type: legislation

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 4.7.2013
 DE
 Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union
 L 185/9
 BESCHLUSS 2013/353/GASP DES RATES
 vom 2. Juli 2013
 zur Änderung und Verlängerung des Mandats des Sonderbeauftragten der Europäischen Union für den Südkaukasus und die Krise in Georgien
 DER RAT DER EUROPÄISCHEN UNION —
 gestützt auf den Vertrag über die Europäische Union, insbesondere auf Artikel 28, Artikel 31 Absatz 2 und Artikel 33,
 auf Vorschlag der Hohen Vertreterin der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik,
 in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe:
 (1)
 Am 25. August 2011 hat der Rat den Beschluss 2011/518/GASP (1) zur Ernennung von Herrn Philippe LEFORT zum Sonderbeauftragten der Europäischen Union (im Folgenden "Sonderbeauftragter") für den Südkaukasus und die Krise in Georgien angenommen. Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten endet am 30. Juni 2013.
 (2)
 Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten der EU sollte geändert und um einen weiteren Zeitraum von zwölf Monaten verlängert werden. Das Mandat sollte im Herbst 2013 überprüft werden. Diese Überprüfung sollte bis zum 31. Dezember 2013 beendet sein.
 (3)
 Der Sonderbeauftragte wird das Mandat in einer Situation ausüben, die sich verschlechtern kann und die Erreichung der Ziele des auswärtigen Handelns der Union nach Artikel 21 des Vertrags behindern könnte —
 HAT FOLGENDEN BESCHLUSS ERLASSEN:
 Artikel 1
 Der Sonderbeauftragte der Europäischen Union
 Das Mandat von Herrn Philippe LEFORT als Sonderbeauftragter für den Südkaukasus und die Krise in Georgien wird geändert und bis zum 30. Juni 2014 verlängert. Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten kann jedoch eher enden, wenn der Rat auf Vorschlag des Hohen Vertreters der Union für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik (im Folgenden "Hoher Vertreter") einen entsprechenden Beschluss erlässt.
 Artikel 2
 Politische Ziele
 Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten beruht auf den politischen Zielen der Union für den Südkaukasus, einschließlich der Ziele, die in den Schlussfolgerungen zu der außerordentlichen Tagung des Europäischen Rates vom 1. September 2008 in Brüssel und in den am 15. September 2008 sowie den am 27. Februar 2012 angenommenen Schlussfolgerungen des Rates festgelegt sind. Diese Ziele umfassen:
 (a)
 gemäß den bestehenden Mechanismen, einschließlich der Organisation für Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit in Europa (OSZE) und deren Minsk-Gruppe, die Verhütung von Konflikten in der Region, einen Beitrag zur friedlichen Beilegung der Konflikte in der Region, einschließlich der Krise in Georgien und des Konflikts um Berg-Karabach durch Förderung der Rückkehr der Flüchtlinge und Binnenvertriebenen und durch andere geeignete Mittel, sowie die Unterstützung der Umsetzung einer solchen Konfliktregelung im Einklang mit den Grundsätzen des Völkerrechts;
 (b)
 die Herstellung konstruktiver Beziehungen zu den wichtigsten interessierten Akteuren bezüglich der Region;
 (c)
 die Förderung und weitere Unterstützung der Zusammenarbeit zwischen Armenien, Aserbaidschan und Georgien und gegebenenfalls ihren Nachbarländern;
 (d)
 die Verbesserung der Effektivität und der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung der Union in der Region.
 Artikel 3
 Mandat
 Zur Erreichung der politischen Ziele hat der Sonderbeauftragte im Rahmen seines Mandats folgende Aufgaben:
 (a)
 Er baut Kontakte zu den Regierungen, zu den Parlamenten, zu sonstigen entscheidenden politischen Akteuren, zur Justiz und zur Zivilgesellschaft in der Region auf;
 (b)
 er bestärkt die Länder in der Region darin, bei regionalen Themen von gemeinsamem Interesse, wie gemeinsame Sicherheitsbedrohungen und Bekämpfung von Terrorismus, illegalem Handel und organisierter Kriminalität, zusammenzuarbeiten;
 (c)
 er leistet einen Beitrag zur friedlichen Beilegung von Konflikten im Einklang mit den Grundsätzen des Völkerrechts und erleichtert die Umsetzung einer solchen Konfliktregelung in enger Abstimmung mit den Vereinten Nationen, der OSZE und deren Minsk-Gruppe;
 (d)
 in Bezug auf die Krise in Georgien trägt er
 (i)
 dazu bei, die unter Nummer 6 der Vereinbarung vom 12. August 2008 vorgesehenen internationalen Gespräche ("Internationale Gespräche von Genf") und die entsprechenden Durchführungsmaßnahmen vom 8. September 2008 vorzubereiten, einschließlich der Modalitäten für die Sicherheit und Stabilität in der Region, der Frage der Flüchtlinge und Binnenvertriebenen auf der Grundlage der international anerkannten Grundsätze und aller sonstigen Themen, auf die sich die Parteien gemeinsam geeinigt haben;
 (ii)
 dazu bei, den Standpunkt der Union festzulegen, und er vertritt die Union auf Ebene des Sonderbeauftragten bei den Gesprächen im Sinne der Ziffer i und
 (iii)
 erleichtert die Durchführung der Vereinbarung vom 12. August 2008 sowie die Umsetzung der entsprechenden Durchführungsmaßnahmen vom 8. September 2008;
 (e)
 er erleichtert die Entwicklung und Durchführung vertrauensbildender Maßnahmen;
 (f)
 er wirkt gegebenenfalls an der Ausarbeitung der Beiträge der Union zur Umsetzung einer möglichen Konfliktregelung mit;
 (g)
 er intensiviert den Dialog der Union mit den wichtigsten betroffenen Akteuren bezüglich der Region;
 (h)
 er unterstützt die Union dabei, eine umfassende Politik gegenüber dem Südkaukasus weiterzuentwickeln;
 (i)
 im Rahmen der Tätigkeiten nach diesem Artikel trägt er zur Umsetzung der Menschenrechtspolitik der Union - in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Sonderbeauftragten für Menschenrechte - und der Leitlinien der Union zu den Menschenrechten bei, insbesondere im Hinblick auf Kinder und Frauen in Konfliktgebieten, indem er vor allem die diesbezüglichen Entwicklungen beobachtet und entsprechend tätig wird.
 Artikel 4
 Ausführung des Mandats
 1. Der Sonderbeauftragte ist für die Ausführung des Mandats verantwortlich und handelt unter der Aufsicht des Hohen Vertreters.
 2. Das Politische und Sicherheitspolitische Komitee (im Folgenden "PSK") unterhält eine enge Verbindung zu dem Sonderbeauftragten und ist dessen vorrangige Anlaufstelle im Rat. Unbeschadet der Befugnisse des Hohen Vertreters erhält der Sonderbeauftragte im Rahmen des Mandats strategische Leitlinien und politische Vorgaben vom PSK.
 3. Der Sonderbeauftragte arbeitet in enger Absprache mit dem Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienst (im Folgenden "EAD") und dessen einschlägigen Dienststellen.
 Artikel 5
 Finanzierung
 1. Der als finanzieller Bezugsrahmen dienende Betrag zur Deckung der Ausgaben in Verbindung mit dem Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten für den Zeitraum vom 1. Juli 2013 bis zum 31. Dezember 2013 beläuft sich auf 1 050 000EUR.
 2. Ausgaben, die mit dem in Absatz 1 genannten Betrag finanziert werden, sind ab dem 1. Juli 2013 anrechnungsfähig. Die Ausgaben werden nach den für den Gesamthaushaltsplan der Union geltenden Verfahren und Vorschriften verwaltet.
 3. Über die Verwaltung der Ausgaben wird ein Vertrag zwischen dem Sonderbeauftragten und der Kommission geschlossen. Der Sonderbeauftragte ist gegenüber der Kommission für alle Ausgaben rechenschaftspflichtig.
 Artikel 6
 Aufstellung und Zusammensetzung des Arbeitsstabs
 1. Im Rahmen des Mandats des Sonderbeauftragten und der dafür bereitgestellten Finanzmittel ist der Sonderbeauftragte dafür verantwortlich, einen Arbeitsstab aufzustellen. Im Arbeitsstab muss die für das Mandat erforderliche Fachkompetenz in spezifischen politischen Fragen vorhanden sein. Der Sonderbeauftragte unterrichtet den Rat und die Kommission stets umgehend über die Zusammensetzung des Arbeitsstabs.
 2. Die Mitgliedstaaten, die Organe der Union und der EAD können vorschlagen, Personal zum Sonderbeauftragten abzuordnen. Die Besoldung dieses abgeordneten Personals geht zulasten des betreffenden Mitgliedstaats, des betreffenden Organs der Union oder des EAD. Von den Mitgliedstaaten zu den Unionsorganen oder zum EAD abgeordnete Experten können ebenfalls eine Verwendung beim Sonderbeauftragten erhalten. Sonstige internationale Mitarbeiter, die unter Vertrag genommen werden, besitzen die Staatsangehörigkeit eines Mitgliedstaats.
 3. Alle abgeordneten Mitglieder des Personals unterstehen weiterhin der Aufsicht des abordnenden Mitgliedstaats, des abordnenden Organs der Union oder des EAD und erfüllen ihre Pflichten und handeln im Interesse des Mandats des Sonderbeauftragten.
 4. Die Mitarbeiter des Sonderbeauftragten werden bei den einschlägigen Dienststellen des EAD oder den einschlägigen Delegationen der Union untergebracht, um so zur Kohärenz und Einheitlichkeit ihrer jeweiligen Tätigkeiten beizutragen.
 Artikel 7
 Vorrechte und Befreiungen des Sonderbeauftragten und der Mitarbeiter des Sonderbeauftragten
 Die Vorrechte, Befreiungen und sonstigen Garantien, die für die Erfüllung und den reibungslosen Ablauf der Mission des Sonderbeauftragten und seiner Mitarbeiter erforderlich sind, werden mit den Gastländern vereinbart. Die Mitgliedstaaten und der EAD gewähren die hierfür erforderliche Unterstützung.
 Artikel 8
 Sicherheit von EU-Verschlusssachen
 Der Sonderbeauftragte und die Mitglieder seines Arbeitsstabs beachten die Grundsätze und Mindeststandards für die Sicherheit, die im Beschluss 2011/292/EU des Rates vom 31. März 2011 über die Sicherheitsvorschriften für den Schutz von EU-Verschlusssachen (2) niedergelegt sind.
 Artikel 9
 Zugang zu Informationen und logistische Unterstützung
 1. Die Mitgliedstaaten, die Kommission und das Generalsekretariat des Rates stellen sicher, dass der Sonderbeauftragte Zugang zu allen relevanten Informationen erhält.
 2. Die Delegationen der Union in der Region und/oder die Mitgliedstaaten leisten gegebenenfalls logistische Unterstützung in der Region.
 Artikel 10
 Sicherheit
 Gemäß dem Konzept der Union für die Sicherheit des im Rahmen des Titels V des Vertrags in operativer Funktion außerhalb der Union eingesetzten Personals trifft der Sonderbeauftragte im Einklang mit seinem Mandat und der Sicherheitslage in seinem geografischen Zuständigkeitsgebiet alle nach vernünftigem Ermessen durchführbaren Maßnahmen für die Sicherheit des ihm direkt unterstellten Personals, indem er insbesondere:
 (a)
 auf der Grundlage der Vorgaben des EAD einen missionsspezifischen Sicherheitsplan aufstellt, der missionsspezifische objekt-, organisations- und verfahrensbezogene Sicherheitsmaßnahmen einschließt, die sichere Abwicklung des Transports des Personals in das Missionsgebiet und innerhalb dieses Gebiets sowie die Bewältigung von sicherheitsrelevanten Zwischenfällen regelt und einen Notfallplan und einen Evakuierungsplan für die Mission enthält;
 (b)
 sicherstellt, dass das gesamte außerhalb der Union eingesetzte Personal einen an die Bedingungen im Missionsgebiet angepassten Versicherungsschutz gegen hohe Risiken genießt;
 (c)
 gewährleistet, dass alle außerhalb der Union einzusetzenden Mitglieder des Arbeitsstabs des Sonderbeauftragten, einschließlich des vor Ort verpflichteten Personals, eine angemessene Sicherheitsausbildung vor oder bei Ankunft im Missionsgebiet erhalten haben, und zwar auf der Grundlage der dem jeweiligen Missionsgebiet vom EAD zugewiesenen Risikoeinstufungen;
 (d)
 gewährleistet, dass alle vereinbarten Empfehlungen, die im Anschluss an die regelmäßigen Sicherheitsbewertungen abgegeben wurden, umgesetzt werden, und dem Rat, dem Hohen Vertreter und der Kommission schriftliche Berichte über diese Umsetzung und andere sicherheitsrelevante Fragen im Rahmen des Zwischenberichts und des Berichts über die Ausführung des Mandats vorlegt.
 Artikel 11
 Berichterstattung
 Der Sonderbeauftragte erstattet dem PSK und dem Hohen Vertreter regelmäßig mündlich und schriftlich Bericht. Der Sonderbeauftragte erstattet erforderlichenfalls auch den Arbeitsgruppen des Rates Bericht. Regelmäßige schriftliche Berichte werden über das COREU-Netz verteilt. Auf Empfehlung des PSK oder des Hohen Vertreters kann der Sonderbeauftragte dem Rat (Auswärtige Angelegenheiten) Bericht erstatten. Gemäß Artikel 36 des Vertrages kann der Sonderbeauftragte zur Unterrichtung des Europäischen Parlaments mit herangezogen werden.
 Artikel 12
 Koordinierung
 1. Zur Erreichung der politischen Ziele der Union trägt der Sonderbeauftragte zu einem einheitlichen, kohärenten und wirksamen Vorgehen der Union bei und dazu, dass alle Instrumente der Union und das Handeln der Mitgliedstaaten kohärent zusammenwirken. Die Tätigkeiten des Sonderbeauftragten werden mit denen der Kommission sowie mit denen anderer Sonderbeauftragter, die in der Region tätig sind, abgestimmt. Der Sonderbeauftragte unterrichtet die Vertretungen der Mitgliedstaaten und die Delegationen der Union in der Region regelmäßig über seine Arbeit.
 2. Vor Ort hält er engen Kontakt zu den Leitern der Delegationen der Union und den Missionschefs der Mitgliedstaaten, die den Sonderbeauftragten nach allen Kräften bei der Ausführung seines Mandats unterstützen. Der Sonderbeauftragte gibt in enger Abstimmung mit dem Leiter der Delegation der Union in Georgien dem Leiter der Beobachtermission der Europäischen Union in Georgien (EUMM Georgia) vor Ort politische Handlungsempfehlungen. Der Sonderbeauftragte und der Zivile Operationskommandeur der EUMM Georgia konsultieren einander je nach Bedarf. Der Sonderbeauftragte stimmt sich mit den anderen internationalen und regionalen Akteuren vor Ort ab.
 Artikel 13
 Unterstützung im Zusammenhang mit Ansprüchen
 Der Sonderbeauftragte und seine Mitarbeiter leisten Unterstützung im Zusammenhang mit der Bearbeitung von Ansprüchen und Pflichten, die auf den Mandaten früherer Sonderbeauftragter beruhen und gewähren administrative Hilfe sowie Zugang zu den in diesem Zusammenhang einschlägigen Akten.
 Artikel 14
 Überprüfung
 1. Die Durchführung dieses Beschlusses und seine Kohärenz mit anderen von der Union in der Region geleisteten Beiträgen werden regelmäßig überprüft. Der Sonderbeauftragte unterbreitet dem Rat, dem Hohen Vertreter und der Kommission bis Ende Oktober 2013 einen Fortschrittsbericht sowie zum Ende seines Mandats einen umfassenden Bericht über die Ausführung des Mandats.
 2. Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten wird zum 31. Dezember 2013 überprüft.
 Artikel 15
 Inkrafttreten
 Dieser Beschluss tritt am Tag seiner Annahme in Kraft.
 Er gilt ab dem 1. Juli 2013.
 Geschehen zu Brüssel am 2. Juli 2013.
 Im Namen des Rates
 Der Präsident
 L. LINKEVIČIUS
 (1) ABl. L 221 vom 27.8.2011, S. 5. Das Mandat des Sonderbeauftragten wurde durch den Beschluss 2012/326/GASP (ABl. L vom 26.6.2012, S. 53) um einen Zeitraum von 12 Monaten verlängert.
 (2) ABl. L 141 vom 27.5.2011, S. 17.


