DRAFT AMENDING BUDGET N° 9 TO THE GENERAL BUDGET 2013 STATEMENT OF REVENUE BY SECTION STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE BY SECTION Section III – Commission
Date: 2013-10-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Austria, Czechia, Germany, Romania, amending budget, budgetary expenditure, budgetary resources, draft budget (EU), drought, flood













EUR-Lex - 52013DC0691 - EN











|



52013DC0691

DRAFT AMENDING BUDGET N° 9 TO THE GENERAL BUDGET 2013 STATEMENT OF REVENUE BY SECTION STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE BY SECTION Section III – Commission /* COM/2013/0691 final */









DRAFT AMENDING BUDGET N° 9
TO THE GENERAL BUDGET 2013
STATEMENT OF REVENUE BY SECTION
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE BY SECTION
Section III – Commission
Having regard to:
–                        
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the
Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular
Article 106a thereof,
–                        
the Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the Financial
Regulation applicable to the general budget of the Union[1], and in particular
Article 41 thereof,
–                        
the general budget of the European Union for the
financial year 2013 adopted on 12 December 2012[2],
–                        
the amending budget No 1/2013, adopted on 4
July 2013,
–                        
the amending budget No 2/2013, adopted on 11 September
2013,
–                        
the amending budget No 3/2013, adopted on 11 September
2013,
–                        
the amending budget No 4/2013, adopted on 11
September 2013,
–                        
the amending budget No 5/2013, adopted on 11
September 2013,
–                        
the draft amending budget No 6/2013[3], adopted on 10 July 2013, as
amended on 18 September 2013[4],
–                        
the draft amending budget No 7/2013[5], adopted on 25 July 2013,
–                        
the draft amending budget No 8/2013[6], adopted on 25 September 2013,
The European
Commission hereby presents to the budgetary authority the Draft Amending Budget
No 9 to the 2013 budget.
CHANGES TO
THE STATEMENT OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE BY SECTION
The changes to
the statement of revenue and expenditure by section are available on EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/budget/www/index-en.htm). An
English version of the changes to this statement is attached for information as
a budgetary annex.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.      Introduction.. 5
2.      Mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund.. 5
2.1    Drought in
Romania.. 5
2.2    Floods in
Central Europe. 6
2.2.1      Germany.. 7
2.2.2      Austria.. 8
2.2.3      The Czech
Republic. 9
3.      Financing.. 10
4.      Summary table by heading of the Financial Framework.. 11
1.           Introduction 
Draft Amending Budget
(DAB) No 9 for the year 2013 covers the mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund
for an amount of EUR 400,5 million in commitment and payment
appropriations. The mobilisation is in favour of Romania in relation to a
drought and forest fires in summer 2012, and of Germany, Austria and the Czech  Republic in relation to flooding in May and June 2013.
2.           Mobilisation of the EU
Solidarity Fund
2.1         Drought in Romania
During the summer of 2012
major parts of Romania suffered from very low precipitation and repeated waves
of extremely high temperatures, leading to drought with important crop failure,
numerous forest and vegetation fires, shortage of water for the population, and
resulting problems for the water supply and hydro-energy production systems.
Subsequently, in November 2012, the Romanian authorities decided to submit an
application for financial aid from the EU Solidarity Fund.
The Commission services
have carried out a thorough examination of the application in accordance with
Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 and in particular with Articles 2, 3 and 4
thereof. The most important elements of the assessment can be summarised as
follows:
(1)              
The Commission received the application from Romania on 2 November 2012. In order to complete the assessment the Commission requested
supplementary and revised information which was received on 30 May 2013. The
translation of this information from the Romanian original became available on
3 July.
(2)              
In responding to the drought disaster in Cyprus
of 2008 the Commission established that, while Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 may
not be well designed to tackle the characteristics of a slowly unfolding
disaster, it can nevertheless be mobilised in response to any major natural
disaster with serious repercussions on living conditions, the natural
environment or the economy in a beneficiary State as established in Article
2(1), provided that the disaster meets the criteria set out in Article 2(2) and
that the application for assistance is presented in good time in accordance
with Article 4(1).
