type: other

text:
Texte adoptate - Poluanții organici persistenți ***I - Joi, 15 noiembrie 2018
 Procedură : 2018/0070(COD)
 Stadii ale documentului : A8-0336/2018
 Poluanții organici persistenți ***I
 Amendamentele adoptate de Parlamentul European la 15 noiembrie 2018 referitoare la propunerea de regulament al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului privind poluanții organici persistenți (reformare) (COM(2018)0144 - C8-0124/2018 – 2018/0070(COD))(1)
 (5) Este necesar să se asigure coordonarea și coerența la punerea în aplicare la nivelul Uniunii a dispozițiilor Convenției de la Rotterdam privind procedura de consimțământ prealabil în cunoștință de cauză aplicabilă anumitor produse chimice și pesticide periculoase care fac obiectul comerțului internațional, care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 19 decembrie 200217, și ale Convenției de la Basel privind controlul transportului peste frontiere al deșeurilor periculoase și al eliminării acestora, care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 1 februarie 199318. Această coordonare și această coerență ar trebui, de asemenea, să fie menținute la participarea la punerea în aplicare și dezvoltarea în continuare a abordării strategice a gestionării internaționale a substanțelor chimice (SAICM) , adoptată de Prima Conferință internațională privind gestionarea substanțelor chimice, care a avut loc la Dubai, la 6 februarie 2006, în cadrul Organizației Națiunilor Unite.
 (5) La punerea în aplicare la nivelul Uniunii a dispozițiilor convenției, este necesar să se asigure coerența și coordonarea cu dispozițiile Convenției de la Rotterdam privind procedura de consimțământ prealabil în cunoștință de cauză aplicabilă anumitor produse chimice și pesticide periculoase care fac obiectul comerțului internațional, care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 19 decembrie 200217,, cu dispozițiile Convenției de la Basel privind controlul transportului peste frontiere al deșeurilor periculoase și al eliminării acestora, care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 1 februarie 199318, și cu dispozițiile Convenției de la Minamata privind mercurul, care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 11 mai 201718a. Această coordonare și această coerență ar trebui, de asemenea, să fie menținute la participarea la punerea în aplicare și dezvoltarea în continuare a abordării strategice a gestionării internaționale a substanțelor chimice (SAICM) , adoptată de Prima Conferință internațională privind gestionarea substanțelor chimice, care a avut loc la Dubai, la 6 februarie 2006, în cadrul Organizației Națiunilor Unite.
 17 JO L 63, 6.3.2003, p. 29 .
 17 JO L 63, 6.3.2003, p. 29.
 18 JO L 39, 16.2.1993, p. 3 .
 18 JO L 39, 16.2.1993, p. 3.
 18a JO L 142, 2.6.2017, p. 4.
 (10) Stocurile de POP expirate sau gestionate neglijent pot prezenta un pericol grav pentru mediu și sănătatea umană, de exemplu prin contaminarea solului și a apelor subterane . Prin urmare , este oportun ca în materie de gestionare a unor astfel de stocuri să se stabilească norme mai stricte, comparativ cu cele prevăzute în convenție. Stocurile de substanțe interzise ar trebui tratate ca deșeuri, în timp ce stocurile de substanțe a căror fabricare sau utilizare este încă permisă ar trebui notificate autorităților și supravegheate în mod corespunzător. În mod special, stocurile existente care sunt formate din sau conțin POP interziși ar trebui gestionate ca deșeuri cât mai curând posibil.
 (10) Stocurile de POP expirate sau gestionate neglijent pot prezenta un pericol grav pentru mediu și sănătatea umană, de exemplu, prin contaminarea solului și a apelor subterane . Prin urmare, este oportun ca în materie de gestionare a unor astfel de stocuri să se stabilească norme mai stricte, comparativ cu cele prevăzute în convenție. Stocurile de substanțe interzise ar trebui tratate ca deșeuri, în timp ce stocurile de substanțe a căror fabricare sau utilizare este încă permisă ar trebui notificate autorităților și supravegheate în mod corespunzător. În mod special, stocurile existente care sunt formate din sau conțin POP interziși ar trebui gestionate ca deșeuri cât mai curând posibil. Dacă alte substanțe sunt interzise în viitor, stocurile acestora ar trebui să fie, de asemenea, distruse fără întârziere și nu ar trebui constituite alte stocuri. În ceea ce privește problemele specifice ale anumitor state membre, ar trebui să se furnizeze asistență financiară și tehnică adecvată prin intermediul instrumentelor financiare existente ale Uniunii.
 (11) În conformitate cu dispozițiile protocolului și ale convenției, emisiile de POP care reprezintă produse secundare neintenționate rezultate din procese industriale ar trebui identificate și reduse cât mai curând posibil, obiectivul final urmărit fiind eliminarea lor , dacă este posibil. Ar trebui să se pună în aplicare și să se dezvolte planuri naționale de acțiune adecvate, care să cuprindă toate sursele și măsurile, inclusiv cele prevăzute în legislația existentă a Uniunii , pentru a reduce astfel de emisii în mod continuu și eficient din punctul de vedere al costurilor. În acest scop, ar trebui să se elaboreze instrumente corespunzătoare în cadrul convenției.
 (11) În conformitate cu dispozițiile protocolului și ale convenției, emisiile de POP care reprezintă produse secundare neintenționate rezultate din procese industriale ar trebui identificate și reduse cât mai curând posibil, obiectivul final urmărit fiind eliminarea lor, dacă este posibil. Ar trebui să se pună în aplicare și să se dezvolte planuri naționale de acțiune adecvate, care să cuprindă toate sursele și măsurile, inclusiv cele prevăzute în legislația existentă a Uniunii , pentru a reduce astfel de emisii în mod continuu și eficient din punctul de vedere al costurilor cât mai curând posibil. În acest scop, ar trebui să se elaboreze instrumente corespunzătoare în cadrul convenției.
 (15) Este necesar să se asigure coordonarea și gestionarea eficace a aspectelor tehnice și administrative ale prezentului regulament la nivelul Uniunii. Agenția Europeană pentru Produse Chimice („agenția”), instituită prin Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1907/2006, are competență și experiență în materie de punere în aplicare a legislației Uniunii privind substanțele chimice și a acordurilor internaționale referitoare la substanțele chimice. Prin urmare, statele membre și agenția ar trebui să îndeplinească sarcini legate de aspectele administrative, tehnice și științifice ale punerii în aplicare a prezentului regulament și de schimbul de informații. Rolul agenției ar trebui să includă pregătirea și examinarea dosarelor tehnice, inclusiv consultări cu părțile interesate, și elaborarea de avize care pot fi utilizate de către Comisie atunci când analizează dacă este oportun să prezinte o propunere de includere a unei substanțe pe lista POP prevăzută în convenție sau în protocol. În plus, Comisia, statele membre și agenția ar trebui să coopereze pentru a pune în aplicare în mod eficace obligațiile internaționale care îi revin Uniunii în temeiul convenției.
 (15) Este necesar să se asigure coordonarea și gestionarea eficace a aspectelor tehnice și administrative ale prezentului regulament la nivelul Uniunii. Agenția Europeană pentru Produse Chimice („agenția”), instituită prin Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1907/2006, are competență și experiență în materie de punere în aplicare a legislației Uniunii privind substanțele chimice și a acordurilor internaționale referitoare la substanțele chimice. Prin urmare, statele membre și agenția ar trebui să îndeplinească sarcini legate de aspectele administrative, tehnice și științifice ale punerii în aplicare a prezentului regulament și de schimbul de informații. Este necesar ca rolul agenției să cuprindă pregătirea și examinarea dosarelor tehnice, inclusiv consultări cu părțile interesate, și elaborarea de avize care trebuie să fie utilizate de către Comisie atunci când analizează dacă este oportun să prezinte o propunere de includere a unei substanțe pe lista POP prevăzută în convenție sau în protocol. În plus, Comisia, statele membre și agenția ar trebui să coopereze pentru a pune în aplicare în mod eficace obligațiile internaționale care îi revin Uniunii în temeiul convenției.
 (16) Convenția prevede că fiecare parte trebuie să elaboreze și să se străduiască să implementeze, după caz, un plan pentru punerea în aplicare a obligațiilor pe care și le-a asumat în temeiul convenției. Statele membre ar trebui să asigure posibilități pentru participarea publicului la elaborarea , implementarea și actualizarea planurilor de punere în aplicare. Având în vedere faptul că Uniunea și statele membre au competențe comune în această privință, planurile de punere în aplicare ar trebui elaborate atât la nivel național, cât și la nivelul Uniunii . Ar trebui să se promoveze cooperarea și schimbul de informații între Comisie , agenție și autoritățile statelor membre.
