text:
 Důležité právní upozornění
 |
 52006PC0785
 Návrh nařízení Evropského Parlamentu a Rady, kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice /* KOM/2006/0785 konecném znení - COD 2006/0274 */
 [pic] | KOMISE EVROPSKÝCH SPOLEČENSTVÍ |V Bruselu dne 13.12.2006KOM(2006) 785 v konečném znění2006/0274 (COD)NávrhNAŘÍZENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU A RADY,kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice(předložená Komisí)DŮVODOVÁ ZPRÁVASOUVISLOSTI NÁVRHU |110 | Odůvodnění a cíle návrhu Vnitrostátní postupy schvalování typu lokomotiv jsou v současné době považovány za jednu z nejzávažnějších překážek vytváření nových železničních podniků v oblasti nákladní dopravy i za velkou brzdu interoperability evropského železničního systému. Žádný členský stát nemůže sám o sobě rozhodnout, že udělí povolení k uvedení do provozu, jež bude platné i na území ostatních členských států. Proto je při harmonizaci vnitrostátních postupů, jejich zjednodušení a při častějším používání zásady vzájemného uznávání nutná iniciativa ze strany Společenství. Toto rozšíření vyžaduje změnu nařízení (ES) č. 881/04 o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice (dále jen „agentura“), jakož i směrnic o interoperabilitě (96/48/ES, 2001/16/ES, 2004/50/ES) a bezpečnosti (2004/49/ES). |120 | Obecné souvislosti Tento návrh je součástí rozsáhlejší iniciativy, jejímž cílem je zdokonalit technickou část regulačního rámce v oblasti železnic, a to směrnice o železniční interoperabilitě, směrnici o bezpečnosti železnic a nařízení o zřízení agentury. K usnadnění volného pohybu vlaků je nezbytně nutné zdokonalit postupy schvalování typu lokomotiv. Podle výrobců a železničních podniků jsou tyto postupy nadále často příliš dlouhé a velmi nákladné; podle nich jsou některé požadavky příslušných orgánů z čistě technického hlediska dokonce nedostatečně oprávněné. Zadruhé, v rámci programu zjednodušování právních předpisů hodlá Komise konsolidovat a sloučit směrnice o interoperabilitě železnic. Zatřetí, Komise, která má bohaté desetileté zkušenosti s prováděním směrnic o interoperabilitě, by měla navrhnout několik zlepšení ohledně technické stránky regulačního rámce. Tento návrh je nutné číst se společnými návrhy sloučení / přepracování směrnic o interoperabilitě železnic, jakož i návrhem změny směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic. Jeho cílem je změna nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 o zřízení agentury. |130 | Platné předpisy vztahující se na oblast návrhu Postup uvedení železničních kolejových vozidel do provozu je předmětem článku 14 směrnic o interoperabilitě železnic a článku 14 směrnic o bezpečnosti železnic. Oznámení vnitrostátních pravidel je předmětem článku 16 směrnic o interoperabilitě železnic a článku 8 směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic. Agentura se řídí nařízením, které ji zřídilo a které má být změněno. |140 | Soulad s ostatními politikami a s cíli Unie Tento podnět umožňuje zvýšit konkurenceschopnost železniční dopravy. Sníží-li se jeho pomocí náklady na dopravní řetězec, přispěje tento podnět ke konkurenceschopnosti celého odvětví na úrovni Evropské unie. Dynamická železniční doprava také upevňuje místo světové jedničky, které zaujímá evropské odvětví železnic, a zachovává pracovní místa daného odvětví. Konkurenceschopnější železniční doprava také přispívá k hlavním závazkům Evropské unie týkajícím se udržitelného rozvoje a boje proti klimatickým změnám. Proto je tento podnět součástí revidované strategie pro růst a zaměstnanost. |KONZULTACE ZÚčASTNěNÝCH STRAN A POSOUZENÍ DOPADů |Konzultace zúčastněných stran |211 | Metody konzultací, hlavní cílová odvětví a obecný profil respondentů Tento podnět vznikl na základě silného zájmu samotných zúčastněných stran. První znaky zmíněných obtíží se objevily ve studii o vydávání osvědčení o bezpečnosti, vypracované v roce 2004. V důsledku této studie Komise zřídila pracovní skupinu, která na konci roku 2005 předložila svá doporučení. Komise v dubnu 2006 vypracovala konzultační dokument, který stanovil několik možností, a na semináři jej předložila všem dotčeným stranám (vnitrostátním orgánům odpovědným za bezpečnost železnic, průmyslu, provozovatelům, provozovatelům infrastruktury, evropským normalizačním subjektům atd.). Postoje sepsané všemi těmito stranami byly shromážděny a posouzeny ve studii o dopadu, která byla vypracována v souladu s platnými normami. |212 | Shrnutí odpovědí a způsob, jakým byly brány v úvahu; Jelikož se jednalo o podnět vyžádaný zúčastněnými subjekty, všechny reakce na podnět Komise byly kladné. Jedna od druhé se lišily postoji k jednotlivým variantám. Posouzení dopadů upřesňuje jednotlivé varianty a postoje jednotlivých subjektů k těmto variantám. Když Komise vypracovávala návrh, zohlednila různá stanoviska.Návrh se skládá ze dvou částí: první pojednává o zahájení činností, které mohou začít okamžitě, aniž by se muselo čekat na změny právních předpisů, druhá o změnách právních předpisů nutných k zabezpečení právního rámce, který přiznává práva a odpovědnosti oběma stranám během postupu vydání povolení k uvedení železničních kolejových vozidel do provozu. |Sběr a využití výsledků odborných konzultací |221 | Dotčená vědecká / odborná odvětví Vnitrostátní postupy schvalování typu železničních kolejových vozidel, vnitrostátní technické a/nebo bezpečnostní předpisy, náklady a lhůty spojené s těmito postupy atd. |222 | Použitá metodika Byla použita příručka Komise SEK(2005) 791 ze dne 15. června 2005, která byla aktualizována v roce 2006. |223 | Hlavní konzultované organizace / odborníci Pro posouzení různých postojů zúčastněných stran daného odvětví a pro posouzení dopadů různých možností se využilo odborných znalostí Evropské agentury pro železnice. |2249 | Shrnutí obdržených a použitých stanovisek Nebyla zmíněna žádná potenciálně závažná rizika s nevratnými důsledky. |225 | Viz posouzení dopadů. |226 | Prostředky poskytnutí výsledků odborných konzultací veřejnosti Posouzení dopadů je zveřejněno na internetu. |230 | Analýza dopadů Referenční scénář: omezit se na uplatňování stávajících právních předpisů a zasahovat výhradně v případě stížnosti. Varianty mimo regulační rámec: vydat doporučení pracovní skupiny o vzájemném schválení stávajících kolejových vozidel a požádat členské státy, aby je používaly, požádat agenturu, aby posoudila vnitrostátní předpisy a označila ty, které jsou rovnocenné, požádat agenturu, aby se zhostila úlohy poradního a odvolacího subjektu, pokud jde o vnitrostátní postupy uvedení do provozu, urychlit vývoj a revizi evropských norem, ověřit správné uplatňování zásady vzájemného uznávání, a pokud to bude nutné, zahájit řízení pro porušení předpisů. Možnosti v rámci regulačního rámce: změna právních předpisů s cílem: zrušit požadavek získání povolení v každém členském státu, ujasnit postup, který se použije pro stávající kolejová vozidla, umožnit agentuře vydávat povolení k uvedení do provozu, umožnit agentuře přijmout úlohu koordinačního, poradního a/nebo odvolacího subjektu, umožnit subjektům odpovědným za ověření shody vydávat povolení k uvedení do provozu, umožnit provozovatelům infrastruktur vydávat povolení k uvedení do provozu. |231 | Komise provedla posouzení dopadů uvedené v legislativním a pracovním programu Komise, jejíž zpráva je k dispozici na http://ec.europa.eu/transport/rail/index_fr.html . |PRÁVNÍ STRÁNKA NÁVRHU |305 | Shrnutí navrhovaných opatření Navrženým řešením je zavést postup na úrovni Společenství, který se skládá ze dvou částí. Nejprve je třeba požádat agenturu, aby zhodnotila jednotlivé vnitrostátní postupy a platné technické předpisy a vytvořila a aktualizovala seznam požadavků, které lze ověřit pouze jednou. Zároveň se před změnou právních předpisů členské státy žádají, aby na dobrovolném základě uplatňovaly doporučení pracovní skupiny, která již vydala Komise. Poté je třeba zavést povinnost dodržování zásady vzájemného uznávání povolení k uvedení do provozu již vydaných některým členským státem. Podle této zásady kolejová vozidla, kterým již povolení k uvedení do provozu bylo vydáno v jednom členském státě, budou případně muset získat dodatečné osvědčení v jiném členském státě pouze v případě, kdy existují doplňující vnitrostátní požadavky plynoucí například z vlastností místní sítě. Přesto je zároveň třeba aktualizovat nařízení agentury, aby se upřesnily nové úkoly, které byly agentuře svěřeny. |310 | Právní základ Článek 71 |320 | Zásada subsidiarity Zásada subsidiarity se použije, pokud se návrh nedotýká oblasti spadající do výlučné pravomoci Společenství. |Cíle návrhu nemohou být uspokojivě dosaženy opatřeními na úrovni jednotlivých členských států z těchto důvodů: |321 | Tento podnět má za cíl vyřešit problém týkající se kolejových vozidel, jejichž uvedení do provozu bylo povoleno v jednom členském státě, ale toto schválení není automaticky přijato v jiném členském státě. Tento problém má nadnárodní aspekt, který nelze vyřešit podnětem na úrovni jednoho státu, protože žádný členský stát nemůže vydat povolení k uvedení kolejových vozidel do provozu na území jiného členského státu. |Cílů návrhu lze lépe dosáhnout opatřením na úrovni Společenství z těchto důvodů: |324 | Zásada územní působnosti u povolení k uvedení do provozu je uvedena ve směrnicích o interoperabilitě železnic a o bezpečnosti železnic a cíle sledovaného tímto návrhem nelze dosáhnout pomocí žádného opatření pouze na vnitrostátní úrovni. Vnitrostátní bezpečnostní orgány se spojily prostřednictvím sítě, kterou vytvořila agentura; agentura je tedy nejvhodnějším orgánem Společenství pro rozvoj opatření