text:
10.10.2009
 DA
 Den Europæiske Unions Tidende
 C 244/5
 Sag anlagt den 16. juli 2009 — Trasys mod Kommissionen
 (Sag T-277/09)
 2009/C 244/08
 Processprog: engelsk
 Parter
 Sagsøger: Trasys (Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgien) (ved lawyers M. Martens og P. Hermant)
 Sagsøgt: Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber
 Sagsøgerens påstande
 —
 Annullation af Kommissionens beslutning om ikke at vælge sagsøgerens bud for parti C og E i udbud nr. 10017, meddelt sagsøgeren ved skrivelse af 9. juni 2009, og om at tildele kontrakten til de valgte bydende.
 —
 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber tilpligtes at betale sagens omkostninger.
 Søgsmålsgrunde og væsentligste argumenter
 Sagsøgeren har i den foreliggende sag nedlagt påstand om annullation af Kommissionens beslutning om ikke at vælge sagsøgerens bud for parti C og D, afgivet som svar på en åben udbudsrunde om bistand til Publikationskontoret og dets CORDIS-enhed ved levering af offentliggørelses- og kommunikationsydelser (1), og om at tildele kontrakten til den valgte bydende.
 Sagsøgeren har påberåbt sig fire anbringender til støtte for søgsmålet.
 For det første har sagsøgeren gjort gældende, at Kommissionen har tilsidesat gennemsigtighedsprincippet i finansforordningens (2) artikel 100 og artikel 89, stk. 1, ved i et urimeligt omfang at begrænse adgangen til vigtige oplysninger, hvilket medførte, at sagsøgeren blev afskåret fra at skaffe sig fornødent kendskab til den metode, hvorved buddene blev vurderet, og til baggrunden for, at sagsøgerens bud ikke blev valgt.
 For det andet hævdede sagsøgeren, at virksomhedens bud blev undergivet en vurderingsmetode, som er i strid med principperne i finansforordningens artikel 89, stk. 1, herunder ligebehandlings- og gennemsigtighedsprincippet.
 For det tredje har sagsøgeren anført, at udbudsbetingelserne ikke var tilstrækkeligt præcise, og den ordregivende myndighed ikke orienterede om den sidste præcisering rettidigt, således at sagsøgeren ikke var i stand til at planlægge sit bud og tage hensyn til den måde, som vurderingen ville blive foretaget på.
 For det fjerde har sagsøgeren gjort gældende, at virksomhedens bud blev undergivet en urimelig og uforholdsmæssig vurdering fra den ordregivende myndigheds side, hvilket medførte fejlskøn, der behæfter den endelige beslutning med fejl.
 (1) EUT 2008/S 242-321376.
 (2) Rådets forordning (EF, Euratom) nr. 1605/2002 af 25.6.2002 om finansforordningen vedrørende De Europæiske Fællesskabers almindelige budget (EFT L 248, s. 1).


