type: caselaw

text:
 21.6.2008
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 158/2
 Rozsudek Soudního dvora (druhého senátu) ze dne 8. května 2008 (žádost o rozhodnutí o předběžné otázce Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre – Německo, Francie) – Zuckerfabrik Jülich AG (dříve Jülich AG) v. Hauptzollamt Aachen
 (Spojené věci C-5/06 a C-23/06 až C-36/06) (1)
 (Cukr - Dávky z výroby - Prováděcí pravidla pro režim kvót - Určení exportovatelného přebytku - Určení průměrné ztráty)
 (2008/C 158/03)
 Jednací jazyk: francouzština
 Předkládající soud
 Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre
 Účastníci původního řízení
 Žalobkyně: Zuckerfabrik Jülich AG (dříve Jülich AG) (C-5/06), Saint Louis Sucre SNC (C-23/06), Société des Sucreries du Marquenterre SA (C-24/06), SA des Sucreries de Fontaine Le Dun, Bolbec, Auffray (SAFBA) (C-25/06), SA Lesaffre Frères (C-26/06), Tereos, právní nástupkyně Sucreries, Distilleries des Hauts de France (C-27/06), SA Sucreries & Distilleries de Souppes – Ouvré fils (C-28/06), SA Sucreries de Toury et Usines Annexes (C-29/06), Tereos (C-30/06), Tereos, právní nástupce SAS Sucrerie du Littoral Groupe SDHF (C-31/06), Cristal Union (C-32/06), Sucrerie Bourdon (C-33/06), SA Sucrerie de Bourgogne (C-34/06), SAS Vermendoise Industries (C-35/06), SA Sucreries et Raffineries d'Erstein (C-36/06)
 Žalovaní: Hauptzollamt Aachen (C-5/06), Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Receveur principal des douanes et droits indirects de Gennevilliers (C-23/06 až C-36/06)
 Předmět věci
 Žádosti o rozhodnutí o předběžné otázce – Finanzgericht Düsseldorf, Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre – Výklad článku 15 nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1260/2001 ze dne 19. června 2001 o společné organizaci trhů v odvětví cukru (Úř. věst. L 178, s. 1) – Platnost čl. 6 odst. 4 nařízení Komise (ES) č. 314/2002 ze dne 20. února 2002 kterým se stanoví prováděcí pravidla pro režim kvót v odvětví cukru (Úř. věst. L 50, s. 40) ve znění nařízení Komise (ES) č. 1140/2003 ze dne 27. června 2003, kterým se v odvětví cukru mění nařízení (ES) č. 779/96, kterým se stanoví prováděcí pravidla, pokud jde o sdělení, a nařízení (ES) č. 314/2002, kterým se stanoví prováděcí pravidla k režimu kvót (Úř. věst. L 160, s. 33) – Platnost nařízení Komise (ES) č. 1775/2004 ze dne 14. října 2004, kterým se pro hospodářský rok 2003/04 stanoví dávky z výroby v odvětví cukru (Úř. věst. L 316, s. 4) – Zohlednění celkového objemu vývozu cukru, isoglukózy a inulinového sirupu při stanovení exportovatelného přebytku a pouze těch objemů, pro které byly skutečně poskytnuty vývozní náhrady při stanovení průměrné ztráty z tuny cukru
 Výrok
 Na základě čl. 15 odst. 1 písm. c) nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1260/2001 ze dne 19. června 2001 o společné organizaci trhů v odvětví cukru je pro účely výpočtu exportovatelného přebytku třeba od spotřeby odečíst všechny objemy vyvážených produktů podle tohoto článku bez ohledu na to, zda byly skutečně zaplaceny náhrady.
 Článek 15 odst. 1 písm. d) zmíněného nařízení je třeba vykládat tak, že pro účely určení jak exportovatelného přebytku tak průměrné ztráty na tunu produktu je třeba zohlednit všechny objemy vyvážených produktů podle tohoto článku bez ohledu na to, zda byly skutečně zaplaceny náhrady.
 Nařízení Komise (ES) č. 1762/2003 ze dne 7. října 2003, kterým se pro hospodářský rok 2002/03 stanoví dávky z výroby v odvětví cukru a nařízení Komise (ES) č. 1775/2004 ze dne 14. října 2004, kterým se pro hospodářský rok 2003/04 stanoví dávky z výroby v odvětví cukru, jsou neplatná.
 Přezkum nařízení Komise (ES) č. 1837/2002 ze dne 15. října 2002, kterým se pro hospodářský rok 2001/02 stanoví dávky z výroby a koeficient pro doplňkovou dávku v odvětví cukru neodhalil skutečnosti, jimiž by mohla být dotčena jeho platnost.
 (1) Úř. věst. C 74, 25.3.2006.


jurisdiction: EU

text:
 27.10.2014
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 C 380/27
 Acțiune introdusă la 19 iulie 2014 – ZZ/Autoritatea Europeană pentru Valori Mobiliare și Piețe
 (Cauza F-69/14)
 2014/C 380/35
 Limba de procedură: franceza
 Părțile
 Reclamant: ZZ (reprezentant: S. Pappas, avocat)
 Pârâtă: Autoritatea Europeană pentru Valori Mobiliare și Piețe
 Obiectul și descrierea litigiului
 Anularea raportului de evaluare întocmit pentru anul 2013
 Concluziile reclamantului
 —
 Anularea raportului de evaluare atacat;
 —
 obligarea Autorității Europene pentru Valori Mobiliare și Piețe la plata cheltuielilor de judecată.


text:
 19.3.2011
 SK
 Úradný vestník Európskej únie
 C 89/11
 Návrh na začatie prejudiciálneho konania, ktorý podal Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (Spojené kráľovstvo) 12. januára 2011 — The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs/Philips Electronics UK Ltd
 (Vec C-18/11)
 2011/C 89/20
 Jazyk konania: angličtina
 Vnútroštátny súd, ktorý podal návrh na začatie prejudiciálneho konania
 Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (Spojené kráľovstvo)
 Účastníci konania pred vnútroštátnym súdom
 Žalobca: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
 Žalovaný: Philips Electronics UK Ltd
 Prejudiciálne otázky
 1.
 Ak členský štát (akým je Spojené kráľovstvo) započíta do základu dane príjmy a straty spoločnosti, ktorá je zapísaná a usadená na daňové účely v inom členskom štáte (akým je Holandsko), v rozsahu, v akom sú príjmy nadobudnuté na základe obchodnej činnosti, ktorú vykonáva holandská spoločnosť v Spojenom kráľovstve prostredníctvom stálej prevádzkarne v Spojenom kráľovstve, ide o obmedzenie slobody štátnych príslušníkov iného členského štátu usadiť sa v Spojenom kráľovstve podľa článku 49 ZFEÚ (predtým článok 43 ES), ak sa stálej prevádzkarni usadenej v Spojenom kráľovstve vytvorenej spoločnosťou, ktorá v Spojenom kráľovstve usadená nie je, zabráni, aby inej spoločnosti usadenej v Spojenom kráľovstve postúpila straty, ktoré jej vznikli, vo forme úľavy na dani pre skupinu, keď časť týchto strát alebo akákoľvek suma, ktorú do nich možno započítať, „sa zhoduje alebo je vyjadrená sumou, ktorá je na účely zahraničnej dane (v akomkoľvek období) odpočítateľná z príjmov spoločnosti alebo iného subjektu mimo územia Spojeného kráľovstva alebo voči nim uznateľná“, t. j. ak sa umožní postúpenie strát, ktoré vznikli stálej prevádzkarni usadenej v Spojenom kráľovstve, iba v prípade, keď je v čase podania žiadosti zrejmé, že nemôže dôjsť k odpočítaniu alebo uznaniu strát v inom štáte než v Spojenom kráľovstve (takže ani v inom členskom štáte, akým je napríklad Holandsko), a je nepostačujúce, že o úľavy na dani, ktoré sú dostupné v zahraničí, v skutočnosti nebolo požiadané, vzhľadom na okolnosť, že rovnaké podmienky sa neuplatňujú v prípade postúpenia strát, ktoré vznikli v Spojenom kráľovstve, na spoločnosť tam usadenú?
 2.
 Ak je odpoveď na prvú otázku kladná, môže byť toto obmedzenie odôvodnené:
 a)
 iba potrebou zamedziť dvojité odpočítanie strát alebo
 b)
 iba potrebou zachovať rovnováhu rozdelenia daňových právomocí medzi členskými štátmi alebo
 c)
 potrebou zachovať rovnováhu rozdelenia daňových právomocí medzi členskými štátmi v spojení s potrebou zamedziť dvojité odpočítanie strát?
 3.
 Ak je odpoveď na druhú otázku kladná, je také obmedzenie primerané takému odôvodneniu alebo odôvodneniam?
 4.
 Ak akékoľvek obmedzenie práv holandskej spoločnosti nie je náležite odôvodnené alebo rozsah obmedzenia nie je primeraný odôvodneniu, vyžaduje sa podľa práva EÚ od Spojeného kráľovstva priznať opravný prostriedok spoločnosti usadenej v Spojenom kráľovstve, ako napríklad právo žiadať úľavu na dani pre skupinu z ich príjmov?


type: other

text:
U 978/2005
 Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 1, 1.
 Wenn ein Verbraucher vom Kaufvertrag über einen Gebrauchtwagen zurücktritt, ist der Verkäufer zur Rückzahlung verpflichtet.
 Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je na podlagi ravnanja potrošnika in tožeče stranke ob upoštevanju določb ZVPot-UPB2 v zvezi z obveznostmi potrošnika in prodajalca ter določilom 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 treba šteti, da med potrošnikom in prodajalcem ni bilo spora o obstoju stvarne napake na vozilu.