navržených v tomto návrhu. |325 | To, že se daří dosahovat cílů sledovaných tímto návrhem, nejlépe dosvědčuje vytvoření srovnávací tabulky, která obsahuje vnitrostátní předpisy, její přijetí Komisí a budoucí rozhodnutí Komise, která stanoví rovnocennost některých vnitrostátních předpisů. |326 |327 | Změna článku 14 směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic umožní upřesnit část o povoleních, která se musejí vzájemně uznávat, a část, která se úzce váže na slučitelnost vozidla s danou infrastrukturou. Možnost centralizace rozhodování o vydávání povolení k uvedení do provozu, kterou navrhla agentura, neuspěla; to dokazuje, že návrh se omezuje na to, čeho členské státy nemohou dosáhnout vnitrostátními podněty. |Návrh je tedy v souladu se zásadou proporcionality. |Zásada proporcionality Návrh je v souladu se zásadou proporcionality z těchto důvodů: |331 | Tento návrh je součástí balíčku, který obsahuje: sdělení; návrh týkající se změny nařízení o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice (ES 881/2004); návrh na sloučení/přepracování směrnic o železniční interoperabilitě (96/48/ES a 2001/16/ES); návrh na změnu směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic (2004/49/ES). Návrhy byly vypracovány tak, aby se minimalizovaly nutné změny. |332 | Tento návrh má nulový vedlejší dopad na provozní rozpočet Komise. U agentury se jedná o 2,2 milionu EUR v prvních pěti letech a o necelých 0,5 milionu EUR v dalších letech. Protože základním cílem je zjednodušit postupy při povolování uvádění do provozu, odstranit nadbytečné ověřování a snížit objem předpisů a pravidel, počítá se u příslušných orgánů a daného odvětví pouze s přínosy. |Volba nástrojů |341 | Navrhovaný nástroj: nařízení. |342 | Jiné prostředky by nebyly přiměřené z těchto důvodů: Návrh má změnit nařízení. |ROZPOčTOVÉ DůSLEDKY |401 | U agentury se jedná o méně než 2,2 milionů EUR po dobu prvních pěti let a poté se rozpočet sníží na méně než 0,5 milionu EUR (viz přiložený finanční výkaz). |DALšÍ INFORMACE |510 | Zjednodušení |511 | Návrh přináší zjednodušení správních postupů platných pro soukromé subjekty a osoby. |514 | Kolejová vozidla, kterým již povolení k uvedení do provozu bylo vydáno v jednom členském státě, budou případně muset získat dodatečné osvědčení v jiném členském státě pouze v případě, kdy existují doplňující vnitrostátní požadavky plynoucí například z vlastností místní sítě. |517 | Tento návrh je uveden v legislativním a pracovním programu Komise pod označením 2006/TREN/005. |560 | Evropský hospodářský prostor Tato předloha právního aktu spadá do oblasti, které se týká Dohoda o EHP, a je tedy třeba ji vztáhnout na Evropský hospodářský prostor. |570 | Podrobné vysvětlení návrhu po kapitolách či článcích 1. Vydávání osvědčení pro stávající kolejová vozidla (nový článek 8a) Agentura se vyzývá k zjednodušení vydávání osvědčení pro stávající kolejová vozidla prostřednictvím vytvoření referenčního nástroje, který u každého ověřeného parametru umožní srovnání jednotlivých platných vnitrostátních předpisů a poskytnutí konkrétních odborných rad ke konkrétním projektům. 2. Vnitrostátní předpisy (článek 11) Vnitrostátní předpisy se oznamují podle směrnic o interoperabilitě železnic a směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic. Je proto třeba porovnat a uspořádat obě skupiny předpisů a logicky uspořádané je představit na internetové stránce agentury. 3. Oznámené subjekty (článek 13) Studie uskutečněná Komisí ukázala, že kritéria subjektů pověřených postupy ověřování, která musí členské státy dodržovat při oznámení, mohou být vykládána velmi široce. Je důležité posoudit dopady takovýchto rozdílů ve výkladu a ověřit, zda tyto rozdíly nepůsobí obtíže u vzájemného uznávání osvědčení o shodě a prohlášení ES o ověření. 4. Posouzení interoperabilního charakteru projektů, které jsou předmětem financování ze strany Společenství (článek 15) Je stanoveno, že na návrh Komise agentura posoudí některé žádosti o financování ze strany Společenství v oblasti projektů infrastruktury, za účelem ověření jejich „interoperabilního“ charakteru. Je třeba stanovit, že agentura může posoudit také žádosti o financování týkající kolejových vozidel, aby se mohla vyslovit k soudržnosti systému. 5. Vztahy mezi železničními podniky a provozovateli kolejových vozidel(nový článek 16a) Vstup v platnost nové úmluvy COTIF 1999 přinesl nová pravidla týkající se smluv o užívání vozidel, a tedy zrušení bývalé dohody RIV mezi železničními podniky. V novém systému již provozovatelé nemají povinnost registrovat své vozy u železničního podniku. Směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic musí být změněna tak, aby definovala pojem provozovatele a upřesnila vztahy mezi provozovateli a železničními podniky, zejména v oblasti údržby. Agentura by měla posoudit tento vztah a popřípadě vytvořit doporučení Komisi. 6. Vydávání osvědčení posádkám vlaků a lokomotiv (článek 17) V návaznosti na přijetí třetího železničního balíčku je třeba odkázat na směrnici o vydávání osvědčení bezpečnostním posádkám vlaků, která zahrnuje několik úkolů, které má agentura splnit, počínaje vytvořením vzorů licencí a dodatečných osvědčení, až po studii o využití čipových karet. 7. Úkoly agentury v oblasti ERTMS (nový článek 21a) Rozvoj a provádění systému ERTMS bylo od přijetí druhého železničního balíčku doprovázeno několika podněty, jako podpisem protokolu dohody mezi Komisí a různými subjekty daného odvětví; zřízením řídícího výboru pro provádění této dohody o spolupráci; přijetím Komisí sdělení o provádění systému ERTMS[1]; určením evropského koordinátora[2] pro projekt ERTMS, prioritní projekt zájmu Společenství; definicí úkolu agentury jako orgánu odpovědného za systém v různých ročních pracovních programech; a přijetím technických specifikací pro interoperabilitu (TSI) „Řízení a zabezpečení“ v oblasti konvenčních železnic[3]. S ohledem na rostoucí důležitost příspěvku agentury v této oblasti by se v tomto nařízení měly upřesnit její úkoly. 8. Konkrétní úkoly (nový článek 21b) Agentura má nyní k dispozici velké množství kvalifikovaných odborníků v oblasti interoperability a bezpečnosti evropského železničního systému. Je třeba, aby ji bylo povoleno provádět konkrétní úkoly na návrh Komise, přestože takový úkol není výslovně uveden v nařízení o zřízení agentury nebo v jejím ročním pracovním programu. Toto povolení je však podmíněno slučitelností konkrétního úkolu s úkolem agentury, dostupností prostředků z rozpočtu a dodržováním dalších priorit agentury. 9. Den přijetí pracovního programu (čl. 25 odst. 2) Bylo by vhodné změnit den přijetí ročního pracovního programu, aby byla umožněna lepší synchronizace s procesem rozhodování o rozpočtu. 10. Informace o výsledcích činnosti agentury (čl. 25 odst. 3) Při sestavování pracovního programu je žádoucí určit u každé činnosti očekávaný výsledek, jakož i jejího příjemce. Je rovněž žádoucí uvědomit Komisi o technických výsledcích každé činnosti, tato informace překračuje rámec obecné zprávy určené všem orgánům. 11. Složení správní rady (čl. 26 odst. 1) Z praktických důvodů je žádoucí jmenovat náhradního zástupce i z řad pozorovatelů. |1. 2006/0274 (COD)NávrhNAŘÍZENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU A RADY,kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice„Text s významem pro EHP“EVROPSKÝ PARLAMENT A RADA EVROPSKÉ UNIE,s ohledem na Smlouvu o založení Evropského společenství, a zejména na čl. 71 odst. 1 této smlouvy,s ohledem na návrh Komise[4],s ohledem na stanovisko Evropského parlamentu[5],s ohledem na stanovisko Evropského hospodářského a sociálního výboru[6],s ohledem na stanovisko Výboru regionů[7],vzhledem k těmto důvodům:(1) Nařízením Evropského parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 881/2004[8] byla zřízena Evropská agentura pro železnice, jež má po technické stránce přispívat k vytvoření evropského železničního prostoru bez hranic. V důsledku vývoje, kterým prošly právní předpisy Společenství v oblasti interoperability a bezpečnosti v odvětví železnic, vývoje na trhu a zkušeností s fungováním agentury a vztahy mezi agenturou a Komisí je třeba určitým způsobem upravit nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 a zejména přidat některé úkoly.(2) Článek 14 směrnice Evropského Parlamentu a Rady 2004/49/ES ze dne 29. dubna 2004 o bezpečnosti železnic Společenství[9] stanoví společný postup pro uvádění kolejových vozidel do provozu. V duchu zásady vzájemného uznávání je třeba usnadnit získávání povolení k uvedení do provozu v jiném členském státě, než tam, kde bylo uděleno první povolení, a omezit rozsah skutečností, které smí příslušný orgán prověřovat. Proto je třeba veškeré platné technické a bezpečnostní předpisy jednotlivých členských států rozdělit do tří skupin a výsledky této klasifikace zanést do referenčního dokumentu. Agentura se vyzývá k zjednodušení tohoto postupu, čehož dosáhne tak, že u každého ověřeného parametru stanoví, do jaké míry si jednotlivé platné vnitrostátní předpisy odpovídají, a poskytne konkrétní odborné rady ke konkrétním projektům.(3) Vnitrostátní předpisy se oznamují podle směrnice .../../ES (*) [ směrnice o interoperabilitě železničního systému ] a směrnice 2004/49/ES. Hranice mezi oběma skupinami předpisů není jasná tam, kde se pravidla bezpečnosti částečně týkají subsystémů, které jsou také předmětem pravidel v oblasti interoperability. Bylo by vhodné porovnat a uspořádat obě skupiny pravidel a logicky uspořádané je představit na internetové stránce agentury.