type: contracts

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 21993D0629(01)
 Απόφαση αριθ. 1/93 της Μεικτής Επιτροπής ΕΟΚ- Τσεχικής Δημοκρατίας και Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας της 28ης Μαΐου 1993 για την εξαγωγή ορισμένων προϊόντων χάλυβα από τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία στην Κοινότητα
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα αριθ. L 157 της 29/06/1993 σ. 0059 - 0066
 ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗ αριθ. 1/93 ΤΗΣ ΜΕΙΚΤΗΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗΣ ΕΟΚ-ΤΣΕΧΙΚΗΣ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΣΛΟΒΑΚΙΚΗΣ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑΣ της 28ης Μαΐου 1993 για την εξαγωγή ορισμένων προϊόντων χάλυβα από τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία στην Κοινότητα(93/372/ΕΚΑΧ)Η ΜΕΙΚΤΗ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ, Εκτιμώντας: ότι η μεικτή επιτροπή που αναφέρεται στο άρθρο 37 της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας μεταξύ της Κοινότητας, αφενός, και της Τσεχικής και Σλοβακικής Ομοσπονδιακής Δημοκρατίας, αφετέρου, που υπεγράφη στις Βρυξέλλες στις 16 Δεκεμβρίου 1991 (εφεξής καλούμενη «ενδιάμεση συμφωνία»), παραδέχθηκε την ανάγκη να εξευρεθούν κατάλληλες λύσεις στο πλαίσιο του άρθρου 44 παράγραφος 1 της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας, για να εξασφαλιστεί ότι δεν θα τεθεί σε κίνδυνο η εξασφάλιση των στόχων της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας 7 ότι ορισμένα προϊόντα σιδήρου αποτέλεσαν αντικείμενο μέτρων διασφάλισης στην Κοινότητα το 1992 σύμφωνα με τη σύσταση 92/434/ΕΚΑΧ της Επιτροπής της 14ης Αυγούστου 1992 (1) και την απόφαση 92/433/ΕΟΚ της Επιτροπής της 14ης Αυγούστου 1992 (2) 7 ότι υποβλήθηκαν δηλώσεις από την Τσεχική Δημοκρατία και τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία που πληροφορούν την Κοινότητα ότι τόσο η Τσεχική Δημοκρατία όσο και η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία εξακολουθούν να επωμίζονται όλες τις υποχρεώσεις που απορρέουν από την ενδιάμεση συμφωνία μετά τη διάλυση της Τσεχικής και Σλοβακικής Ομοσπονδιακής Δημοκρατίας στις 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1992 7 ότι, λόγω της σοβαρής κρίσεως και της ανάγκης αναδιάρθρωσης της βιομηχανίας χάλυβα τόσο της Κοινότητας όσο και της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας, είναι σκόπιμο να εξασφαλισθεί ένα προβλέψιμο και σταθερό πλαίσιο για την εμπορική τους σχέση 7 ότι η φύση της κατάστασης απαιτεί τη λήψη άμεσης απόφασης από τη μεικτή επιτροπή σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 38 της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας 7 ότι η κατάσταση αποτέλεσε αντικείμενο διεξοδικής εξέτασης και με βάση τις σχετικές πληροφορίες που παρασχέθηκαν, τα μέρη συμφωνούν ότι η θέσπιση ενός καθεστώτος δασμολογικών ποσοστώσεων για τις εισαγωγές ορισμένων προϊόντων χάλυβα στην Κοινότητα αποτελεί αποδεκτή λύση που διαταράσσει όσο το δυνατό λιγότερο την εφαρμογή της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας, ΑΠΟΦΑΣΙΖΕΙ: Άρθρο 1 1. Για την περίοδο από την 1η Ιουνίου 1993 έως τις 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1995, οι εισαγωγές στην Κοινότητα προϊόντων των οποίων οι κωδικοί ΣΟ απαριθμούνται στο παράρτημα Ι, καταγωγής του εδάφους της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας, υπόκεινται στον εισαγωγικό δασμό που προβλέπει η ενδιάμεση συμφωνία και, ιδίως, το άρθρο 2 του πρωτοκόλλου της αριθ. 2, υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι συνοδεύονται από πιστοποιητικό κυκλοφορίας εμπορευμάτων «EUR 1» και από άδεια εξαγωγής υπό τη μορφή που καθορίζεται στο παράρτημα ΙΙ εντός των ακολούθων ορίων: >ΘΕΣΗ ΠΗΝΑΚΑ> 2. Για την περίοδο που αναφέρεται στην παράγραφο 1, οι εισαγωγές στην Κοινότητα προϊόντων που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι καταγωγής του εδάφους της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας: - εντός των ορίων που καθορίζονται στην παράγραφο 1, μη συνοδευόμενες από πιστοποιητικό κυκλοφορίας εμπορευμάτων EUR 1 και από άδεια εξαγωγής υπό τη μορφή που αναφέρεται στο παράρτημα ΙΙ, - καθ' υπέρβαση αυτών των ποσοτήτων, υπόκεινται σε εισαγωγικό δασμό επιπλέον απ' αυτόν που προβλέπεται στην ενδιάμεση συμφωνία. Ο πρόσθετος δασμός ισούται με τα ακόλουθα ποσοστά της τελωνειακής αξίας των προϊόντων: - 25 % για τους ρόλους θερμής έλασης, - 30 % για τα φύλλα (λαμαρίνες) ψυχρής έλασης, - 25 % για τις ταινίες θερμής έλασης, - 25 % για τα προϊόντα σε φύλλα, - 30 % για τους σωλήνες χωρίς συγκόλληση. 3. Με την επιφύλαξη της ισχύουσας κοινοτικής νομοθεσίας, τα προϊόντα που εισάγονται στην Κοινότητα αφού υποστούν τελειοποίηση για επανεισαγωγή ή για να υποστούν τελειοποίηση για επανεξαγωγή βάσει του συστήματος αναστολής που προβλέπει ο κανονισμός (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 1999/85 της Επιτροπής της (1), και τα οποία πληρούν τους συνήθεις διοικητικούς όρους δεν συμπεριλαμβάνονται στο πεδίο εφαρμογής της παρούσας απόφασης. 4. Οι κανόνες καταγωγής που πρέπει να εφαρμοστούν είναι αυτοί που θεσπίζει το πρωτόκολλο αριθ. 4 της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας. Εντούτοις, αυτοί οι κανόνες εφαρμόζονται στο έδαφος της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας και όχι, όπως προβλέπεται στο πρωτόκολλο, στο έδαφος της Τσεχικής και Σλοβακικής Ομοσπονδιακής Δημοκρατίας. Άρθρο 2 Οι σλοβακικές αρχές αναλαμβάνουν να παραμείνουν εντός των ορίων που καθορίζονται στο άρθρο 1 παράγραφος 1 για τις άδειες που εκδίδονται υπό τη μορφή που καθορίζεται στο παράρτημα ΙΙ. Αυτές οι άδειες περιλαμβάνουν την ακόλουθη πληροφορία για τη σχετική δασμολογική ποσόστωση: «Εμπορεύματα που αφαιρούνται από τη δασμολογική ποσόστωση μέχρι ποσότητας . . . τόνων». Άρθρο 3 1. Οι σλοβακικές αρχές καταβάλλουν κάθε δυνατή προσπάθεια: - για να αποφύγουν αιφνίδιες και επιζήμιες μεταβολές των παραδοσιακών ρευμάτων συναλλαγών που συνεπάγονται περιφερειακή συγκέντρωση των εξαγωγών προς την Κοινότητα των προϊόντων που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι και - για την εξασφάλιση ισορροπημένου ρυθμού παράδοσης των προϊόντων που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι για να αποφευχθεί υπερβολική συγκέντρωση ενός συγκεκριμένου προϊόντος σε μία συγκεκριμένη περίοδο. 2. Εάν προκύψουν απότομες και επιζήμιες μεταβολές των ρευμάτων συναλλαγών ή έντονη άνοδος των εισαγωγών, η Κοινότητα θα έχει το δικαίωμα να ζητήσει διαβουλεύσεις για να επιτύχει ικανοποιητική επίλυση αυτών των προβλημάτων. Οι εν λόγω διαβουλεύσεις πρέπει να πραγματοποιηθούν εντός δέκα πέντε εργάσιμων ημερών από την ημερομηνία κατά την οποία τις ζητά η Κοινότητα. Άρθρο 4 1. Η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία αναλαμβάνει να παρέχει στην Κοινότητα ακριβείς στατιστικές πληροφορίες για τις άδειες εξαγωγής που εκδίδουν οι σλοβακικές αρχές σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 2. Αυτές οι πληροφορίες διαβιβάζονται στην Κοινότητα ως το τέλος του μήνα που ακολουθεί το μήνα στον οποίο αναφέρονται οι στατιστικές. 2. Η Κοινότητα αναλαμβάνει να παρέχει στις σλοβακικές αρχές ακριβή στατιστικά στοιχεία για τις εισαγωγές των προϊόντων που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι το ταχύτερο δυνατόν. Άρθρο 5 1. Εάν είναι απαραίτητο, μετά από αίτηση ενός από τα δύο μέρη, διεξάγονται διαβουλεύσεις για οποιοδήποτε πρόβλημα προκύψει από την εφαρμογή της παρούσας απόφασης. Οι σχετικές διαβουλεύσεις διεξάγονται αμέσως. Οι διαβουλεύσεις βάσει του παρόντος άρθρου διεξάγονται και από τα δύο μέρη με πνεύμα συνεργασίας και επιθυμία διευθέτησης της διαφοράς μεταξύ τους. 2. Με την επιφύλαξη της παραγράφου 1, οι διαβουλεύσεις για την εφαρμογή της παρούσας απόφασης διεξάγονται σε τριμηνιαία βάση μεταξύ των αντιπροσώπων της Κοινότητας αφενός και των αντιπροσώπων της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας αφετέρου. Οι εν λόγω διαβουλεύσεις αφορούν κυρίως συγκρίσεις στατιστικών και άλλων σχετικών στοιχείων για τα ρεύματα συναλλαγών και τα επίπεδα των τιμών και πληροφορίες σχετικά με πιθανή καταστρατήγηση των κανόνων καταγωγής. 3. Το αργότερο μέχρι τις 31 Μαρτίου 1994 και τις 31 Μαρτίου 1995 τα μέρη, υπό το φως της εφαρμογής της παρούσας απόφασης, εξετάζουν κατά πόσον πρέπει να εξακολουθούν να ισχύουν οι όροι εφαρμογής της παρούσας απόφασης. Άρθρο 6 Κάθε πληροφορία που πρέπει να παρασχεθεί δυνάμει της παρούσας απόφασης διαβιβάζεται: - όσον αφορά την Κοινότητα, στην Επιτροπή των Ευρωπαϊκών Κοινοτήτων (ΓΔ I/D/2 και ΓΔ III/E/1), - όσον αφορά τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία: στην αντιπροσωπία της Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας στις Ευρωπαϊκές Κοινότητες και στο Ministry of Economy of the Slovac Republic, Multilateral Co-operation Department, Spitalska 8, 81315 Bratislava, Slovak Republic (Fax 00427368093). Άρθρο 7 Η παρούσα απόφαση είναι δεσμευτική τόσο για την Κοινότητα όσο και για τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία, οι οποίες λαμβάνουν τα απαραίτητα μέτρα για την εφαρμογή της. Η παρούσα απόφαση αρχίζει να ισχύει από την ημερομηνία υπογραφής της. Βρυξέλλες, 28 Μαΐου 1993. Για την Κοινότητα Για τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία Jφrn KECK Jan VARSO ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ Ι Ρολοί θερμής έλασης 7208 11 00 7208 12 10 7208 12 91 7208 12 95 7208 12 98 7208 13 10 7208 13 91 7208 13 95 7208 13 98 7208 14 10 7208 14 91 7208 14 99 7208 21 10 7208 21 90 7208 22 10 7208 22 91 7208 22 95 7208 22 98 7208 23 10 7208 23 91 7208 23 95 7208 23 98 7208 24 10 7208 24 91 7208 24 99 7219 11 10 7219 11 90 7219 12 10 7219 12 90 7219 13 10 7219 13 90 7219 14 10 7219 14 90 7225 10 10 7225 20 20 7225 30 00 Φύλλα (λαμαρίνες) ψυχρής έλασης 7209 11 00 7209 12 90 7209 13 90 7209 14 90 7209 21 00 7209 22 90 7209 23 90 7209 24 91 7209 24 99 7209 31 00 7209 32 90 7209 33 90 7209 34 90 7209 41 00 7209 42 90 7209 43 90 7209 44 90 7211 30 10 7211 41 10 7211 41 91 7211 49 10 Χονδρόσυρμα 7213 10 00 7213 20 00 7213 31 00 7213 39 00 7213 41 00 7213 49 00 7213 50 10 7213 50 90 7221 00 10 7221 00 90 7227 10 00 7227 20 00 7227 90 10 7227 90 30 7227 90 50 7227 90 70 Ταινίες θερμής έλασης 7211 12 10 7211 12 90 7211 19 10 7211 19 91 7211 19 99 7211 22 10 7211 22 90 7211 29 10 7211 29 91 7211 29 99 7212 60 91 7220 11 00 7220 12 00 7220 90 31 7226 10 10 7226 20 20 7226 91 10 7226 91 90 7226 99 20 Προϊόντα σε φύλλα 7208 32 10 7208 33 10 7208 33 99 7208 34 10 7208 34 90 7208 42 10 7208 43 10 7208 43 99 7208 44 10 7208 44 90 7208 35 10 7208 35 90 7208 45 10 7208 45 90 Σωλήνες χωρίς συγκόλληση Ολόκληρη η κλάση 7304 της Συνδυασμένης Ονοματολογίας. Συγκολλημένοι σωλήνες Ολόκληρη η κλάση 7306 της Συνδυασμένης Ονοματολογίας. ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ ΙΙ MINISTRY OF ECONOMY OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC Licensing Department OSpitαlska 8 813 15 Bratislava EXPORT LICENCE No Exporter: Description of goods: CN codes Name Quantity Country of destination: Certification by the competent authority: Goods deducted from the tariff quota to the amount of tonnes. In Bratislava on Signature ΣΥΜΦΩΝΗΘΕΝ ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΟ αριθ. 1 Στο πλαίσιο της απόφασης αριθ. 1/93 (S) της μεικτής επιτροπής ΕΚ-Τσεχικής Δημοκρατίας και Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας της 28ης Μαΐου 1993 όσον αφορά τα εμπορικά προβλήματα που αφορούν ορισμένα προϊόντα χάλυβα, τα μέρη συμφώνησαν σχετικά με τις ποσότητες που αναφέρει το άρθρο 1 παράγραφος 1 για την περίοδο από 1ης Ιουνίου έως 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1993. Η Κοινότητα και η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία συμφωνούν επίσης ότι αν οι εισαγωγές των εν λόγω προϊόντων καταγωγής Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας για την περίοδο από 1ης Ιανουαρίου έως 31 Μαΐου 1993 υπερβούν τις ακόλουθες ποσότητες: - ρόλοι θερμής έλασης 55 833 τόνοι, - φύλλα (λαμαρίνες) ψυχρής έλασης 38 950 τόνοι, - ταινίες θερμής έλασης 15 375 τόνοι, - προϊόντα σε φύλλα 39 583 τόνοι, - σωλήνες χωρίς συγκόλληση 8 580 τόνοι, οι σλοβακικές αρχές θα μειώσουν τις ποσότητες των αδειών που μπορούν να εκδόσουν σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 2 για την περίοδο από 1ης Ιουνίου έως 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1993 (και, εφόσον αποβεί απαραίτητο, για το έτος 1994) κατά την ποσότητα που αντιστοιχεί στην υπέρβαση. Στην περίπτωση που οι ποσότητες για την περίοδο από 1ης Ιανουαρίου έως 31 Μαΐου 1993 είναι κατώτερες από τις ποσότητες που αναφέρονται παραπάνω, οι σλοβακικές αρχές μπορούν να αυξήσουν τις ποσότητες των αδειών που μπορούν να εκδόσουν σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 2 για την περίοδο από 1ης Ιουνίου έως 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1993 κατά την ποσότητα που αντιστοιχεί στο έλλειμμα. Τα μέρη συμφωνούν να συναντηθούν το αργότερο στις 30 Σεπτεμβρίου 1993 για να εξακριβώσουν τις ποσότητες που εισήχθησαν στην Κοινότητα κατά την περίοδο από 1ης Ιανουαρίου έως 31 Μαΐου 1993. ΣΥΜΦΩΝΗΘΕΝ ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΟ αριθ. 2 Στο πλαίσιο της απόφασης αριθ. 1/93 (S) της μεικτής επιτροπής ΕΚ-Τσεχικής Δημοκρατίας και Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας της 28ης Μαΐου 1993 όσον αφορά τα εμπορικά προβλήματα που αφορούν ορισμένα προϊόντα χάλυβα, τα μέρη συμφώνησαν ότι οι σλοβακικές αρχές καταβάλλουν όλες τις δυνατές προσπάθειες για να αποφύγουν αιφνίδιες και επιζήμιες μεταβολές των ρευμάτων των συναλλαγών που συνεπάγονται περιφερειακές συγκεντρώσεις των εξαγωγών προς την Κοινότητα και για να εξασφαλίζουν ισορροπημένο ρυθμό παράδοσης αυτών των εξαγόμενων προϊόντων. Η Κοινότητα και η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία συμφωνούν επίσης ότι, με την επιφύλαξη της πλήρους εφαρμογής του συστήματος δασμολογικών ποσοστώσεων, τα παραδοσιακά ρεύματα συναλλαγών κατά την περίοδο εφαρμογής της παρούσας απόφασης εξακριβώνονται με βάση τα παραδοσιακά ρεύματα συναλλαγών του έτους 1991 των συναλλαγών μεταξύ της Κοινότητας και του τμήματος του εδάφους της πρώην Τσεχικής και Σλοβακικής Ομοσπονδικαής Δημοκρατίας που αντιπροσωπεύει τώρα η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία. Μετά από αίτηση οποιουδήποτε από τα δύο μέρη, μπορούν να διεξαχθούν διαβουλεύσεις σχετικά με την προσαρμογή των παραδοσιακών ρευμάτων συναλλαγών ώστε να ληφθούν υπόψη οι μεταβολές στην κοινοτική αγορά. ΔΗΛΩΣΗ Στο πλαίσιο της απόφασης αριθ. 1/93 της μεικτής επιτροπής της ΕΚ-Τσεχικής Δημοκρατίας και Σλοβακικής Δημοκρατίας της 28ης Μαΐου 1993 όσον αφορά τα εμπορικά προβλήματα που αφορούν ορισμένα προϊόντα χάλυβα, τα μέρη συμφώνησαν ότι τα προϊόντα που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι της απόφασης υπόκεινται σε καθεστώς δασμολογικών ποσοστώσεων. Η Κοινότητα δηλώνει ότι θεωρεί ότι η απόφαση θεσπίζει μέτρα που διαταράσσουν το λιγότερο δυνατό τη λειτουργία της ενδιάμεσης συμφωνίας, καθώς επίσης και ότι η σωστή εφαρμογή της απόφασης θα αποκλείσει την προσφυγή σε άλλες λύσεις για την αντιμετώπιση των εμπορικών προβλημάτων. ΔΗΛΩΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΣΛΟΒΑΚΙΚΗΣ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑΣ Η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία δηλώνει ότι για την περίοδο ισχύος της παρούσας απόφασης είναι ικανοποιημένη που δεν προβλέπονται εξαγωγές χονδροσύρματος και συγκολλημένων σωλήνων, όπως αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι της παρούσας απόφασης, από τη Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία προς την Κοινότητα. ΔΗΛΩΣΗ Δεδομένου ότι η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία διατύπωσε ερωτήματα, εξαιτίας των διαφορών των στατιστικών στοιχείων που υπέβαλαν τα μέρη, όσον αφορά τα στατιστικά στοιχεία για τα φύλλα (λαμαρίνες) (που αναφέρονται στο παράρτημα Ι) που εισήχθησαν στην Κοινότητα από την Τσεχική και Σλοβακική Ομοσπονιακή Δημοκρατία το 1991, η Κοινότητα και η Σλοβακική Δημοκρατία δηλώνουν ότι προτίθενται να τα επανεξετάσουν και να προβούν σε διαβουλεύσεις με σκοπό την επαλήθευση των εν λόγω στοιχείων το ταχύτερο δυνατό. Εάν προκύψει από την επαλήθευση ότι υπάρχει σημαντικό λάθος, τα μέρη θα συναντηθούν για να επιλύσουν το πρόβλημα καταλλήλως.


