text: b'("\'4\n\\:\',::::::1.\n DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES\n Office of Inspector General\n Offices of Audit Services\n\n\n\n Region VII\n 601 East 12th Street\n ~~!)lJ 0 \xc2\xb71 2008 Room 284A\n Kansas City. Missouri 64106\n\n\n\n\n Report Number: A-07-08-00259\n\n Mr. David Breuer\n\n Senior Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer\n\n Noridian Mutual Insurance Company\n 4510 13 th Avenue S.\n Fargo, North Dakota 58121-0001\n\n Dear Mr. Breuer:\n\n Enclosed is the U.S. Department ofRealth and Ruman Services (RRS), Office of Inspector\n General (OIG), final report entitled "Review of Pension Costs Claimed for Medicare\n Reimbursement by Noridian Mutual Insurance Company for Fiscal Years 1999 Through 2005."\n We will forward a copy of this report to the HHS action official noted on the following page for\n review and any action deemed necessary.\n\n The HHS action official will make final determination as to actions taken on all matters reported.\n We request that you respond to this official within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your\n response should present any comments or additional information that you believe may have a\n bearing on the final determination.\n\n Pursuant to the principles of the Freedom ofInformation Act, 5 U.S.c. \xc2\xa7 552, as amended by\n Public Law 104-231, OIG reports generally are made available to the public to the extent the\n information is not subject to exemptions in the Act (45 CFR part 5). Accordingly, this report\n will be posted on the Internet at http://oig.hhs.gov.\n\n If you have any questions or comments about this report, please do not hesitate to call me at\n (816) 426-3591, or contact Jenenne Tambke, Audit Manager, at (573) 893-8338, extension 21 or\n through e-mail at Jenenne.Tambke@oig.hhs.gov. Please refer to report number A-07-08-00259\n in all correspondence.\n\n\n Since~\n q .\n Patrie . Cogley\n Regional Inspector General\n for Audit Services\n\n\n Enclosure\n\x0cPage 2 - Mr. David Breuer\n\n\nDirect Reply to HHS Action Official:\n\nMs. Nanette Foster Reilly, Consortium Administrator\nConsortium for Financial Management & Fee for Service Operations\nCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services\n601 East 12th Street, Room 235\nKansas City, Missouri 64106\n\x0cDepartment of Health and Human Services\n \n\n OFFICE OF \n\n INSPECTOR GENERAL \n\n\n\n\n\n REVIEW OF PENSION COSTS \n\n CLAIMED FOR MEDICARE \n\nREIMBURSEMENT BY NORIDIAN \n\nMUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY \n\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999\n \n\n THROUGH 2005 \n\n\n\n\n\n Daniel R. Levinson\n \n\n Inspector General \n\n\n November 2008\n \n\n A-07-08-00258\n \n\n\x0c Office of Inspector General\n http://oig.hhs.gov\n\n\n\nThe mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as\namended, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)\nprograms, as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. This\nstatutory mission is carried out through a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and\ninspections conducted by the following operating components:\n\nOffice of Audit Services\n\nThe Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides auditing services for HHS, either by conducting\naudits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine\nthe performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their\nrespective responsibilities and are intended to provide independent assessments of HHS\nprograms and operations. These assessments help reduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and\npromote economy and efficiency throughout HHS.\n\nOffice of Evaluation and Inspections\nThe Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts national evaluations to provide HHS,\nCongress, and the public with timely, useful, and reliable information on significant issues.\nThese evaluations focus on preventing fraud, waste, or abuse and promoting economy,\nefficiency, and effectiveness of departmental programs. To promote impact, OEI reports also\npresent practical recommendations for improving program operations.\n\nOffice of Investigations\nThe Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of\nfraud and misconduct related to HHS programs, operations, and beneficiaries. With\ninvestigators working in all 50 States and the District of Columbia, OI utilizes its resources by\nactively coordinating with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local law\nenforcement authorities. The investigative efforts of OI often lead to criminal convictions,\nadministrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties.\n\nOffice of Counsel to the Inspector General\nThe Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG,\nrendering advice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support\nfor OIG\xe2\x80\x99s internal operations. OCIG represents OIG in all civil and administrative fraud and\nabuse cases involving HHS programs, including False Claims Act, program exclusion, and civil\nmonetary penalty cases. In connection with these cases, OCIG also negotiates and monitors\ncorporate integrity agreements. OCIG renders advisory opinions, issues compliance program\nguidance, publishes fraud alerts, and provides other guidance to the health care industry\nconcerning the anti-kickback statute and other OIG enforcement authorities.\n\x0c Notices\n\n\n\n THIS REPORT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC\n at http://oig.hhs.gov\n\nPursuant to the principles of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.\n\xc2\xa7 552, as amended by Public Law 104-231, Office of Inspector General\nreports generally are made available to the public to the extent the\ninformation is not subject to exemptions in the Act (45 CFR part 5).\n\n OFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES FINDINGS AND OPINIONS\n\nThe designation of financial or management practices as questionable, a\nrecommendation for the disallowance of costs incurred or claimed, and\nany other conclusions and recommendations in this report represent the\nfindings and opinions of OAS. Authorized officials of the HHS operating\ndivisions will make final determination on these matters.\n\x0c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nDuring our audit period, Noridian Mutual Insurance Company (Noridian) administered Medicare\nPart A and Part B operations under cost reimbursement contracts with the Centers for Medicare\n& Medicaid Services.\n\nMedicare reimburses a portion of the annual contributions that contractors make to their pension\nplans. In claiming costs, contractors must follow cost reimbursement principles contained in the\nFederal Acquisition Regulation, Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), and Medicare contracts.\n\nThe Medicare contracts require contractors to allocate or separately calculate pension costs.\nContractors must use the separate calculation\'method if there is a material difference between the\nresults of the two methods.\n\nOBJECTIVE\n\nOur objective was to determine the allowability of pension costs that Noridian claimed for\nMedicare reimbursement for fiscal years (FY) 1999 through 2005.\n\nSUMMARY OF FINDING\n\nNoridian did not claim all pension costs that were allowable for Medicare reimbursement for\nFYs 1999 through 2005 because it based its claim for Medicare reimbursement on improperly\ncomputed CAS pension costs. Therefore, Noridian underclaimed $38,645 of allowable pension\ncosts.\n\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n\nWe recommend that Noridian revise its Final Administrative Cost Proposals (FACP) to claim\nallowable CAS pension costs of $38,645 for FYs 1999 through 2005. We also recommend that\nNoridian claim future pension costs in accordance with Federal requirements and the Medicare\ncontracts.\n\nAUDITEE COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, Noridian concurred with our recommendations and\nstated that it will revise its FACPs.\n\nNoridian\'s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix B.\n\n\n\n\n 1\n\x0c INTRODUCTION\n\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nNoridian\n\nDuring our audit period, Noridian Mutual Insurance Company (Noridian) administered Medicare\nPart A and Part B operations under cost reimbursement contracts with the Centers for Medicare\n& Medicaid Services (CMS).\n\nMedicare Reimbursement of Pension Costs\n\nMedicare reimburses a portion of the annual contributions that contractors make to their pension\nplans. To be allowable for Medicare reimbursement, pension costs must be (1) measured,\nassigned, and allocated in accordance with Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) 412 and 413 and\n(2) funded as specified by part 31 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).\n\nBeginning with fiscal year (FY) 1988, CMS incorporated specific segmentation language into\nMedicare contracts that requires contractors to use either an allocation method or a separate\ncalculation method to identify and claim pension costs for Medicare reimbursement. Under the\nallocation method, the contractor determines total plan CAS pension costs and allocates a share\nto Medicare. Under the separate calculation method, the contractor separately identifies the\npension cost components for the Medicare segment. The contractor must use the separate\ncalculation method if its result is materially different from that of the allocation method.\n\nFederal Requirements\n\nThe Medicare contracts address the determination and allocation of pension costs. Appendix B,\nsection XVI of the contracts states: "The calculation of and accounting for pension costs\ncharged to this agreement/contract are governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation and Cost\nAccounting Standards 412 and 413."\n\nFAR 31.205-6(j) addresses allowability of pension costs and requires that plan contributions\nsubstantiate pension costs assigned to contract periods.\n\nCAS 412 regulates the determination and measurement of pension cost components. It also\nregulates the assignment of pension costs to appropriate accounting periods.\n\nCAS 413 regulates the valuation of pension assets, allocation of pension costs to segments of an\norganization, adjustment of pension costs for actuarial gains and losses, and assignment of gains\nand losses to cost accounting periods.\n\n\n\n\n 1\n\n\x0cOBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY\n\nObjective\n\nOur objective was to determine the allowability of pension costs that Noridian claimed for\nMedicare reimbursement for FYs 1999 through 2005.\n\nScope\n\nWe reviewed pension costs that Noridian claimed for Medicare reimbursement on its Final\nAdministrative Cost Proposals (FACP) for FYs 1999 through 2005. Achieving the objective did\nnot require that we review Noridian\'s overall internal control structure. However, we did review\nthe internal controls related to the pension costs claimed for Medicare reimbursement to ensure\nthat the pension costs were allocable in accordance with the CAS and allowable in accordance\nwith the FAR.\n\nWe performed fieldwork at Noridian in Fargo, North Dakota, during August 2007.\n\nMethodology\n\nWe identified Noridian\'s CAS pension costs for the total company and the Medicare segment.\nWe also determined the extent to which Noridian funded CAS pension costs with contributions\nto the pension trust fund and accumulated prepayment credits. We based the calculations on\nseparately computed CAS pension costs for the Medicare segment and total company CAS\npension costs. The CMS Office of the Actuary calculated the allocable CAS pension costs based\non Noridian\'s historical practices and on the results of our segmentation review, "Review of\nMedicare Contractor\'s Pension Segmentation Requirements at Noridian Mutual Insurance\nCompany for the Period January 1, 1998, to January 1, 2006" (A-07-08-00258). Appendix A\ncontains details on the pension costs and contributions.\n\nIn performing this review, we used information that Noridian\'s actuarial consulting firm\nprovided. The information included assets, actuarial liabilities, normal costs, contributions,\nbenefit payments, investment earnings, and administrative expenses. We examined Noridian\'s\naccounting records, pension plan documents, annual pension plan actuarial valuation reports, and\nDepartment of Labor/Internal Revenue Service Form 5500s.\n\nWe conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government\nauditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain\nsufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions\nbased on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis\nfor our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective.\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\n\x0c FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION\n\nALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS NOT CLAIMED\n\nNoridian did not claim all pension costs that were allowable for Medicare reimbursement for\nFYs 1999 through 2005 because it based its claim for Medicare reimbursement on improperly\ncomputed CAS pension costs. Specifically, Noridian did not claim $38,645 of pension costs that\nwere allowable for Medicare reimbursement for FYs 1999 through 2005.\n\nFor FYs 1999 through 2005, Noridian claimed pension costs of $16,230,921 for Medicare\nreimbursement. We calculated the allowable costs based on separately computed CAS pension\ncosts for the Medicare segment and the total company. We determined that the allowable CAS\npension costs totaled $16,269,566. We compared allowable CAS pension costs with the pension\ncosts claimed on Noridian\'s FACPs, as shown in the table below.\n\n Pension Cost Claimed Variance\n\n Fiscal Year Per Audit Per Noridian Difference\n\n 1999 $925,535 $873,990 $51,545\n 2000 1,231,977 1,081,801 150,176\n 2001 1,553,609 1,275,537 278,072\n 2002 2,019,921 2,062,281 (42,360)\n 2003 3,122,531 3,541,839 (419,308)\n 2004 3,495,166 3,491,485 3,681\n 2005 3,920,827 3,903,988 16,839\n Total $16,269,566 $16,230,921 $38,645\n\nThe Medicare contracts required Noridian to allocate or separately calculate CAS pension costs\nfor Medicare reimbursement. Noridian based its claim for Medicare reimbursement on\nseparately computed CAS pension costs. However, Noridian improperly computed those CAS\npension costs because Noridian misidentified the Medicare segment. As a result, Noridian\nunderclaimed $38,645 of allowable pension costs.\n\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n\nWe recommend that Noridian revise its FACPs to claim allowable CAS pension costs of $38,645\nfor FYs 1999 through 2005. We also recommend that Noridian claim future pension costs in\naccordance with Federal requirements and the Medicare contracts.\n\nAUDITEE COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, Noridian concurred with our recommendations and\nstated that it will revise its FACPs.