(4) Podle článku 13 nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 může agentura dohlížet na kvalitu práce subjektů oznámených členskými státy. Studie uskutečněná Komisí nicméně ukázala, že kritéria, jež je nutno dodržovat při oznámení, mohou být vykládána velmi široce. Aniž je dotčena odpovědnost členských států při výběru subjektů k oznámení a při kontrolách, které provádějí za účelem ověření dodržování těchto kritérií, je důležité posoudit dopady takovýchto rozdílů ve výkladu a ověřit, zda tyto rozdíly nepůsobí obtíže u vzájemného uznávání osvědčení o shodě a prohlášení ES o ověření. Bylo by tedy vhodné stanovit, že agentura může v této oblasti převzít koordinační úlohu, například při plnění úkolu shromažďování informací.(5) Článek 15 nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 stanoví, že na návrh Komise agentura posoudí některé žádosti o financování projektů infrastruktury ze strany Společenství za účelem ověření jejich „interoperabilního“ charakteru. Je třeba, aby byl pojem „projekty infrastruktury“ rozšířen, aby agentura mohla posuzovat také k soudržnosti systému jako např. v případě projektů provádějících systém ERTMS.(6) Vzhledem k vývoji v mezinárodní oblasti, zvláště pak v důsledku vstupu nové úmluvy COTIF 1999 v platnost, je třeba požádat agenturu, aby posoudila vztahy mezi železničními podniky a provozovateli, především pak v oblasti údržby a podle potřeby vydala doporučení. Je třeba, aby tento úkol měl návaznost na práci agentury týkající se osvědčení opraven.(7) S ohledem na přijetí třetího železničního balíčku[10] je třeba odkázat na směrnici .../.../ES (*) [směrnici o vydávání osvědčení bezpečnostním posádkám vlaků], která zahrnuje několik úkolů, které má agentura splnit.(8) Rozvoj a provádění systému ERTMS bylo od přijetí druhého železničního balíčku doprovázeno několika podněty, jako podpisem protokolu dohody mezi Komisí a různými subjekty daného odvětví; zřízením řídícího výboru pro provádění této dohody o spolupráci; přijetím Komisí sdělení o provádění systému ERTMS[11]; určením evropského koordinátora pro projekt ERTMS, prioritní projekt zájmu Společenství, a to prostřednictvím rozhodnutí ...[12]; definováním úkolu agentury jako orgánu odpovědného za systém v různých ročních pracovních programech; a přijetím technických specifikací pro interoperabilitu (TSI) „Řízení a zabezpečení“ v oblasti konvenčních železnic[13]. S ohledem na rostoucí důležitost příspěvku agentury v této oblasti by se tyto úkoly měly upřesnit.(9) Agentura má nyní k dispozici velké množství kvalifikovaných odborníků v oblasti interoperability a bezpečnosti evropského železničního systému. Je tedy potřeba, aby agentura mohla provádět konkrétní úkoly na návrh Komise za předpokladu, že se tyto konkrétní úkoly slučují s úkolem agentury, že jsou dostupné prostředky z rozpočtu a že se dodržují další priority agentury.(10) V zájmu lepší synchronizace s procesem rozhodování o rozpočtu, bylo by vhodné změnit den přijetí ročního pracovního programu. .(11) Při sestavování pracovního programu agentury je třeba určit cíl každé činnosti, jakož i jejího příjemce. Je rovněž žádoucí uvědomit Komisi o technických výsledcích každé činnosti; tato informace překračuje rámec obecné zprávy určené všem orgánům.(12) Vzhledem k tomu, že u hlavního cíle zamýšleného opatření, totiž rozšíření úkolů agentury tak, aby se účastnila zjednodušení procesu Společenství, kterým se vydávají osvědčení železničních kolejových vozidel, nelze dosáhnout uspokojivých výsledků na úrovni členských států a že vzhledem k velikosti úkolu jich tedy lze lépe dosáhnout na úrovni Společenství, může Společenství přijmout opatření v souladu se zásadou subsidiarity uvedenou v článku 5 Smlouvy. V souladu se zásadou proporcionality stanovenou v uvedeném článku nepřekračuje tato směrnice rámec toho, co je nezbytné k dosažení tohoto cíle,PŘIJALY TOTO NAŘÍZENÍ:Článek 1Nařízení (ES) č. 881/2004 se mění takto:2. Vkládá se nový článek 8a, který zní:„Článek 8aKlasifikace vnitrostátních předpisů. Agentura zjednoduší schválení kolejových vozidel uvedených do provozu v jednom členském státě ostatními členskými státy v souladu s postupy uvedenými v odstavcích 2 až 5.2. Agentura postupně vytvoří referenční dokument, který umožní sladění všech vnitrostátních pravidel, která používají členské státy v oblasti uvádění kolejových vozidel do provozu. Tento dokument u každého parametru uvedeného v příloze VI směrnice 2004/49/ES uvádí vnitrostátní předpisy každého členského státu, jakož i skupinu určenou v uvedené příloze, do které tato předpisy náležejí. Tyto předpisy obsahují předpisy oznámené v čl. 16 odst. 3 směrnice .../.../ES (*) [ směrnice o interoperabilitě železničního systému ], předpisy oznámené po přijetí TSI (zvláštní případy, nevyřešené body, odchylky) a předpisy oznámené podle článku 8 směrnice 2004/49/ES.3. Ve spolupráci s vnitrostátními bezpečnostními orgány založenými podle čl. 6 odst. 5 agentura s cílem postupně omezit vnitrostátní předpisy náležející do skupiny B pravidelně aktualizuje referenční dokument a postupuje jej Komisi. První verze dokumentu se Komisi doručí nejpozději jeden rok od vstupu tohoto nařízení v platnost.4. Na agenturu se může obrátit vnitrostátní bezpečnostní orgán ohledně otázek týkajících se žádosti o povolení k uvedení kolejových vozidel do provozu nebo Komise za účelem poskytnutí odborné rady týkající se:a) rovnocennosti technických pravidel u jednoho nebo více parametrů;b) žádosti o dodatečné informace, o posouzení rizik nebo zkoušky a/nebo veškerých výsledků takové žádosti;c) odůvodnění zamítnutí povolení._____________________________________Úř. věst. ............“3. V článku 11 se doplňuje odstavec 4, který zní:„4. Agentura po dohodě s členskými státy a Komisí definuje prováděcí pravidla předávání dokumentů uvedených v odstavci 1.“Článek 13 se nahrazuje tímto:„ Článek 13Oznámené subjektyAgentura může na žádost Komise ověřit, zda kritéria pro oznámení těchto subjektů vyjmenovaná v příloze VII směrnic o interoperabilitě železnic jsou dodržována, a posoudit kvalitu práce těchto subjektů, aniž je dotčena odpovědnost členských států za oznámené subjekty, jež určí. V případě potřeby vydá stanovisko určené Komisi.“4. Článek 15 se nahrazuje tímto:„ Článek 15Interoperabilita železničního systémuNa žádost Komise přezkoumá agentura z hlediska interoperability každý projekt obnovy, modernizace nebo výstavby s ohledem na železniční systém, pro nějž je žádána finanční podpora Společenství. Agentura poskytne stanovisko týkající se souladu projektu s odpovídajícími TSI ve lhůtě, na které se dohodne s Komisí a která závisí na důležitosti projektu a dostupných zdrojích. Toto stanovisko plně zohlední odchylky stanovené v článku 7 směrnice 96/48/ES a článku 7 směrnice 2001/16/ES.“5. Vkládá se nový článek 16a, který zní:„ Článek 16aVztah mezi provozovateli kolejových vozidel a železničními podnikyDo jednoho roku ode dne vstupu v platnost tohoto nařízení agentura posoudí vztah mezi provozovateli kolejových vozidel a železničními podniky, co se týče údržby, v souladu s článkem 14b směrnice 2004/49/ES. Za stejnou dobu předloží agentura Komisi zprávu, ve které v případě potřeby vysloví doporučení k provádění dobrovolného nebo povinného systému vydávání osvědčení pro provozovatele kolejových vozidel.Posouzení agentury se zaměřuje zejména na to, zda:a) je provozovatel schopen z hlediska organizace, zaměstnanců a vozidel zajistit údržbu typů vozidel, o které se stará,b) má k dispozici informace nutné k zamýšleným činnostem údržby (zejména doklady a plány údržby),c) má k dispozici nástroje nutné ke sledování stavu vozidel a dohledu na ně.“6. Článek 17 se mění takto:7. Název a odstavec 1 jsou nahrazeny tímto:„ Článek 17Vydávání osvědčení posádkám vlaků a odborná způsobilost1. Agentura vypracuje doporučení týkající se vymezení společných kritérií pro definici odborné způsobilosti a hodnocení zaměstnanců podílejících se na provozu a údržbě železničního systému. Přitom bude brát ohled na kritéria a priority směrnice .../.../ES [ směrnice o vydávání osvědčení posádkám vlaků ][14]. V souladu s článkem 4 vede agentura konzultace se zástupci sociálních partnerů.“8. Vkládá se nový odstavec 4, který zní:„4. Agentura přispívá k provádění směrnice .../.../ES [ směrnice o vydávání osvědčení posádkám vlaků ] tím, že plní všechny úkoly, které ji byly přiznány podle uvedené směrnice.“9. Článek 18 se nahrazuje tímto:„ Článek 18Registrace kolejových vozidelAgentura vytvoří a doporučí Komisi vzorový formulář žádosti o registraci, jakož i společné specifikace vnitrostátního rejstříku, a to v souladu s článkem 14 směrnice .../.../ES [ směrnice o interoperabilitě železničního systému ].“10. Článek 19 se mění takto:11. v odstavci 1 se vkládá nové písmeno e), které zní:„e) technické předpisy oznámené členskými státy podle čl. 16 odst. 3 a čl. 17 odst. 2 směrnice .../.../ES [ směrnice o interoperabilitě železničního systému ].“12. doplňuje se nový odstavec, který zní:„5. Při vytváření databáze uvedených v tomto článku a článku 11 jsou se bere ohled na jejich vzájemnou provázanost, zejména pokud jde o vnitrostátní předpisy.“13. Kapitola 4 se mění takto:14. Nadpis kapitoly 4 se nahrazuje tímto:„ZVLÁŠTNÍ ÚKOLY“15. Vkládají se nové články 21a a 21b, které znějí:Článek 21aERTMS1. Agentura se zhostí úkolu orgánu odpovědného za systém, co se týče vytvoření a provedení evropského systému řízení železniční dopravy nazvaného „ERTMS“. Za tímto účelem se zhostí úkolů popsaných v odstavcích 2 až 5.2. Agentura zavádí postup řízení žádostí o změny specifikací systému ERTMS.3. Agentura podporuje práci Komise týkající se přechodu na ERTMS a koordinace práce zavádění ERTMS na dopravních transevropských koridorech.4. Agentura ve spolupráci s oznámenými subjekty a vnitrostátními bezpečnostními orgány dohlíží na používání ověřovacích postupů podle ES a uvedení do provozu u zvláštních projektů, zejména za účelem posouzení technické kompatibility infrastruktury a kolejových vozidel vybavených různými výrobci. Agentura Komisi případně doporučí příslušná opatření.5. Agentura vytvoří strategii řízení různých verzí ERTMS, aby se zajistila technická a provozní kompatibilita infrastruktur a kolejových vozidel vybavených různými verzemi.