text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21993D0202(01)
 Recommendation No 1/91 of the EEC-EFTA Joint Committee on Common Transit of 19 September 1991 for the amendment of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on a common transit procedure
 Official Journal L 025 , 02/02/1993 P. 0029 - 0033
 ANNEXRECOMMENDATION No 1/91 OF THE EEC-EFTA JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMON TRANSIT of 19 September 1991for the amendment of the Convention of 20 May 1987 on a common transit procedureTHE JOINT COMMITTEE,Having regard to the Convention of 20 May 1987 on a common transit procedure, and in particular Article 15 (2) (a) thereof,Whereas the Convention of the 20 May 1987 gave effect to the Community Transit rules on trade between the Community and the EFTA countries and between those countries themselves;Whereas substantial changes have recently been made to the basic provisions of the Community Transit system in operation within the European Economic Community with a view to the achievement of the internal market on 1 January 1993; whereas steps should accordingly be taken to modify the Convention;Whereas it is considered necessary to arrange for the simultaneous entry into force of these modifications and of the changes in the Community Transit system,HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the Contracting parties to the Convention:- amend it, with effect from 1 January 1993 along the lines set out in the proposal annexed to this recommendation,- review, before 1 November 1992, this recommendation on the basis of a report from the Commission of the European Communities on the harmonization of provisions on the achievement of the internal market.- inform each other, by means of an exchange of letters, of their acceptance of this recommendation.Done at Helsinki, 19 September 1991.For the Joint CommitteeThe ChairmanAnnex to the AnnexProposed amendment to the Convention between the European Economic Community, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Swiss Confederation on a common transit procedure The Convention between the European Economic Community, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Swiss Confederation is amended as follows:A. Article 2 is replaced by the following text:'Article 21. The common transit procedure shall hereinafter be described as the T 1 procedure or the T 2 procedure, as the case may be.2. The T 1 procedure may be applied to any goods carried in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 1.3. The T 2 procedure shall apply to goods carried in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 1:(a) in the Community:only when the goods are Community goods. By "Community goods" is meant goods:- entirely obtained in the customs territory of the Community without the addition of goods from third countries or territories which are not part of the customs territory of the Community.- from countries or territories not forming part of the customs territory of the Community which have been released for free circulation in a Member State.- obtained in the customs territory of the Community from goods referred to either exclusively in the second indent or in the first and second indents.However, without prejudice to this Convention, or to other Agreements concluded by the Community, goods which, although fulfilling the conditions laid down in one of the preceding three indents, are reintroduced into the customs territory of the Community after being exported outside that territory shall be deemed not to be Community goods.(b) in an EFTA country:only when the goods have arrived in that EFTA country under the T 2 procedure and are reconsigned under the special conditions laid down in Article 9 below.4. The special conditions laid down in this Convention in respect of placing goods under the T 2 procedure shall apply also to the issue of documents certifying the Community status of goods and goods covered by such a document shall be treated in the same way as goods carried under the T 2 procedure, except that the document certifying the Community status of the goods need not accompany them.`B. Article 3 is replaced by the following text:'Article 31. For the purposes of this Convention, the term:(a) "transit" shall mean a procedure under which goods are carried under the control of the competent authorities from one office of a Contracting Party to another office of the same Contracting Party or that of another Contracting Party over at least one frontier;(b) "country", shall mean any EFTA country and any Member State of the Community;(c) "third country" shall mean any State which is neither an EFTA country nor a Member State of the Community.2. In the application of the rules laid down in this Convention for the T 1 or T 2 procedure, the EFTA countries and the Community and its Member States shall have the same rights and obligations.`C. Article 4 is replaced by the following text:'Article 41. This Convention shall be without prejudice to the application of any other international agreement concerning a transit procedure, subject to any limitations to such application in respect of the carriage of goods from one point in the Community to another point in the Community and to any limitations on the issue of documents certifying the Community status of goods.2. This Convention shall be without prejudice also to:(a) movements of goods under a temporary admission procedure;and(b) agreements concerning frontier traffic.`D. Article 6 is replaced by the following text:'Article 6Provided that the implementation of any measures applicable to the goods is ensured, countries may, within the T 1 or T 2 procedure, introduce among themselves simplified procedures, by means of bilateral or multilateral agreements, which shall conform to criteria to be laid down, where necessary, in Appendix II and which shall be applicable to certain types of traffic or to designated undertakings.Such agreements shall be communicated to the Commission of the European Communities and to the other countries.`Implementation of the transit procedure E. Article 7 is replaced by the following text:'Article 71. Subject to any special provisions of this Convention, the competent offices of the EFTA countries are empowered to assume the functions of offices of departure, offices of transit, offices of destination and offices of guarantee.2. The competent offices of the Member States of the Community shall be empowered to issue T 1 or T 2 documents for transit to an office of destination situated in an EFTA country. Subject to any special provisions of this Convention, they shall also be empowered to issue, for goods consigned to an EFTA country, documents certifying the Community status of those goods.3. Where several consignments of goods are grouped together and loaded on a single means of transport, within the meaning of Article 12, paragraph 2, of Appendix I, and are dispatched as a consolidated load by one principal in a single T 1 or T 2 operation, from one office of departure to one office of destination for delivery to one consignee, a Contracting Party may require that those consignments shall save in exceptional, duly justified cases, be included in one single T 1 or T 2 declaration with the corresponding loading lists.4. Notwithstanding the requirement for the Community status of goods to be certified where applicable, a person completing export formalities at the frontier customs office of a Contracting Party shall not be required to place the goods consigned under the T 1 or the T 2 procedure, irrespective of the customs procedure under which the goods will be placed at the neighbouring frontier customs office.5. Notwithstanding the requirement for the Community status of goods to be certified where applicable, the frontier customs office of the Contracting Party where export formalities are completed may refuse to place the goods under the T 1 or T 2 procedure if that procedure is to end at the neighbouring frontier customs office.`F. Article 9 is replaced by the following text:'Article 91. Goods which are brought into an EFTA country under the T 2 procedure and may be reconsigned under that procedure shall remain at all times under the control of the customs authorities of that country to ensure that there is no change in their identity or state.2. Where such goods are reconsigned from an EFTA country after having been placed, in that EFTA country, under a customs procedure other than a transit or a warehousing procedure, no T 2 procedure may be applied.This provision shall, however, not apply to goods which are admitted temporarily to be shown at an exhibition, fair or similar public display and which have received no treatment other than that needed for their preservation in their original state or for splitting up consignments.3. Where goods are reconsigned from an EFTA country after storage under a warehousing procedure, the T 2 procedure may be applied only on the following conditions:- that the goods have not been warehoused over a period exceeding five years; however, as regards goods falling within Chapters 1 to 24 of the Nomenclature for the Classification of Goods in Customs Tariffs (International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System of 14 June 1983), that period shall be limited to six months,- that the goods have been stored in special spaces and have received no treatment other than that needed for their preservation in their original state, or for splitting up consignments without replacing the packaging,- that any treatment has taken place under customs supervision.4. Any T 2 document or any document certifying the Community status of goods issued by a competent office of an EFTA country shall bear a reference to the corresponding T 2 document or document certifying the Community status of goods under which the goods arrived in that EFTA country and shall include all special endorsements appearing thereon.`G. Article 10 is replaced by the following text:'Article 101. Except where otherwise provided for in paragraph 2 below or in the Appendices, any T 1 or T 2 operation shall be covered by a guarantee valid for all Contracting Parties involved in that operation.2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not prejudice the right:(a) of Contracting Parties to agree among themselves that the guarantee shall be waived for T 1 or T 2 operations involving only their territories;(b) of a Contracting Party not to require a guarantee for the part of a T 1 or T 2 operation between the office of departure and the first office of transit.3. For the purposes of the flat rate guarantee as provided for in Appendices I and II, the "ecu" means the total of the following amounts:0,6242 German mark,0,08784 Pound sterling,1,332 French francs,151,8 Italian lira,0,2198 Dutch guilder,3,301 Belgian francs,0,130 Luxembourg franc,0,1976 Danish krone,0,008552 Irish pound,1,440 Greek drachmas,6,885 Spanish pesetas,1,393 Portuguese escudos.The value of the ecu in a given currency shall be equal to the sum of the exchange values in that currency of the amounts set out in the first subparagraph.`H. Article 11 is replaced by the following text:'Article 111. As a general rule, identification of the goods shall be ensured by sealing.2. The following shall be sealed:(a) the space containing the goods, when the means of transport has already been approved under other regulations or recognized by the office of departure as suitable for sealing;(b) each individual package in other cases.3. Means of transport may be recognized as suitable for sealing on condition that:(a) seals can be simply and effectively affixed to them;(b) they are so constructed that no goods can be removed or introduced without leaving visible traces of tampering or without breaking the seals;(c) they contain no concealed spaces where goods may be hidden;(d) the spaces reserved for the load are readily accessible for inspection by the competent authorities.4. The office of departure may dispense with sealing if, having regard to other possible measures for identification, the description of the goods in the T 1 or T 2 declaration or in the supplementary documents makes them readily identifiable.`I. In the German version, at Article 12/1 (a) and (b) the word 'Grenzübergangsstelle` is replaced by the word 'Durchgangszollstelle`.J. Article 13 is replaced by the following text:'Article 131. The competent authorities of the countries concerned shall furnish each other with any information at their disposal which is of importance in order to verify the proper application of this Convention.2. Where necessary, the competent authorities of the countries concerned shall communicate to one another all findings, documents, reports, records of proceedings and information relating to transport operations carried out under the T 1 or T 2 procedure as well as to irregularities or infringements in connection with such operations.Furthermore, where necessary, they shall communicate to one another all findings relating to goods in respect of which mutual assistance is provided for and which have been subject to a customs warehousing procedure.3. Where irregularities or infringements are suspected in connection with goods which have been brought into one country from another country or have passed through a country or have been stored under a warehousing procedure, the competent authorities of the countries concerned shall on request communicate to one another all information concerning:(a) the conditions under which those goods were carried:- whatever the way in which they were reconsigned, where they arrived in the country to which the request is addressed under cover of a T 1 or T 2 document or a document certifying the Community status of the goods, or- whatever the way in which they arrived, where they were reconsigned from the country to which the request is addressed under cover of a T 1 or T 2 document or a document certifying the Community status of the goods;(b) the conditions of any warehousing of those goods where they arrived in the country to which the request is addressed under cover of a T 2 document or a document certifying the Community status of the goods or where they were reconsigned from that country under cover of a T 2 document or a document certifying the Community status of the goods.4. Any request made under paragraphs 1 to 3 shall specify the case or cases to which it refers.5. If the competent authority of a country requests assistance which it would not be able to give if requested, it will draw attention to that fact in the request. Compliance with such a request will be within the discretion of the competent authority to whom the request is made.6. Information obtained in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 3 shall be used solely for the purpose of this Convention and shall be accorded the same protection by a receiving country as is afforded to information of like nature under the national law of that country. Such information may be used for other purposes only with the written consent of the competent authority which furnished it and subject to any restrictions laid down by that authority.`


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 21.7.2012
 EL
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
 C 217/26
 Προσφυγή της 22ας Μαΐου 2012 — Micrus Endovascular κατά ΓΕΕΑ — Laboratorios Delta (DELTA)
 (Υπόθεση T-218/12)
 2012/C 217/55
 Γλώσσα στην οποία ασκήθηκε η προσφυγή: η αγγλική
 Διάδικοι
 Προσφεύγουσα: Micrus Endovascular LLC (Wilmington, Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες) (εκπρόσωπος: B. Brandreth, Barrister)
 Καθού: Γραφείο Εναρμονίσεως στο πλαίσιο της Εσωτερικής Αγοράς (εμπορικά σήματα, σχέδια και υποδείγματα)
 Αντίδικος ενώπιον του τμήματος προσφυγών: Laboratorios Delta Lda (Queluz, Πορτογαλία)
 Αιτήματα της προσφεύγουσας
 Η προσφεύγουσα ζητεί από το Γενικό Δικαστήριο:
 —
 να ακυρώσει την απόφαση του δεύτερου τμήματος προσφυγών του Γραφείου Εναρμονίσεως στο πλαίσιο της Εσωτερικής Αγοράς (εμπορικά σήματα, σχέδια και υποδείγματα) της 6ης Μαρτίου 2012 στην υπόθεση R 244/2011-2· και
 —
 να καταδικάσει το καθού στα δικαστικά έξοδα στα οποία υποβλήθηκε η προσφεύγουσα ενώπιον του τμήματος προσφυγών και ενώπιον του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου.