 S prvostopenjsko odločbo Tržnega inšpektorata RS, Enota A., št. ... z dne 16. 2. 2005, je tržni inšpektor na podlagi 1. odstavka 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2 naložil tožeči stranki obvez-nost, da potrošniku A.A., vrne znesek za plačano blago - vozilo znamke VW SHARAN 1,8 T, ker so na vozilu ugotovljene stvarne napake in s tem vozilo nima lastnosti, ki so potrebne za normalno rabo. Kot rok za izvršitev odločbe je določil dan prejetja odločbe in hkrati navedel, da pritožba ne zadrži izvršitve odločbe. Tožena stranka je z izpodbijano odločbo zavrnila pritožbo tožeče stranke in odločbo organa prve stopnje v celoti potrdila. V obrazložitvi navaja, da je potrošnik pri tožeči stranki kupil rabljeno osebno vozilo za katerega je ugotovil vrsto napak, ki jih je reklamiral 20. 1. 2005 in zahteval vrnitev zneska za kupljeni avto. Ker le-ta na reklamacijo ni odgovorila v predpisanem 8-dnevnem roku, je podal prijavno na tržni inšpektorat. Organ prve stopnje je dne 1. 2. 2005 pri tožeči stranki opravil inšpekcijski pregled. Napaka na avtomobilu je bila sporna, zato je organ prve stopnje potrošnika napotil, da pridobi izvedeniško mnenje. Na podlagi tega mnenja je organ prve stopnje izdal odločbo o vračilu plačanega zneska. Glede pritožbenih navedb pa je tožena stranka ugotovila, da ni razvidno, da bi potrošnik uveljavljal reklamacijo iz razloga, ker vozilo nima motorja na gorivo diesel, tožeča stranka pa tudi ni ugovarjala, da na vozilu ni napak temveč navaja le, da bi napake lahko odpravila. V izpodbijani odločbi je tožena stranka tožeči stranki pojasnila, da ima potrošnik v primeru, če je prodajalca obvestil o napaki, na podlagi 37. c člena Zakona o varstvu potrošnikov (Uradni list RS, št. 98/2004, uradno prečiščeno besedilo, v nadaljevanju: ZVPot-UPB2), pravico od prodajalca zahtevati odpravo napake na blagu ali vrnitev dela plačanega zneska sorazmerno z napako ali zamenjavo blaga z ustreznim brezhibnim blagom ali vrnitev plačanega zneska - od potrošnikove odločitve pa je odvisno, katero od naštetih pravic bo uveljavil. Tožena stranka nadalje ugotavlja, da so navedbe tožeče stranke o garanciji in roku, ki naj bi ga določila za uveljavljanje garancije, neutemeljene, ker potrošnik ni uveljavljal pravic iz garancije temveč stvarno napako na vozilu. Poudarja, da tožeča stranka nima prav, ko zatrjuje, da bi potrošnik moral dokazati škodo in vzročno zvezo med napako in povzročeno škodo, saj to pride v poštev le pri morebitnem ugotavljanju odškodnine, ne pa v obravnavanem postopku. Tudi (pri)tožbeni ugovor, da je imel potrošnik pred prepisom o spremembi lastništva vozilo več dni za preizkus, je tožena stranka zavrnila kot neutemeljen, saj lahko potrošnik po določbi 37. a člena ZVPot-UPB2 uveljavlja svoje pravice iz naslova stvarne napake, če o napaki obvesti prodajalca v roku 2 mesecev od dneva, ko je bila napaka odkrita. Da je imelo vozilo napake, pa izhaja iz dokazil, ki jih je predložil potrošnik. Tudi ugovor tožeče stranke, da je vozilo kupljeno pod klavzulo ̋videno-kupljeno ̋ni utemeljen, saj določilo 37. č člena ZVPot-UPB2 določa, da z nobenim pogodbenim določilom ni mogoče omejiti ali izključiti prodajalčeve odgovornosti za stvarne napake, pogodbeno določilo, ki temu nasprotuje pa je nično. Hkrati ugotavlja, da ugovor, da organ prve stopnje ni upošteval pripomb danih na zapisnik, ni utemeljen, saj iz zapisnika izhaja, da je bil direktorju tožeče stranke prebran in na njegovo vsebino ni imel pripomb. Iz navedenih razlogov je tožena stranka pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnila.
 Tožeča stranka v tožbi navaja enake tožbene ugovore kot v pritožbi. Dodaja, da ne organ prve stopnje, ne tožena stranka nista upoštevali pripomb, ki jih je tožeča stranka dala na zapisnik. Trdi, da potrošnik z vozilom ni zadovoljen, ker nima motorja diesel. Če bi vozilo res imelo kakšno napako, bi jo odpravili, potrošnik pa ne more vrniti vozila in zahtevati nazaj ves plačani znesek. V skladu z Zakonom o varstvu potrošnikov in OZ, je za rabljeno vozilo izdala minimalno zakonsko garancijo za 8 dni in potrošnika na ta rok izrecno opozorila, ker po poteku tega roka upošteva klavzulo videno-kupljeno. Potrošnik je vozilo odpeljal 31. 12. 2004. Opozorila ga je na vsa pomembna dejstva in ga prosila, da ga vrne v 8 dneh, če z njim ne bo zadovoljen, saj je za vozilo imela drugega kupca. Potrošnika je pooblastila na komisijski pogodbi, da lahko vozilo sam odjavi in naredi prenos na svoje ime, kar je potrošnik storil šele 4. 1. 2005. Tudi po tem mu je dala 8-dnevno garancijo, ki je potekla 12. 2. 2005 (pravilno 12. 1. 2005). Potrošnik pa je reklamacijo pisno uveljavljal šele 20. 1. 2005 in je s tem zamudil 8 dnevni rok iz 1. odstavka 461. člena OZ za uveljavljanje reklamacije, pri tem pa tudi ni tožeče stranke povabil, da bi stvar skupaj pogledali in se prepričali o napakah, kot to zahteva 1. odstavek 464. člen OZ. Tožeča stranka sodišču predlaga, da upošteva njene pripombe, sodno prakso in zakonske predpise pri reševanju zadeve.
 Tožba je bila poslana toženi stranki, ki je sodišču v danem roku predložila predmetne upravne spise, posebnega odgovora na tožbo pa ni podala.
 Državno pravobranilstvo Republike Slovenije, kot zastopnik javnega interesa, ni prijavilo udeležbe v tem sporu.
 Izpodbijana odločba je po presoji sodišča pravilna in zakonita. Sodišče se strinja z razlogi, s katerimi svojo odločitev v obrazložitvi izpodbijane odločbe utemeljuje tožena stranka in se nanje, v izogib nepotrebnemu ponavljanju, v celoti sklicuje (2. odstavek 71. člena Zakona o upravnem sporu, Uradni list RS, št. 105/06, v nadaljevanju: ZUS-1). V zvezi s tožbenimi ugovori pa še dodaja: Iz podatkov v upravnem spisu izhaja, da je sporno vprašanje ali gre za uveljavljanje garancije za brezhibno delovanje stvari v skladu z Obligacijskim zakonikom (Uradni list RS, št. 83/01, 32/04, v nadaljevanju: OZ) ali pa gre za uveljavljanje stvarne napake. 2. odstavek 481. člena OZ določa, da pravila o garanciji za brezhibno delovanje stvari ne posegajo v pravila o odgovornosti prodajalca za napake stvari. Tožeča stranka se v (pri)tožbi sklicuje na določila 1. odstavka 464. člena in 1. odstavka 461. člena OZ. 461. člen OZ (Pregled stvari in očitne napake), ki v 1. odstavku določa dolžnost kupca, da prejeto stvar na običajen način pregleda ali jo dati v pregled, brž ko je to po normalnem teku stvari mogoče, in o očitnih napakah obvesti prodajalca v osmih dneh, pri gospodarskih pogodbah pa nemudoma, sicer izgubi pravico, ki mu gre iz tega naslova. Pri tem tožeča stranka spregleda dejstvo, da v konkretnem primeru ne gre za očitne napake temveč za skrite napake, o katerih govori OZ v 462. člen. Ta člen pa v 1. odstavku določa, da če se potem, ko je kupec prevzel stvar, pokaže, da ima stvar kakšno napako, ki je z običajnim pregledom pri prevzemu ni bilo mogoče opaziti (skrita napaka), mora kupec obvestiti o njej prodajalca v osmih dneh, šteto od dneva, ko je napako opazil, pri gospodarskih pogodbah pa nemudoma, sicer izgubi to pravico. 1. odstavek 458. člena OZ pa določa, da prodajalec odgovarja za stvarne napake, ki jih je stvar imela takrat, ko je nevarnost prešla na kupca, ne glede na to, ali mu je bilo to znano ali ne. To pomeni, da zanje odgovarja v času in tudi po prenehanju garancijskega roka. V konkretnem primeru pa je potrošnik uveljavljal skrite napake, ker stvar ni imela lastnosti, ki so potrebne za njeno normalno rabo in ne garancije za brezhibno delovanje stvari.