 (16) Convenția prevede că fiecare parte trebuie să elaboreze și să se străduiască să implementeze, după caz, un plan pentru punerea în aplicare a obligațiilor pe care și le-a asumat în temeiul convenției și să-l transmită Conferinței părților cât mai curând posibil, cel târziu până la ... [doi ani de la intrarea în vigoare a prezentului regulament]. Statele membre ar trebui să asigure posibilități pentru participarea publicului la elaborarea , implementarea și actualizarea planurilor de punere în aplicare. Având în vedere faptul că Uniunea și statele membre au competențe comune în această privință, planurile de punere în aplicare ar trebui elaborate atât la nivel național, cât și la nivelul Uniunii . Ar trebui să se promoveze cooperarea și schimbul de informații între Comisie , agenție și autoritățile statelor membre.
 (17) Fabricarea și utilizarea substanțelor enumerate în partea A din anexa I și în partea A din anexa II la prezentul regulament ar trebui autorizate doar ca intermediari limitați în spațiu și în sistem închis, dacă o adnotare în acest sens s-a introdus în mod expres în anexa respectivă și dacă producătorul confirmă statului membru în cauză faptul că substanța este fabricată și utilizată numai în condiții strict controlate.
 (17) Fabricarea și utilizarea substanțelor enumerate în partea A din anexa I și în partea A din anexa II la prezentul regulament ar trebui autorizate doar ca intermediari limitați în spațiu și în sistem închis, dacă o adnotare în acest sens s-a introdus în mod expres în anexa respectivă și dacă producătorul confirmă statului membru în cauză faptul că substanța este fabricată și utilizată numai în condiții strict controlate, și anume fără a prezenta riscuri semnificative pentru mediu sau pentru sănătatea umană și în lipsa unor alternative fezabile din punct de vedere tehnic.
 (18) În conformitate cu convenția și cu protocolul, ar trebui să se furnizeze celorlalte părți la acordurile menționate informații privind POP. De asemenea, ar trebui să se încurajeze schimbul de informații cu țări terțe care nu sunt parte la acordurile menționate anterior.
 (18) În conformitate cu convenția și cu protocolul, ar trebui să se furnizeze celorlalte părți la acordurile menționate informații privind POP. De asemenea, ar trebui să se încurajeze schimbul de informații cu țări terțe care nu sunt parte la acordurile menționate anterior. În mod similar, convenția prevede ca fiecare parte să se angajeze să elaboreze strategii adecvate pentru a identifica siturile contaminate cu POP, iar cel de-al șaptelea program de acțiune pentru mediu al Uniunii până în 2020 obligă Uniunea și statele sale membre să-și intensifice eforturile pentru reabilitarea siturilor contaminate.
 (19) Deoarece adeseori se constată faptul că publicul nu este conștient de pericolele pe care le prezintă POP pentru sănătatea generațiilor prezente și viitoare, precum și pentru mediu, în special în țările în curs de dezvoltare, este necesar un proces amplu de informare pentru a ridica nivelul de precauție și de înțelegere de către public a motivelor care stau la baza aplicării restricțiilor și a interdicțiilor. În conformitate cu convenția, programele de sensibilizare a publicului cu privire la aceste substanțe, în special pentru grupurile cele mai vulnerabile, precum și formarea lucrătorilor, a oamenilor de știință, a educatorilor, a personalului tehnic și managerial ar trebui încurajate și facilitate, după caz.
 (19) Deoarece adeseori se constată faptul că publicul nu este conștient de pericolele pe care le prezintă POP pentru sănătatea generațiilor prezente și viitoare, precum și pentru mediu, în special în țările în curs de dezvoltare, este necesar un proces amplu de informare pentru a ridica nivelul de precauție și de înțelegere de către public a motivelor care stau la baza aplicării restricțiilor și a interdicțiilor. În conformitate cu convenția, programele de sensibilizare a publicului cu privire la aceste substanțe în ceea ce privește efectele acestora asupra sănătății și a mediului, în special pentru grupurile cele mai vulnerabile, precum și formarea lucrătorilor, a oamenilor de știință, a educatorilor, a personalului tehnic și managerial ar trebui încurajate și facilitate, după caz. Uniunea ar trebui să asigure accesul la informații și participarea publicului, punând în aplicare Convenția CEE/ONU privind accesul la informație, participarea publicului la luarea deciziei și accesul la justiție în probleme de mediu (Convenția de la Aarhus), care a fost aprobată de Uniune la 17 februarie 20051a.
 1a JO L 124, 17.5.2005, p. 1.
 Articolul 1 – paragraful 1 – litera j
 (j) „intermediar limitat în spațiu și în sistem închis” înseamnă o substanță care este fabricată pentru un proces chimic și consumată sau utilizată în cadrul acestuia, în scopul transformării într-o altă substanță sau în mai multe alte substanțe, iar fabricarea intermediarului și transformarea sa într-o altă substanță sau în mai multe alte substanțe se desfășoară în același loc în condiții strict controlate, fiind menținută izolată în mod riguros prin mijloace tehnice, de-a lungul întregului său ciclu de viață.
 (j) „intermediar limitat în spațiu și în sistem închis” înseamnă o substanță care este fabricată pentru un proces chimic și consumată sau utilizată în cadrul acestuia, în scopul transformării într-o altă substanță, denumită în continuare „sinteză”, iar fabricarea intermediarului și transformarea sa într-o altă substanță (alte substanțe) se desfășoară prin sinteză în același loc, inclusiv într-un loc care este gestionat de una sau mai multe entități juridice, în condiții strict controlate, fiind menținută izolată în mod riguros prin mijloace tehnice, de-a lungul întregului său ciclu de viață.
 Articolul 4 – alineatul 3 – paragraful 2 – litera b
 (b) producătorul demonstrează că procesul de fabricare va determina transformarea substanței într-una sau mai multe substanțe care nu prezintă caracteristicile unui POP ;
 (b) producătorul demonstrează că procesul de fabricare va determina transformarea substanței într-una sau mai multe substanțe care nu prezintă caracteristicile unui POP, că nu se preconizează expunerea ființelor umane sau a mediului la cantități semnificative din substanța vizată în timpul producției și utilizării acesteia, după cum se arată în evaluarea sistemului închis în cauză, în conformitate cu Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1272/20081a al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului și că nu există alternative fezabile din punct de vedere tehnic la utilizarea substanțelor enumerate la anexa I partea A sau la anexa II partea A din prezentul regulament;
 1a Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1272/2008 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 16 decembrie 2008 privind clasificarea, etichetarea și ambalarea substanțelor și a amestecurilor, de modificare și de abrogare a Directivelor 67/548/CEE și 1999/45/CE, precum și de modificare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1907/2006 (JO L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1).
 Deținătorul gestionează stocul în mod sigur, eficient și rațional din punct de vedere ecologic.
 Deținătorul gestionează stocul în mod sigur, eficient și rațional din punct de vedere ecologic, în conformitate cu pragurile și cerințele prevăzute de Directiva 2012/18/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului1a și de Directiva 2010/75/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului1b, după caz.
 1a Directiva 2012/18/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 4 iulie 2012 privind controlul pericolelor de accidente majore care implică substanțe periculoase, de modificare și ulterior de abrogare a Directivei 96/82/CE a Consiliului (JO L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 1).
 1b Directiva 2010/75/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 24 noiembrie 2010 privind emisiile industriale (prevenirea și controlul integrat al poluării) (JO L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17).
 3a. Informațiile menționate în prezentul articol se exprimă utilizându-se codurile prevăzute în Regulamentul (CE) nr. 2150/2002 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului1a.
 1a Regulamentul (CE) nr. 2150/2002 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 25 noiembrie 2002 referitor la statisticile privind deșeurile (JO L 332, 9.12.2002, p. 1).
 3. Atunci când analizează propunerile privind construirea unor noi instalații sau modificarea semnificativă a instalațiilor existente prin utilizarea unor procese care determină emisia substanțelor chimice enumerate în anexa III, , statele membre analizează în mod prioritar procesele, tehnicile sau practicile alternative care au aceeași utilitate, dar care evită formarea și emisia substanțelor enumerate în anexa III , fără a aduce atingere Directivei 2010/75/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului30.
 3. Atunci când analizează propunerile privind construirea unor noi instalații sau modificarea semnificativă a instalațiilor existente prin utilizarea unor procese care determină emisia substanțelor chimice enumerate în anexa III, statele membre analizează în mod prioritar procesele, tehnicile sau practicile alternative29a care au aceeași utilitate, dar care evită formarea și emisia substanțelor enumerate în anexa III, fără a aduce atingere Directivei 2010/75/UE30 a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului.
 29a Convenția de la Stockholm privind POP (2008). Orientările privind cele mai bune tehnici disponibile și orientările provizorii privind cele mai bune practici de mediu relevante pentru articolul 5 și anexa C la Convenția de la Stockholm privind poluanții organici persistenți. Geneva, Secretariatul Convenției de la Stockholm privind POP.
 http://www.pops.int/Implementation/BATandBEP/BATBEPGuidelinesArticle5/tabid/187/Default.aspx
 30 Directiva 2010/75/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 24 noiembrie 2010 privind emisiile industriale (prevenirea și controlul integrat al poluării) (JO L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17).