 Λόγοι και κύρια επιχειρήματα
 Αιτούσα την καταχώριση του κοινοτικού σήματος: Η προσφεύγουσα
 Σήμα προς καταχώριση: Το λεκτικό σήμα «DELTA», για προϊόντα της κλάσεως 10 — Καταχωρισμένο κοινοτικό σήμα υπ’ αριθ. 6655906
 Δικαιούχος του κατά τη διαδικασία ανακοπής αντιταχθέντος σήματος ή σημείου: Η αντίδικος ενώπιον του τμήματος προσφυγών
 Αντιταχθέν σήμα ή σημείο: Καταχωρισμένο υπ’ αριθμ. 131374 διεθνές εικονιστικό σήμα «DELTA PORTUGAL», για προϊόντα της κλάσεως 5· καταχωρισμένο υπ. αριθμ. 140578 πορτογαλικό εικονιστικό σήμα «DELTA PORTUGAL», για προϊόντα της κλάσεως 5· καταχωρισμένη εμπορική επωνυμία υπ’ αριθμ. 23113 «LABORATORIOS DELTA»
 Απόφαση του τμήματος ανακοπών: Δέχεται την ανακοπή
 Απόφαση του τμήματος προσφυγών: Απορρίπτει την προσφυγή
 Προβαλλόμενοι λόγοι: Παράβαση του άρθρου 8, παράγραφος 1, στοιχείο β', του κανονισμού 207/2009 του Συμβουλίου.


type: contracts

text:
 27.11.2014
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 L 342/44
 DECIZIA NR. 136/2014 A COMITETULUI MIXT AL SEE
 din 27 iunie 2014
 de modificare a anexei XVIII (Sănătatea și securitatea la locul de muncă, dreptul muncii și egalitatea de tratament pentru femei și bărbați) la Acordul privind SEE
 COMITETUL MIXT AL SEE,
 având în vedere Acordul privind Spațiul Economic European („Acordul privind SEE”), în special articolul 98,
 întrucât:
 (1)
 Directiva 2013/35/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 26 iunie 2013 privind cerințele minime de sănătate și securitate referitoare la expunerea lucrătorilor la riscuri generate de agenții fizici (câmpuri electromagnetice) [a douăzecea directivă specială în sensul articolului 16 alineatul (1) din Directiva 89/391/CEE] și de abrogare a Directivei 2004/40/CE (1) trebuie încorporată în Acordul privind SEE.
 (2)
 Prin urmare, anexa XVIII la Acordul privind SEE ar trebui modificată în mod corespunzător,
 ADOPTĂ PREZENTA DECIZIE:
 Articolul 1
 În anexa XVIII la Acordul privind SEE, textul de la punctul 16jc (Directiva 2004/40/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului) se înlocuiește cu următorul text:
 „32013 L 0035: Directiva 2013/35/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 26 iunie 2013 privind cerințele minime de sănătate și securitate referitoare la expunerea lucrătorilor la riscuri generate de agenții fizici (câmpuri electromagnetice) [a douăzecea directivă specială în sensul articolului 16 alineatul (1) din Directiva 89/391/CEE] și de abrogare a Directivei 2004/40/CE (JO L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1).”
 Articolul 2
 Textele Directivei 2013/35/UE în limbile islandeză și norvegiană, care urmează să fie publicate în suplimentul SEE al Jurnalului Oficial al Uniunii Europene, sunt autentice.
 Articolul 3
 Prezenta decizie intră în vigoare la 28 iunie 2014, cu condiția să se fi efectuat toate notificările prevăzute la articolul 103 alineatul (1) din Acordul privind SEE (2).
 Articolul 4
 Prezenta decizie se publică în secțiunea SEE și în suplimentul SEE ale Jurnalului Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 Adoptată la Bruxelles, 27 iunie 2014.
 Pentru Comitetul mixt al SEE
 Președintele
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 (1) JO L 179, 29.6.2013, p. 1.
 (2) Nu au fost semnalate obligații constituționale.


type: legislation

text:
 EUROPOS KOMISIJA
 Briuselis, 2018 12 13
 COM(2018) 831 final
 2018/0421(NLE)
 Pasiūlymas
 TARYBOS SPRENDIMAS
 dėl Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimo dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą, Europos Sąjungos, Šveicarijos Konfederacijos ir Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės protokolo dėl prieigos prie EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais pasirašymo Europos Sąjungos vardu
 AIŠKINAMASIS MEMORANDUMAS
 1.PASIŪLYMO APLINKYBĖS
 •Pasiūlymo pagrindimas ir tikslai
 2013 m. liepos 19 d. priimtas ir įsigaliojo Reglamentas (ES) Nr. 603/2013
 1
 , kuriuo nauja redakcija išdėstytas 2000 m. gruodžio 11 d. Reglamentas Nr. 2725/2000 dėl „Eurodac“ sistemos sukūrimo pirštų atspaudams lyginti siekiant veiksmingiau taikyti Dublino konvenciją. Reglamentas taikomas nuo 2015 m. liepos 20 d.
 Reglamentu (ES) Nr. 603/2013, inter alia, sudaromos sąlygos teisėsaugos institucijoms susipažinti su EURODAC duomenimis teroristinių ir kitų sunkių nusikaltimų prevencijos, atskleidimo ir tyrimo tikslais. Teisėsaugos institucijoms turėtų būti suteikta galimybė teikti prašymą palyginti pirštų atspaudų duomenis su EURODAC centrinėje duomenų bazėje saugomais duomenimis, kai jos siekia tiksliai nustatyti asmens, įtariamo padarius teroristinį ar sunkų nusikaltimą, tapatybę arba gauti apie jį išsamesnės informacijos.
 2004 m. spalio 26 d. sudarytas Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimas dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą (toliau – 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarimas)
 2
 . 2008 m. vasario 28 d. sudarytas Europos bendrijos, Šveicarijos Konfederacijos ir Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės protokolas dėl Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės prisijungimo prie Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimo dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą (toliau – 2008 m. vasario 28 d. Protokolas)
 3
 .
 Šveicarija ir Lichtenšteinas taiko su prieglobsčiu susijusias Reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 nuostatas pagal 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarimą ir 2008 m. vasario 28 d. Protokolą. Tačiau teisėsaugos institucijų prieiga prie EURODAC nepatenka į minėto Susitarimo ir Protokolo taikymo sritį.
 2014 m. gegužės 14 d. susitikime su Komisijos atstovais Danija, Šveicarija, Lichtenšteinas, Norvegija ir Islandija patvirtino, kad yra suinteresuotos pradėti derybas su Europos Sąjunga, kad su teisėsauga susijusios Reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 nuostatos joms būtų taikomos pagal tarptautinį susitarimą.
 2015 m. gruodžio 14 d. Taryba įgaliojo Komisiją pradėti derybas dėl Europos Sąjungos ir, inter alia, Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino susitarimo dėl Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino dalyvavimo taikant duomenų palyginimo ir perdavimo teisėsaugos tikslais procedūrą, numatytą Reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 dėl „Eurodac“ sistemos pirštų atspaudams lyginti sukūrimo siekiant veiksmingai taikyti Reglamentą (ES) Nr. 604/2013, kuriuo išdėstomi valstybės narės, atsakingos už trečiosios šalies piliečio arba asmens be pilietybės vienoje iš valstybių narių pateikto tarptautinės apsaugos prašymo nagrinėjimą, nustatymo kriterijai ir mechanizmai, ir dėl valstybių narių teisėsaugos institucijų bei Europolo teisėsaugos tikslais teikiamų prašymų palyginti duomenis su „Eurodac“ sistemos duomenimis VI skyriuje.
 Derybos baigtos ir parafuotas susitarimas – 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarimo protokolas, kuriuo į 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarimo taikymo sritį įtraukiama prieiga teisėsaugos tikslais.
 Pradėjus taikyti su teisėsauga susijusias Reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 nuostatas Šveicarijai ir Lichtenšteinui, jų teisėsaugos institucijoms būtų sudarytos sąlygos teikti prašymą palyginti pirštų atspaudų duomenis su kitų dalyvaujančių valstybių įvestais, EURODAC duomenų bazėje saugomais duomenimis, kai jos siekia nustatyti asmens, įtariamo padarius teroristinį ar sunkų nusikaltimą, arba aukos tapatybę arba gauti apie juos išsamesnės informacijos. Be to, juo būtų sudarytos sąlygos visų kitų dalyvaujančių valstybių (valstybių narių ar asocijuotųjų šalių) teisėsaugos institucijoms tais pačiais tikslais teikti prašymą palyginti pirštų atspaudų duomenis su Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino įvestais, EURODAC duomenų bazėje saugomais duomenimis.
 Šio protokolo tikslas – nustatyti teisiškai privalomas teises ir pareigas siekiant užtikrinti, kad Šveicarijai ir Lichtenšteinui būtų veiksmingai taikomos su teisėsauga susijusios Reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 nuostatos. Protokole nustatyta, kad visos dalyvaujančios valstybės – kitos ES valstybės narės, asocijuotosios šalys arba Šveicarija ir Lichtenšteinas, – turinčios prieigą prie EURODAC, taip pat gali teisėsaugos tikslais naudotis viena kitos duomenimis.