\n\nNoridian\'s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix B.\n\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0cAPPENDIXES\n\n\x0c NORIDIAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY APPENDIX A\n STATEMENT OF ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS Page 1 of5\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 THROUGH 2005\n\n\n\n\n Total Other Medicare\nDate DescriDtion ComDanv Se!!ment Se!!ment\n\n1998 CY Allowable Pension Cost 1/ $129,741 $698,584\n\n 1999 Contributions 2/ $3,728,000 $3,728,000 $0\n9.00% Discount for Interest 3/ (306,647) (306,647) 0\n1/1/99 Present Value Contributions 4/ 3,421,353 3,421,353 0\n Prepayment Credit 5/ 2,947,938 2,087,251 860,687\n Present Value of Funding 6/ 6,369,291 5,508,604 860,687\n\n1/1/99 CAS Funding Target 7/ 2,947,938 2,087,251 860,687\n Percentage Funded 8/ 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 9/ 2,087,251 860,687\n Allowable Interest 10/ 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost ill 2,087,251 860,687\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 12/ 6.82% 94.76%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 13/ 142,351 815,587\n\n1999 FY Allowable Pension Cost 14/ $925,535 $139,199 $786,336\n\n\n\n\n 2000 Contributions $2,440,000 $2,440,000 $0\n9.00% Discount for Interest (200,219) (200,219) 0\n1/1/00 Present Value Contributions 2,239,781 2,239,781 0\n Prepayment Credit 3,034,379 1,800,485 1,233,894\n Present Value of Funding 5,274,160 4,040,266 1,233,894\n\n1/1/00 CAS Funding Target 3,034,379 1,800,485 1,233,894\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 1,800,485 1,233,894\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 1,800,485, 1,233,894\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 7.53% 96.26%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 135,577 1,187,746\n\n2000 FY Allowable Pension Cost $1,231,977 $137,271 $1,094,706\n\x0c NORIDIAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY APPENDIX A\n STATEMENT OF ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS Page 2 of5\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 THROUGH 2005\n\n\n\n\n Total Other Medicare\nDate Descrintion Comnanv Sel!ment Sel!ment\n\n 2001 Contributions $10,307,301 $10,307,301 $0\n9.00% Discount for Interest (825,785) (825,785) 0\n1/1/01 Present Value Contributions 9,481,516 9,481,516 0\n Prepayment Credit 3,809,109 2,275,724 1,533,385\n Present Value of Funding 13,290,625 11,757,240 1,533,385\n\n1/1/01 CAS Funding Target 3,809,109 2,275,724 1,533,385\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 2,275,724 1,533,385\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 2,275,724 1,533,385\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 7.24% 95.58%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 164,762 1,465,609\n\n2001 FY Allowable Pension Cost $1,553,609 $157,466 $1,396,143\n\n\n\n\n 2002 Contributions $9,100,000 $9,100,000 $0\n9.00% Discount for Interest (751,376) (751,376) 0\n1/1/02 Present Value Contributions 8,348,624 8,348,624 0\n Prepayment Credit 4,904,220 2,994,491 1,909,729\n Present Value of Funding 13,252,844 11,343,115 1,909,729\n\n1/1/02 CAS Funding Target 4,904,220 2,994,491 1,909,729\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 2,994,491 1,909,729\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 2,994,491 1,909,729\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 8.96% 98.52%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 268,306 1,881,465\n\n2002 FY Allowable Pension Cost $2,019,921 $242,420 $1,777,501\n\x0c NORIDIAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY APPENDIX A\n STATEMENT OF ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS Page 3 of5\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 THROUGH 2005\n\n\n\n\n Total Other Medicare\nDate Descrintion Comnanv Sef!ment Sef!ment\n\n 2003 Contributions $23,900,000 $23,900,000 $0\n8.50% Discount for Interest (1,732,111) (1,732,111) 0\n1/1/03 Present Value Contributions 22,167,889 22,167,889 0\n Prepayment Credit 8,641,948 5,627,682 3,014,266\n Present Value of Funding 30,809,837 27,795,571 3,014,266\n\n1/1/03 CAS Funding Target 8,641,948 5,627,682 3,014,266\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 5,627,682 3,014,266\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 5,627,682 3,014,266\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 10.61% 94.54%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 597,097 2,849,687\n\n2003 FY Allowable Pension Cost $3,122,531 $514,899 $2,607,632\n\n\n\n\n2004 Contributions $13,000,000 $13,000,000 $0\n8.50% Discount for Interest (1,018,433) (1,018,433) 0\n1/1/04 Present Value Contributions 11,981,567 11,981,567 0\n Prepayment Credit 9,216,294 6,189,311 3,026,983\n Present Value of Funding 21,197,861 18,170,878 3,026,983\n\n1/1/04 CAS Funding Target 9,216,294 6,189,311 3,026,983\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 6,189,311 3,026,983\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 6,189,311 3,026,983\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 10.73% 94.06%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 664,113 2,847,180\n\n2004 FY Allowable Pension Cost $3,495,166 $647,359 $2,847,807\n\x0c NORIDIAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY APPENDIX A\n STATEMENT OF ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS Page 4 of5\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 THROUGH 2005\n\n\n\n\n Total Other Medicare\n Date Descriotion Comuanv See:ment See:ment\n\n 2005 Contributions $18,000,000 $18,000,000 $0\n 8.00% Discount for Interest (1,331,333) (1,331,333) 0\n 1/1/05 Present Value Contributions 16,668,667 16,668,667 0\n Prepayment Credit 11,061,794 7,668,217 3,393,577\n Present Value of Funding 27,730,461 24,336,884 3,393,577\n\n 1/1/05 CAS Funding Target 11,061,794 7,668,217 3,393,577\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 7,668,217 3,393,577\n Allowable Interest 0 0\n Allocable Pension Cost 7,668,217 3,393,577\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 11.36% 93.89%\n CY Allowable Pension Cost 871,109 3,186,229\n\n 2005 FY Allowable Pension Cost $3,920,827 $819,360 $3,101,467\n\n\n\n\n * Line of business.\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n 1/ We developed the 1998 calendar year (CY) allowable pension cost using information from our\n prior audit (report number A-07-00-00 117).\n\n 2/ We obtained Total Company contribution amounts and dates of deposit from Internal Revenue\n Service Form 5500 reports. The contributions included deposits made during the plan year and\n accrued contributions deposited after the end of the plan year but within the time allowed for\n filing tax returns. We determined the contributions allocated to the Medicare segment during the\n pension segmentation review (A-07-08-00258). The amounts shown for the Other segment\n represent the difference between the Total Company and the Medicare segment.\n\n 3/ We subtracted the interest that is included in the contributions deposited after January 1 of each\n year to discount the contributions back to their beginning-of-the-year value. For purposes of this\n Appendix, we computed the interest as the difference between the present value of contributions\n (at the valuation interest rate) and actual contribution amounts.\n\n 4/ The present value of contributions is the value ofthe contributions discounted from the date of\n deposit back to January 1. For purposes of this Appendix, we deemed deposits made after the\n end of the plan year to have been made on the final day of the plan year, consistent with the\n method mandated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.\n\x0c NORIDIAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY APPENDIX A\n STATEMENT OF ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS Page 5 of5\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999 THROUGH 2005\n\n\n\n 5/ A prepayment credit represents the accumulated value of premature funding from the previous\n year(s). A prepayment credit is created when contributions, plus interest, exceed the end-of-year\n Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) funding target. A prepayment credit may be carried forward,\n with interest, to fund future CAS pension costs.\n\n 6/ The present value of funding represents the present value of contributions plus prepayment\n credits. This is the amount of funding that is available to cover the CAS funding target measured\n at January 1 of each year.\n\n 7/ The CAS funding target must be funded by current or prepaid contributions to satisfy the funding\n requirement of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 31.205-6(j)(2)(i).\n\n 8/ The percentage of costs funded is a measure of the portion of the CAS funding target that was\n funded during the plan year. Because any funding in excess of the CAS funding target is\n considered premature funding in accordance with CAS 412.50(c)(1) (as amended), the funded\n ratio may not exceed 100 percent. We computed the percentage funded as the present value of\n funding divided by the CAS funding target. For purposes of illustration, the percentage of\n funding has been rounded to four decimals.\n\n 9/ We computed the funded CAS pension cost as the CAS funding target multiplied by the percent\n funded.\n\n10/ We assumed that interest on the funded CAS pension cost, less the prepayment credit, accrues in\n the same proportion as the interest on contributions bears to the present value of contributions.\n However, we limited the interest in accordance with FAR 31.205-6(j)(2)(iii), which does not\n permit the allowable interest to exceed the interest that would accrue if the CAS funding target,\n less the prepayment credit, were funded in four equal installments deposited within 30 days of\n the end of the quarter.\n\nill The allocable CAS pension cost is the amount of pension cost that may be allocated for contract\n cost purposes.\n\n12/ We calculated allowable pension costs of the Medicare and Other Segments based on the\n Medicare line of business (LOB) percentage of each segment. We determined the LOB\n percentages based upon documents provided by Noridian.\n\n13/ We computed the CY allowable Medicare pension cost as the allocable pension cost multiplied\n by the Medicare LOB percentage.\n\n14/ We converted the CY (January 1 through December 31) allowable pension costs to a fiscal year\n (FY) basis (October 1 through September 30). We calculated the FY pension costs as 1/4 of the\n prior year\'s costs plus 3/4 of the current year\'s costs. Costs charged to the Medicare contract\n should consist of the Medicare segment\'s direct pension costs plus pension costs attributable to\n indirect Medicare operations.\n\x0c APPENDIXB\n Page 1 of2\n\n\n\n\n "~\n\n IVDRIDIAAf\n Mutq~lln.sfJr8nCeCbmpa.ny-\n\n\nOctober 17,2008\n\n\n\nMLPatfick J. Cogley\nRegional Inspector General for Audit Services\nDepilttmentofBealth & Human ServiCes\n601 Eastlih Street\nRoom 284A\nKansas City, MO 64.106\n\nRE: Report Number A-07-0.8-00258 and A-07-08-00259\n\nDear Mr; Cogley:\n\nWe have reviewed YDllt draft reports entitled "Review of Medjcare Contr4ctor\'s Pension\nSegmentation Requitementsat Noridillh MiltlJal Inslltance Company for the Period\nJanual\'y 1, 1998, to JanlJary 1, 2006" anc:! "Reviewof Pension Costs Claimed for\nMedicareReimblu\'sementbyNoridianMl,ltlJajlnsll1:al1ce Company fot Fiscal Years 1999\nThrough 2005" and offer the fpnOW~ng cp.!PJ11ents:\n\nRecommendations " "Review;ofPension Segmentation ReqlJirements"\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Increase Medicare segment assels by $158,26.1 as of January], 2006\n o\t We concur with this recommendation.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t IrnplementcOritrols to erisore thattheMedicare segment\'s assets are\n updated in acmrdance With the Medicate Contracts,\n o\t We concur with this recommendatidn and will ensure that\n individuals arepmperly identified to the Medicare segment and\n that the Mediearesegment\'sassets are updated.\n\nRecommendations - "Review of Pension Costs Claimed"\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Revise the Final AdministratiVe Cost Propos/us to claim allowable CAS\n pensioncostsof$38,645 for pYs 1999 through 2005 and claim future\n pensioncostsinaccordance, with Federal requirements llnd the Medicare\n contracts,\n o\t We.conclJI\'1\'itI1 this!\'p?9tplUcndation and will revise the Firial\n Administrati yeCpstpl\'0posals.\n\n\n\n\n 4510 13th Avenue South. Fargo, North Dakota \'58121 8-07\n\x0c APPENDIXB\n Page 2 of2\n\n\n\n\n Page 2\n\n\n\n\nDavid Breuer\nSenidr\'Vice\'PresidertIOIFirtartce aMeFQ\n\x0c'


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21981A0318(03)
 Agreement in the form of an exchange of letters derogating further from Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway
 Official Journal L 371 , 31/12/1980 P. 0051 Greek special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 24 P. 0116
 AGREEMENT in the form of an exchange of letters derogating further from Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway Letter No 1 Brussels, ... Sir, The last sentence of Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway, signed on 14 May 1973, provides that the petroleum products in List C annexed to the Protocol do not fall within the scope of the latter. To prevent this legal situation leading to application of different methods of administrative cooperation, I propose that it be agreed that, by way of derogation from the said sentence, the methods of administrative cooperation laid down in Protocol 3 will apply to these products as from 1 May 1981. I should be grateful if you would inform me of your Government's agreement to this proposal. Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration. For the Councilof the European CommunitiesLetter No 2 Brussels, ... Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of today's date drafted as follows: "The last sentence of Article 1 of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway, signed on 14 May 1973, provides that the petroleum products in List C annexed to the Protocol do not fall within the scope of the latter. To prevent this legal situation leading to application of different methods of administrative cooperation, I propose that it be agreed that, by way of derogation from the said sentence, the methods of administrative cooperation laid down in Protocol 3 will apply to these products as from 1 May 1981. I should be grateful if you would inform me of your Government's agreement to this proposal." I have the honour to inform you that my Government agrees to the proposal contained in that letter. Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration. For the Government of the Kingdom of Norway


text:
11/17. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 145
 21990A0809(01)
 L 212/3 EIROPAS KOPIENU OFICIĀLAIS VĒSTNESIS 9.8.1990.