(3)              
Article 4(1) of the Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
requires the application to be presented no later than ten weeks after the
first damage caused by the disaster. In the case of slowly unfolding disasters
such as drought this meets an objective difficulty. In Romania a prolonged period characterised by low rainfall, increasingly high temperatures
and numerous fires over several months led to the development of severe drought
conditions affecting some 2.764 million hectares of land in 35 of the 41
Romanian counties which cumulated on 25 August 2012 with the outbreak of major
vegetation and forest fires. The Commission, therefore, considers that 25
August 2012, as presented by the Romanian authorities, i.e. just under 10 weeks
before the application was received, can be accepted as the starting date of
the major disaster. As a consequence, the application presented to the
Commission on 2 November 2012 respects the time-limits laid down in Article
4(1).
(4)              
The drought and its consequences are of natural
origin and therefore fall within the main field of application of the EU
Solidarity Fund.
(5)              
In their initial application the Romanian
authorities estimated the total direct damage caused by the drought and forest
fires at over EUR 1,9 billion. This amount represented 263 % of
the normal threshold for mobilising the Solidarity Fund applicable to Romania
in 2012 of EUR 735,5 million (i.e. 0,6 % of GNI based on 2010
data). This figure however contained agricultural damage that had occurred
prior to the defined starting date which may not be included in the total
amount of damage. Moreover, the estimate of agricultural damage was based on
unrealistic expectations about crop yields and market prices. Following a
request from the Commission Romania therefore reviewed its damage assessment.
The revised total damage presented by Romania amounts to EUR 872,8 million.
However, this amount still includes economic losses in the hydro-energy
production sector amounting to EUR 66,1 million which cannot be
accepted as direct damage and need to be excluded. The Commission therefore
considers that total direct damage should be estimated at EUR 806,7 million.
As this amount exceeds the normal threshold for activating the Solidarity Fund
the drought qualifies as a major natural disaster within the meaning of Article
2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002. Total direct damage is the basis for the
calculation of the amount of financial assistance. The financial assistance may
only be used for essential emergency operations as defined in Article 3 of the
Regulation. 
(6)              
Over 99 % of the damage relate to
agriculture and forestry which is not eligible for Solidarity Fund aid as it is
not covered by the types of eligible emergency operations pursuant to Article
3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002. The Romanian authorities estimate the
cost of operations eligible under Article 3(2) at EUR 2,5 million. These
costs relate to emergency operations of the rescue services, in particular fire
fighting and water transport, and rehabilitation operations on the water
infrastructure. Aid from the Solidarity Fund may not exceed the total cost of
eligible operations.
(7)              
The affected region is eligible as
"Convergence Region" under the Structural Funds (2007-2013).
(8)              
The Romanian authorities indicated that there is
no insurance coverage of eligible cost.
In conclusion, for the
reasons set out above, the drought and wildfires referred to in the application
are considered to be a major disaster within the meaning of the Regulation and
to meet the conditions set out by Article 2(2), first subparagraph, of
Regulation 2012/2002 for mobilising the Solidarity Fund.
2.2         Floods
in Central Europe
In May and June 2013 Central Europe was affected by a meteorological situation very similar to the one which
lead to the 100-year-flooding-event in 2002 and subsequently to the creation of
the EU Solidarity Fund. Again, Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic were affected by extreme flooding. In spite of partly higher flood levels, overall
damage, while still very high, remained below that of 2002, in particular in
Austria and the Czech Republic, not least because of the effectiveness of flood
protection and risk control measures introduced since 2002. 
Subsequently, Germany submitted an application for financial assistance from the European Union Solidarity Fund
under the criteria for major disasters, whereas the applications from Austria and the Czech Republic were based on the so-called "neighbouring country criterion".
The Commission services
have carried out a thorough examination of the applications in accordance with
Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 and in particular with Articles 2, 3 and 4
thereof. The most important elements of the assessment can be summarised as
follows:
2.2.1      Germany
(1)              
The Commission received the application from Germany on 24 July 2013, within the deadline of 10 weeks after the first damage was
recorded on 18 May 2013.