 6. După caz și luând în considerare progresul tehnic și orientările și deciziile internaționale relevante, precum și orice autorizații acordate de un stat membru sau de autoritatea competentă desemnată de respectivul stat membru în conformitate cu alineatul (4) și cu anexa V, Comisia poate adopta , prin intermediul unor acte de punere în aplicare, măsuri suplimentare cu privire la punerea în aplicare a prezentului articol. În special, Comisia poate specifica informațiile care trebuie furnizate de statele membre în conformitate cu alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii). Aceste măsuri se adoptă în conformitate cu procedura de consultare prevăzută la articolul 20 alineatul (2).
 6. După caz și luând în considerare progresul tehnic și orientările și deciziile internaționale relevante, precum și orice autorizații acordate de un stat membru sau de autoritatea competentă desemnată de statul membru vizat în conformitate cu alineatul (4) și cu anexa V, Comisia poate adopta acte de punere în aplicare care să stabilească formatul informațiilor care trebuie furnizate de statele membre în conformitate cu alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii). Respectivele acte de punere în aplicare se adoptă în conformitate cu procedura de consultare menționată la articolul 20 alineatul (2).
 (c) la cerere, îi acordă Comisiei sprijin tehnic și științific și îi furnizează informații tehnice și științifice privind substanțe care pot să îndeplinească criteriile pentru enumerarea în convenție sau în protocol;
 (c) la cerere, îi acordă Comisiei sprijin tehnic și științific solid și îi furnizează informații tehnice și științifice substanțiale privind substanțe care pot să îndeplinească criteriile pentru enumerarea în convenție sau în protocol, inclusiv privind prevenirea producției și utilizării de POP noi și privind evaluarea pesticidelor sau a substanțelor chimice industriale utilizate în prezent;
 (f) compilează, înregistrează, prelucrează și pune la dispoziția Comisiei și a autorităților competente ale statelor membre toate informațiile primite sau disponibile în temeiul articolului 4 alineatele (2) și (3), al articolului 7 alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii), al articolului 9 alineatul (2) și al articolului 13 alineatul (1). Agenția publică pe site-ul său web informațiile neconfidențiale și facilitează schimbul de astfel de informații cu platformele de informații relevante, cum ar fi cele menționate la articolul 13 alineatul (2);
 (f) compilează, înregistrează, prelucrează și pune la dispoziția Comisiei și a autorităților competente ale statelor membre toate informațiile primite sau disponibile în temeiul articolului 4 alineatele (2) și (3), al articolului 5, al articolului 7 alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii), al articolului 9 alineatul (2) și al articolului 13 alineatul (1). Agenția publică pe site-ul său web informațiile neconfidențiale și facilitează schimbul de astfel de informații cu platformele de informații relevante, cum ar fi cele menționate la articolul 13 alineatul (2);
 1a. Agenția începe să furnizeze asistența și îndrumarea tehnică și științifică menționate la articolul 8 alineatul (1) litera (a) până la... [un an de la intrarea în vigoare a prezentului regulament].
 2a. Comisia organizează un schimb de informații cu statele membre cu privire la măsurile adoptate la nivel național pentru a identifica și a evalua siturile contaminate de POP și pentru a combate eventualele riscuri semnificative pe care această contaminare le poate genera pentru sănătatea umană și pentru mediu.
 3. Fără a aduce atingere Directivei 2003/4/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului32, informațiile menționate la alineatele (1) și (2) nu sunt considerate confidențiale. Comisia , agenția și statele membre care fac schimb de informații cu o țară terță protejează orice informații cu caracter confidențial în conformitate cu dreptul Uniunii .
 3. Fără a aduce atingere Directivei 2003/4/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului, informațiile privind sănătatea și siguranța umană și a mediului nu sunt considerate confidențiale. Comisia , agenția și statele membre care fac schimb de alte informații cu o țară terță protejează orice informație cu caracter confidențial în conformitate cu dreptul Uniunii.
 32 Directiva 2003/4/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 28 ianuarie 2003 privind accesul publicului la informațiile despre mediu și de abrogare a Directivei 90/313/CEE a Consiliului (JO L 41, 14.2.2003, p. 26).
 Articolul 13 – alineatul 1 – paragraful 2 a (nou)
 Uniunea asigură accesul la informație și participarea publicului pe parcursul monitorizării punerii în aplicare.
 5. Comisia poate adopta acte de punere în aplicare menite să aducă precizări suplimentare cu privire la informațiile minime care trebuie furnizate în conformitate cu alineatul (1), inclusiv definiția indicatorilor, a hărților și a situațiilor generale ale statelor membre menționate la alineatul (1) litera (f). Respectivele acte de punere în aplicare se adoptă în conformitate cu procedura de consultare menționată la articolul 20 alineatul (2).
 5. Comisia poate adopta acte de punere în aplicare care să stabilească formatul informațiilor care trebuie furnizate în conformitate cu alineatul (1), inclusiv definiția indicatorilor, a hărților și a situațiilor generale ale statelor membre menționate la alineatul (1) litera (f). Respectivele acte de punere în aplicare se adoptă în conformitate cu procedura de consultare menționată la articolul 20 alineatul (2).
 2. Competența de a adopta acte delegate menționată la articolul 4 alineatul (3), la articolul 7 alineatul (5) și la articolul 15 se conferă Comisiei pentru o perioadă nedeterminată, începând cu [...].
 2. Competența de a adopta acte delegate menționată la articolul 4 alineatul (3), la articolul 7 alineatul (5) și la articolul 15 se conferă Comisiei pentru o perioadă de cinci ani începând cu... [data intrării în vigoare a prezentului regulament]. Comisia prezintă un raport privind delegarea de competențe cu cel puțin nouă luni înainte de încheierea perioadei de cinci ani. Delegarea de competențe se prelungește tacit cu perioade de timp identice, cu excepția cazului în care Parlamentul European sau Consiliul se opune prelungirii respective cu cel puțin trei luni înainte de încheierea fiecărei perioade.
 1. Comisia este sprijinită de un comitet instituit prin articolul 133 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1907/2006 pentru toate chestiunile reglementate de prezentul regulament.
 1. Comisia este sprijinită de:
 (a) comitetul instituit prin articolul 133 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1907/2006 pentru punerea în aplicare a chestiunilor menționate la articolul 13 alineatul (5), cu excepția cazului în care se face referire la actele de punere aplicare care stabilesc formatul informațiilor menționate la articolul 13 alineatul (1) litera (a) cu privire la aplicarea articolului 7 și la articolul 13 alineatul (1) litera (b), în cazul în care se face referire la informațiile primite în temeiul articolului 5 alineatul (2) și al articolului 7 alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii); și
 (b) comitetul instituit prin articolul 39 din Directiva 2008/98/CE1a a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului pentru punerea în aplicare a chestiunilor menționate la articolul 7 alineatul (6) și la articolul 13 alineatul (5), în cazul în care se face referire la actele de punere aplicare care stabilesc formatul informațiilor menționate la articolul 13 alineatul (1) litera (a) cu privire la aplicarea articolului (7) și la articolul 13 alineatul (1) litera (b) în cazul în care se face referire la informațiile primite în temeiul articolului 5 alineatul (2) și al articolului 7 alineatul (4) litera (b) punctul (iii).
 Anexa I – partea A – tabel – rândul 17
 1336-36-3 și altele
 215-648-1 și altele
 Fără a aduce atingere Directivei 96/59/CE, se aprobă utilizarea articolelor care se află deja în uz la momentul intrării în vigoare a prezentului regulament.
 Statele membre identifică și scot din uz echipamentele (de exemplu, transformatoare, condensatoare sau alte recipiente conținând stocuri de lichide reziduale) care conțin PCB în proporție de peste 0,005 % și în volume de peste 0,05 dm3, cât mai curând posibil, dar nu mai târziu de 31 decembrie 2025.
 Statele membre depun eforturi pentru a identifica și a scoate din uz echipamentele (de exemplu, transformatoare, condensatoare sau alte recipiente conținând stocuri de lichide reziduale) care conțin PCB în proporție de peste 0,005 % și în volume de peste 0,05 dm3, cât mai curând posibil și nu mai târziu de 31 decembrie 2025.
 Anexa I – partea A – rândul 24 a (nou)
 Derogare specifică privind utilizarea intermediară sau alte specificații
 Bis(pentabromfenil)eter (decabromdifenil eter; decaBDE)
 1163/-19/-5
 214/-604/-9
 1. În sensul prezentei rubrici , articolul 4 alineatul (1) litera (b) se aplică concentrațiilor de decaBDE mai mici sau egale cu 10 mg/kg (0,001 procente masice) prezente în substanțe, amestecuri , articole sau care intră în alcătuirea părților ignifuge ale articolelor.
 2. Prin derogare, se autorizează producerea, introducerea pe piață și utilizarea decaBDE pentru:
 (a) producția de aeronave – pentru care s-a solicitat omologarea de tip înainte de data intrării în vigoare și a fost primită înainte de luna decembrie 2022 – înainte de 2 martie 2027;
 (b) producția de piese de schimb pentru oricare din următoarele:
 (i) o aeronavă – pentru care s-a solicitat omologarea de tip înainte de data intrării în vigoare și a fost primită înainte de luna decembrie 2022 – produsă înainte de 2 martie 2027 până la sfârșitul duratei de exploatare a aeronavei;
 (ii) autovehiculele care se încadrează în domeniul de aplicare al Directivei 2007/46/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului, produse înainte de... [data intrării în vigoare a prezentului regulament], fie până în 2036, fie până la sfârșitul duratei de viață a acestor autovehicule, oricare dintre aceste date este prima.