 Tožeča stranka se v tožbi sklicuje tudi na 1. odstavek 464. člena OZ, ki določa kupčevo dolžnost, da prodajalca obvesti o napaki in dolžnost, da v obvestilu o napaki stvari natančneje opiše napako in povabi prodajalca, da stvar pregleda. V obravnavanem primeru je potrebno poleg OZ prvenstveno upoštevati tudi ZVPot-UPB2 (Uradni list RS, št. 98/04), ki je v lex specialis in lex posterior glede na OZ, in ki v VI. poglavju ureja prodajo blaga in opravljanje storitev, v IX. poglavju pa inšpekcijski nadzor ter upravne ukrepe. To pomeni, da se uporablja splošni zakon le glede vprašanj, ki niso urejena v posebnem zakonu. ZVPot-UPB2 v VI. poglavju med drugim ureja dolžnosti potrošnika v primeru, da potrošnik želi varstvo pravic po tem zakonu zaradi stvarnih napak v zvezi s prodajo blaga in dolžnosti prodajalca v postopkih uveljavljanja pravic potrošnikov. Iz podatkov v spisu izhaja, da je bil potrošnik prepričan, da gre za stvarno napako na vozilu, zaradi katere stvar nima lastnosti, ki je potrebna za njeno normalno rabo ali promet (1. točka 2. odstavka 37. člena ZVPot-UPB2). Temu mnenju pa je pritrdil tako organ prve stopnje kakor tudi tožena stranka v iz-podbijani odločbi. Dejstvo, da je napaka nesporna pa je tudi pogoj za obveznost prodajalca, da ugodi potrošnikovi zahtevi (37. in 39. člen ZVPot-UPB2). To pa je tudi sporna okoliščina v tem upravnem sporu, kajti tožeča stranka uveljavlja, da potrošniku ni prodala stvari z napako oziroma, da potrošnik ni uveljavljal pravočasno garancije. Sodišče je zato v tem upravnem sporu moralo presoditi, ali je na podlagi ravnanj potrošnika in tožeče stranke v postopku varstva pravic potrošnika po ZVPot-UPB2 mogoče šteti, da so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji za obveznost tožeče stranke, da ugodi zahtevi potrošnika ali ne oziroma ali so podani pogoji za izrek inšpekcijskega ukrepa po določilu 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2. Ob presoji ravnanj potrošnika in tožeče stranke v postopku uveljavljanja pravic po ZVPot-UPB2 sodišče ugotavlja, da je tožena stranka pravilno zavrnila pritožbo tožeče stranke zoper prvostopenjsko odločbo. Razlog je v tem, da je potrošnik izpolnil vse svoje obveznosti za uveljavljanje varstva pravic po ZVPot-UPB2, med tem ko tožeča stranka kot prodajalec svojih obveznosti v postopku varstva pravic potrošnika ni izpolnila. V konkretnem primeru je pravno relevantno dejstvo, da tožeča stranka v tožbi uveljavlja, da vozilo ni imelo napak oziroma je potrošnik zamudil rok za uveljavljanje garancije. Če je bila za tožečo stranko napaka na vozilu sporna, kot trdi v tožbi, potem bi morala po ZVPot-UPB2 potrošniku najkasneje v osmih dneh pisno odgovoriti, da je napaka sporna oziroma da po njenem mnenju ni šlo za stvarno napako na blagu. To je zakonska obveznost izvajalca storitve po določilu 2. odstavka 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2. Ker tega pisnega odgovora tožeča stranka ni podala, je treba z interpretativno tehniko nasprotnega razlogovanja (argumentum a contrario) določila 2. odstavka 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 šteti, da je imelo v konkretnem primeru prodano vozilo stvarne napake. Drugačna razlaga 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 bi pripeljala do tega, da potrošniki ne bi mogli učinkovito uveljavljati pravice iz ZVPot-UPB2 in bi bila zato drugačna razlaga določbe 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 v nasprotju z namenom ZVPot-UPB2. Iz določila 1. člena ZVPot-UPB2 jasno izhaja, da ZVPot-UPB2 vzpostavlja pravice s t.i. zakonskim statusom in tudi za zakonske pravice po uveljavljenih metodah razlage prava velja, da jih je treba razlagati tako, da jih upravičenci lahko učinkovito uveljavljajo in zavarujejo. Iz tega sledi, da je tožeča stranka imela v skladu z določilom 1. odstavka 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 obveznost, da najpozneje v osmih dneh ugodi potrošnikovi zahtevi. Potrošnik, ki je uveljavljal svoje pravice iz naslova stvarne napake, je po podatkih v spisu izpolnil vse obveznosti, ki jih določa postopek uveljavljanja varstva pravic potrošnika. O napaki je obvestil tožečo stranko kot prodajalca v roku dveh mesecev od dneva, ko je bila napaka odkrita (1. odstavek 37.a. člena ZVPot-UPB2); v obvestilu o napaki je potrošnik opisal napako (2. odstavek 37. a člena ZVPot-UPB2) - obvestilo o napaki je potrošnik tožeči stranki poslal dne 20. 1. 2005 (3. odstavek 37. a člena ZVPot-UPB2). 2. odstavek 37. a člena ZVPot-UPB2 določa tudi, da mora potrošnik prodajalcu omogočiti, da stvar pregleda. Zakonsko določilo, da mora potrošnik prodajalcu omogočiti, da stvar pregleda, pomeni tako dolžnost potrošnika, da prodajalcu omogoči pregled vozila, kakor tudi pravico prodajalca, da zahteva, da se mu omogoči pregled vozila. Iz upravnih spisov nikjer ne izhaja, da bi tožeča stranka od potrošnika kadarkoli zahtevala, da vozilo pregleda in bi ji bilo to na kakršen koli način onemogočeno. Tožeča stranka je torej imela možnost kadarkoli zahtevati pregled vozila, vendar pa tega ni storila. Ker je torej potrošnik pravilno obvestil prodajalca o napaki (1. odstavek 37.c člena ZVPot-UPB2), je po presoji sodišča potrošnik izpolnil vse zakonske dolžnosti, ki so potrebne za uveljavljanje varstva pravice potrošnika v skladu z določilom 37.c člena ZVPot-UPB2.
 V nadaljnjem presojanju zakonitosti izpodbijane odločbe je sodišče moralo ugotoviti, ali so bili podani pogoji za izrek inšpekcijskega ukrepa po določilu 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2 oziroma ali je imela tožena stranka utemeljene razloge za zavrnitev pritožbe zoper prvostopenjsko odločbo. Po določilu 1. odstavka 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2, če podjetje neupravičeno zavrne potrošnikovo zahtevo, naj mu vrne znesek za plačano blago, lahko pristojni tržni inšpektorat ali drug pristojen inšpekcijski organ na potrošnikov predlog izda odločbo, s katero podjetju odredi, naj ugodi zahtevi. Iz dopisa z dne 31. 1. 2005 izhaja, da je potrošnik podal prijavo zoper tožečo stranko na Tržni inšpektorat Republike Slovenije, Enota A.. Po določilu 2. odstavka 71. člena lahko odločbo iz 1. odstavka 71. člena pristojni organ izda, če med strankama ni spora o obstoju napake ali če potrošnik predloži mnenje sodnega izvedenca, ali če je na drug način nedvomno dokazana. Navedeni trije pogoji za izdajo inšpekcijskega ukrepa iz določila 2. odstavka 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2 so postavljeni alternativno. Sodišče je ugotovilo, da je na podlagi ravnanja potrošnika in tožeče stranke ob upoštevanju določb ZVPot-UPB2 v zvezi z obveznostmi potrošnika in prodajalca ter določilom 39. člena ZVPot-UPB2 treba šteti, da med potrošnikom in prodajalcem ni bilo spora o obstoju stvarne napake na vozilu. Poleg tega pogoja je izpolnjen tudi tretji alternativni pogoj iz določila 2. odstavka 71. člena ZVPot-UPB2. Med tem, ko je potrošnik že v fazi pred izdajo odločbe prve stopnje pridobil računalniški izpisek zgodovine posegov na kupljenem blagu, ki ga je izdala Avtohiša A.A.A. in predračun eventualnega popravila vozila pri pooblaščenem avtomehaniku (s.p.) B.B.B., ki ju je prvostopenjski upravni organ štel za dokaz o nepravilno opravljeni storitvi, tožeča stranka niti v pritožbi niti v tožbi ni pridobila neodvisnega strokovnega mnenja glede napak na vozilu. V pritožbi samo navaja, da mora kupec dokazati napako, škodo in vzročno zvezo med njima, da je kupec kupil vozilo pod klavzulo videno-kupljeno in da se reklamacij po preteku 8-dnevnega garancijskega roka ne upošteva, pri tem pa z ničemer ne konkretizira svojih pavšalnih navedb, da vozilo ni imelo napak. S takšno trditvijo, pa tožeča stranka ne more uspeti, če zanjo ne ponudi ustreznih dokazil.
 Glede (pri)tožbenega ugovora tožeče stranke, da njene pripombe na zapisnik niso bile upoštevane pa sodišče navaja sledeče: Zapisnik je bil s strani direktorja tožeče stranke brez pripomb podpisan. Zapisnik o inšpekcijskem pregledu pa je (v skladu s 1. odstavkom 80. člena ZUP) javna listina, za katero velja, da dokazuje tisto, kar se v njej potrjuje ali določa (1. odstavek 169. člen ZUP). Zapisnik o inšpekcijskem nadzoru, ki je sestavljen v skladu z ZUP potrjuje, da je resnično, kar je v njem zapisano. Zaradi takšne lastnosti javne listine ni potreben noben dodaten dokaz o tem, kar se v javni listini potrjuje ali določa. Tožbene navedbe, da ne organ prve stopnje, ne tožena stranka nista upoštevali pripomb, ki jih je tožeča stranka dala na zapisnik, so tako neutemeljene. Tožeča stranka je imela v skladu z 171. členom ZUP možnost dokazovati, da so v javni listini navedena dejstva neresnično potrjena ali da je javna listina nepravilno sestavljena, vendar tega v pritožbenem postopku ni storila.
 Ker je po presoji sodišča izpodbijana odločba tožene stranke pravilna in na zakonu utemel-jena, postopek pred izdajo odločbe pa je bil tudi pravilen, je sodišče tožbo na podlagi 1. odstavka 63. člena ZUS-1 kot neutemeljeno zavrnilo.


type: contracts

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 11951K/PRO/CJ/25
 TRATTATO CHE ISTITUISCE LA COMUNITA EUROPEA DEL CARBONE E DELL' ACCIAIO ( CECA ), PROTOCOLLO SULLO STATUTO DELLA CORTE DI GIUSTIZIA DELLA COMUNITA EUROPEA DEL CARBONE E DELL' ACCIAIO, TITOLO III: PROCEDURA, PROVVEDIMENTI D' ISTRUZIONE
 ++++Articolo 25 In ogni momento , la Corte può affidare una missione di inchiesta o una perizia a qualunque persona , istituto , ufficio , commissione o organo di sua scelta ; a tal fine , essa può compilare un albo di persone o di organismi riconosciuti come periti .


text:
 14.7.2014
 HR
 Službeni list Europske unije
 C 223/43
 Tužba podnesena 2. svibnja 2014. – Klemme protiv Komisije
 (Predmet T-294/14)
 2014/C 223/46
 Jezik postupka: njemački
 Stranke
 Tužitelj: Klemme AG (Lutherstadt Eisleben, Njemačka) (zastupnici: T. Volz, M. Ringel, B. Wißmann, M. Püstow, C. Oehme i T. Wielsch, odvjetnici)
 Tuženik: Europska komisija
 Tužbeni zahtjev
 Tužitelj od Općeg suda zahtijeva da:
 —
 poništi Odluku Europske komisije od 18. prosinca 2013. o pokretanju formalnog istražnog postupka prema članku 108. stavku 2. UFEU-a protiv Savezne Republike Njemačke zbog poticanja proizvodnje struje iz obnovljivih izvora energije i ograničavanja nameta na temelju EEG-a u korist energetski intenzivnih poduzeća, državna potpora SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN), u dijelu u kojem se odnosi na ograničenje nameta na temelju EEG-a u korist energetski intenzivnih poduzeća;
 —
 tuženiku naloži snošenje troškova postupka.
 Tužbeni razlozi i glavni argumenti
 U prilog osnovanosti tužbe tužitelj ističe dva tužbena razloga.
 1.