type: caselaw

text:
9.2.2008
 DA
 Den Europæiske Unions Tidende
 C 37/34
 EU-Personalerettens dom (Tredje Afdeling) af 7. november 2007 — Hinderyckx mod Rådet
 (Sag F-57/06) (1)
 (Tjenestemænd - forfremmelse - forfremmelsesåret 2005 - ikke-optaget på listen over forfremmede tjenestemænd - tilsidesættelse af vedtægtens artikel 45 - sammenligning af fortjenester - bedømmelsesrapporter fra flere institutioner)
 (2008/C 37/55)
 Processprog: fransk
 Parter
 Sagsøger: Jacques Hinderyckx (Bruxelles, Belgien) (ved avocat J. Martin)
 Sagsøgt: Rådet for Den Europæiske Union (ved M. Simm og M. Bauer, som befuldmægtigede)
 Sagens genstand
 Påstand dels om annullation af afgørelsen, hvorefter sagsøgeren ikke blev forfremmet til lønklasse B*8 i forfremmelsesåret 2005, dels om erstatning.
 Konklusion
 1)
 Rådet for Den Europæiske Union frifindes.
 2)
 Rådet for Den Europæiske Union betaler sine egne og en tredjedel af sagsøgerens omkostninger.
 3)
 Sagsøgeren bærer to tredjedele af sine egne omkostninger.
 (1) EUT C 178 af 29.7.2006, s. 34.


type: wikipedia

text:
Šáhovska olimpijáda (tudi š. olimpiada) je turnir držav v šahu, ki ga organizira FIDE vsako drugo leto od leta 1927. Vmes so bile tudi neuradne olimpijade. Šah (še) ni priznan kot olimpijski šport čeprav je FIDE od leta 1999 priznana od Mednarodnega olimpijskega komiteja.
 Leta 2002 se je olimpijada je odvijala na Bledu, v Jugoslaviji pa so bile tri: leta 1950 v Dubrovniku (sedaj Hrvaška), 1972 v Skopju (Makedonija) in 1990 v Novem Sadu (Srbija).
 40. šahovska olimpijada (2012) je bila v Istambulu. 44. olimpijada bo leta 2020 v Hati-Mansijsku, 45. leta 2022 v Minsku.
 Moške olimpijade
 (Leto: olimpijada, kraj, država—zmagovalci (uvrstitev Jugoslavije oz. Slovenije))
 1924: 1. neuradna šahovska olimpijada, Pariz, Francija—Češkoslovaška. (JUG -)
 1927: 1. šahovska olimpijada, London, Anglija—Madžarska. (JUG 8.)
 1928: 2. šahovska olimpijada, Haag, Nizozemska, -- Madžarska. (JUG -)
 1930: 3. šahovska olimpijada, Hamburg, Nemčija, -- Poland. (JUG -)
 1931: 4. šahovska olimpijada, Praga, Češkoslovaška, -- ZDA. (JUG 4.)
 1931: 2. neuradna šahovska olimpijada, Budimpešta, Madžarska, -- Madžarska.
 1933: 5. šahovska olimpijada, Folkstone, Anglija, Združeno kraljestvo—ZDA. (JUG -)
 1935: 6. šahovska olimpijada, Varšava, Poljska, -- ZDA. (JUG 6.)
 1936: 3. neuradna šahovska olimpijada, Munchen, Nemčija, -- Madžarska.
 1937: 7. šahovska olimpijada, Stockholm, Švedska, -- ZDA. (JUG 9.)
 1939: 8. šahovska olimpijada, Buenos Aires, Argentina, -- Nemčija. (JUG -)
 1950: 9. šahovska olimpijada, Dubrovnik, Jugoslavija, -- Jugoslavija.
 1952: 10. šahovska olimpijada, Helsinki, Finska, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1954: 11. šahovska olimpijada, Amsterdam, Nizozemska, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1956: 12. šahovska olimpijada, Moskva, Sovjetska zveza, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1958: 13. šahovska olimpijada, Munchen, Zahodna Nemčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1960: 14. šahovska olimpijada, Leipzig, Zahodna Nemčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1962: 15. šahovska olimpijada, Varna, Bolgarija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1964: 16. šahovska olimpijada, Tel Aviv, Izrael, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1966: 17. šahovska olimpijada, Havana, Kuba, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 4.)
 1968: 18. šahovska olimpijada, Lugano, Švica, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1970: 19. šahovska olimpijada, Siegen, Zahodna Nemčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1972: 20. šahovska olimpijada, Skopje, Jugoslavija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1974: 21. šahovska olimpijada, Nica, Francija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1976: 22. šahovska olimpijada, Haifa, Izrael, -- ZDA. (JUG -)
 1976: 4. neuradna šahovska olimpijada, Tripolis, Libija, -- Salvador.
 1978: 23. šahovska olimpijada, Buenos Aires, Argentina, -- Madžarska. (JUG 15.)
 1980: 24. šahovska olimpijada, La Valletta, Malta, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 3.)
 1982: 25. šahovska olimpijada, Luzern, Švica, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 4.)
 1984: 26. šahovska olimpijada, Solun, Grčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 8.)
 1986: 27. šahovska olimpijada, Dubaj, Združeni arabski emirati, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 15.)
 1988: 28. šahovska olimpijada, Solun, Grčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 6.)
 1990: 29. šahovska olimpijada, Novi Sad, Jugoslavija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 5.-7.)
 1992: 30. šahovska olimpijada, Manila, Filipini, -- Rusija. (SLO 17.-21.)
 1994: 31. šahovska olimpijada, Moskva, Rusija, -- Rusija (SLO 37.)
 1996: 32. šahovska olimpijada, Erevan, Armenija, -- Rusija. (SLO 22.)
 1998: 33. šahovska olimpijada, Elista, Kalmikija, Rusija—Rusija. (SLO 23.)
 2000: 34. šahovska olimpijada, Carigrad, Turčija, -- Rusija. (SLO 12.)
 2002: 35. šahovska olimpijada, Bled, Slovenija, -- Rusija. (SLO-A 40., SLO-B 69., SLO-C 80.)
 2004: 36. šahovska olimpijada, Calviá, Španija, -- Ukrajina (SLO 17.)
 2006: 37. šahovska olimpijada, Torino, Italija, -- Armenija (SLO 23.)
 2008: 38. šahovska olimpijada, Dresden, Nemčija, --Armenija (SLO 17.)
 2010: 39.šahovska olimpijada, Hanti-Mansisk, Rusija, -- Ukrajina (SLO 36.)
 2012: 40.šahovska olimpijada, Instanbul, Turčija, -- Armenija (SLO 25.)
 2014: 41.šahovska olimpijada, Tromsø, Norveška, -- Kitajska (SLO 38.)
 2016: 42.šahovska olimpijada, Baku, Azerbajdžan, --
 2018: 43.šahovska olimpijada, Batumi, Gruzija, --
 2020: 44.šahovska olimpijada, Hanti-Mansijsk, Rusija, --
 2022: 45.šahovska olimpijada, Minsk, Belorusija, --
 Ženske olimpijade
 Ženske olimpijade so bile najprej ločene od moških tekmovanj, od leta 1976 pa so združene v enotno olimpijado.
 (Leto: olimpijada, kraj, država - zmagovalke (uvrstitev Jugoslavije oz. Slovenije))
 1957: 1. ženska šahovska olimpijada, Emmen, Nizozemska, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 6.)
 1963: 2. ženska šahovska olimpijada, Split, Jugoslavija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 2.)
 1966: 3. ženska šahovska olimpijada, Oberhausen, Zahodna Nemčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 4.)
 1969: 4. ženska šahovska olimpijada, Lublin, Poljska, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 4.)
 1972: 20. šahovska olimpijada, Skopje, Jugoslavija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 10.)
 1974: 6. ženska šahovska olimpijada, Medelin, Kolumbija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 7.)
 1976: 22. šahovska olimpijada, Haifa, Izrael, -- Izrael. (JUG -)
 1978: 23. šahovska olimpijada, Buenos Aires, Argentina, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 4.)
 1980: 24. šahovska olimpijada, La Valletta, Malta, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 7.-8.)
 1982: 25. šahovska olimpijada, Luzern, Švica, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 10.-13.)
 1984: 26. šahovska olimpijada, Solun, Grčija, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 9.-10.)
 1986: 27. šahovska olimpijada, Dubaj, Združeni arabski emirati, -- Sovjetska zveza. (JUG 5.)
 1988: 28. šahovska olimpijada, Solun, Grčija, -- Madžarska. (JUG 3.)
 1990: 29. šahovska olimpijada, Novi Sad, Jugoslavija, -- Madžarska. (JUG 5.)
 1992: 30. šahovska olimpijada, Manila, Filipini, -- Gruzija. (SLO 26.)
 1994: 31. šahovska olimpijada, Moskva, Rusija, -- Rusija. (SLO 30.)
 1996: 32. šahovska olimpijada, Erevan, Armenija, -- Gruzija. (SLO 28.)
 1998: 33. šahovska olimpijada, Elista, Kalmikija, Rusija—Kitajska. (SLO 35.)
 2000: 34. šahovska olimpijada, Carigrad, Turčija, -- Kitajska. (SLO 46.)
 2002: 35. šahovska olimpijada, Bled, Slovenija, -- Kitajska. (SLO-A 32., SLO-B 53.)
 2004: 36. šahovska olimpijada, Calviá, Španija, -- Kitajska. (SLO 19.)
 2006: 37. šahovska olimpijada, Torino, Italija, -- Ukrajina (SLO 9.)
 2006: 38. šahovska olimpijada, Dresden, Nemčija—Gruzija (SLO 37.)
 Viri
 Drinovec, Aleš (urednik). Slovenski šah. Šahovska zveza Slovenije, Ljubljana 2002.
 Zunanje povezave
 OlimpBase - Zgodovina šahovskih olimpijad
 Šahovska tekmovanja
 Športne prireditve, ustanovljene leta 1927