 NOLĪGUMS
 starp Eiropas Ekonomikas kopienu un Zaļā Raga Salu Republiku par zveju pie Zaļā Raga salu krastiem
 EIROPAS EKONOMIKAS KOPIENA,
 turpmāk tekstā “Kopiena”, un
 ZAĻĀ RAGA SALU REPUBLIKA,
 turpmāk tekstā “Zaļā Raga salas”,
 APZINOTIES sadarbības garu, kas izriet no Konvencijas starp Āfrikas, Karību un Klusā okeāna valstīm un Eiropas Ekonomikas
 kopienu (ĀKK-EEK konvencija) un no kopējās apņemšanās panākt ciešākas attiecības starp Kopienu un Zaļā Raga salām,
 APZINOTIES Zaļā Raga salu vēlmi veicināt sadarbību, tādējādi sekmējot savu zivsaimniecības resursu racionālu izmantošanu,
 PATUROT PRĀTĀ, ka, veicot jūras zveju, Zaļā Raga salas izmanto savas suverēnās tiesības vai jurisdikciju līdz 200 jūras jūdžu
 platā joslā no krasta,
 ŅEMOT VĒRĀ Apvienoto Nāciju Organizācijas Jūras tiesību konvencijas noteikumus,
 APŅEMOTIES veidot savas attiecības zvejas jomā abpusējas uzticības un savstarpējo interešu ievērošanas garā,
 VĒLOTIES izstrādāt zveju reglamentējošus nosacījumus un noteikumus, kas var interesēt abas puses,
 IR VIENOJUŠĀS PAR TURPMĀKO.
 1. pants 2. Zaļā Raga salu iestādes informē Eiropas Kopienu Komisiju par
 visām izmaiņām iepriekšminētajos tiesību aktos pirms to piemē-
 rošanas.
 Šā nolīguma mērķis ir izstrādāt principus un normas, kas nākotnē
 pilnībā reglamentēs zveju, ko veic kuģi, kuri peld ar Kopienas 3. Pasākumi, ko resursu saglabāšanas nolūkā veic Zaļā Raga salu
 dalībvalstu karogiem, turpmāk tekstā “Kopienas kuģi”, jūras iestādes, reglamentējot zveju, balstās uz objektīviem zinātnes atzi-
 ūdeņos, uz kuriem attiecas Zaļā Raga salu suverenitāte vai numiem un ir piemērojami gan Kopienas kuģiem, gan pārējiem
 jurisdikcija saskaņā ar Apvienoto Nāciju Organizācijas Jūras ārvalstu kuģiem, neierobežojot nolīgumus, kas noslēgti starp
 tiesību konvencijas noteikumiem un citām starptautisko tiesību viena ģeogrāfiskā reģiona jaunattīstības valstīm, ieskaitot abpusē-
 normām, turpmāk tekstā - “Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zona”. jus zvejas nolīgumus.
 4. pants
 2. pants
 1. Zvejai Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā Kopienas kuģiem ir vaja-
 dzīga licence, ko izsniedz Zaļā Raga salu iestādes pēc Kopienas
 pieprasījuma.
 Zaļā Raga salas atļauj Kopienas kuģiem veikt zveju Zaļā Raga salu
 zvejas zonā saskaņā ar šo nolīgumu.
 2. Lai saņemtu licenci, ieinteresētajam kuģa īpašniekam ir jāsa-
 maksā nodeva.
 3. pants 3. Licences pieteikšanas kārtība, nodevas lielums un maksāšanas
 kārtība ir izklāstīta pielikumā.
 1. Kopiena veic visus vajadzīgos pasākumus, lai nodrošinātu to,
 5. pants
 ka tās kuģi ievēro šā nolīguma noteikumus, kā arī likumus, kas
 reglamentē zveju Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā saskaņā ar Apvie-
 noto Nāciju Organizācijas Jūras tiesību konvencijas prasībām un Puses apņemas tieši vai starptautiskās organizācijās saskaņot savus
 citām starptautisko tiesību normām. pūliņus, lai nodrošinātu dzīvo resursu apsaimniekošanu un
 ---pagebreak--- 146 LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 11/17. sēj.
 saglabāšanu centrālajā Austrumatlantijā, jo īpaši, ja tas skar aktīvi 11. pants
 migrējošas sugas, un veicināt attiecīgos zinātniskos pētījumus.
 Šo nolīgumu, no vienas puses, piemēro teritorijās, uz kurām
 attiecas Eiropas Ekonomiskās kopienas dibināšanas līgums,
 ievērojot minētajā Līgumā paredzētos nosacījumus, un, no otras
 6. pants
 puses, Zaļā Raga Salu Republikas teritorijā.
 Kuģu kapteiņi, kam ir tiesības saskaņā ar šā nolīguma
 noteikumiem zvejot Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā, nosūta pārskatu
 par nozveju Zaļā Raga salu iestādēm un tā kopiju — Eiropas
 Kopienu Komisijas delegācijai Prajā saskaņā ar pielikumā 12. pants
 izklāstītajiem noteikumiem.
 Šā nolīguma pielikums un protokols ir tā būtiska sastāvdaļa un, ja
 nav noteikts citādi, jebkura atsauce uz šo nolīgumu ir uzskatāma
 7. pants par atsauci uz pielikumu un protokolu.
 kā atlīdzību par zvejas tiesībām, kas piešķirtas, ievērojot 2. pantu,
 Kopiena veic finansiālu ieguldījumu Zaļā Raga salās atbilstīgi
 kārtībai, kas paredzēta nolīgumam pievienotajā protokolā,
 neierobežojot Zaļā Raga salām piešķirto finansējumu saskaņā ar 13. pants
 ĀKK-EEK konvenciju.
 1. Šis nolīgums sākotnēji noslēgts uz trim gadiem no dienas, kad
 tas stājas spēkā. Ja neviena no pusēm to neuzteic, paziņojot par
 to sešus mēnešus pirms sākotnējā termiņa beigām, to pagarina vēl
 8. pants uz diviem gadiem, ja vien to nedenonsē, brīdinot vismaz trīs
 mēnešus pirms attiecīgā divu gadu termiņa beigām.
 Ja, mainoties zivju krājumu stāvoklim, Zaļā Raga salu iestādes
 nolemj piemērot resursu saglabāšanas pasākumus, kas skar
 Kopienas kuģu zvejas gaitu, puses savstarpēji apspriežas ar mērķi 2. Beidzoties sākotnējam termiņam un vēlāk attiecīgajam divu
 pielāgot pielikumu un protokolu. gadu termiņam, Līgumslēdzējas Puses rīko sarunas, lai, abpusēji
 vienojoties, noteiktu, kādi grozījumi vai papildinājumi būtu izda-
 Šīs apspriedes balstās uz principu, ka jebkuram minētajā rāmi pielikumā vai protokolā.
 protokolā noteikto zvejas tiesību ierobežojumam seko
 proporcionāls Kopienas izmaksājamās finansiālās kompensācijas Puses rīko sarunas, ja kāda no tām uzteic nolīgumu.
 samazinājums.
 9. pants 14. pants
 Lai nodrošinātu šā nolīguma pareizu piemērošanu, izveido
 apvienoto komiteju. Pēc jebkuras Līgumslēdzējas Puses Šis nolīgums stājas spēkā dienā, kad puses savstarpēji paziņo, ka
 pieprasījuma šī komiteja sanāk pārmaiņus Zaļā Raga salās un ir pabeigtas šajā sakarā veicamās procedūras.
 Kopienā.
 Puses savstarpēji apspriežas, rodoties jebkuram strīdam saistībā ar
 šā nolīguma interpretāciju vai piemērošanu.
 15. pants
 Šo nolīgumu, kurš sastādīts divos eksemplāros angļu, dāņu,
 10. pants franču, grieķu, holandiešu, itāliešu, portugāļu, spāņu un vācu
 valodā, visiem tekstiem esot vienlīdz autentiskiem, deponē
 Šis nolīgums nekādā veidā neiespaido un neierobežo nevienas Eiropas Kopienu Padomes Ģenerālsekretariāta arhīvā, kas nosūta
 Puses viedokli attiecībā uz jautājumiem, kas skar Jūras tiesības. apstiprinātu eksemplāru katrai Līgumslēdzējai Pusei.
 ---pagebreak--- 11/17. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 147
 PIELIKUMS
 NOSACĪJUMI, AR KĀDIEM KOPIENAS KUĢI VEIC ZVEJU ZAĻĀ RAGA SALU ZVEJAS ZONĀ
 A. Licences pieteikšanas un izsniegšanas kārtība
 1. Vismaz 15 dienas pirms datuma, kurā sākas pieprasītais spēkā esamības laiks, attiecīgās Kopienas iestādes ar
 Komisijas delegācijas starpniecību Zaļā Raga salās iesniedz Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts
 sekretariātā pieteikumu par katru kuģi, ko paredzēts izmantot zvejai saskaņā ar šo nolīgumu.
 Pieteikumiem izmanto veidlapas, ko šim nolūkam paredzējis Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts
 sekretariāts, tās paraugs ir pievienots šeit (1. papildinājumā).
 2. Katram licences pieteikumam pievieno apstiprinājumu par nomaksāto nodevu visam licences derīguma
 laikam. Maksājumu veic kontā, ko atvērusi Zaļā Raga salu iestāžu izraudzītā finansu iestāde vai cita
 organizācija.
 Nodevas ietver sevī visus valsts un vietējos nodokļus, ostas nodokļus un maksu par pakalpojumiem.
 3. Licenci attiecībā uz katru kuģi kuģa īpašniekam vai tā pārstāvim ar Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegācijas
 starpniecību Zaļā Raga salās izsniedz Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāts 15 dienu laikā pēc
 tam, kad ir saņemts 2. punktā noteiktais maksājuma apstiprinājums.