 Prvi tužbeni razlog: pretpostavka stavljanja u povoljniji položaj u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a nije ispunjena
 —
 Tužitelj tvrdi da ograničenje nameta iz Zakona o poticanju obnovljivih izvora energije (Gesetz für den Vorrang erneubarer Energien, u daljnjem tekstu: EEG), a koje je predviđeno tim zakonom za energetski intenzivna poduzeća, nije potpora u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a. S tim u svezi, tužitelj pojašnjava da poduzeća s velikom potrošnjom struje već samim pravnim uređenjem nisu stavljena u povoljniji položaj. Posebno korekcijsko uređenje više je naknada za izvanredne namete koji u sklopu poticanja proizvodnje struje iz obnovljivih izvora energije posebno pogađaju tužitelja i slična poduzeća te ono služi ponovnoj uspostavi konkurentnosti poduzeća s velikom potrošnjom struje koja bi plaćanjem posebnog nameta na temelju EEG-a u startu bila stavljena u vrlo nepovoljan položaj.
 2.
 Drugi tužbeni razlog: pretpostavka državnih sredstava u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a nije ispunjena
 —
 Tužitelj pored toga tvrdi da posebno korekcijsko uređenje nije mjera koju „dodjeljuje država članica ili koja se dodjeljuje putem državnih sredstava”. S tim u svezi pojašnjava da ni sâm poseban namet na temelju EEG-a nije državno sredstvo pa stoga odricanje od tih sredstava putem posebnog korekcijskog uređenja ne može predstavljati mjeru koja se dodjeljuje putem državnih sredstava.
 —
 Namet na temelju EEG-a ne ubire, njime ne upravlja niti ga raspodjeljuje država ili javna odnosno privatna institucija koju je imenovala ili osnovala država. Operator prijenosnog sustava zapravo može neposredno ubirati namet EEG-a na temelju odgovarajućeg građanskopravnog zahtjeva. Namet na temelju EEG-a nije prihod državnog proračuna pa prema tome posebno korekcijsko uređenje nikako ne umanjuje državne prihode, bilo posredno bilo neposredno.
 —
 Sredstva iz EEG-a ne stoje na raspolaganju državnim tijelima. Također ne postoji javni nadzor nad sredstvima EEG-a od strane npr. Savezne službe za gospodarstvo i nadzor izvoza (Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle – BAFA) ili Savezne agencije za mreže (Bundesnetzagentur).


text:
Estatuto da ABQ - Associação Brasileira de Química
 Publicações Históricas ESTATUTO
 Conforme última alteração em 05 de novembro de 2014, registrada sob a matrícula 1981 do Cartório de Registro Civil de Pessoas Jurídicas do Rio de Janeiro.
 ESTATUTO DA ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE QUÍMICA
 CAPÍTULO I Denominação, fins e sede
 Artigo 1o) A ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE QUÍMICA, doravante denominada ABQ, é uma entidade de âmbito nacional, resultante da fusão, a partir de 1951, de duas outras entidades - a Sociedade Brasileira de Chimica, fundada em agosto de 1922 e a Associação Chimica do Brasil, fundada em 1939. A ABQ foi reconhecida como de Utilidade Pública Federal pelo Decreto 33.254 de 08/07/1953, reconhecimento este atualizado pelo Decreto S/N de 27/05/1992, publicado no D.O.U. de 28/05/1992, página 6590. A ABQ passa a ser regulamentada pelo presente Estatuto. A ABQ tem os seguintes objetivos: 1.1 – Congregar todos os que no Brasil dedicam-se a atividades relacionadas à área da Química. 1.2 – Elevar os padrões de ética profissional e de educação científica e tecnológica. 1.3 – Estimular a pesquisa científica e tecnológica. 1.4 – Promover, da forma mais ampla e liberal, o progresso da Química em todas as suas especialidades. 1.5 – Instituir prêmios e bolsas que estimulem o desenvolvimento da Química. 1.6 – Difundir a ciência Química. 1.7 – Manter intercâmbio com outras entidades científicas, sociais e culturais, nacionais e estrangeiras, especialmente aquelas que se dedicam à Química. 1.8 – Promover e realizar eventos científicos visando atividades, relatórios ou trabalhos que despertem o interesse e contribuam para o desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico, para o progresso da indústria, para a prosperidade e bem estar do povo brasileiro. 1.9 – Promover e realizar atividades de ensino na área da Química. 1.10 – Colaborar com os poderes públicos no estudo e solução dos problemas que, direta ou indiretamente, se relacionam à Química. 1.11 – Participar da representação oficial do Brasil junto à União Internacional de Química Pura e Aplicada - IUPAC, através do Comitê Brasileiro para Assuntos de Química - CBAQ, ou de quaisquer outros organismos que vierem a ser criados para a representação brasileira junto à IUPAC. 1.12 – Prestar serviços especializados na área da Química. 1.13 – Estimular e fomentar publicações, em língua portuguesa, na área da Química. 1.14 - Atuar em favor da Química, em todos os aspectos, inclusive no que diz respeito a equívocos da mídia.
 Artigo 2o) A Sede da ABQ é na cidade do Rio de Janeiro, atualmente em imóvel próprio, na Avenida Presidente Vargas no 633 sala 2208. Parágrafo único: A transferência da atual Sede para qualquer outro logradouro, no mesmo ou em outro estado da Federação, requer a concordância da maioria absoluta dos Membros do Conselho Diretor da ABQ, em Reunião convocada especificamente para este fim.
 Artigo 4o) São categorias de associados: a) profissionais
 e) usuários da página virtual da ABQ 4.1 – Sócio profissional é pessoa apresentada por algum associado ou por iniciativa própria, desde que atuante em área em que a química é matéria destacada. 4.2 – Sócio estudante é pessoa apresentada por algum associado ou por iniciativa própria, desde que comprove matrícula em curso superior ou técnico, com habilitação em áreas em que a química é matéria destacada. 4.3 – Sócio institucional é qualquer empresa, corporação ou sociedade, pública ou privada, apresentada por algum associado ou por iniciativa própria, desde que interessada nos objetivos da ABQ. 4.3.1 – Cada sócio institucional poderá indicar até 2 (dois) profissionais como seus prepostos junto à ABQ. 4.4 – Sócio correspondente é pessoa residente no exterior ou em estado brasileiro que não tenha uma Regional da ABQ, apresentada por algum associado ou por iniciativa própria, de reconhecida cultura geral e científica, desde que contribua para o desenvolvimento técnico-científico da ABQ ou prestado notável contribuição ao desenvolvimento da ciência ou da tecnologia. 4.5 – Sócio usuário da página virtual da ABQ é pessoa cadastrada que tem acesso somente às informações de domínio público, veiculadas no sítio web da ABQ. Parágrafo único – Os sócios profissionais, estudantes, institucionais e correspondentes constituem os sócios contribuintes da ABQ, cujos valores das anuidades serão estabelecidos em Assembleia Geral.
 Artigo 5o) A admissão de sócios nas diferentes categorias será efetivada conforme os itens abaixo: 5.1 – As propostas de admissão para as categorias profissional, estudante e institucional deverão ser aprovadas pela maioria dos membros da Diretoria da Seção Regional da ABQ no Estado de residência do proponente ou pela maioria dos membros da Diretoria Executiva da ABQ. Artigo 6o) A exclusão de sócios deverá ser proposta ao Conselho Diretor da ABQ, por parte de pelo menos 3 (três) de seus membros e decidida pela maioria dos seus membros. Poderão ser excluídos: 6.1 – sócios publicamente condenados por: atentado contra a integridade da Pátria ou contra as instituições do país, crimes infamantes e crimes perante as leis vigentes. 6.2 – sócios que deixarem de pagar, por mais de 2 (dois) anos consecutivos, as contribuições anuais à ABQ. 6.3 – sócios cujas atitudes comprovadamente prejudiquem a ABQ denegrindo seu nome. Parágrafo único: Os sócios excluídos poderão ser readmitidos por deliberação da maioria do Conselho Diretor, por proposta de pelo menos 3 (três) de seus membros.
 Artigo 7o) São direitos dos sócios contribuintes (profissional, estudante e institucional) adimplentes: a) participar, discutir, votar e ser votado nas Assembleias Gerais da ABQ;
 b) participar de atividades e eventos organizados pela ABQ, obtendo os descontos previstos para cada categoria; c) adquirir, com os descontos previstos para cada categoria, todas as publicações da ABQ; d) obter os descontos previstos para cada categoria em todos os serviços prestados pela ABQ; e) ser convidado a integrar a Diretoria Executiva da ABQ ou a Diretoria da Seção Regional à qual está afiliado. Parágrafo único: O sócio estudante terá direito ao desconto de 50% (cinquenta por cento) do valor previsto para a anuidade do sócio profissional.
 Artigo 8o) São deveres dos sócios contribuintes (profissional, estudante e institucional): a) pagar, regularmente, as contribuições anuais estabelecidas pela ABQ para cada categoria;
 b) colaborar para que a ABQ atinja seus objetivos.
 Artigo 9o) A ABQ é administrada pelos seguintes organismos: a) Assembleia Geral
 Seção I Assembleia Geral: a constituição, competência e funcionamento
 Artigo 10) A Assembleia Geral, composta por todos os sócios contribuintes adimplentes, é o órgão soberano da ABQ. Artigo 11) A Assembleia Geral realizar-se-á, ordinariamente, uma vez por ano, devendo ser convocada por meio virtual e/ou correspondência pelo Presidente em exercício com um mínimo de 30 (trinta) dias de antecedência informando data, hora e local. Parágrafo primeiro: A Assembleia Geral poderá realizar-se extraordinariamente, tantas vezes quantas necessárias. Parágrafo segundo: A convocação da Assembleia Geral em caráter extraordinário poderá ser feita por 2/3 (dois terços) dos membros do Conselho Diretor ou, ainda, por 1/5 (um quinto) dos sócios contribuintes adimplentes. Artigo 12) Compete à Assembleia Geral: 12.1 – Aprovar alterações do presente Estatuto. 12.2 – Homologar as decisões do Conselho Diretor da ABQ. 12.3 – Dar posse ao Presidente, ao Vice-Presidente, aos membros do Conselho Fiscal e da Diretoria indicados para um determinado mandato. 12.4 – Homologar a destituição do Presidente da ABQ e demais sócios ocupantes de cargos eletivos. Parágrafo primeiro: Para alteração do presente Estatuto, é necessária a presença de um mínimo de 50% (cinquenta por cento) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em primeira convocação, ou a presença ou a manifestação autenticada de 1/3 (um terço) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em segunda convocação. Qualquer alteração estatutária só pode ser aprovada com a concordância de 2/3 (dois terços) dos votantes. Parágrafo segundo: Para destituição do Presidente da ABQ, bem como qualquer membro Da Diretoria, é necessária à presença de um mínimo de 50% (cinquenta por cento) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em primeira convocação, ou a presença ou a manifestação autenticada de 1/3 (um terço) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em segunda convocação. A destituição só pode ser aprovada com a concordância de 2/3 (dois terços) dos votantes. Parágrafo terceiro: As resoluções da Assembleia Geral relativas aos itens 12.2 e 12.3 serão válidas somente quando aprovadas pela maioria dos presentes.