(2)              
From mid May 2013, large areas of Germany experienced amounts of extremely intense rainfall in some areas reaching 300 %
of the monthly average. Combined with already saturated soils and, in the case
of the Danube river basin melting snow in the Alps, this resulted in widespread
flooding. Water levels reached a new all-time high on many rivers. The floods
were more extensive and more severe than the floods of August 2002 and the
previous record summer floods of July 1954. On 18 May severe thunderstorms and
extreme downpours triggered the first flood damage in Bavaria and Thuringia. The Danube, Lech and Regen rivers and the Inn-Salzach region were hit
particularly hard by the floods between 1 and 16 June 2013. From 30 May 2013
onwards, the constant rain caused flooding along the length of the Rhine and
through its entire catchment area in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Hessen,
Rhineland-Palatinate and Thuringia. The regions around the Elbe and Saale
rivers in Saxony, Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, Lower Saxony,
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and Schleswig-Holstein saw prolonged flooding,
which began on 2 June 2013 and continued until the end of the month.
(3)              
The flooding is of natural origin and therefore
falls within the main field of application of the Solidarity Fund.
(4)              
As regards the impact and consequences of the
flooding, the German authorities reported a death toll of eight people, with at
least 128 people injured. More than 100 000 people were evacuated from
flood-affected areas with a total of almost 600 000 people affected by the
disaster. The impact was felt in almost 1 700 communities. Many town and
city centres were partly or completely inundated (e.g. Passau, Deggendorf, Bad
Schandau, Pirna, Meissen, Dresden, Grimma, Döbeln, Waldheim). More than
32 000 houses were damaged or completely destroyed. The total damage to private
households amounted to almost EUR 1,5 billion. In many places,
drinking water supplies, sewage systems and electricity networks were
disrupted, schools and kindergartens were closed. More than 170 bridges and
some 700 km of roads were damaged or destroyed. The key railway connection
between Berlin and Stendal remains closed. Public flood defences suffered
structural damage and will no longer be functional in the event of future
flooding. The business sector has sustained damage estimated at over EUR 1,3 billion
with serious impact on tens of thousands of companies. Production was partly
interrupted because of damage to production facilities or logistical problems.
More than 430 000 hectares of agricultural and forestry land were flooded
with considerable direct damage extending from crop failure to total
destruction of buildings and equipment.
(5)              
The German authorities estimated the total
direct damage at over EUR 8,2 billion. This amount exceeds by far the threshold
for mobilising the Solidarity Fund of EUR 3,7 billion applicable to Germany in 2013 (EUR 3 billion in 2002 prices). As the estimated total direct
damage exceeds the threshold the disaster qualifies as a “major natural
disaster”. Total direct damage is the basis for the calculation of the amount
of financial assistance. The financial assistance may only be used for
essential emergency operations as defined in Article 3 of the Regulation.
(6)              
The German authorities estimated the cost of
operations eligible under Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 at
EUR 3,3 billion and presented it broken down by type of operation. The
largest share of the cost of emergency operations (over EUR 2,5 billion)
concerns recovery operations in the field of transport infrastructure.
(7)              
The affected parts of Germany are partly
eligible as "Convergence Regions", partly as “Phasing-out Regions”
and partly as “Competitiveness and Employment Regions” under the Structural
Funds (2007-2013). The German authorities intend using existing funding from
the Structural Funds and from the EAFRD projects to tackle the effects of the
disaster in the regions concerned. Operations funded by the Solidarity Fund may
not benefit from assistance from the Structural Funds referred to in Article 6
of the Regulation.
(8)              
At the moment of application detailed
information on insurance coverage of eligible cost was not available. The
Commission reserves the right to assess this element once available. Cost for
repairing damage by a third party is not eligible for Solidarity Fund
assistance.
In conclusion, for the
reasons set out above, the flooding referred to in the application is
considered to be a major disaster within the meaning of the Regulation and to
meet the conditions set out by Article 2(2), first subparagraph, of Regulation
2012/2002 for mobilising the Solidarity Fund.
2.2.2      Austria
(1)              
 Commission received the application from Austria on 6 August 2013, within the deadline of 10 weeks after the first damage was
recorded on 30 May 2013.