type: caselaw

text:
C 169/30 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 13.7.2002
 1) Talan ogillas. FÖRSTAINSTANSRÄTTENS DOM
 2) Vardera parten skall bära sin rättegångskostnad.
 av den 30 april 2002
 (1) EGT C 316, 4.11.2000. i förenade målen T-195/01 och T207/01: Gibraltars rege-
 ring mot Europeiska gemenskapernas kommission
 (Statligt stöd – Skattebestämmelser – Befintligt stöd eller
 nytt stöd – Inledande av det formella granskningsförfarandet
 enligt artikel 88.2 EG)
 FÖRSTAINSTANSRÄTTENS DOM (2002/C 169/53)
 den 3 maj 2002 (Rättegångsspråk: engelska)
 i mål T-177/01: Jégo-Quéré et Cie SA mot Europeiska
 gemenskapernas kommission (1)
 Förstainstansrätten, andra avdelningen i utökad sammansätt-
 (”Fiske – Förordning (EG) nr 1162/2001 – Återhämtning ning (ordföranden R.M. Moura Ramos samt domarna V. Tiili,
 av kummelbeståndet – Fiskeföretag – Talan om ogiltigförkla- J. Pirrung, P. Mengozzi och A.W.H. Meij; justitiesekreterare:
 ring – Person som berörs personligen – Upptagande till J. Plingers), har den 30 april 2002 avkunnat dom i förenade
 sakprövning”) målen T-195/01 och T-207/01: Gibraltars regering (ombud:
 A. Sutton, M. Llamas, barristers, och W. Schuster, avocat,
 delgivningsadress i Luxemburg) mot Europeiska gemenskaper-
 (2002/C 169/52) nas kommission (ombud: V. di Bucci och R. Lyal) med stöd av
 Konkungariket Spanien (ombud: R. Silva de Lauperta) angåen-
 (Rättegångsspråk: franska) de en talan om ogiltigförklaring av kommissionens beslut SG
 (2001) D/289755 och SG (2001) D/289757 av den 11 juli
 2001 om att inleda det förfarande som föreskrivs i artikel 88.2
 EG angående Gibraltars förordningar om undantagna bolag
 respektive om kvalificerade bolag. Domslutet i denna dom har
 I mål T-177/01, Jégo-Quéré et Cie SA, Lorient (Frankrike), följande lydelse:
 företrätt av advokaterna A. Creus Carreras, B. Uriarte Valiente
 och A. Agustinoy Guilayn mot Europeiska gemenskapernas
 kommission (ombud: T. van Rijn och A. Bordes), angående 1) I mål T-195/01:
 en talan om ogiltigförklaring av artiklarna 3 d och 5 i
 kommissionens förordning (EG) nr 1162/2001 av den 14 juni
 2001 om fastställande av åtgärder för kummelbeståndets a) Kommissionens beslut SG (2001) D/289755 av den
 återhämtning i ICES-delområde III, IV, V, VI och VII och ICES- 11 juli 2001 om att inleda det förfarande som föreskrivs
 område VIIIa, b, d, e och villkor i samband med detta för i artikel 88.2 EG angående förordningen om undantagna
 kontroll av fiskefartygens verksamhet (EGT L 159, s. 4), har bolag på Gibraltar ogiltigförklaras.
 förstainstansrätten (första avdelningen i utökad sammansätt-
 ning), sammansatt av ordföranden B. Vesterdorf samt domarna b) Kommissionen skall betala såväl de rättegångskostnader
 K. Lenaerts, J. Azizi, N.J. Forwood och H. Legal, justitiesekrete- som förorsakats Gibraltars regering som sina egna rätte-
 rare: byrådirektören D. Christensen, den 3 maj 2002 avkunnat gångskostnader, med undantag för de kostnader som
 en dom där domslutet har följande lydelse: avser det interimistiska förfarandet i mål T 195/01 R,
 vilka i sin helhet skall betalas av Gibraltars regering.
 1) Invändningen om rättegångshinder ogillas.
 c) Konungariket Spanien skall betala sina egna rättegångs-
 kostnader.
 2) Förfarandet skall fortsätta med avseende på sakprövningen.
 2) I mål T-207/01:
 3) Beslut om rättegångskostnader kommer att meddelas senare.
 a) Talan ogillas.
 (1) EGT C 289, 13.10.2001.
 b) Gibraltars regering skall betala såväl sina egna som
 kommissionens rättegångskostnader, inkluderande de som
 härrör från det interimistiska förfarandet T-207/01 R.


text:
 30.4.2011
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 130/25
 Rikors ippreżentat fl-14 ta’ Marzu 2011 — Mangou vs Il-Kunsill
 (Kawża T-148/11)
 2011/C 130/52
 Lingwa tal-kawża: il-Franċiż
 Partijiet
 Rikorrent: Philippe Mangou (Abidjan, il-Côte d’Ivoire) (rappreżentanti: G. Collard u L. Aliot, avukati)
 Konvenut: Il-Kunsill tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 Talbiet tar-rikorrent
 Ir-rikorrent jitlob li l-Qorti Ġenerali jogħġobha:
 —
 tiddikjara li, għar-rikorrent, Philippe Mangou, ir-Regolament tal-UE Nru 25/2011, tal-14 ta’ Jannar 2011, u d-Deċiżjoni Nru 2011/18/PESK, tal-14 ta’ Jannar 2011, ippubblikati fil-15 ta’ Jannar 2011 fil-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea, huma infondati fil-fatt,
 —
 konsegwentement,
 —
 tannulla r-Regolament tal-Kunsill Nru 25/2011, tal-14 ta’ Jannar 2011, u d-Deċiżjoni tal-Kunsill 2011/18/PESK, tal-14 Jannar 2011;
 —
 sussidjarjament, tordna li l-isem ta’ Philippe Mangou jitneħħa mil-listi annessi mal-imsemmi regolament u mal-imsemmija deċiżjoni.
 Motivi u argumenti prinċipali
 Il-motivi u l-argumenti prinċipali mressqa mir-rikorrent huma sostanzjalment identiċi jew simili għal dawk imressqa fil-kuntest tal-kawża T-137/11, Guiai Bi Poin vs Il-Kunsill.