text:
 4.10.2012
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 L 270/1
 ROZHODNUTÍ SMÍŠENÉHO VÝBORU EHP
 č. 103/2012
 ze dne 15. června 2012,
 kterým se mění příloha I (Veterinární a rostlinolékařské předpisy) Dohody o EHP
 SMÍŠENÝ VÝBOR EHP,
 s ohledem na Dohodu o Evropském hospodářském prostoru, ve znění Protokolu o úpravě Dohody o Evropském hospodářském prostoru (dále jen „Dohoda“), a zejména na článek 98 této dohody,
 vzhledem k těmto důvodům:
 (1)
 Příloha I Dohody byla změněna rozhodnutím Smíšeného výboru EHP č. 80/2012 ze dne 30. dubna 2012 (1).
 (2)
 Nařízení Komise v přenesené pravomoci (EU) č. 1152/2011 ze dne 14. července 2011, kterým se doplňuje nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 998/2003, pokud jde o preventivní zdravotní opatření pro tlumení infekce Echinococcus multilocularis u psů (2), by mělo být začleněno do Dohody.
 (3)
 Nařízení Komise v přenesené pravomoci (EU) č. 1153/2011 ze dne 30. srpna 2011, kterým se mění příloha Ib nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 998/2003, pokud jde o technické požadavky na očkování proti vzteklině (3), by mělo být začleněno do Dohody.
 (4)
 Směrnice Rady 2007/43/ES ze dne 28. června 2007 o minimálních pravidlech pro ochranu kuřat chovaných na maso (4) by měla být začleněna do Dohody.
 (5)
 Prováděcí rozhodnutí Komise 2011/629/EU ze dne 20. září 2011, kterým se mění příloha D směrnice Rady 88/407/EHS, pokud jde o obchod se spermatem skotu uvnitř Unie odeslaným z inseminačních stanic a středisek pro skladování spermatu (5), by mělo být začleněno do Dohody.
 (6)
 Toto rozhodnutí se týká právních předpisů vztahujících se na živá zvířata kromě ryb, živočichů pocházejících z akvakultury a živočišných produktů jako vajíčka, embrya a sperma. Právní předpisy týkající se těchto záležitostí se nevztahují na Island, jak je uvedeno v odstavci 2 v úvodní části kapitoly I přílohy I Dohody. Toto rozhodnutí by se tudíž nemělo vztahovat na Island.
 (7)
 Toto rozhodnutí se týká právních předpisů vztahujících se na veterinární otázky. Právní předpisy vztahující se na veterinární otázky se nepoužijí na Lichtenštejnsko po celou dobu, po niž je na Lichtenštejnsko rozšířena působnost Dohody mezi Evropským společenstvím a Švýcarskou konfederací o obchodu se zemědělskými produkty, jak je uvedeno v odvětvových úpravách v příloze I Dohody. Toto rozhodnutí se tedy nevztahuje na Lichtenštejnsko,
 PŘIJAL TOTO ROZHODNUTÍ:
 Článek 1
 V příloze I Dohody se kapitola I mění takto:
 1)
 V části 1.1 se v bodě 10 (nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 998/2003) doplňuje nová odrážka, která zní:
 „—
 32011 R 1153: nařízení Komise v přenesené pravomoci (EU) č. 1153/2011 ze dne 30. srpna 2011 (Úř. věst. L 296, 15.11.2011, s. 13).“
 2)
 V části 1.2 se za bod 148 (prováděcí rozhodnutí Komise 2011/215/EU) vkládá nový bod, který zní:
 „149.
 32011 R 1152: nařízení Komise v přenesené pravomoci (EU) č. 1152/2011 ze dne 14. července 2011 (Úř. věst. L 296, 15.11.2011, s. 6).
 Tento akt se nevztahuje na Island.
 Pro účely Dohody se nařízení upravuje takto:
 V příloze I části A se doplňuje nový řádek, který zní:
 „NO
 Norsko
 Celé území“ “
 3)
 V bodě 7 (směrnice Rady 88/407/EHS) v části 4.1 se doplňuje nová odrážka, která zní:
 „—
 32011 D 0629: prováděcí rozhodnutí Komise 2011/629/EU ze dne 20. září 2011 (Úř. věst. L 247, 24.9.2011, s. 22).“
 4)
 V bodě 6 (směrnice Rady 88/407/EHS) v části 8.1 se doplňuje nová odrážka, která zní:
 „—
 32011 D 0629: prováděcí rozhodnutí Komise 2011/629/EU ze dne 20. září 2011 (Úř. věst. L 247, 24.9.2011, s. 22).“
 5)
 V části 9.1 se za bod 12 (směrnice Rady 2008/119/ES) vkládá nový bod, který zní:
 „13.
 32007 L 0043: směrnice Rady 2007/43/ES ze dne 28. června 2007 o minimálních pravidlech pro ochranu kuřat chovaných na maso (Úř. věst. L 182, 12.7.2007, s. 19).
 Tento akt se nevztahuje na Island.“
 Článek 2
 Znění nařízení v přenesené pravomoci (EU) č. 1152/2011 a (EU) č. 1153/2011, směrnice 2007/43/ES a prováděcího rozhodnutí 2011/629/EU v norském jazyce, která mají být zveřejněna v dodatku EHP Úředního věstníku Evropské unie, jsou platná.
 Článek 3
 Toto rozhodnutí vstupuje v platnost dnem 16. června 2012 za předpokladu, že Smíšenému výboru EHP jsou učiněna veškerá oznámení podle čl. 103 odst. 1 Dohody (6).
 Článek 4
 Toto rozhodnutí bude zveřejněno v oddíle EHP a v dodatku EHP Úředního věstníku Evropské unie.
 V Bruselu dne 15. června 2012.
 Za Smíšený výbor EHP
 pověřený předseda
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 (1) Úř. věst. L 248, 13.9.2012, s. 13.
 (2) Úř. věst. L 296, 15.11.2011, s. 6.
 (3) Úř. věst. L 296, 15.11.2011, s. 13.
 (4) Úř. věst. L 182, 12.7.2007, s. 19.
 (5) Úř. věst. L 247, 24.9.2011, s. 22.
 (6) Nebyly oznámeny žádné ústavní požadavky.