(2)              
The flood affected 7 out of 9 Austrian Länder,
in particular Vorarlberg, Tyrol, Salzburg, Lower Austria and Upper Austria with
a population some 4,6 million inhabitants. In some river basins (Saalach,
Salzach, Inn, and upper Danube) flood levels reached a 500 year high. It
resulted in widespread damage to infrastructure, in particular protective
infrastructure along the rivers, in the transport and in the water/waste water
sectors. Private homes and property were damaged or destroyed, crop failure
resulted from flooding of over 22 000 hectares of agricultural land. Over 300
businesses suffered direct damage, including some in the all-important tourism
sector.
(3)              
The disaster is of natural origin and falls
within the field of application of the Solidarity Fund.
(4)              
The Austrian authorities estimated the total
direct damage at EUR 866,5 million. This amount represents 48 %
of the threshold of EUR 1,8 billion (i.e. 0,6 % of Austria's
GNI), the disaster therefore does not qualify as a "major disaster"
under the terms of Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002. However, Austria was affected by the same flooding disaster which led to the major disaster in Germany. Therefore, the Austrian authorities presented their application under the so
called "neighbouring country criterion", whereby a country affected
by the same major disaster as a neighbouring country may exceptionally benefit
from Solidarity Fund aid even if the normal damage threshold for mobilising the
Fund is not reached. There is clear evidence that the floods in Germany and Austria have the same underlying cause; the Commission therefore considers that the
criterion is met. Total direct damage is the basis for the calculation of the
amount of financial assistance. The financial assistance may only be used for
essential emergency operations as defined in Article 3 of the Regulation.
(5)              
(The Austrian authorities estimated the cost of
operations eligible under Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 at
EUR 350,4 million and presented it broken down by type of operation.
The largest share of the cost of emergency operations concerns recovery
operations in the field of transport infrastructure (EUR 164 million)
and preventive infrastructure (EUR 79 million).
(6)              
The Austrian authorities indicated that they do
not plan to submit other requests for assistance from other Union instruments.
(7)              
The Austrian authorities declared that none of
the eligible operations is insured.
In conclusion, for the
reasons set out above, the flooding referred to in the application is
considered to be a disaster in a neighbouring country within the meaning of the
Regulation and to meet the conditions set out by Article 2(2), second
subparagraph, of Regulation 2012/2002 for mobilising the Solidarity Fund.
2.2.3      The
Czech Republic
(1)              
The Commission received the application from the
  Czech Republic on 8 August 2013, within the deadline of 10 weeks after the
first damage was recorded on 2 June 2013.
(2)              
From the end of May and during June 2013 the
Czech Republic was affected by considerable, partly torrential rainfalls
causing flooding with up to 50-year return periods especially in the catchment
areas of the Berounka, Vltava and Labe rivers and affecting in particular the
regions of South Bohemia, Plzeň, Central Bohemia, Hradec Králové, Liberec, Ústí
and the City of Prague which represent approx. 54 % of the Czech Republic
territory and directly concerned more than one third of the population of the
Czech Republic. 15 people were killed and 23 000 had to be evacuated. The
floods damaged or destroyed in particular the transport infrastructure
(railways, roads and bridges etc.), telecommunication networks, water supply
and wastewater systems, as well as electricity and gas networks. More than
7 000 private homes were damaged. Health care and social services, many
businesses – some of which may need to close down - agriculture and forestry
also suffered extensive damage. 
(3)              
The disaster is of natural origin and falls
within the field of application of the Solidarity Fund.
(4)              
The Czech authorities estimated the total direct
damage at EUR 637,1 million. This amount represents 73 % of the
threshold of EUR 871,6 million (i.e. 0,6 % of the Czech Republic's GNI), the disaster therefore does not by far qualify as a "major
disaster" according to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002. However, the Czech Republic was affected by the same flooding disaster which led to the major disaster in Germany. Therefore, the Czech authorities presented their application under the so called
"neighbouring country criterion", whereby a country affected by the
same major disaster as a neighbouring country may exceptionally benefit from
Solidarity Fund aid. There is clear evidence that the floods in Germany and the Czech Republic have the same underlying cause; the Commission therefore considers
that the criterion is met. Total direct damage is the basis for the calculation
of the amount of financial assistance. The financial assistance may only be
used for essential emergency operations as defined in Article 3 of the
Regulation.