 4. Licences izsniedz attiecībā uz konkrētu kuģi, un tās nav nododamas citam. Tomēr pēc Eiropas Kopienu
 Komisijas pieprasījuma, kā arī nepārvaramu apstākļu dēļ kuģa licenci var apmainīt pret jaunu licenci citam
 kuģim, kas pēc raksturojuma ir līdzīgs iepriekšējam kuģim. Pirmā kuģa īpašnieks nodod anulēto licenci Zaļā
 Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātam ar Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegācijas starpniecību Zaļā
 Raga salās.
 Jaunajā licencē norāda:
 — izsniegšanas datumu,
 — to, ka tā aizstāj iepriekšējā kuģa licenci visu atlikušo derīguma laiku.
 Šajā gadījumā par atlikušo derīguma laiku nav jāmaksā nolīguma 4. panta 2. punktā noteiktā nodeva.
 5. Licencei visu laiku jāglabājas uz kuģa.
 6. Pirms nolīguma stāšanās spēkā Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāts brīdina par nodevas
 maksāšanas kārtību, sniedzot arī ziņas par bankas kontiem un izmantojamo valūtu.
 B. Licencēšanas noteikumi tunču zvejas kuģiem un āķu zvejas kuģiem pelaģiskai zvejai
 1. Licences ir derīgas vienu gadu. Tās var pagarināt.
 2. Paredzētais maksājums ir ECU 20 par tonnu zivju, kas nozvejotas Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā.
 3. Licences izsniedz pēc tam, kad Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātā veikta vienreizēja gada
 iemaksa ECU 1 500 par katru tunču seineri un ECU 300 par katru kuģi tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām
 vai āķu zvejas kuģi pelaģiskai zvejai, kas ir līdzvērtīga maksājumam, kurš jāsamaksā:
 — par nozvejotām 75 tonnām tunču gadā, seineru gadījumā,
 — par nozvejotām 15 tonnām gadā, kuģu tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām vai āķu zvejas kuģu
 pelaģiskai zvejai gadījumā.
 4. Gala aprēķinu attiecībā uz nodevām, kas jāsamaksā par zvejas laiku, sastāda Eiropas Kopienu Komisija katra
 kalendārā gada beigās, pamatojoties uz nozvejas pārskatiem par katru kuģi, ko veikuši attiecīgie zinātņu
 ---pagebreak--- 148 LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 11/17. sēj.
 institūti, to skaitā Institut français de recherche scientifique et technique d’outre-mer (ORSTOM), Instituto Español de
 Oceanografía (IEO) un Zaļā Raga salu Instituto Nacional de Investigação das Pescas (INIP).
 Šo aprēķinu vienlaicīgi nosūta Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātam un kuģu īpašniekiem.
 Jebkurus paredzētos papildu maksājumus Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātam kuģu
 īpašnieki veic ne vēlāk kā 30 dienu laikā pēc gala aprēķina paziņošanas, pārskaitot naudu kontā, ko atvērusi
 Zaļā Raga salu iestāžu pilnvarotā finanšu iestāde vai cita organizācija.
 Tomēr, ja gala aprēķina summa ir mazāka par iepriekšminēto summu, summas atlikumu neatmaksā.
 C. Licencēšanas noteikumi citiem kuģiem
 1. Licences grunts āķu zvejas kuģiem ir derīgas trīs, sešus vai 12 mēnešus. Ikgadējo maksājumu nosaka atbilstīgi
 GRT pēc likmes ECU 100 par GRT proporcionāli licences derīguma laikam.
 2. Kuģiem, kas veic eksperimentālu galvkāju zveju, ik gadu nosaka maksājumu ECU 60 par GRT.
 D. Nozvejas pārskats
 1. Tunču seineru, kuģu tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām, kā arī āķu zvejas kuģu pelaģiskai zvejai zvejas
 žurnālā jābūt ierakstiem atbilstīgi paraugam 2. papildinājumā par jebkuru Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā pavadīto
 zvejas laiku. Beidzoties zvejas reisam Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā, veidlapu 45 dienu laikā nosūta Zaļā Raga salu
 Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātam ar Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegācijas starpniecību Zaļā Raga
 salās.
 2. Ar Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegācijas starpniecību Zaļā Raga salās grunts āķu zvejas kuģiem un kuģiem,
 kas veic eksperimentālu galvkāju zveju, jāziņo Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariātam par
 nozveju, izmantojot 3. papildinājumā norādīto veidlapas paraugu. Šos pārskatus par katru mēnesi nosūta
 vismaz reizi trijos mēnešos.
 3. Aizpildītām veidlapām jābūt viegli salasāmām un ar kuģa kapteiņa parakstu.
 4. Ja šie noteikumi netiek ievēroti, attiecīgās Zaļā Raga salu iestādes patur sev tiesības inter alia piemērot vienu
 vai abas no turpmāk norādītajām sankcijām:
 — attiecīgā kuģa licences apturēšana,
 — soda naudas uzlikšana.
 Par šiem gadījumiem informē Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegāciju Zaļā Raga salās.
 E. Zivju izkraušana
 Ja vien tas ir iespējams, Kopienas tunču zvejas kuģi atbilstīgi nozvejai šajā zonā palīdz apgādāt tunču pārstrādes
 fabrikas Zaļā Raga salās pēc cenas, kas noteikta abpusēji vienojoties Kopienas kuģu īpašniekiem un Zaļā Raga salu
 zivsaimniecības iestādēm, ņemot vērā starptautiskajā tirgū esošās cenas. Norēķinus veic konvertējamā valūtā.
 Turklāt, ja vien tas ir iespējams, tunču zvejas kuģi, kas izkrauj zivis ostās Zaļā Raga salās, piedāvā daļu no savas
 piezvejas Zaļā Raga salu zivsaimniecības iestādēm pēc vietējā tirgus cenām.
 F. Jūrnieku nolīgšana darbā
 1. Tunču zvejas kuģu un āķu zvejas kuģu pelaģiskai zvejai īpašnieki algo Zaļā Raga salu pilsoņus ar šādiem
 nosacījumiem un ierobežojumiem:
 — tunču seineru flotē nolīgst trīs Zaļā Raga salu jūrniekus darbam Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā tunču zvejas
 laikā,
 — kuģu flotē tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām nolīgst astoņus Zaļā Raga salu jūrniekus darbam Zaļā
 Raga salu zvejas zonā tunču zvejas laikā, katru no viņiem norīkojot uz citu kuģi,
 ---pagebreak--- 11/17. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 149
 — āķu zvejas kuģu flotē pelaģiskai zvejai nolīgst divus Zaļā Raga salu jūrniekus darbam Zaļā Raga salu zvejas
 zonā tunču zvejas laikā, katru no viņiem norīkojot uz citu kuģi.
 2. Algas šiem jūrniekiem nosaka pirms licences izsniegšanas, savstarpēji vienojoties kuģu īpašniekiem vai to
 pārstāvjiem un attiecīgajām Zaļā Raga salu iestādēm; algas maksā kuģu īpašnieki un tās ietver sevī sociālās
 iemaksas, kas pienākas jūrniekiem (to skaitā dzīvības apdrošināšana un apdrošināšana pret nelaimes
 gadījumiem, un veselības apdrošināšana).
 3. Ja jūrniekus nepieņem darbā, kuģu īpašnieki veic vienreizēju iemaksu, kas ir līdzvērtīga nenolīgto jūrnieku gada
 algai.
 Šo summu izmanto jūrnieku profesionālajām mācībām Zaļā Raga salās, un tā jāpārskaita attiecīgo Zaļā Raga
 salu iestāžu norādītajā kontā.
 G. Novērotāju uzņemšana uz kuģa
 1. Pēc attiecīgo Zaļā Raga salu iestāžu pieprasījuma kuģi ar tilpību, kas pārsniedz 150 GRT, uzņem uz klāja
 minēto iestāžu ieceltu novērotāju, kura pienākums ir pārbaudīt nozveju Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonā. Viņam rada
 visus nepieciešamos apstākļus pienākumu veikšanai, to skaitā nodrošinot pieeju telpām un dokumentiem. Viņš
 nedrīkst uzkavēties uz kuģa ilgāk, nekā to prasa pienākumu veikšana.
 Kuģa kapteinis atvieglo darbu novērotājam, nodrošinot viņam tādus pašus apstākļus kā kuģa virsniekiem.
 Novērotāja algu un sociālās iemaksas saņem no attiecīgās Zaļā Raga salu iestādes.
 2. Novērotāja darbs un viņa uzņemšana uz kuģa nedrīkst kavēt vai traucēt zvejas norisi. Ostu, kurā novērotāju
 uzņem uz kuģa, izvēlas, savstarpēji vienojoties attiecīgajām Zaļā Raga salu iestādēm un kuģa īpašniekam vai
 viņa pārstāvim. Ja novērotāju uzņem uz kuģa ārzemju ostā, viņa ceļa izdevumus sedz kuģa īpašnieks. Ja tunču
 zvejas kuģis ar novērotāju uz klāja pamet Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonu, jādara viss nepieciešamais, lai
 nodrošinātu pēc iespējas ātrāku novērotāja atgriešanos Zaļā Raga salās par kuģa īpašnieka līdzekļiem.
 H. Zvejas zonas
 1. Kopienas kuģi drīkst veikt zveju šādās zonās attiecībā pret pamatlīnijām:
 — tunču zvejas seineri un āķu zvejas kuģi pelaģiskai zvejai: ārpus 12 jūdžu joslas,
 — kuģi tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām: ārpus sešu jūdžu joslas,
 — dzīvu ēsmu zvejai un grunts āķu zvejas kuģi: sākot no pamatlīnijām.
 2. Galvkāju zvejas kuģiem, kas veic eksperimentālu zveju, nodrošina pieeju visai Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonai.
 I. Atļautie tīkla acs izmēri
 Atļautie tīkla acs izmēri traļa vidusdaļā (tīkla acis maksimāli izstieptas) ir šādi:
 — 16 mm, zvejojot dzīvu ēsmu,
 — 40 mm, zvejojot galvkājus.
 Tunču zvejai piemēro ICCAT ieteiktos starptautiskos standartus.
 J. Iebraukšana un izbraukšana no zonas
 1. Visi Kopienas kuģi, kas zvejo saskaņā ar nolīgumu Zaļā Raga salu zonā, ziņo Sanvisenti radiostacijai datumu,
 laiku un atrašanās vietu, iebraucot un izbraucot no Zaļā Raga salu zvejas zonas.
 2. Zvejojot Zaļā Raga salu zonā, kuģi ik pēc trim dienām ar Sanvisenti radiostacijas starpniecību dara zināmu
 attiecīgajām Zaļā Raga salu iestādēm savu atrašanās vietu un nozveju, kā arī norāda savu kopējo nozveju ikreiz,
 kad izbrauc no zonas.
 ---pagebreak--- 150 LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 11/17. sēj.
 3. Par radiostacijas izsaukuma signālu un raidītāja frekvencēm un darba laiku kuģu īpašniekus informē Zaļā Raga
 salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāts, izsniedzot licenci.
 4. Gadījumos, kad nevar izmantot šos radiosakarus, kuģi drīkst izmantot alternatīvus sakarus, piemēram teleksu
 vai telegrāfu.
 K. Ostu iekārtas un piegāžu un pakalpojumu izmantošana
 Kopienas kuģi, ja tas ir iespējams, sagādā visus to darbībai vajadzīgos materiālus un pakalpojumus Zaļā Raga salās.
 Attiecīgās Zaļā Raga salu iestādes vienojas ar kuģu īpašniekiem vai viņu pārstāvjiem par ostu iekārtu izmantošanas
 un, vajadzības gadījumā, piegādājamo materiālu un pakalpojumu saņemšanas nosacījumiem.
 L. Pārmeklēšanas procedūra
 1. Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas delegāciju Zaļā Raga salās 48 stundu laikā informē par jebkuru pārmeklēšanu Zaļā
 Raga salu zvejas zonā uz zvejas kuģa, kas peld ar Kopienas dalībvalsts karogu un veic darbību saskaņā ar šo
 nolīgumu. Īsu ziņojumu par šādas pārmeklēšanas apstākļiem un iemesliem iesniedz 72 stundu laikā.