 3. Derogările specifice pentru piesele de schimb destinate autovehiculelor menționate la alineatul 2 litera (b) punctul (ii) se aplică producției și utilizării de decaBDE comercial care se încadrează în una sau mai multe dintre următoarele categorii:
 (i) aplicațiile grupului motopropulsor și cele din compartimentul motorului, cum ar fi cablul de masă al bateriei, cablurile de conectare ale bateriei, țevile sistemului mobil de climatizare, grupul motopropulsor, cuzineții colectorului de evacuare, izolația compartimentului motorului, cablajul și distribuția electrică din compartimentul motorului (cablajul motorului etc.), senzorii de viteză, tuburile, modulele de ventilație și senzorii de detonație;
 (ii) aplicațiile sistemului de combustibil, cum ar fi furtunurile pentru combustibil, rezervoarele de combustibil, precum și rezervoarele de combustibil montate sub caroserie;
 (iii) dispozitivele pirotehnice și aplicațiile legate de dispozitive pirotehnice, cum ar fi cablurile de detonare ale airbagului, tapițeria scaunelor/materialele textile care acoperă scaunele (numai dacă sunt relevante pentru airbaguri) și airbagurile (frontale și laterale);
 (iv) suspensiile și elementele de interior, cum ar fi accesoriile interioare, materialele acustice și centurile de siguranță;
 (v) materiale plastice ranforsate (tablouri de bord și accesorii interioare);
 (vi) compartimentul motorului sau tabloul de bord [blocuri de borne/de siguranțe, cabluri de mare amperaj și izolații pentru cabluri (cabluri pentru bujii)];
 (vii) echipamente electrice și electronice (carcase de baterii și suporturi de baterii, conectori electrici pentru controlul motorului, componente ale discurilor radio, sisteme de navigație prin satelit, sisteme globale de poziționare și sisteme informatice);
 (viii) materialele textile cum ar fi cele din portbagaj, tapițeria, plafonul, scaunele automobilului, tetierele, vizierele parasolar, covoarele, panourile de echipare ale portierelor, covorașele.
 3. Se autorizează producerea de decaBDE și utilizarea sa în producția și introducerea pe piață a următoarelor articole:
 (a) articole introduse pe piață înainte de... [data intrării în vigoare a prezentului regulament];
 (b) aeronave produse în conformitate cu punctul 2 litera (a);
 (c) piese de schimb pentru aeronave produse în conformitate cu punctul 2 litera (b);
 (d) echipamentele electrice și electronice care se încadrează în domeniul de aplicare al Directivei 2011/65/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului.
 4. În sensul prezentei rubrici, „aeronavă” înseamnă una dintre următoarele:
 (a) o aeronavă civilă produsă în conformitate cu un certificat de tip eliberat în conformitate cu Regulamentul (UE) nr. 2018/11391c al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului sau cu o aprobare de proiectare, eliberată în conformitate cu reglementările naționale ale unui stat contractant al Organizației Aviației Civile Internaționale (OACI) ori pentru care a fost eliberat un certificat de navigabilitate de un stat contractant al OACI în temeiul anexei 8 la Convenția privind aviația civilă internațională;
 (b) o aeronavă militară.
 1a Directiva 2007/46/CE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 5 septembrie 2007 de stabilire a unui cadru pentru omologarea autovehiculelor și remorcilor acestora, precum și a sistemelor, componentelor și unităților tehnice separate destinate vehiculelor respective (Directivă-cadru) (JO L 263, 9.10.2007, p. 1).
 1b Directiva 2011/65/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 8 iunie 2011 privind restricțiile de utilizare a anumitor substanțe periculoase în echipamentele electrice și electronice (JO L 174, 1.7.2011, p. 88).”
 1c Regulamentul (UE) 2018/1139 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului din 4 iulie 2018 privind normele comune în domeniul aviației civile și de înființare a Agenției Uniunii Europene pentru Siguranța Aviației, de modificare a Regulamentelor (CE) nr. 2111/2005, (CE) nr. 1008/2008, (UE) nr. 996/2010, (UE) nr. 376/2014 și a Directivelor 2014/30/UE și 2014/53/UE ale Parlamentului European și ale Consiliului, precum și de abrogare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 216/2008 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului și a Regulamentului (CEE) nr. 3922/91 al Consiliului (JO L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1).”
 Anexa I – partea A – rândul 24 b (nou)
 Cloroalcani C10-C13 (parafine clorurate cu catenă scurtă — PCCS-uri)
 1. Prin derogare, sunt autorizate producerea, introducerea pe piață și utilizarea substanțelor sau preparatelor care conțin PCCS în concentrații mai mici de 1 procent masic sau a articolelor care conțin PCCS în concentrații mai mici de 0,15 procente masice.
 2. Utilizarea este permisă în ceea ce privește:
 (a) benzile transportoare din industria minieră și materialele de etanșare pentru baraje care conțin PCCS, aflate deja în uz înainte de 4 decembrie 2015 sau la acea dată; și
 (b) articolele care conțin PCCS, altele decât cele menționate la litera (a), care erau deja în uz înainte de 10 iulie 2012 sau la acea dată.
 3. Articolul 4 alineatul (2) al treilea și al patrulea paragraf se aplică articolelor menționate la punctul 2 de mai sus.
 Anexa I – partea B
 5 cloroalcani C10-C13 (parafine clorurate cu catenă scurtă) (PCCS)
 5 1. Prin derogare, sunt autorizate producerea, introducerea pe piață și utilizarea substanțelor sau a amestecurilor care conțin PCCS în concentrații mai mici de 1 procent masic sau a articolelor care conțin PCCS în concentrații mai mici de 0,15 procente masice.
 Hidrocarburi aromatice policiclice (HAP)37
 37. în scopul inventarierii emisiilor, se utilizează patru compuși indicatori, și anume: benzo(a)piren, benzo(b)fluoranten, benzo(k)fluoranten și indeno(1,2,3-cd)piren.
 Pentaclorbenzen (Nr. CAS 608-93-5)
 Naftaline policlorurate (37a)
 (37a) Naftaline policlorurate înseamnă compuși chimici bazați pe sistemul inelului naftalenic, în care unul sau mai mulți atomi de hidrogen sunt înlocuiți de atomi de clor.
 Hexaclorbutadienă (nr. CAS 87-68-3)
 Anexa IV – rândurile 5 – 8
 Limita de concentrație menționată la articolul 7 alineatul (4) litera (a)
 40088-47-9 și altele
 254-787-2 și altele
 Suma concentrațiilor de tetrabromodifenileter, pentabromodifenileter, hexabromodifenileter și heptabromodifenileter: 1 000 mg/kg
 32534-81-9 și altele
 251-084-2 și altele
 36483-60-0 și altele
 253-058-6 și altele
 68928-80-3 și altele
 273-031-2 și altele
 Suma concentrațiilor de tetrabromodifenileter, pentabromodifenileter, hexabromodifenileter, heptabromodifenileter și decabromdifenileter: 500 mg/kg
 Hexabromdifenileter
 Decabromdifenileter
 1163-19-5 și altele
 214-604-9 și altele
 Anexa IV – tabelul 1 – coloana „Limita de concentrație menționată la articolul 7 alineatul (4) litera (a)” – rândul „Dibenzo-p-dioxine ” – nota de subsol 7
 7. Limita se calculează în PCDD și PCDF în conformitate cu următorii factori de echivalență toxică (TEF):
 (1) Chestiunea a fost retrimisă pentru negocieri interinstituționale comisiei competente în conformitate cu articolul 59 alineatul (4) al patrulea paragraf din Regulamentul de procedură (A8-0336/2018).