Článek 21bDalší úkolyAgentura po dohodě s Komisí nebo na její návrh vykoná každý konkrétní úkol, který napomáhá dosažení cílů popsaných v článku 1, přestože tento úkol není výslovně uveden v tomto nařízení nebo v pracovním programu stanoveném v čl. 25 odst. 2 písm. c).“16. Článek 25 se mění takto:17. V odstavci 2 se písmeno c) nahrazuje tímto:„c) do 30. listopadu každého roku schválí, s přihlédnutím ke stanovisku Komise, pracovní program agentury na příští rok a postoupí jej členským státům, Evropskému parlamentu, Radě a Komisi. Tento pracovní program se přijímá, aniž je dotčen roční rozpočtový proces Společenství. Pokud s pracovním programem Komise do 15 dnů ode dne jeho schválení vyjádří nesouhlas, správní rada jej znovu posoudí a do dvou měsíců přijme s případnými změnami ve druhém čtení buď dvoutřetinovou většinou hlasů, včetně hlasů zástupců Komise, anebo jednomyslně hlasy zástupců členských států;“18. Vkládá se nový odstavec 3, který zní:„3. Pracovní program agentury určí sledované cíle každé činnosti. Obecně řečeno, každá činnost a/nebo výsledek je předmětem zprávy pro Komisi.“19. V článku 26 se odstavec 1 nahrazuje tímto:„1. Správní rada se skládá z jednoho zástupce, jehož si určí každý členský stát, a ze čtyř zástupců určených Komisí, dále ze šesti zástupců, kteří nemají hlasovací právo a kteří na evropské úrovni zastupují tyto kategorie:a) železniční podniky,b) provozovatele infrastruktury,c) železniční průmysl,d) odbory,e) cestující,f) zákazníky nákladní železniční dopravy.Za každou z těchto kategorií určí Komise jednoho zástupce a jednoho náhradního zástupce na základě seznamu čtyř jmen předloženého jejich organizacemi.Členové správní rady, jakož i jejich zástupci, jsou jmenováni na základě jejich odpovídajících zkušeností a znalostí.“20. V článku 36 se odstavec 1 nahrazuje tímto:„1. Agentura je otevřená účasti evropských zemí a zemí, na něž se vztahuje evropská politika sousedství[15], které s Evropským společenstvím uzavřely dohody stanovující přijetí a uplatňování práva Společenství ze strany těchto zemí v oblasti, která je upravena v tomto nařízení.“Článek 2Toto nařízení vstupuje v platnost prvním dnem po vyhlášení v Úředním věstníku Evropské unie .Toto nařízení je závazné v celém rozsahu a přímo použitelné ve všech členských státech.V Bruselu dne [...]Za Evropský parlament Za Radupředseda předseda / předsedkyně LEGISLATIVNÍ FINANČNÍ VÝKAZ1. NÁZEV NÁVRHU:Návrh na změnu nařízení 881/2004 o zřízení Evropské agentury pro železnice.Návrh je součástí souboru, který dále tvoří:- sdělení- návrh na sloučení/přepracování směrnice o železniční interoperabilitě (96/48/ES a 2001/16/ES)- návrh na změnu směrnice o bezpečnosti železnic (2004/49/ES)- souhrn zprávy o analýze dopadů2. RÁMEC ABM / ABBHlava 06: Energetika a doprava.Kapitola rozpočtu 06 02: Vnitrostátní, letecká a námořní doprava.3. ROZPOČTOVÉ LINIE3.1. Rozpočtové linie (provozní linie a související linie na technickou a administrativní pomoc) (ex – linie B.A) včetně okruhů:Rozpočtová položka 06 02 08 01 – Evropská agentura pro železnice – Dotace v rámci hlavy 1 a 2 (správní výdaje)Rozpočtová položka 06 02 08 02 – Evropská agentura pro železnice – Dotace v rámci hlavy 3 (provozní výdaje)3.2. Doba trvání akce a finančního dopadu:Doba trvání je neomezená, protože některé úkoly jsou trvalého charakteru.3.3. Rozpočtové charakteristiky:Rozpočtová linie | Druh výdajů | Nové | Příspěvek ESVO | Příspěvky od kandidátských zemí | Okruh ve finančním výhledu |06.020801 | NEPOV | RP[16] | NE | ANO | NE | Č. 3 Vnitřní politiky (2000-2006) / Č 1a Konkurenceschopnost pro růst a zaměstnanost (2007-2013) |06.020802 | NEPOV | RP | NE | ANO | NE | Č. 3 Vnitřní politiky (2000-2006) / Č 1a Konkurenceschopnost pro růst a zaměstnanost (2007-2013) |4. SHRNUTÍ ZDROJŮ4.1. Finanční zdroje4.1.1. Shrnutí položek závazků (PZ) a položek plateb (PP)v milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 3 desetinná místa)Druh výdajů | Oddíl č. | Rok n[17] | n + 1 | n + 2 | n + 3 | n + 4 | n + 5 a násl. | Celkem |Provozní výdaje[18] |Položky závazků (PZ) | 8.1. | a | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |Položky plateb (PP) | b | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |Administrativní výdaje zahrnuté do referenční částky[19] |Technická a administrativní pomoc (NP) | 8.2.4. | c |CELKOVÁ REFERENČNÍ ČÁSTKA |Položky závazků (PZ) | a+c | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |Položky plateb (PP) | b+c | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |Administrativní výdaje nezahrnuté do referenční částky[20] |Lidské zdroje a související výdaje (NP) | 8.2.5. | d | neuvedeno |Administrativní náklady, kromě nákladů na lidské zdroje a souvisejících nákladů, nezahrnuté do referenční částky (NP) | 8.2.6. | e |Celkové orientační finanční náklady zásahu |PZ CELKEM, včetně nákladů na lidské zdroje | a+c+d+e | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |PP CELKEM, včetně nákladů na lidské zdroje | b+c+d+e | 1,685 | 2,185 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 1,685 | 0,48 | neuvedeno |SpoluúčastPokud financování návrhu předpokládá spoluúčast členského státu či jiných subjektů (uveďte, o které se jedná), je třeba v níže uvedené tabulce vyplnit odhadovanou výši finanční spoluúčasti (pokud se předpokládá finanční spoluúčast jiných subjektů, lze doplnit další řádky):v milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 3 desetinná místa)Spolufinancující subjekt | Rok n | n + 1 | n + 2 | n + 3 | n + 4 | n + 5 a násl. | Celkem |........................ | f |PZ CELKEM včetně spolufinancování | a+c+d+e+f |4.1.2. Soulad s finančním plánemX Návrh je v souladu se stávajícím finančním plánem.( Návrh si vyžádá změnu plánu a úpravu příslušného okruhu finančního výhledu.( Návrh může vyžadovat použití ustanovení interinstitucionální dohody[21] (tj. nástroje pro flexibilitu nebo revizi finančního výhledu).4.1.3. Finanční dopady na straně příjmůX Návrh nemá žádné finanční dopady na příjmy.( Návrh má finanční dopady na příjmy s následujícím účinkem:v milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 1 desetinné místo)Před akcí [Rok n - 1] | Situace po akci |Celkový objem lidských zdrojů |Přijetí tohoto legislativního návrhu nebude mít dopady na pracovníky GŘ TREN, jež kontroluje práci agentury.5. CHARAKTERISTIKY A CÍLE5.1. Potřeba, která má být uspokojena v krátkodobém nebo dlouhodobém horizontuNové činnosti agentury jsou z krátkodobého hlediska nezbytné, a to jak v oblasti vzájemného uznávání lokomotiv, tak v oblasti certifikace strojvedoucích.U vzájemného uznávání lokomotiv se od agentury požaduje zjednodušení postupů při povolování uvádění stávajících kolejových vozidel do provozu vypracováním srovnávacího nástroje, jenž u všech sledovaných ukazatelů umožní přehled o odpovídajících vnitrostátních předpisech. Zároveň v rámci konkrétních projektů poskytne cílená technická stanoviska.Směrnice o vydávání osvědčení pro posádky vlaků[23] navazuje na třetí železniční balíček[24] a obsahuje několik úkolů, které má agentura splnit, počínaje vypracováním vzorových licencí a dodatečných osvědčení a konče studií o používání čipových karet.5.2. Přidaná hodnota zásahu ze strany Společenství, provázanost návrhu s dalšími finančními nástroji a možná součinnostVysoká přidaná hodnota v důsledku využití již částečně dostupné organizační struktury, kvalifikovaných pracovníků a rovněž osvědčených metod (např. využití stávajících provozuschopných vnitrostátních bezpečnostních orgánů).5.3. Cíle, očekávané výsledky a související ukazatele návrhu v kontextu rámce ABMOperativní cíl č. 1: vzájemné uznávání lokomotiv (hlavní cíl tohoto balíčku) .- Cíl: zvýšení počtu vzájemně uznávaných vnitrostátních předpisů- Výsledek: zkrácení doby schvalování typu lokomotiv- Ukazatel: počet lokomotiv uvedených do provozu v zemi původuOperativní cíl č. 2: certifikace strojvedoucích (třetí železniční balíček):- Cíl a výsledek: vypracování vzorových licencí a specifikace registrů- Ukazatel: počet strojvedoucích certifikovaných podle směrnice o certifikace posádek vlakůOperativní cíl č. 3: různé úkolyViz bod 8.2.25.4. Způsob provádění (orientační)X Centralizované řízení( přímo ze strany KomiseX nepřímo na základě pověření pro:( výkonné agenturyX subjekty, které Společenství zřídila, uvedené v článku 185 finančního nařízení( vnitrostátní veřejné subjekty / subjekty pověřené veřejnou službou( Sdílené nebo decentralizované řízení( spolu s členskými státy( spolu s třetími zeměmi( Společné řízení s mezinárodními organizacemi (uveďte s kterými)6. MONITOROVÁNÍ A HODNOCENÍ6.1. Monitorovací systémPráce Evropské agentury pro železnice je každoročně sledována a hodnocena v rámci souhrnné výroční zprávy (za předchozí rok) a pracovního programu (na následující rok). Uvedené dva dokumenty schvaluje správní rada agentury a zasílají se Evropskému parlamentu, Radě, Komisi, Účetnímu dvoru a členským státům.6.2. Hodnocení6.2.1. Hodnocení předem (ex-ante)Během konzultací před zahájením legislativního procesu byly se zástupci členských států a reprezentativními organizacemi odvětví projednány a posouzeny různé alternativy. Konzultací se zúčastnila i agentura. Na internetových stránkách Komise