text:
 23.7.2005
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 C 182/16
 TIESAS SPRIEDUMS
 (trešā palāta)
 2005. gada 2. jūnijā
 lietā C-89/04 (Raad van State lūgums sniegt prejudiciālu nolēmumu) Mediakabel BV pret Commissariaat voor de Media
 (1)
 (Direktīva 89/552/EEK - 1. panta a) apakšpunkts - Televīzijas apraides pakalpojumi - Piemērošanas joma - Direktīva 98/34/EK - 1. panta 2. punkts - Informācijas sabiedrības pakalpojumi - Piemērošanas joma)
 (2005/C 182/30)
 tiesvedības valoda — holandiešu
 Lietā C-89/04 par lūgumu sniegt prejudiciālu nolēmumu atbilstoši EKL 234. pantam, ko Raad van State [Valsts padome] (Nīderlande) iesniedza ar lēmumu, kas pieņemts 2004. gada 18. februārī un kas Tiesā reģistrēts 2004. gada 20. februārī, tiesvedībā Mediakabel BV pret Commissariaat voor de Media, Tiesa (trešā palāta) šādā sastāvā: palātas priekšsēdētājs A. Ross [A. Rosas], tiesneši E. Borgs-Bertets [A. Borg Barthet], Ž.-P. Puisošē [J.-P. Puissochet] (referents), S. fon Bārs [S. von Bahr] un J. Malenovskis [J. Malenovský], ģenerāladvokāts A. Ticano [A. Tizzano], sekretāre M. M. Fereira [M. M. Ferreira], galvenā administratore, 2005. gada 2. jūnijā ir pasludinājusi spriedumu, kura rezolutīvā daļa ir šāda:
 1)
 Padomes 1989. gada 3. oktobra Direktīvas 89/552/EEK par dažu tādu televīzijas raidījumu veidošanas un apraides noteikumu koordinēšanu, kas ietverti dalībvalstu normatīvajos un administratīvajos aktos, ko groza Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 1997. gada 30. jūnija Direktīva 97/36/EK, 1. panta a) apakšpunktā noteikto “televīzijas apraides” jēdzienu šī norma nosaka neatkarīgi no citiem avotiem. To nevar definēt, pretstatot to “informācijas sabiedrības pakalpojumu” jēdzienam Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 1998. gada 22. jūnija Direktīvas 98/34/EK, ar ko nosaka informācijas sniegšanas kārtību tehnisko standartu un noteikumu jomā, ko groza Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 1998. gada 20. jūlija Direktīva 98/48/EK, 1. panta 2. punkta izpratnē, un tādējādi tas ne vienmēr attiecas uz pakalpojumiem, ko neaptver šis pēdējais jēdziens.
 2)
 Direktīvas 89/552, ko groza Direktīva 97/36, 1. panta a) apakšpunktā noteiktais “televīzijas apraides” jēdziens attiecas uz pakalpojumu tad, ja šis pakalpojums sastāv no televīzijas programmu sākotnējas pārraides, lai to uztvertu skatītāji, proti, nenoteikts potenciālo teleskatītāju loks, kuriem vieni un tie paši attēli tiek pārraidīti vienlaicīgi. Attēlu pārraides tehnika šajā vērtējumā nav noteicošs elements.
 3)
 Tāds pakalpojums kā “Filmtime”, ko veido televīzijas raidījumu pārraide, kas domāta, lai to uztvertu skatītāji, un ko nesniedz pēc pakalpojumu saņēmēja individuāla pieprasījuma, ir televīzijas apraides pakalpojums Direktīvas 89/552, ko groza Direktīva 97/36, 1. panta a) apakšpunkta izpratnē. Analizējot “televīzijas apraides” pakalpojuma jēdzienu, primāra nozīme ir jāpiešķir pakalpojuma sniedzēja skatpunktam. Turpretī, to pakalpojumu situācija, kas konkurē ar attiecīgo pakalpojumu, šo vērtējumu neietekmē.
 4)
 Nosacījumi, kādos tāda pakalpojuma kā “Filmtime” sniedzējs izpilda Direktīvas 89/552, ko groza Direktīva 97/36, 4. panta 1. punktā noteikto pienākumu atvēlēt lielāko daļu sava raidlaika Eiropas darbiem, neietekmē šī pakalpojuma kā televīzijas apraides pakalpojuma kvalifikāciju.
 (1) OV C 94, 17.04.2004.


type: contracts

text:
 13.12.2012
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 L 341/31
 EEZ APVIENOTĀS KOMITEJAS LĒMUMS
 Nr. 177/2012
 (2012. gada 28. septembris),
 ar ko groza EEZ līguma XIII pielikumu (Transports)
 EEZ APVIENOTĀ KOMITEJA,
 ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Ekonomikas zonu, kurā grozījumi izdarīti ar Protokolu, ar ko pielāgo Līgumu par Eiropas Ekonomikas zonu, turpmāk “Līgums”, un jo īpaši tā 98. pantu,
 tā kā:
 (1)
 Līguma XIII pielikums ir grozīts ar EEZ Apvienotās komitejas 2012. gada 13. jūlija Lēmumu Nr. 135/2012 (1).
 (2)
 Līgumā jāiekļauj Komisijas 2011. gada 5. maija Regula (ES) Nr. 454/2011 par savstarpējas izmantojamības tehnisko specifikāciju attiecībā uz Eiropas dzelzceļu sistēmas pasažieru pārvadājumu telemātikas lietojumprogrammu apakšsistēmu (2),
 IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO LĒMUMU.
 1. pants
 Līguma XIII pielikumā aiz 37.di punkta (Komisijas Lēmums 2011/291/ES) iekļauj šādu punktu:
 “37.dj
 32011 R 0454: Komisijas 2011. gada 5. maija Regula (ES) Nr. 454/2011 par savstarpējas izmantojamības tehnisko specifikāciju attiecībā uz Eiropas dzelzceļu sistēmas pasažieru pārvadājumu telemātikas lietojumprogrammu apakšsistēmu (OV L 123, 12.5.2011., 11. lpp.).”
 2. pants
 Regulas (ES) Nr. 454/2011 teksts islandiešu un norvēģu valodā, kas jāpublicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ papildinājumā, ir autentisks.
 3. pants
 Šis lēmums stājas spēkā 2012. gada 29. septembrī, ja EEZ Apvienotajai komitejai ir sniegti visi paziņojumi saskaņā ar līguma 103. panta 1. punktu (3).
 4. pants
 Šo lēmumu publicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ iedaļā un tā EEZ papildinājumā.
 Briselē, 2012. gada 28. septembrī
 EEZ Apvienotās komitejas vārdā –
 priekšsēdētājs
 Atle LEIKVOLL
 (1) OV L 309, 8.11.2012., 16. lpp.
 (2) OV L 123, 12.5.2011., 11. lpp.
 (3) Konstitucionālas prasības nav norādītas.


text:
30.8.2008
 IT
 Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea
 C 223/19
 Sentenza della Corte (Terza Sezione) 11 luglio 2008 (domanda di pronuncia pregiudiziale proposta dal Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Lituania) — Procedimento penale a carico di Inga Rinau
 (Causa C-195/08 PPU) (1)
 (Cooperazione giudiziaria in materia civile - Competenza giurisdizionale ed esecuzione delle decisioni - Esecuzione in materia matrimoniale e in materia di responsabilità genitoriale - Regolamento (CE) n. 2201/2003 - Istanza di non riconoscimento di un provvedimento di rientro di un minore illecitamente trattenuto in un altro Stato membro - Procedimento pregiudiziale d'urgenza)
 (2008/C 223/30)
 Lingua processuale: il lituano
 Giudice del rinvio
 Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas
 Imputata nella causa principale
 Inga Rinau
 Oggetto
 Domanda di decisione pregiudiziale — Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Interpretazione degli artt. 21, 23, 24, 31, n. 1, 40, n. 2, e 42 del regolamento (CE) del Consiglio 27 novembre 2003, n. 2201, relativo alla competenza, al riconoscimento e all'esecuzione delle decisioni in materia matrimoniale e in materia di responsabilità genitoriale, che abroga il regolamento (CE) n. 1347/2000 (GU L 338, pag. 1) — omanda di non riconoscimento in uno Stato membro A di una decisione pronunciata dal giudice di uno Stato membro B che prescrive il rientro di un minore, ritenuto illecitamente trattenuto da sua madre nello Stato membro A, al padre residente nello Stato membro B e che ha ottenuto la custodia del minore
 Dispositivo
 1)
 Una volta che un provvedimento contro il ritorno sia stato emanato e portato a conoscenza del giudice d'origine, è irrilevante, ai fini del rilascio del certificato previsto all'art. 42 del regolamento (CE) del Consiglio 27 novembre 2003, n. 2201, relativo alla competenza, al riconoscimento e all'esecuzione delle decisioni in materia matrimoniale e in materia di responsabilità genitoriale, che abroga il regolamento (CE) n. 1347/2000, che tale provvedimento sia stato sospeso, riformato, annullato o comunque non sia passato in giudicato o sia stato sostituito da un provvedimento di ritorno, quando il ritorno del minore non ha effettivamente avuto luogo. Non essendo stato sollevato alcun dubbio in merito all'autenticità di tale certificato ed essendo quest'ultimo stato redatto conformemente al formulario il cui modello è riportato all'allegato IV di detto regolamento, l'opposizione al riconoscimento del provvedimento di ritorno è vietata ed al giudice adito spetta solo constatare l'esecutività del provvedimento certificato e pronunciare il ritorno immediato del minore.
 2)
 Salvo i casi in cui il procedimento riguardi una decisione certificata in applicazione degli artt. 11, n. 8, e 40-42 del regolamento n. 2201/2003, qualsiasi parte interessata può chiedere il non riconoscimento di una decisione giudiziaria, anche qualora non sia stata precedentemente presentata un'istanza di riconoscimento di tale decisione.
 3)
 L'art. 31, n. 1, del regolamento n. 2201/2003, nella parte in cui prevede che, in questa fase del procedimento, né la parte contro la quale l'esecuzione viene chiesta né il minore possono presentare osservazioni, non è applicabile ad un procedimento di non riconoscimento di una decisione giudiziaria avviato senza che sia stata precedentemente proposta un'istanza di riconoscimento nei confronti della stessa decisione. In una situazione del genere, la convenuta, che chiede il riconoscimento, può presentare osservazioni.
 (1) GU C 171 del 5.7.2008.