 Seção II Conselho Diretor: constituição, competência e funcionamento
 Artigo 13) O Conselho Diretor da ABQ é constituído por: a) 4 (quatro) Diretores Executivos, a saber, Presidente, Vice-Presidente, Diretor-Financeiro e Diretor-Administrativo, empossados pela Assembleia Geral e em exercício do mandato;
 b) O Ex-Presidente;
 c) Os 5 (cinco) Diretores Regionais; c) Os outros Diretores, até um máximo de 8 (oito), empossados pela Assembleia Geral;
 d) O representante de cada uma das Seções Regionais legalmente constituídas, normalmente o Presidente ou o Vice-Presidente. Parágrafo primeiro: Todos os membros do Conselho Diretor da ABQ devem ser sócios contribuintes. Parágrafo segundo: Cada membro terá direito a 1 (um) voto.
 Artigo 14 A constituição dos membros do Conselho Diretor dar-se-á segundo as seguintes determinações: 14.1 - Os Presidente e Vice-Presidente são definidos por meio de eleição direta dos associados para a função de Vice-Presidente, que após 2 (dois) anos na função, assume a Presidência para um mandato de 2 (dois) anos. 14.2 – Os Diretores Financeiro e Administrativo são de escolha e convite do Presidente e empossados pela Assembleia Geral para o mandato de 2 (dois) anos idêntico ao do Presidente, podendo ser substituídos a qualquer momento pelo Presidente, que submeterá o novo nome à Assembleia Geral. 14.3 – O Ex-Presidente assume essa função após cumprir o mandato na Presidência, sendo empossado pela Assembleia Geral com mandato de 2 (dois) anos. 14.4 – Os 5 (cinco) Diretores Regionais são representantes das 5 (cinco) regiões geográficas do Brasil, sendo indicados ao Presidente pelas Seções Regionais, legalmente constituídas em cada região geográfica. Caberá ao Presidente a escolha do Diretor de cada região entre os nomes apresentados em lista tríplice por região. Os 5 (cinco) membros terão mandato idêntico ao Presidente em empossados pela Assembleia Geral. Parágrafo primeiro: As Seções Regionais da ABQ deverão discutir entre si as indicações dos Diretores Regionais e encaminhá-las em lista tríplice ao Vice-Presidente até 30 dias antes de sua posse na Presidência. Parágrafo segundo: Caso não ocorra a indicação de nomes para qualquer Diretoria Regional dentro de prazo, caberá ao Presidente nomear um Diretor Regional a sua livre escolha, devendo o profissional necessariamente ser da região que irá representar. 14.5 – Os demais Diretores da ABQ são de livre escolha e convite do Presidente, visando o melhor desenvolvimento da área específica. Artigo 15) O Conselho Diretor reunir-se-á obrigatoriamente antes das Assembléias Gerais ordinárias. Parágrafo primeiro: O Conselho Diretor poderá reunir-se tantas vezes quantas necessárias, devendo ocorrer o mínimo de 2 (duas) reuniões presenciais anuais. Parágrafo segundo: A convocação das reuniões do Conselho Diretor deverá ser feita pelo Presidente da ABQ por meio virtual e/ou correspondência ou por 2/3 (dois terços) de seus membros com um mínimo de 15 (quinze) dias de antecedência.
 Artigo 16) Compete ao Conselho Diretor: 16.1 – Analisar e aprovar as propostas de alteração do presente Estatuto, a serem submetidas à Assembleia Geral. 16.2 – Supervisionar o cumprimento das deliberações da Assembleia Geral. 16.3 – Aprovar as propostas de inclusão de sócios correspondentes. 16.4 – Aprovar o orçamento anual da ABQ. 16.5 – Deliberar sobre os relatórios e pareceres emitidos pelo Conselho Fiscal. 16.6 – Deliberar sobre todas as matérias referentes aos objetivos e à administração da ABQ. 16.7 – Deliberar sobre a constituição de Seções Regionais, auxiliando-as na aprovação de seus Estatutos junto aos órgãos competentes. 16.8 – Deliberar sobre a extinção de Seções Regionais. 16.9 – Deliberar sobre o local e o período de realização dos eventos que a ABQ irá realizar. 16.10 – Deliberar sobre as publicações técnicas e científicas da ABQ, inclusive sua extinção. 16.11 – Analisar e aprovar propostas de aplicação de punição aos sócios que descumprirem o presente Estatuto. 16.12 – Analisar e aprovar propostas de destituição do Presidente, Vice-Presidente, membros do Conselho Fiscal e de demais sócios ocupantes de cargos eletivos. 16.13 – Cumprir e fazer cumprir este Estatuto e demais dispositivos legais. Artigo 17) As deliberações do Conselho Diretor são definidas com a concordância da maioria dos membros votantes. Parágrafo primeiro: Para deliberação sobre os itens 16.1, 16.8, 16.12 e 16.13 do Artigo 16o é necessária a presença de 2/3 dos membros do Conselho Diretor.
 Conselho Fiscal: constituição, competência e funcionamento Artigo 18) O Conselho Fiscal da ABQ é constituído por 3 (três) membros titulares e 3 (três) membros suplentes, indicados pelo Presidente, devendo ser referendado pelo Conselho Diretor e empossados pela Assembleia Geral. Parágrafo primeiro – O mandato dos membros do Conselho Fiscal será coincidente com o mandato do Presidente. Parágrafo segundo – Em caso de vacância do titular, seu mandato será assumido por um dos suplentes a convite do Presidente. Parágrafo terceiro – Os membros do Conselho Fiscal - titulares e suplentes - não poderão fazer parte da Diretoria Executiva da ABQ. Artigo 19) Compete ao Conselho Fiscal: 19.1 – Examinar e emitir parecer sobre os lançamentos contábeis da entidade. 19.2 – Examinar e emitir parecer, trimestralmente, sobre os balancetes apresentados pelo Diretor-Financeiro. 19.3 – Emitir parecer sobre a aquisição e a alienação de bens. Artigo 20) O Conselho Fiscal da ABQ reunir-se-á ordinariamente a cada 3 (três) meses e, extraordinariamente, sempre que necessário, podendo as reuniões acontecerem virtualmente, por meio de correio eletrônico autenticado. Seção IV Diretoria Executiva: constituição, competência e funcionamento
 Artigo 21) A Diretoria Executiva é constituída por: a) Presidente
 c) Diretor-Administrativo
 d) Diretor-Financeiro Parágrafo primeiro: Compete aos membros da Diretoria Executiva exercer as funções da administração ordinária da Associação. Parágrafo segundo: O mandato da Diretoria Executiva é de 2 (dois) anos.
 Artigo 22) Compete ao Presidente: a) exercer a função executiva da administração ordinária da ABQ;
 b) representar a ABQ ativa e passivamente, judicial e extrajudicialmente; c) cumprir e fazer cumprir este Estatuto, o Regimento Interno da ABQ e demais dispositivos legais; d) convocar e presidir a Assembleia Geral, as reuniões do Conselho Diretor e da Diretoria; e) assinar convênios e contratos, com entidades públicas ou privadas, nacionais ou internacionais, sempre visando o cumprimento dos objetivos da ABQ;
 f) assinar cheques, ordens de pagamento e quaisquer títulos que representem obrigações financeiras da ABQ;
 g) delegar ao Vice-Presidente ou a outro membro da Diretoria, sempre que necessário, a representação da ABQ;
 h) convocar a eleição para a Vice-Presidência;
 i) praticar todos os atos relativos à formação do quadro de pessoal e à contratação de serviços, necessários ao funcionamento da ABQ.
 Artigo 23) Compete ao Vice-Presidente: substituir o Presidente em suas faltas ou impedimentos; assumir o mandato em caso de vacância; prestar, de um modo geral, sua colaboração ao Presidente. Artigo 24) Compete ao Diretor-Administrativo: a) secretariar a Assembleia Geral, as reuniões do Conselho Diretor e as da Diretoria; b) redigir as respectivas Atas; c) organizar a Secretaria da ABQ, prevista no Regimento Interno; d) divulgar as notícias sobre as atividades da entidade, sempre que pertinente. .
 Artigo 25) Compete ao Diretor-Financeiro:
 a) acompanhar e escriturar toda a movimentação financeira da ABQ;
 b) manter o Presidente e o Conselho Diretor permanentemente informados sobre as condições financeiras da Associação;
 c) conservar os documentos relativos à movimentação financeira da ABQ;
 d) organizar e conservar os documentos relativos ao patrimônio da ABQ;
 e) apresentar ao Conselho Fiscal, mensalmente, balancetes financeiros consolidados, e após aprovação dos mesmos, encaminhar a todos os membros do Conselho Diretor.
 Artigo 26) A ABQ elege seu Vice-Presidente para um mandato de 2 (dois) anos. Após esse período, o Vice-Presidente assume, automaticamente e por igual período, a Presidência da Associação, sendo então eleito outro Vice-Presidente. Parágrafo primeiro: Qualquer sócio profissional adimplente, brasileiro, poderá ser indicado como candidato à Vice-Presidência da ABQ. Parágrafo segundo: A convocação de eleições para o cargo de Vice-Presidente é feita pelo Presidente em exercício, por meio de edital específico, com antecedência mínima de 120 (cento e vinte dias) antes do término de seu mandato.