 •Suderinamumas su toje pačioje politikos srityje galiojančiomis nuostatomis
 Pasiūlymas dera su ES politika, susijusia su prieiga prie EURODAC duomenų bazės.
 •Suderinamumas su kitomis Sąjungos politikos sritimis
 Pasiūlymas dera su ES politika laisvės, saugumo ir teisingumo erdvėje.
 2.TEISINIS PAGRINDAS, SUBSIDIARUMO IR PROPORCINGUMO PRINCIPAI
 •Teisinis pagrindas
 Šio Tarybos sprendimo pasiūlymo teisinis pagrindas – Sutarties dėl Europos Sąjungos veikimo (SESV) 87 straipsnio 2 dalies a punktas, 88 straipsnio 2 dalies a punktas kartu su SESV 218 straipsnio 5 dalimi.
 •Subsidiarumo principas (neišimtinės kompetencijos atveju)
 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarimas yra galiojantis ES ir Šveicarijos sudarytas tarptautinis susitarimas. Vadovaujantis ES sutarties 5 straipsnyje nustatytu subsidiarumo principu, šio Susitarimo protokolo tikslus galima pasiekti tik ES lygmens Komisijos pasiūlymu.
 •Proporcingumo principas
 Siekiant remti ir stiprinti valstybių narių ir Šveicarijos bei Lichtenšteino kompetentingų institucijų policijos bendradarbiavimą teroristinių ir kitų sunkių nusikaltimų prevencijos, atskleidimo ir tyrimo tikslais, ES turi imtis veiksmų, kad Šveicarija ir Lichtenšteinas galėtų naudotis su teisėsauga susijusiais EURODAC aspektais. Pasiūlymas atitinka proporcingumo principą, nes juo neviršijama to, kas būtina siekiant, kad Šveicarijai ir Lichtenšteinui būtų veiksmingai taikomos su teisėsauga susijusios EURODAC reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013 nuostatos.
 •Priemonės pasirinkimas
 Pagal SESV 218 straipsnio 5 dalį turi būti priimtas Tarybos sprendimas, kuriuo suteikiami įgaliojimai pasirašyti Susitarimą.
 3.EX POST VERTINIMO, KONSULTACIJŲ SU SUINTERESUOTOSIOMIS ŠALIMIS IR POVEIKIO VERTINIMO REZULTATAI
 •Konsultacijos su suinteresuotosiomis šalimis
 Dėl derybų turinio ir eigos konsultuotasi su Taryba (Prieglobsčio darbo grupe). Europos Parlamentui (LIBE komitetui) pateikta informacija.
 4.KITI ELEMENTAI
 •Išsamus konkrečių pasiūlymo nuostatų paaiškinimas
 Pasiūlyme išdėstytas sprendimas, kuriuo įgaliojama Europos Sąjungos vardu pasirašyti ES ir Šveicarijos bei Lichtenšteino protokolą. SESV numatyta, kad Komisijos pasiūlymą dėl sprendimo leisti pasirašyti ir sudaryti tarptautinį susitarimą priima Taryba.
 Protokole nustatyta, kad Reglamentas (ES) Nr. 603/2013 taikomas Šveicarijai ir Lichtenšteinui, kiek tai susiję su prieiga prie EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais. Todėl juo suteikiama galimybė kitų dalyvaujančių valstybių paskirtosioms teisėsaugos institucijoms ir Europolui teikti prašymą palyginti duomenis su Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino į EURODAC centrinę sistemą perduotais duomenimis. Taip pat juo suteikiama galimybė Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino paskirtosioms teisėsaugos institucijoms teikti prašymą palyginti duomenis su kitų dalyvaujančių valstybių į EURODAC centrinę sistemą perduotais duomenimis.
 Protokolu užtikrinama, kad dabartinis ES lygmens asmens duomenų apsaugos lygis būtų taikomas Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino bei valstybių narių valdžios institucijoms pagal Protokolą tvarkant asmens duomenis. Tokiam asmens duomenų tvarkymui turėtų būti taikomas jų nacionalinėje teisėje nustatytas asmens duomenų apsaugos standartas, atitinkantis 2016 m. balandžio 27 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos direktyvą (ES) 2016/680 dėl fizinių asmenų apsaugos kompetentingoms institucijoms tvarkant asmens duomenis nusikalstamų veikų prevencijos, tyrimo, atskleidimo ar baudžiamojo persekiojimo už jas arba bausmių vykdymo tikslais ir dėl laisvo tokių duomenų judėjimo, ir kuria panaikinamas Tarybos pamatinis sprendimas 2008/977/TVR.
 Protokole nustatyta, kad Šveicarija ir Lichtenšteinas gali naudotis EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais, prieš tai teisiškai ir techniškai įgyvendinusios Sprendimą 2008/615/TVR dėl daktiloskopinių duomenų.
 Protokole nustatyta, kad 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Susitarime numatyti mechanizmai dėl pakeitimų turėtų būti taikomi visiems pakeitimams, susijusiems su prieiga prie EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais.
 2018/0421 (NLE)
 Pasiūlymas
 TARYBOS SPRENDIMAS
 dėl Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimo dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą, Europos Sąjungos, Šveicarijos Konfederacijos ir Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės protokolo dėl prieigos prie EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais pasirašymo Europos Sąjungos vardu
 EUROPOS SĄJUNGOS TARYBA,
 atsižvelgdama į Sutartį dėl Europos Sąjungos veikimo, ypač į jos 87 straipsnio 2 dalies a punktą, 88 straipsnio 2 dalies a punktą ir 218 straipsnio 5 dalį,
 atsižvelgdama į Europos Komisijos pasiūlymą,
 kadangi:
 (1)2015 m. gruodžio 14 d. Taryba įgaliojo Komisiją pradėti derybas su Šveicarija ir Lichtenšteinu dėl Šveicarijos ir Lichtenšteino dalyvavimo taikant duomenų palyginimo ir perdavimo teisėsaugos tikslais procedūrą, numatytą Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamento (ES) Nr. 603/2013
 4
 VI skyriuje;
 (2)derybos baigtos ir 2017 m. lapkričio 22 d. parafuotas 2004 m. spalio 26 d. Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimo dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą, protokolas;
 (3)Protokolas turėtų būti pasirašytas Europos Sąjungos vardu su sąlyga, kad jis bus sudarytas vėliau;
 (4)pagal prie Europos Sąjungos sutarties ir Sutarties dėl Europos Sąjungos veikimo pridėto Protokolo dėl Jungtinės Karalystės ir Airijos pozicijos dėl laisvės, saugumo ir teisingumo erdvės 3 straipsnį šios valstybės narės pranešė apie savo pageidavimą dalyvauti priimant ir taikant šį sprendimą;
 (5)pagal prie Europos Sąjungos sutarties ir Sutarties dėl Europos Sąjungos veikimo pridėto Protokolo Nr. 22 dėl Danijos pozicijos 1 ir 2 straipsnius Danija nedalyvauja priimant šį sprendimą ir jis nėra jai privalomas ar taikomas,
 PRIĖMĖ ŠĮ SPRENDIMĄ:
 1 straipsnis
 Europos Sąjungos vardu patvirtinamas Europos bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos susitarimo dėl kriterijų ir mechanizmų, padedančių nustatyti valstybę, atsakingą už valstybėje narėje ar Šveicarijoje pateikto prieglobsčio prašymo nagrinėjimą, Europos Sąjungos, Šveicarijos Konfederacijos ir Lichtenšteino Kunigaikštystės protokolo dėl prieigos prie EURODAC teisėsaugos tikslais pasirašymas su sąlyga, kad tas Protokolas bus sudarytas.
 2 straipsnis
 Tarybos generalinis sekretoriatas parengia įgaliojamąjį raštą, kuriuo Protokolo derybininko nurodytam (-iems) asmeniui (-ims) suteikiami įgaliojimai pasirašyti Protokolą su sąlyga, kad jis bus sudarytas.
 3 straipsnis
 Šis sprendimas įsigalioja kitą dieną po jo paskelbimo Europos Sąjungos oficialiajame leidinyje.
 Priimta Briuselyje
 Tarybos vardu
 Pirmininkas
 (1)
 2013 m. birželio 26 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentas (ES) Nr. 603/2013 dėl „Eurodac“ sistemos pirštų atspaudams lyginti sukūrimo siekiant veiksmingai taikyti Reglamentą (ES) Nr. 604/2013, kuriuo išdėstomi valstybės narės, atsakingos už trečiosios šalies piliečio arba asmens be pilietybės vienoje iš valstybių narių pateikto tarptautinės apsaugos prašymo nagrinėjimą, nustatymo kriterijai ir mechanizmai, ir dėl valstybių narių teisėsaugos institucijų bei Europolo teisėsaugos tikslais teikiamų prašymų palyginti duomenis su „Eurodac“ sistemos duomenimis ir kuriuo iš dalies keičiamas Reglamentas (ES) Nr. 1077/2011, kuriuo įsteigiama Europos didelės apimties IT sistemų laisvės, saugumo ir teisingumo erdvėje operacijų valdymo agentūra (OL L 180, 2013 6 29, p. 1).
 (2)
 OL L 53, 2008 2 27, p. 5.
 (3)
 OL L 160, 2011 6 18, p. 39.
 (4)
 2013 m. birželio 26 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentas (ES) Nr. 603/2013 dėl „Eurodac“ sistemos pirštų atspaudams lyginti sukūrimo siekiant veiksmingai taikyti Reglamentą (ES) Nr. 604/2013, kuriuo išdėstomi valstybės narės, atsakingos už trečiosios šalies piliečio arba asmens be pilietybės vienoje iš valstybių narių pateikto tarptautinės apsaugos prašymo nagrinėjimą, nustatymo kriterijai ir mechanizmai, ir dėl valstybių narių teisėsaugos institucijų bei Europolo teisėsaugos tikslais teikiamų prašymų palyginti duomenis su „Eurodac“ sistemos duomenimis (OL L 180, 2013 6 29, p. 1).


text:
 19.3.2009
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 L 73/49
 DECIZIA NR. 13/2009 A COMITETULUI MIXT AL SEE
 din 5 februarie 2009
 de modificare a anexei XIII (Transporturile) la Acordul SEE
 COMITETUL MIXT AL SEE,
 având în vedere Acordul privind Spațiul Economic European, astfel cum a fost modificat prin Protocolul de adaptare a Acordului privind Spațiul Economic European, denumit în continuare „acordul”, în special articolul 98,
 întrucât:
 (1)
 Anexa XIII la acord a fost modificată prin Decizia nr. 129/2008 a Comitetului mixt al SEE din 5 decembrie 2008 (1).