(5)              
The Czech authorities estimated the cost of
operations eligible under Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 at
EUR 416,4 million and presented it broken down by type of operation.
The largest share of the cost of emergency operations concerns works on roads
and bridges (EUR 158 million), sewage systems (over EUR 52 million)
and water courses (over EUR 56 million).
(6)              
The affected parts of the Czech Republic are eligible as "Convergence Regions” under the Structural Funds (2007-2013) with
the exception of Prague which is eligible as “Phasing-in Region”. The Czech
authorities indicated that they are considering the use of existing funding
within Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund programmes for flood recovery. Operations
funded by the Solidarity Fund may not benefit from assistance from the Structural
Funds referred to in Article 6 of the Regulation.
(7)              
The Czech authorities indicated that certain
public buildings are generally insured while there is no insurance of infrastructure
assets. The Commission reserves the right to assess this element. Cost for
repairing damage by a third party is not eligible for Solidarity Fund
assistance.
In conclusion, for the
reasons set out above, the flooding referred to in the application is
considered to be a disaster in a neighbouring country within the meaning of the
Regulation and to meet the conditions set out by Article 2(2), second
subparagraph, of Regulation 2012/2002 for mobilising the Solidarity Fund.
3.           Financing
The total annual budget available for the
Solidarity Fund is EUR 1 000 million.
As solidarity was the central justification for the creation of the Fund, the
Commission takes the view that aid from the Fund should be progressive. That
means that, according to previous practice, the portion of the damage exceeding
the threshold (0,6% of the GNI or EUR 3 billion in 2002 prices,
whichever is the lower amount) should give rise to higher aid intensity than
damage up to the threshold. The rate applied in the past for defining the
allocations for major disasters is 2,5 % of total direct damage under the
threshold for mobilising the Fund and 6 % above. The methodology for
calculating Solidarity Fund aid was set out in the 2002-2003 Annual Report on
the Solidarity Fund and accepted by the Council and the European Parliament.
It is proposed to apply the same percentages in this case and to grant
the following aid amounts:
   ||   ||   || (EUR) 
 Disaster || Direct damage || Threshold (million €) || Total cost of eligible operations || Amount based on 2.5% || Amount based on 6% || Total amount of aid proposed 
 Romania drought || 806 724 312 || 735.487 || 2 475 689 || 18 387 175 || 4 274 239 || 2 475 689 
 Germany flooding || 8 153 500 000 || 3 678.755 || 3 289 400 000 || 91 968 875 || 268 484 700 || 360 453 575 
 Austria flooding || 866 462 000 || 1 798.112 || 350 334 000 || 21 661 550 || - || 21 661 550 
 Czech Republic flooding || 637 131 000 || 871.618 || 416 368 000 || 15 928 275 || - || 15 928 275 
 TOTAL ||   || 400 519 089 
In conclusion, for
the reasons set out above, it is proposed to accept the applications submitted
by Romania relating to the drought disaster in 2012 and by Germany, Austria and
the Czech Republic relating to the flooding disasters of May and June 2013 and
to propose the mobilisation of the Solidarity Fund for each of these cases.
