results. All animals in isolation must also have given negative results to this test. In the case of pigs aged over four months the test used shall be the whole virus Elisa;1.7. the pigs must have remained on the herd of origin since birth or the pigs must have remained in the consigning herd for three months and in others of equivalent status since birth;1.8. the pigs must not come into contact with pigs which do not fulfil the conditions set out in points 1.1 to 1.7 during transport from the site of origin to the farm of destination.2. Pigs intended for production coming from other EFTA States, or EC Member States or regions thereof and destined for EFTA States or regions thereof where vaccination for Aujeszky's disease is not permitted, listed in Annex I, must fulfil the following conditions:2.1. Aujeszky's disease must be compulsorily noticeable in the EFTA State or the EC Member State of origin;2.2. no clinical, pathological or serological evidence of Aujeszky's disease must have been recorded in the herd of origin for the past 12 months;2.3. the pigs must not have been vaccinated;2.4. no pre-movement testing shall be necessary if the herd of origin is part of an official monitoring programme where at least 15 % of the breeding animals (or 25 animals, whichever is the greater) are tested over the course of each year. Such testing shall be split into at least three approximately equal divisions, each being separated by at least two months; movement into such herds shall only be from herds of equivalent or superior status and no clinical case of Aujeszky's disease shall have been recorded within 2 km of the herd of origin for the previous 60 days;2.5. if the herd of origin is not part of such a monitoring programme the pigs must have been segregated prior to movement and the pigs must have been sampled in accordance with Annex III within 10 days prior to movement and subjected to a test in accordance with Annex II. All animals tested must have passed the test;2.6. the pigs must have remained in the herd of origin since birth or the pigs must have remained in the herd of origin for three months and in herds of equivalent status since birth;2.7. the pigs must not come into contact with pigs which do not fulfil the conditions set out in points 2.1 to 2.6 during transport from the site of origin to the farm of destination.3. The animals referred to in point 2 shall be transported directly to the farm of destination and shall remain there until slaughter unless otherwise authorized by the competent authority in the EFTA State of destination. The competent authority of the EFTA State of destination may require that the pigs go directly to slaughter.4. Pigs intended for slaughter coming from other EFTA States or EC Member States or regions thereof and destined for EFTA States or regions thereof, listed in Annex I, must fulfil the following conditions:4.1. the pigs must be transported directly to the slaughterhouse of destination;4.2. if such pigs have been vaccinated, only a g1 deleted vaccine shall have been used;4.3. no clinical, pathological or serological evidence of Aujeszky's disease must have been recorded in the herd of origin for the past three months;4.4. the pigs must have remained in the herd of origin for the previous 60 days or since birth;4.5. Aujeszky's disease must be compulsorily noticeable in the EFTA State or EC Member State of origin;4.6. the pigs must not come into contact with pigs which do not fulfil the conditions set out in points 4.1 to 4.5 during transport from the site of origin to the slaughterhouse.5. The health certificate referred to as Model III in Annex F to the Cattle and Swine Act must be completed by the following for pigs destined for an EFTA State or region thereof, listed in Annex I, and coming from an EFTA State or EC Member State or region thereof;'pigs in accordance with EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision 226/96/COL concerning Aujeszky's disease. In the case of pigs for breeding the test used was the whole virus Elisa/Elisa for g1 antibodies. (Delete where applicable)`.6. The conditions laid down in points 1 to 5 shall not apply to the introduction of pigs into an EFTA State or region thereof, listed in Annex I, from an EFTA State or region thereof which pursuant to Article 10 of the Cattle and Swine Act has been granted additional guarantees corresponding to those provided for in this Decision.7. An EFTA State listed in Annex I shall submit annual reports on the monitoring and findings concerning Aujeszky's disease. This report shall be submitted to the EFTA Surveillance Authority at the latest by 1 April, the following year.ANNEX IRegions free of Aujeszky's disease which do not permit vaccinationNorway: All regionsANNEX IIProtocol for enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (Elisa) for detecting antibodies to Aujeszky's disease virus glycoprotein 1 (ADV-g1) in serum1. The institutions listed in point 2 (d) shall evaluate Elisa g1-tests and kits against the criteria in point 2 (a), (b) and (c). The competent authority in each EFTA State shall ensure that only Elisa g1-kits that meet these standards shall be registered. The examinations listed in point 2 (a) and (b) must be carried out prior to approval of the test and the examination in point 2 (c), at least, must thereafter be carried out on each batch.2. Standardization, sensitivity and specificity of the test(a) The sensitivity of the test must be of such a level that the following Community reference (1) are scored positive:- Community reference serum ADV1 at 1 : 8 dilution,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 A,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 B,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 C,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 D,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 E,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 F.b) The specificity of the test must be of such a level that the following Community reference are scored negative:- Community reference serum ADV-g1 G,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 H,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 J,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 K,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 L,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 M,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 N,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 O,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 P,- Community reference serum ADV-g1 Q.(c) For batch control, the EC reference serum ADV1 must be scored positive at a dilution of 1 : 8 and the EC reference serum ADV-g1 K must be scored negative.(1) As laid down in 'Report of Sub-Committee of Scientific Veterinary Committee on Aujeszky's disease`, reference No VI/2556/92-EN (PVET/EN/1374), which can be obtained from the EFTA Surveillance Authority.(d) The institute listed below will, in addition, be responsible for checking the quality of the Elisa method in each EFTA State, and in particular for producing and standardizing national reference according to the EC reference:1. Veterinærinstituttet, Oslo, Norway.(e) The Community reference will be supplied by those institutes listed in paragraph 2 (d).ANNEX III>TABLE>