text:
Vänern är Sveriges och Europeiska Unionens största insjö med en yta på 5 450 km2 och volymen 153 km3. Den ligger 44 meter över havet. Vänern är även den tredje största insjön i Europa, efter Ladoga och Onega, och på 26:e plats i världen.
 Etymologi
 Sjöns namn (Væni i avskrifter från 1100-talet, Lacus Wener i dokument från 932) anses komma från fornsvenskans vænir, med kopplingar till orden vån 'förhoppning' och vän 'förtroendeingivande', 'vacker'. En annan möjlighet är att vænir hör ihop med ett gammalt noanamn på Göta älv, Van 'förhoppningen'. Tolkningarna är osäkra och namnet kan vara flera tusen år gammalt, och kopplat till numera okända ord. Namnet har alltid grav accent (accent 2) i landskapen runt Vänern, men ofta akut accent (accent 1) annorstädes.
 Geografi
 Vänern ligger mellan landskapen Dalsland i väst, Värmland i norr och Västergötland i söder. Kommunsäten längs dess strand är Åmål, Säffle, Grums, Karlstad, Skoghall, Kristinehamn, Gullspång, Mariestad, Lidköping och Vänersborg. Ytterligare tre kommuner har strandlinje längs Vänern utan att kommunsätet är vid stranden. Det gäller Götene, Grästorp och Mellerud. Historiskt sett delades Vänern mellan tre län, men sedan 1997 och sammanslagningen mellan de västgötska länen är Värmlands län och Västra Götalands län de två län som sjön delas mellan.
 Sjöns medeldjup är 27 meter och största djupet ligger på 106 meter. Vänern delas av en skärgård mellan Kållandsö i söder och Värmlandsnäs i norr i en västlig och en östlig del. Den västra delen av sjön kallas Dalbosjön, och den östra delen kallas Värmlandssjön.
 Vänern är en del av vattenvägen Göta älv – Vänern – Göta kanal och är närmast förbunden med Nordsjön/Skagerack vid Göteborg genom Göta älv på den sydvästra sidan och med Vättern vid Karlsborg via Göta kanal.
 Öar
 Sjön har flera skärgårdar och totalt 22 000 öar. De största öarna i Vänern är Torsö, Kållandsö och Hammarön. Mindre öar är Brommö, Djurö och Lurö.
 Strandlinje
 Att mäta längden på en kust eller strand är vanskligt eftersom mätresultatet är helt avhängigt av skalan på den karta vilken man mäter på, se vidare artikeln En kuststräckas längd. Det innebär att mätvärden för olika sjöar eller kustlinjer är jämförbara endast om de har uppmätts på kartor med samma noggrannhet. Statistiska centralbyrån, som i mätningar utgår från Lantmäteriets vattenmasker i skala 1:10 000, anger Vänerns totala strandlinje till 4 527 kilometer, varav 1 790 kilometer är fastlandsstränder och 2 737 kilometer är ö-stränder.
 Fauna och flora
 Enligt en undersökning av Fiskeriverket går den hotade fiskarten asp upp i bland annat Dalbergsån, Lidan, Tidan, Norsälven, Ölman, Byälven, Alsterån och Gullspångsälven för att leka under våren.
 I Vänern finns över 700 fågelskär där det varje år häckar mer än 30 000 måsfåglar och tärnor. I skydd av deras kolonier häckar också många andra fåglar – så många som 50 arter har hittats på Vänerns fågelskär i de inventeringar som görs varje år. Fiskmås är vanligast, följd av skrattmås och gråtrut. Därefter kommer fisktärna och silvertärna. Exempel på arter som gärna häckar i skydd av kolonierna är småskrake, storlom och strandskata. Många av skären är fågelskyddsområden, där det är förbjudet att komma närmare än 100 m mellan den 1 april-31 juli.
 Vänerns stränder och fågelskär växer igen i allt snabbare takt vilket utgör ett hot mot fågelarter som är beroende av öppna holmar och skär som häckningsmiljöer. Därför ska länsstyrelserna i Värmland och Västra Götaland röja de viktigaste fågelskären inom Natura 2000-områden i Vänern i ett EU-projekt som heter LIFE Vänern.
 Historia
 Vänern bildades efter den senaste istiden för omkring 10 000 år sedan. När isen smälte var Sverige täckt av en längsgående vattenmassa som skapade en förbindelse mellan Kattegatt och Bottenhavet. Landhöjningen gjorde att sjöar som Vänern och Vättern skars av från havet. Den tidigare förbindelsen med havet innebär att det idag finns arter i Vänern som normalt inte lever ut hela sin livscykel i sötvatten, till exempel vänerlax.
 Vänern var efter sin tillkomst betydligt större än i dag, vilket beror på att landhöjningen är större i norr än vid utloppet i söder, och därför drar sig de norra stränderna tillbaka med tiden. Många platta områden i Värmland, Dalsland och Västergötland låg under den så kallade Storvänerns yta.
 Sjöfart
 Trafiken på Vänern karakteriserades historiskt dels av småskalig bondeseglation, dels av storskalig sjöfart med vänerkulturens förbindelser till Bergslagen, och därigenom till Mälardalen.
 På grund av frånvaron av städer på medeltiden (förutom Lidköping) dominerades trafiken helt av allmogeseglationen. Men efter städernas tillkomst fortsatte bondeseglationen på grund av städernas inbördes konkurrensförhållande. Bondeseglation och småredandet tar bara fart i lämpliga konkurrenser eller nischer inom den samtida ekonomin. Ibland ligger den maritima erfarenheten latent. Skutskepparnas tid återfinns under den "lilla sjöfarten", den som gillar småskaliga, speciella transporter och varor. Den maritima erfarenheten fanns framför allt på Värmlandsnäs, eller Näset, och Kålland med Kållandsö. I den muntliga traditionen på Kållandsö är värmlandsfararna omgivna av en aura av romantik. Kustborna mellan städerna Karlstad och Kristinehamn deltog inte i bondeseglationen, åtminstone inte i samma utsträckning. För dem var de egna städerna den största magneten.
 Stora delar av värmlandskusten är knuten till Bergslagen. Vänersjöfarten var därför också baserad på städernas tillkomst kring insjön. Efter Trollhätte kanals tillkomst 1800 utkonkurrerades vänerskepparna av bohuslänska småredare (som delvis hade samma bakgrund som småredarna vid Vänern). Men vänerfolket kom tillbaka på allvar under senare hälften av 1800-talet. Trafiken på Vänern var livlig. I Karlstads hamn fördelade sig antalet fartyg så här under åren 1877, 1900 och 1925:
 Efter Trollhätte kanals utvidgning 1916 kan fartyg på flera tusen ton gå upp till Vänern, och det går fortfarande kommersiell fraktsjöfart.
 Se även
 Lista över fyrar i Vänern
 Göta kanal
 Trollhätte kanal
 Svea kanal
 Säffle kanal
 Referenser
 Vidare läsning
 Externa länkar
 SMHI om vattenståndsmätning i Vänern
 Vänermuseet
 Insjöar i Dalsland
 Insjöar i Värmland
 Insjöar i Västergötland
 Göta kanal
 Vänerns avrinningsområde
 Områden och platser i SMHI:s sjöväderrapport
 Insjöar i Sverige större än 100 kvadratkilometer