type: wikipedia

text:
Willi Störring (* 11. April 1896 in Hagen; † 29. Oktober 1978 in Düsseldorf) war ein deutscher Opernsänger (Tenor). Er wurde insbesondere als Heldentenor in den Opern Richard Wagners bekannt.
 Leben
 Störring war zuerst Schmiedegeselle. Als seine Stimme entdeckt wurde, wurde diese durch Fritz Rémond senior in Köln ausgebildet.
 Sein Bühnendebüt gab er 1927 am Opernhaus von Köln als „Manrico“ im Troubadour Von dort wechselte er 1930 ans Opernhaus Düsseldorf und dann 1932 auf Wunsch Heinz Tietjens an die Berliner Staatsoper, wo er bis 1935 als Heldentenor erfolgreich in italienischen und Wagner-Opern war.
 1933 und 1934 sang er kleinere Partien bei den Bayreuther Festspielen. 1935 war er bei den Festspielen von Zoppot der „Rienzi“ in der gleichnamigen Wagner-Oper. 1940 gastierte er an der Wiener Staatsoper.
 Von 1936 bis 1944 war er im Verband des Nationaltheaters Weimar. 1947 ging er in seine Geburtsstadt Hagen und wirkte dort bis 1952, dem Jahr seines offiziellen Bühnenabschied. Dabei sang er den „Canio“ im Bajazzo. Er trat danach aber noch gelegentlich bis 1972 auf. Nach seinem Bühnenabschied arbeitete er in Düsseldorf als Gesangspädagoge.
 Literatur
 Störring, Willi. In: Karl-Josef Kutsch, Leo Riemens: Großes Sängerlexikon. 3. Auflage 1997–2000. Bd. 5, S. 3354
 Weblinks
 Opernsänger
 Tenor
 Heldentenor
 Musiker (Düsseldorf)
 Darstellender Künstler (Weimar)
 Person (Bayreuther Festspiele)
 Person (Hagen)
 Deutscher
 Geboren 1896
 Gestorben 1978
 Mann


text:
 26.5.2012
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 151/16
 Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mill-Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Il-Pajjiżi l-Baxxi) fil-29 ta’ Frar 2012 — Staat der Nederlanden vs Delta N.V.
 (Kawża C-107/12)
 2012/C 151/28
 Lingwa tal-kawża: l-Olandiż
 Qorti tar-rinviju
 Hoge Raad der Nederlanden.
 Partijiet fil-kawża prinċipali
 Rikorrenti: Staat der Nederlanden.
 Konvenuta: Delta N.V.
 Domandi preliminari
 (1)
 L-Artikolu 345 TFUE għandu jiġi interpretat fis-sens li taqa’ wkoll taħt il-kunċett ta’ “sistema ta’ proprjetà fl-Istati Membri” is-sistema tal-projbizzjoni assoluta ta’ privatizzazzjoni inkwistjoni f’din il-kawża, kif stabbilita fid-digriet dwar l-azzjonijiet ta’ operaturi ta’ netwerk, flimkien mal-Artikolu 93 tal-liġi tal-1998 dwar l-elettriku u l-Artikolu 85 tal-liġi dwar il-gass, li jimplika li l-azzjonijiet f’operatur ta’ netwerk jistgħu jiġu ttrasferiti biss fl-ambitu tal-awtoritajiet?
 (2)
 Fil-każ ta’ risposta fl-affermattiv għall-ewwel domanda, dan għandu bħala konsegwenza li r-regoli dwar il-moviment liberu tal-kapital ma japplikawx għall-projbizzjoni ta’ grupp, jew tal-inqas li ma hemmx bżonn li tiġi evalwata l-projbizzjoni ta’ grupp fid-dawl tar-regoli dwar il-moviment liberu tal-kapital?
 (3)
 L-għanijiet, li huma wkoll il-bażi tal-Won [liġi dwar il-ġestjoni indipendenti tan-netwerks (Wet onafhankelijk netbeheer), intiżi, permezz tal-ġlieda kontra s-sussidji trażversali fis-sens wiesa’ (inkluż l-iskambju ta’ informazzjoni strateġika), sabiex jiżguraw it-trasparenza fis-suq tal-enerġija u sabiex jipprevjenu d-distorsjonijiet tal-kompetizzjoni, huma interessi ekonomiċi puri, jew jistgħu jiġu kkunsidrati bħala interessi ta’ natura mhux ekonomika, fis-sens li, skont iċ-ċirkustanzi, huma jistgħu jikkostitwixxu, bħala raġunijiet imperattivi ta’ interess ġenerali, ġustifikazzjoni għal restrizzjoni tal-moviment liberu tal-kapital?


text:
Edmund Pevensie (Engels: Edmund Pevensie), ook bekend als Edmund de Rechtvaardige (Engels: Edmund the Just), is een personage uit Het betoverde land achter de kleerkast, Het paard en de jongen, Prins Caspian, De reis van het drakenschip en Het laatste gevecht van De Kronieken van Narnia door C.S. Lewis. Edmund is de een na jongste van de Pevensie-kinderen, de andere zijn Lucy, Susan en Peter.
 Het betoverde land achter de kleerkast
 De Pevensies moeten vanwege de oorlog uit Londen vluchten en vertrekken naar het huis van Professor Kirke in het noorden van Engeland. De tweede dag komt Lucy met een verhaal over een andere wereld genaamd Narnia, dat ze in de kleerkast heeft gevonden. Edmund en de anderen geloven haar niet.
 De volgende keer dat Lucy gaat, gaat Edmund ook om haar te betrappen. Als hij de kleerkast doorgaat komt hij ook in Narnia. Daar komt hij Jadis, de Witte Heks tegen. Hij laat zich omkopen met betoverd Turks Fruit en belooft dat hij zijn broer en zussen naar haar zal brengen.
 De derde keer dat Lucy en de tweede keer dat Edmund naar Narnia gaan zijn ook Peter en Susan erbij en is dit het begin van een avontuur. Als eerste gaan ze naar Tumnus, maar die is opgepakt. Als ze dan naar een beverdam worden geleid naar meneer en mevrouw Bever horen ze van de voorspelling en dat Aslan een leger voor hen aan het maken is. Tijdens het gesprek glipt Edmund weg, naar het kasteel van de Witte Heks, om zijn broer en zussen te verraden.
 De Witte Heks is niet blij dat hij alleen komt. Als perfecte lokaas neemt ze Edmund mee, op weg naar het strijdveld. Op een dag komt plotseling het leger van Aslan binnen vallen en bevrijdt Edmund.
 Terug bij de andere kinderen gaat Edmund zich voorbereiden op de Slag. Wanneer ze horen dat Aslan dood is, krijgt Peter de leiding. Uiteindelijk, wanneer Peter en de Witte Heks tegenover elkaar staan, komt Aslan, herrezen uit de dood, hem te hulp en doodt Jadis, de Witte Heks. Hierna worden Edmund en de anderen de vier koningen en koninginnen van Narnia.
 Het paard en de jongen
 Hierin speelt Edmund maar een kleine rol, als hij op bezoek is in Tashbaan. Hij gaat samen met Susan weer terug met een schip naar Cair Paravel. Ook voert hij het leger aan dat het kasteel van de koning van Archenland ontzet.
 Prins Caspian
 Hierin moeten de kinderen Prins Caspian helpen om zijn oom van de troon te stoten en zichzelf tot Koning te kunnen kronen van Narnia. Ze krijgen hierbij hulp van de Pratende Dieren van Narnia.
 Uiteindelijk weten ze de Koning en zijn gevolg te verslaan en Aslan stuurt het volk terug naar waar ze vandaan komen, een klein eilandje in de wereld Aarde.
 De reis van het drakenschip
 Hier gaan Lucy, Edmund en Eustaas Schreutel mee aan boord van het schip De Dageraad. Ze gaan met Koning Caspian mee op zoek naar zeven vrienden van zijn vader. Uiteindelijk gaan ze naar het Einde van de Wereld. Hier gaan de kinderen en een muis, genaamd Rippertjiep, van boord om naar het Land van Aslan te varen. Rippertjiep gaat van hun weg, en de kinderen komen even verder Aslan tegen, die zich als Lam openbaart. Deze keer zegt Aslan het tegen Lucy en Edmund dat het voor hen de laatste keer is dat ze in Narnia komen, omdat ze te oud zijn geworden.
 Het laatste gevecht
 Hierin komt Edmund pas voor na de vernietiging van Narnia door Aslan in de "hemel" van Narnia.
 Hier krijgt hij ook te horen dat hij voorgoed hier zal blijven leven, omdat hij bij een treinongeluk, toen hij naar Narnia werden geroepen, omkwam, net als de andere Pevensies. Behalve Susan want die geloofde niet meer in Narnia
 Personage uit Narnia


text:
Laranjeiras is een van de oudste wijken in Rio de Janeiro. In de 17e eeuw werden er chácaras (kleine boerderijen) gebouwd naast de Carioca rivier, die vanuit het Floresta da Tijuca naar de Baai van Guanabara loopt. Vroeger werd de wijk Vallei van de Carioca genoemd.
 De woonplaats van de gouverneur van de staat Rio de Janeiro (Palácio Guanabara) bevindt zich in Laranjeiras. Tot 2003 huisde ook de voetbalclub Fluminense FC in de wijk en speelde in het Estádio das Laranjeiras, in 2003 verhuisde de club echter naar het Maracanã.
 Laranjeiras ligt tussen de wijken Cosme Velho, Catete, Flamengo, Botafogo en Santa Teresa.
 Wijk in Rio de Janeiro


text:
 4.8.2016
 EL
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
 L 211/50
 ΑΠΌΦΑΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΜΕΙΚΤΉΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΉΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΟΧ
 αριθ. 99/2015
 της 30ής Απριλίου 2015
 για την τροποποίηση του παραρτήματος II (Τεχνικοί κανόνες, πρότυπα, δοκιμές και πιστοποίηση) και του παραρτήματος IV (Ενέργεια) της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ [2016/1282]
 Η ΜΕΙΚΤΗ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ ΤΟΥ ΕΟΧ,
 Έχοντας υπόψη τη συμφωνία για τον Ευρωπαϊκό Οικονομικό Χώρο («η συμφωνία για τον ΕΟΧ»), και ιδίως το άρθρο 98,
 Εκτιμώντας τα ακόλουθα:
 (1)
 Ο κανονισμός (ΕΕ) αριθ. 548/2014 της Επιτροπής, της 21ης Μαΐου 2014, για την εφαρμογή της οδηγίας 2009/125/ΕΚ του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τους μετασχηματιστές μικρής, μεσαίας και μεγάλης ισχύος (1) πρέπει να ενσωματωθεί στη συμφωνία για τον ΕΟΧ.
 (2)
 Τα παραρτήματα II και IV της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ θα πρέπει, επομένως, να τροποποιηθούν αναλόγως,
 ΕΞΕΔΩΣΕ ΤΗΝ ΠΑΡΟΥΣΑ ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗ:
 Άρθρο 1
 Μετά το σημείο 6ζ [κανονισμός (ΕΕ) αριθ. 1194/2012 της Επιτροπής] του κεφαλαίου IV του παραρτήματος II της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ, παρεμβάλλεται το ακόλουθο σημείο:
 «6η.
 32014 R 0548: Κανονισμός (ΕΕ) αριθ. 548/2014 της Επιτροπής, της 21ης Μαΐου 2014, για την εφαρμογή της οδηγίας 2009/125/ΕΚ του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τους μετασχηματιστές μικρής, μεσαίας και μεγάλης ισχύος (ΕΕ L 152 της 22.5.2014, σ. 1).».
 Άρθρο 2
 Μετά το σημείο 26η [κανονισμός (ΕΕ) αριθ. 1194/2012 της Επιτροπής] του παραρτήματος IV της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ, παρεμβάλλεται το ακόλουθο σημείο:
 «26θ.
 32014 R 0548: Κανονισμός (ΕΕ) αριθ. 548/2014 της Επιτροπής, της 21ης Μαΐου 2014, για την εφαρμογή της οδηγίας 2009/125/ΕΚ του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τους μετασχηματιστές μικρής, μεσαίας και μεγάλης ισχύος (ΕΕ L 152 της 22.5.2014, σ. 1).».
 Άρθρο 3
 Τα κείμενα του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) αριθ. 548/2014 στην ισλανδική και τη νορβηγική γλώσσα, τα οποία δημοσιεύονται στο συμπλήρωμα ΕΟΧ της Επίσημης Εφημερίδας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, είναι αυθεντικά.
 Άρθρο 4
 Η παρούσα απόφαση αρχίζει να ισχύει την 1η Μαΐου 2015, υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί όλες οι κοινοποιήσεις που προβλέπονται στο άρθρο 103 παράγραφος 1 της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ (*).
 Άρθρο 5
 Η παρούσα απόφαση δημοσιεύεται στο τμήμα ΕΟΧ και στο συμπλήρωμα ΕΟΧ της Επίσημης Εφημερίδας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
 Βρυξέλλες, 30 Απριλίου 2015.
 Για τη Μεικτή Επιτροπή του ΕΟΧ
 Ο Πρόεδρος
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 (1) ΕΕ L 152 της 22.5.2014, σ. 1.
 (*) Δεν έχουν αναφερθεί συνταγματικές απαιτήσεις.