title: Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1338 of 4 August 2016 amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Kosovo (This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.)

text:
                  5.8.2016

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 212/109

            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2016/1338
      of 4 August 2016
      amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Kosovo (*)

      THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
      Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP (1) appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo.

                  (2)

                  On 16 November 2015, the Council adopted Decision(CFSP) 2015/2052 (2) extending the mandate of the EUSR until 28 February 2017.

                  (3)

                  Following the appointment of Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR to another function, Ms Nataliya APOSTOLOVA should be appointed as a new EUSR in Kosovo for the period from 1 September 2016 to 28 February 2017.

                  (4)

                  Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052 should therefore be amended accordingly.

                  (5)

                  The EUSR will implement her mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
      Article 1
      Amendment of Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052
      Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052 is replaced by the following:

         ‘Article 1
         European Union Special Representative
         1.   The mandate of Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) is hereby extended until 31 August 2016.
         2.   Ms Nataliya APOSTOLOVA is hereby appointed as EUSR in Kosovo for the period from 1 September 2016 to 28 February 2017.
         3.   The mandate of the EUSR may be terminated earlier, if the Council so decides, on a proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).’.

      Article 2
      Entry into force
      This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

         Done at Brussels, 4 August 2016.

               For the Council

               The President

            M. LAJČÁK

         (*)  This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.

         (1)  Council Decision 2012/39/CFSP of 25 January 2012 appointing the European Union Special Representative in Kosovo (OJ L 23, 26.1.2012, p. 5).

         (2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/2052 of 16 November 2015 extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative in Kosovo (OJ L 300, 17.11.2015, p. 22).


title: Council Decision of 18 March 2014 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

text:
               21.3.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 82/2

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 18 March 2014
   appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training
   2014/C 82/02
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),
   Having regard to the nomination submitted to the Council by the Commission in the category of Employees' representatives,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015.

               (2)

               The seat of the Croatian member had to be filled,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   The following person is hereby appointed as a member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of the term of office, which runs until 17 September 2015:

                  REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYEES' ORGANISATIONS:

               CROATIA

               Ms Dijana ŠOBOTA

               Executive Secretary for International Cooperation and Education

               UATUC

      Done at Brussels, 18 March 2014.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. VENIZELOS

      (1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ C 228, 31.7.2012, p. 3.