 (2)
 Directiva 2008/87/CE a Comisiei din 22 septembrie 2008 de modificare a Directivei 2006/87/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului de stabilire a cerințelor tehnice pentru navele de navigație interioară (2) trebuie încorporată în acord,
 DECIDE:
 Articolul 1
 În anexa XIII la acord, la punctul 47a (Directiva 2006/87/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului) se adaugă următoarea liniuță:
 „—
 32008 L 0087: Directiva 2008/87/CE a Comisiei din 22 septembrie 2008 (JO L 255, 23.9.2008, p. 5).”
 Articolul 2
 Textele Directivei 2008/87/CE în limbile islandeză și norvegiană, care urmează să fie publicate în suplimentul SEE la Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene, sunt autentice.
 Articolul 3
 Prezenta decizie intră în vigoare la 6 februarie 2009, cu condiția să se fi efectuat toate notificările prevăzute la articolul 103 alineatul (1) din acord către Comitetul mixt al SEE (3).
 Articolul 4
 Prezenta decizie se publică în secțiunea SEE și în suplimentul SEE ale Jurnalului Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 Adoptată la Bruxelles, 5 februarie 2009.
 Pentru Comitetul mixt al SEE
 Președintele
 Alan SEATTER
 (1) JO L 25, 29.1.2009, p. 36.
 (2) JO L 255, 23.9.2008, p. 5.
 (3) Nu au fost semnalate obligații constituționale.


text:
 28.11.2013
 DA
 Den Europæiske Unions Tidende
 L 318/16
 DET BLANDEDE EØS-UDVALGS AFGØRELSE
 Nr. 114/2013
 af 14. juni 2013
 om ændring af bilag II (Tekniske forskrifter, standarder, prøvning og certificering) til EØS-aftalen
 DET BLANDEDE EØS-UDVALG HAR —
 under henvisning til aftalen om Det Europæiske Økonomiske Samarbejdsområde (»aftalen«), særlig artikel 98, og
 ud fra følgende betragtninger:
 (1)
 Kommissionens direktiv 2012/7/EU af 2. marts 2012 om ændring af del III i bilag II til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2009/48/EF om sikkerhedskrav til legetøj med henblik på tilpasning til den tekniske udvikling (1) skal indarbejdes i aftalen.
 (2)
 Bilag II til aftalen bør derfor ændres —
 VEDTAGET DENNE AFGØRELSE:
 Artikel 1
 Følgende indsættes i punkt 1a (Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2009/48/EF) i kapitel XXIII i bilag II til aftalen:
 », som ændret ved:
 —
 32012 L 0007: Kommissionens direktiv 2012/7/EU af 2. marts 2012 (EUT L 64 af 3.3.2012, s. 7).«
 Artikel 2
 Den islandske og den norske udgave af direktiv 2012/7/EU, der offentliggøres i Den Europæiske Unions Tidendes EØS-tillæg, er begge autentiske.
 Artikel 3
 Denne afgørelse træder i kraft den 15. juni 2013, forudsat at alle meddelelser er indgivet, jf. aftalens artikel 103, stk. 1 (2).
 Artikel 4
 Denne afgørelse offentliggøres i Den Europæiske Unions Tidendes EØS-afsnit og EØS-tillæg.
 Udfærdiget i Bruxelles, den 14. juni 2013.
 På Det Blandede EØS-Udvalgs vegne
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 Formand
 (1) EUT L 64 af 3.3.2012, s. 7.
 (2) Forfatningsmæssige krav angivet.


type: other

text:
Prono pour le tiércé du vendredi 25 Janvier à Pau - LE TIERCE MATHEMATIQUE AVEC KERTIS
 Prono pour le tiércé du vendredi 25 Janvier à Pau
 Le 13 ou le 14écart 02
 Le 10 ou le 13 écart 19
 le 1 écart 21 ,Le 4 écart 15 , le 8 écart 12, le 12 écart 10 ,
 le 2 écart 8, le 3 écart 7, le 10 écart 6, le 9 écart 3 , le 5,13,16 écart 2
 le 1 écart 21, le 4 écart 15 , le 3 écart 13, le 8 écart 12
 le 12 écart 10 , le 6 écart 9 , le 2,16 écart 8, le 10 écart 6, le 14 écart 4 , le 9 écart 3, le 5,13 écart 2
 Pair = 9 Unité = 5
 Course n°1 - PRIX EQUIDIA (PRIX RENE CRAMAIL)
 Haies - Handicap - 5 ans et Plus - 3800 mètres - Ref: +07 +09 - départ vers 13h45
 HANDICAP DIVISE, Réf. +070,+090 , HAIES, 3.800 mètres- Pour tous chevaux de 5 ans et au-dessus , ayant couru depuis le 1er septembre 2017 inclus et ayant, lors de l'une de leurs six dernières courses en obstacles, soit été classés dans les sept premiers d'une course ayant servi de support à des paris enregistrés sur le plan national, soit ayant reçu une allocation de 7.500, soit été classés dans les trois premiers d'un prix (A Réclamer excepté) couru sur un hippodrome de 1ère catégorie.La référence de cette épreuve sera éventuellement remontée à la déclaration des partants probables, afin que le poids le plus élevé soit fixé à 72 k.
 C'est sur l'hippodrome du Béarn que va se dérouler l'événement de ce vendredi 25 janvier, un Prix René Cramail qui va réunir 16 protagonistes sur les 3800 m du parcours de haies. Nous avons décidé de placer en tête de notre sélection TAKE TWO, un sujet qui est programmé pour remporter une telle épreuve. CAYO DE PAIL est un véritable métronome dans ce genre de tournoi. Il peut lui aussi viser la victoire. SANTANA DU BERLAIS sera redoutable, surtout s'il peut évoluer sur une piste très lourde. CALINIGHT est un sujet de classe qui pourrait mettre à profit sa forme pour réaliser une performance de premier plan. KASARCA est sur le chemin du renouveau. Il pourrait profiter de sa faible charge pour causer une belle surprise. BEAUTE PROMISE va se présenter en progrès par rapport à sa dernière sortie. Méfiance. ETERNAL ARMY vient d'avoir un très bon comportement dans un lot relevé. Il fait partie ici des nombreuses possibilités pour les places. DINAN est moins bien placé en valeur, mais sa forme peut lui permettre d'accrocher un accessit.
 7 favoris Hongres 5 premiérs prix estrem rey du 02 Janvier = 67% = 18 sur 27
 Numéro 5 = 80% = 8 sur 10
 Du 2 au 6 favoris les Hongres moins de 15/1 Les 2 der courses = 68% = 17 sur 25
 7 favoris les 5 à 8 ans 10 prem numéros der course 3 prem en haies à Pau = 61 = 11 sur 18
 6 favoris 7 à 10 ans , 6 prem numéros , derniere course à Pau = 93% = 11 sur 12
 Soit les numéros 1 2 6
 2 der courses 4 premiérs la derniere à 15/1 ou moins
 Soit les numéros 2 4 13
 7 ans ou plus et 2 der courses dans des quintés
 5 ou 6 ans portant le plus petit numéro
 au dela 9e favori , 8 prem numéros derniere course Pau Cagnes sur Mer ou Auteuil
 Soit les numéros 3 4 5 8
 80% = 8 sur 10 Numéro 5
 78% = 7 sur 9 Hongres de 10 ans
 71% = 5 sur 7 = S Paillard
 70% = 7 sur 10 = 2 et 3e favori
 Soit le numéro 12 9
 67% = 2 sur 3 = D Mescam
 64% = 7 sur 11 = 70 ou 70,5 kilos
 9e favori paris course écart 45 = 06 arrive 3e ce jeudi
 6e du carré d’as écart 12 = 16
 9 du carré d’as écart 26 = 07
 7e cote aujourdhui écart 18 = 15
 9 cote aujourdhui écart 16 = 07
 12 cote aujourdhui écart 29 = 04
 3 favori paris course écart 10 = 09
 11 favori paris course écart 47 = 04
 10 Rédaction Geny écart 67 = 10
 12 Rédaction Geny écart 33 = 08
 soit les numéros 4 7 8 9 10 15 16
 Voila donc les 4 numéros à surveiller cela tombe bien avec le 11e de la synthese qui est le ....4
 Le 1E un numéro Pair unité écart 9= 2 4 6 8
 Le 2e un numéro Pair unité écart 9 = 2 4 6 8
 Le 3e un numéro impair dizaine écart 19 = 11 13 15 17
 Suivi également pour demain cela donne comme numéro le 4 10
 On vient d’avoir 4 couplés impairs !!! consécutifs !! on les élimine pour demain
 Et on privilégie les numéros pairs dans un prono
 BASE 102 Calinight - 70kg ()
 1h(18)3h9s0s4s2s4s5s1s
 Vient de s'imposer sur ce parcours (4 sur 7 au total). Après une absence, il s'est vite remis dans le bain, dès son arrivée en Béarn. 3e du quinté du 19 décembre, il a confirmé en s'imposant. Plus 4 kg, il est à surveiller
 Ex-Cherel. Irrésistible le 15 janvier dans un handicap sur ce tracé. En plein épanouissement. Priorité
 SUPER BASE 106 Cayo de Pail - 67kg
 2 sur 2 sur ce tracé. C'est plus un adepte du meeting cagnois que palois. Mais à 10 ans, il est toujours aussi performant dans les handicaps. 4e du quinté du 2 janvier sur ce tracé, et adepte du lourd, il doit confirmer
 4edu quinté référence. Retrouve son jockey préféré et «vole» en terrain lourd. Entraîneur très confiant. Tuyau
 BASE . 112 Take Two - 64kg
 5h(18)3h(17)2h(16)1hAh2h
 Sujet tout neuf à 6 ans, il a réussi ses débuts dans les quintés (5e). Il va monter en puissance là-dessus. Il a pris la température à ce niveau. La piste plus assouplie va l'avantager. Dans ces conditions, on fonce
 5edu quinté référence. Sur la montante depuis et va réaliser une survaleur dans ce terrain. Base spéculative
 TOCARD 104 Celtior - 69kg le 11 e de la synthese de Paris Course en pleine forme et numéro Pair ...