 Ultima actualizare: 6 februarie 2020 Notă juridică - Politica de confidențialitate


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 7.3.2016
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 90/7
 Žádost o rozhodnutí o předběžné otázce podaná Cour de cassation (Francie) dne 14. prosince 2015 – Président de l’Autorité de la concurrence v. Association des producteurs vendeurs d’endives (APVE), Association Comité économique régional agricole fruits et légumes de Bretagne (Cerafel), Société Fraileg, Société Prim’Santerre, Union des endiviers, Société Soleil du Nord, Comité économique fruits et légumes du Nord de la France (Celfnord), Association des producteurs d’endives de France (APEF), Section nationale de l’endive (SNE), Fédération du commerce de l’endive (FCE), Société France endives, Société Cambrésis Artois-Picardie endives (CAP'Endives), Société Marché de Phalempin, Société Primacoop, Société Coopérative agricole du marais audomarois (Sipema), Société Valois-Fruits, Société Groupe Perle du Nord, Ministre de l’économie, de l’industrie et du numérique
 (Věc C-671/15)
 (2016/C 090/10)
 Jednací jazyk: francouzština
 Předkládající soud
 Cour de cassation
 Účastníci původního řízení
 Navrhovatel: Président de l’Autorité de la concurrence
 Odpůrci: Association des producteurs vendeurs d’endives (APVE), Association Comité économique régional agricole fruits et légumes de Bretagne (Cerafel), Société Fraileg, Société Prim’Santerre, Union des endiviers, Société Soleil du Nord, Comité économique fruits et légumes du Nord de la France (Celfnord), Association des producteurs d’endives de France (APEF), Section nationale de l’endive (SNE), Fédération du commerce de l’endive (FCE), Société France endives, Société Cambrésis Artois-Picardie endives (CAP'Endives), Société Marché de Phalempin, Société Primacoop, Société Coopérative agricole du marais audomarois (Sipema), Société Valois-Fruits, Société Groupe Perle du Nord, Ministre de l’économie, de l’industrie et du numérique
 Předběžné otázky
 1)
 Mohou dohody, rozhodnutí nebo jednání organizací producentů, sdružení organizací producentů a profesních organizací, které by mohly být kvalifikovány jako protisoutěžní z hlediska článku 101 SFEU, vybočovat z působnosti zákazu, který je stanoven v tomto článku, pouze proto, že by mohly souviset s úkoly, které byly těmto organizacím svěřeny v rámci společné organizace trhu, přestože nespadají pod žádnou z obecných výjimek, které byly postupně upraveny v článku 2 nařízení (EHS) č. 26 ze dne 4. dubna 1962 (1), v článku 2 nařízení (ES) č. 1184/2006 ze dne 24. července 2006 (2) a v článku 176 nařízení (ES) č. 1234/2007 ze dne 22. října 2007 (3)?
 2)
 Je-li tomu tak, musí být čl. 11 odst. 1 nařízení (ES) č. 2200/1996 (4), čl. 3 odst. 1 nařízení (ES) č. 1182/2007 (5) a čl. 122 první pododstavec nařízení (ES) č. 1234/2007, které jako jeden z cílů organizací producentů a jejich sdružení stanoví stabilizaci cen producentů a přizpůsobení produkce poptávce, zejména pokud jde o množství, vykládány v tom smyslu, že se na jednání těchto organizací nebo jejich sdružení spočívající ve společném určování minimálních cen, v dohodách o množství uváděném na trh nebo ve výměně strategických informací, nevztahuje zákaz protisoutěžních kartelových dohod, pokud tato jednání směřují k dosažení uvedených cílů?
 (1) Nařízení Rady (EHS) č. 26 ze dne 4. dubna 1962 o použití určitých pravidel hospodářské soutěže na produkci zemědělských produktů a obchod s nimi.
 (2) Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1184/2006 ze dne 24. července 2006 o použití určitých pravidel hospodářské soutěže na produkci zemědělských produktů a obchod s nimi (Úř. věst. L 214, s. 7).
 (3) Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1234/2007 ze dne 22. října 2007, kterým se stanoví společná organizace zemědělských trhů a zvláštní ustanovení pro některé zemědělské produkty (Úř. věst. L 299, s. 1).
 (4) Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 2200/96 ze dne 28. října 1996 o společné organizaci trhu s ovocem a zeleninou (Úř. věst. L 297, s. 1; Zvl. vyd. 03/20, s. 55).
 (5) Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 1182/2007 ze dne 26. září 2007, kterým se stanoví zvláštní pravidla pro odvětví ovoce a zeleniny a kterým se mění směrnice 2001/112/ES a 2001/113/ES a nařízení (EHS) č. 827/68, (ES) č. 2200/96, (ES) č. 2201/96, (ES) č. 2826/2000, (ES) č. 1782/2003 a (ES) č. 318/2006 a ruší nařízení (ES) č. 2202/96 (Úř. věst. L 273, s. 1).


type: contracts

text:
 29.8.2013
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 L 231/24
 EEZ APVIENOTĀS KOMITEJAS LĒMUMS
 Nr. 50/2013
 (2013. gada 30. aprīlis),
 ar ko groza EEZ līguma XX pielikumu (Vide)
 EEZ APVIENOTĀ KOMITEJA,
 ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Ekonomikas zonu (“EEZ līgums”) un jo īpaši tā 98. pantu,
 tā kā:
 (1)
 EEZ līgumā jāiekļauj Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 24. aprīļa Lēmums Nr. 377/2013/ES par pagaidu atkāpi no Direktīvas 2003/87/EK, ar kuru nosaka sistēmu siltumnīcas efektu izraisošo gāzu emisijas kvotu tirdzniecībai Kopienā (1).
 (2)
 Tādēļ būtu attiecīgi jāgroza EEZ līguma XX pielikums,
 IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO LĒMUMU.
 1. pants
 EEZ līguma XX pielikumā pēc 21.apg punkta (Komisijas Regula (ES) Nr. 601/2012) iekļauj šādu punktu:
 “21.aph
 32013 D 0377: Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 24. aprīļa Lēmums Nr. 377/2013/ES par pagaidu atkāpi no Direktīvas 2003/87/EK, ar kuru nosaka sistēmu siltumnīcas efektu izraisošo gāzu emisijas kvotu tirdzniecībai Kopienā (OV L 113, 25.4.2013., 1. lpp.).”
 2. pants
 Lēmuma Nr. 377/2013/ES teksts islandiešu un norvēģu valodā, kas jāpublicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ papildinājumā, ir autentisks.
 3. pants
 Šis lēmums stājas spēkā 2013. gada 30. aprīlī, ja ir iesniegti visi paziņojumi saskaņā ar EEZ līguma 103. panta 1. punktu (2).
 4. pants
 Šo lēmumu publicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ iedaļā un tā EEZ papildinājumā.
 Briselē, 2013. gada 30. aprīlī
 EEZ Apvienotās komitejas vārdā –
 priekšsēdētājs
 Gianluca GRIPPA
 (1) OV L 113, 25.4.2013., 1. lpp.
 (2) Konstitucionālās prasības nav norādītas.


text:
C 184/2 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 13.6.98
 geval blijkt te zijn, kunnen deze gegevens alsnog wor- ringen gelden en niet van dien aard mogen zijn, dat zij
 den verlangd voorzover er wegens de bijzondere ken- het verkrijgen van schadevergoeding nagenoeg onmo-
 merken van het proceÂdeÂ voor de productie van de gelijk of uiterst moeilijk maken.
 grondstof uit de stof geen enkel ander middel is om de
 zuiverheid van de grondstof te beoordelen. (1) PB C 174 van 8.7.1995.
 Wanneer de bevoegde instantie krachtens artikel 9,
 punt 3, van Richtlijn 81/851/EEG gegevens verlangt
 van de aanvrager van een vergunning voor het in de
 handel brengen, zijn de bij artikel 8 van deze richtlijn
 gestelde termijnen opgeschort totdat deze inlichtingen ARREST VAN HET HOF
 zijn verstrekt. (Zesde Kamer)
 van 30 april 1998
 2) Voor de antwoorden op de eerste vraag heeft het geen in zaak C-230/96 (verzoek van de Cour d'appel de Douai
 belang, of het productieproces van een geneesmiddel om een prejudicieÈle beslissing): Cabour SA en Nord Distri-
 continu of discontinu is. bution Automobile SA tegen Arnor 1SOCOo SARL, in
 aanwezigheid van Automobiles Peugeot SA en Automobi-
 les CitroeÈn SA (1)
 3) De bevoegde instantie kan de aanvrager van een ver-
 gunning voor het in de handel brengen niet vrijstellen (Mededinging Ð Afzet van motorvoertuigen Ð Geldigheid
 van het verstrekken van een in artikel 5 van Richtlijn van exclusieve dealer-overeenkomst Ð Artikel 85, leden 1
 81/851/EEG genoemd gegeven of bescheid, ook al en 3, EG-Verdrag Ð Verordening (EEG) nr. 123/85 Ð
 blijkt de verkrijging van dit gegeven in een concreet Verordening (EG) nr. 1475/95)
 geval nagenoeg onmogelijk.
 (98/C 184/02)
 4) Bij het onderzoek van de vierde vraag is niet gebleken (Procestaal: Frans)
 van feiten of omstandigheden die de geldigheid van
 artikel 5, tweede alinea, punten 3, 4 en 9, van Richt-
 lijn 81/851/EEG en van de punten A, B en C van (Voorlopige vertaling; de definitieve vertaling verschijnt in
 deel 1 van de bijlage bij Richtlijn 81/852/EEG ten aan- de Jurisprudentie van het Hof)
 zien van het evenredigheidsbeginsel kunnen aantasten.