Avis juridique important

|

31994D0901

94/901/EEC: Council Decision of 26 April 1993 on the conclusion of the Agreements in the form of an exchange of letters between the European Economic Community and, on the one hand, Barbados, Belize, The People's Republic of the Congo, the Republic of Fiji, the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, the Republic of Côte d' Ivoire, Jamaica, the Republic of Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Madagascar, the Republic of Malawi, the Republic of Mauritius, the Republic of Suriname, Saint Kitts and Nevis, the Kingdom of Swaziland, the United Republic of Tanzania, the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the Republic of Uganda, the Republic of Zimbabwe and, on the other hand, the Republic of India on the guaranteed prices for cane sugar for the 1992/93 delivery period

Official Journal L 355 , 31/12/1994 P. 0019

COUNCIL DECISIONof 26 April 1993on the conclusion of the Agreements in the form of an exchange of  letters between the European Economic Community and, on the one hand, Barbados, Belize, the  People's Republic of the Congo, the Republic of Fiji, the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, the  Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, Jamaica, the Republic of Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Madagascar,  the Republic of Malawi, the Republic of Mauritius, the Republic of Suriname, Saint Kitts and Nevis,  the Kingdom of Swaziland, the United Republic of Tanzania, the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the  Republic of Uganda, the Republic of Zimbabwe and, on the other hand, the Republic of India on the  guaranteed prices for cane sugar for the 1992/93 delivery period(94/901/EEC)THE  COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article  113 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas implementation of Protocol 8 on ACP sugar annexed to the Fourth ACP-EEC Convention (1) and  of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of India on cane sugar  (2) is carried out, in accordance with Article 1 (2) of each, within the framework of the  management of the common organization of the sugar market: Whereas it is appropriate to approve the Agreements in the form of an exchange of letters between  the Community and, on the one hand, the States referred to in the Protocol and, on the other hand,  the Republic of India on the guaranteed prices for cane sugar for the 1992/93 delivery period, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1The Agreements in the form of an exchange of letters between the  European Economic Community and, on the one hand, Barbados, Belize, the People's Republic of the  Congo, the Republic of Fiji, the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire,  Jamaica, the Republic of Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Madagascar, the Republic of Malawi, the  Republic of Mauritius, the Republic of Suriname, Saint Kitts and Nevis, the Kingdom of Swaziland,  the United Republic of Tanzania, the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the Republic of Uganda, the  Republic of Zimbabwe and, on the other hand, the Republic of India on the guaranteed prices for  cane sugar for the 1992/93 delivery period are hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Agreements is attached to this Decision. Article 2The President of the Council is hereby authorized to designate the person empowered to  sign the Agreements referred to in Article 1 in order to bind the Community. Article 3This Decision will be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Done at Luxembourg, 26 April 1993. For the CouncilThe PresidentB. WESTH (1) OJ No L 229, 17. 8. 1991, p. 216. (2) OJ No L 190, 22. 7. 1975, p. 35.


title: 2007/741/EC: Commission Decision of 8 November 2007 amending Decision 2007/102/EC adopting the work plan for 2007 for implementation of the programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003 to 2008), including the annual work programme for grants (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               17.11.2007

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 300/73

      COMMISSION DECISION

   of 8 November 2007
   amending Decision 2007/102/EC adopting the work plan for 2007 for implementation of the programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003 to 2008), including the annual work programme for grants
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2007/741/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 152(1) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (1), and in particular Article 110 thereof,
   Having regard to Decision No 1786/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 adopting a programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003 to 2008) (2), and in particular Article 8(1), thereof,
   Having regard to Commission Decision 2004/858/EC of 15 December 2004 setting up an executive agency, the ‘Executive Agency for the Public Health Programme’, for the management of Community action in the field of public health — pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 (3), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The work plan for 2007 was adopted on 12 February 2007.