type: other

text:
515/2004 Sb. Nařízení vlády o hmotné podpoře na vytváření nových pracovních míst a hmotné podpoře rekvalifikace n...
 515/2004verze 8
 Nařízení vlády č. 515/2004 Sb.Nařízení vlády o hmotné podpoře na vytváření nových pracovních míst a hmotné podpoře rekvalifikace nebo školení zaměstnanců v rámci investičních pobídek
 Aktuální znění 01.12.2019 (verze 8)
 (1) Výše hmotné podpory zaměstnavateli na vytváření nových pracovních míst v rámci investičních pobídek v případě investiční akce v technologickém centru činí 200000 Kč na jedno nové pracovní místo zřízené v územní oblasti1); na vytváření nových pracovních míst v hlavním městě Praze se podpora neposkytuje.
 (2) Hmotná podpora zaměstnavateli na vytváření nových pracovních míst v rámci investičních pobídek v případě investiční akce ve výrobě se poskytuje, pokud průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob v územní oblasti1) dosáhne alespoň výše 7,5 %, a její výše činí
 b) 200000 Kč na jedno nové pracovní místo zřízené v územní oblasti1) s podílem nezaměstnaných osob nejméně o 50 % vyšším, než je průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob v České republice.
 (3) Hmotná podpora se poskytuje na nová pracovní místa zřízená za podmínek uvedených v dohodě sjednané podle § 111 odst. 6 zákona.
 (1) Výše hmotné podpory rekvalifikace nebo školení zaměstnanců v rámci investičních pobídek v případě investiční akce v technologickém centru činí 50 % z nákladů na rekvalifikaci nebo školení zaměstnanců2) v územní oblasti; na rekvalifikaci nebo školení zaměstnanců se podpora neposkytuje v hlavním městě Praze.
 (2) Hmotná podpora rekvalifikace nebo školení zaměstnanců v rámci investičních pobídek v případě investiční akce ve výrobě se poskytuje, pokud průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob v územní oblasti dosáhne alespoň výše 7,5 %, a její výše činí
 a) v územní oblasti s podílem nezaměstnaných osob nejméně o 50 % vyšším, než je průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob v České republice, 50 % z nákladů na rekvalifikaci nebo školení zaměstnanců2),
 b) v územní oblasti s podílem nezaměstnaných osob nejméně o 25 % vyšším, než je průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob v České republice, 25 % z nákladů na rekvalifikaci nebo školení zaměstnanců2).
 (3) Jestliže v době podání žádosti o hmotnou podporu organizaci určené podle zákona o investičních pobídkách je žadatelem
 a) malý podnik3), navyšuje se výše hmotné podpory podle odstavců 1 a 2 o 20 procentních bodů,
 b) střední podnik3), navyšuje se výše hmotné podpory podle odstavců 1 a 2 o 10 procentních bodů.
 (4) V případě rekvalifikace nebo školení zaměstnanců se zdravotním postižením nebo znevýhodněných zaměstnanců se výše hmotné podpory podle odstavců 1 a 2 navyšuje o 10 procentních bodů, nejvýše však na 70 % z nákladů na rekvalifikaci nebo školení těchto zaměstnanců2).
 (5) Při stanovení výše hmotné podpory rekvalifikace nebo školení se vychází z předpokládaných nákladů uvedených v dohodě sjednané podle § 111 odst. 7 zákona.
 Průměrným podílem nezaměstnaných osob se pro účely tohoto nařízení rozumí průměrný podíl nezaměstnaných osob za ukončené kalendářní pololetí bezprostředně předcházející datu předložení záměru zaměstnavatele získat investiční pobídky podle zákona o investičních pobídkách. Při zjišťování průměrného podílu nezaměstnaných osob se vychází ze statistických údajů Ministerstva práce a sociálních věcí.
 (1) Hmotnou podporu na vytváření nových pracovních míst a hmotnou podporu rekvalifikace nebo školení poskytuje Úřad práce na základě dohody sjednané podle § 111 odst. 6 a 7 zákona a bezhotovostně ji převede ve lhůtách uvedených v této dohodě na účet zaměstnavatele vedený u peněžního ústavu.
 (2) Má-li být jednotlivému zaměstnavateli poskytnuta hmotná podpora rekvalifikace nebo školení (§ 2), jejíž hodnota na jeden projekt přesahuje v době podání záměru získat investiční pobídky v českých korunách částku odpovídající 2000000 EUR, vyžaduje se k jejímu poskytnutí předchozí oznámení a schválení Evropskou komisí6).
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 578/2004 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 338/2006 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 68/2008 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 97/2010 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 10/2014 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 173/2015 Sb. Čl. II
 Přechodné ustanovení zavedeno nařízením vlády č. 299/2019 Sb. Čl. II
 1) § 111 odst. 11 zákona č. 435/2004 Sb., o zaměstnanosti, ve znění pozdějších předpisů.
 3) Příloha I k nařízení Komise (EU) č. 651/2014 ze dne 17. června 2014.
 4) § 1a odst. 1 písm. h) zákona č. 72/2000 Sb., o investičních pobídkách a o změně některých zákonů, ve znění pozdějších předpisů.
 6) Čl. 4 odst. 1 písm. n) nařízení Komise (EU) č. 651/2014 ze dne 17. června 2014.