 In zaak C-230/96, betreffende een verzoek aan het Hof
 krachtens artikel 177 EG-Verdrag van de Cour d'appel de
 5) Bij het onderzoek van de vijfde vraag is niet gebleken
 Douai (Frankrijk), in het aldaar aanhangig geding tussen
 van feiten of omstandigheden die de geldigheid van de
 Cabour SA en Nord Distribution Automobile SA en Arnor
 Richtlijnen 81/851/EEG en 81/852/EEG ten aanzien
 1SOCOo SARL, in aanwezigheid van Automobiles Peu-
 van de artikelen 30 tot en met 36 EG-Verdrag kunnen
 geot SA en Automobiles CitroeÈn SA, om een prejudicieÈle
 aantasten.
 beslissing over de uitlegging van artikel 85, lid 1, EG-Ver-
 drag en van sommige bepalingen van Verordening (EEG)
 nr. 123/85 van de Commissie van 12 december 1984
 6) Artikel 40 van Richtlijn 81/851/EEG moet aldus wor-
 betreffende de toepassing van artikel 85, lid 3, van het
 den uitgelegd, dat een op artikel 9, punt 3, van deze
 Verdrag op groepen afzet- en klantenserviceovereenkom-
 richtlijn gebaseerd verzoek om aanvullende gegevens
 sten inzake motorvoertuigen (PB L 15 van 18.1.1985,
 niet behoeft te worden gemotiveerd.
 blz. 16) en van Verordening (EG) nr. 1475/95 van de
 Commissie van 28 juni 1995 (PB L 145 van 29.6.1995,
 blz. 25), heeft het Hof (Zesde Kamer), samengesteld als
 7) Een lidstaat moet de schade vergoeden die de aanvra- volgt: H. Ragnemalm, kamerpresident, R. Schintgen (rap-
 ger van een vergunning voor het in de handel brengen porteur), G. F. Mancini, P. J. G. Kapteyn en G. Hirsch,
 als gevolg van met de Richtlijnen 81/851/EEG en 81/ rechters; advocaat-generaal: G. Tesauro; griffier: D. Lou-
 852/EEG strijdige eisen en verzoeken om gegevens terman-Hubeau, hoofdadministrateur, op 30 april 1998
 heeft geleden, wanneer de geschonden Gemeenschaps- een arrest gewezen waarvan het dictum luidt als volgt:
 regel de particulieren rechten toekent, de schending
 voldoende gekwalificeerd is en er een direct causaal
 verband bestaat tussen deze schending en de door par- 1. Artikel 5, lid 2, punt 1, onder a) en b), van Verorde-
 ticulieren geleden schade. Onder dit voorbehoud moet ning (EEG) nr. 123/85 van de Commissie van
 de staat in het kader van het nationale aansprakelijk- 12 december 1984 betreffende de toepassing van
 heidsrecht de gevolgen ongedaan maken van de schade artikel 85, lid 3, van het Verdrag op groepen afzet- en
 die is veroorzaakt door een aan hem toe te rekenen klantenserviceovereenkomsten inzake motorvoertuigen,
 schending van het Gemeenschapsrecht, met dien ver- moet aldus worden uitgelegd, dat de in de verordning
 stande dat de door de toepasselijke nationale wettelijke voorziene vrijstelling geldt voor een beding in een
 regeling gestelde voorwaarden niet ongunstiger mogen exclusieve dealerovereenkomst, dat enkel bepaalt dat
 zijn dan die welke voor gelijksoortige nationale vorde- partijen objectief gerechtvaardigde redenen kunnen
 ---pagebreak--- 13.6.98 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 184/3
 inroepen om zich van hun wederzijdse concurrentiever- ARREST VAN HET HOF
 bod te bevrijden, zonder die redenen te specificeren.
 (Zesde Kamer)
 van 30 april 1998
 De artikelen 3, punt 3, en 5, lid 2, van Verordening
 (EEG) nr. 123/85 moeten aldus worden uitgelegd, dat in zaak C-24/97: Commissie van de Europese Gemeen-
 de in deze verordening voorziene vrijstelling niet geldt schappen tegen Bondsrepubliek Duitsland (1)
 voor een beding, dat de dealer verbiedt om Ð behou-
 dens objectief gerechtvaardigde redenen Ð ook in (Niet-nakoming Ð Verblijfsrecht Ð Legitimatieplicht Ð
 andere verkoopruimten dan die waarin de contractpro- Sancties)
 ducten worden aangeboden, nieuwe voertuigen van (98/C 184/03)
 een ander merk te verkopen.
 (Procestaal: Duits)
 De artikelen 4, lid 1, punt 3, en 5, lid 2, punten 2 en
 3, van Verordening (EEG) nr. 123/85 moeten aldus
 worden uitgelegd, dat de in de verordening voorziene
 vrijstelling geldt voor een beding, dat de dealer een (Voorlopige vertaling; de definitieve vertaling verschijnt in
 bepaalde verkoopdoelstelling oplegt en sancties bevat de Jurisprudentie van het Hof)
 Ð waaronder eventueel ook opzegging van de over-
 eenkomst Ð voor het geval die doelstelling niet wordt
 bereikt, op voorwaarde evenwel dat de vaststelling van In zaak C-24/97, Commissie van de Europese Gemeen-
 de verkoopdoelstelling niet meer dan een inspannings- schappen (gemachtigden: P. Hillenkamp en P. J. Kuijper)
 verbintenis inhoudt. tegen Bondsrepubliek Duitsland (gemachtigde: E. Röder),
 betreffende een verzoek om vast te stellen, dat de Bondsre-
 publiek Duitsland, door onderdanen van andere lidstaten
 2. De artikelen 3, punt 3, en 5, lid 2, van Verordening op Duits grondgebied met betrekking tot de schuldmaat-
 (EG) nr. 1475/95 van de Commissie van 28 juli 1995 staf en de oplegging van geldboetes onevenredig anders te
 betreffende de toepassing van artikel 85, lid 3, van het behandelen dan eigen onderdanen die op vergelijkbare
 Verdrag op groepen afzet- en klantenserviceovereen- wijze niet aan hun legitimatieplicht voldoen, niet heeft vol-
 komsten inzake motorvoertuigen moeten aldus worden daan aan de verplichtingen die op haar rusten krachtens
 uitgelegd, dat de in deze verordening voorziene vrijstel- de artikelen 48, 52 en 59 EG-Verdrag, artikel 4, lid 1, van
 ling niet geldt voor een beding, dat de dealer verbiedt richtlijn 68/360/EEG van de Raad van 15 oktober 1968
 om Ð behoudens objectief gerechtvaardigde redenen inzake de opheffing van de beperkingen van de verplaat-
 Ð ook in andere verkoopruimten dan die waarin de sing en het verblijf van de werknemers der lidstaten en
 contractproducten worden aangeboden, nieuwe voer- van hun familie binnen de Gemeenschap (PB L 257 van
 tuigen van een ander merk te verkopen. 19.10.1968, blz. 13), en artikel 4, lid 1, van Richtlijn 73/
 148/EEG van de Raad van 21 mei 1973 inzake de ophef-
 De artikelen 4, lid 1, punt 3, en 5, leden 2 en 3, van fing van de beperkingen van de verplaatsing en het verblijf
 Verordening (EG) nr. 1475/95 moeten aldus worden van onderdanen van de lidstaten binnen de Gemeenschap
 uitgelegd, dat de in de verordening voorziene vrijstel- ter zake van vestiging en verrichten van diensten (PB L 172
 ling geldt voor een beding, dat de dealer een bepaalde van 28.6.1973, blz. 14), heeft het Hof (Zesde Kamer),
 verkoopdoelstelling oplegt en sancties bevat Ð waar- samengesteld als volgt: H. Ragnemalm (rapporteur),
 onder eventueel opzegging van de overeenkomst Ð kamerpresident, G. F. Mancini, J. L. Murray, G. Hirsch en
 voor het geval die doelstelling niet wordt bereikt, op K. M. Ioannou, rechters; advocaat-generaal: F. G. Jacobs;
 voorwaarde evenwel dat de vaststelling van de ver- griffier: R. Grass, op 30 april 1998 een arrest gewezen
 koopdoelstelling niet meer dan een inspanningsverbin- waarvan het dictum luidt als volgt:
 tenis inhoudt en die doelstelling door partijen in onder-
 linge overeenstemming of anders door een onafhanke-
 lijke derde wordt bepaald. 1. Door onderdanen van andere lidstaten op Duits
 grondgebied met betrekking tot de schuldmaatstaf en
 de oplegging van geldboetes onevenredig anders te
 3. Het verbod van artikel 85, lid 1, van het Verdrag is behandelen dan eigen onderdanen die op vergelijkbare
 van toepassing op bedingen van een dealerovereen- wijze niet aan hun legitimatieplicht voldoen, heeft de
 komst voor motorvoertuigen die niet onder de groeps- Bondsrepubliek Duitsland niet voldaan aan de ver-
 vrijstelling vallen, wanneer, gelet op de economisch- plichtingen die op haar rusten krachtens de
 juridische samenhang, die bedingen ertoe strekken of artikelen 48, 52 en 59 EG-Verdrag, artikel 4 van
 tot gevolg hebben dat de mededinging op de gemeen- Richtlijn 68/360/EEG van de Raad van 15 oktober
 schappelijke markt merkbaar wordt beperkt, en wan- 1968 inzake de opheffing van de beperkingen van de
 neer zij de handel tussen lidstaten ongunstig kunnen verplaatsing en het verblijf van de werknemers der lid-
 beïnvloeden. staten en van hun familie binnen de Gemeenschap, en
 artikel 4 van Richtlijn 73/148/EEG van de Raad van
 (1) PB C 269 van 14.9.1996. 21 mei 1973 inzake de opheffing van de beperkingen
 van de verplaatsing en het verblijf van onderdanen van
 de lidstaten binnen de Gemeenschap ter zake van ves-
 tiging en verrichten van diensten.