 Artigo 27) O mandato de um Presidente pode ser prorrogado por igual período, ou seja 2 (dois) anos, nos casos de desistência ou falecimento do Vice-Presidente eleito e ainda no caso de ausência de candidato ao cargo de Vice-Presidente. Parágrafo primeiro: A prorrogação do mandato de um Presidente deve ser aprovada por um mínimo de 2/3 (dois terços) dos membros do Conselho Diretor. Parágrafo segundo: O mandato de um Presidente não pode ser prorrogado mais de uma vez. Seção V
 Artigo 28) A ABQ é representada nos Estados da Federação por meio de suas Seções Regionais. Parágrafo único: As Seções Regionais são constituídas como unidades independentes, registro civil próprio, para o desenvolvimento de suas atividades, em consonância com os objetivos da Associação. Artigo 29) Para a constituição de uma Seção Regional é necessário o encaminhamento de documento a Diretoria da ABQ, incluindo uma exposição de motivos que justificam tal intenção e a manifestação de interesse de pelo menos 10 (dez) pretendentes, dos quais 50% (cinquenta por cento) devem ser sócios profissionais. Parágrafo único: Além da exposição de motivos, o documento deve conter o nome, a qualificação e o endereço de cada um dos pretendentes. Artigo 30) Após a aprovação da constituição de uma Seção Regional pelo Conselho Diretor, é necessário o encaminhamento a Diretoria da ABQ, dos documentos comprobatórios do registro nos órgãos competentes. Artigo 31) Compete a cada Seção Regional: 31.1 – Promover a eleição de uma Diretoria, cuja composição mínima é de: 1 (um) Presidente, 1 (um) Vice-Presidente, 1 (um) Diretor-Secretário e 1 (um) Diretor-Tesoureiro. 31.2 – Participar das reuniões do Conselho Diretor da ABQ. 31.3 – Promover e realizar atividades, em consonância com os objetivos da ABQ, que contribuam para o ensino da Química e para o desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico de sua região. 31.4 – Promover a captação de novos sócios. 31.5 – Repassar à Tesouraria da ABQ os percentuais previamente aprovados pelo Conselho Diretor e homologados em Assembleia Geral, dos recursos arrecadados com anuidades, promoção de atividades e outros serviços prestados. 31.6 – Cumprir e fazer cumprir este Estatuto, o Regimento Interno da ABQ e demais dispositivos legais. Parágrafo único: O mandato da Diretoria de cada Seção Regional é de 2 (dois) anos, podendo haver reeleição. Artigo 32) A Diretoria de uma Seção Regional que não estiver desenvolvendo suas atividades de modo satisfatório, pode ser destituída após aprovação por 2/3 (dois terços) dos membros do Conselho Diretor. Nesse caso, o Conselho Diretor deve indicar uma Diretoria Provisória, com mandato de 1 (um) ano, para evitar solução de descontinuidade das atividades da Seção Regional. Artigo 33) Uma Seção Regional poderá ser extinta quando o número de sócios contribuintes adimplentes permanecer inferior a 10 (dez), por dois anos consecutivos ou quando não estiver cumprindo, a contento, o estabelecido no Artigo 31 deste Estatuto.
 CAPÍTULO IV Recursos financeiros e patrimônio
 Artigo 34) Constituem os recursos financeiros e o patrimônio da ABQ : a) os bens móveis e imóveis atuais ou que venham a ser adquiridos a título oneroso ou gratuito;
 b) as anuidades e outras contribuições dos sócios;
 c) as doações e subvenções concedidas por pessoas físicas ou jurídicas, públicas ou privadas, nacionais ou estrangeiras;
 d) os resultados financeiros de eventos ou de atividades de caráter técnico-científico;
 e) os saldos financeiros. Parágrafo único: Os sócios não são, solidária ou individualmente, responsáveis pelas dívidas da ABQ. CAPÍTULO V Duração e extinção
 Artigo 35) A duração da ABQ é por tempo indeterminado. Artigo 36) Para dissolução da Associação é necessária a convocação de uma Assembleia Geral especificamente convocada para este fim com a presença de um mínimo de 50% (cinquenta por cento) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em primeira convocação, ou a presença ou a manifestação autenticada de 1/3 (um terço) de sócios contribuintes adimplentes ou de seus representantes legais, em segunda convocação. A dissolução será aprovada com a concordância de 2/3 (dois terços) dos votantes. Artigo 37) Os recursos financeiros e o patrimônio remanescentes serão destinados a outra instituição congênere, por escolha e deliberação dos membros presentes a Assembleia Geral especificamente convocada para este fim. CAPÍTULO VI Disposições finais
 Artigo 38) Os cargos de todos os seus Dirigentes e Diretores são exercidos voluntariamente e sem remuneração. Artigo 39) A ABQ não distribui resultados financeiros, dividendos, bonificações, participações ou parcela de seu patrimônio, sob qualquer forma ou pretexto.
 Artigo 41) Os casos omissos neste Estatuto serão resolvidos pelo Conselho Diretor da ABQ e homologados pela Assembleia Geral. O presente Estatuto foi aprovado pela Assembleia Geral realizada no dia 5 de novembro de 2014 e entra em vigor após seu registro no Cartório de Registro Civil de Pessoas Jurídicas, da cidade do Rio de Janeiro.


jurisdiction: US

text: b' U.S. Department of Energy\n Office of Inspector General\n Office of Inspections and Special Inquiries\n\n\n\n\nInspection Report\nThe Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Review of\nExport License Applications for China\n\n\n\n\nDOE/IG-0723 April 2006\n\x0c\x0c\x0cTHE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY\xe2\x80\x99S REVIEW OF EXPORT\nLICENSE APPLICATIONS FOR CHINA\n\n\nTABLE OF\nCONTENTS\n OVERVIEW\n\n Introduction and Objectives \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6 1\n\n Observations and Conclusions \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6.. 2\n\n\n DETAILS OF FINDINGS\n\n Background \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6. 3\n\n Energy Review of Licenses .......\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6.\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6. 3\n\n Interagency Coordination \xe2\x80\xa6......\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6.\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6. 4\n\n Observations \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6......\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6.\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6.. 4\n\n\n RECOMMENDATIONS \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6... 5\n\n\n MANAGEMENT COMMENTS \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6 5\n\n\n INSPECTOR COMMENTS \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6. 5\n\n\n APPENDICES\n\n A. Scope and Methodology \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6 6\n\n B. Status of Recommendations from Prior\n National Defense Authorization Act Reports \xe2\x80\xa6.\xe2\x80\xa6. 7\n\n C. Prior Export Control Related Reports \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6..\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6 13\n\n D. Management Comments \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\xa6 14\n\x0cOverview\n\nINTRODUCTION The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year\nAND OBJECTIVES 2000 provides that beginning in the year 2000 and ending in the\n year 2007, the President shall annually submit to Congress a report\n by the Inspectors General of, at a minimum, the Departments of\n Energy (Energy), Commerce (Commerce), Defense (Defense), and\n State (State) of the policies and procedures of the United States\n Government with respect to the export of technologies and\n technical information with potential military application to\n countries and entities of concern. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2001\n also requires the Inspectors General to include in each annual\n report the status of the implementation or disposition of\n recommendations that were set forth in previous annual reports.\n\n The People\xe2\x80\x99s Republic of China (China), which since 1997 has\n included Hong Kong, is one of the world\xe2\x80\x99s largest trading nations.\n China\xe2\x80\x99s trade includes the substantial import and export of\n technologies. An interagency working group comprised of\n representatives from the Offices of Inspector General (OIGs) for\n Energy, Commerce, Defense, State, the Department of Homeland\n Security, and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) selected the\n export of sensitive U.S. technologies and technical information to\n China as the topic for its 2006 review.\n\n The objective of our inspection was to determine if Energy\n appropriately participated in the export license review process to\n control the export of critical technologies to China. Within\n Energy, the Office of International Regimes and Agreements\n (OIRA), which is part of the National Nuclear Security\n Administration\xe2\x80\x99s, Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, is\n the primary entity responsible for export control issues and is the\n focus of our review. To accomplish this objective, we examined:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Energy\xe2\x80\x99s roles and responsibilities relevant to the review\n of escalated export license applications regarding China.\n Escalated export license applications are those applications\n that were appealed to higher levels of agency review when\n the reviewing agencies could not come to agreement after\n their initial reviews; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 Coordination by Energy officials with other Federal\n agencies regarding cases escalated to the dispute resolution\n process.\n\n Additionally, we reviewed the status of recommendations set forth\n in previous Energy OIG reports on annual export control reviews\n conducted pursuant to the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2000.\n\nPage 1 The Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Review of\n Export License Applications for China\n\x0cOBSERVATIONS AND We concluded that Energy appropriately participated in the export\nCONCLUSIONS license review process to control the export of critical technologies to\n China. Specifically, we found that:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 OIRA conducted reviews of all escalated export license\n applications referred to them during Fiscal Year 2004 that were\n relevant to China; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 OIRA effectively coordinated with the formal interagency\n entities mandated by Executive Order 12981 for the conduct of\n its license reviews.\n\n We observed that access by Energy officials conducting license\n reviews to end-user review information maintained by the\n Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Livermore) could be\n improved. We also observed that access by OIRA to intelligence\n information within the Energy Office of Intelligence and\n Counterintelligence (IN) has recently been enhanced.\n\n Regarding the status of recommendations set forth in previous\n Energy OIG reports on annual export control reviews conducted\n pursuant to the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2000, we determined that 12\n of the 15 recommendations have been closed. Details regarding\n the recommendations can be found in Appendix B.\n\n The Energy OIG has conducted numerous reviews related to the\n topic of export controls. A listing of these reports is contained in\n Appendix C.\n\n\n\n\nPage 2 Observations and Conclusions\n\x0cDetails of Findings\n\nBACKGROUND The principal legislative authorities governing the export control of\n nuclear-related, dual-use1 items are the Export Administration Act of\n 1979 and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978. The provisions\n of the Export Administration Act have been updated by Executive\n Order, most recently by Executive Order 12981, which grants the\n Secretary of Commerce the authority to refer export license\n applications to other agencies for review and gives agencies such as\n Energy the authority to look at any export license application\n submitted to Commerce. This Executive Order also establishes the\n Operating Committee (OC) and the Advisory Committee on Export\n Policy (ACEP). This Executive Order stipulates that the OC\n examines all license applications in which the reviewing departments\n are not in agreement and that if a department disagrees with an OC\n decision, they may appeal to the ACEP for resolution.\n\n Energy\xe2\x80\x99s export control efforts, as coordinated by OIRA, includes\n the review of licenses for nuclear, chemical, biological, and\n missile-related commodities. OIRA utilizes the expertise of\n Energy officials at headquarters and the Department\xe2\x80\x99s field sites to\n conduct end-user reviews (analysis of intelligence information\n relevant to the final user of an item) and technical reviews\n (analysis of a specific item by a subject matter expert). In addition\n to reviewing licenses, OIRA participates in working level groups\n for licensing and nonproliferation activities that include China-\n related issues; represents Energy at meetings of the Nuclear\n Suppliers Group, an informal international regime that works to\n prevent the misuse of nuclear materials for military reasons; and\n leads an outreach effort that trains Federal officials at the nation\xe2\x80\x99s\n borders on how to recognize proliferation items and potential\n weapons of mass destruction.\n\nENERGY REVIEW We found that Energy conducted reviews of all escalated export\nOF LICENSES license applications relevant to China referred to them during\n Fiscal Year 2004.