type: other

jurisdiction: US

text: b' U.S. Department of Agriculture\n\n Office of Inspector General\n Southwest Region\n\n\n\n\n Audit Report\n\n Food And Nutrition Service\nAccountability And Oversight Of The National\n School Lunch Program\n Star Programs, Inc.\n Ingram, Texas\n\n\n\n\n Report No. 27010-9-Te\n October 2003\n\x0c UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE\n OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL\n Southwest Region - Audit\n 101 South Main Street, Suite 324\n Temple, Texas 76501\n TEL: 254-743-6565 FAX: 254-298-1373\n\n\nDATE: October 9, 2003\n\nREPLY TO\nATTN OF: 27010-09-Te\n\nSUBJECT: Accountability and Oversight of the National School Lunch Program \xe2\x80\x93\n Star Programs, Inc., Ingram, Texas\n\nTO: William Ludwig\n Regional Administrator\n Food and Nutrition Service\n 1100 Commerce Street, Room 5-A-6\n Dallas, TX 75242\n\nATTN: Ronald Rhodes\n Regional Director\n Special Nutrition Programs\n\n\nThis report presents the results of our audit of the Accountability and Oversight of the National School\nLunch Program \xe2\x80\x93 Star Program, Inc., Ingram, Texas. Your written response concurring with all findings\nand recommendations to the official draft report is included in its entirety as exhibit B. The Office of\nInspector General\xe2\x80\x99s position is incorporated into the Findings and Recommendations section of the report.\n\nManagement decisions have not been reached for Recommendations Nos. 1 through 6. The information\nneeded to reach management decision is set forth in our position section after each recommendation.\n\nIn accordance with Departmental Regulation 1720-1, please furnish a reply within 60 days describing the\ncorrective action taken or planned and the timeframes for implementation for those recommendations for\nwhich a management decision has not yet been reached. Please note that the regulation requires a\nmanagement decision to be reached on all findings and recommendations within a maximum of 6 months\nfrom report issuance, and final action to be taken within 1 year of each management decision.\n\nIf you have any questions, please call me at 254-743-6565 or have a member of your staff contact Amy\nMcCormack, Assistant Regional Inspector General, at 254-743-6566.\n\n\n\n\n/s/TRM\nTIMOTHY R. MILLIKEN\nRegional Inspector General\n for Audit\n\nAttachments\n\x0cExecutive Summary\nFood and Nutrition Service, Accountability and Oversight of the National School Lunch\nProgram (Audit Report No. 27010-9-Te)\n\nResults in Brief This report presents the results of our audit of the National School Lunch\n Program (NSLP) as administrated by Star Programs, Inc., a residential\n childcare institution, in Ingram, Texas, also known as the School Food\n Authority (SFA). The purpose of the NSLP is to provide nutritionally\n balanced, low-cost or free lunches to schoolchildren that will encourage\n better eating habits.\n\n The objectives of this audit were to evaluate the SFA\xe2\x80\x99s procedures to ensure\n the propriety of (1) meal claims, (2) the application and verification process\n for determining student eligibility, (3) individual school monitoring,\n (4) program fund investments, and (5) program procurements.\n\n We found that SFA\xe2\x80\x99s Food Service Management Company (FSMC) contract\n and subsequent renewals were not in accordance with Federal regulations or\n Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) instruction. SFA officials were unaware of\n any procurement requirements for FSMC contracts. Specifically, they were\n not aware of the need to bid the FSMC contract and they accepted the FSMC\n contract and renewals as fixed cost contracts. As a result, SFA paid FSMC at\n least $18,391 in ineligible management fees.\n\n We also found that the SFA had inadequate procedures in place to ensure the\n accuracy and eligibility of meals claimed for reimbursement. This occurred\n because SFA officials had not participated in the voluntary training that the\n Texas Department of Human Services (TDHS) offered and had not read the\n NSLP regulations. Instead they relinquished administrative responsibility of\n the program to its FSMC, which was located in California. SFA officials\n stated that they did not think it was necessary to perform administrative\n oversight. As a result, SFA could not provide assurance to the accuracy of\n meals claimed or that reimbursed meals were eligible.\n\n For the other stated objectives in this audit (appropriate application and\n verification process for determining student eligibility, monitoring individual\n schools, and investment of program funds, which was limited to the\n purchases made with NSLP reimbursements), we found no problems that\n would warrant further audit coverage or corrective actions, at this time.\n\nRecommendation\nIn Brief We recommend that FNS recover $18,391 in ineligible costs used by SFA to\n pay the FSMC\xe2\x80\x99s management fees. We also recommend FNS direct TDHS to\n require the SFA to bid the FSMC contract using the Federal regulations.\n Further, we recommend that FNS direct TDHS to require the SFA to\n establish internal controls and to require all new SFAs to attend NSLP\n training. FNS should direct TDHS to perform a followup review to ensure the\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page i\n\x0c SFA is administering the program in accordance with Federal and State\n regulations and collect any additional monies found during these reviews.\n\nAgency Response In a letter dated October 6, 2003, FNSRO agreed with the findings and\n recommendations. (See exhibit B.)\n\nOIG Position We need additional information to reach management decision for all of the\n recommendations. The information needed to reach management decision is\n set forth in the findings and recommendations section of the report.\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page ii\n\x0cAbbreviations Used in This Report\n\n\nCFR Code of Federal Regulations\nFNS Food and Nutrition Service\nFSMC Food Service Management Company\nFY Fiscal Year\nNSLP National School Lunch Program\nOIG Office of Inspector General\nSBP School Breakfast Program\nSFA School Food Authority\nTDHS Texas Department of Human Services\nTEA Texas Education Agency\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page iii\n\x0cTable of Contents\n\nExecutive Summary .................................................................................................................................i\n\nAbbreviations Used in This Report ......................................................................................................iii\n\nBackground and Objectives ................................................................................................................... 1\n\nFindings and Recommendations............................................................................................................ 3\n\n Section 1. Noncompliance in Administering the NSLP ................................................................ 3\n\n Finding 1 FSMC Contract is Not in Accordance With Federal Regulations .......................... 3\n Recommendation No. 1.................................................................................... 4\n Recommendation No. 2.................................................................................... 5\n Finding 2 SFA Officials Had Inadequate Internal Control Procedures ................................... 5\n Recommendation No. 3.................................................................................... 7\n Recommendation No. 4.................................................................................... 7\n Recommendation No. 5.................................................................................... 7\n Recommendation No. 6.................................................................................... 8\n\nScope and Methodology.......................................................................................................................... 9\n\nExhibit A \xe2\x80\x93 Summary of Monetary Results ....................................................................................... 11\nExhibit B \xe2\x80\x93 Agency Response............................................................................................................... 12\nExhibit C \xe2\x80\x93 SFA Payments To FSMC For Renewal Periods ............................................................ 13\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page iv\n\x0cBackground and Objectives\nBackground On June 4, 1946, Congress passed the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.\n 1751), now the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as amended\n December 29, 2001, authorizing Federal assistance to States in the\n establishment, maintenance, and operation of school lunch programs. The\n Act established the NSLP to safeguard the health and well-being of the\n Nation\xe2\x80\x99s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious\n agricultural commodities. The program provides Federal assistance to help\n public and nonprofit private schools of high school grade or under, as well as\n public nonprofit private residential childcare institutions that serve nutritious\n lunches to children.\n\n The Act, as amended, authorizes the payment of general and special cash\n assistance funds to States based upon the number and category of lunches\n served. Section 4 of the Act authorizes general cash assistance payments for\n all lunches served to children in accordance with the provisions of the NSLP,\n and additional special cash assistance for lunches served under the NSLP to\n children determined eligible for free or reduced-price lunches. States are\n reimbursed at various rates per lunch, depending on whether the child was\n served a free, reduced-price, or full-price (paid) lunch. Eligibility of children\n for free or reduced-price lunches is based upon their family\xe2\x80\x99s household size\n and income, as listed in the FNS Income Eligibility Guidelines, which are\n reviewed annually.\n\n NSLP is promulgated, primarily through Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations\n (CFR), part 210, the NSLP, and part 220, School Breakfast Program (SBP).\n Other regulatory requirements include part 245, Determining Eligibility for\n Free and Reduced-Price Meals and Free Milk in Schools, and part 3019,\n Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with\n Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit\n Organizations, establishing uniform administrative requirements for Federal\n grants and agreements.\n\n Through the FNS National Office, headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, the\n seven regional offices administer the NSLP and provide technical assistance\n to the States. FNS Regional Offices monitor the States in their region by\n conducting management evaluations; also they directly administer the\n programs in some private schools. FNS Regional Offices also monitor and\n control the flow of Federal funds to the States through a review of reports\n which detail the financial expenditures of the States and the number of free,\n reduced-price, and paid meals served.\n\n NSLP is usually administered through a State\xe2\x80\x99s Department of Education\n (known as the State agency) that has the responsibility for administration of\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 1\n\x0c the NSLP. In the State of Texas the NSLP is administered by two agencies,\n the Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) and the TDHS. The\n administration of the NSLP was moved from the TEA to the TDA in\n July 2003. TDA administers charter and public schools, while TDHS\n administers the private schools and residential childcare institutions. This\n audit focused on the administration of the NSLP with regards to this\n particular SFA\n\n The State agency is required to enter into a written agreement with FNS for\n the administration of NSLP Statewide, and written agreements with SFA for\n local administration. The State Agency is also required to perform\n administrative reviews covering both critical and general areas that include,\n but are not limited to, meal claims, eligibility determinations, and use of\n program funds. A coordinated review effort and a review of compliance with\n nutrition standards are conducted at each SFA. FNS Regional Office\n personnel may participate in these reviews. SFAs are responsible for the\n administration of the program at the local school district level. Individual\n schools are responsible for the onsite operation of the NSLP, including the\n implementation of adequate meal accountability systems and the review and\n approval of student applications for free and reduced-price meals. The State\n agency and the SFAs are responsible for reviewing the monthly meal claims\n to ensure that the number of meals claimed is limited to the number of\n approved students in each category, adjusted to reflect the average daily\n attendance.\n\n The fiscal year (FY) 2002 funding for NSLP was $5.8 billion for meal\n reimbursements of approximately 6 billion lunches. The FY 2003 estimated\n funding is $6 billion in meal reimbursements. For the 2001/2002 school year,\n the State of Texas had a NSLP enrollment of 4.2 million and reimbursements\n of $800 million and the selected SFA had an enrollment of 30 to 36 and\n reimbursements of $31,386.\n\nObjectives The objectives of this audit were to evaluate SFA\xe2\x80\x99s procedures to ensure the\n propriety of (1) meal claims, (2) the application and verification process for\n determining student eligibility, (3) individual school monitoring, (4) program\n fund investments, and (5) program procurements.\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 2\n\x0cFindings and Recommendations\nSection 1. Noncompliance in Administering the NSLP\n\n SFA did not comply with multiple provisions of the NSLP. This occurred\n because of inadequate internal controls and reliance on the FSMC to operate\n the program. Additionally, TDHS had not provided critical FNS guidance\n regarding contract procurement to the SFA. As a result, SFA incurred over\n $18,000 in ineligible management fees and could not provide assurance that\n claims for reimbursement were either accurate or eligible.\n\n\nFinding 1 FSMC Contract is Not in Accordance With Federal Regulations\n\n We found that SFA\xe2\x80\x99s FSMC contract and subsequent renewals were not in\n accordance with the Federal regulations or FNS instruction. SFA officials\n were unaware of any procurement requirements for FSMC contracts.\n Specifically, they were not aware of the need to bid the FSMC contract and\n they accepted the FSMC contract and renewals as fixed cost contracts. As a\n result, SFA paid FSMC at least $18,391 in ineligible management fees.\n\n Federal regulations1 and the FNS manual state all procurement transactions\n shall be conducted in a manner to provide, to the maximum extent practical,\n open and free competition. Awards shall be made to the bidder or offeror\n whose bid or offer is responsive to the solicitation and is most advantageous\n to the recipient, price, quality, and other factors considered. Solicitations\n shall clearly set forth all requirements that the bidder or offeror shall fulfill in\n order for the bid or offer to be evaluated by the recipient.\n\n Federal regulations2 also state that the State agency or school food authority\n is the responsible authority, without recourse to FNS, regarding the\n settlement and satisfaction of all contractual and administrative issues arising\n out of procurements entered into in connection with the program. This\n includes, but is not limited to source evaluation, protests, disputes, claims, or\n other matters of a contractual nature.\n\n Finally, Federal regulations3 state that the NSLP \xe2\x80\x9ccost-plus-a-percentage-of-\n cost\xe2\x80\x9d and \xe2\x80\x9ccost-plus-a-percentage-of-income\xe2\x80\x9d contracts are prohibited.\n Contracts that provide for fixed fees such as those that provide for\n management fees established on a per meal basis are allowed.\n\n\n\n1\n 7, CFR, section 3019.43, revised January 1, 2002\n2\n 7, CFR, section 210.21(b), revised January 1, 2002\n3\n 7, CFR, section 210.16(c), revised January 1, 2002\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 3\n\x0c A firm-fixed-price contract if defined as a contract that provides for a price\n that is not subject to any adjustments. This contract type places upon the\n contractor maximum risk and full responsibility for all costs and resulting\n profit or loss.\n\n A 99-CN-04 All State Directors memo from the FNS Regional Office, dated\n January 19, 1999, specifically addressed the FSMC used by the SFA. The\n letter stated that any SFA entering the NSLP while under contract with this\n particular FSMC must competitively bid the next contract renewal. The letter\n also stated that FNS will allow the SFA to pay for the FSMC services, but\n must follow all Federal procurement guidelines for renewals.\n\n SFA initially contracted with FSMC to administer the NSLP from September\n 1998 through June 1999. Subsequently, the FSMC contract was\n automatically renewed annually from July 1999 until June 2003. The terms of\n the original contract and three of the four renewals required SFA to pay a\n management fee based on a percentage of the monthly claims for\n reimbursement; making it a \xe2\x80\x9ccost-plus-percentage-of-income\xe2\x80\x9d contract. The\n fourth contract renewal based the management fee on a set price per meal\n served, which would have been allowable, if the SFA would have received\n bids for the FSMC contract.\n\n Upon entering the NSLP in February 1999, SFA officials received applicable\n regulations and rules but advised us they did not read them. Additionally, the\n above-mentioned letter was found in the SFA file folder held at the TDHS\n area office, but was never forwarded to SFA. Therefore, SFA officials did not\n know what constituted a \xe2\x80\x9ccost-plus-percentage-of-income\xe2\x80\x9d contract or that\n they were required to obtain bids for the contract renewal. As a result, our\n analysis of invoices and supporting documentation from July 1999 (the date\n of the first renewal) through December 2002 showed the SFA paid the FSMC\n at least $18,391 in ineligible NSLP management fees. (See exhibit C.)\n\n FNS Regional Office officials confirmed that the initial FSMC contract\n should have been honored because they did not want to disrupt the program.\n FNS National Office officials stated SFA could not go years without\n competitively bidding their FSMC contract because the contract would not be\n reimbursable with NSLP funds.\n\nRecommendation No. 1\n\n Direct TDHS to recover the $18,391 in ineligible management fees.\n\n Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 4\n\x0c OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n specific corrective action to be taken, the timeframe within which the\n corrective action will be completed, and documentation that the amounts\n determined to be owed the Government have been collected.\n\nRecommendation No. 2\n\n Direct TDHS to require the SFA to bid the FSMC contract using the Federal\n regulations.\n\n Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n specific corrective action to be taken, and the timeframe within which the\n corrective action will be completed.\n\n\nFinding 2 SFA Officials Had Inadequate Internal Control Procedures\n\n SFA officials had inadequate procedures in place to ensure the accuracy and\n eligibility of meals claimed for reimbursement. SFA officials had not\n participated in the voluntary training that TDHS offered and had not read\n NSLP regulations. Instead they relinquished administrative responsibility of\n the program to its FSMC, which was located in California. SFA officials\n stated that they did not think it was necessary to perform administrative\n oversight since they serve so few students. As a result, the SFA could not\n assure the accuracy of meals claimed or that reimbursed meals were eligible.\n\n Controls over reimbursement claims not established\n\n Federal regulations4 and TDHS regulations5 state that SFA shall establish\n internal controls to ensure the accuracy of lunch counts prior to submission of\n the claims for reimbursement. At a minimum, these internal controls shall\n include: comparisons of daily free, reduced-price and paid lunch counts\n against data which will assist in the identification of lunch counts in excess of\n the number of free, reduced-price and paid lunches served each day to\n4\n 7, CFR, section 210.8(a), revised January 1, 2002\n5\n TDHS NSLP/SBP Handbook, chapter 4, dated June 1, 2002\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 5\n\x0c children eligible for such lunches, and a system for following up on those\n lunch counts which suggest the likelihood of lunch counting problems.\n\n FSMC provided a web-based application for SFA to enter daily meal counts\n for each house. At the end of the month, FSMC employees consolidated the\n meal claims into one claim for reimbursement. The monthly claim for\n reimbursement was then forwarded to the SFA business manager who signed\n and submitted it to TDHS without reviewing it for accuracy. SFA officials\n also stated that they have no system in place to ensure that the number of\n students counted during lunch matched the number of students enrolled at\n SFA for that day. In addition, SFA officials do not have any written\n procedures for entering lunch counts. According to the SFA officials, they\n relied on FSMC for guidance and upon the houseparent to ensure that meal\n counts for free and paid students were entered into the system. We found that\n TDHS offers voluntary NSLP training to all SFAs; however, the TDHS\n records indicated that SFA had never participated in such training.\n\n SFA houseparent supervisors stated they reviewed meal counts for\n completeness every 1 to 3 days and before biweekly paychecks were\n released. However, we found that from February 13 to 15, 2003, one of the\n houses was missing meal counts. The meal counts were still missing as of\n February 27, 2003.\n\n Our comparison of meal counts versus enrollment for August 2002, October\n 2002, December 2002, and January 2003 found the SFA officials over\n claimed 25 lunches, 23 breakfasts and 19 snacks. Furthermore, when we\n compared the daily claims for reimbursement with the number of children\n under the free and paid status, there were inconsistencies with meal entries.\n Consequently, the SFA officials claimed 12 more free lunches and 17 more\n free breakfasts than should have been allowed. For example, in October\n 2002, a houseparent in one house entered six children under a different status\n (free or paid) every 3 to 4 days. Though problems exist with the SFA claims\n for reimbursement, the monetary impact is minimal and does not warrant\n recovery.\n\n Nonreimbursable meals served\n\n Federal regulations6 state the contents of a reimbursable lunch must include\n at least three menu items, one must be an entr\xc3\xa9e and one must be fluid milk\n as a beverage.\n\n During our two lunch observations, SFA cafeteria staff did not offer or serve\n milk to the students. SFA cafeteria staff stated they were unaware of the\n requirement although they did serve milk with breakfast and dinner; however,\n dinner is not eligible for reimbursement.\n\n6\n 7, CFR, section 210.10.i.2(i), revised January 1, 2002\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 6\n\x0c Since breakfast was served in the houses, we checked four of the five houses\n to make sure that milk was available. We found 1\xc2\xbd to 3 gallons of milk in\n each house, which appeared to be sufficient to meet the milk requirement.\n FSMC provided menus to the SFA, which included milk for lunch, but the\n SFA cafeteria staff did not follow the menus.\n\nRecommendation No. 3\n\n Direct TDHS to require SFA to establish internal controls that includes a\n meal counting system with proper documentation, a system for monthly\n verification of FSMC prepared claims for reimbursement, and second party\n reviews to ensure that claims for reimbursement are accurate and meals\n claimed are reimbursable.\n\n Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n specific corrective action to be taken, and the timeframe within which the\n corrective action will be completed.\n\n\nRecommendation No. 4\n\n Direct TDHS to require all new SFAs to attend the NSLP training.\n\n Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n specific corrective action to be taken, and the timeframe within which the\n corrective action will be completed.\n\nRecommendation No. 5\n\n Direct TDHS to perform a followup review to ensure that SFA is\n administering the program in accordance with Federal and State regulations.\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 7\n\x0c Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n specific corrective action to be taken, and the timeframe within which the\n corrective action will be completed.\n\nRecommendation No. 6\n\n Direct TDHS to collect any additional monies found during the followup\n review.\n\n Agency Response.\n\n We concur with the recommendation.\n\n OIG Position.\n\n We do not accept FNS management decision. To reach a management\n decision for this recommendation, we need documentation showing the\n amounts determined to be owed the Government have been collected.\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 8\n\x0cScope and Methodology\n Audit work was performed at the FNS Regional Office in Dallas, Texas, the\n TDHS offices in Austin and San Antonio, Texas, and the SFA in Ingram,\n Texas. SFA was selected based on concerns raised regarding SFA\xe2\x80\x99s contract\n with FSMC. Our fieldwork was conducted between January 2003 and\n July 2003. The period covered by the audit included the NSLP operations for\n SY 2002/2003 (August 2002 to January 2003), but due to questions about the\n FSMC contract, we expanded the scope to include the months of April 1999 to\n July 2002. However, the scope was limited due to missing FSMC invoices and\n checks from May 1999, September 2001, October 2001, July 2002, and\n October 2002.\n\n The audit was conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards\n issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Accordingly, the\n audit included such tests of program and accounting records as considered\n necessary to meet the audit objectives.\n\n In order to evaluate the accuracy of the meal claims, we examined monthly\n claims for reimbursement and FSMC invoices, meal production records, meal\n count records, and daily attendance records. We also attended two meal services\n to observe SFA\xe2\x80\x99s meal counting process. In addition, we accessed the FSMC\xe2\x80\x99s\n online meal count system to facilitate validation of the meal count records. This\n was necessary because the FSMC was in another state.\n\n According to the TDHS regulations,7 residential childcare institutions are not\n required to obtain an application or signature from an adult household\n member to receive free or reduced-price meals on behalf of a child in\n residence. However, SFA must document the child\xe2\x80\x99s income and eligibility\n status in the child\xe2\x80\x99s case file and on the master list. Since SFA is a residential\n childcare institution, we evaluated the monthly attendance records to ensure\n that they contained the information required by the TDHS regulations.\n\n SFA was a single campus and therefore did not need to perform separate\n monitoring functions. However, the meal count information was entered and\n separated in the FSMC\xe2\x80\x99s system by house. The information is consolidated\n by the FSMC staff and sent to SFA for submission to TDHS. We evaluated\n the internal controls and review process used by SFA to ensure the accuracy\n of the monthly claim for reimbursement.\n\n To evaluate the investment of funds, we interviewed the SFA personnel about\n the current NSLP financial system and we performed a comparative analysis of\n\n\n7\n TDHS NSLP/SBP Handbook, chapter 2, dated June 1, 2002\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 9\n\x0c bank statements and general ledger entries from October 2002 through\n December 2002.\n\n We discussed the procurement process that the SFA personnel used to obtain\n goods and services. We obtained the invoices from the cafeteria staff and\n calculated the total spent on food purchases. We also reviewed the FSMC\n contract and the Federal regulations regarding procurement.\n\n In addition, we reviewed the FNS and the TDHS regulations, policies, and\n procedures relating to NSLP. We also discussed any concerns regarding the\n operations of the program with the FNS and the TDHS personnel.\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 10\n\x0cExhibit A \xe2\x80\x93 Summary of Monetary Results\n Exhibit Page 1 of 1\n\n\n\n FINDING RECOMMENDATION\n NUMBER NUMBER DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CATEGORY\n\n SFA Paid FSMC Questioned\n Nonreimbursable Costs/Loans,\n Contract Fees Recovery\n 1 1 $18,391 Recommended\nTOTAL $18,391\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 11\n\x0cExhibit B \xe2\x80\x93 FNS Response\n Exhibit Page 1 of 1\n\n\n\n\n United States Department of Agriculture\n Food and Nutrition Service\n Southwest Region\n\n\n\n\nReply to\n Attn of: SWSN :220 OCT 6 2003\n\nSubject: Official Draft of Audit Report 270l0-09-Te\n\n Timothy R. Milliken\n To:\n Regional Inspector General for Audit\n\n This is to provide our concurrence with the audit findings and recommendations in the\n official draft of audit 27010-09- Te, Accountability and Oversight of the National School\n Lunch Program -Star Programs, Inc., Ingram, Texas.\n\n\n\n\nFORM FCS-60S (3-96) 1100 Commerce Street. Dallas. TX 75242-1005\n\n\n\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 12\n\x0cExhibit C \xe2\x80\x93 SFA Payments To FSMC For Renewal Periods\n Exhibit Page 1 of 1\n\n\n Service Month Check Date Check Number Check Amount\n July 19991 08/31/99 19475 $ 659.09\n August 19992 12/15/99 19899 591.96\n September/October/November 1999 01/17/00 20023 1,016.30\n December 1999 02/15/00 20149 483.01\n January/February 2000 04/14/00 20385 798.04\n March 2000 05/15/00 20579 399.33\n April 2000 06/15/00 20732 411.34\n May 2000 07/15/00 20861 418.68\n June 2000 08/15/00 20994 622.75\n July 2000 09/21/00 21251 538.90\n August/September 2000 10/01/00 21369 786.17\n October 2000 11/01/00 21436 530.05\n November 2000 01/01/01 21508 456.95\n December 2000 01/01/01 21579 582.37\n January 2001 02/01/01 21644 490.76\n February 2001 04/03/01 21720 430.79\n March 2001 04/25/01 21793 468.42\n April 2001 05/01/01 21870 438.93\n May 2001 07/16/01 21941 483.28\n June 2001 08/15/01 22013 682.52\n July 2001 10/15/01 22148 422.11\n August 2001 11/15/01 22222 418.85\n September 20013 Not Known Not Known Not Known\n October 2001 12/14/01 22297 340.11\n October 20012 01/15/02 22393 516.45\n November 2001 02/15/02 22434 326.39\n December 2001/January 2002 03/06/02 22505 844.37\n February 2002 04/15/02 22631 324.30\n March 2002 05/15/02 22706 366.62\n April 2002 06/17/02 22787 321.15\n May 2002 07/15/02 22862 403.35\n June 2002 08/15/02 22937 469.12\n June 20024 09/16/02 23019 469.12\n July 20025 Not Known Not Known Not Known\n August 2002 Not Known 5875 496.12\n September 2002 12/02/02 23258 447.65\n October 20022 12/16/02 23283 448.30\n November 2002 01/15/03 23385 440.49\n December 2002 02/17/03 23484 46.49\n Total $18,390.63\n\n\n1\n Services for June 1999 and July 1999 paid with one check for $1,339.77, which included $659.09 for July 1999\n2\n No invoice provided\n3\n No invoice or check provided\n4\n SFA paid twice for same amount.\n5\n No check provided\n\nUSDA/OIG-A/27010-9-Te Page 13\n\x0c'