je k dispozici velmi podrobná analýza dopadů, jejíž souhrn je přílohou tohoto návrhu.6.2.2. Opatření přijatá po průběžném / následném hodnocení (ex post) (na základě podobných zkušeností z minulosti)V září roku 2006 proběhl audit agentury a v době zpracování tohoto návrhu se vypracovávají i nápravná opatření.6.2.3. Podmínky a periodicita budoucího hodnoceníKromě ověřování a auditu ze strany Evropského úřadu pro boj proti podvodům (OLAF) a Účetního dvora článek 43 nařízení o agentuře stanoví hodnocení agentury ze strany Komise (výsledků, pracovních postupů), a to pět let po jejím zřízení, tj. kolem roku 2010.7. OPATřENÍ PROTI PODVODůMRozpočet agentury plní výkonný ředitel. Každoročně předkládá Komisi, Účetnímu dvoru a správní radě agentury podrobné vyúčtování příjmů a výdajů za předchozí rok. Navíc má vnitřní auditor Komise ve vztahu k Evropské agentuře pro železnice tytéž pravomoci jako ve vztahu k útvarům Komise a agentura má obdobný systém vnitřního auditu jako Komise.Nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 1073/1999 ze dne 25. května 1999 o vyšetřování prováděném Evropským úřadem pro boj proti podvodům (OLAF) a interinstitucionální dohoda ze dne 25. května 1999 o vnitřním vyšetřování prováděném OLAF se na Evropskou agenturu pro železnice vztahují bez omezení.8. PODROBNOSTI O ZDROJÍCH8.1. Cíle návrhu z hlediska jejich finanční náročnostiZávazky (v eurech na tři desetinná místa)Rok n | Rok n + 1 | Rok n + 2 | Rok n + 3 | Rok n + 4 | Rok n + 5 |Úředníci nebo dočasní zaměstnanci (XX 01 01)[27] | A*/AD |B*, C*/AST |Zaměstnanci financovaní[28] podle čl. XX 01 02 |Ostatní zaměstnanci financovaní[29] podle čl. XX 01 04/05 |CELKEM |Přijetí tohoto legislativního návrhu nebude mít dopady na pracovníky GŘ TREN, jež kontroluje práci agentury.8.2.1.b. Počet a druh lidských zdrojů (Evropská agentura pro železnice)Pro roky n až n+4 je třeba ve srovnání s plánem pracovních míst uvedeným v předběžném návrhu rozpočtu na rok 2007 přidat dalších 7 pracovních míst AD8 a pro roky n+5 a následující 1 pracovní místo AD8. Zdůvodnění těchto dodatečných pracovních míst je uvedeno dále v textu.8.2.2. Popis úkolů, které vyplývají z akcePozor: dále jsou popsány úkoly agentury, nikoli útvaru GŘ TREN E2, které bude plnění úkolů agenturou sledovat.Operativní cíl č. 1: vzájemné uznávání kolejových vozidel- vypracování srovnávacího nástroje, kde budou uvedeny všechny vnitrostátní předpisy platné pro oblast kolejových vozidel- klasifikace a porovnání uvedených předpisů- koordinace vzájemných kontaktů vnitrostátních orgánů s cílem snížit počet vnitrostátních předpisů- zveřejnění srovnávací tabulky vnitrostátních předpisů- příprava technického stanovisko na vyžádání vnitrostátních bezpečnostních orgánů a Komise- příprava doporučení pro rozhodnutí Komise zaměřené na snížení počtu vnitrostátních předpisů a zvýšení počtu vzájemně uznávaných předpisůTento operativní cíl bude vyžadovat:- v prvních 5 letech 4 dodatečné experty, poté jednoho ročně; náklady na jednoho pracovníka A8 jsou v průměru 0,122 milionu EUR v hlavě 1 a 0,013 milionu EUR v hlavě 2- dále je třeba počítat s částkou 100 000 EUR ročně během prvních 5 let a následně s 50 000 EUR ročně pro pracovní skupinu (hlava 3)- na překlad části vnitrostátních předpisů je nutno počítat s částkou 540 000 EUR ročně po dobu nejbližších 5 let (hlava 3)- rovněž je nutno vyvinout specifický materiál/software v hodnotě 500 000 EUR v druhém roce (hlava 3)Operativní cíl č. 2: certifikace strojvedoucích (třetí železniční balíček):- doporučení harmonizovaných vzorů licencí a dodatečných potvrzení- doporučení kódů Společenství ohledně kategorií licencí- návrh specifikace rejstříku strojvedoucích- spolupráce s příslušnými orgány členských států s cílem zajistit interoperabilitu rejstříků- zpráva o ostatních pracovnících plnících úkoly, které jsou zásadní z hlediska bezpečností- zpráva o provádění směrnice- zpráva o používání čipových karetTento cíl bude vyžadovat:- dva další experty v prvních 5 letech a následně jednoho experta ročně (hlavy 1 a 2)- navíc je třeba počítat s částkou 100 000 EUR ročně po dobu prvních 5 let (50 000 EUR na pracovní skupinu a 50 000 EUR na studie) a následně s částkou 25 000 EUR ročně pro pracovní skupinu (hlava 3)Operativní cíl č. 3: ostatní úkoly- úkoly navazující na systém ERTMS: odpovědný orgán, správa specifikací, správa souběžného nasazení různých verzí v rámci sítě, podpora zavádění systému ERTMS podél koridorů- vypracování kritérií Společenství pro certifikaci držitelů vagonů návazně na práce na certifikaci zařízení pro údržbu- vypracování pokynů pro zprovoznění rejstříků týkajících se infrastruktury a kolejových vozidel- atd.Kromě disponibilních zdrojů je pro tyto úkoly třeba počítat s jedním expertem ročně (hlavy 1 a 2).8.2.3. Původ lidských zdrojů (statutární pracovní místa)Pozor: jedná se o pracovníky útvaru GŘ TREN E2, kteří budou sledovat dotyčné činnosti agentury.X Pracovní místa vyčleněná v současnosti na řízení programu, který má být nahrazen nebo prodloužen( Pracovní místa předběžně vyčleněná v rámci procesu RSP / PNR na rok n( Pracovní místa, o něž je třeba požádat v příštím procesu RSP / PNR( Pracovní místa, jež mají být obsazena převedením stávajících zdrojů v rámci řídícího útvaru (interní přeobsazování)( Pracovní místa požadovaná pro rok n, avšak neplánovaná v procesu RSP / PNR dotyčného roku8.2.4. Další administrativní výdaje zahrnuté v referenční částce (XX 01 04/05 – Výdaje na správu a řízení)v milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 3 desetinná místa)Rozpočtová linie (číslo a okruh) | Rok n | Rok n + 1 | Rok n + 2 | Rok n + 3 | Rok n + 4 | Rok n + 5 a násl. | CELKEM |1. Technická a administrativní pomoc (včetně souvisejících personálních nákladů) |Výkonné agentury[30] |Další technická a administrativní pomoc |- interní (intra muros) |- externí (extra muros) |Technická a administrativní pomoc celkem |8.2.5. Finanční náklady na lidské zdroje a související náklady nezahrnuté do referenční částkyv milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 3 desetinná místa)Druh lidských zdrojů | Rok n | Rok n + 1 | Rok n + 2 | Rok n + 3 | Rok n + 4 | Rok n + 5 a násl. |Úředníci nebo dočasní zaměstnanci (XX 01 01)[31] |Zaměstnanci financovaní podle čl. XX 01 02 (pomocní pracovníci, přidělení národní odborníci, smluvní zaměstnanci, atd.) (upřesněte rozpočtovou linii) |Náklady na lidské zdroje a související náklady celkem (nezahrnuté do referenční částky) |Výpočet – Úředníci nebo dočasní zaměstnanci |Předpokládá se, že sledování práce agentury vyžaduje v současnosti jednoho pracovníka ročně a nové úkoly agentury nebudou vyžadovat dalšího úředníka. |Výpočet – Zaměstnanci financovaní podle článku XX 01 02 |Přidání úkolů agentuře nevyžaduje žádné pracovníky financované z tohoto titulu. |8.2.6. Další administrativní výdaje nezahrnuté do referenční částky v milionech EUR (zaokrouhleno na 3 desetinná místa) |Rok n | Rok n + 1 | Rok n + 2 | Rok n + 3 | Rok n + 4 | Rok n + 5 a násl. | CELKEM |XX 01 02 11 01 – Služební cesty |XX 01 02 11 02 – Schůze a konference |XX 01 02 11 03 – Výbory[32] |XX 01 02 11 04 – Studie a konzultace |XX 01 02 11 05 - Informační systémy |2. Ostatní výdaje na řízení celkem (XX 01 02 11) |3. Ostatní výdaje administrativního charakteru (upřesněte i s odkazem na rozpočtovou linii) |Administrativní výdaje celkem, kromě nákladů na lidské zdroje a souvisejících nákladů (NEZAHRNUTÉ do referenční částky) |Výpočet - Další administrativní výdaje nezahrnuté do referenční částky |Předpokládá se, že nové úkoly agentury neznamenají pro Komisi dodatečné náklady na správu a řízení.Agentura je v podstatě plně provozuschopná a počet zasedání/služebních cest by tak měl zůstat víceméně konstantní. |Potřeby lidských zdrojů a správní potřeby budou pokryty ze zdrojů dotace přidělené řídícímu GŘ v rámci ročního příspěvku.[pic][pic][pic][1] Úř. věst. ............[2] Úř. věst. ............[3] Úř. věst. ............[4] Úř. věst. C ..., ..., s.....[5] Úř. věst. C ..., ..., s.....[6] Úř. věst. C ..., ..., s.....[7] Úř. věst. C ..., ..., s.....[8] Úř. věst. L 164, 30.4.2004, s. – opravené znění Úř. věst. L 220, 21.6.2004, s. 3.[9] Úř. věst. L 164, 30.4.2004, s. – opravené znění Úř. věst. L 220, 21.6.2004, s. 16.[10] Úř. věst. ...........[11] Úř. věst. ............[12] Úř. věst. ............[13] Úř. věst. ............[14] Ověřit nadpis a odkaz po přijetí třetího železničního balíčku.[15] Viz sdělení Komise KOM(2004) 373 v konečném znění, 12.5.2004.[16] Rozlišené položky, dále jen „RP“.[17] Rok n je prvním rokem realizace změn daných tímto legislativním finančním výkazem, tj. první rok po přijetí změn oběma složkami rozpočtového orgánu.[18] Výdaje, které nespadají pod kapitolu xx 01 příslušné hlavy xx.[19] Výdaje v rámci článku xx 01 04 hlavy xx.[20] Výdaje v rámci kapitoly xx 01 kromě článků xx 01 04 nebo xx 01 05.[21] Viz body 19 a 24 interinstitucionální dohody.[22] V případě potřeby, např. potrvá-li akce déle než 6 let, je třeba doplnit další sloupce.[23] Úř. věst. ... je třeba ověřit název.[24] Úř. věst. ...........[25] Rok n je prvním rokem realizace změn daných tímto legislativním finančním výkazem, tj. první rok po přijetí změn oběma složkami rozpočtového orgánu.[26] Jak je popsáno v bodě 5.3 a 8.2.2.[27] Tyto náklady NEJSOU zahrnuty do referenční částky.[28] Tyto náklady NEJSOU zahrnuty do referenční částky.[29] Tyto náklady jsou zahrnuty do referenční částky.[30] Je třeba uvést odkaz na konkrétní legislativní finanční výkaz dotyčných výkonných agentur.[31] Průměrné náklady na úředníka kategorie A za předpokladu, že n=2008 a 2 % ročně.[32] Uveďte přesně druh výboru a skupinu, do níž náleží.