4.           Summary
table by heading of the Financial Framework
 Financial framework Heading/subheading || Revised 2013 Financial framework || Budget 2013 (incl. AB 1 to AB 5 + DAB 6 to DAB 8/2013) || DAB 9/2013 || Budget 2013 (incl. AB 1 to AB 5 + DAB 6 to DAB 9/2013) 
 CA || PA || CA || PA || CA || PA || CA || PA 
 1. SUSTAINABLE GROWTH ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 1a. Competitiveness for growth and employment || 15 670 000 000 ||   || 16 168 150 291 || 12 886 628 095 ||   ||   || 16 168 150 291 || 12 886 628 095 
 Margin ||   ||   || 1 849 709 ||   ||   ||   || 1 849 709 ||   
 1b. Cohesion for growth and employment || 54 974 000 000 ||   || 55 108 049 037 || 56 349 544 736 ||   ||   || 55 108 049 037 || 56 349 544 736 
 Margin[7] ||   ||   || 0 ||   ||   ||   || 0 ||   
 Total || 70 644 000 000 ||   || 71 276 199 328 || 69 236 172 831 ||   ||   || 71 276 199 328 || 69 236 172 831 
 Margin[8] ||   ||   || 1 849 709 ||   ||   ||   || 1 849 709 ||   
 2. PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Of which market related expenditure and direct payments || 48 574 000 000 ||   || 43 956 548 610 || 43 934 188 711 ||   ||   || 43 956 548 610 || 43 934 188 711 
 Total || 61 289 000 000 ||   || 60 159 241 416 || 58 068 031 826 ||   ||   || 60 159 241 416 || 58 068 031 826 
 Margin ||   ||   || 1 129 758 584 ||   ||   ||   || 1 129 758 584 ||   
 3. CITIZENSHIP, FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 3a. Freedom, Security and Justice || 1 661 000 000 ||   || 1 440 827 200 || 1 050 404 650 ||   ||   || 1 440 827 200 || 1 050 404 650 
 Margin ||   ||   || 220 172 800 ||   ||   ||   || 220 172 800 ||   
 3b. Citizenship || 746 000 000 ||   || 753 287 942 || 664 802 559 || 400 519 089 || 400 519 089 || 1 153 807 031 || 1 065 321 648 
 Margin ||   ||   || 7 320 000 ||   ||   ||   || 7 320 000 ||   
 Total || 2 407 000 000 ||   || 2 194 115 142 || 1 715 207 209 || 400 519 089 || 400 519 089 || 2 594 634 231 || 2 115 726 298 
 Margin[9] ||   ||   || 227 492 800 ||   ||   ||   || 227 492 800 ||   
 4. EU AS A GLOBAL PLAYER || 9 595 000 000 ||   || 9 583 118 711 || 6 941 146 336 ||   ||   || 9 583 118 711 || 6 941 146 336 
 Margin[10] ||   ||   || 275 996 289 ||   ||   ||   || 275 996 289 ||   
 5. ADMINISTRATION || 8 492 000 000 ||   || 8 430 374 740 || 8 430 049 740 ||   ||   || 8 430 374 740 || 8 430 049 740 
 Margin[11] ||   ||   || 147 625 260 ||   ||   ||   || 147 625 260 ||   
 6.COMPENSATION || 75 000 000 ||   || 75 000 000 || 75 000 000 ||   ||   || 75 000 000 || 75 000 000 
 Margin ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TOTAL || 152 502 000 000 || 144 285 000 000 || 151 718 049 337 || 144 465 607 942 || 400 519 089 || 400 519 089 || 152 118 568 426 || 144 866 127 031 
 Margin [12],[13],[14] ||   ||   || 1 782 722 642 || 0 ||   ||   || 1 782 722 642 || 0 
[1]               OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.
[2]               OJ L 66, 8.3.2013, p. 1.
[3]               COM(2013) 518.
[4]               COM(2013) 655.
[5]               COM(2013) 557.
[6]               COM(2013) 669.
[7]               EUR 134,0 million
above the ceiling are financed by the mobilisation of the Flexibility
Instrument in 2013.
[8]               The European Globalisation adjustment
Fund (EGF) is not included in the calculation of the margin under
Heading 1a (EUR 500 million).
[9]               The
European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) amount is entered over and above the
relevant headings as foreseen by the IIA of 17 May 2006 (OJ C 139 of 14.6.2006).
[10]             The 2013 margin for heading 4 does not
take into account the appropriations related to the Emergency Aid Reserve
(EUR 264,1 million).
[11]             For calculating the margin under the
ceiling for heading 5, account is taken of the footnote (1) of the
financial framework 2007-2013 for an amount of EUR 86 million for the
staff contributions to the pension scheme.
[12]             EUR 134,0 million
above the ceiling for commitments are financed by the mobilisation of the Flexibility
Instrument in 2013.
[13]             The global margin for commitments does not
take into account the appropriations related to the EGF
(EUR 500 million), the EUSF (EUR 415,1 million), the EAR
(EUR 264,1 million), and the staff contributions to the pensions
scheme (EUR 86 million).
[14]             The global margin for payments does not
take into account the appropriations related to the EUSF
(EUR 415,1 million), the EAR (EUR 80 million), and to the
staff contributions to the pensions scheme (EUR 86 million).