text:
 4.8.2016
 PL
 Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej
 L 211/50
 DECYZJA WSPÓLNEGO KOMITETU EOG
 NR 99/2015
 z dnia 30 kwietnia 2015 r.
 zmieniająca załącznik II (Przepisy techniczne, normy, badania i certyfikacja) i załącznik IV (Energia) do Porozumienia EOG [2016/1282]
 WSPÓLNY KOMITET EOG,
 uwzględniając Porozumienie o Europejskim Obszarze Gospodarczym (zwane dalej „Porozumieniem EOG”), w szczególności jego art. 98,
 a także mając na uwadze, co następuje:
 (1)
 W Porozumieniu EOG należy uwzględnić rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 548/2014 z dnia 21 maja 2014 r. w sprawie wykonania dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady 2009/125/WE w odniesieniu do transformatorów elektroenergetycznych małej, średniej i dużej mocy (1).
 (2)
 Należy zatem odpowiednio zmienić załączniki II i IV do Porozumienia EOG,
 PRZYJMUJE NINIEJSZĄ DECYZJĘ:
 Artykuł 1
 Po pkt 6g (rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 1194/2012) w rozdziale IV w załączniku II do Porozumienia EOG dodaje się punkt w brzmieniu:
 „6h.
 32014 R 0548: rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 548/2014 z dnia 21 maja 2014 r. w sprawie wykonania dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady 2009/125/WE w odniesieniu do transformatorów elektroenergetycznych małej, średniej i dużej mocy (Dz.U. L 152 z 22.5.2014, s. 1).”.
 Artykuł 2
 Po pkt 26h (rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 1194/2012) w załączniku IV do Porozumienia EOG dodaje się punkt w brzmieniu:
 „26i.
 32014 R 0548: rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 548/2014 z dnia 21 maja 2014 r. w sprawie wykonania dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady 2009/125/WE w odniesieniu do transformatorów elektroenergetycznych małej, średniej i dużej mocy (Dz.U. L 152 z 22.5.2014, s. 1).”.
 Artykuł 3
 Teksty rozporządzenia (UE) nr 548/2014 w języku islandzkim i norweskim, które zostaną opublikowane w Suplemencie EOG do Dziennika Urzędowego Unii Europejskiej, są autentyczne.
 Artykuł 4
 Niniejsza decyzja wchodzi w życie z dniem 1 maja 2015 r., pod warunkiem dokonania wszystkich notyfikacji przewidzianych w art. 103 ust. 1 Porozumienia EOG (*).
 Artykuł 5
 Niniejsza decyzja zostaje opublikowana w sekcji EOG i w Suplemencie EOG do Dziennika Urzędowego Unii Europejskiej.
 Sporządzono w Brukseli dnia 30 kwietnia 2015 r.
 W imieniu Wspólnego Komitetu EOG
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 Przewodniczący
 (1) Dz.U. L 152 z 22.5.2014, s. 1.
 (*) Nie wskazano wymogów konstytucyjnych.


