title: 2012/832/EU: Decision of the European Central Bank of 10 December 2012 amending Decision ECB/2010/21 on the annual accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB/2012/30)

text:
               22.12.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 356/93

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
   of 10 December 2012
   amending Decision ECB/2010/21 on the annual accounts of the European Central Bank
   (ECB/2012/30)
   (2012/832/EU)
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 26.2 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Decision ECB/2010/21 of 11 November 2010 on the annual accounts of the European Central Bank (1) lays down the rules for drawing up the annual accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB).

               (2)

               Article 3 of Decision ECB/2010/21 specifies that the basic accounting assumptions defined in Article 3 of Guideline ECB/2010/20 of 11 November 2010 on the legal framework for accounting and financial reporting in the European System of Central Banks (2) also apply for the purposes of Decision ECB/2010/21. This applies, inter alia, to Article 3(c) of Guideline ECB/2010/20 in relation to post-balance sheet events, which provides that assets and liabilities are adjusted for events that occur between the annual balance sheet date and the date on which the financial statements are approved by the relevant bodies if they affect the condition of assets or liabilities at the balance sheet date.

               (3)

               It needs to be clarified for the ECB’s annual accounts that post-balance sheet events should only be taken into account until the date when the financial statements are authorised for issue, i.e. the date on which the Executive Board authorises the submission of the ECB’s annual accounts to the Governing Council for approval.

               (4)

               Decision ECB/2010/21 should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Amendment
   Article 3 of Decision ECB/2010/21 is replaced by the following:

      ‘Article 3
      Basic accounting assumptions
      The basic accounting assumptions defined in Article 3 of Guideline ECB/2010/20 shall also apply for the purposes of this Decision. In derogation from the first sentence of Article 3(c) of Guideline ECB/2010/20, post-balance sheet events shall only be taken into account until the date on which the Executive Board authorises the submission of the ECB’s annual accounts to the Governing Council for approval.’.

   Article 2
   Entry into force
   This Decision shall enter into force on 31 December 2012.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 10 December 2012.

            The President of the ECB

         Mario DRAGHI

      (1)  OJ L 35, 9.2.2011, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 35, 9.2.2011, p. 31.


Avis juridique important

|

31997D0819

97/819/CFSP: Council Decision of 28 November 1997 on the implementation of the Joint Action 96/588/CFSP on anti- personnel landmines with a view to contributing to the funding of certain programmes of the SADC and the ICRC

Official Journal L 338 , 09/12/1997 P. 0006 - 0006

COUNCIL DECISION of 28 November 1997 on the implementation of the Joint Action 96/588/CFSP on anti-personnel landmines with a view to contributing to the funding of certain programmes of the SADC and the ICRC (97/819/CFSP)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles J.3 and J.11 thereof,Having regard to Joint Action 96/588/CFSP of 1 October 1996 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article J.3 of the Treaty on European Union on anti-personnel landmines (1),Whereas, under the specific actions provided for by Article 8 of the Joint Action to support the Union's priority effort to help the victims of anti-personnel landmines, a contribution should be made to the funding of the regional programme of the Southern Africa Development Conference (SADC) and to the programmes of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in the former Yugoslavia and in Iraq,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1 1. The following initiatives shall be eligible for the funding provided for by Joint Action 96/588/CFSP:- the SADC's regional mine clearance programme, to be allocated an amount of ECU 2,07 million, and- the ICRC's Mines Awareness Programme in the former Yugoslavia and the programme for the rehabilitation of victims disabled by mines in Iraq, to be allocated an amount of ECU 1,43 million.Eligibility for expenditure shall commence on 1 July 1997.2. The expenditure financed by the sums stipulated in paragraph 1 shall be managed in compliance with the European Community procedures and rules applicable to the budget.Article 2 This Decision shall come into force on the date of its adoption.It shall be published in the Official Journal.Done at Brussels, 28 November 1997.For the CouncilThe PresidentG. WOHLFART(1) OJ L 260, 12. 10. 1996, p. 1.


title: Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1525 of 4 September 2017 amending Decision 2014/256/EU in order to prolong the validity of the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel to converted paper products (notified under document C(2017) 5948) (Text with EEA relevance. )

text:
               6.9.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 230/28

         COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2017/1525
   of 4 September 2017
   amending Decision 2014/256/EU in order to prolong the validity of the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel to converted paper products

         (notified under document C(2017) 5948)

   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 66/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the EU Ecolabel (1), and in particular Article 8(3)(c) thereof,
   After consulting the European Union Eco-Labelling Board,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Commission Decision 2014/256/EU (2) expires on 2 May 2017.

               (2)

               An assessment has been carried out confirming the relevance and appropriateness of the current ecological criteria, as well as of the related assessment and verification requirements, established by Decision 2014/256/EU. Decision 2014/256/EU should therefore be amended accordingly.

               (3)

               The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee set up by Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 66/2010,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Article 4 of Decision 2014/256/EU is replaced by the following:

      ‘Article 4
      The ecological criteria for the product group “converted paper products” and the related assessment and verification requirements shall be valid until 31 December 2020.’

   Article 2
   This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 4 September 2017.

            For the Commission

         Karmenu VELLA

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 27, 30.1.2010, p. 1.