 2. Eiropas Kopienu Komisijas Delegācija Zaļā Raga salās, Zaļā Raga Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāts un
 pārbaudes iestādes 24 stundu laikā pēc iepriekšminētā paziņojuma saņemšanas sasauc sanāksmi, kuru var
 apmeklēt arī ieinteresētās dalībvalsts pārstāvis un kurā puses apmainās ar jebkuru svarīgu dokumentāciju vai
 informāciju, lai noskaidrotu konstatēto faktu būtību. Kuģa īpašnieku vai tā pārstāvi informē par sanāksmes
 rezultātiem un par turpmāko rīcību, kas seko pārmeklēšanai.
 3. Kuģi, kas pārmeklēts pēc zvejas noteikumu pārkāpuma, atbrīvo pret drošības naudu, kuras lielumu nosaka,
 ņemot vērā pārmeklēšanas izmaksas, kā arī soda naudu un atlīdzības summu, kas jāsedz vainīgajiem šajā
 pārkāpumā.
 ---pagebreak--- 11/17. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 151
 1. papildinājums
 ZIVSAIMNIECĪBAS LIETU VALSTS SEKRETARIĀTS
 Licences pieteikums ārzemju rūpnieciskās zvejas kuģiem
 1. Kuģa īpašnieka vārds un uzvārds: .............................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 2. Kuģa īpašnieka adrese: ............................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 3. Kuģa īpašnieka pārstāvja vai vietējā aģenta vārds un uzvārds: ............................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 4. Kuģa īpašnieka pārstāvja vai vietējā aģenta adrese: ........................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 5. Kapteiņa vārds un uzvārds: ......................................................................................................
 6. Kuģa nosaukums: ..................................................................................................................
 7. Reģistrācijas numurs: ............................................................................................................
 8. Kad un kur uzbūvēts: ............................................................................................................
 9. Piederības valsts: ..................................................................................................................
 10. Reģistrācijas osta: ..................................................................................................................
 11. Kuģa apgādes osta: ...............................................................................................................
 12. Kopējais garums: ..................................................................................................................
 13. Platums: ...........................................................................................................................
 14. Bruto tonnāža: .....................................................................................................................
 15. Neto tonnāža: .....................................................................................................................
 16. Tilpnes ietilpība: ..................................................................................................................
 17. Dzesināšanas vai saldēšanas jauda: .............................................................................................
 18. Dzinēja tips un zirgspēja: ......................................................................................................
 19. Zvejas veids: ........................................................................................................................
 20. Apkalpes locekļu skaits: .........................................................................................................
 21. Sakaru iekārtas: .....................................................................................................................
 22. Radio signāls:........................................................................................................................
 23. Pazīšanas signāli: ..................................................................................................................
 24. Paredzētā zvejas vieta: ............................................................................................................
 25. Zivju izkraušanas vieta: .........................................................................................................
 26. Zvejas zonas: ........................................................................................................................
 27. Zvejojamās sugas: ..................................................................................................................
 28. Spēkā esamības laiks ...............................................................................................................
 29. Īpašie nosacījumi: ..................................................................................................................
 ---pagebreak--- 152 LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 11/17. sēj.
 30. Pieteikuma iesniedzēja citi darbības veidi Zaļā Raga salās: ...............................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 Zivsaimniecības ģenerāldirektorāta atzinums
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāts
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ..........................................................................................................................................
 ---pagebreak--- 2. papildinājums ---pagebreak--- 154 LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 11/17. sēj.
 3. papildinājums
 INFORMĀCIJA PAR NOZVEJU, VEICOT RŪPNIECISKO ZVEJU
 1. Kuģa nosaukums un reģistrācijas numurs: ....................................................................................
 2. Valsts piederība: ..................................................................................................................
 3. Kuģa tips: ...........................................................................................................................
 (piemēram, svaigo zivju, tunču utt. zvejas kuģis)
 4. Kapteiņa vārds un uzvārds: ......................................................................................................
 5. Zvejas licenci izdevis: ............................................................................................................
 derīguma termiņš: .............................................................................................
 6. Zvejas veids: ........................................................................................................................
 7. Izbraukšana no ostas (datums): ................................................................................................
 Iebraukšana ostā (datums): ......................................................................................................
 8. Nozveja:
 Es, apakšā parakstījies ......, iepriekšminētā kuģa kapteinis (vai viņa pārstāvis) šeit paziņoju, ka manis iepriekš sniegtās
 ziņas ir patiesas, ko apliecina valdības novērotājs.
 Apliecinājis Valdības novērotājs Parakstījis Kapteinis
 ---pagebreak--- 11/17. sēj. LV Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis 155
 PROTOKOLS,
 kas nosaka zvejas tiesības un finansiālo kompensāciju, ko paredz Nolīgums starp Eiropas
 Ekonomikas kopienu un Zaļā Raga Salu Republiku par zveju pie Zaļā Raga salu krastiem
 1. pants 4. pants
 1. Ievērojot nolīguma 2. pantu, piešķir šādas zvejas tiesības uz trīs gadu
 laikposmu:
 Laikposmā, kas minēts 1. pantā, Kopiena papildus piešķir ECU 500 000
 a) aktīvi migrējošas sugas: Zaļā Raga salu zinātnes un tehnikas programmai (iekārtām,
 infrastruktūrai, semināriem, pētījumiem utt.), lai uzlabotu informācijas
 — tunču saldētājseineri: 21 kuģim, iegūšanu par zivsaimniecības resursiem Zaļā Raga salu īpašajā
 ekonomiskajā telpā.
 — kuģi tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām un āķu zvejas kuģi
 pelaģiskai zvejai: 24 kuģiem.
 — Pēc Kopienas pieprasījuma, piešķirot zvejas tiesības attiecībā uz Šo summu nodod Zaļā Raga salu Zivsaimniecības lietu valsts sekretariāta
 aktīvi migrējošām sugām, šā protokola otrajā piemērošanas gadā rīcībā, pārskaitot to sekretariāta norādītajā bankas kontā.
 ir pieļaujamas izmaiņas, kas skar ne vairāk kā 15 % attiecīgo kuģu.
 b) pārējās sugas:
 — grunts āķu zvejas kuģi: diviem kuģiem, katram no kuriem tonnāža 5. pants
 ir mazāka par 210 GRT,
 — eksperimentāla galvkāju zveja: diviem kuģiem.
 1. Abas puses ir vienisprātis, ka jūras zvejā iesaistīto personu iemaņu un
 2. Šā nolīguma 9. pantā minētās apvienotās komitejas pirmajā sēdē, kas zināšanu pilnveidošana ir svarīgs priekšnosacījums to veiksmīgai sadarbī-
 paredzēta šā protokola otrajā piemērošanas gadā, aplūko rezultātus, kuri bai. Tādēļ Kopiena apņemas atvieglot Zaļā Raga salu pilsoņu uzņemšanu
 iegūti, veicot eksperimentālu galvkāju zveju. tās dalībvalstu mācību iestādēs un šim nolūkam piešķirt stipendijas mācī-
 bām un praktiskām profesionālajām mācībām dažādās zinātnes, tehnikas
 un ekonomikas nozarēs, kas ir saistītas ar zvejniecību. Stipendijas var
 2. pants izmantot arī valstīs, kuras ar Kopienu saista sadarbības nolīgums.
 1. Šā nolīguma 7. pantā minētā finansiālā kompensācija 1. pantā norādī-
 tajā laikposmā ir ECU 1 950 000, tā piešķirama, veicot trīs vienādas 2. Stipendiju kopējā summa nedrīkst pārsniegt ECU 160 000. Pēc Zaļā
 iemaksas gada laikā. Raga salu iestāžu pieprasījuma daļu no šīs summas var izmantot, lai
 apmaksātu piedalīšanos starptautiskās zvejniecības konferencēs vai
 2. Tas, kā šī kompensācija tiek izmantota, ir vienīgi Zaļā Raga salu iestāžu
 mācību kursos. Šo summu izmaksā atkarībā no izlietojuma.
 pārziņā.
 3. Kompensācijas summu iemaksā kontā, ko atvērusi finanšu iestāde vai
 jebkura cita Zaļā Raga salu iestāžu pilnvarota organizācija.
 6. pants
 3. pants
 Attiecīgie kuģu īpašnieki patur pilnas īpašuma tiesības uz nozveju, kas Ja Kopiena nespēj veikt 2. un 4. pantā paredzētos maksājumus, šā
 gūta, veicot eksperimentālu galvkāju zveju. protokola piemērošana var tikt apturēta.


type: wikipedia

text:
Ο Σερ Άρθουρ Σίμορ Σάλιβαν (Sir Arthur Seymour Sullivan, Λονδίνο, 13 Μαΐου 1842 - Λονδίνο, 22 Νοεμβρίου 1900) ήταν Άγγλος συνθέτης ελαφριάς όπερας (ή πιο σωστά οπερέτας), ο πιο σημαντικός συνθέτης της χώρας του κατά τον 19ο αιώνα. Στη μουσική του κυριαρχεί η ζωντάνια και η ευθυμία, ενώ επίσης προσπαθεί, και πολύ επιτυχώς μάλιστα, να ακούγονται όσο το δυνατόν πιο πολύ οι διάλογοι των έργων του, ενώ αποτέλεσε πρότυπο για τους συνθέτες των μιούζικαλ,
 ξεκινώντας από τον Βίκτωρ Χέρμπερτ στις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα και φθάνοντας ως τον σύγχρονό μας Άντριου Λόιντ Βέμπερ. Εν ολίγοις ήταν ένας συνθέτης που σημάδεψε την παράδοση της αγγλικής και γενικότερα της αγγλοσαξωνικής μουσικής, χρωστώντας μεγάλο μέρος της επιτυχίας του στη συνεργασία του με τον λιμπρετίστα και χιουμορίστα Γουίλιαμ Σβένκ Γκίλμπερτ (William Schwenk Gilbert, 1836-1906) με τον οποίο συνεργάστηκε για 25 χρόνια (1871-1896).
 Πριν ακόμα ασχοληθεί με την όπερα, ο Σάλιβαν έγραψε κυρίως ορχηστρική (όπως μια συμφωνία και ένα κοντσέρτο για τσέλο) και εκκλησιαστική μουσική (π.χ. το ορατόριο Ο Άσωτος υιός). Τον Γκίλμπερτ γνώρισε το 1870 από τον φίλο του Ρίτσαρντ Μπάρκερ και από τον επόμενο χρόνο γράψαν την πρώτη τους όπερα, με τίτλο Θέσπις. Ακολούθησαν πολλές συνεργασίες, οι περισσότερες από τις οποίες σημείωσαν τεράστια επιτυχία, όπως το Πίναφορ (1878), οι Πειρατές (1879), η Ιολάνθη (1882), η Πριγκίπισσα Άιντα (1884), ο Μικάντο (1885), οι Υπαξιωματικοί της Φρουράς (1888) και οι Γονδολιέροι (1889). Μεγάλες επιτυχίες του σε συνεργασία με άλλους λιμπρετίστες υπήρξαν ο Ιβανόης (1891) και το Ρόδο της Περσίας (1899).
 Ο Σάλιβαν πέθανε στις 22 Νοεμβρίου του 1900 από οξύ πνευμονικό οίδημα και η ταφή του έγινε στον καθεδρικό ναό του Αγίου Παύλου στο Λονδίνο.