               (2)

               The budget available for 2007 (commitments) was estimated at EUR 40 000 000. The contribution of EEA/EFTA countries was estimated at EUR 912 000. The contribution of one Applicant Country (Turkey) was estimated at EUR 958 000. The total budget for 2007 was estimated at EUR 41 870 000. The total indicative amount for the call for proposals was estimated at EUR 33 888 000. The overall indicative amount for the call for tenders was EUR 4 064 000.

               (3)

               The contribution received from EEA/EFTA countries amounted to EUR 884 640. The contribution to be received from one Applicant Country (Turkey) amounted to EUR 957 697. The following former candidate countries, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania and Slovenia contributed to the Public Health Programme on the basis of the Enlargement Protocols for an amount of EUR 7 133 382,18, of which EUR 1 226 395,90 were committed in the previous years of the abovementioned Programme. The amount of EUR 5 906 986,28 is therefore still available for financing actions in 2007.

               (4)

               The total budget available for 2007 is therefore EUR 47 749 323,28. The total amount for the call for proposals is EUR 37 888 963. The total amount for the call for tenders is EUR 5 324 000.

               (5)

               The actions initially foreseen for 2007 with the cooperation of the OECD will be postponed to 2008, therefore a part of the budget allocated to finance direct grant agreements with the OECD is now available for other actions in 2007. Three actions are foreseen with the cooperation of the WHO and one action with the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) for a total amount of EUR 2 550 000 instead of the initial amount estimated at EUR 2 032 000.

               (6)

               In the light of the increased budget made available, it is therefore necessary to amend the Work Plan for 2007 to finance a larger number of tenders, projects under the 2007 Call for Proposals and of direct grant agreements with international organisations.

               (7)

               Furthermore, since in 2007 final budget item 17 03 01 01 did not have the necessary commitment allocation, the relevant amount available under budget article 17 03 06 was transferred to item 17 03 01 01 at the beginning of the budget year.

               (8)

               The expenditure for administrative management of the programme is covered by budget item 17 01 04 02 (4).

               (9)

               The Public Health Programme Committee gave a favourable opinion on this draft Decision.

               (10)

               Commission Decision 2007/102/EC (5) should therefore be amended accordingly,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Sole Article
   Annex I to Decision 2007/102/EC is amended as follows:

               1.

               Point 1.2 (Resources) is replaced by the following:
               ‘Amending Budget No 1/2007 amounts to EUR 38 800 000 for operating appropriations under budget item 17 03 01 01 and to EUR 1 200 000 for administrative appropriations under budget item 17 01 04 02.
               The budget line for administrative appropriations related to the Executive Agency for Public Health is 17 01 04 30.
               The budget approved for 2007 (commitments) amounts to EUR 40 000 000.
               The budget for operating appropriations is EUR 38 800 000. The budget for administrative appropriations is EUR 1 200 000.
               To this budget should be added:

                           —

                           the contribution received from EEA/EFTA countries for an amount of EUR 884 640,

                           —

                           the contribution of one Applicant Country (Turkey): estimated at EUR 957 697,

                           —

                           the contribution of the following former candidate countries, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania and Slovenia, for an amount of EUR 5 906 986,28.

                     The total budget for 2007 is therefore EUR 47 749 323,28. This includes both resources for the operating budget and resources for technical and administrative assistance:

                           —

                           the total for the operating budget is estimated at EUR 46 416 963,28;

                           —

                           the total for the administrative budget is estimated at EUR 1 332 360.

                     It is proposed that EUR 5 324 000 of the operating budget be spent on calls for tenders and EUR 2 550 000 on direct grants for international organisations.
               The total indicative amount for the call for proposals is estimated at EUR 37 888 963.
               As far as the allocation of grants for the call for proposal is concerned, a balance between the programme’s different strands will be pursued, while taking into account the quality and quantity of proposals received, unless particular public health emergencies (e.g. pandemic influenza) arise to justify any reallocation of resources. In case resources from the operating budget would remain available at the end of 2007, these will be reallocated to the funding of grants selected through the Call for proposals 2007.’