      (2)  Commission Decision 2014/256/EU of 2 May 2014 establishing the ecological criteria for the award of the EU Ecolabel for converted paper products (OJ L 135, 8.5.2014, p. 24)


Avis juridique important

|

31993D0407

93/407/EEC: Council Decision of 19 July 1993 concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia

Official Journal L 189 , 29/07/1993 P. 0001 - 0001 Finnish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 22 P. 0073  Swedish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 22 P. 0073

COUNCIL DECISION of 19 July 1993 concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia (93/407/EEC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Articles 113 and 235 thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),Whereas the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia signed in Luxembourg on 5 April 1993 should be approved;Whereas the Treaty does not provide, for the adoption of this Decision, powers other than those of Article 235,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 1 The Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.Article 2 The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Community, give the notification provided for in Article 53 (2) of the Agreement.Article 3 The Presidency of the Council shall represent the Community in the Cooperation Council set up by Article 38 of the Agreement.Article 4 This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall take effect on the day of its publication.Done at Brussels, 19 July 1993.For the CouncilThe PresidentW. CLAES(1) Opinion delivered on 25 June 1993 (not yet published in the Official Journal).


title: 2008/514/EC: Decision of the European Parliament of 24 April 2007 on closing the accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2005

text:
               15.7.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 187/104

      DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

   of 24 April 2007
   on closing the accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2005
   (2008/514/EC)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2005 (1),
   having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2005, together with the Centre's replies (2),
   having regard to the Council's Recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),
   having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 302/93 of 8 February 1993 on the establishment of a European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (4), and in particular Article 11a thereof,
   having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,
   having regard to the Report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A6-0100/2007),

               1.

               Notes that the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial years 2004 and 2005 are as follows:
               Revenue and expenditure account for the financial years 2004 and 2005

                           (in EUR 1000)

                           2005

                           2004

                           Revenue

                           Subsidies from the Commission

                           12 000

                           11 730

                           Subsidies from Norway

                           516

                           514

                           Assigned revenue

                           190

                           211

                           Miscellaneous revenue

                           93

                           33

                              Total revenue (a)

                              12 799

                              12 488

                           Budgetary expenditure for the financial year

                           Staff — Title l of the budget

                           Payments

                           5 762

                           5 832

                           Appropriations carried over

                           154

                           122

                           Administration — Title II of the budget

                           Payments

                           1 094

                           1 088

                           Appropriations carried over

                           650

                           356

                           Operating activities — Title III of the budget (except assigned revenue)

                           Payments against payment appropriations for the financial year

                           4 159

                           2 342

                           Appropriations carried over

                           1 260

                              Assigned revenue (Phare and third countries)

                           101

                           201

                              Total expenditure (b)

                              11 920

                              11 200

                              Outturn for the financial year (a-b)

                           879

                           1 288

                           Balance carried over from the previous financial year

                           1 508

                           295

                           Appropriations carried over and cancelled

                           1 239

                           245

                           Sums for re-use from the previous financial year not used

                           - 58

                           15

                           Refunds to the Commission

                           -1 508

                           - 3

                           Refunds to Norway

                           -128

                           81

                           Exchange-rate differences

                           1

                           - 1

                           Balance for the financial year (EC grant + Norway contribution)

                           1 933

                           1 920

                           Norway Grant 2005

                           - 516

                              Balance for the financial Year only EC Grant

                              1 417

                              Source: Information supplied by the Monitoring Centre — This table summarises the data provided by the Monitoring Centre in its own annual accounts;

               2.

               Approves closing the accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2005;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Hans-Gert PÖTTERING

            The Secretary-General

         Harald RØMER

      (1)  OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 43.

      (2)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 86.

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

      (4)  OJ L 36, 12.2.1993, p. 1, Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1651/2003 (OJ L 245, 29.9.2003, p. 30).

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


Avis juridique important

|

32002D0968

2002/968/CFSP: Council Decision of 10 December 2002 concerning the implementation of Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission

Official Journal L 335 , 12/12/2002 P. 0001 - 0001

Council Decisionof 10 December 2002concerning the implementation of Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission(2002/968/CFSP)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to Council Joint Action 2002/210/CFSP of 11 March 2002 on the European Union Police Mission (EUPM)(1), and in particular Article 9(1)(b), last subparagraph thereof, in conjunction with the second indent of Article 23(2) of the Treaty on European Union,Whereas the Council should decide on the final budget for the year 2003,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 11. The budget for the EUPM for 2003 shall be EUR 38 million, of which a reference amount of EUR 20 million shall be financed in common from the general budget of the European Union.2. The management of the expenditure financed by the Community budget specified in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the procedures and rules of the Community applying to budget matters with the exception that any pre-financing shall not remain the property of the Community.Article 2This Decision shall take effect on the date of its adoption.Article 3This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal.Done at Brussels, 10 December 2002.For the CouncilThe PresidentP. S. Møller(1) OJ L 70, 13.3.2002, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31990D0507

90/507/EEC: Commission Decision of 7 September 1990 terminating the review of the anti-dumping measures concerning dense sodium carbonate originating in the United States of America