 Παραπομπές
 Άγγλοι συνθέτες
 Συνθέτες του Ρομαντισμού
 Συνθέτες οπερέτας
 Ιππότες της Λεγεώνας της Τιμής


type: other

text:
AB: az önkormányzatok alkotmányjogi panasszal élhetnek az Alaptörvényben rögzített hatásköreik védelme érdekében - Jogászvilág
 Kezdőlap » AB: az önkormányzatok alkotmányjogi panasszal élhetnek az Alaptörvényben rögzített hatásköreik védelme érdekében
 Az Alkotmánybíróság a nemzeti köznevelésről szóló 2011. évi CXC. törvény 74. § (4) bekezdése alaptörvény-ellenességének megállapítására és megsemmisítésére irányuló alkotmányjogi panaszt elutasította. A döntéshez párhuzamos indokolást csatolt Juhász Imre.
 Budaörs város önkormányzata az Alkotmánybírósághoz fordult egyrészt azért, mert az indítvánnyal támadott, a 2017. évi központi költségvetéséről szóló 2016. évi XC. törvény bevezette az ún. szolidaritási hozzájárulást, melynek elvonása a települési önkormányzat számára folyósítandó támogatás havi összegéből a nettó finanszírozás keretében történik. Másrészt a panasz alapjául az szolgált, hogy a nemzeti köznevelésről szóló törvény 2017. január 1-től kezdődően előírta, hogy a tankerületi központ által fenntartott köznevelési intézmény feladatainak ellátását szolgáló, települési önkormányzati tulajdonú vagyonra vonatkozóan a tankerületi központot ingyenes vagyonkezelői jog illeti meg mindaddig, amíg a köznevelési közfeladat a tankerületi központ részéről történő ellátása az adott ingatlanban meg nem szűnik.
 A központi költségvetésről szóló törvény vonatkozásában az indítványozó elsősorban a jogszabály közjogi érvénytelenségét panaszolta, míg az Ntv. vonatkozásában a tulajdonhoz való jogának sérelmét állította. Ennek oka, hogy évtizedek alatt, nagyrészt saját erőből létrehozott egy ingatlanból és nagy értékű ingóságokból álló iskolavagyont, a támadott rendelkezés pedig ennek a tulajdonnak minden részelemét elvonja, annak tartalma kiüresedett, minthogy számára hozzáférhetetlenné vált. Az indítványozó álláspontja szerint tulajdonképpen egy közvetett kisajátítás történt, amely mögött közérdek nem húzódik meg.
 Az Alkotmánybíróság a központi költségvetés vonatkozásában az indítványt visszautasította, mivel az indítványozó érvei részben az Alaptörvény 37. cikk (4) bekezdésében foglalt hatásköri korlátozás alá tartoztak.
 Utóbbi értelmében ugyanis mindaddig, amíg az államadósság a teljes hazai össztermék felét meghaladja, az Alkotmánybíróság – bírói kezdeményezés, alkotmányjogi panasz és absztrakt normakontroll hatáskörében – a központi költségvetésről, a központi költségvetés végrehajtásáról, a központi adónemekről, az illetékekről és járulékokról, a vámokról, valamint a helyi adók központi feltételeiről szóló törvények Alaptörvénnyel való összhangját kizárólag az élethez és az emberi méltósághoz való joggal, a személyes adatok védelméhez való joggal, a gondolat, a lelkiismeret és a vallás szabadságához való joggal vagy a magyar állampolgársághoz kapcsolódó jogokkal összefüggésben vizsgálhatja felül, és ezek sérelme miatt semmisítheti meg.
 Az Ntv. szabályozásával összefüggésben az AB határozatában hangsúlyozta, hogy a mindenkori kormányzatnak kell azt bizonyítania, hogy a tervezett változtatások miért és mennyiben járulnak hozzá a közérdek érvényesítéséhez, az pedig, hogy valamely, korábban önkormányzati feladat- és hatáskör állami feladattá válása mennyiben segíti elő az adott feladat- és hatáskör a korábbiaknál hatékonyabb ellátását, a mindenkori jogalkotó kompetenciájába tartozó kérdés.
 Az Alkotmánybíróság egy korábbi határozatával egyezően megállapította, hogy az önkormányzatok vagyonának feladathoz kötöttségéből következően nem jelenti a tulajdonhoz való jog sérelmét az a jogszabályi rendelkezés, amely az adott köznevelési feladat ellátásához mint közérdek megvalósításához feltétlenül szükséges mértékben az állam javára korlátozza az önkormányzatok tulajdonhoz való jogát.
 A szabályozás továbbá azért sem aránytalan korlátozás, mert a jogalkotó az ingyenes vagyonkezelői jog alapításának törvényi szabályozásával egyidejűleg megteremtette azon anyagi jogi és eljárásjogi garanciális szabályokat is, amelyek biztosítják azt, hogy az ingyenes vagyonkezelői jog terjedelme, tartalma és időbeni fennállta a feltétlenül szükséges mértéket ne haladja meg. Ezen túlmenően pedig az Alkotmánybíróság arra is emlékeztetett, hogy az ingyenes vagyonkezelői joggal nem csupán a vagyontárgy vagy vagyoni értékű jog kezelésének jogát, hanem a kezeléssel járó kötelezettségeket is megszerzik. Mindezek alapján az AB az indítványt elutasította.
 Ezen érdemi vizsgálódást megelőzte ugyanakkor az indítvány befogadhatóságának kérdése, amelynek legizgalmasabb eleme az önkormányzatok indítványozói jogosultságának kérdése volt. E körben az AB emlékeztetett arra, hogy eddigi gyakorlata során csak a tisztességes eljáráshoz való joggal összefüggésben, valamint a mellérendelt jogalanyként történő eljárással kapcsolatosan állapította meg az önkormányzatok indítványozói jogosultságát. Jelen ügyben azonban az indítványozó az állította, hogy Alaptörvényben biztosított jogát, tulajdonjogát állami szerv sértette meg.
 Az AB alkotmányértelmezése során arra jutott, hogy az Alaptörvény egyértelműen elismeri az összállami érdektől elkülönülő helyi közügy és közhatalom létét. A helyi önkormányzatok az egységes állami szervezetrendszer részei ugyan, de az is egyértelmű, hogy a helyi önkormányzatok a központi állami szervekkel szemben relatív autonómiát élveznek.
 Ez az autonómia képezi az önkormányzat lényegét, amelynek legfontosabb elemeit az Alaptörvény 32. cikk (1) bekezdése sorolja fel. Eszerint az autonómia feltétlenül tartalmazza a törvények szabta keretek között az önálló szabályozás, az önálló gazdálkodás, továbbá a befolyástól mentes döntéshozatal lehetőségét.
 Ebben a tekintetben az Alkotmánybíróság álláspontja szerint figyelembe kell venni azt is, hogy a hatalommegosztás klasszikus szereplőihez képest a helyi önkormányzatok vertikális pozícióban vannak, azaz számos esetben szükségszerűen kerülnek alárendelt helyzetbe, így igen kényes a központi állami szervek és a helyi önkormányzatok egymáshoz való viszonya.
 Minthogy az önkormányzatok autonómiájának érvényesülését védelemben kell részesíteni, ezért az Alaptörvény 32. cikk (1) bekezdése az AB értelmezése alapján olyan hatásköröket tartalmaz, amelyeket a helyi önkormányzatok esetében az alkotmányjogi panaszok szempontjából Alaptörvényben biztosított jogként szükséges értelmezni.
 Mindez azt jelenti, hogy ezen hatáskörök sérelmére a helyi önkormányzatok alkotmányjogi panaszt alapíthatnak. Mindazonáltal azt is hangsúlyozta az Alkotmánybíróság, hogy a törvényhozó hatalommal szemben ezek a rendelkezések csak korlátozott védelemre adnak lehetőséget, tekintettel arra, hogy eleve törvény keretei között léteznek. Ennélfogva a törvényhozó hatalommal szemben csak azok kiüresítése lehet az alaptörvény-ellenesség mércéje.


type: legislation

text:
 12.4.2022
 DA
 Den Europæiske Unions Tidende
 L 114/49
 KOMMISSIONENS GENNEMFØRELSESFORORDNING (EU) 2022/594
 af 8. april 2022
 om ændring af forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 for så vidt angår listen over luftfartsselskaber, der er omfattet af driftsforbud eller driftsmæssige begrænsninger i Unionen
 (EØS-relevant tekst)
 EUROPA-KOMMISSIONEN HAR —
 under henvisning til traktaten om Den Europæiske Unions funktionsmåde,
 under henvisning til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 af 14. december 2005 om opstilling af en fællesskabsliste over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud i Fællesskabet og oplysning til passagerer om det transporterende luftfartsselskabs identitet, samt ophævelse af artikel 9 i direktiv 2004/36/EF (1), særlig artikel 4, stk. 2, og
 ud fra følgende betragtninger:
 (1)
 I Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 (2) er der opstillet en liste over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud i Unionen.
 (2)
 Luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af den russiske føderale lufttransportmyndighed (»FATA«), er ikke opført i bilag A eller B til forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006, undtagen luftfartsselskabet SKOL Airline LLC, som blev opført i bilag A ved Kommissionens gennemførelsesforordning (EU) 2021/2070 (3).
 (3)
 Visse af Den Europæiske Unions (»EU«) medlemsstater samt Den Europæiske Unions Luftfartssikkerhedsagentur (»agenturet«) har i henhold til artikel 4, stk. 3, i forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 givet Kommissionen oplysninger, der kan være relevante for ajourføringen af denne liste. Tredjelande og internationale organisationer har også indgivet relevante oplysninger. Kommissionen har vurderet de indgivne oplysninger behørigt med henblik på at fastslå, om det er formålstjenligt at ajourføre listen.
 (4)
 I medfør af den aftale, der blev indgået i 1999 mellem Bermuda og Rusland om gennemførelsen af artikel 83a i Chicagokonventionen angående international civil luftfart underskrevet i Chicago den 7. december 1944 (»Chicagokonventionen«) for så vidt angår luftfartøjer registreret i Bermudas luftfartøjsregister, som opereres af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, og som vedrører overførslen af funktioner og opgaver i forbindelse med det lovpligtige tilsyn, jf. bilag 1, 2 og 6 til Chicagokonventionen, meddelte Bermudas luftfartsmyndighed (»BCAA«) den 14. marts 2022 ved almindelig meddelelse GEN-01-2022 til FATA, at luftdygtighedsbeviserne for alle leasede luftfartøjer registreret i Bermuda, som opereres af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, var suspenderet med virkning fra den 12. marts 2022, kl. 23.59 UTC med den begrundelse, at disse luftfartøjers fortsatte luftdygtighed ikke længere kan garanteres.
 (5)
 I medfør af den aftale, der blev indgået i 2002 mellem Irland og Rusland om gennemførelsen af artikel 83a i Chicagokonventionen for så vidt angår luftfartøjer registreret i Irlands luftfartøjsregister, som opereres af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, og som vedrører overførslen af funktioner og opgaver i forbindelse med det lovpligtige tilsyn, jf. bilag 1, 2 og 6 til Chicagokonventionen, udsendte Irlands luftfartsmyndighed (»IAA«) den 15. marts 2022 aeronautisk meddelelse A.114, i hvilken myndigheden erklærede, at alle luftdygtighedsbeviser for luftfartøjer, som opereres af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, var ugyldige med virkning fra datoen for meddelelsen med den begrundelse, at disse luftfartøjers fortsatte luftdygtighed ikke længere kan garanteres.
 (6)
 Til trods for disse afgørelser truffet af BCAA og IAA i deres egenskab af kompetente myndigheder i registreringsstaterne, opereres et antal berørte luftfartøjer stadig af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, såvel inden for Rusland som til visse andre tredjelande. Organisationen for International Civil Luftfart (»ICAO«) mindede i sit elektroniske nyhedsbrev 2022/12 af 11. marts 2022 om, at sådanne handlinger er en direkte overtrædelse af Chicagokonventionens artikel 29 og 31. I henhold til dette elektroniske nyhedsbrev, burde FATA, som den myndighed, der er ansvarlig for at sikre, at russisk-certificerede luftfartsselskaber overholder de relevante internationale sikkerhedsstandarder, ikke have tilladt, at en sådan drift fandt sted. Desuden har de FATA-certificerede luftfartsselskaber, der opererer sådanne flyvninger med de i betragtning 4 og 5 omhandlede luftfartøjer, gjort dette bevidst i strid med de relevante internationale sikkerhedsstandarder, navnlig ICAO's bilag 6, del I, kapitel 5, standard 5.2.3 »Enhver flyvemaskine skal opereres i overensstemmelse med bestemmelserne i flyvemaskinens luftdygtighedsbevis og inden for de godkendte begrænsninger, som er angivet i flyvemaskinens flyvehåndbog«, idet det er underforstået, at et sådant luftdygtighedsbevis er udstedt af registreringsstaten.