jurisdiction: US

text: b' OFFICE OF\n THE INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\nSOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION\n\n\n\n SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER\n INTEGRITY: AN IMPORTANT LINK\n IN HOMELAND SECURITY\n\n May 2002 A-08-02-22077\n\n\n\n\n MANAGEMENT\n ADVISORY REPORT\n\x0c Mission\nWe improve SSA programs and operations and protect them against fraud, waste,\nand abuse by conducting independent and objective audits, evaluations, and\ninvestigations. We provide timely, useful, and reliable information and advice to\nAdministration officials, the Congress, and the public.\n\n Authority\nThe Inspector General Act created independent audit and investigative units,\ncalled the Office of Inspector General (OIG). The mission of the OIG, as spelled\nout in the Act, is to:\n\n m Conduct and supervise independent and objective audits and\n investigations relating to agency programs and operations.\n m Promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency within the agency.\n m Prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in agency programs and\n operations.\n m Review and make recommendations regarding existing and proposed\n legislation and regulations relating to agency programs and operations.\n m Keep the agency head and the Congress fully and currently informed of\n problems in agency programs and operations.\n\n To ensure objectivity, the IG Act empowers the IG with:\n\n m Independence to determine what reviews to perform.\n m Access to all information necessary for the reviews.\n m Authority to publish findings and recommendations based on the reviews.\n\n Vision\nBy conducting independent and objective audits, investigations, and evaluations,\nwe are agents of positive change striving for continuous improvement in the\nSocial Security Administration\'s programs, operations, and management and in\nour own office.\n\x0c SOCIAL SECURITY\nMEMORANDUM\n\nDate: May 9, 2002\n\nTo: The Commissioner\n\nFrom: Inspector General\n\nSubject: Social\n Security Number Integrity: An Important Link in Homeland Security\n (A-08-02-22077)\n\n\n OBJECTIVE\n\n The objective of this Management Advisory Report is to provide information regarding\n (1) how Social Security number (SSN) integrity has become a critical element in the\n protection of our homeland, (2) what the Social Security Administration (SSA) and\n SSA\'s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have done to ensure the SSN\'s integrity,\n and (3) what tasks remain in this important effort.\n\n BACKGROUND\n As the Office of Homeland Security stated in its report, Securing the Homeland,\n Strengthening the Nation, \xe2\x80\x9cThe Government of the United States has no more important\n mission than fighting terrorism overseas and securing the homeland from future terrorist\n attacks.\xe2\x80\x9d Federal agencies, including SSA, have embraced this challenge\xe2\x80\x94one of\n monumental scale and complexity. We believe strengthening SSN integrity is one way\n in which SSA can make an important contribution to this national goal.\n\n In the past, OIG has issued numerous reports addressing SSN integrity (Appendix A).\n These reports included recommendations that addressed vulnerabilities in several SSA\n processes including SSN assignment and issuance, employer wage reporting, and\n death master file reporting and issuance. SSA elected to implement many of these\n recommendations. Additionally, after the events of September 11, 2001, SSA revisited\n its position on many prior OIG recommendations that it had either not yet implemented\n or disagreed with. In several cases, SSA decided to escalate the implementation of\n some recommendations, while it reversed its position on others.\n\x0cPage 2 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nSCOPE AND METHODOLOGY\nIn preparing this report, we obtained and reviewed information from various sources,\nincluding the Office of Homeland Security\xe2\x80\x99s web site, previous OIG reports, statistics\nand case summaries from our Office of Investigations and Fraud Hotline, and\npreliminary drafts of certain legislation. Although we did not perform an audit of a\nspecific SSA entity, most of the information contained herein relates to responsibilities\nof the Office of Program Benefits under the Deputy Commissioner for Disability and\nIncome Security Programs. We performed this work in March 2002 in accordance with\nthe President\xe2\x80\x99s Council on Integrity and Efficiency\xe2\x80\x99s Quality Standards for Inspections.\n\nRESULTS OF REVIEW\nWe have long been aware that failure to protect the integrity of the SSN has enormous\nfinancial consequences for the Government, the people, and the business community.\nWe now know that shortcomings in the SSN issuance process can have far graver\nconsequences than previously imagined. The difficult lessons of September 11, 2001\nhave taught us that SSA can no longer afford to operate from a "business as usual"\nperspective. Whatever the cost, whatever the sacrifice, we must protect the number\nthat has become our national identifier; the number that is the key to social, legal, and\nfinancial assimilation in this country.\n\nWe recognize SSA alone cannot resolve the monumental issues surrounding homeland\nsecurity. Efforts to make our Nation safer will involve new or expanded initiatives by\nalmost every segment of our population, including State and local governments, private\nindustry, non-governmental organizations, and citizens. However, we also recognize\nthat, in endeavoring to protect our homeland, no Government system or policy should\nbe ignored. As such, SSA, as a Federal agency and public servant, must resolve to\nreview its systems and processes for opportunities to prevent the possibility that anyone\nmight commit or camouflage criminal activities against the United States. We believe\nSSN integrity is a link in our homeland security goal that must be strengthened.\n\nHOW DOES SSN INTEGRITY IMPACT HOMELAND SECURITY?\n\n In the weeks following September 11, concerned citizens\n How can we assist the across the Nation asked many questions about the\n Administration\xe2\x80\x99s efforts terrorists. For example, how were these individuals able\n to investigate the initial to assimilate into our society? What documentation\n attacks and prevent allowed them to do so, and how did they obtain it? Are\n future attacks? there more terrorists hiding in the United States, and, if\n so, how can law enforcement officials locate them? Who\nare their supporters in the United States? Most importantly, many asked \xe2\x80\x9chow can we\nassist in efforts to investigate the attacks and prevent future attacks?\xe2\x80\x9d\n\x0cPage 3 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nFor SSA\xe2\x80\x99s OIG, the answer to many of these questions revolved around one item\xe2\x80\x95the\nSSN. A unique set of nine numbers assigned to almost everyone in the United States.\nIn fact, today, approximately 300 million people have an SSN. The SSN is critical to\nSSA\xe2\x80\x99s implementation of its programs and operations. While this was originally the\nSSN\xe2\x80\x99s only intended use, the SSN quickly became our de facto national identifier, used\nas a key means of identification in both the public and private sectors.\n\nAs use of the SSN has grown, so has its misuse. Because the SSN is so heavily relied\nupon as an identifier, it is a valuable commodity for criminals. It can be obtained\nillegally in many ways: presenting false documentation to SSA; stealing another\nperson\'s SSN; purchasing an SSN on the black market; using the SSN of a deceased\nindividual; and creating a nine-digit number out of thin air. As we have learned through\nthe terrorist investigations, even a legally obtained SSN can be used to facilitate an\nunlawful act.\n\nIn Fiscal Year 2001, OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Fraud Hotline received over 115,000 allegations of fraud. Of\nthis total, over 55 percent were allegations of SSN misuse. Examples of this type of\nfraud include use of an improperly obtained SSN to obtain a driver\'s license or a credit\ncard, open a bank account, or secure a loan. The remaining allegations were of\nprogram or employee fraud, receipt of Social Security benefits, or other fraud having a\ndirect effect on the Social Security Trust Fund. Experience has shown that these cases\noften also include implications of SSN misuse.\n\nGiven the magnitude of such allegations and competing priorities, OIG is regrettably\nunable to investigate a large percentage of the possible criminal violations involving\nSSN misuse. Nevertheless, in response to the September 11 attacks, we have\ncommitted extensive resources to investigating cases in which SSNs may have been\nused to facilitate or camouflage terrorist crimes. The following examples summarize a\nfew of the many cases we pursued involving SSN misuse and possible terrorist activity\nor connections. These cases also illustrate SSA\xe2\x80\x99s vulnerability to counterfeit evidentiary\ndocuments that individuals sometimes use to inappropriately obtain an SSN.\n\n\xc3\xbc On December 6, 2001, a Federal Grand Jury in Phoenix, Arizona, returned a\n 41-count indictment against an individual for, among other crimes, 2 counts of\n Furnishing False Information as an Identity to Obtain an SSN and 25 counts of Using\n an SSN Assigned to Someone Else. The Investigation revealed that the individual, a\n licensed commercial pilot, obtained an initial SSN in July 1992 in Mesa, Arizona. In\n August 1999, the individual used a counterfeit Somali passport in another name to\n obtain an additional SSN.\n\n The indictment stated the individual interchanged the names and SSN\'s on a variety\n of official documents, including Federal Aviation Administration documents. He also\n obtained driver\'s licenses in both names and used both identities on a variety of loan\n and credit card applications, leases and more.\n\x0cPage 4 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\n\xc3\xbc Based on a referral from an SSA field office employee, SSA\xe2\x80\x99s OIG and other law\n enforcement agencies arrested an individual for possessing counterfeit documents,\n violating the Immigration and Nationality Act, and filing a fraudulent SSN application.\n The individual had a Pakistani passport that contained a counterfeit non-immigrant\n U.S. visa and a counterfeit I-94, Arrival/Departure Record. He also had a genuine\n SSN card; a counterfeit, blank SSN card; a counterfeit Alien Registration card; and\n numerous credit cards.\n\n The individual obtained the genuine SSN card by submitting an application to SSA\n with the counterfeit non-immigrant visa as proof of his immigration status. The\n suspect stated he filed for an SSN twice. The first time he filed, he was denied, but\n he received an SSN on his second try at a different SSA field office. The suspect\n purported to have paid $1,200 for the counterfeit U.S. visa and SSN card.\n\nIn addition, our Office of Audit (OA) is conducting an audit in which we are reviewing\nSSA\xe2\x80\x99s procedures for verifying documents submitted with SSN applications. Although\nwe plan to issue the final report in the Summer of 2002, preliminary results indicate that\napproximately 8 percent (over 100,000) of the 1.2 million original SSNs assigned to\nnon-citizens in Calendar Year 2000 may have been based on invalid immigration\ndocuments. We believe results and examples like those cited above illustrate the\nnecessity to verify all evidentiary documents submitted with SSN applications. We\nrecognize SSA is moving toward this goal; however, we are concerned that delays in\nimplementation could result in thousands more improperly assigned SSNs.\nAccordingly, we urge the Agency to establish a firm time frame by which it will commit to\nindependently verifying all immigration documents before assigning an SSN.\n\nWHAT STEPS HAVE SSA AND OIG TAKEN TO ADDRESS THIS CRITICAL ISSUE?\n\nBoth SSA and OIG promptly accepted the challenge of addressing the Agency\xe2\x80\x99s role in\nhomeland security. Recognizing the SSN\xe2\x80\x99s importance in non-citizens\xe2\x80\x99 assimilation in\nU.S. society, SSA established an Enumeration Task Force to examine and establish\npolicy that would strengthen the Agency\xe2\x80\x99s procedures. As a member of this Task Force,\nOIG has shared many insights and ideas with the Agency, which we believe will help\nincrease the integrity of the enumeration process. Additionally, since moments after the\ninitial terrorist attacks, OIG has been fully engaged in investigating these crimes. We\nassisted in search, rescue and recovery efforts, and we devoted extensive resources to\ndeveloping information regarding possible co-conspirators in the attacks. As evidenced\nby our actions, SSA and OIG are committed to bringing to justice individuals who\nparticipated in these terrible acts and improving procedures for ensuring SSN integrity,\nthereby strengthening our link in the homeland security chain.\n\nENUMERATION TASK FORCE\n\nThe Enumeration Task Force is re-examining the entire enumeration process, including\nprevious OIG recommendations, to identify ways SSA can strengthen its enumeration\npolicies and procedures. On November 1, 2001, SSA\xe2\x80\x99s then-Acting Commissioner\nissued a memorandum to SSA executive staff announcing seven reforms the\n\x0cPage 5 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nEnumeration Task Force recommended and the Agency would implement to address\nenumeration-related vulnerabilities. In that memorandum, the Acting Commissioner\ncommitted that SSA would institute these reforms by February 2002. Additionally, the\nEnumeration Task Force added another planned initiative to the list after the\nNovember 2001 memorandum, bringing the total short-term projects to eight. SSA has\nimplemented several of these initiatives, while others have been delayed. A chart\ncontaining the status of each initiative is included as Appendix B. These initiatives are\nas follows.\n\n1. Provide refresher training on enumeration policy and procedures, with emphasis on\n enumerating non-citizens, for all involved staff.\n\n2. Convene a joint task force between SSA, the Immigration and Naturalization Service\n (INS), the Department of State (DoS), and the Office of Refugee Resettlement to\n resolve issues involving enumeration of non-citizens, including working out\n procedures for verifying INS documents before SSN issuance.\n\n3. Eliminate driver\xe2\x80\x99s licenses as a reason for a non-work number.\n\n4. Provide an alternative to giving out a Numident printout for SSN verification.\n\n5. Lower the age tolerance from age 18 to age 12 for mandatory interview procedures,\n including verification of birth records before enumeration for all applicants age 1 and\n over for original SSNs and require evidence of identity for all children, regardless of\n age.