Official Journal L 283 , 16/10/1990 P. 0038 - 0042

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 7 September 1990  terminating the review of the anti-dumping measures concerning dense sodium carbonate originating in the United States of America  (90/507/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 originating in countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 14 thereof,  After consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for by the abovementioned Regulation,  Whereas:  I. PROCEDURE  (1) On 8 March 1983 Council Regulation (EEC) No 550/83 (2) imposed an anti-dumping duty on imports of dense sodium carbonate originating in the United States of America. The duty did not apply to consignments of dense sodium carbonate exported by Allied Corporation (now General Chemical Corporation), FMC, Stauffer Chemical Company or Texas Gulf Chemicals Company, which offered acceptable price undertakings at the time the duty was imposed.  (2) In April 1984, in response to a request from the European Council of Chemical Manufacturers Federations (Cefic) and on the basis of evidence that renewed dumping was causing injury to the Community industry, the Commission reopened the proceeding concerning these imports (3).  (3) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3337/84 (4) amended the scope of the original Regulation. However, the new anti-dumping duty did not apply to exports by Allied Chemical Corporation (now General Chemical Corporation) or Texas Gulf Chemicals Company, which again offered acceptable price undertakings (5).  (4) In 1988 the Commission received a request for a review of the measure referred to above from certain US producers and exporters and the Standing Committee of Glass industries of the EEC on behalf of the Community glass industry. They asserted that US exporters were no longer dumping the product and that there was consequently no longer any material injury to the Community industry from imports from this source. The measures adopted in 1984 should therefore be repealed or amended.  (5) Having decided, after consultations, that there was sufficient evidence to justify a review, the Commission initiated an investigation in accordance with Article 14 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88. As the Commission had cause to believe, in addition, that the circumstances adduced by certain US exporters also applied to the other producers/exporters, the review would cover all of them (1).  (6) The Commission officially informed the exporters, Community producers, importers and consumers known to be concerned, and gave the interested parties the opportunity to make known their views in writing and to request a hearing.  (7) The Community producers, the exporters and some importers made known their views in writing.  (8) Some of the exporters and several Community importers and consumers of sodium carbonate asked for an opportunity to make known their views orally, and their request was granted.  (9) Several exporters and Community producers asked to be informed of the main facts and considerations on the basis of which the Commission had made its proposal to the Council, and their request was granted.  (10) The Commission colltected and verified all the information it deemed necessary to establish whether there was dumping, injury or the threat of injury, and carried out checks at the premises of the following companies:  - Community producers  - Solvay, Belgium,  - Solvay, France,  - Rhône-Poulenc, France,  - Solvay, Italy,  - Chemische Fabrik Kalk, Germany,  - Matthes & Weber, Germany,  - Deutsche Solvay, Germany,  - Akzo, Netherlands,  - ICI, United Kingdom,  - Solvay, Spain,  - Soda Povoa, Portugal,  - Community importers  - General Chemical Ltd, United Kingdom,  - Saint-Gobain, France,  - BSN, France,  - Durand, France,  - US producers/exporters  - General Chemical Corporation, New Jersey,  - Texas Gulf Inc., North Carolina,  - Kerr McGee Corporation, Oklahoma,  - FMC Wyoming Corporation, Pennsylvania,  - Stauffer Chemical Company, Connecticut,  - Tenneco Minerals Company, Colorado.  (11) The investigation of dumping covered the period 1 December 1987 to 28 February 1989.  (12) The complexity of the case meant that the review could not be completed within the one year referred to in Article 7 (9) (a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88; it was still in progress when the five-year period referred to in Article 15 (1) came to an end. The Commission published an opinion in accordance with Article 15 (4) (2).  II. PRODUCT  1. Description  (13) The product concerned is high-density sodium carbonate, in other words sodium carbonate with a specific gravity exceeding 0,700 kg/dm3, consisting of grains with a diameter of not less than 0,25 mm and no more than 0,60 mm, falling within CN code ex 2836 20 00.  2. Like product  (14) The Commission established that the sodium carbonate produced in the Community and that exported by the United States were like products in terms of all their essential physical and technical characteristics.  III. DUMPING  1. Normal value  (15) Normal value was, in general, established on a month-by month basis, using the prices charged on the US domestic market by the US producers which exported to the Community and furnished sufficient evidence. The Commission based its calculations on the price paid or payable in the ordinary course of trade, disregarding all sales at prices below the cost of production. Although substantial quantities had been sold at a loss, the volume of sales of the like product on the exporters' domestic market was a  average of 30 % of total sales and was well above the threshold adopted by the Commission in previous cases: 5 % of the volume of exports to the Community of that product.  (16) In order to identify sales made at a loss, the Commisison calculated a cost of production for the export period concerned for each of the firms in question. The figure was based on all costs, both fixed and variable, in the contry of origin, of materials and manufacture, plus an amount for selling, administrative and other general expenses. From this figure were deducted the costs (not the selling price) identifiably and directly relating to any by-product of the manufacture of dense sodium carbonate.  (17) Domestic sales at prices below the cost of production so calculated were not taken into consideration in establishing normal value in accordance with Article 2 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88.  2. Export price  (18) Export prices were established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for products sold for export to the Community.  In cases where consignments were sent to subsidiaries in the Community, export prices were calculated on the basis of the prices at which the imported product was first resold to an independent buyer, duly adjusted to take account of all costs, particularly storage costs, incurred between importation and resale and of a reasonable profit margin (3 %), calculated with reference to that of independent importers of the product.  (19) From the export prices were deducted costs resulting from non-recoverable waste caused by successive loading and unloading of the export consignments. Where a producer had not furnished evidence of these costs, a percentage considered reasonable in the light of the financial data from those firms which did provide it and checked during the investigation was deducted from the selling price in order to obtain the net ex-works price of the exports.  (20) The Commission considered it reasonable to adjust some of the figures provided by the US manufacturers whose exports had not been regular, particularly the data relating to the costs of transport, insurance, commission and interest rates, in the light of the verified figures for regular exports. Based on a single sale in the Community, these costs in fact appeared abnormally low.  3. Comparison  (21) In makin a transaction-by-transaction comparison of the normal value with the export price, the Commission took account, where necessary and where sufficient evidence had been provided, of differences affecting price comparability. The adjustments mad related mainly to delivery and payment terms and to transport and insurance costs. All the comparisons were made ex works.  4. Margin  (22) Comparison of the normal value and export prices for the period from December 1987 to February 1989 reveals that the four US producers who exported to the Community dumped their products and that the weighted average dumping margins on the basis of the free-at-Community frontier price were:  - General Chemical Corporation: 2,9 %,  - Texas Gulf Inc.: 12,8 %,  - FMC Wyoming Corporation: 9,8 %,  - Kerr McGee Corporation: 11,9 %.  IV. INJURY  (23) The issue on which the Commission was being asked to decide was that of whether the expiry of the anti-dumping measures in force would lead to renewed injury.  1. Current situation  (24) United Statets exports to the Community have remained limited since the imposition of anti-dumping duties. They had acquired a 3,2 % share of the Community market before 1983. Since then, this share has fallen to 1,4 % and remained at that level.  (25) Between 1982 and 1989, Community consumption of dense sodium carbonate rose very slightly - from 3,55 million tonnes in 1982 to around 4 million tonnes in 1989.  (26) The Commission has established that t   prices of the imports were an average of 6 % lower than those of the Community industry during the perid covered by the investigation. In the light of the limited volume of these imports, the undercutting observed had practically no effect on general price levels. (27) The financial situation of the Community industry has improved, and this has enabled it to achieve satisfactory results overall. The improvement is due partly to the restructuring measures which have made it possible to keep the utilization of capacity high, and partly to the effect of the anti-dumping duties on the imports in question, but the recovery of the market for glass has also played a part.  2. Threat of injury  (28) Account was taken of the following considerations in determining if under these circumstances the expiry of the anti-dumping measures was likely to cause renewed material injury to Community producers.  (29) The US exporters in question together possess 10 million tonnes of production capacity and thus account for a high proportion of world capacity. Their combined production is currently around nine million tonnes, while domestic consumption is approximately six million tonnes.  (30) Since consumption is showing a tendency to stabilize, appreciable quantities are available for export. The fact that new production facilities are being set up throughout the world means that it will probably not be long before the United States loses some of its traditional markets, chiefly in the People's Republic of China and South Africa. It is therefore not unlikely that additional quantities of the US product will reach the Community, which is an attractive market because of its price levels.  (31) However, in present circumstances, the conclusion is that the possible increase is unlikely to become a genuine threat. Firstly, the current volume of US exports is very low, and the manufacturers do not at the moment have the kind of sales structure needed to increase their sales significantly, mainly because their joint sales organization does not operate on the Community market. In addition, a feature of the Community market for dense sodium carbonate is the stability of relations between the suppliers and users: the latter attach importance to having their needs met in a constant and regular fashion by their traditional suppliers.  (32) The investigation showed moreover that during the period concerned the US exporter whose exports were steady maintained a moderate price policy. It can be presumed that all the US exporters would base their export prices for the Community on their normal value in order to avoid dumping and thus a recurrence of complaints.  (33) In the light of these considerations, it should be recognized that it has not been established that the expiry of the anti-dumping measures in force would threaten to cause serious injury to the Community industry.  V. TERMINATION OF THE INVESTIGATION  (34) The Community producers and other interested parties were informed of the facts and main considerations on the basis of which the Commission intended to terminate the proceeding. Some made known their views, and the Commission studied these in detail.  (35) The Community producers' comments included a comparison of production costs in the exporting countries and in the Community which revealed a more advantageous cost structure in the United States of America. It was observed, however, that this comparison was not relevant to the Commission's conclusions, since the existence of a comparative advantage on the part of the US producers, provided it was also reflected in prices on the domestic market, was not evidence of dumping.  (36) With regard to the effect of possible increases in US exports to the Community, the Community producers claimed that the sensitivity of the product in question to market prices in the Community meant that even a small volume of low-priced imports was sufficient to cause material injury to the Community industry. Though allowing that in the case of a raw material such as sodium carbonate differences in price levels had a key influence on the competitiveness of the various operators, the Commission considered that in view of the circumstances seen in the investigation the argument could not apply in this case.  As the current volume of US exports is insignificant, only a large increase is liable to succed in influencing general price levels in the Community. It is difficult to imagine such an increase in current circumstances, however (see recitals 31 and 32).  (37) In view of these circumstances and the current situation of the market for dense sodium carbonate in the Community, the review concerning imports of dense sodium carbonate originating in the United States of America should be terminated without protective measures being imposed, it being understood that a recurrence of dumping and injury could justify the immediate opening of a new investigation, and, in the light of previous dumping and injury, that definitive anti-dumping duties with retroactive effect could be imposed in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The review of the anti-dumping measures concerning imports of dense sodium carbonate falling within CN code ex 2836 20 00 originating in the United States of America is hereby terminated.  Article 2  This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.  It shall take effect on the day of its publication.  Done at Brussels, 7 September 1990.  For the Commission  Frans ANDRIESSEN  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 64, 10. 3. 1983, p. 23.  (3) OJ No C 101, 13. 4. 1984, p. 10.  (4) OJ No L 311, 29. 11. 1984, p. 26.  (5) OJ No L 206, 2. 8. 1984, p. 15.  (1) OJ No C 64, 14. 3. 1989, p. 6.  (2) OJ No C 183, 20. 7. 1989, p. 10.