type: wikipedia

text:
Milenii: Mileniul al II-lea î.Hr. - Mileniul I î.Hr. - Mileniul I
 Secole: Secolul al II-lea î.Hr. - Secolul I î.Hr. - Secolul I
 Decenii: Anii 200 î.Hr. Anii 190 î.Hr. Anii 180 î.Hr. Anii 170 î.Hr. Anii 160 î.Hr. - Anii 150 î.Hr. - Anii 140 î.Hr. Anii 130 î.Hr. Anii 120 î.Hr. Anii 110 î.Hr. Anii 100 î.Hr. Anii 90 î.Hr.
 Ani: 160 î.Hr. 159 î.Hr. 158 î.Hr. 157 î.Hr. 156 î.Hr. - 155 î.Hr. - 154 î.Hr. 153 î.Hr. 152 î.Hr. 151 î.Hr. 150 î.Hr.
 Evenimente
 Arte, științe, literatură și filozofie
 Nașteri
 Decese
 155 î.Hr.


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: US

text:
George H. Strott and two other citizens, voters and taxpayers of Baltimore City, instituted these amended proceedings for: (1) The grant of a writ of mandamus to be directed against William F. Broening and others, who constitute the board of estimates of the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, commanding them forthwith to reconvene as a board and to allow and include in the proposed ordinance of estimates, for the year 1931, the sum of $3,800, which had been estimated in writing by the city service commission to be necessary for the performance of its statutory duty in respect of covering into the classified city service the laborers now employed, and those to be employed, by the City of Baltimore; or that said sum of $3,800 be allowed by said board of estimates to said city service commission out of the sum of $150,000, set up by the said board of estimates as a contingent fund in said proposed ordinance of estimates for the year 1931; and, also (2) the grant of the writ directed to John G. Rolker, William H. Lawrence and Ralph F. Proctor, who constitute the city service commission of Baltimore, commanding them to cover into the classified city service of Baltimore all those laborers now employed and to be employed by the said City of Baltimore. For convenience the words board and commission will be used to designate the two respondents. A demurrer was overruled to the original petition, and the respondents severally answered, issue was joined, a jury trial waived, and testimony was offered on the part of the relators, who, at the close of their evidence, by leave of court, amended the form of the writ desired. The respondents did not offer any testimony, and the board submitted the only prayer, which was to the effect that there was no legally sufficient evidence upon which a writ of mandamus could issue against the board. The court granted this prayer, and dismissed the petition against, not only the board, but also the commission. Two of the relators have appealed from this judgment. The questions arise on seven bills of exceptions, but there is no occasion to consider *Page 563
 any but the last, which relates to the action of the court in granting the prayer.
 Among the duties imposed by the charter of Baltimore City is the making of three lists of moneys to be appropriated by the city council for the next ensuing fiscal year. One of these lists is known as the "departmental estimates" of the amounts estimated to be required to pay the expenses of conducting the public business of the municipality for the next fiscal year. In order to enable the board to make this list, the various municipal administrative units are required to make and send to the board estimates in writing of the amounts needed for the next fiscal year, and to specify in detail the objects and the items, including a statement of the salaries of those serving in any capacity. The three lists are similarly prepared, so that, together, they shall embrace all moneys to be expended for the ensuing fiscal year for all municipal purposes. When these lists are thus prepared, the board shall cause a draft of an ordinance to be prepared, to be submitted to the city council, that will provide appropriations sufficient to meet the amounts called for by the three lists, and a copy of the proposed ordinance, when certified by a majority of the members of the board, shall be published as prescribed, and, immediately after the expiration of the publication, the board shall transmit a copy of the draft of the proposed ordinance to the president of the city council, whereupon a special meeting of the city council shall be called to consider the proposed ordinance, and, when so assembled, the duty is imposed upon the city council to consider and investigate the estimates contained in the proposed ordinance, and to remain in daily sessions for its consideration until an ordinance is passed.
 The city council shall not have the power to increase the amounts fixed by the board nor to insert new items, but, by a majority vote of all its elected members, the city council may reduce the amounts, except such items as may be fixed by law, or may be inserted to pay state taxes or the interest and principal of the municipal debt. After its passage and approval by the mayor, the several sums of this ordinance of *Page 564
 estimates for the designated year are exclusively appropriated for the several purposes therein named for the specified year. Not only are the amounts not to be diverted, but the city council is without the power to enlarge any item contained in the ordinance after it is duly passed. Section 36, Baltimore City Charter (1927).
 In pursuance of these requirements, the city service commission prepared and submitted to the board its written estimates of the amounts needed for the fiscal year 1931. The commission was created for the purpose of introducing the method of appointing municipal officers and employees for merit and of securing them against removal except for cause. It has three members, who serve without pay, and it began to function on January 1st, 1920. Its powers and duties are set forth in sections 203A to 203Q, both inclusive, of the Baltimore City Charter (1927). With the exception of positions of teachers or supervisors, who are appointed by the board of school commissioners, as provided in sections 100 and 101 of the Charter, all the municipal officers and positions, which are filled pursuant to any law or ordinance relating to Baltimore City by any municipal official or body other than the mayor or the city council, are required to be separated by the commission into four classes, which are respectively denominated as exempt, competitive, noncompetitive, and labor, which constitute the classified city service of Baltimore, and no appointment shall be made in any of these classes, except under and according to the rules which the commission was directed to promulgate. The law defines these classes. The exempt class is declared to embrace all offices or positions, except those of laborers, which shall be specifically named in the rules of the commission as impracticable to be filled by competitive or noncompetitive examinations; the competitive class is declared to include all other positions in the service for which it is practicable to determine the fitness of the applicants by competitive examination, and covers all positions which are within the service and which are neither in the exempt, the noncompetitive, nor the labor class; the noncompetitive class is composed of the *Page 565
 positions which are neither in the exempt nor the labor class, and which it is not practicable to include in the competitive class; and, lastly, the labor class is formed by the unskilled laborers and such skilled labor as may be classified by the rules and regulations of the commission, exclusive of any person whose service shall consist of clerical work, office work, or inspection of other work or service. Sections 203D-H of Baltimore City Charter (1927).
 The commission is required to make rules to carry out the purposes of this civil service legislation, and to provide for the appointments and employments in all positions in the classified service on the basis of "merit, efficiency, character and industry," and it is obligatory that the promulgated rules shall provide: (a) For examinations and other tests as may in its judgment be necessary to determine the fitness of applicants for positions in the competitive and noncompetitive classes; (b) for the employment of those in the labor class, either in the order of priority of application, or by selection on account of fitness, or by such other methods as the commission may find will produce the best results; (c) for the rejection of candidates who fail to comply with reasonable requirements as to age, sex, physical condition, and moral character; (d) for the preparation of lists of candidates eligible for employment, which lists in the case of the competitive class shall be arranged in the order of the relative standing of applicants as determined by the commission; and (e) for the certification, as occasion may require, to the appointing officer, of the persons eligible to employment under the rules of the commission, provided that, in the case of the competitive class, such certification shall include only the five persons standing highest on the appropriate eligible list, or the person or persons on such list when it contains five names or less. Section 2031.
 The rules adopted, which have any relation to the cause at bar, are Rules 8, 13 and 33. The first one named provides that the commission by minute shall designate the classes of position that involve common labor services, and none other shall be within the labor division. Rule 13 requires that any *Page 566
 one desiring a position in the labor division shall make his application in writing for the fitness tests prescribed, and the chief examiner shall maintain a register of applicants, upon which shall be entered, in the order of priority of filing application, the name, address and date of every application according to the position desired in the class embraced in the labor division, and this registry shall be utilized in filling vacancies in positions in any class for which applicants have filed, whenever there is no eligible or re-employment list as provided in Rule 33. By the last-named rule, it is specified that, whenever vacancies occur in any position, the official who is to make the appointment shall make a written request of the chief examiner, in which shall be stated the kind of labor needed, the pay and probable length of employment, the number to be employed, and the date on which and the time and place at which the applicant is to report. Whereupon the chief examiner shall notify, in the order of their standing on the eligible list, twice the number to be employed to report at the designated time and place, and shall send to the official, who has made the application, a list of the laborers thus notified. The official shall then appoint, from those who report at the designated time and place, the number required in the exact order of their standing on the eligible register, and shall make prompt report to the commission of his action with the names of those appointed. The Rule 33 further provides that, in case of emergency, where it is not practicable to secure laborers from an eligible registry with sufficient promptness, the appointing officer may employ, subject to the subsequent approval of the commission, as many persons as may be required, but no such emergency employment shall continue for more than five days, unless extended by the commission by action on its minutes.
 When a vacancy occurs or a new position is created in the classified service, other than the exempt class, the appointing officer must fill such position provisionally by one of the persons who has been certified to him. The appointee is on probation for a period of six months, and, at or before the end of this period, the head of the department or office may, *Page 567
 in the exercise of his discretion, remove the appointee, whose appointment, unless he be so dismissed, shall be deemed complete. Should an emergency arise, or if the services to be rendered are only for a temporary period, not to exceed sixty days, the appointing officer may, with the approval of the commission, make a temporary appointment to remain in force not exceeding sixty days, and only until a regular appointment under the provisions of the Charter can be made.
 The Charter contains other provisions in reference to promotions, transfers, reinstatements, removals; to a roster of employees; to offices with their functions, duties, powers; to the inhibition of payment of any salary or compensation to any officer, clerk, employee, or other person in the classified city service, whose name is not upon the roster as having been appointed and employed in conformity with the provisions of the charter and the rules of the commission. Sections 203C, 203J-Q. The particularity and comprehensiveness of these and other provisions of the Charter on this subject make plain the purpose and mandatory nature of the duties of the commission. Section 203Q. This body of three members is obliged to appoint a chief examiner, who shall act as secretary of the board and register of labor, and who, under the direction of the commission, shall superintend the examinations, supervise the administration of the rules, and perform such other duties as the commission may prescribe. His yearly salary is not to exceed $4,000. The commission may appoint such other employees, fix their salaries, and incur such expenses as may be necessary, but the aggregate thereof is not to exceed the amount fixed therefor in the annual ordinance of estimates. The commission now employs a chief examiner, an assistant chief examiner, a stenographer-secretary, four clerks, one typist, and a full-time medical examiner, making a total of nine.