 1h1h(18)2h8h4h6sTsAs5s
 Débute à Pau. Vient de réaliser un bon meeting cagnois. Relevé de 3 kg sur sa dernière victoire, il tente le coup avec des ambitions, vu sa forme. Il va se plaire sur cette distance. Malgré son poids, a sa chance
 Alterne les 2 spécialités. 2 victoires cet hiver en haies à Cagnes. Monte de catégorie et découvre Pau. En bout de combinaison
 BASE 109 Santana du Berlais - 64kg
 6h(18)2h3h5h2h7sAh0hAs
 6e pour sa première sur ce tracé. On s'attendait à mieux, jugé sur ses sorties précédentes dans des quintés parisiens. Il a pris ses marques et ne sera que mieux cette fois. La piste lourde va l'aider. On y croit
 6esans démériter du quinté référence. Un plus en terrain lourd et a le niveau d’un tel handicap. Notre outsider préféré
 OUTSIDER 101 Vangel de Cerisy - 73kg Numéro à l’écart
 1h(18)1h9h0h0h6s7h(17)1h
 2 sur 2 sur ce tracé, il vient d'ailleurs d'y remporter un quinté. Pénalisé de 5 kg là-dessus, il avait pris 3 kg précédemment. Après un passage à vide, il revient au mieux. Avantagé par le terrain lourd, méfiance
 Vainqueur du quinté référence. 5 kilos de pénalité mais n’a jamais été aussi bien. Adore le lourd. Obligés d’y croire pour une place
 OUTSIDER 110 Lovely Vallée - 64kg le 10e du prono rédaction et numéro pair
 5h(18)9h4s4h4h5h7h2h0p
 Elle débute à Pau, après un meeting de Cagnes un peu mitigé. Battue à ce niveau sur la Côte d'Azur, elle perd 1 kg. Elle sera avantagée par la distance et si le rythme n'est pas trop élevé. Dans ce lot, une place
 5ede la Grande Course de Haies de Cagnes le 6 janvier. Va se plaire dans ce terrain et sur ce tracé. Dernière minute
 OUTSIDER 111 Dansili Prince - 64kg
 3h(18)2h2s2s2s4h5h9hAh
 3e sur ce parcours dans la course référence du 2/01. Régulier, il a des lignes favorables avec des éléments qui ont déjà brillé à ce niveau. Toujours aussi bien et efficace en ce moment, il est compétitif
 Courageux 3edu quinté référence mais des doutes sur son aptitude à être aussi performant en terrain lourd. Affaire d’impression
 115 Dinan - 63kg méfiance le numéro 15 rattrape son retard
 1h(18)8h1p1p6p1p9h8s0h
 Vient de gagner pour ses débuts sur ce parcours. Plus 3 kg là-dessus, il a ainsi effacé ses échecs précédents. Sa marge de manoeuvre est plus mince mais il est tellement bien. Yannick Fertillet vient rarement à Pau. Possible
 A bien gagné la 2eépreuve du quinté référence. 3 kilos de pénalité mais nouveaux progrès attendus. Méfiez-vous en
 107 Eternal Army - 66kg ()
 5hTh(18)5h7h2s5s0h4hAh
 Après quelques mois d'absence, il a bien couru pour sa rentrée à Pau. Vite tombé dans la course référence du 2/01, c'est pour cette raison qu'il s'est présenté de façon rapprochée. A ce poids, il a son mot à dire
 Une qualité de plat et désormais bien réglé en haies. Aptitude au terrain et vaut 57 de valeur. C’est un «Cottin». Attention
 116 Kasarca - 63kg
 2h(18)AhAh(16)2hTh3hTh7h
 2e pour ses débuts sur ce parcours. Il avait besoin de retrouver le rythme après une très longue absence. Il y a du mieux sur sa dernière sortie. Mais il aurait été mieux dans la 2e épreuve. Dès lors, il ne visera qu'un lot
 Ex-Scandella. Sur le bon chemin après deux ans d’absence. 2ede la 2eépreuve du quinté référence. Le regret
 105 Beauté Promise - 68kg ()
 9h(18)Ah5hAs3h8h6s3p1h
 Elle perd encore 1 kg sur sa dernière sortie, ce n'est pas si mal. Mais elle demeure encore chargée dans cette catégorie où elle coince souvent. Le terrain lourd va l'avantager. Cela ne semble pas suffisant. Compliqué
 9esans excuse du Prix Pierre Estrem Rey, le quinté référence du 2 janvier sur ce parcours. Des doutes. Pas si simple
 114 Ultranet - 63kg ()
 (18)0h4h3s3h5h1h2hAsTs
 Une première Pau. Décevant en fin de saison à Auteuil, son entraîneur le court en Béarn afin de préparer l'année sur la butte Mortemart. Ce n'est guère la confiance dans son camp. Dès lors, on l'écarte
 Deux fois à l’arrivée l’an dernier dans cette catégorie à Auteuil. Absent depuis le 17 nov. et découvre Pau. Dommage
 103 Plumeur - 70kg ()
 (18)AhAhAh5h5h6h3h(17)2h
 A 12 ans, ses jambes se font plus lourdes. Au meilleur de sa carrière, il a pointé en 67 de valeur (2014) mais depuis c'est compliqué face aux "bons". Là, il vise moins haut. Même avec les australiennes, ce n'est pas simple
 5ed’un Groupe II au printemps dernier à Auteuil mais rien depuis. Redescend de catégorie mais c’est lui qui décide. A voir
 108 Chabalko - 65kg ()
 (18)As1s0s1s4s2s3sTs3s
 Il connaît Pau, mais en steeple seulement. On l'a laissé à Auteuil en fin d'année, largement battu à ce niveau. Une rentrée ici sur un terrain lourd qu'il va apprécier. Mais on le préfère sur les "gros". Outsider
 Aussi bien en haies qu’en steeple mais pas revu depuis plus de deux mois. Entraînement sérieux. A ne pas écarter
 113 Tiot Cas - 65kg
 (17)3s3s2h7s6s8h4s7s6h
 Plus d'un an et demi d'absence pour ce valeureux 12 ans. Il va certainement manquer de rythme et être un peu rouillé. Il sera plus compétitif sur le steeple dans les jours à venir. Pour ce vendredi, patientons
 Une rentrée après plus de 16 mois d’absence. A du travail mais va avoir besoin d’un vrai parcours. L’impasse
 2 6 12 4 9 1 10 11 puis 15 7 16
 Le 02 avec 6 12 15 7 16 Soit 5 euros
 Le 06 avec 2 12 10 11 7 16 Soit 6 euros
 Le 12 avec 2 6 4 9 11 7 16 Soit 7 euros
 Le 04 avec 12 1 7 16 Soit 4 euros
 Le 09 avec 12 10 11 15 7 Soit 5 euros
 Jeu total = 22 (le ou les couplés 2 6 / 2 12/ 6 12 / 12 4 / 12 9/ sont doublés,)
 = 11 15
 11 15 4 13 1 12 6 10
 6 12 2 1 14
 OUTSIDER DU JOUR = 4 7 11 14
 6 9 15 12 11 complément 02
 06 à 43,90
 09 à 40,38
 02 à 39,29
 15 à 24,63
 16 à 22,54
 12 à 21,97
 1 11 DANSILI PRINCE DE GILES F. HENDERSON D. Après avoir longtemps patienté en queue de peloton, a progressé dans le tournant final puis a terminé le plus vite. 16.8
 2 1 VANGEL DE CERISY RE G. COTTIN D. Après avoir figuré au sein du peloton, a bien conclu mais sans jamais approcher le lauréat. 13.5
 3 5 BEAUTE PROMISE DUBOURG P. CHAILLE-CHAILLE A. Après avoir attendu, a progressé dans le tournant final puis a bien conclu en dehors. 26.1
 4 14 ULTRANET HENDERSON T. CHAIGNON GIL. Attentiste en queue de peloton, a comblé beaucoup de terrain depuis la sortie du tournant final. 52.3
 5 4 CELTIOR VIEL M. VIEL L. Un des animateurs, a progressivement faibli après le saut de la dernière difficulté. 21.6
 - 3 PLUMEUR BEAURAIN T. CHAIGNON GIL. Un des animateurs, est rentré progressivement dans le rang au bout de la ligne opposée. 49.7
 - 2 CALINIGHT PLOUGANOU J. MESCAM M. Principal animateur, a nettement abdiqué en venant sauter la dernière difficulté. 3.0
 - 6 CAYO DE PAIL NATTIEZ J. BEAUNEZ B. N'a joué aucun rôle utile. 6.8
 - 7 ETERNAL ARMY DENUAULT W. COTTIN D. Rapidement bien placé, a progressivement concédé du terrain depuis le bout de la ligne opposée. 26.1
 - 8 CHABALKO METIVIER E. MARION (S) J.D. Après avoir figuré en bonne place, a lâché prise en face et a été arrêté devant la dernière difficulté. 66.6
 - 9 SANTANA DU BERLAIS BURELLER E. COLLET (S) ROB. Rapidement bien placé, a nettement marqué le pas dans la phase finale. 9.3
 - 10 LOVELY VALLEE PAGEOT A. VIEL L. Jamais menaçante, a fait tomber son jockey au bout de la ligne opposée. 30.8
 - 12 TAKE TWO DESOUTTER MLLE N. BRESSOU D. Après avoir figuré au sein du peloton, a bien conclu échouant de peu pour la cinquième place. 7.6
 - 13 TIOT CAS PAILLARD S. CHEMIN & HERPIN (S) P&CH. N'a joué aucun rôle utile et a été arrêté devant la dernière difficulté. 107.4
 - 15 DINAN MESCAM D. MESCAM M. N'a joué aucun rôle utile. 13.5
 - 16 KASARCA MORICEAU A. BRESSOU D. Après avoir figuré en étant brillante, est tombée lourdement au bout de la ligne opposée. 41.1
 11 Gagnant 13.90 20.85
 11 Placé 4.30 6.45
 11-1 Gagnant 67.90 101.85
 11-5 Placé 35.60 53.40
 1-5 Placé 31.10 46.65
 11-1-5 Ordre 1413.70 2120.55
 11-1-5 Désordre 238.50 357.75
 11-1-5-14 Ordre 11256.20 14633.06
 11-1-5-14 Désordre 846 1099.80
 11-1-5 Bonus 38.90 50.57
 11-1-5-14-4 Ordre 173781.40 347562.80
 11-1-5-14-4 Désordre 2362.80 4725.60
 11-1-5-14 Bonus 4 89.50 179
 11-1-5 Bonus 3 10.10 20.20
 11-1 Gagnant 25.50 76.50
 11-5 Gagnant 25.50 76.50
 11-14 Gagnant 25.50 76.50
 1-5 Gagnant 25.50 76.50
 1-14 Gagnant 25.50 76.50
 4 Gagnant 2394 7182
 5 Gagnant 478.80 1436.40
 6 Gagnant 159.60 478.80
 7 Gagnant 68.40 205.20


jurisdiction: US

text: b'FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION \n\n\nOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL \n\n\n\n\n\n FINAL REPORT\n\n\n\n Review of Outstanding Recommendations\n as of June 2013\n\n\n\n\n August 2013\n\n\n\n\n ASSIGNMENT No. OIG -13-03\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\nReport Overview\n\nAs required by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, the Office of Inspector General (OIG)\nis responsible for conducting audits of the Federal Election Commission\xe2\x80\x99s (FEC) programs and\noperations. In addition to conducting and supervising audits, the OIG also has the responsibility to\nconduct audit follow-ups to ensure that management has effectively implemented OIG\nrecommendations. Audit follow-up, to include the timely implementation of audit recommendations\nby FEC management, is required by Office of Management and Budget Circular A-50, Audit\nFollowup, as revised, and FEC Directive 50: Audit Follow-Up.\n\nManagement has established a process to adhere to Directive 50 and provide semiannual status\nreports to the Commission of their progress concerning outstanding OIG recommendations. The\nofficial status (open/closed) of OIG recommendations is determined by the OIG once the OIG has\nverified that management has adequately implemented the corrective actions. The Inspector General\ncan also make a decision to close recommendations or seek resolution from the Commission for\nrecommendations where the OIG and management disagree. The number of outstanding\nrecommendations is reported to the Commission and Congress in the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Semiannual Reports to\nCongress.\n\nThis report provides the Commission with details regarding the:\n\n \xef\x82\xb7 OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Audit Follow-up process, see page 2;\n \xef\x82\xb7 Audit follow-up meetings/communications with management to determine the status of\n outstanding audit recommendations, starting on page 3:\n a. Audit Follow-up Review of the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Employee Transit Benefit Program, see page 4;\n b. Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property Management Controls, see page 4;\n c. 2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy and Data Protection, see page 5;\n d. 2010 Follow-up Audit of Procurement and Contract Management, see page 6;\n e. Inspection of FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Kastle Key Program, see page 6;\n f. Quality Assessment Audit of the Audit Division, see page 6; \n\n \xef\x82\xb7 Additional Outstanding Recommendation Closures, see page 7; and\n\n \xef\x82\xb7 OIG Concerns, see page 9.\n\n\nFor this review period, the OIG reviewed six audits and inspections that had a total of 114\nrecommendations that were outstanding for six months or more as of December 2012, the date of our\nlast report. Collectively, the OIG closed 42 outstanding recommendations based on the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s review\nof management\xe2\x80\x99s implementation of corrective action, or changes made to management processes\nthat would satisfy the audit issue. Since our December 2012 report on the status of outstanding\nrecommendations, the Quality Assessment Audit of the Audit Division report, released in September\n2012, was added to the audit follow-up process because the recommendations have been outstanding\nfor more than six months. The OIG\xe2\x80\x99s January 2013 Inspection of the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Disaster Recovery Plan\nand Continuity of Operations Plans report contained 30 recommendations, which are not included as\nthese recommendations had not been outstanding for six months or more during this period of review.\nThe follow-up on the status of the inspection recommendations will be reported in the next\nsemiannual report of this kind.\n\n\n 1\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\nIn addition, at the IG\xe2\x80\x99s discretion, four recommendations from the 2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy\nand Data Protection and two from the Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property Management Controls\nwere closed. Management disagreed with the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s recommendations and decided not to apply the\nresources necessary to fully or adequately implement these recommendations. However, the OIG\ncontinues to believe these recommendations are important, and would reduce the risk of fraud, waste,\nand/or abuse to FEC programs if implemented. For details, see the Additional Outstanding\nRecommendation Closures section of this report on page 7.