               2.

               In point 2.1 (Call for proposals):

                           —

                           the fourth paragraph is replaced by the following:

                              ‘The total indicative amount for the call for proposals is estimated at EUR 37 888 963.’

                           —

                           the ninth paragraph is replaced by the following:

                              ‘It should be noted that the indicative amount for Community financial participation in the retained projects during the opening of the negotiations can vary from – 20 % to + 10 % as a result of the latter.’

               3.

               Point 2.2 (Call for tenders), the first paragraph is replaced by the following:
               ‘Services procurements should be financed under budget items 17 03 01 01 and 17 01 04 02. The overall indicative amount for the call for tenders would be up to EUR 5 324 000.’

               4.

               Point 2.3.1 (Areas for cooperation in 2007) is replaced by the following:
               ‘In accordance with Article 11 of the Programme Decision, cooperation with international organisations competent in the sphere of public health and the European Economic Area (EEA) States will be pursued in the course of the programme in coordination within Commission services dealing with the same subjects.
               Cooperation with the World Health Organisation (WHO)
               Cooperation with the WHO will be implemented in accordance with:

                           —

                           the “Agreement between the United Nations and the European Community on the principles applying to the financing or co-financing by the Community of programmes and projects administered by the United Nations” which entered into force on 9 August 1999, and the Verification Clause Agreement between the European Community and the United Nations which entered into force on 1 January 1995, as amended,

                           —

                           the Exchange of Letters between the WHO and the European Commission concerning the consolidation and intensification of cooperation (including the memorandum concerning the framework and arrangements for cooperation between the WHO and the European Commission forming part of the Exchange of Letters),

                           —

                           financial assistance by the European Commission for activities undertaken by the WHO shall, unless agreed otherwise in exceptional circumstances, be provided in accordance with the Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement between the European Community and the United Nations, which entered into force on 29 April 2003 (to which the WHO acceded on 11 December 2003).

                     Following the discussion had with the WHO, the priority areas of climate change/environment, nutrition and physical activity surveillance, and mental health have been identified.

                           —

                           Climate change/environment & health information to implement the Climate Information Decision Support Tool for Heat in Europe as a EU Heat Health Warning Systems to predict heat events in Europe,

                           —

                           Nutrition and Physical Activity surveillance to link the databases, to update their content and to provide technical support to Member States for the standardisation and quality control of the information collected by the Commission and the WHO,

                           —

                           Mental health. To map the richness of experience and initiatives in mental health promotion, mental disorder prevention and social inclusion of people with mental health problems in countries at national, regional and local levels, identify and support credible leaders in the health sector and identify gaps in evidence where a need for further research exists.

                     The actions undertaken will avoid any overlaps or duplication with other activities funded by the Community, in particular other actions funded under the public health programme.
               Cooperation with the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) affiliated to the WHO
               A separate negotiation with IARC is envisaged for a project for the development of the European Prospective Study of Nutrition and Cancer (EPIC) and European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR), for updating the European Code Against Cancer and for preparing an Atlas of Cancer Mortality in the European Union using most recent mortality data (6).

               5.

               Point 2.3.2 (Financing) is replaced by the following:
               ‘Funding for actions with the international organisations mentioned above can be allocated only through direct grant agreements. Direct grant agreements will improve the synergies and responsiveness of the European Commission to international organisations where actions are jointly covered. These organisations have certain capacities linked to their specific tasks and responsibilities, which make them particularly qualified to carry out some of the actions set out in this Work Programme and for which direct grant agreements are considered to be the most appropriate procedure.
               The amount of the financial contribution can be up to 60 % per organisation of the eligible costs for the projects considered. The Commission will determine in each individual case the maximum percentage to be awarded.
               Direct grant agreements should be financed under budget item 17 03 01 01; the indicative amount for direct grants is estimated to be EUR 2 550 000. This amount could be increased depending on the unused appropriations available under the operating budget.’