 (7)
 Desuden er et stort antal af disse luftfartsselskaber blevet opført i Ruslands luftfartøjsregister uden samtykke fra ejerne og uden efterfølgende sikkerhedsrelateret samarbejde med hverken BCAA eller IAA. Som det også fremgår af ICAO's elektroniske nyhedsbrev, jf. betragtning 6, udgør sådanne handlinger en overtrædelse af Chicagokonventionens artikel 17 og 18.
 (8)
 Den 18. marts 2022 udsendte ICAO skrivelse AN 3/1.1-22/41, hvori den minder alle kontraherende stater i Chicagokonventionen om det tilsynsansvar og de tilsynsforpligtelser, de har i henhold til nævnte konvention og bilagene dertil for så vidt angår passende udøvelse af sikkerhedstilsynet.
 (9)
 Den 18. marts 2022 meddelte Rusland Bermuda, at landet suspenderede artikel 83a-aftalen, jf. betragtning 4, med øjeblikkelig virkning. Således tilbageførtes alt tilsynsansvar, der tidligere var blevet overført til Rusland i henhold til nævnte aftale, til Bermuda som registreringsstat i overensstemmelse med de relevante internationale sikkerhedsstandarder for civil luftfart.
 (10)
 FATA har i strid med de gældende internationale sikkerhedsstandarder for civil luftfart beholdt det overførte tilsynsansvar, der er omhandlet i betragtning 4 og 5, og uden nogen form for koordination med Bermuda eller Irland i deres kapacitet af registreringsstater varetaget de tilsynsmæssige funktioner og opgaver, der er opstillet i bilag 8 til Chicagokonventionen. Der foreligger ikke verificerbar dokumentation, som kan føre til den konklusion, at FATA har udviklet den nødvendige sikkerhedstilsynskapacitet for på tilfredsstillende vis at kunne udøve en sådan udvidet tilsynsforpligtelse med så kort varsel og over for dette meget store antal luftfartøjer.
 (11)
 Den 21. marts 2022 underrettede Kommissionen i medfør af artikel 3, stk. 2, i forordning (EF) nr. 473/2006 (4) FATA om sine alvorlige betænkeligheder med hensyn til tilsynet med flyvesikkerheden i Rusland og meddelte FATA de væsentligste kendsgerninger og betragtninger, på grundlag af hvilke der kan træffes afgørelse om at nedlægge driftsforbud i Unionen over for luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA.
 (12)
 Kommissionen gav FATA mulighed for at fremsætte skriftlige bemærkninger og den 5. april 2022 give en mundtlig redegørelse til Kommissionen og EU-Udvalget for Luftfartsikkerhed. FATA blev anmodet om inden den 1. april 2022 at meddele, om den ønskede at gøre brug af sin ret til et forsvar og møde for EU-Udvalget for Luftfartsikkerhed.
 (13)
 Den 21. marts 2022 oplyste Kommissionen EU-Udvalget for Luftfartssikkerhed om igangværende fælles samråd med FATA inden for rammerne af forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 og Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 473/2006.
 (14)
 Den 31. marts 2022 meddelte FATA pr. brev adresseret til Kommissionen, at den afviser beskyldningerne vedrørende sikkerhedsforholdene hos luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, og at den mener, at den til fulde varetager sit ansvar, der pålægges de kontraherende ICAO-stater. FATA afleverede imidlertid ingen dokumentation eller oplysninger til at understøtte dens erklæringer og påviste ikke, hvordan den udfører sine funktioner og opgaver i forbindelse med det lovpligtige tilsyn som indeholdt i bilag 8 til Chicagokonventionen, ikke mindst hvad angår luftfartsselskaber, der opererer de i betragtning 4 og 5 omhandlede luftfartøjer.
 (15)
 Den 1. april 2022 bemærkede Kommissionen, at FATA ikke, som anmodet i Kommissionens brev til FATA af 21. marts 2022, havde meddelt, om den ønskede at gøre brug af sin ret til et forsvar i medfør af forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005.
 (16)
 Den 5. april 2022 samledes EU-Udvalget for Luftfartsikkerhed for at drøfte sikkerhedsforholdene hos luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, samt FATA's evne til at overholde de internationale sikkerhedsstandarder for civil luftfart. EU-Udvalget for Luftfartsikkerhed bemærkede overtrædelsen af Chicagokonventionen, jf. betragtning 6 og 7, samt overtrædelsen af de gældende internationale sikkerhedsstandarder for civil luftfart, jf. betragtning 10. Det bemærkede også en manglende vilje til at samarbejde med Kommissionen og EU's medlemsstater om spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt FATA og de luftfartsselskaber, den har certificeret, har tilstrækkelig kapacitet til at sikre den fortsatte luftdygtighed og driftssikkerhed i luftfartsselskabernes flåder, herunder de i betragtning 4 og 5 omhandlede luftfartøjer.
 (17)
 Der blev også taget hensyn til følgevirkningerne af de restriktive foranstaltninger, der er truffet ved Rådets forordning (EU) 2022/328 (5) om ændring af forordning (EU) nr. 833/2014, navnlig virkningerne for driften på kort sigt af kun at have begrænset adgang til ajourføringer af navigationsdatabaser og til terrænadvarselssystemer, hvilket alvorligt hæmmer evnen til at navigere sikkert for så vidt angår luftfartøjer, der opereres af luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA.
 (18)
 Det blev bemærket, at den tekniske støtte til luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, er blevet begrænset som følge af de gældende restriktive foranstaltninger. Desuden vil manglen på en sådan støtte sammen med den øgede tilsynsopgaver, der følger af tilføjelsen af et betydeligt antal nye fly i det russiske register, øge FATA's arbejdsbyrde og behov for ekspertise, som sandsynligvis ikke umiddelbart vil kunne opfyldes i betragtning af på den ene side de betingelser i henhold til artikel 83a-aftalen, hvorunder disse opgaver hidtil er blevet varetaget i Rusland, og på den anden side konsekvenserne af de gældende restriktive foranstaltninger.
 (19)
 I lyset af ovennævnte overtrædelser og den manglende vilje til at samarbejde med Kommissionen og EU's medlemsstater ved at tage fat på de specifikke punkter og betænkeligheder, som Kommissionen havde rejst i sit brev af 21. marts 2022, konkluderede Kommissionen og EU-Udvalget for Luftfartssikkerhed i overensstemmelse med de fælles kriterier, der er fastsat i bilaget til forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005, herunder navnlig det tredje kriterium, at der ikke er noget bevis for, at FATA er i stand til at varetage sit ansvar i henhold til Chicagokonventionen og standarderne i bilagene hertil for så vidt angår luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, og som opererer de luftfartøjer, der er omhandlet i betragtning 4 og 5.
 (20)
 I overensstemmelse med de fælles kriterier, der er fastsat i bilaget til forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005, og navnlig det første kriterium, har luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret af FATA, og som har opereret et eller flere af de luftfartøjer, der er omhandlet i betragtning 4 og 5, desuden påvist alvorlige sikkerhedsmangler ved at tillade flyveoperationer at finde sted i strid med relevante internationale sikkerhedsstandarder for erhvervsmæssig lufttransport.
 (21)
 Ifølge de fælles kriterier, der er fastsat i bilaget til forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005, finder Kommissionen, at listen over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud i Unionen, jf. bilag A til forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006, bør ændres til også at indeholde alle luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret i Rusland, og som opererer de i betragtning 4 og 5 omhandlede luftfartøjer.
 (22)
 Medlemsstaterne bør gennem en prioritering af rampeinspektioner i henhold til Kommissionens forordning (EU) nr. 965/2012 (6) fortsat kontrollere, at luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret FATA, faktisk overholder de relevante internationale sikkerhedsstandarder.
 (23)
 Situationen med hensyn til FATA's evne og kapacitet til at varetage sin rolle og sit ansvar med hensyn til at føre tilsyn med dens luftfartsindustri samt alle luftfartsselskaber, der er certificeret i Rusland, herunder navnlig luftfartsselskaber, der opererer de luftfartøjer, der er omhandlet i betragtning 4 og 5, vil blive fulgt nøje og vil blive undersøgt nærmere af Kommissionen bistået af agenturet med henblik på revision på de næste møder i EU-Udvalget for Luftfartssikkerhed.
 (24)
 Forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 bør derfor ændres.
 (25)
 I betragtning af betydningen for sikkerheden anerkendes det i artikel 5 og 6 i forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005, at det er nødvendigt at træffe hurtige afgørelser og om nødvendigt fastlægge en hasteprocedure. For at beskytte følsomme oplysninger og passagerne er det derfor afgørende, at eventuelle afgørelser om at ajourføre listen over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud eller driftsmæssige begrænsninger i Unionen, offentliggøres og træder i kraft straks efter vedtagelsen.
 (26)
 De i denne forordning fastsatte foranstaltninger er i overensstemmelse med udtalelse fra EU-Udvalget for Luftfartsikkerhed, som er nedsat i medfør af artikel 15 i forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 —
 VEDTAGET DENNE FORORDNING:
 Artikel 1
 I forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 foretages følgende ændringer:
 1)
 Bilag A erstattes af teksten i bilag I til nærværende forordning.
 2)
 Bilag B erstattes af teksten i bilag II til nærværende forordning.
 Artikel 2
 Denne forordning træder i kraft dagen efter offentliggørelsen i Den Europæiske Unions Tidende.
 Denne forordning er bindende i alle enkeltheder og gælder umiddelbart i hver medlemsstat.
 Udfærdiget i Bruxelles, den 8. april 2022.
 På Kommissionens vegne
 For formanden
 Adina VĂLEAN
 Medlem af Kommissionen
 (1) EUT L 344 af 27.12.2005, s. 15.
 (2) Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 af 22. marts 2006 om opstilling af fællesskabslisten over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud i Fællesskabet i henhold til kapitel II i Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 (EUT L 84 af 23.3.2006, s. 14).
 (3) Kommissionens gennemførelsesforordning (EU) 2021/2070 af 25. november 2021 om ændring af forordning (EF) nr. 474/2006 for så vidt angår listen over luftfartsselskaber, der er omfattet af driftsforbud eller driftsmæssige begrænsninger i Unionen (EUT L 421 af 26.11.2021, s. 31).
 (4) Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 473/2006 af 22. marts 2006 om gennemførelsesbestemmelser til den fællesskabsliste over luftfartsselskaber med driftsforbud i Fællesskabet, der er omhandlet i kapitel II i Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2111/2005 (EUT L 84 af 23.3.2006, s. 8).
 (5) Rådets forordning (EU) 2022/328 af 25. februar 2022 om ændring af forordning (EU) nr. 833/2014 om restriktive foranstaltninger på baggrund af Ruslands handlinger, der destabiliserer situationen i Ukraine (EUT L 49 af 25.2.2022, s. 1).
 (6) Kommissionens forordning (EU) nr. 965/2012 af 5. oktober 2012 om fastsættelse af tekniske krav og administrative procedurer for flyveoperationer i henhold til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 216/2008 (EUT L 296 af 25.10.2012, s. 1).