jurisdiction: US

text:
 235 Md. 401 (1964)
 201 A.2d 852
 STATE
 v.
 BROWN
 [No. 402, September Term, 1963.]
 Court of Appeals of Maryland.
 Decided July 2, 1964.
 The cause was argued before HENDERSON, HAMMOND, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ., and ANDERSON, J., Associate Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, specially assigned.
 Robert L. Karwacki, Assistant Attorney General, with whom were Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General, William J. O'Donnell, *403 State's Attorney for Baltimore City, and William T.S. Bricker, Assistant State's Attorney, on the brief, for the appellant and cross-appellee.
 Bayard Z. Hochberg for the appellee and cross-appellant.
 Decided July 2, 1964. Certiorari denied, 379 U.S. 978.
 HENDERSON, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
 On December 31, 1961, appellee and cross-appellant was convicted of illegal posession and control of heroin, in a non-jury case before Judge Carter, and sentenced to twelve years in the House of Correction. He had been convicted on two prior occasions of violations of the narcotics law. He did not appeal, but on August 20, 1962, filed a petition for post conviction relief. Counsel was appointed and a hearing was held before Judge Allen. There were subsequent amendments and hearings, and on June 26, 1963, Judge Allen ordered his release. The order was stayed pending an application by the State for leave to appeal. Leave to appeal and leave to file a cross-appeal were granted, and the case was briefed and argued in this Court.
 The ground upon which Judge Allen ordered the petitioner's release was that the petitioner was denied due process of law because his conviction "for the alleged current offenses of possession and control of narcotics were without legal basis * * *." The State contends that Judge Allen passed on the sufficiency of the evidence, not a proper subject of inquiry under the Post Conviction Procedure Act, and that in any event the evidence was sufficient. To understand the contentions it is necessary to summarize the facts.
 Officer Buchanan, attached to the narcotics squad of the Baltimore City Police, accompanied by an informer and addict named Sylvester Holman, known as "Dukie," went to Fulton and Baker Streets about 4:20 p.m. on October 20, 1961. They met Brown, who was an acquaintance of Holman's and an addict. Holman asked Brown if he could get some heroin for him. Brown readily agreed to do so and Holman gave him ten dollars in marked money. Brown went away and returned a few minutes later with a glassine envelope containing heroin. Whether Brown got the envelope from his room, or from a *404 third person, was not shown. Officer Buchanan testified that he saw Brown hand the envelope to Holman, and that Holman gave it to the witness. The officer had searched Holman before they went on the expedition. Officer Buchanan took the envelope to the United States Customs laboratory, and upon verification as to what it contained, arrested Brown on October 25, 1963. Brown was interviewed by Captain Carroll and admitted meeting Dukie and Officer Buchanan, but denied that he produced any drug. Brown was charged and tried as a third offender for the sale, dispensing, possession and control of illegal narcotics. However, when the evidence at the trial showed that the sale was made to Holman, not to Officer Buchanan as alleged in the indictment, Judge Carter found him not guilty on the first two counts, but guilty of illegal possession and control. The appellee stipulated at the trial to the fact of his two prior convictions on February 4, 1957, and December 18, 1959, as alleged in the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth counts of the indictment.
 Code (1963 Supp.), Art. 27, sec. 645 A (b), states that the remedy provided by the Post Conviction Procedure Act "is not a substitute for, nor does it affect any remedies which are incident to the proceedings in the trial court * * * or any remedy of direct review of the sentence or conviction." We have repeatedly held that questions of the petitioner's guilt or innocence, or the sufficiency of the evidence to convict, are not open on post conviction. Duff v. Warden, 234 Md. 646, 648; Slater v. Warden, 233 Md. 609, 611; Harrington v. Warden, 232 Md. 621, 626; Drehoff v. Warden, 231 Md. 654, 656. The appellee seeks to draw a distinction between the legal sufficiency of evidence, and the absence of any evidence at all. He cites Thompson v. Louisville, 362 U.S. 199, Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157, and Taylor v. Louisiana, 370 U.S. 154. See also the annotation in 80 A.L.R. 2d 1362. He also cites United States v. Myers, 301 F.2d 782 (C.A. 3d.), cert. den., 371 U.S. 841; Torrance v. Salzinger, 297 F.2d 902 (C.A. 3d.), cert. den., 369 U.S. 887; Penn v. Salzinger, 177 A.2d 619 (Pa.), cert. den., 369 U.S. 888; Faust v. North Carolina, 307 F.2d 869 (C.A. 4th), cert. den., 371 U.S. 964. Cf. Grundler v. North Carolina, 283 F.2d 798, 802 (C.A. *405 4th). In Faust it was said (p. 872) that "there is a difference between a conviction based upon evidence deemed insufficient as a matter of state criminal law and one so totally devoid of evidentiary support as to raise a due process issue."
 If we assume, without deciding, that the distinction is valid, and that the facts in the instant case do raise an issue of due process, we find no legal basis for the action taken. Judge Allen's holding was that even assuming the facts to be as stated and found by the trial court, the possession and control was in law that of the informer or officer. It was predicated upon Henderson v. United States, 261 F.2d 909 (C.A. 5th), a case wherein the accused was convicted of acquisition, concealment and sale of narcotics. The Court of Appeals, in reversing and remanding, held that the defendant had been entrapped and went on to say (p. 912) that "the defendant acted, not for herself but as the subagent of, and conduit for, the government's provocator, and, because, acting for the government, he was not guilty of any offense, neither was she," citing United States v. Sawyer, 210 F.2d 169 (C.A. 3d.) and Adams v. United States, 220 F.2d 297 (C.A. 5th), both cases where the defendant was convicted only of selling heroin. See also United States v. Prince, 264 F.2d 850 (C.A. 3d.). In Coronado v. United States, 266 F.2d 719, 720 (C.A. 5th), cert. den., 361 U.S. 851 the Court said:
 "Henderson and related cases held that if the accused acted as a purchasing agent for the buyer of narcotics and did not act as or represent the seller, he cannot be convicted of making an illegal sale of narcotics. * * * The defense presupposes a sale. * * * It does not apply in the instant case since Coronado was not convicted of selling narcotics. He was convicted of unlawfully acquiring and facilitating the transportation and concealment of heroin." For similar holdings see Vasquez v. United States, 290 F.2d 897, 898 (C.A. 9th), and Washington v. United States, 275 F.2d 687, 690 (C.A. 5th). The crimes of which Brown was convicted, possession and control, may be equated with the crimes of which the defendants were convicted in the later Federal cases. We considered the same point in Stewart v. State, 232 Md. 319, 322, and we think that case is controlling here. Cf. Snead v. State, 234 Md. 63. *406 It was shown in the instant case that Officer Buchanan saw Brown hand the envelope, later found to contain heroin, to Holman. Obviously, at that moment Brown was in physical possession and control of the drug. He does not claim entrapment. Since Brown was not convicted of a sale of narcotics, we do not reach the question posed in the Henderson case.
 In the cross-appeal the appellee urges that Judge Carter's finding of guilty generally, without further specification of any particular counts, was a finding of guilt with respect to the current offense only, and the sentence as a third offender was therefore void. The record clearly shows that Judge Carter found Brown not guilty on the first two counts, and "necessarily the same verdict would have to apply to the fifth, seventh, ninth and tenth counts" (alleging a sale to Officer Buchanan). The verdict was guilty as to the third and fourth counts. "Now, of course, that means you have stipulated that he had two prior convictions." Since Brown had so stipulated in open court, it was not necessary for Judge Carter to make a specific finding of guilt on counts five through twelve, charging the prior offenses, in order to sentence the accused as a third offender. Beard v. State, 216 Md. 302, 309. See also McCoy v. State, 216 Md. 332, and Murray v. State, 226 Md. 624. The case of Robertson v. Warden, 212 Md. 646, relied on by the appellant was distinguished in Beard, and is distinguishable here.
 The appellee further contends that incorrect advice given by his court-appointed counsel deprived him of his right to appeal. His trial counsel (not his present counsel) testified that he told the defendant he had a right to file a motion for a new trial or to take an appeal, but admitted that he told Brown, or his relatives, that they would have to put up the money to pay for the transcript. Brown was an indigent, and under the rule laid down in Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956), he was entitled to a free transcript. In Pearlman v. State, 226 Md. 67, 74, we called attention to Code (1960 Supp.), Art. 5, sec. 15 A, implementing the right established by the Supreme Court. The appellant argues that this erroneous advice placed a stumbling block in the way of an appeal, and that he should be entitled to a belated appeal.