title: 2012/243/EU: Council Decision of 8 March 2012 on the conclusion of a Memorandum of Cooperation between the European Union and the International Civil Aviation Organization providing a framework for enhanced cooperation, and laying down procedural arrangements related thereto

text:
               8.5.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 121/16

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 8 March 2012
   on the conclusion of a Memorandum of Cooperation between the European Union and the International Civil Aviation Organization providing a framework for enhanced cooperation, and laying down procedural arrangements related thereto
   (2012/243/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 100(2), in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a), Article 218(7) and the first subparagraph of Article 218(8) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Commission has negotiated a Memorandum of Cooperation between the European Union and the International Civil Aviation Organization providing a framework for enhanced cooperation (the ‘Memorandum of Cooperation’), in accordance with the mandate adopted by the Council on 17 December 2009 authorising the Commission to open negotiations.

               (2)

               The Memorandum of Cooperation was signed on behalf of the Union on 4 May 2011 and has been provisionally applied from that date, subject to its possible conclusion at a later date.

               (3)

               The Memorandum of Cooperation should be concluded on behalf of the Union.

               (4)

               It is necessary to lay down procedural arrangements for the participation of the Union in the Joint Committee established by the Memorandum of Cooperation, the resolution of disputes, the adoption of additional Annexes, as well as the amendment of Annexes to the Memorandum,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Memorandum of Cooperation between the European Union and the International Civil Aviation Organization providing a framework for enhanced cooperation is hereby approved on behalf of the Union (1).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to make the notification provided for in paragraph 9.2 of the Memorandum of Cooperation.
   Article 3
   The Council shall determine the position to be taken by the Union in the Joint Committee established under paragraph 7.1 of the Memorandum of Cooperation (the ‘Joint Committee’) as regards the adoption of new Annexes to the Memorandum and amendments thereto, as referred to in point (c) of paragraph 7.3 of the Memorandum.
   Article 4
   1.   The Commission, after consultation with a Special Committee appointed by the Council and taking full account of its opinion, shall determine the position to be taken by the Union in the Joint Committee with respect to the decisions referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 7.3 of the Memorandum of Cooperation with regard to working arrangements, and the decisions referred to in points (d) and (e) of paragraph 7.3 of the Memorandum of Cooperation.
   2.   The Commission, after consultation with the Special Committee referred to in paragraph 1, may take any appropriate action under Articles 4 and 5 of the Memorandum of Cooperation.
   3.   The Union shall be represented in the Joint Committee by the Commission, assisted by representatives of the Member States.
   4.   The Commission shall represent the Union in consultations under Article 8 of the Memorandum of Cooperation.
   Article 5
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 8 March 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. BØDSKOV

      (1)  The Memorandum of Cooperation has been published in OJ L 232, 9.9.2011, p. 2 together with the decision on signature.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2016/1023 of 17 June 2016 abrogating Decision 2010/289/EU on the existence of an excessive deficit in Slovenia

text:
               24.6.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 166/17

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/1023
   of 17 June 2016
   abrogating Decision 2010/289/EU on the existence of an excessive deficit in Slovenia
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 126(12) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 2 December 2009, by Council Decision 2010/289/EU (1) on the basis of a recommendation from the Commission, the Council decided, in accordance with Article 126(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), that an excessive deficit existed in Slovenia. The Council noted that the general government deficit planned for 2009 was 5,9 % thus above the Treaty reference value of 3 % of GDP. The general government gross debt was planned to reach 34,2 % of GDP in 2009, thus below the Treaty reference value of 60 % of GDP.

               (2)

               On 2 December 2009, in accordance with Article 126(7) TFEU and Article 3(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 (2), the Council, on the basis of a recommendation from the Commission, addressed a recommendation to Slovenia with a view to bringing the excessive deficit situation to an end by 2013. That Council recommendation was made public.