\n\nAudit Follow-up Process\n\nAt the conclusion of each OIG audit and inspection, it is management\xe2\x80\x99s responsibility to develop a\ncorrective action plan (CAP). The CAP identifies the plan management has developed to address the\nOIG\xe2\x80\x99s findings and recommendations. The CAP should detail the following:\n\n 1. assignment of Audit Follow-up Official (AFO);\n 2. OIG finding(s);\n 3. OIG recommendation(s);\n 4. detailed corrective action to implement the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s recommendation(s);\n 5. FEC staff person with responsibility to implement each task; and\n 6. expected completion dates.\n\nOnce management drafts the CAP, the OIG then reviews their CAP and provides comments to\nmanagement regarding the sufficiency of their planned corrective actions to address the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nfindings. Management reviews the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s comments, finalizes the CAP, and then provides the final\nCAP to the Commission with a courtesy copy to the OIG.\n\nFEC Directive 50 requires management to:\n\n \xe2\x80\x9c(3) Conduct regular meetings with the Inspector General throughout the year to follow-up\n on outstanding findings and recommendations, and include reports of these meetings in the\n written corrective action plan and semi-annual reports required to be presented to the\n Commission;\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nIn order to work effectively with FEC management in adhering to Directive 50, and to ensure\ncontinuous monitoring and adequate and timely audit resolution, the OIG meets with management at\nleast semiannually to discuss the progress of outstanding OIG recommendations. These meetings\nprovide management with timely OIG feedback for their semiannual reports to the Commission and\nenables the OIG to keep abreast of management\xe2\x80\x99s progress. The OIG schedules these meetings and\nprovides management with the results of our review prior to management\xe2\x80\x99s reporting deadlines to the\nCommission. The OIG also reports semiannually (status as of June & December) to the Commission\nand management on recommendations that the OIG has closed (if any) based on follow-up reviews.\nThe semiannual meetings are also intended to assist the audit follow-up official in following\nprovisions 4 through 6 of Directive 50, which are listed as follows:\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\n \xe2\x80\x9c(4) Respond in a timely manner to all audit reports;\n (5) Engage in a good faith effort to resolve all disagreements; and\n (6) Produce semi-annual reports that are submitted to the agency head.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nFollow-up Meetings & Communications\n\nTo discuss the current status and progress of each outstanding recommendation, the OIG held\nmeetings and communicated via email with the applicable audit follow-up official, and/or\nmanagement staff for each audit/inspection. Out of the six follow-up reviews, the OIG was able to\nclose recommendations from all six audits/inspection.\n\nAlthough several recommendations were closed, further corrective action from management is still\nneeded to implement the remaining outstanding recommendations. Specifically, the OIG has\nconcerns regarding the lack of progress and focus from the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Privacy Team regarding the\noutstanding recommendations for the 2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy and Data Protection, and the\nInformation Technology Division (ITD) regarding the Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property\nManagement Controls (release date 3/2010). See the table below for a summary of progress made by\nFEC management and the outstanding recommendations as of June 2013.\n\n Outstanding Audit Recommendations Status Table\n\n 2\n Title & Report Date 1 Additional Total Open\n Total Outstanding Total\n of OIG Closed as of\n Recommendations Closed and\n Audits/Inspection June 2013\n as of December 2012 Verified by\n OIG\n Audit Follow-up Review of\n the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Employee Transit 15 7 N/A 8\n Benefit Program (7/2009)\n Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s\n Property Management 14 5 2 7\n Controls (3/2010)\n 2010 Follow-up Audit of\n Privacy and Data Protection 38 4 4 30\n (3/2011)\n 2010 Follow-up Audit of\n Procurement and Contract 29 12 N/A 17\n Management (6/2011)\n Inspection of the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s\n Kastle Key Program 7 6 N/A 1\n (12/2011)\n Quality Assessment Audit of\n the Audit Division (9/2012)\n 11 8 N/A 3\n Total Outstanding Recommendations as of June 2013 66\n\n1\n This column includes recommendations that management has disagreed with or has not adequately implemented, and\n\nthe OIG concludes that these recommendations are still \xe2\x80\x98open\xe2\x80\x99. \n\n2\n The numbers in this column include recommendations that were closed by the OIG, but not implemented by FEC \n\nmanagement. See the \xe2\x80\x9cAdditional Recommendation Closures\xe2\x80\x9d section on pg. 7.\n\n\n\n 3\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\nA. Audit Follow-up Review of the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Employee Transit Benefit Program\n\nThe December 2012 Review of Outstanding Audit Recommendations report identified 15 open\nrecommendations. During the period ending June 30, 2013, the OIG met with the Transit Program\nManager and the Director of OHR to discuss status of open recommendations. Subsequent to the\nmeeting, OIG obtained documentation related to some of the outstanding recommendations. Based\non the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s review of supporting documentation, and actions taken to implement FEC Directive 54\non the transit program, we were able to close seven (7) of the 15 open recommendations.\n\n B. Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property Management Controls\n\nThe Audit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property Management Controls (Property Audit) audit report was\nreleased in March 2010. The responsibility of implementing the audit recommendations for the\nProperty Audit is shared by the Administrative Services Division (ASD) and the Information\nTechnology Division (ITD). The OIG has worked with the ASD Managers3 and the Deputy Chief\nInformation Officer of Operations (Deputy CIO) to receive any updates regarding the implementation\nof audit recommendations.\n\nThe Property Audit report identified 36 audit recommendations; ASD is responsible for the\nimplementation of 10 recommendations, and the ITD 26 of the 36 recommendations. In the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nDecember 2012 outstanding recommendations report, ASD had only one remaining open\nrecommendation, in which the OIG was able close this review period. All recommendations\nassigned to ASD for the Property Audit have been adequately implemented and the related\nfindings have been officially closed. The OIG would like to note that the current ASD manager and\nher staff worked diligently and cooperatively with the OIG throughout the audit follow-up process to\nresolve these outstanding findings. The OIG appreciates ASD\xe2\x80\x99s commitment to implementing the\naudit recommendations to ensure that FEC programs and processes are working effectively and\nefficiently.\n\nITD is responsible for the remaining 13 recommendations still outstanding as of the December 2012\nreport. For this review period, the OIG requested that ITD provide documentation for any corrective\nactions that were implemented regarding these outstanding recommendations; however, no corrective\nactions were implemented. Since management had not made any progress since the last review\nperiod to implement any additional recommendations, the OIG conducted follow-up on open\nrecommendations where corrective actions were implemented by management in prior review\nperiods, but the corrective action was either ineffective or inadequate. Through this review, the OIG\nwas able to close four recommendations based on process improvements that would address the\nrecommendation, but several remain open.\n\nThe OIG is concerned with management\xe2\x80\x99s lack of progress to improve their management controls\nover FEC property. As ITD has a non personnel budget of approximately seven million dollars ($7\nmillion), the largest budget (excluding personnel costs) in the entire agency, the OIG believes that\n\n\n3\n The OIG has worked with one acting ASD manager and two permanent ASD managers since the completion of the\nProperty audit due to frequent turnover in this position.\n\n 4\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\nmanagement should be more focused to ensure that the proper controls are in place to reduce the risk\nof any excessive cost, waste, or abuse to the agency and its programs.\n\nThe OIG conducted an additional assessment of all outstanding recommendations, and the Inspector\nGeneral (IG) decided to close two (2) outstanding recommendations. This decision was made because\nmanagement disagreed with the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s recommendation and/or decided not to apply the resources\nnecessary to fully or adequately implement the recommendations. However, the IG believes\nmanagement should focus their resources on the remaining open recommendations. See details in the\nAdditional Recommendation Closures section, pg. 7.\n\nC. 2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy and Data Protection\n\nFor the 2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy and Data Protection, the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s December 2012 report\nidentified 38 open recommendations. The OIG met with the Privacy Team on May 14, 2013 to\ndiscuss the status of the 38 open recommendations. The OIG was able to verify and close only four\n(4) recommendations during this review period.\n\nAlso, management did not implement a planned system that was noted in the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s prior outstanding\nrecommendations report that would have the capability to keep a record of the laptops encrypted by\nthe FEC. Since this corrective action was not implemented by management, this recommendation\nremains open. It is essential that ITD has assurance that all issued laptops have been encrypted to\nreduce the risk of unauthorized access to sensitive information. For instance, ITD provided FEC staff\nwith new laptops this fiscal year that were not encrypted, and instructed staff via email to download\nthe encryption software from the network to their laptops to encrypt the laptop hard drives. If there\nare any FEC employees who did not adhere to ITD\xe2\x80\x99s email, there are potentially FEC laptops that are\naccessing FEC\xe2\x80\x99s network and/or being removed from the agency building that are not encrypted. If\nso, and one of these laptops were to be lost or stolen, the information contained on the laptop,\npotentially sensitive, could be released to the public. ITD does not have an adequate process/system\nin place that can identify if there are laptops that are not encrypted, or ensure all devices accessing the\nnetwork or that have been removed from the building (i.e. telework purposes) have been encrypted. If\nall devices are not encrypted, it also increases the risk that outside hackers can access or manipulate\nFEC sensitive information (i.e. Disclosure data).\n\nThe OIG is aware that the Privacy Team has encountered many staff changes; however, our concern\nis that the Privacy Team has not made much progress in resolving these outstanding\nrecommendations. The open recommendations have been outstanding since March 2011 with\nminimal progress from the Privacy Team to implement corrective action.\n\nThe OIG conducted an additional assessment of all outstanding recommendations, and the Inspector\nGeneral decided to close four (4) outstanding recommendations. This decision was made because\nmanagement disagreed with the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s recommendation and/or decided not to apply the resources\nnecessary to fully or adequately implement the recommendations. The IG believes management\nshould focus their resources on the remaining open recommendations. See details in the Additional\nRecommendation Closures section, pg. 7.