\n\n6. Determine the feasibility of photocopying (or scanning) all documentary evidence\n submitted with SSN applications.\n\n7. Change the Modernized Enumeration System to provide an electronic audit trail,\n regardless of the mode used to process SSN applications.\n\n8. Implement the SSN Verification System.\n\nOIG INITIATIVES\n\nOIG has taken the challenge of addressing homeland security and the SSN\xe2\x80\x99s role in this\nendeavor seriously. We are committed to providing whatever assistance we can in\nbringing to justice those who committed the unfathomable terrorist acts against our\nNation. Additionally, we will provide whatever knowledge and resources we have to\naffect significant changes in Federal programs so that not one more terrorist can use\nour own systems and processes to facilitate such crimes. As evidenced by the myriad\nefforts OIG has already taken, our resolve is deep.\n\x0cPage 6 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nInvestigative Efforts\n\nOIG special agents, computer specialists, and attorneys have long worked closely with\nFederal, State and local law enforcement officials to investigate and prosecute SSN\nmisuse. Since September 11, we have further increased our efforts in this area,\nworking aggressively to support the Administration\'s efforts to investigate the attacks\nand prevent future incidents. Examples of our efforts follow.\n\n\xc3\xbc Within minutes of the attack on the World Trade Center, the Special Agent-in-\n Charge for OIG New York Field Division contacted the Federal Bureau of\n Investigation (FBI), offering the services of all the special agents under his\n command. In the days following the attacks, several of these special agents\n assisted in search, rescue and recovery efforts at Ground Zero.\n\n\xc3\xbc Nationally, OIG has been an active participant in the FBI\xe2\x80\x99s Joint Terrorism Task\n Force. We have provided round-the-clock support to the national criminal\n investigation of the terrorist attacks. Our special agents, computer specialists, and\n attorneys have helped identify, detain, indict, and convict individuals who may have\n a relationship with terrorist activities.\n\n\xc3\xbc OIG quickly assigned its agents in the New York/New Jersey area to the FBI\n investigation. Additionally, OIG had representatives assigned to the FBI\xe2\x80\x99s Strategic\n Information and Operations Center and to the National Infrastructure Protection\n Center. The OIG\xe2\x80\x99s Electronic Crimes Team assisted the FBI, while our computer\n specialists wrote programs to more specifically query SSA\xe2\x80\x99s data bases for FBI-\n requested information. Additionally, OIG agents fielded SSN information requests\n on suspects and witnesses, each of which was routed through the FBI\xe2\x80\x99s Baltimore\n office to our Headquarters. Many SSA OIG investigators are working full-time on the\n terrorism investigation and responding to allegations of SSN misuse.\n\n\xc3\xbc \xe2\x80\x9cOperation Safe Travel\xe2\x80\x9d began in September 2001 when SSA OIG agents developed\n information that individuals working at the Salt Lake City International Airport were\n misusing SSN\'s for security badge applications and I-9\'s, (Employment Eligibility\n Verification). Under the direction of the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ),\n investigators subpoenaed records for all 9,000 airport employees with security\n badges to identify instances of SSN misuse. They identified 61 individuals with the\n highest-level security badges and 125 individuals with lower level badges who\n misused SSN\'s. A Federal grand jury indicted 69 individuals for Social Security and\n INS violations. Sixty-one of the 69 individuals arrested had an SSN misuse charge\n by the U.S. Attorney. On December 11, 2001, SSA\xe2\x80\x99s OIG agents and other\n members of the Operation Safe Travel Task Force arrested 50 individuals. To date,\n more than 20 have been sentenced after pleading guilty to violations cited in the\n indictments. Many are now involved in deportation proceedings. There were other\n similar airport operations after the Salt Lake City Operation, and more are underway.\n In conjunction with DoJ, we are looking at other critical infrastructure facility sites.\n\x0cPage 7 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nAudit Efforts\n\nOur OA produced in-depth responses to two congressional inquiries assessing SSA\'s\npolicies and procedures for issuing original and replacement Social Security (SS) cards.\nIn early October 2001, we assessed SSA\'s business processes for issuing and\nprotecting SSNs. This assessment addressed evidence presented with SSN\napplications; computerized controls; SSA\'s accounting for SS cards; additional training\nfor SSA employees; public awareness on the proper use and dissemination of the SSN;\nand SSA\'s coordination efforts with other Federal agencies.\n\nLater in October, we assessed SSA\'s programs and operations to identify counterfeit\nand stolen SS cards and described SSA\'s coordination efforts with other Federal\nagencies to identify suspected terrorists. Additionally, in October, we provided our\nviews to SSA\xe2\x80\x99s Enumeration Task Force on techniques to improve SSN verification and\ndecrease incidents of identity theft with new categories of SSNs, suggestions on\nphotograph identifications, and additional automated controls.\n\nOur OA is conducting a follow-up review of SSA\'s procedures for verifying evidentiary\ndocuments presented by non-citizens in applying for original SSNs. We will evaluate\nSSA\'s progress in implementing prior recommendations and also quantify the extent to\nwhich SSA is detecting false documents presented by foreign-born individuals.\n\nWHAT TASKS REMAIN TO ENSURE SSN INTEGRITY IN A POST-\nSEPTEMBER 11TH ENVIRONMENT?\n\nWe have seen the enactment of The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of\n1998 and the Internet False Identification Prevention Act of 2000. The former is the\nfirst Federal legislative response to the growing wave of identity thefts and imposes\ncriminal sanctions for those who create false identities or misappropriate someone\nelse\xe2\x80\x99s. It is also the first piece of legislation that recognized the SSN as a means of\nidentification. The latter closed a loophole left by the first, enabling law enforcement\nagencies to pursue those who could previously sell counterfeit SS cards legally, by\nmaintaining the fiction that such cards are \xe2\x80\x9cnovelties,\xe2\x80\x9d rather than counterfeit\ndocuments. Both pieces of legislation are helpful but mainly treat the identity theft\ndisease in its later stages, rather than at its onset. In most cases, identity theft begins\nwith the misuse of an SSN, and, while the ability to punish identity theft is important, the\nability to prevent it is even more critical.\n\nHow do we do this? Our audit and investigative work has shown that there are\nthree stages at which protections for the SSN must be put in place: upon issuance,\nduring the life of the number holder, and upon that individual\xe2\x80\x99s death.\n\x0cPage 8 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nAssignment/Issuance of an SSN\n\nIn Fiscal Year 2001, SSA issued over 18.4 million original and replacement SS cards.\nApproximately 1.5 million of the original SSNs were issued to non-citizens. When SSA\nassigns an SSN or issues an SS card, it is critical that SSA independently verify the\nauthenticity of the birth records, immigration records, and other identification documents\nthe applicant presented.\n\nIn several previous audit reports, OIG recommended independent verification of birth\nand immigration records submitted to support an SSN application. Additionally, we\nrecommended full and expedited implementation of a joint Enumeration at Entry\nprogram to issue SSNs to non-citizens upon their entry into the United States with the\nINS and DoS. However, before September 11, the Agency disagreed with our\nrecommendation to independently verify birth and immigration records. The Agency\nstated that delaying the receipt of SSNs for thousands of non-citizens, most of whom\nwere legitimately entitled to a number, was not acceptable. Rather, they preferred to\nwork with the INS on improving existing systems until the Enumeration at Entry program\ncould be implemented. Unfortunately, until September 11, SSA had little success\nencouraging the INS to move quickly on either of these planned initiatives. SSA\nrepresentatives have reported that negotiations with INS are proceeding more smoothly\nand at a faster pace.\n\nSSA\xe2\x80\x99s Enumeration Task Force recommended that the Agency seek independent\nverification of all non-citizen documents before assigning an SSN. Additionally, the\nAgency is planning to implement a process requiring verification of all U.S. birth\ncertificates for anyone applying for an SSN after the age of 1. We believe\nimplementation of these actions will have an immediate positive impact on the\nassignment of SSNs based on fraudulent documents. Both recommendations were\nalso included in House Bill 2036, The Social Security Number Privacy and Identity Theft\nPrevention Act of 2001. This legislation would require SSA to verify birth records and\nprovide a status report, with the Attorney General, on the joint initiative to enumerate\nnon-citizens at entry.\n\nUnfortunately, full implementation of the initiative to verify immigration documents has\nbeen delayed, perhaps for 6 months or more. SSA is waiting for the INS to incorporate\ninformation on certain immigrants with work authorization in its data base. Additionally,\nanother delay will be necessary while SSA and the INS work out the details for\nobtaining access to the INS\' data base on non-immigrants or those who may have\ntemporary authorization to work in the United States. As a result, for at least several\nmore months, SSA will continue to issue SSNs to non-citizens without obtaining\nindependent verification of evidentiary documents from the issuing agency.\n\nThis continued practice concerns us greatly. We understand the agencies need\nsufficient time and planning to effectively adopt the Enumeration at Entry program.\nHowever, we strongly believe the Agency should immediately begin verifying non-citizen\ndocuments before issuing SSNs, regardless of the time delay required for the individual\n\x0cPage 9 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\nto obtain an SSN. While SSA should strive for timely customer service, this desire must\nbe balanced against enumeration integrity and the security of our Nation\'s borders. To\nemphasize the importance of the implementation of the Enumeration at Entry program,\nwe recently issued correspondence to the Inspectors General for DoJ and DoS asking\nthat they advise us of the feasibility of INS and DoS meeting the proposed due dates for\nsystems changes needed to support the program.\n\nProtection During the Life of the Number Holder\n\nOnce SSA issues an SSN and it becomes an integral part of the number holder\xe2\x80\x99s life, it\nbecomes difficult to give the SSN the degree of privacy it requires. Businesses and\nGovernment agencies nationwide rely on the SSN as a convenient means of record\nkeeping. By doing so, these entities collect, store, and, sometimes, share a lifetime of\npersonal information associated with the number. With this information, a criminal can\ncommit financial fraud, and, in some cases, camouflage other crimes. The challenge for\nSSA and the Congress is to find a balance between ensuring the SSN\xe2\x80\x99s privacy and\nensuring that businesses and Federal and State agencies are not unduly limited in the\nprocess. Despite this challenge, there are important steps we can take.\n\n \xc3\xbc Limit the SSN\xe2\x80\x99s public availability to the greatest extent practicable,\n without unduly limiting commerce.\n\n We recognize it is virtually impossible to turn back the clock and limit the use of\n the SSN to Federal programs. We have, therefore, focused our efforts on limiting\n the public availability of SSN information. We have worked with Federal, State,\n and local agencies; SSA; the Congress; and the public to strengthen controls\n over the SSN and prosecute those who misuse it. Several of our\n recommendations are contained in pending legislation, including provisions in\n Senate Bill 848, the Social Security Number Misuse Prevention Act of 2001;\n Senate Bill 1055, the Privacy Act of 2001; and House Bill 2036, the Social\n Security Number Privacy and Identity Theft Prevention Act of 2001.\n\n \xc3\xbc Prohibit the sale of SSNs, prohibit their display on public records, and limit\n their use to valid transactions.\n\n Recent and proposed legislation addresses important elements in protecting\n one\xe2\x80\x99s SSN. We support the pending legislation and encourage Congress to\n expedite such measures.\n\n \xc3\xbc Enact strong enforcement mechanisms and stiff penalties to further\n discourage SSN misuse.\n\n OIG special agents and attorneys have long worked closely with Federal, State\n and local law enforcement officials to investigate and prosecute SSN misuse.\n Since September 11, we have further increased our efforts in this area, working\n aggressively to support the Administration\'s efforts to investigate the attacks and\n\x0cPage 10 \xe2\x80\x93 The Commissioner\n\n\n prevent future incidents. However, we have been limited in our ability to respond\n to these concerns as a consequence of balancing priority matters with existing\n resources. We believe more resources should be directed to investigating and\n prosecuting such crimes.\n\nProtection of the SSN After the Number Holder\xe2\x80\x99s Death\n\nFinally, we must do more to protect the SSN after the number holder\xe2\x80\x99s death.\nSSA receives death information from a variety of sources and compiles a Death\nMaster File, which is updated monthly, transmitted to various Federal agencies,\noffered for sale to the public, and available for access over the Internet. There is\nno question this information must be accurate. However, we also believe the\npractice of offering this information to the general public needs serious\nconsideration.\n\nCONCLUSION\nSSA and OIG promptly responded to the challenge of ensuring SSN integrity as a part\nof homeland security efforts. We recognize that \xe2\x80\x9cbusiness as usual\xe2\x80\x9d is no longer\npermissible and have committed significant resources and energy in developing\nimproved procedures in our enumeration business practice. Despite SSA\xe2\x80\x99s commitment\nto this endeavor, more needs to be done to ensure the SSN\xe2\x80\x99s link to homeland security\nis strong and durable. We believe that the current efforts of the Executive Branch and\nthe Congress to work together to address these concerns will continue.