               (3)

               On 21 June 2013, the Council concluded that Slovenia had taken effective action in compliance with the Council Recommendation of 2 December 2009 under Article 126(7) TFEU but that unexpected adverse economic events with major unfavourable consequences for public finances had occurred after the adoption of that Recommendation. Therefore, the Council, on the basis of a recommendation from the Commission, considered that the conditions provided for in Article 3(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 had been fulfilled and adopted a new recommendation addressed to Slovenia under Article 126(7) TFEU, with a view to bringing the excessive deficit situation to an end by 2015. That new Council recommendation was made public.

               (4)

               On 5 March 2014, in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), in view of the risks to the achievement of a durable correction of the excessive deficit by 2015, the Commission addressed a recommendation to Slovenia, with a view to taking the necessary action to ensure full compliance with the Council Recommendation of 21 June 2013, in particular by meeting the fiscal effort recommended by the Council.

               (5)

               In accordance with Article 4 of Protocol (No 12) on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the TFEU, the Commission provides the data for the implementation of the procedure. As part of the application of that Protocol, Member States are to notify data on government deficits and debt and other associated variables twice a year, namely before 1 April and before 1 October, in accordance with Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2009 (4).

               (6)

               The Council is to take a decision to abrogate a decision on the existence of an excessive deficit on the basis of notified data. Moreover, a decision on the existence of an excessive deficit is to be abrogated only if the Commission's forecasts indicate that the deficit will not exceed the Treaty reference value of 3 % of GDP over the forecast horizon (5).

               (7)

               Based on data provided by the Commission (Eurostat) in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2009, following the notification by Slovenia in April 2016, the 2016 Stability Programme and the Commission's 2016 spring forecast, the following conclusions are justified.

                           —

                           After peaking at 15 % of GDP in 2013, the general government deficit was reduced to 5 % of GDP in 2014 and reached 2,9 % of GDP in 2015. The deficit reduction in 2015 was mainly driven by the non-recurrence of one-offs that affected the deficit in 2014 (1,1 % of GDP) and a significant increase in current revenues (by 1,4 % of GDP) which more than offset the increase in current expenditure (by 0,2 % of GDP) and the increase in gross fixed capital expenditure (by 0,2 % of GDP) that is explained by a higher absorption rate of EU funds.

                           —

                           The Stability Programme for 2016-2019, submitted by the Slovenian government on 28 April 2016, plans a decline in the general government deficit to 2,2 % of GDP in 2016 and to 1,6 % of GDP in 2017. The Commission's 2016 spring forecast projects a deficit of 2,4 % of GDP in 2016 and 2,1 % of GDP in 2017. Thus, the deficit is set to remain below the Treaty reference value of 3 % of GDP over the forecast horizon.

                           —

                           The structural balance, which is the general government balance adjusted for the economic cycle and net of one-off and other temporary measures, deteriorated by 0,7 % of GDP over the period 2013-2015.

                           —

                           The debt-to-GDP ratio increased to 83,2 % of GDP in 2015, from 71 % of GDP in 2013, on account of debt-increasing stock-flow adjustments and one-off expenditures. The Commission 2016 spring forecast projects the gross government debt to have peaked in 2015 and to decrease to 78 % of GDP in 2017 due to a reduction in cash buffers.

               (8)

               As from 2016, which is the year following the correction of the excessive deficit, Slovenia is subject to the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact and should progress towards its medium-term objective at an appropriate pace, including respecting the expenditure benchmark, and comply with the debt criterion in accordance with Article 2(1a) of Regulation (EC) No 1467/97. In that context, there appears to be a risk of some deviation from the required adjustment of 0,6 % of GDP towards the medium-term objective in 2016. In 2017, under unchanged policies, there appears to be a risk of a significant deviation from the recommended adjustment of 0,6 % of GDP towards the medium-term objective. It is projected that Slovenia will be compliant with the transitional debt rule in 2016 and broadly compliant in 2017. Overall, further measures will be needed in 2016 and 2017.

               (9)

               In accordance with Article 126(12) TFEU, a Council Decision on the existence of an excessive deficit is to be abrogated when the excessive deficit in the Member State concerned has, in the view of the Council, been corrected.

               (10)

               In the view of the Council, the excessive deficit in Slovenia has been corrected and Decision 2010/289/EU should therefore be abrogated,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   From an overall assessment it follows that the excessive deficit situation in Slovenia has been corrected.
   Article 2
   Decision 2010/289/EU is abrogated.
   Article 3
   This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Slovenia.

      Done at Luxembourg, 17 June 2016.

            For the Council

            The President

         J.R.V.A. DIJSSELBLOEM

      (1)  Council Decision 2010/289/EU of 2 December 2009 on the existence of an excessive deficit in Slovenia (OJ L 125, 21.5.2010, p. 46).

      (2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 6).

      (3)  Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area (OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 11).

      (4)  Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2009 of 25 May 2009 on the application of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community (OJ L 145, 10.6.2009, p. 1).