 BILAG I
 »BILAG A
 LISTE OVER LUFTFARTSSELSKABER MED DRIFTSFORBUD I UNIONEN, MED UNDTAGELSER (1)
 Luftfartsselskabets juridiske enheds navn som anført på dens AOC (og firmanavnet, hvis dette er anderledes)
 Nummer på Air Operator's Certificate (»AOC«) eller licens
 ICAO-designatorkode på tre bogstaver
 Luftfartsselskabets hjemstat
 AVIOR AIRLINES
 ROI-RNR-011
 ROI
 Venezuela
 BLUE WING AIRLINES
 SRBWA-01/2002
 BWI
 Surinam
 IRAN ASEMAN AIRLINES
 FS-102
 IRC
 Iran
 IRAQI AIRWAYS
 001
 IAW
 Irak
 MED-VIEW AIRLINE
 MVA/AOC/10-12/05
 MEV
 Nigeria
 AIR ZIMBABWE (PVT)
 177/04
 AZW
 Zimbabwe
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Afghanistan, herunder:
 Afghanistan
 ARIANA AFGHAN AIRLINES
 AOC 009
 AFG
 Afghanistan
 KAM AIR
 AOC 001
 KMF
 Afghanistan
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de myndigheder i Angola, der har ansvaret for det lovpligtige tilsyn, undtagen TAAG Angola Airlines og Heli Malongo, herunder:
 Angola
 AEROJET
 AO-008/11-07/17 TEJ
 TEJ
 Angola
 GUICANGO
 AO-009/11-06/17 YYY
 Ukendt
 Angola
 AIR JET
 AO-006/11-08/18 MBC
 MBC
 Angola
 BESTFLYA AIRCRAFT MANAGEMENT
 AO-015/15-06/17YYY
 Ukendt
 Angola
 HELIANG
 AO 007/11-08/18 YYY
 Ukendt
 Angola
 SJL
 AO-014/13-08/18YYY
 Ukendt
 Angola
 SONAIR
 AO-002/11-08/17 SOR
 SOR
 Angola
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Armenien, herunder:
 Armenien
 AIRCOMPANY ARMENIA
 AM AOC 065
 NGT
 Armenien
 ARMENIA AIRWAYS
 AM AOC 063
 AMW
 Armenien
 ARMENIAN HELICOPTERS
 AM AOC 067
 KAV
 Armenien
 FLYONE ARMENIA
 AM AOC 074
 Armenien
 NOVAIR
 AM AOC 071
 NAI
 Armenien
 SHIRAK AVIA
 AM AOC 072
 SHS
 Armenien
 SKYBALL
 AM AOC 073
 N/A
 Armenien
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Congo (Brazzaville), herunder:
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 CANADIAN AIRWAYS CONGO
 CG-CTA 006
 TWC
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 EQUAFLIGHT SERVICES
 CG-CTA 002
 EKA
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 EQUAJET
 RAC06-007
 EKJ
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 TRANS AIR CONGO
 CG-CTA 001
 TSG
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 SOCIETE NOUVELLE AIR CONGO
 CG-CTA 004
 Ukendt
 Republikken Congo (Brazzaville)
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC), herunder:
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 AIR FAST CONGO
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/03
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 AIR KATANGA
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/08
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 BUSY BEE CONGO
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/04
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 COMPAGNIE AFRICAINE D'AVIATION (CAA)
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/02
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 CONGO AIRWAYS
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/01
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 KIN AVIA
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/10
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 MALU AVIATION
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/05
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 SERVE AIR CARGO
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/07
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 SWALA AVIATION
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/06
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 MWANT JET
 AAC/DG/OPS-09/09
 Ukendt
 Den Demokratiske Republik Congo (DRC)
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Djibouti, herunder:
 Djibouti
 DAALLO AIRLINES
 Ukendt
 DAO
 Djibouti
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Ækvatorialguinea, herunder:
 Ækvatorialguinea
 CEIBA INTERCONTINENTAL
 2011/0001/MTTCT/DGAC/SOPS
 CEL
 Ækvatorialguinea
 CRONOS AIRLINES
 2011/0004/MTTCT/DGAC/SOPS
 Ukendt
 Ækvatorialguinea
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Eritrea, herunder:
 Eritrea
 ERITREAN AIRLINES
 AOC No 004
 ERT
 Eritrea
 NASAIR ERITREA
 AOC No 005
 NAS
 Eritrea
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Kirgisistan, herunder:
 Kirgisistan
 AEROSTAN
 08
 BSC
 Kirgisistan
 AIR COMPANY AIR KG
 50
 Ukendt
 Kirgisistan
 AIR MANAS
 17
 MBB
 Kirgisistan
 AVIA TRAFFIC COMPANY
 23
 AVJ
 Kirgisistan
 FLYSKY AIRLINES
 53
 FSQ
 Kirgisistan
 HELI SKY
 47
 HAC
 Kirgisistan
 KAP.KG AIRCOMPANY
 52
 KGS
 Kirgisistan
 SKY KG AIRLINES
 41
 KGK
 Kirgisistan
 TEZ JET
 46
 TEZ
 Kirgisistan
 VALOR AIR
 07
 VAC
 Kirgisistan
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Liberia.
 Liberia
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Libyen, herunder:
 Libyen
 AFRIQIYAH AIRWAYS
 007/01
 AAW
 Libyen
 AIR LIBYA
 004/01
 TLR
 Libyen
 AL MAHA AVIATION
 030/18
 Ukendt
 Libyen
 BERNIQ AIRWAYS
 032/21
 BNL
 Libyen
 BURAQ AIR
 002/01
 BRQ
 Libyen
 GLOBAL AIR TRANSPORT
 008/05
 GAK
 Libyen
 HALA AIRLINES
 033/21
 HTP
 Libyen
 LIBYAN AIRLINES
 001/01
 LAA
 Libyen
 LIBYAN WINGS AIRLINES
 029/15
 LWA
 Libyen
 PETRO AIR
 025/08
 PEO
 Libyen
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Nepal, herunder:
 Nepal
 AIR DYNASTY HELI. S.
 035/2001
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 ALTITUDE AIR
 085/2016
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 BUDDHA AIR
 014/1996
 BHA
 Nepal
 FISHTAIL AIR
 017/2001
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 SUMMIT AIR
 064/2010
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 HELI EVEREST
 086/2016
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 HIMALAYA AIRLINES
 084/2015
 HIM
 Nepal
 KAILASH HELICOPTER SERVICES
 087/2018
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 MAKALU AIR
 057A/2009
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 MANANG AIR PVT
 082/2014
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 MOUNTAIN HELICOPTERS
 055/2009
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 PRABHU HELICOPTERS
 081/2013
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 NEPAL AIRLINES CORPORATION
 003/2000
 RNA
 Nepal
 SAURYA AIRLINES
 083/2014
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 SHREE AIRLINES
 030/2002
 SHA
 Nepal
 SIMRIK AIR
 034/2000
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 SIMRIK AIRLINES
 052/2009
 RMK
 Nepal
 SITA AIR
 033/2000
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 TARA AIR
 053/2009
 Ukendt
 Nepal
 YETI AIRLINES
 037/2004
 NYT
 Nepal
 Følgende luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Rusland.
 Rusland
 AURORA AIRLINES
 486
 SHU
 Rusland
 AVIACOMPANY "AVIASTAR-TU" CO. LTD
 458
 TUP
 Rusland
 IZHAVIA
 479
 IZA
 Rusland
 JOINT STOCK COMPANY "AIR COMPANY "YAKUTIA"
 464
 SYL
 Rusland
 JOINT STOCK COMPANY "RUSJET"
 498
 RSJ
 Rusland
 JOINT STOCK COMPANY "UVT AERO"
 567
 UVT
 Rusland
 JOINT STOCK COMPANY SIBERIA AIRLINES
 31
 SBI
 Rusland
 JOINT STOCK COMPANY SMARTAVIA AIRLINES
 466
 AUL
 Rusland
 JOINT-STOCK COMPANY "IRAERO" AIRLINES
 480
 IAE
 Rusland
 JOINT-STOCK COMPANY "URAL AIRLINES"
 18
 SVR
 Rusland
 JOINT–STOCK COMPANY ALROSA AIR COMPANY
 230
 DRU
 Rusland
 JOINT-STOCK COMPANY NORDSTAR AIRLINES
 452
 TYA
 Rusland
 JS AVIATION COMPANY "RUSLINE"
 225
 RLU
 Rusland
 JSC YAMAL AIRLINES
 142
 LLM
 Rusland
 LLC "NORD WIND"
 516
 NWS
 Rusland
 LLC "IRCOMPANY IKAR"
 36
 KAR
 Rusland
 POBEDA AIRLINES LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
 562
 PBD
 Rusland
 PUBLIC JOINT STOCK COMPANY "AEROFLOT - RUSSIAN AIRLINES"
 1
 AFL
 Rusland
 ROSSIYA AIRLINES, JOINT STOCK COMPANY
 2
 SMD
 Rusland
 SKOL AIRLINE LLC
 228
 CDV
 Rusland
 UTAIR AVIATION, JOINT-STOCK COMPANY
 6
 UTA
 Rusland
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i São Tomé og Príncipe, herunder:
 São Tomé og Príncipe
 AFRICA'S CONNECTION
 10/AOC/2008
 ACH
 São Tomé og Príncipe
 STP AIRWAYS
 03/AOC/2006
 STP
 São Tomé og Príncipe
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Sierra Leone
 Sierra Leone
 Alle luftfartsselskaber, som er certificeret af de tilsynsansvarlige myndigheder i Sudan, herunder:
 Sudan
 ALFA AIRLINES SD
 54
 AAJ
 Sudan
 BADR AIRLINES
 35
 BDR
 Sudan
 BLUE BIRD AVIATION
 11
 BLB
 Sudan
 ELDINDER AVIATION
 8
 DND
 Sudan
 GREEN FLAG AVIATION
 17
 GNF
 Sudan
 HELEJETIC AIR
 57
 HJT
 Sudan
 KATA AIR TRANSPORT
 9
 KTV
 Sudan
 KUSH AVIATION CO.
 60
 KUH
 Sudan
 NOVA AIRWAYS
 46
 NOV
 Sudan
 SUDAN AIRWAYS CO.
 1
 SUD
 Sudan
 SUN AIR
 51
 SNR
 Sudan
 TARCO AIR
 56
 TRQ
 Sudan
 «
 (1) Luftfartsselskaber, der er opført i bilag A, kan eventuelt få tilladelse til at udøve trafikrettigheder ved at benytte wet lease-luftfartøjer fra et luftfartsselskab, der ikke er omfattet af driftsforbud, hvis de relevante sikkerhedsstandarder opfyldes.
 BILAG II
 »BILAG B
 LISTE OVER LUFTFARTSSELSKABER, DER ER OMFATTET AF DRIFTSMÆSSIGE BEGRÆNSNINGER I UNIONEN (1)
 Luftfartsselskabets juridiske enheds navn som anført på dens AOC (og firmanavnet, hvis dette er anderledes)
 Nummer på Air Operator's Certificate (»AOC«)
 ICAO-designatorkode på tre bogstaver
 Luftfartsselskabets hjemstat
 Luftfartøjstype med begrænsning
 Registreringsnummer eller -numre og serienummer eller -numre, hvis det/de er kendt
 Registreringsstat
 IRAN AIR
 FS100
 IRA
 Iran
 Alle luftfartøjer af typen Fokker F100 og af typen Boeing B747.
 Luftfartøjer af typen Fokker F100, som er opført på AOC, og luftfartøjer af typen Boeing B747, som er opført på AOC.
 Iran
 AIR KORYO
 GAC-AOC/KOR-01
 KOR
 Nordkorea
 Hele flåden, undtagen: 2 luftfartøjer af typen TU-204.
 Hele flåden, undtagen: P-632 og P-633.
 Nordkorea
 «
 (1) Luftfartsselskaber, der er opført i bilag B, kan eventuelt få tilladelse til at udøve trafikrettigheder ved at benytte wet lease-luftfartøjer fra et luftfartsselskab, der ikke er omfattet af driftsforbud, hvis de relevante sikkerhedsstandarder opfyldes.