\n\n We and the OIG interagency group examined 102 cases relevant to\n China and Hong Kong that were addressed by the OC and/or\n ACEP during Fiscal Year 20042. We determined that Energy\n officials conducted required end-user reviews for each case.\n However, we found that the end-user review for one case was not\n\n1\n Some controlled commodities are designated as \xe2\x80\x9cdual-use,\xe2\x80\x9d that is, goods and technologies that have both civilian\n and military uses. The U.S. Government designates some dual-use commodities as \xe2\x80\x9cnuclear dual-use\xe2\x80\x9d items,\n which are controlled for nuclear nonproliferation purposes.\n2\n 104 separate China cases were examined by either the OC and/or the ACEP in Fiscal Year 2004. Two of these\n 104 cases were withdrawn by the applicant, resulting in a total of 102 cases analyzed by the OIG. Of these 102\n cases, three were reviewed by both the OC and ACEP in Fiscal Year 2004.\n\nPage 3 Details of Findings\n\x0c completed in time for the relevant OC meeting. Although the\n review was not timely, the results of that review did not alter the\n position already established by Energy and the other reviewing\n agencies or effect the processing of that application.\n\nINTERAGENCY Energy effectively coordinated with the formal interagency entities\nCOORDINATION mandated by Executive Order 12981 for the conduct of its license\n reviews. Energy has participated in the OC and the ACEP since\n 1965. The OC and the ACEP include senior officials from Energy,\n Commerce, Defense, and State, which are voting members, and the\n CIA, which is a non-voting member. We determined that Energy\n officials participated in the review of all 102 cases relevant to\n China and Hong Kong addressed by the OC and the ACEP in\n Fiscal Year 2004. Export control officials with Commerce,\n Defense, State, and the CIA advised that Energy coordinated with\n them on all export license applications, including those for China,\n and that Energy provided them with analysis relevant to the export\n license review process.\n\nOBSERVATIONS We observed that access by Energy officials conducting license\n reviews to end-user review information maintained by Livermore\n could be improved. Currently, technical reviewers must wait until\n an end-user review is completed by Livermore before being able to\n access this end-user information. Several field officials who\n perform technical reviews indicated that it would be an\n improvement if they could access end-user information at any time\n instead of waiting until the end-user review is completed.\n Livermore officials said that they are developing a new database\n that will allow any technical reviewers at Energy to have real-time\n access to end-user information. An OIRA official indicated that\n had this database been in place for the one late end-user review\n addressed above, that review would have likely been completed in\n time for the OC meeting. We believe that the implementation of\n this new Livermore database will help expedite Energy\xe2\x80\x99s export\n license reviews.\n\n We also observed that access by OIRA to intelligence information\n within IN has recently been enhanced. Specifically, IN controls\n the access for Energy officials to Sensitive Compartmented\n Information (SCI), which includes intelligence information that\n can be used by OIRA to conduct their license reviews. During our\n review, OIRA officials advised that they could not access IN\xe2\x80\x99s SCI\n computers or hand-carry SCI documents and relied upon: an IN\n employee who dedicated part of his time to OIRA efforts; field\n officials at IN\xe2\x80\x99s Field Intelligence Elements; or other Federal\n agencies.\n\nPage 4 Details of Findings\n\x0c An IN official informed us that based on established Energy policy\n on the use of and access to SCI, only Federal Energy employees\n that are part of IN can have direct access to SCI computers and be\n able to hand-carry SCI documents. The official added, however,\n that his office could arrange for OIRA-affiliated management and\n operating contractor officials who are members of a Field\n Intelligence Element, to access SCI at IN headquarters because\n Field Intelligence Element members are managed by IN for\n intelligence purposes.\n\n We learned that IN had previously sponsored direct SCI access by\n one OIRA-affiliated management and operating contractor\n stationed at Energy headquarters, but that the relevant contract\n ended in July 2005. In recognition of this problem and concurrent\n with our review, in February 2006, IN management granted three\n OIRA-affiliated management and operating contractors access to\n IN and is processing them to have SCI computer and hand-carrying\n access. We believe that this improved access should enhance\n OIRA\xe2\x80\x99s analysis of export control issues, including those relevant\n to China. Because this type of arrangement between IN and OIRA\n had lapsed before, we believe that actions need to be taken to\n ensure that OIRA representatives continue to have access to SCI\n computers and be able to hand-carry SCI documents.\n\nRECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the Deputy Administrator, Defense Nuclear\n Nonproliferation;\n\n 1. Expedite the development and implementation of the new\n Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory database for\n processing end-user reviews; and\n\n 2. Coordinate with the Director, Office of Intelligence and\n Counterintelligence, to ensure personnel affiliated with the\n Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation who conduct\n export license reviews have continual access to Sensitive\n Compartmented Information computers and be able to hand-\n carry Sensitive Compartmented Information documents.\n\nMANAGEMENT In comments on our draft report, management agreed with\nCOMMENTS our report recommendations and will implement corrective actions.\n These comments are included in their entirety at Appendix D.\n\nINSPECTOR We found management\xe2\x80\x99s comments to be responsive to our report\nCOMMENTS recommendations.\n\n\n\n\nPage 5 Recommendations\n Management and Inspector Comments\n\x0cAppendix A\n\nSCOPE AND We interviewed Federal and contractor Energy officials at\nMETHODOLOGY headquarters and field facilities, including personnel who perform\n end-user reviews and technical reviews. We reviewed Energy and\n Commerce documentation for 102 export license applications to\n China and Hong Kong that were addressed by the Operating\n Committee and the Advisory Committee on Export Policy in Fiscal\n Year 2004. We also reviewed relevant export control regulations.\n\n As part of our review, we evaluated Energy\xe2\x80\x99s implementation of\n the \xe2\x80\x9cGovernment Performance Results Act of 1993.\xe2\x80\x9d We did not\n identify any performance measure issues regarding the review of\n export license applications for China and Hong Kong.\n\n This inspection was conducted in accordance with the \xe2\x80\x9cQuality\n Standards for Inspections\xe2\x80\x9d issued by the President\xe2\x80\x99s Council on\n Integrity and Efficiency.\n\n\n\n\nPage 6 Scope and Methodology\n\x0cAppendix B\n\n STATUS OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PRIOR\n NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT REPORTS\n\nSection 1204 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2001 amended Section 1402(b) of the NDAA for\nFiscal Year 2000 to require the specified Offices of Inspectors General (OIGs) to include in each\nannual report the status of the implementation or other disposition of recommendations that have\nbeen set forth in previous annual reports under Section 1402(b). To date, six reports have been\ncompleted by the Energy OIG under this requirement. Two reports: \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of Status of\nRecommendations from the Office of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s March 2000 and December 2001\nExport Control Reviews,\xe2\x80\x9d INS-L-03-07, May 2003, and \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of\nEnergy\xe2\x80\x99s Role in the Commerce Control List and the U.S. Munitions List,\xe2\x80\x9d INS-O-01-03, March\n2001, did not contain recommendations. The following is the status of the recommendations\nfrom the other reports. Of 15 total recommendations, 12 have been closed.\n\n\xe2\x80\x9cThe Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Chemical and Biological Export License\nApplications,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0682, March 2005:\n\nRecommendation 1. We recommended that the Deputy Administrator, Defense Nuclear\nNonproliferation, take appropriate action to ensure that Energy licensing officers have access to\nthe Department of Commerce\xe2\x80\x99s Export Control Automated Support System (ECASS).\n\nEnergy management reported that Commerce promised to provide support to the office as\nneeded. Currently, new National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) staff are completing\nnew registration forms to receive their passwords. Energy management is awaiting response\nfrom Commerce on the NNSA letter requesting training on accessing ECASS.\n\nThe Energy OIG determined that this recommendation should remain open until all corrective\nactions are completed.\n\nRecommendation 2. We recommended that the Deputy Administrator, Defense Nuclear\nNonproliferation, take appropriate action to ensure that Energy licensing officers are properly\ntrained in the use of this system.\n\nEnergy management reported that Commerce promised to provide support to the office as\nneeded. Currently, new NNSA staff are completing new registration forms to receive their\npasswords. Energy management is awaiting response from Commerce on the NNSA letter\nrequesting training on accessing ECASS.\n\nThe Energy OIG determined that this recommendation should remain open until all corrective\nactions are completed.\n\n\xe2\x80\x9cContractor Compliance with Deemed Export Controls,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0645, April 2004:\n\nRecommendation 1. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Safety\nPerformance Assurance, expedite issuance of a draft unclassified foreign visits and assignments\n\nPage 7 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix B (continued)\n\nOrder 142.X that addresses training requirements and responsibilities for hosts of foreign\nnationals.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes the principal roles and responsibilities for hosts\nof foreign national visitors and assignees. The Energy OIG determined that DOE Order 142.3\nincludes training requirements and responsibilities for hosts of foreign nationals.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 2. We recommended that the Deputy Administrator, Defense Nuclear\nNonproliferation, ensure that export control guidance, including deemed export guidance, is\ndisseminated and is being consistently implemented throughout the Energy complex.\n\nEnergy management reported that the updated DOE \xe2\x80\x9cGuidelines on Export Control and\nNonproliferation\xe2\x80\x9d were undergoing review at Energy headquarters through August. In\nSeptember they were transmitted to the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Executive Secretary for final review and\nsignature. Subsequently, DOE General Counsel (GC) performed a second review and presented\ntheir comments in November, and the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Environment\n(NE) also sent a comment. NNSA management is reviewing and coordinating comments with\nGC and NE to finalize the Guidelines in January 2006. In the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2006,\nEnergy management began developing elements of a training module to help strengthen\ncontractor compliance with deemed export controls. The goal of the training is to specifically\naddress the needs of employees serving as foreign national hosts who are actively initiating\nvisits. Energy management tasked a national laboratory with drafting a training program, which\nwas subsequently briefed in September 2005 to export compliance representatives from five sites\nfor comment. Comment incorporation was being finalized in the First Quarter of Fiscal Year\n2006, with pilot implementation at a national laboratory planned for Second Quarter of Fiscal\nYear 2006. In the Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2006 work will commence on designing a\nsurvey to gain insight of the export control programs at laboratories/sites with the goal of making\npreliminary assessments in the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2006. Assuming the satisfactory\nresolution of any management and operating contractual issues that may arise, on-site surveys\nmay begin as early as the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2006.\n\nThe Energy OIG determined that this recommendation should remain open until all corrective\nactions are completed.\n\n\xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Automated Export Control System,\xe2\x80\x9d\nDOE/IG-0533, December 2001:\n\nRecommendation 1. We recommended that the Assistant Deputy Administrator for Arms\nControl and Nonproliferation coordinate with Commerce and Treasury to ensure access by\nEnergy to information within the Automated Export System regarding the purchase and/or\n\n\n\nPage 8 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix B (continued)\n\nshipment of commodities under an approved export license, and develop guidelines for Energy\xe2\x80\x99s\naccess to the information.