      Done at Brussels, 8 November 2007.

            For the Commission

         Markos KYPRIANOU

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

      (2)  OJ L 271, 9.10.2002, p. 1. Decision as amended by Decision No 786/2004/EC (OJ L 138, 30.4.2004, p. 7).

      (3)  OJ L 369, 16.12.2004, p. 73.

      (4)  Amending budget No 1 (OJ L 124, 15.5.2007, p. 1).

      (5)  OJ L 46, 16.2.2007, p. 27.

      (6)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_international/int_organisations/who_en.htm’


title: Council Decision of 6 December 2007 concerning the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Convention, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests, the Protocol of 27 September 1996 , the Protocol of 29 November 1996 and the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997

text:
               12.1.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 9/23

      COUNCIL DECISION

   of 6 December 2007
   concerning the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the Convention, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests, the Protocol of 27 September 1996, the Protocol of 29 November 1996 and the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997
   (2008/40/JHA)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,
   Having regard to the 2005 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 3(4) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission,
   Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament (1),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Convention, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (2) (hereinafter referred to as the Convention) was done at Brussels on 26 July 1995 and entered into force on 17 October 2002.

               (2)

               The Convention was supplemented by the Protocol, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, to the Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (3) (hereinafter referred to as the Protocol of 27 September 1996), which was done at Brussels on 27 September 1996, and the Protocol, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the interpretation, by way of preliminary rulings, by the Court of Justice of the European Communities of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (4) (hereinafter referred to as the Protocol of 29 November 1996), which was done at Brussels on 29 November 1996. Both Protocols entered into force on 17 October 2002.

               (3)

               The Convention was further supplemented by the Second Protocol, drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, to the Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (5) (hereinafter referred to as the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997), which was done at Brussels on 19 June 1997 but which has not yet entered into force.

               (4)

               Article 3(3) of the 2005 Act of Accession provides that Bulgaria and Romania accede to the conventions and protocols listed in Annex I to the Act of Accession, which include, inter alia, the Convention, the Protocol of 27 September 1996, the Protocol of 29 November 1996 and the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997. The conventions and the protocols listed in Annex I to the 2005 Act of Accession are to enter into force in relation to Bulgaria and Romania on the date determined by the Council,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The texts of the Convention, the Protocol of 27 September 1996, the Protocol of 29 November 1996 and the Second Protocol of 19 June 1997, drawn up in the Bulgarian and Romanian languages (6), shall be authentic under the same conditions as the other texts thereof.
   Article 2
   1.   The Convention, the Protocol of 27 September 1996 and the Protocol of 29 November 1996 shall enter into force in relation to Bulgaria and Romania on the first day of the first month following the date of adoption of this Decision, unless they have already entered into force for Bulgaria or Romania before that date.
   2.   The Second Protocol of 19 June 1997 shall enter into force in relation to Bulgaria and Romania on the date on which it enters into force in relation to the State which, being a member of the European Union on the date of the adoption by the Council of the act drawing up that Protocol (7), is the last to fulfil the formality of notification referred to in Article 16(2) thereof.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall take effect on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 6 December 2007.

            For the Council

            The President

         A. COSTA

      (1)  Opinion of 23 October 2007 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

      (2)  OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 49.

      (3)  OJ C 313, 23.10.1996, p. 2.

      (4)  OJ C 151, 20.5.1997, p. 2.

      (5)  OJ C 221, 19.7.1997, p. 12.

      (6)  The Bulgarian and Romanian texts of the Convention and of the Protocols thereto shall be published in a special edition of the OJ at a later date.

      (7)  Council Act of 19 June 1997 drawing up the Second Protocol of the Convention on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (OJ C 221, 19.7.1997, p. 11).