      (5)  In line with the Specifications on the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact and Guidelines on the format and content of Stability and Convergence Programmes.


title: Use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (new Rule 202a) European Parliament decision of 9 October 2008 on insertion in Parliament's Rules of Procedure of a new Rule 202a on the use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (2007/2240(REG))

text:
               15.1.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               CE 9/67

         Thursday 9 October 2008Use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (new Rule 202a)
   P6_TA(2008)0472
   European Parliament decision of 9 October 2008 on insertion in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure of a new Rule 202a on the use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (2007/2240(REG))
   2010/C 9 E/12

      The European Parliament,
   having regard to its resolution of 11 July 2007 on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference (1), in particular paragraph 23 thereof,
   having regard to the letter from its President of 12 September 2007,
   having regard to the importance of symbols for reconnecting the citizens with the European Union and for building a European identity which is complementary to the national identities of the Member States,
   having regard to the fact that the symbols have been in use for over 30 years by all European Institutions and were formally approved by the European Council in 1985 (2),
   having regard to Rules 201 and 202 of its Rules of Procedure,
   having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A6-0347/2008),

               1.

               Decides to amend its Rules of Procedure as shown below;

               2.

               Decides that the amendment will enter into force on the day following its adoption;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.

               PRESENT TEXT

               AMENDMENT

                  Amendment 1

                  Parliament’s Rules of Procedure

                  Title XIII — Miscellaneous Provisions — Rule 202a (new)

                     Rule 202a

                     The symbols of the Union

                     1.

                     Parliament shall recognise and espouse the following symbols of the Union:

                           —

                                 the flag showing a circle of twelve golden stars on a blue background;

                           —

                                 the anthem based on the ‘Ode to Joy’ from the Ninth Symphony by Ludwig van Beethoven;

                           —

                                 the motto ‘United in diversity’.

                     2.

                     Parliament shall celebrate Europe Day on 9 May.

                     3.

                     The flag shall be flown at all Parliament premises and on the occasion of official events. The flag shall be used in each meeting room of the Parliament.

                     4.

                     The anthem shall be performed at the opening of each constitutive sitting and at other solemn sittings, notably to welcome heads of State or government or to greet new Members following enlargements.

                     5.

                     The motto shall be reproduced on Parliament’s official documents.

                     6.

                     The Bureau shall examine further use of the symbols within the Parliament. The Bureau shall lay down detailed provisions for the implementation of this Rule.

      (1)  OJ C 175 E, 10.7.2008, p. 347.

      (2)  Milan European Council of 28 and 29 June 1985.


title: Council Decision (EU) 2015/873 of 18 May 2015 on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, at the 48th session of the Port State Control Committee of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control

text:
               6.6.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 142/25

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/873
   of 18 May 2015
   on the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, at the 48th session of the Port State Control Committee of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 100(2) and Article 218(9) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Maritime safety, pollution prevention and on-board living and working conditions may be effectively enhanced through a drastic reduction of substandard ships in Union waters, by strictly applying relevant Conventions, international codes and resolutions.

               (2)

               While the primary responsibility for monitoring the compliance of ships with the international standards for safety, pollution prevention and on-board living and working conditions lies with the flag State, responsibility for maintenance of the condition of the ship and its equipment after survey to comply with the requirements of Conventions applicable to the ship lies with the ship company. There has, however, been a serious failure on the part of a number of flag States to implement and enforce those international standards.

               (3)

               Therefore, as a second line of defence against substandard shipping, the monitoring of compliance with the international standards for safety, pollution prevention and on-board living and working conditions should also be ensured by port States, while recognising that port State control inspection is not a survey and the relevant inspection forms are not seaworthiness certificates. A harmonised approach to the effective enforcement of those international standards by coastal Member States of the Union in respect of ships sailing in the waters under their jurisdiction and using their ports should avoid distortions of competition.

               (4)

               Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) sets out the Union regime on port State control, reformulating and reinforcing the previous Union legislation in this field in force since 1995. The Union regime is based on the pre-existing structure of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (the ‘Paris MOU’), signed in Paris on 26 January 1982.

               (5)

               As regards Union Member States, Directive 2009/16/EC effectively brings certain procedures, tools and work of the Paris MOU within the scope of Union law. By virtue of Directive 2009/16/EC, certain decisions taken by the appropriate competent body of the Paris MOU become binding on Member States of the Union.

               (6)

               The Port State Control Committee (PSCC) of the Paris MOU will hold its 48th session from 18 to 22 May 2015. During that session, the PSCC is expected to decide on certain issues which have direct legal effect on Directive 2009/16/EC.

               (7)

               The PSCC is expected to consider and, subsequently, adopt the updated 2014 inspection statistics, including the new white, grey and black flag performance lists and the recognised organisations performance list which will be used for targeting purposes as from 1 July 2015. As the Paris MOU inspection statistics are essential for the implementation of the inspection regime established by Directive 2009/16/EC, the Member States, on behalf of the Union, should support their adoption.

               (8)

               The PSCC is also expected to consider and, subsequently, adopt the regional commitment and the fair share calculation in accordance with Annex 11 to the Paris MOU. Given the importance of the inspection commitment being shared in an equitable manner among Member States and that each Member State contributes fairly to the achievement of the Union objective as set out in Article 5 of Directive 2009/16/EC, the Member States, on behalf of the Union, should support those actions of the PSCC.

               (9)

               The PSCC is also expected to confirm the average detention and deficiency ratios. Bearing in mind Commission Regulation (EU) No 802/2010 (2) and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1205/2012 (3), the Member States, on behalf of the Union, should support their adoption.