\n\n\n\n 5\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\n\nD. 2010 Follow-up Audit of Procurement and Contract Management\n\nThe December 2012 Review of Outstanding Recommendations report noted 29 outstanding\nrecommendations. In March 2013, the OIG met with the outgoing Director of Procurement\n(Contracting Officer), to discuss processes implemented to address the recommendations. The OIG\nselected a sample of contract files to verify if controls were fully implemented. Based on the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nreview of 13 contract files and follow-up work performed, the OIG was able to close six (6) of the 29\noutstanding audit recommendations. In June 2013, the OIG met with the acting Chief Financial\nOfficer (CFO) and other Office of the CFO staff members to discuss the remaining outstanding audit\nrecommendations, as well as additional progress made since the CO left the agency. Subsequent to\nthe meeting, the OIG obtained and reviewed documentation to support corrective actions to address\nsome of the open recommendations. Based on this review, the OIG was able to close an additional six\n(6) recommendations. Therefore, a total of 12 of the 29 recommendations have been closed since our\nlast report in December 2012.\n\nE. Inspection of the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s Kastle Key Program\n\nThe December 2012 Review of Outstanding Recommendations report noted seven outstanding\nrecommendations. During this follow-up review period, six of the seven recommendations were\nclosed based on the finalization of the revised Kastle key policy.\n\nOne recommendation remains open. To test the implementation of the recommendation, the OIG\nselected a sample of six Kastle key request forms with temporary dates to: (1) ensure the correct\ntemporary (expiration) date was entered in the Kastle system; (2) determine if the temporary date had\npast and was not updated; and (3) whether the key had been deactivated appropriately. The OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nreview noted one of the six sampled temporary Kastle key assignments did not have a required date\nentered in the system. This issue was also noted in the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s prior review, particularly with\ntemporary keys issued to staff in the Reports and Analysis Division (RAD), who frequently request\ntemporary date extensions. It is important that ASD enter the correct and/or updated temporary date\nof the Kastle keys assigned to ensure that staff and contractors do not have building access beyond\nthe date authorized by management. To better track requests, the OIG suggests that ASD require a\nnew Kastle key form whenever a date extension occurs, rather than allowing staff to provide an email\nto request date extensions.\n\nF. Quality Assessment Audit of the Audit Division\n\nThe Quality Assessment Audit of the Audit Division (Audit Division) audit report was released in\nSeptember 2012. The Audit Division audit report identified 11 audit recommendations to improve\nthe quality assurance of audits conducted by the Audit Division (AD). In June 2013, the OIG met\nwith AD management to discuss corrective actions taken to address the recommendations.\nSubsequent to the meeting, the AD Program Manager provided evidence to support processes\nimplemented. Based on the OIG review of supporting documentation, we were able to close eight (8)\nof the 11 open recommendations. The AD management informed the OIG that corrective actions\nhave been taken to address the other three (3) recommendations. Once the OIG can review evidence\nof corrective action, the OIG will be able to close the remaining recommendations.\n\n 6\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\nThe OIG would like to recognize the work by the AD Program Manager and AD management to\npromptly and sufficiently implement the audit recommendations. These efforts by Audit Division\nhave demonstrated a strong commitment to ensure a quality audit process.\n\nAdditional Recommendation Closures\n\nThe OIG reviewed all open recommendations that have been open for several follow-up review\ncycles, along with management\xe2\x80\x99s responses and/or plan of action. At the IG\xe2\x80\x99s discretion, based on\nthe assessment of the open recommendations, a total of 6 recommendations were closed from the\nProperty Audit, and the Privacy Audit.\n\nThese recommendations were closed by the OIG because management disagreed with the\nrecommendation and made the decision to focus their resources on other areas and not fully\nimplement these recommendations. However, the OIG still believes that implementation of these\nrecommendations by management would reduce the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse to agency\nprograms.\n\nThe recommendations that were not implemented by management, but have been closed by the IG,\nare listed below, along with the potential risk to the agency of not implementing the\nrecommendations.\n\nAudit of the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Property Management Controls:\n\n1.\t Recommendation 2h: Provide the international add-on plan to the standard monthly service for\n users who frequently travel internationally for business. Require written request for the\n international add-on plan for Blackberry users who do not frequently travel internationally for\n business. This request should include their beginning and ending date of travel. Based on the\n information, the international service option should be promptly activated and terminated.\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: Management is not deactivating the international add-on plan in a\n timely manner once the staff person has returned from travel. In some cases, the travel\n dates are not provided in the email in order for management to know when the add-on\n plan should be deactivated. Management has stated that they believe the human error of\n not deactivating this feature in a timely manner is at an acceptable level, and no further\n action will be taken. However, management is incurring additional cost to the agency\n because they are paying for services that are not in use; therefore, agency funds are being\n wasted. Especially during periods of strict budget control, it is troubling to the OIG that\n the program office is not planning to implement better cost controls.\n\n2.\t Recommendation 3c: ITD staff coordinate with GSA and implement processes and procedures\n to ensure:\n a.\t [Blackberry] devices no longer needed should be made available to other government\n agencies or non-profit organizations; and\n b.\t obsolete or broken devices are disposed in a manner that is not detrimental to public\n health.\n\n\n 7\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: Management has not updated their policy to reflect their current\n process for the disposition of devices to GSA. Without proper documentation of current\n policies and procedures, it would be more difficult for management to hold staff\n accountable for the unauthorized use or disposition of the property (on-line\n trading/selling, retaining for personal use, etc.). In addition, in the event of staff\n changes/turnover in the program office, there are no documented policies on this process\n to ensure the disposal process is performed in accordance with proper procedures.\n\n2010 Follow-up Audit of Privacy and Data Protection:\n\n1. Recommendation 1b: Identify, document in position descriptions and performance plans, and\n assign specific roles and responsibilities for the monitoring and reporting of compliance with\n Federal and Commission privacy requirements.\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: The lack of clear roles and responsibilities for the Privacy team\n members could result in important work not being accomplished and\n recommendations remaining open for extended periods of time because the Privacy\n team members have not made these tasks a priority, and may not understand their\n responsibilities for the privacy program.\n\n2. Recommendation 6d: Perform a review of the process and systems used to maintain the inventory\n of mobile devices to ensure that they are appropriately designed to maintain a complete and\n accurate inventory. A complete physical inventory of all mobile devices purchased less those\n disposed should be performed and reconciled to the existing mobile device inventory listing.\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: In order to detect potential fraud, proper reconciliations should be\n performed periodically for all mobile devices. Currently, management can not\n identify if they have the correct number of mobile devices on hand if a reconciliation\n of devices purchased less obsolete/disposed devices is not performed. Without an\n expectation of the inventory count, there is a greater opportunity for devices to be\n removed from the agency for personal use, sold, or other unauthorized use because\n management does not have proper monitoring procedures.\n\n3. Recommendation 6f: Implement a process and form requiring employees and contractors to sign\n when they receive a mobile device acknowledging their receipt of the asset and maintain a record\n of these sign-offs.\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: Management decision to not require employees to sign for receipt\n of a mobile device (laptop, Blackberry, etc.) increases the chance that FEC has\n inadequate inventory records, which was identified during the Privacy Audit. In\n addition, to hold employees accountable for proper stewardship of FEC issued\n equipment, there needs to be evidence that the physical device was provided to the\n employee. If there are no records of when a device was distributed, who it was\n distributed to, and which device was issued, management can not properly\n track/monitor the life cycle of the device. This allows for the potential loss of agency\n assets with little or no accountability by agency staff or management.\n\n 8\n\n\x0cOffice of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Outstanding Recommendations\nJune 2013 Report\n\n\n4. Recommendation 9: Implement logging for all computer-readable data extracts from databases\n holding personally identifiable information (PII).\n\n \xef\x82\xb7\t OIG Assessment: Without logging, FEC will not have a record of system user\n activity and the nature of the system activity which is essential in the event of a system\n intrusion or unauthorized activity occurs. It is more difficult for the FEC to capture\n the activity of employees or the activity of unauthorized individuals (i.e. hackers) if\n they penetrate the FEC\xe2\x80\x99s network.\n\nOIG Concerns\n\nCurrently, the FEC lacks the accountability necessary to ensure compliance with all aspects of\nDirective 50: Audit Follow-Up. It is essential that the Commission not only requires management to\nreport on a semi-annual basis the status of outstanding recommendations, but also develop a process\nto ensure the Audit Follow-up Officials are being held accountable for implementing outstanding\nrecommendations in a timely manner that are beneficial to the agency\xe2\x80\x99s mission and will improve\nagency programs. Without the accountability necessary to ensure corrective actions are taken by\nmanagement, the mission of the agency is consistently operating under weaker controls that can\nincrease cost, expose the agency to risks, and increase the potential of fraud, waste, and abuse to\nagency programs.\n\n\n\n\n 9\n\n\x0c\x0c'


text:
 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION
 Bryssel den 12.06.1996
 KOM(96)267 slutlig
 Förslag till
 RÅDETS FÖRORDNING (EG)
 om ändring av förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 om kompensation för märkbara
 sänkningar av jordbruksomräkningskursema före den 1 juli 1996
 (framlagt av kommissionen)
 ---pagebreak--- ---pagebreak--- MOTIVERING
 I förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 fastställs vilka åtgärder som skall vidtas för vissa valutor
 fram till och med den 30 juni 1996 i händelse av märkbara uppskrivningar, framför allt
 för att hindra att tillämpningen av artikel 7 i förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92 strider mot de
 förpliktelser som följer av GATT-avtalet och av budgetdisciplinen. De grundläggande
 skälen för antagandet av förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 är fortfarande giltiga och kommer
 troligen att fortsätta vara det under de kommande månaderna.