\n\nAGENCY COMMENTS\nAs we made no recommendations in the report, SSA elected not to provide a formal\nresponse. Rather, the Agency provided minor technical comments, which we have\nincorporated where appropriate.\n\n\n\n\n James G. Huse, Jr.\n\x0c Appendices\nAppendix A \xe2\x80\x93 Prior Office of the Inspector General Audit Reports\n\nAppendix B \xe2\x80\x93 Status of Enumeration Task Force Recommendations\n\nAppendix C \xe2\x80\x93 Acronyms\n\nAppendix D \xe2\x80\x93 OIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgment\n\x0c Appendix A\n\nPRIOR OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR\nGENERAL AUDIT REPORTS\n\n Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General Reports\n Related to Social Security Number Integrity\nName and Common Identification Number Date Report Issued\n\nCanada\xe2\x80\x99s Experience in Charging a User Fee\nfor Social Insurance Number Cards May 1997\n(A-06-97-62003)\nManagement Advisory Report: Activity\nRelated to the Suspense File (A-03-96-31001 September 1997\nand A-03-96-31002)\nFollow-Up of the Internal Controls over the\nModernized Enumeration System March 1998\n(A-04-96-44001)\nPayment of Benefits to Individuals Who Do\nNot Have Their Own Social Security Number March 1998\n(A-04-96-42000)\nPerformance Measure Audit: Timely\nIssuance of Social Security Number Cards April 1998\n(A-02-97-93003)\nAssessment of the Social Security\nAdministration\xe2\x80\x99s Processing of Requests for\nSocial Security Numbers in Emergency June 1998\nSituations (Limited Distribution)\n(A-08-97-44001)\nManagement Advisory Report: Using Social\nSecurity Numbers to Commit Fraud May 1999\n(A-08-99-42002)\nManagement Advisory Report: Analysis of\nSocial Security Number Misuse Allegations\nMade to the Social Security Administration\xe2\x80\x99s August 1999\nFraud Hotline (A-15-99-92019)\nPatterns of Reporting Errors and\nIrregularities by 100 Employers with the Most September 1999\nSuspended Wage Items (A-03-98-31009)\nReview of Controls Over Nonwork Social September 1999\nSecurity Numbers (A-08-97-41002)\n\n\n A-1\n\x0cThe Social Security Administration is\nPursuing Matching Agreements with New\nYork and Other States Using Biometric January 2000\nTechnologies (A-08-98-41007)\nPerformance Measure Review: Reliability of\nthe Data Used to Measure Social Security\nNumber Request Processing March 2000\n(A-02-99-01009)\nImproving the Usefulness of the Social\nSecurity Administration\xe2\x80\x99s Death Master File July 2000\n(A-09-98-61011)\nEffectiveness of Internal Controls in the\nModernized Enumeration System September 2000\n(A-08-97-41003)\nProcedures for Verifying Evidentiary\nDocuments Submitted with Original Social\nSecurity Number Applications September 2000\n(A-08-98-41009)\nObstacles to Reducing Social Security\nNumber Misuse in the Agriculture Industry January 2001\n(A-08-99-41004)\nForce Processing of Magnetic Media Wage\nReports with Validation Problems May 2001\n(A-03-99-31001)\nManagement Advisory Report: Review of\nService Industry Employer with Wage September 2001\nReporting Problems (A-03-00-10022)\nAudit of the Enumeration at Birth Program\n(A-08-00-10047) September 2001\nReplacement Social Security Number Cards:\nOpportunities to Reduce the Risk of Improper September 2001\nAttainment and Misuse (A-08-00-10061)\nCongressional Response Report: SSN\nMisuse \xe2\x80\x93 A Challenge for the Social Security October 2001\nAdministration (A-08-02-22030)\nCongressional Response Report: Terrorist\nMisuse of Social Security Numbers October 2001\n(A-08-02-32041)\nDisclosure of Personal Beneficiary\nInformation to the Public (Limited December 2001\nDistribution) (A-01-01-01018)\n\n\n\n\n A-2\n\x0c Appendix B\n\nStatus of Enumeration Task Force\nRecommendations\n Status of Enumeration Task Force\n Recommendations\n Description of Recommendation Status as of March 30, 2002\nProvide refresher training on enumeration Ongoing. Refresher training was conducted\npolicy and procedures, with emphasis on on December 19 and 20, 2001. Additionally,\nenumerating non-citizens, for all involved an interactive video training session was held\nstaff. on January 31, 2002. During the week of\n February 11, 2002, field office managers\n reviewed a daily maximum of 50 non-citizen\n enumeration actions. Managers provided\n feedback on problems or trends. Further\n action will be decided based on these\n findings, which were being evaluated at the\n time of this review.\nConvene a joint task force between the Ongoing. On January 3, 2002, SSA signed a\nSocial Security Administration (SSA), the protocol with the DoS outlining procedures\nImmigration and Naturalization Service (INS), for SSA use of information housed in the\nand the Department of State (DoS) to resolve Refugee Data Center, which will be used to\nissues involving enumerating non-citizens, enumerate refugees. The procedure to verify\nincluding working out procedures for verifying immigration documents for refugees before\nINS documents before the Social Security assigning an SSN became effective in\nnumber (SSN) is assigned. February 2002.\n\n SSA, INS, and DoS are also working\n together to implement the Enumeration at\n Entry program. Additionally, the INS has\n taken several steps to improve the timeliness\n of its data entry process. Once corrected,\n SSA will begin electronically verifying all non-\n citizen immigration documents before\n assigning an SSN. However, it is our\n understanding that corrections required by\n INS have been delayed. Therefore, SSA\n may not begin to implement this policy until\n late in Calendar Year 2002.\nEliminate driver\xe2\x80\x99s licenses as a reason for a Completed. SSA notified the governors of all\nnon-work SSN. States in February 2002, and the policy went\n into effect on March 1, 2002.\n\n\n\n B-1\n\x0cProvide an alternative to issuing a Numident Completed. The \xe2\x80\x9cNUMI-lite\xe2\x80\x9d went into\nprintout for SSN verification. production in SSA field offices in\n March 2002. This printout provides less\n identification information and therefore is less\n likely to facilitate identity theft.\nLower the age tolerance from 18 to 12 for Ongoing. The policy change needed to\nmandatory interview procedures, including lower the age tolerance for mandatory\nverification of birth records before interviews from 18 to 12 requires a regulatory\nenumeration for all applicants for original change. Additionally, eliminating an existing\nSSNs and require evidence of identity for all waiver provision for those under age 7 will\nchildren, regardless of age. require a regulation. However, in the interim,\n SSA will rely on refresher training to\n strengthen existing policies. Beginning in\n May 2002, SSA will verify birth records for all\n applicants for original SSNs over the age\n of 1.\n\nDetermine the feasibility of photocopying (or Ongoing. Between February and March\nscanning) all documentary evidence 2002, SSA conducted a pilot in two field\nsubmitted with SSN applications. offices to photocopy all evidence submitted\n in conjunction with SSN applications and\n ship them weekly to SSA\xe2\x80\x99s record storage\n facility for scanning. As of April 1, 2002, SSA\n was conducting the cost-benefit analysis for\n the pilot.\nChange the Modernized Enumeration Completed. The audit trail went into\nSystem to provide an electronic audit trail, production in mid-December 2001.\nregardless of the mode used to process SSN\napplications.\nImplement the SSN Verification System. Ongoing. SSA implemented a pilot of the on-\n line version in April 2002.\n\n\n\n\n B-2\n\x0c Appendix C\n\nAcronyms\nDoJ Department of Justice\nDoS Department of State\nFBI Federal Bureau of Investigation\nINS Immigration and Naturalization Service\nOA Office of Audit\nOIG Office of the Inspector General\nSS Social Security\nSSA Social Security Administration\nSSN Social Security Number\n\x0c Appendix D\n\nOIG Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments\n\nOIG Contacts\n Kimberly A. Byrd, Director, Southern Audit Division, (205) 801-1605\n\n Jeffrey Pounds, Deputy Director, Birmingham Field Office, (205) 801-1606\n\nStaff Acknowledgments\nIn addition to those named above:\n\n Kathy Buller, Counsel to the Inspector General\n\n George Penn, Senior Attorney\n\n Tom Sipes, Special Agent-in-Charge\n\n Charles Lober, Senior Auditor\n\n Kathy Youngblood, Senior Auditor\n\n Susan Phillips, Auditor\n\n Kimberly Beauchamp, Writer/Editor\n\nFor additional copies of this report, visit our web site at www.ssa.gov/oig or contact the\nOffice of the Inspector General\xe2\x80\x99s Public Affairs Specialist at (410) 966-1375. Refer to\nCommon Identification Number A-08-02-22077.\n\x0c DISTRIBUTION SCHEDULE\n\n No. of\n Copies\n\nCommissioner of Social Security 1\nManagement Analysis and Audit Program Support Staff, OFAM 10\nInspector General 1\nAssistant Inspector General for Investigations 1\nAssistant Inspector General for Executive Operations 3\nAssistant Inspector General for Audit 1\nDeputy Assistant Inspector General for Audit 1\n Director, Systems Audit Division 1\n Director, Financial Management and Performance Monitoring Audit Division 1\n Director, Operational Audit Division 1\n Director, Disability Program Audit Division 1\n Director, Program Benefits Audit Division 1\n Director, General Management Audit Division 1\nTeam Leaders 25\nIncome Maintenance Branch, Office of Management and Budget 1\nChairman, Committee on Ways and Means 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Ways and Means 1\nChief of Staff, Committee on Ways and Means 1\nChairman, Subcommittee on Social Security 2\nRanking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security 1\nMajority Staff Director, Subcommittee on Social Security 2\nMinority Staff Director, Subcommittee on Social Security 2\nChairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources 1\nRanking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Human Resources 1\nChairman, Committee on Budget, House of Representatives 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Budget, House of Representatives 1\nChairman, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 1\nChairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs 1\n\x0cRanking Minority Member, Committee on Governmental Affairs 1\nChairman, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations,\n House of Representatives 1\nChairman, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education\n and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations,\n House of Representatives 1\n\nRanking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human\n Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations,\n House of Representatives 1\nChairman, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate 1\nChairman, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education\n and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate 1\nRanking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human\n Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations,\n U.S. Senate 1\nChairman, Committee on Finance 1\nRanking Minority Member, Committee on Finance 1\nChairman, Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy 1\nRanking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy 1\nChairman, Senate Special Committee on Aging 1\nRanking Minority Member, Senate Special Committee on Aging 1\nVice Chairman, Subcommittee on Government Management Information\n and Technology 1\nPresident, National Council of Social Security Management Associations,\n Incorporated 1\nTreasurer, National Council of Social Security Management Associations,\n Incorporated 1\nSocial Security Advisory Board 1\nAFGE General Committee 9\nPresident, Federal Managers Association 1\nRegional Public Affairs Officer 1\n\n\nTotal 97\n\x0c Overview of the Office of the Inspector General\n\n\n Office of Audit\n\nThe Office of Audit (OA) conducts comprehensive financial and performance audits of the\nSocial Security Administration\xe2\x80\x99s (SSA) programs and makes recommendations to ensure that\nprogram objectives are achieved effectively and efficiently. Financial audits, required by the\nChief Financial Officers Act of 1990, assess whether SSA\xe2\x80\x99s financial statements fairly present\nthe Agency\xe2\x80\x99s financial position, results of operations, and cash flow. Performance audits review\nthe economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of SSA\xe2\x80\x99s programs. OA also conducts short-term\nmanagement and program evaluations focused on issues of concern to SSA, Congress, and the\ngeneral public. Evaluations often focus on identifying and recommending ways to prevent and\nminimize program fraud and inefficiency.\n\n Office of Executive Operations\n\nThe Office of Executive Operations (OEO) supports the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)\nby providing information resource management; systems security; and the coordination of\nbudget, procurement, telecommunications, facilities and equipment, and human resources. In\naddition, this office is the focal point for the OIG\xe2\x80\x99s strategic planning function and the\ndevelopment and implementation of performance measures required by the Government\nPerformance and Results Act. OEO is also responsible for performing internal reviews to ensure\nthat OIG offices nationwide hold themselves to the same rigorous standards that we expect from\nthe Agency, as well as conducting employee investigations within OIG. Finally, OEO\nadministers OIG\xe2\x80\x99s public affairs, media, and interagency activities and also communicates OIG\xe2\x80\x99s\nplanned and current activities and their results to the Commissioner and Congress.\n\n Office of Investigations\n\nThe Office of Investigations (OI) conducts and coordinates investigative activity related to fraud,\nwaste, abuse, and mismanagement of SSA programs and operations. This includes wrongdoing\nby applicants, beneficiaries, contractors, physicians, interpreters, representative payees, third\nparties, and by SSA employees in the performance of their duties. OI also conducts joint\ninvestigations with other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.\n\n Counsel to the Inspector General\n\nThe Counsel to the Inspector General provides legal advice and counsel to the Inspector General\non various matters, including: 1) statutes, regulations, legislation, and policy directives\ngoverning the administration of SSA\xe2\x80\x99s programs; 2) investigative procedures and techniques;\nand 3) legal implications and conclusions to be drawn from audit and investigative material\nproduced by the OIG. The Counsel\xe2\x80\x99s office also administers the civil monetary penalty program.\n\x0c'