               (10)

               Furthermore, the PSCC is expected to discuss the follow-up detention (FUD) forms and the procedures in the event of failure to recycle a vessel as agreed and to consider an amendment of the procedures and guidelines of the Paris MOU. Bearing in mind the importance of an effective, proportionate and dissuasive detention, access refusal and follow-up to inspection system under Articles 16, 19 and 21 of Directive 2009/16/EC, the Member States, on behalf of the Union, should oppose the proposal in point 2.6 of the amended guideline set out in Annex II to document PSCC48/4.3.8, which concerns a definitive and permanent ban on vessels, as opposed to a temporary ban, as that proposal is not in line with Directive 2009/16/EC.

               (11)

               Pursuant to Article 218(9) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the position to be adopted on behalf of the Union in a body set up by an agreement, when that body is called upon to adopt acts having legal effects, is to be adopted by Council decision, on a proposal from the Commission.

               (12)

               The Union is not a contracting party to the Paris MOU. It is therefore necessary for the Council to authorise the Member States to express the position to be adopted on behalf of the Union and express their consent to be bound by the decisions taken by the PSCC,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The positions to be adopted on behalf of the Union at the 48th session of the PSCC of the Paris MOU when that body is called upon to adopt decisions having legal effects are set out in the Annex.
   Article 2
   The positions to be adopted on behalf of the Union as referred to in Article 1 shall be expressed by the Member States, which are bound by the Paris MOU, acting jointly in the interest of the Union.
   Article 3
   Formal and minor changes to the positions referred to in Article 1 may be agreed without requiring those positions to be amended.
   Article 4
   Member States are hereby authorised to give their consent to be bound, in the interest of the Union, by the decisions referred to in Article 1.
   Article 5
   This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 18 May 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. SEILE

      (1)  Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on port State control (OJ L 131, 28.5.2009, p. 57).

      (2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 802/2010 of 13 September 2010 implementing Article 10(3) and Article 27 of Directive 2009/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards company performance (OJ L 241, 14.9.2010, p. 4).

      (3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1205/2012 of 14 December 2012 amending Regulation (EU) No 802/2010 as regards the company performance (OJ L 347, 15.12.2012, p. 10).

      ANNEX
      The positions to be adopted, on behalf of the Union, at the 48th session of the Port State Control Committee of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control shall be to:

                  (a)

                  endorse the actions proposed in document PSCC48/3.3 A, paragraph 9.1;

                  (b)

                  endorse the actions proposed in document PSCC48/4.2.2B, paragraph 5.1;

                  (c)

                  endorse the actions proposed in document PSCC48/4.2.2C, paragraph 6.1; and

                  (d)

                  oppose the proposed amendment in point 2.6 of the amended guideline in document PSCC48/4.3.8.


Avis juridique important

|

32001D0608(01)

Council Decision of 28 May 2001 adjusting the basic salaries and allowances applicable to Europol staff

Official Journal C 165 , 08/06/2001 P. 0001 - 0002

Council Decisionof 28 May 2001adjusting the basic salaries and allowances applicable to Europol staff(2001/C 165/01)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Council Act of 3 December 1998 laying down the Staff Regulations applicable to Europol employees(1) (hereinafter referred to as the "Staff Regulations"), and in particular Article 44 thereof,Having regard to the initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,Having regard to the review of remuneration of officials of Europol by the Management Board of Europol,Whereas:(1) In the aforementioned review the Management Board took account of the changes in the cost of living in the Netherlands, as well as of the changes in salaries in the public service in the Member States and the recruitment needs of Europol.(2) The review justifies a 2,5 % increase in remuneration for the period 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001.(3) It is for the Council, acting unanimously, to adjust the basic salaries and allowances of officials of Europol, on the basis of the review,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS.Article 1The Staff Regulations are amended as follows:1. With effect from 1 July 2000:(a) the table of basic monthly salaries in Article 45 shall be replaced by the following: ">TABLE>"(b) in Article 59(3) the amount "EUR 842,44" shall be replaced by "EUR 863,50";(c) in Article 59(3) the amount "EUR 1684,88" shall be replaced by "EUR 1727,00";(d) in Article 60(1) the amount "EUR 224,65" shall be replaced by "EUR 230,27";(e) in Article 2(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 234,86" shall be replaced by "EUR 240,73";(f) in Article 3(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 10211,37" shall be replaced by "EUR 10466,65";(g) in Article 3(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 2297,56" shall be replaced by "EUR 2355,00";(h) in Article 3(2) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 13785,35" shall be replaced by "EUR 14129,98";(i) in Article 4(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 1021,13" shall be replaced by "EUR 1046,66";(j) in Article 4(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 765,86" shall be replaced by "EUR 785,01";(k) in Article 4(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 510,57" shall be replaced by "EUR 523,33";(l) in Article 4(1) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 408,45" shall be replaced by "EUR 418,66".2. With effect from the date on which this Decision takes effect:- in Article 7(3) of Appendix 5, the amount "EUR 0,21" shall be replaced by "EUR 0,22".Article 2This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.Article 3This Decision shall take effect on the day following that of its adoption.Done at Brussels, 28 May 2001.For the CouncilThe PresidentT. Bodström(1) OJ C 26, 30.1.1999, p. 23.