\n\nEnergy management reported that NNSA has taken actions as far as its cognizant authority\nallows. All remaining actions are contingent on other Government agencies. NNSA\nrecommended that the interagency OIG group involved with export controls make specific\nrecommendations to individual agencies in order to effect change. While actions are not\ncompleted, NNSA can no longer report meaningful status.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation. The Energy OIG will continue to follow\nup on these issues through the interagency OIG group.\n\nRecommendation 2a. We recommended that the Assistant Deputy Administrator for Arms\nControl and Nonproliferation coordinate with State to improve communications regarding review\nof export license applications for munitions commodities.\n\nEnergy management reported that NNSA has taken actions as far as its cognizant authority\nallows. All remaining actions are contingent on other Government agencies. NNSA\nrecommended that the interagency OIG group involved with export controls make specific\nrecommendations to individual agencies in order to effect change. While actions are not\ncompleted, NNSA can no longer report meaningful status.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation. The Energy OIG will continue to follow\nup on these issues through the interagency OIG group.\n\nRecommendation 2b. We recommended that the Assistant Deputy Administrator for Arms\nControl and Nonproliferation coordinate with State to ensure access by Energy to information\nmaintained by State regarding final disposition (i.e., approval/denial of license applications and\nthe purchase and/or shipment of commodities) of export license applications and develop\nguidelines for Energy\xe2\x80\x99s access to the information.\n\nEnergy management reported that NNSA has taken actions as far as its cognizant authority\nallows. All remaining actions are contingent on other Government agencies. NNSA\nrecommended that the interagency OIG group involved with export controls make specific\nrecommendations to individual agencies in order to effect change. While actions are not\ncompleted, NNSA can no longer report meaningful status.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation. The Energy OIG will continue to follow\nup on these issues through the interagency OIG group.\n\n\xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Export License Process for Foreign National\nVisits and Assignments,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0465, March 2000:\n\nRecommendation 1. We recommended that the Acting Deputy Administrator for Defense\nNuclear Nonproliferation ensure that senior Energy officials work with senior Commerce\n\nPage 9 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix B (continued)\n\nofficials to assure clear, concise, and reliable guidance is obtained in a timely manner from\nCommerce regarding the circumstances under which a foreign national\xe2\x80\x99s visit or assignment to\nan Energy site would require an export license.\n\nEnergy management was advised by the Commerce Assistant Secretary for Export\nAdministration that extensive guidance regarding compliance with the deemed export rule was\navailable on the Commerce Web site and that Commerce would continue to strengthen its\noutreach training programs for Energy\xe2\x80\x99s National Laboratories.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 2. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Emergency\nOperations, ensure that a proposed revision of the Energy Notice concerning unclassified foreign\nvisits and assignments includes the principal roles and responsibilities for hosts of foreign\nnational visitors and assignees.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes the principal roles and responsibilities for hosts\nof foreign national visitors and assignees.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 3. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Emergency\nOperations, include a requirement for Energy and Energy contractor officials to enter required\nforeign national visit and assignment information in the Foreign Access Records Management\nSystem, or a designated central data base, in a complete and timely manner.\n\nEnergy management reported that a new Energy-wide information system, the Foreign Access\nCentralized Tracking System (FACTS), was developed and implemented. Energy further\nadvised that Draft Order 142.X includes a requirement for Energy sites to enter required foreign\nnational visit and assignment information into FACTS in a complete and timely manner.\n\nBecause Energy management\xe2\x80\x99s corrective action addressed usage of FACTS by all Energy\nFederal and contractor employees, the Energy OIG previously agreed to close this\nrecommendation and track this issue under recommendation 8.\n\nRecommendation 4. We recommended that the Manager of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Oak Ridge Operations\nOffice ensure that requests for foreign national visits and assignments at the Oak Ridge site are\nreviewed by the Y-12 National Security Program Office to assist in identifying those foreign\nnationals who may require an export license in conjunction with the visit or assignment.\n\nEnergy management reported that to ensure requests for foreign national visits and assignments\nat the Oak Ridge National Laboratory receive appropriate export license consideration, Oak\nRidge National Laboratory initiated a system of reviews. Under the system, requests are\n\nPage 10 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix B (continued)\n\nreviewed by five separate disciplines (Cyber Security, Export Control, Classification,\nCounterintelligence, and Security). In addition, requests associated with concerns are referred\nfor resolution to the Non-citizen Access Review Committee. Energy management further\nreported that while each of the reviews can involve the National Security Program Office, the\nOak Ridge National Laboratory Export Control Officer is responsible for referring requests to\nthe National Security Program Office as necessary.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 5. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Emergency\nOperations, ensure that the requirements in the revised Energy Notice for unclassified foreign\nnational visits and assignments are clearly identified and assigned to responsible officials or\norganizations.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes clear identification of requirements for foreign\nnational visits and assignments, and identifies responsible officials and organizations.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 6. We recommended that the Acting Deputy Administrator for Defense\nNuclear Nonproliferation ensure that guidance issued by the Office of Nuclear Transfer and\nSupplier Policy to advise hosts of their responsibilities regarding foreign nationals includes the\nappropriate level of oversight to be provided by the host during the period of the visit or\nassignment.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes the principal roles and responsibilities for hosts\nof foreign national visitors and assignees.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nRecommendation 7. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Emergency\nOperations, revise the Energy policy regarding foreign national visits and assignments to ensure\nthat Energy sites are maintaining consistent information about foreign nationals visiting or\nassigned to work at the site.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes the requirement for documentation in FACTS\nfor all visit and assignment requests in a timely manner.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\nPage 11 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix B (continued)\n\nRecommendation 8. We recommended that the Director, Office of Security and Emergency\nOperations, require that all Energy sites with foreign national visitors or assignees enter\ninformation regarding the visits or assignments into Foreign Access Records Management\nSystem, or a designated central Energy database.\n\nEnergy management reported that the Office of Security has incorporated all required changes\ninto DOE Order 142.3, \xe2\x80\x9cUnclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d which was\napproved on June 18, 2004. This Order includes the requirement that all sites having foreign\nnational visitors or assignees are required to enter information regarding the visits and\nassignments into FACTS.\n\nThe Energy OIG agreed to close this recommendation.\n\n\n\n\nPage 12 Status of Recommendations from\n Prior National Defense Authorization\n Act Reports\n\x0cAppendix C\n PRIOR EXPORT CONTROL RELATED REPORTS\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cThe Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Review of Chemical and Biological Export License\n Applications,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0682, March 2005;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cContractor Compliance with Deemed Export Controls,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0645, April 2004;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cSafeguards Over Sensitive Technology,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0635, January 2004;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of Status of Recommendations from the Office of Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s March\n 2000 and December 2001 Export Control Reviews,\xe2\x80\x9d INS-L-03-07, May 2003;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cThe Department\xe2\x80\x99s Unclassified Foreign Visits and Assignments Program,\xe2\x80\x9d\n DOE/IG-0579, December 2002;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cFollow-up Inspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Export Licensing Process for\n Foreign National Visits and Assignments,\xe2\x80\x9d INS-L-02-06, June 2002;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Automated Export Control System,\xe2\x80\x9d\n DOE/IG-0533, December 2001;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Role in the Commerce Control List and the\n U.S. Munitions List,\xe2\x80\x9d INS-O-01-03, March 2001;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cInspection of the Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Export License Process for Foreign National\n Visits and Assignments,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0465, March 2000;\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cThe Department of Energy\xe2\x80\x99s Export Licensing Process for Dual-Use and Munitions\n Commodities,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0445, May 1999; and\n\n\xe2\x80\xa2 \xe2\x80\x9cReport on Inspection of the Department\xe2\x80\x99s Export Licensing Process for Dual-Use and\n Munitions Commodities,\xe2\x80\x9d DOE/IG-0331, August 1993.\n\n\n\n\nPage 13 Prior Export Control Related Reports\n\x0cAppendix D\n\n\n\n\nPage 14 Management Comments\n\x0cAppendix D (continued)\n\n\n\n\nPage 15 Management Comments\n\x0c IG Report No. DOE/IG-0723\n\n CUSTOMER RESPONSE FORM\n\nThe Office of Inspector General has a continuing interest in improving the usefulness of its\nproducts. We wish to make our reports as responsive as possible to our customers\xe2\x80\x99 requirements,\nand, therefore, ask that you consider sharing your thoughts with us. On the back of this form,\nyou may suggest improvements to enhance the effectiveness of future reports. Please include\nanswers to the following questions if they are applicable to you:\n\n1. What additional background information about the selection, scheduling, scope, or\n procedures of the inspection would have been helpful to the reader in understanding this\n report?\n\n2. What additional information related to findings and recommendations could have been\n included in the report to assist management in implementing corrective actions?\n\n3. What format, stylistic, or organizational changes might have made this report\xe2\x80\x99s overall\n message more clear to the reader?\n\n4. What additional actions could the Office of Inspector General have taken on the issues\n discussed in this report which would have been helpful?\n\n5. Please include your name and telephone number so that we may contact you should we have\n any questions about your comments.\n\n\nName Date\n\nTelephone Organization\n\n\nWhen you have completed this form, you may telefax it to the Office of Inspector General at\n(202) 586-0948, or you may mail it to:\n\n Office of Inspector General (IG-1)\n Department of Energy\n Washington, DC 20585\n\n ATTN: Customer Relations\n\nIf you wish to discuss this report or your comments with a staff member of the Office of\nInspector General, please contact Judy Garland-Smith at (202) 586-7828.\n\x0cThe Office of Inspector General wants to make the distribution of its reports as customer friendly and cost\n effective as possible. Therefore, this report will be available electronically through the Internet at the\n following address:\n\n U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Home Page\n http://www.ig.doe.gov\n\n Your comments would be appreciated and can be provided on the Customer Response Form\n attached to the report.\n\x0c'