 The commission has apparently performed its official duty with respect to the exempt, competitive and noncompetitive classes, but, notwithstanding the clear and imperative obligation imposed by the Charter, the commission has never carried out the requirements of the Charter with respect to the *Page 568
 labor class. Since its organization the commission has never had available a registry or list of laborers eligible for service as contemplated by the Charter, and no appropriate action has been taken to compel it to assume and discharge its manifest obligation. For some time it was, therefore, necessary for the heads of departments to hire laborers on their own initiative, but, since the creation of a municipal employment bureau, an agency of the city that originated during a period of industrial depression, and has since been maintained, to secure places for unemployed laborers in private industry, this bureau, which has developed into a center for the concentration of the idle laborers and their allocation in new employment, supplies the laborers for municipal employment. When a laborer is so secured, the commission is notified in order that his name may be put on the roster of employees that the commission is required to keep, where it remains if he can pass the physical examination prescribed by the commission. This manifest evasion of the charter has continued until the present, and it should not be suffered to endure.
 During the period embraced between 1922 and 1930, both inclusive, the city has appropriated for the support of the commission sums in varying annual amounts, but fluctuating between $16,600 and $20,650. Beginning with 1923 and ending with 1929, the commission has yearly requested an allowance varying between $2,420 and $5,200 for the purpose, as was stated, of enabling the commission to perform its duties in respect of the labor class, and the board has consistently rejected these requests. In 1930, the commission omitted this request.
 Finally, in submitting its estimate for the year 1931, the commission estimated its requirements at $25,000, which included, under the heading of "The establishment of a Labor Registration Division as required by the Charter," $1,300 for a new clerk, and $2,500 for two assistant medical examiners, which aggregated $3,800. At the time the estimate was presented, the commission requested the board to grant it a hearing in order to advocate its reasons for the increase. *Page 569
 The board consented, and two members of the commission appeared before the board and submitted a written statement over the signature of the three members, to the effect that the request for the appropriation of $3,800 was to provide medical and clerical help in order to establish a labor division. At the same time, the president of the commission, its attorney, and a second attorney, addressed the board, which heard their arguments. Shortly afterwards the board further considered the matter and decided, after deliberation and conference, to allow the commission an increase of $500 in its expense account, but to reject the allowance of $1,300 sought for another clerk, and of $2,500 for two assistant medical examiners, who would give a part of their time to the commission. The amount ultimately allowed by the board was an appropriation of $20,300, of which the sum of $17,300 was to pay the salaries of the nine subordinates, and $3,000 was for the expenses during the year 1931.
 The testimony adduced showed unmistakably that the commission had consistently declined to comply with its manifest duty in reference to the employment of laborers, because its demand for a larger force, which the commission believed necessary, was not granted. On the other hand, the testimony demonstrated an equal persistency in the refusal of the board to allow an increase. The testimony is conclusive that the board declined to enlarge the commission's corps of assistants, for the fiscal year 1931, because it was of the opinion that the force of the commission was sufficient to discharge every duty which the commission was bound by the Charter to perform. The Charter committed to the board the preliminary decision of this difference of opinion. It was not until after notice, a hearing, and due deliberation, that the board came to the considered conclusion that more work by those then its employees, rather than more money for more employees, was what was requisite for the complete accomplishment of every official duty imposed by the Charter on the commission. It may be that this determination was not the sounder, or was even an erroneous view, but the court cannot substitute its discretion and judgment for that of the *Page 570
 designated administrative agency which could find one way or the other, and whose action here cannot be reviewed by the writ of mandamus, as it does not clearly and convincingly appear that the board has acted arbitrarily or in a plain and willful disregard of duty. Manger v. Board of Examiners, 90 Md. 659, 671, 672,45 A. 891; Woods v. Simpson, 146 Md. 547, 551, 126 A. 882; Grahamv. Gaither, 140 Md. 330, 117 A. 858; Henkel v. Millard,97 Md. 24, 54 A. 657; Merrill on Mandamus, secs. 37, 40, 41, 126;High on Extraordinary Legal Remedies, secs. 325, 328, 345, 42, 43; Baltimore City v. Gorter, 93 Md. 13, 48 A. 445.
 There is an element of novelty in the theory that a highly controversial matter, admitting of a reasonable difference of honest and informed opinion, such as the necessity for one or the other number of agents to do a variable amount of work, can be the basis for the losing protagonist to enforce his particular view by mandamus after the question has been honestly and fairly, although, perhaps, mistakenly, resolved by the authorized agency.
 It is clear that the relators can have no writ issue against the board. While the prayer granted relates to the board alone, the questions here are not so confined. As was decided in Mangerv. Board of Examiners, 90 Md. 659, 673, 45 A. 891, 895, where the issues of fact have been determined by the judge, sitting without the aid of a jury, this tribunal is not, as in ordinary appeals from a court of law, confined to a review of the rulings on questions of law presented by exceptions. In such instances, the appellate court must inquire whether the writ was properly granted or refused, after an inspection of the whole record, and is not restricted to an instruction, or limited to determining whether that instruction was right or wrong, particularly as no instruction is needed as a basis to bring up for revision the final order, when the case is heard in the trial court without the intervention of a jury. As was said in that case: "It is the final order granting or refusing a mandamus which an appeal to this court assails, when the case has been tried by the judge alone; and, whatever the instructions may be, if there are *Page 571
 any, the accuracy or inaccuracy of that order is the thing to be determined" Whitridge v. Pope, 110 Md. 486, 487, 73 A. 288;Woods v. Simpson, 146 Md. 547, 549, 126 A. 882.
 As a consequence of this rule, the court will, in this case, pass upon the right of the relators with respect to both the board and the commission.
 The writ will not be directed against the board and the commission, since their functions and duties are separate and distinct, and, if the writ cannot issue against one respondent, it will not issue against the other, and, so the trial court was right in dismissing a petition which could only be granted against both, as was prayed in the petition. Merrill onMandamus, sec. 234a. Pennington v. Gilbert, 148 Md. 649, 652,129 A. 905.
 For the reasons assigned, the judgment denying the writ will be affirmed.
 Judgment affirmed, with costs to the appellee.


text:
Vormsa () ir sena pilsēta Vācijas dienvidrietumos pie Reinas upes, Reinzemes-Pfalcas federālajā zemē. Pilsēta pazīstama kā vieta, kur risinās "Nībelungu dziesmas" galvenie notikumi, ar Liebfraumilch vīnu un romānisko Vormsas katedrāli.
 Vēsture
 Vormsas nosaukums ir atvasināts no seno ķeltu vārda Borbetomagus (mitra pļava), 14. gadā p.m.ē. to ieņēma romiešu karavadonis Druzs un Romas imperatora Augusta vārdā nosauca par Augusta Vangionum. Pilsētā bija forums un romiešu dieviem Jupiteram, Junonai, Minervai un Marsam veltīti tempļi.
 Romas impērijas sabrukuma periodā 411. gadā burgundu vadonis Ginters (Gundicar), kurš bija viens no centrālajiem "Nībelungu dziesmas" () varoņiem, pasludināja romiešu senatoru Jovinu par Romas imperatoru.
 Vēlāk pilsēta kļuva par pirmās Burgundijas karalistes galvaspilsētu, līdz 437. gadā to ar romiešu palīdzību nopostīja huņņi Attilas vadībā.
 613. gadā Vormsa kļuva par bīskapa rezidences vietu (bīskapija pastāvēja līdz 1801. gadam). 11. gadsimtā Vormsa ieguva impērijas brīvpilsētas statusu. 1122. gadā pilsētā tika noslēgts Vormsas konkordāts. Viduslaikos pilsēta pazīstama arī kā ebreju kultūras centrs, pisētas rabīns bija hasīdu (“dievbijīgo”) novirziena pārstāvis Eliazārs ben Jūda ben Kalonimus.
 1521. gadā Vormsā tika izdots Vormsas edikts, kurš pasludināja ārpus likuma Luteru un tā sekotājus. 1698. gadā Augsburgas līgas kara laikā franči nopostīja pilsētu.
 No 1789. līdz 1816. gadam Vormsa bija Francijas sastāvā. 2. pasaules kara laikā 1945. gada 22. februārī Vormsa smagi cieta Sabiedroto aviācijas uzlidojumā. Tika sagrauti 39% no pilsētas apbūves.
 Cilvēki
 Vormsā dzimuši:
 Hermanis Štaudingers (Hermann Staudinger, 1881—1965), ķīmiķis
 Timo Hildebrands (Timo Hildebrand, 1979), futbolists
 Atsauces
 Ārējās saites
 Vormsa
 Pilsētvalstis


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 8.5.2008
 BG
 Официален вестник на Европейския съюз
 L 124/18
 РЕШЕНИЕ НА СЪВМЕСТНИЯ КОМИТЕТ НА ЕИП
 No 156/2007
 от 7 декември 2007 година
 за изменение на приложение II (Технически наредби, стандарти, изпитвания и сертифициране) към Споразумението за ЕИП
 СЪВМЕСТНИЯТ КОМИТЕТ НА ЕИП,
 като взе предвид Споразумението за Европейското икономическо пространство, изменено с Протокола за адаптиране на Споразумението за Европейското икономическо пространство, наричано по-долу „Споразумението“, и по-специално член 98 от него,
 като има предвид, че:
 (1)
 Приложение II към Споразумението бе изменено с Решение на Съвместния комитет на ЕИП No 141/2007 от 26 октомври 2007 г. (1)
 (2)
 Решение 2007/395/EО на Комисията от 7 юни 2007 г. относно националните разпоредби за употребата на хлорирани парафини с къса верига, нотифицирани от Кралство Нидерландия съгласно член 95, параграф 4 от Договора за ЕО (2) следва да бъде включено в Споразумението,
 РЕШИ:
 Член 1
 След точка 12ч (Директива 2006/66/ЕО на Европейския парламент и на Съвета) от глава XV на приложение II към Споразумението се включва следната точка:
 „12ш.
 32007 D 0395: Решение 2007/395/EО на Комисията от 7 юни 2007 г. относно националните разпоредби за употребата на хлорирани парафини с къса верига, нотифицирани от Кралство Нидерландия съгласно член 95, параграф 4 от Договора за ЕО (ОВ L 148, 9.6.2007 г., стр. 17).“
 Член 2
 Текстовете на Решение 2007/395/ЕО на исландски и норвежки език, които следва да се публикуват в притурката за ЕИП към Официален вестник на Европейския съюз, са автентични.
 Член 3
 Настоящото решение влиза в сила на 8 декември 2007 г., при условие че всички нотификации, предвидени в член 103, параграф 1 от Споразумението, са внесени в Съвместния комитет на ЕИП (3).
 Член 4
 Настоящото решение се публикува в раздела за ЕИП и в притурката за ЕИП към Официален вестник на Европейския съюз.
 Съставено в Брюксел на 7 декември 2007 година.
 За Съвместния комитет на ЕИП
 Председател
 Stefán Haukur JÓHANNESSON
 (1) ОВ L 100, 10.4.2008 г., стр. 68.
 (2) ОВ L 148, 9.6.2007 г., стр. 17.