 Den svenska kronan har på grund den nya uppvärderingen den senaste tiden löpt risken
 att skrivas upp märkbart, vilket skulle kunna inträffa efter den 1 juli 1996.1 enlighet med
 artikel 1 e i förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92 skall varje sänkning i
 jordbruksomräkningskursen för denna valuta som följer av den monetära avvikelsen på
 mer än 5 procentenheter betraktas som märkbar, eftersom den skulle vara större än
 verkningarna av tidigare devalveringar.
 För att kunna fortsätta behandla den svenska kronan på samma sätt som andra valutor
 som tidigare befunnit sig i liknande situationer, är det nödvändigt att förlänga förordning
 (EG) nr 2990/95.
 De åtgärder som bör vidtas kommer med nödvändighet att vara på gemenskapsnivå
 eftersom det rör sig om ett område där gemenskapen har exklusiv behörighet. De följer
 det allmänna målet att åstadkomma en enhetlig tillämpning av den gemensamma
 jordbrukspolitiken och anpassar bestämmelser som redan föreskrivs av rådet för att ta
 hänsyn till den särskilda situation som har uppstått.
 ---pagebreak--- FORSLAG
 RÅDETS FÖRORDNING (EG) nr
 av den
 om ändring av förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 om kompensation för märkbara
 sänkningar av jordbruksomräkningskursema före den 1 juli 1996
 EUROPEISKA UNIONENS RÅD HAR ANTAGIT DENNA FÖRORDNING
 med beaktande av Fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen,
 med beaktande av kommissionens förslag,
 med beaktande av rådets förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92 av den 28 december 1992 om den
 beräkningsenhet och de omräkningskurser som skall tillämpas inom den gemensamma
 jordbrukspolitiken1, särskilt artikel 9 i denna, och
 med beaktande av följande:
 I rådets förordning (EG) nr 2990/952 fastställs särskilda regler som är tillämpliga till och
 med den 30 juni 1996 för de valutor som under denna period drabbas av märkbara
 sänkningar av jordbruksomräkningskursema, särskilt för svenska kronor och finska mark.
 Det har uppstått en ny risk för en märkbar sänkning av jordbruksomräkningskursen för
 svenska kronor då monetära avvikelser på mer än 5 % har konstaterats för valutan i fråga.
 Denna situation skulle kunna leda till en märkbar sänkning av jordbruksomräkningskursen
 efter den period som avses i förordning (EG) nr 2990/95.
 I artikel 9 i förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92 föreskrivs att rådet i händelse av märkbar
 uppskrivning skall besluta om alla nödvändiga åtgärder som - särskilt för att vidmakthålla
 respekten för de förpliktelser som följer av GATT-avtalet och för budgetdisciplinen - kan
 medföra undantag från de bestämmelser i den förordningen som har samband med stöd
 och avveckling av monetära avvikelser, utan att för den skull åstadkomma en höjning av
 tröskelvärdet. De åtgärder som föreskrivs i artiklarna 7 och 8 i den förordningen kan
 alltså inte tillämpas i oförändrat skick. Det är nödvändigt att vidta åtgärder på
 gemenskapsnivå för att undvika monetärt orsakade snedvridningar vid tillämpningen av
 den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.
 De upplysningar som för närvarande är tillgängliga är inte tillräckliga för att bedöma
 situationen efter den 31 december 1996. Tillämpningen av bestämmelserna i förordning
 (EG) nr 2990/95 förblir berättigad i liknande fall under den här perioden.
 EGT nr L 387, 31.12.1992, s. 1. Förordningen senast ändrad genom förordning (EG) nr 150/95
 (EGT nr L 22, 31.1.1995, s. 1).
 EGT nr L 312, 23.12.1995, s. 7.
 ---pagebreak--- HÄRIGENOM FÖRESKRIVS FÖLJANDE.
 Artikel 1
 Förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 ändras på följande sätt:
 a) I rubriken skall datumet "den 1 juli 1996" ersättas med datumet "den 1 januari
 1997".
 b) I artikel 1 skall datumet "den 30 juni 1996" ersättas med datumet den "31
 december 1996".
 Artikel 2
 Denna förordning träder i kraft samma dag som den offentliggörs i Europeiska
 gemenskapernas officiella tidning.
 Den skall tillämpas från och med den 1 juli 1996.
 Denna förordning är till alla delar bindande och direkt tillämplig i alla medlemsstater.
 Utfärdad i Bryssel den
 På rådets vägnar
 Ordförande
 ---pagebreak--- FINANSIERINGSOVERSIKT
 1. BERÖRD BUDGETPOST: 390 ANSLAG: 194 milj ecu (post 390)
 2. ÅTGÄRDENS BETECKNING: Förslag till rådets förordning om ändring av förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 om
 kompensation för märkbara sänkningar av jordbruksomräkningskursen före den
 juli 1996.
 3. RÄTTSLIG GRUND:
 Artikel 9 i förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92
 4. BESKRIVNING AV
 ÅTGÄRDEN: Sex månaders förlängning av giltighetsperioden för förordning (EG) nr 2990/95 som för Sverige
 fastställer ett gradvis avtagande stöd som finansieras genom gemenskapens budget och som
 kompenserar den inkomstförlust som jordbrukarna drabbas av till följd av sänkningar av
 j ordbruksomräkningskursen.
 5. BUDGETKONSEKVENSER 12-MÅNADERS- PÅGÅENDE FÖLJANDE
 PERIOD BUDGETÅR BUDGETÅR
 (96) (97)
 5.0 UTGIFTER SOM BELASTAR + i:
 - GEMENSKAPENS BUDGET
 . WTERVENTION
 5.1 INTÄKTER
 1998 1999
 + 12 +6
 5.0.1 UTGIFTSPROGNOS
 5.1.1
 5.2 BERÄKNING:
 6.0 ÄR FINANSIERING MÖJLIG GENOM ANSLAG SOM FÖRTS UPP I DET BERÖRDA
 KAPITLET I PÅGÅENDE BUDGET? JA/NEJ
 6.1 ÄR FINANSIERING MÖJLIG GENOM ÖVERFÖRING MELLAN KAPITEL
 I DEN PÅGÅENDE BUDGETEN? JA/NEJ
 6.2 ÄR DET NÖDVÄNDIGT MED EN TILLÄGGSBUDGET? JA/NEJ
 6.3 SKALL DET FÖRAS UPP ANSLAG I KOMMANDE BUDGETAR? J/K/rTEJV
 S
 ---pagebreak--- ANMÄRKNINGAR:
 På detta stadium är det nödvändigt att göra antaganden för att uppskatta förslagets budgetkonsekvenser.
 Beräkningarna är baserade på den monetära avvikelse som konstaterats för SKR under referensperioden 18-27 maj 1996 och
 som ligger på 5,5 punkter.
 Den föreslagna åtgärden hindrar tillämpning av artikel 7 i förordning (EEG) nr 3813/92 vilket med 3% uppskrivning och för
 EUR-15 skulle kunna innebära budgetkonsekvenser på 750 milj ecu tillsammans med en besparing av den dubbla kursen
 (DK) på 3 miljoner ecu på andra sektorer än de i artikel 7 i förordning 3813/92
 ---pagebreak--- ISSN 1024-4506
 KOM(96) 267 slutlig
 DOKUMENT
 SV 03
 Katalognummer : CB-CO-96-278-SV-C
 ISBN 92-78-05342-2
 Byrån för Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella publikationer
 L-2985 Luxemburg
 7-


text:
 7.7.2007
 SV
 Europeiska unionens officiella tidning
 C 155/10
 Talan väckt den 11 april 2007 – Europeiska gemenskapernas kommission mot Konungariket Spanien
 (Mål C-196/07)
 (2007/C 155/18)
 Rättegångsspråk: spanska
 Parter
 Sökande: Europeiska gemenskapernas kommission (ombud: V. Di Bucci och E. Gippini Fournier)
 Svarande: Konungariket Spanien
 Sökandens yrkanden
 Sökanden yrkar att domstolen skall
 —
 fastställa att Konungariket Spanien har underlåtit att uppfylla sina skyldigheter enligt dels artikel 2 i kommissionens beslut av den 26 september 2006 (ärende nr COMP/M.4197 – E.ON/Endesa – K(2006)4279 slutlig), genom att inte utan dröjsmål upphäva ett antal villkor som införts genom Comisión Nacional de la Energía (CNE) (nämligen de första–sjätte, åttonde och sjuttonde villkoren) som förklarats vara oförenliga med gemenskapsrätten enligt artikel 1 i nämnda beslut av kommissionen, dels artikel 2 i kommissionens beslut av den 20 december 2006 (ärende nr COMP/M.4197 – E.ON/Endesa – K(2006)7039 slutlig), genom att inte senast den 19 januari 2007 upphäva ett antal villkor som införts genom ministerns beslut (nämligen de första, tionde, elfte och femtonde villkoren i deras ändrade lydelse) som förklarats vara oförenliga med gemenskapsrätten enligt artikel 1 i sistnämnda beslut av kommissionen, och
 —
 förplikta Konungariket Spanien att ersätta rättegångskostnaderna.
 Grunder och huvudargument
 De spanska myndigheterna har underlåtit att upphäva ett antal villkor som införts genom CNE:s beslut (nämligen de första–sjätte, åttonde och sjuttonde villkoren) som förklarats vara oförenliga med gemenskapsrätten enligt artikel 1 i kommissionens första beslut av den 26 september 2006. De har likaså underlåtit att upphäva ett antal villkor som införts genom ministerns beslut (nämligen de första, tionde, elfte och femtonde villkoren i deras ändrade lydelse) som förklarats vara oförenliga med gemenskapsrätten enligt artikel 1 i kommissionens andra beslut av den 20 december 2006.
 Genom det första beslutet ålades kommissionen en skyldighet att upphäva villkoren i fråga ”utan dröjsmål”. Vid utgången av den frist för att rätta sig efter det motiverade yttrandet som angetts av kommissionen hade nästan sex månader förflutit sedan det hade skett en delgivning av det första beslutet. Det är därför uppenbart att Konungariket Spanien inte har uppfyllt sin skyldighet enligt artikel 2 ”utan dröjsmål”.
 Fristen för att följa det andra beslutet av kommissionen löpte ut den 19 januari 2007, utan att Konungariket Spanien hade upphävt de villkor som genom nämnda beslut hade förklarats vara oförenliga med gemenskapsrätten.
 Av detta följer att Konungariket Spanien har åsidosatt artikel 2 i det första beslutet av kommissionen och artikel 2 i det andra beslutet av kommissionen.