text:
 26.5.2007
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 C 117/24
 Acțiune introdusă la 14 martie 2007 — Kliq (în faliment)/Comisie
 (Cauza T-82/07)
 (2007/C 117/38)
 Limba de procedură: olandeza
 Părțile
 Reclamant: Jan Rudolf Maas și Cornelis van den Bergh, în calitate de lichidatori ai societății cu răspundere limitată Kliq B.V. (Apeldoorn, Țările de Jos) (reprezentanți: Gerard van der Wal și Timothy Boesman, advocaten)
 Pârâtă: Comisia Comunităților Europene
 Concluziile reclamantului
 —
 anularea Deciziei Comisiei din 19 iulie 2006 în cauza C-30/2005;
 —
 obligarea Comisiei la plata cheltuielilor de judecată.
 Motivele și principalele argumente
 Reclamantul contestă Decizia 2006/939/CE a Comisiei din 19 iulie 2006 privind schema de ajutor notificată de Țările de Jos în favoarea KG Holding NV (1).
 Ajutorul acordat privește un ajutor pentru restructurare pe care Țările de Jos doreau să îl acorde KG Holding NV, prin transformarea unui împrumut pentru salvare deja acordat și a dobânzii datorate aferente în fonduri proprii. În decizia atacată, Comisia declară ajutorul sub forma unui ajutor pentru restructurare ca fiind incompatibil cu piața comună.
 De asemenea, Comisia a decis să solicite Țărilor de Jos ca acea parte a ajutorului care a fost transferată cu titlu de împrumut pentru salvare de la KG Holding NV către filiala sa Kliq BV și care a fost transformată în fonduri proprii să fie recuperată de la KG Holding NV și Kliq BV și că, în cadrul procedurii de faliment, Țările de Jos, în calitate de creditor, trebuie să înregistreze la lichidator creanța sa împotriva KG Holding și/sau Kliq Reïntegratie.
 În susținerea acțiunii sale, reclamantul arată, în primul rând, că, în mod nejustificat, Comisia s-a pronunțat asupra plății integrale a acțiunilor pe care KG Holding le deținea la Kliq BV prin compensarea obligației de plată cu creanța deținută de KG Holding împotriva Kliq BV în baza contractului de împrumut. Această poziție nu ar face parte din decizia din 5 august 2005 (2), prin care a fost declanșată procedura. Comisia și-a depășit competențele și a acționat cu încălcarea dreptului la apărare și a dreptului reclamantului la contradictorialitate. În al doilea rând, Comisia a stabilit în mod nejustificat ca Kliq BV să fie considerată destinatarul ajutorului de stat în valoare de 9,25 milioane euro. În aprecierea sa, în mod nejustificat, Comisia nu a avut în vedere împrejurarea că „transformarea împrumutului pentru salvare în fonduri proprii”, despre care se vorbește în considerentele (43) și (46) din decizia atacată, nu poate în nici un mod să fie atribuită statului membru Țările de Jos și, de aceea, nu poate fi considerată ajutor de stat în sensul articolului 87 alineatul (1) CE. Comisia a săvârșit o eroare în aprecierea faptelor. Decizia atacată este inexactă în drept și/sau în fapt, cel puțin neinteligibilă și/sau inexactă ori insuficient motivată și încalcă articolul 87 alineatul (1) CE și/sau articolul 253 CE.
 În al treilea rând, Comisia a omis în mod nejustificat să stabilească faptul că pretinsul ajutor ar putea să restrângă concurența și comerțul între statele membre, cel puțin cu privire la acest aspect considerentele Comisiei fiind insuficient motivate.
 În al patrulea rând, Comisia a dispus în mod nejustificat că pretinsul ajutor în valoare de 9,25 milioane euro ar trebui recuperat de Țările de Jos de la KG Holding și Kliq BV. Dat fiind falimentul KG Holding, Kliq Reïntegratie și Kliq BV, recuperarea sumelor pretinsului ajutor ar fi imposibilă pe o durată mai îndelungată și, în orice caz, nu ar avea efect, în sensul că recuperarea prin înregistrarea creanței în procedura de faliment a societăților menționate nu ar fi necesară, ci chiar complet inutilă, în scopul încetării denaturării concurenței.
 În al cincilea rând, Comisia a decis în mod nejustificat că în suma de recuperat de la KG Holding și Kliq BV se include și dobânda de la data la care fiecare parte din această sumă a fost acordată destinatarului și până la data efectuării acestei rambursări. Această cerere încalcă dreptul național al falimentului.
 (1) JO L 366, p. 40.
 (2) Ajutorul de stat nr. C 30/2005 (fostul nr. N 78/2004) — ajutor pentru restructurare în favoarea KG Holding NV — invitaţie pentru prezentarea de observaţii în conformitate cu articolul 88 alineatul (2) din Tratatul CE (JO 2005, C 280, p. 2).


type: legislation

text:
 20.3.2015
 SK
 Úradný vestník Európskej únie
 L 76/44
 VYKONÁVACIE NARIADENIE KOMISIE (EÚ) 2015/464
 z 19. marca 2015,
 ktorým sa ustanovujú paušálne dovozné hodnoty na určovanie vstupných cien niektorých druhov ovocia a zeleniny
 EURÓPSKA KOMISIA,
 so zreteľom na Zmluvu o fungovaní Európskej únie,
 so zreteľom na nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (EÚ) č. 1308/2013 zo 17. decembra 2013, ktorým sa vytvára spoločná organizácia trhov s poľnohospodárskymi výrobkami, a ktorým sa zrušujú nariadenia Rady (EHS) č. 922/72, (EHS) č. 234/79, (ES) č. 1037/2001 a (ES) č. 1234/2007 (1),
 so zreteľom na vykonávacie nariadenie Komisie (EÚ) č. 543/2011 zo 7. júna 2011, ktorým sa ustanovujú podrobné pravidlá uplatňovania nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 1234/2007, pokiaľ ide o sektory ovocia a zeleniny a spracovaného ovocia a zeleniny (2), a najmä na jeho článok 136 ods. 1,
 keďže:
 (1)
 Vykonávacím nariadením (EÚ) č. 543/2011 sa v súlade s výsledkami Uruguajského kola mnohostranných obchodných rokovaní ustanovujú kritériá, na základe ktorých Komisia stanovuje paušálne hodnoty na dovoz z tretích krajín, pokiaľ ide o výrobky a obdobia uvedené v časti A prílohy XVI k uvedenému nariadeniu.
 (2)
 Paušálne dovozné hodnoty sa vypočítajú každý pracovný deň v súlade s článkom 136 ods. 1 vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) č. 543/2011, pričom sa zohľadnia premenlivé každodenné údaje. Toto nariadenie by preto malo nadobudnúť účinnosť dňom jeho uverejnenia v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie,
 PRIJALA TOTO NARIADENIE:
 Článok 1
 Paušálne dovozné hodnoty uvedené v článku 136 vykonávacieho nariadenia (EÚ) č. 543/2011 sú stanovené v prílohe k tomuto nariadeniu.
 Článok 2
 Toto nariadenie nadobúda účinnosť dňom jeho uverejnenia v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie.
 Toto nariadenie je záväzné v celom rozsahu a priamo uplatniteľné vo všetkých členských štátoch.
 V Bruseli 19. marca 2015
 Za Komisiu
 v mene predsedu
 Jerzy PLEWA
 generálny riaditeľ pre poľnohospodárstvo a rozvoj vidieka
 (1) Ú. v. EÚ L 347, 20.12.2013, s. 671.
 (2) Ú. v. EÚ L 157, 15.6.2011, s. 1.
 PRÍLOHA
 Paušálne dovozné hodnoty na určovanie vstupných cien niektorých druhov ovocia a zeleniny
 (EUR/100 kg)
 Číselný znak KN
 Kód tretej krajiny (1)
 Paušálna dovozná hodnota
 0702 00 00
 IL
 94,1
 MA
 85,9
 TR
 94,6
 ZZ
 91,5
 0707 00 05
 JO
 229,9
 MA
 179,7
 TR
 178,9
 ZZ
 196,2
 0709 93 10
 MA
 101,2
 TR
 186,6
 ZZ
 143,9
 0805 10 20
 EG
 47,3
 IL
 72,4
 MA
 53,1
 TN
 61,7
 TR
 71,6
 ZZ
 61,2
 0805 50 10
 TR
 61,7
 ZZ
 61,7
 0808 10 80
 AR
 94,0
 BR
 70,7
 CL
 125,7
 CN
 81,0
 MK
 28,2
 US
 181,4
 ZZ
 96,8
 0808 30 90
 AR
 107,0
 CL
 97,1
 CN
 102,5
 ZA
 111,2
 ZZ
 104,5
 (1) Nomenklatúra krajín stanovená nariadením Komisie (EÚ) č. 1106/2012 z 27. novembra 2012, ktorým sa vykonáva nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 471/2009 o štatistike Spoločenstva o zahraničnom obchode s nečlenskými krajinami, pokiaľ ide o aktualizáciu nomenklatúry krajín a území (Ú. v. EÚ L 328, 28.11.2012, s. 7). Kód „ZZ“ znamená „iného pôvodu“.