 (3) Няма посочени конституционни изисквания.


text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21996D0411(01)
 Besluit van het Gemengd Comité van de EER nr. 1/96 van 26 januari 1996 tot wijziging van bijlage VI (Sociale zekerheid) bij de EER-Overeenkomst
 Publicatieblad Nr. L 090 van 11/04/1996 blz. 0038 - 0038
 BESLUIT VAN HET GEMENGD COMITÉ VAN DE EER Nr. 1/96 van 26 januari 1996 tot wijziging van bijlage VI (Sociale zekerheid) bij de EER-OvereenkomstHET GEMENGD COMITÉ VAN DE EER,Gelet op de Overeenkomst betreffende de Europese Economische Ruimte, aangepast bij het Protocol tot aanpassing van de Overeenkomst betreffende de Europese Economische Ruimte, hierna "de Overeenkomst" te noemen, inzonderheid op artikel 98,Overwegende dat bijlage VI bij de Overeenkomst laatstelijk werd gewijzigd bij Besluit nr. 49/95 van het Gemengd Comité van de EER (1);Overwegende dat Besluit nr. 156 van de Administratieve Commissie van de Europese Gemeenschappen voor de sociale zekerheid van migrerende werknemers van 7 april 1995 betreffende de voorrangsregels van de ziekte- en moederschapsverzekering (2) in de Overeenkomst dient te worden opgenomen,BESLUIT:Artikel 1 In bijlage VI bij de Overeenkomst wordt na punt 42d (Besluit nr. 151) het volgende punt toegevoegd:"42e. 395 D 0419: Besluit nr. 156 van de Administratieve Commissie van de Europese Gemeenschappen voor de sociale zekerheid van migrerende werknemers van 7 april 1995 betreffende de voorrangsregels van de ziekte- en moederschapsverzekering (PB nr. L 249 van 17. 10. 1995, blz. 41).".Artikel 2 De tekst van Besluit nr. 156 in het IJslands en het Noors, die aan de onderscheiden taalversies van dit besluit is gehecht, is authentiek.Artikel 3 Dit besluit treedt in werking op 1 februari 1996, mits alle in artikel 103, lid 1, van de Overeenkomst bedoelde kennisgevingen aan het Gemengd Comité van de EER hebben plaatsgevonden.Artikel 4 Dit besluit wordt bekendgemaakt in het EER-gedeelte van en het EER-supplement bij het Publikatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen.Gedaan te Brussel, 26 januari 1996.Voor het Gemengd Comité van de EERDe VoorzitterFrançoise GAUDENZI-AUBIER(1) PB nr. L 30 van 8. 2. 1996, blz. 53.(2) PB nr. L 249 van 17. 10. 1995, blz. 41.


type: legislation

text:
 6.10.2017
 IT
 Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea
 L 258/124
 REGOLAMENTO DI ESECUZIONE (UE) 2017/1796 DELLA COMMISSIONE
 del 5 ottobre 2017
 che fissa il coefficiente di attribuzione da applicare alle domande di titoli di esportazione per i formaggi da esportare negli Stati Uniti d'America nel 2018 nell'ambito dei contingenti di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009
 LA COMMISSIONE EUROPEA,
 visto il trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea,
 visto il regolamento (UE) n. 1308/2013 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 17 dicembre 2013, recante organizzazione comune dei mercati dei prodotti agricoli e che abroga i regolamenti (CEE) n. 922/72, (CEE) n. 234/79, (CE) n. 1037/2001 e (CE) n. 1234/2007 del Consiglio (1), in particolare l'articolo 188,
 considerando quanto segue:
 (1)
 Il capo III, sezione 2, del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009 della Commissione (2) stabilisce la procedura di attribuzione dei titoli di esportazione per i formaggi da esportare negli Stati Uniti d'America nell'ambito dei contingenti di cui all'articolo 21 del medesimo regolamento.
 (2)
 I quantitativi che formano oggetto delle domande di titoli di esportazione sono, per alcuni gruppi di prodotti e contingenti, superiori ai quantitativi disponibili per l'anno contingentale 2018. È pertanto opportuno determinare in che misura si possa procedere al rilascio dei titoli di esportazione, fissando i coefficienti di attribuzione da applicare ai quantitativi richiesti, a norma dell'articolo 23, paragrafo 1, del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009.
 (3)
 I quantitativi che formano oggetto delle domande di titoli di esportazione sono, per alcuni gruppi di prodotti e contingenti, inferiori ai quantitativi disponibili per l'anno contingentale 2018. È pertanto opportuno assegnare i quantitativi residui ai richiedenti proporzionalmente alle quantità richieste fissando un coefficiente di attribuzione, a norma dell'articolo 23, paragrafo 4, del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009.
 (4)
 Tenuto conto del termine previsto all'articolo 23, paragrafo 1, del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009 per la fissazione dei coefficienti di attribuzione, è opportuno che il presente regolamento entri in vigore il giorno successivo alla pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea,
 HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO:
 Articolo 1
 Ai quantitativi che formano oggetto delle domande di titoli di esportazione presentate a norma del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009 per i gruppi di prodotti e i contingenti identificati dai codici 16-Tokyo e 16-, 17-, 18-, 20-, 21-Uruguay riportati nella colonna 3 dell'allegato del presente regolamento si applicano i coefficienti di attribuzione indicati nella colonna 5 del medesimo allegato.
 Articolo 2
 Le domande di titoli di esportazione presentate a norma del regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009 per i gruppi di prodotti e i contingenti identificati dai codici 22-, 25-Tokyo e 22-, 25-Uruguay riportati nella colonna 3 dell'allegato del presente regolamento sono accettate per i quantitativi richiesti.
 Possono essere rilasciati titoli di esportazione per quantitativi supplementari, da ripartire tra i richiedenti mediante l'applicazione dei coefficienti di attribuzione indicati nella colonna 6 del suddetto allegato, previa accettazione dei quantitativi da parte dell'operatore entro una settimana a decorrere dalla pubblicazione del presente regolamento e previa costituzione della cauzione richiesta.
 Articolo 3
 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il giorno successivo alla pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea.
 Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri.
 Fatto a Bruxelles, il 5 ottobre 2017
 Per la Commissione,
 a nome del presidente
 Jerzy PLEWA
 Direttore generale
 Direzione generale dell'Agricoltura e dello sviluppo rurale
 (1) GU L 347 del 20.12.2013, pag. 671.
 (2) Regolamento (CE) n. 1187/2009 della Commissione, del 27 novembre 2009, recante modalità particolari di applicazione del regolamento (CE) n. 1234/2007 del Consiglio riguardo ai titoli di esportazione e alle restituzioni all'esportazione nel settore del latte e dei prodotti lattiero-caseari (GU L 318 del 4.12.2009, pag. 1).
 ALLEGATO
 Identificazione del gruppo secondo le note aggiuntive di cui al capitolo 4 della «Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States»
 Identificazione del gruppo e del contingente
 Quantitativi disponibili per il 2018 (in kg)
 Coefficiente di attribuzione di cui all'articolo 1
 Coefficiente di attribuzione di cui all'articolo 2
 Numero della nota
 Gruppo
 (1)
 (2)
 (3)
 (4)
 (5)
 (6)
 16
 Not specifically provided for (NSPF)
 16-Tokyo
 908 877
 0,1296811
 16-Uruguay
 3 446 000
 0,0880789
 17
 Blue Mould
 17-Uruguay
 350 000
 0,0754310
 18
 Cheddar
 18-Uruguay
 1 050 000
 0,1212471
 20
 Edam/Gouda
 20-Uruguay
 1 100 000
 0,0955026
 21
 Italian type
 21-Uruguay
 2 025 000
 0,0704102
 22
 Swiss or Emmentaler cheese other than with eye formation
 22-Tokyo
 393 006
 19,6493175
 22-Uruguay
 380 000
 4,4705882
 25
 Swiss or Emmentaler cheese with eye formation
 25-Tokyo
 4 003 172
 1,0007930
 25-Uruguay
 2 420 000
 1,4447761


text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21996D1114(10)
 Beschluß des Gemeinsamen EWR-Ausschusses Nr. 47/96 vom 23. Juli 1996 über die Änderung des Anhangs XX (Umweltschutz) des EWR-Abkommens
 Amtsblatt Nr. L 291 vom 14/11/1996 S. 0041 - 0041
 BESCHLUSS DES GEMEINSAMEN EWR-AUSSCHUSSES Nr. 47/96 vom 23. Juli 1996 über die Änderung des Anhangs XX (Umweltschutz) des EWR-Abkommens DER GEMEINSAME EWR-AUSSCHUSS -gestützt auf das Abkommen über den Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum, geändert durch das Anpassungsprotokoll zum Abkommen über den Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum, nachstehend "Abkommen" genannt, insbesondere auf Artikel 98,in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe:Anhang XX des Abkommens wurde durch den Beschluß Nr. 37/96 des Gemeinsamen EWR-Ausschusses vom 5. Juni 1996 (1) geändert.Die Entscheidung 94/741/EG der Kommission vom 24. Oktober 1994 über die Fragebögen für die Berichte der Mitgliedstaaten über die Durchführung bestimmter Abfallrichtlinien (Durchführung der Richtlinie 91/692/EWG des Rates) (2) ist in das Abkommen aufzunehmen -BESCHLIESST:Artikel 1 In Kapitel I des Anhangs XX des Abkommens wird nach Nummer 2a (Richtlinie 91/692/EWG des Rates) folgende neue Nummer eingefügt:"2aa. 394 D 0741: Entscheidung 94/741/EG der Kommission vom 24. Oktober 1994 über die Fragebögen für die Berichte der Mitgliedstaaten über die Durchführung bestimmter Abfallrichtlinien (Durchführung der Richtlinie 91/692/EWG des Rates) (ABl. Nr. L 296 vom 17. 11. 1994, S. 42)."Artikel 2 Der Wortlaut der Entscheidung 94/741/EG in isländischer und norwegischer Sprache, der den jeweiligen Sprachfassungen dieses Beschlusses beigefügt ist, ist verbindlich.Artikel 3 Dieser Beschluß tritt am 1. August 1996 in Kraft, sofern dem Gemeinsamen EWR-Ausschuß alle Mitteilungen nach Artikel 103 Absatz 1 des Abkommens übermittelt worden sind.Artikel 4 Dieser Beschluß wird im EWR-Abschnitt und im EWR-Supplement des Amtsblatts der Europäischen Gemeinschaften veröffentlicht.Brüssel, den 23. Juli 1996Für den Gemeinsamen EWR-AusschußDer VorsitzendeH. HAFSTEIN(1) ABl. Nr. L 237 vom 19. 9. 1996, S. 46.(2) ABl. Nr. L 296 vom 17. 11. 1994, S. 42.