 *407 We have held under similar circumstances that erroneous advice given by counsel would not afford grounds for a belated appeal. Strosnider v. Warden, 216 Md. 635. The decision was rested in part upon the ground that the appeal was not thwarted by the action of any State official. But see State v. Shoemaker, 225 Md. 639. However, the main reliance of the opinion was upon the fact that there was no effort to take an appeal, and hence that there was no authority in the courts to waive the time limitation. Cf. Sewell v. Warden, 235 Md. 615, and cases cited.
 But if we assume, without deciding, that the petitioner might be entitled to a belated appeal under some circumstances, as a remedy to insure that he could obtain as full a review as if he had entered an appeal, we find no error in this record to justify the remedy sought, since none of the points herein presented, that could have been raised on direct appeal, has any merit.
 In addition to the points raised by counsel, which we have already discussed, the appellee and cross-appellant raises further contentions, summarized by Judge Allen as follows:
 1. He received an unfair trial.
 2. He was convicted because of his previous record.
 3. He was convicted on influence of Captain Carroll and not on the evidence presented in court.
 4. He received an unjust sentence.
 5. The court erred in not summoning the informer into court.
 6. He did not have drugs in his possession at the time of his arrest.
 7. He did not give the officer any drugs.
 8. The officer purchased the drug from the informer in the presence of the petitioner.
 9. The officer could not have seen the purchase since he was two blocks away.
 10. Captain Carroll said petitioner was too smart and should have received more than two years on a previous conviction.
 11. Captain Carroll told petitioner he would get fifteen years; he actually did receive fifteen years but Judge Carter reduced it to twelve years.
 12. The informer had a criminal record and petitioner was *408 found guilty on the informer's statements to the officer and to Captain Carroll.
 13. The court disregarded all the legal points in the petitioner's favor.
 14. If the informer had been in court, he would have testified that he did not get the drugs from the petitioner.
 Most of these contentions require no comment. They go to the weight of the evidence, or they lack specificity. The sentence was within the maximum of twenty years for a third offender. Code (1957), Art. 27, sec. 300. The points regarding the failure of the State to produce the informer "Dukie" are without merit. See Whyte v. State, 229 Md. 459, and Knight v. State, 229 Md. 460. Cf. Lee v. State, 235 Md. 301. The testimony of Officer Buchanan was enough to support the verdict. Moreover, the appellee knew the informer, but made no effort to summon him or to seek a postponement.
 Order reversed and petition dismissed.


text:
 13.12.2007
 EL
 Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
 L 328/46
 ΑΠΌΦΑΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΜΕΙΚΤΉΣ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΉΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΟX
 αριθ. 94/2007
 της 6ης Ιουλίου 2007
 για την τροποποίηση του παραρτήματος XΧI (Στατιστικά στοιχεία) της συμφωνίας για τον ΕΟΧ
 Η ΜΕΙΚΤΗ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ TOY ΕΟΧ,
 Έχοντας υπόψη τη συμφωνία για τον Ευρωπαϊκό Οικονομικό Χώρο, μετά την τροποποίησή της με το πρωτόκολλο προσαρμογής της συμφωνίας για τον Ευρωπαϊκό Οικονομικό Χώρο, εφεξής «η συμφωνία», και ιδίως το άρθρο 98,
 Εκτιμώντας τα ακόλουθα:
 (1)
 Το παράρτημα XXΙ της συμφωνίας τροποποιήθηκε με την απόφαση αριθ. 62/2007 της Μεικτής Επιτροπής του ΕΟΧ της 8ης Ιουνίου 2007 (1).
 (2)
 Ο κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 224/2007 της Επιτροπής, της 1ης Μαρτίου 2007, για τροποποίηση του κανονισμού (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1216/2003 όσον αφορά τις οικονομικές δραστηριότητες που καλύπτει ο δείκτης κόστους εργασίας (2), πρέπει να ενσωματωθεί στη συμφωνία.
 (3)
 Ο κανονισμός (EΚ) αριθ. 294/2007 της Επιτροπής, της 20ής Φεβρουαρίου 2007, σχετικά με τη θέσπιση για το 2006 του καταλόγου βιομηχανικών προϊόντων Prodcom που προβλέπεται από τον κανονισμό (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 3924/91 του Συμβουλίου (3), πρέπει να ενσωματωθεί στη συμφωνία,
 ΑΠΟΦΑΣΙΖΕΙ:
 Άρθρο 1
 Το παράρτημα XXΙ της συμφωνίας τροποποιείται ως εξής:
 1.
 Προστίθενται το ακόλουθο κείμενο στο σημείο 18h [κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1216/2003 της Επιτροπής]:
 «, όπως τροποποιήθηκε από:
 —
 32007 R 0224: Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 224/2007 της Επιτροπής, της 1ης Μαρτίου 2007 (ΕΕ L 64 της 2.3.2007, σ. 23).».
 2.
 Το παρόν κείμενο προσαρμογής στο σημείο 18h [κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1216/2003 της Επιτροπής] γίνεται προσαρμογή α).
 3.
 Το ακόλουθο κείμενο προσαρμογής παρεμβάλλεται μετά την προσαρμογή α) στο σημείο 18h [κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1216/2003 της Επιτροπής]:
 «β)
 Στο άρθρο 4 παράγραφος 2 οι λέξεις “και η Νορβηγία” προστίθενται μετά τη λέξη “Σουηδία”.».
 4.
 Το ακόλουθο σημείο παρεμβάλλεται μετά το σημείο 4ad [κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 317/2006 της Επιτροπής]:
 «4ae.
 32007 R 0294: Κανονισμός (EΚ) αριθ. 294/2007 της Επιτροπής, της 20ής Φεβρουαρίου 2007, σχετικά με τη θέσπιση για το 2006 του καταλόγου βιομηχανικών προϊόντων Prodcom που προβλέπεται από τον κανονισμό (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 3924/91 του Συμβουλίου (ΕΕ L 83 της 23.3.2007, σ. 1).».
 Άρθρο 2
 Τα κείμενα των κανονισμών (ΕΚ) αριθ. 224/2007 και (ΕΚ) αριθ. 294/2007 στην ισλανδική και τη νορβηγική γλώσσα, τα οποία δημοσιεύονται στο συμπλήρωμα ΕΟΧ της Επίσημης Εφημερίδας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, είναι αυθεντικά.
 Άρθρο 3
 Η παρούσα απόφαση αρχίζει να ισχύει στις 7 Ιουλίου 2007, υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί προς τη Μεικτή Επιτροπή του ΕΟΧ όλες οι κοινοποιήσεις που προβλέπονται στο άρθρο 103 παράγραφος 1 της συμφωνίας (4).
 Άρθρο 4
 Η παρούσα απόφαση δημοσιεύεται στο τμήμα ΕΟΧ και στο συμπλήρωμα ΕΟΧ της Επίσημης Εφημερίδας της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
 Βρυξέλλες, 6 Ιουλίου 2007.
 Για τη Μεικτή Επιτροπή του ΕΟΧ
 Ο Πρόεδρος
 Stefán Haukur JÓHANNESSON
 (1) ΕΕ L 266 της 11.10.2007, σ. 27.
 (2) ΕΕ L 64 της 2.3.2007, σ. 23.
 (3) ΕΕ L 83 της 23.3.2007, σ. 1.
 (4) Δεν αναφέρονται συνταγματικές απαιτήσεις.


text:
 5.7.2007
 EN
 Official Journal of the European Union
 L 175/31
 DECISION No 1/2007 OF THE ACP-EC COUNCIL OF MINISTERS
 of 25 May 2007
 on reassigning part of the reserve of the Ninth European Development Fund (EDF) envelope for long-term development to the allocation for intra-ACP cooperation in the Ninth EDF envelope for regional cooperation and integration
 (2007/460/EC)
 THE ACP-EC COUNCIL OF MINISTERS,
 Having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) as revised by the Agreement (2) amending the said ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005, and in particular paragraph 8 of Annex I thereto,
 Whereas:
 (1)
 Following the completion of the Ninth European Development Fund (EDF) end-of-term review in accordance with Articles 5 and 11 of Annex IV of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, the resource allocation should be revised in the light of current needs and performance.
 (2)
 The funds reserved for the financing of support for regional cooperation and integration and the expected decommitments transferred to this reserve before the end of 2007 are insufficient to meet new needs for increasing the impact of intra-ACP activities.
 (3)
 Additional funds should be allocated to set up an intra-ACP funding mechanism for FLEX for each of the years 2006 and 2007 (application years 2005 and 2006 respectively), thereby ensuring minimal support to those countries subject to the adverse effects of instability in export earnings regardless of the level of the uncommitted balances under their national B-envelopes.
 (4)
 The uncommitted balances of the national B-envelopes may not cover expected needs and should be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve at the date of adoption of this Decision, to create five regionalised B-envelopes to finance future humanitarian and emergency assistance in each of these regions, based on regional solidarity, and an intra-ACP reserve for emergency assistance under Article 72(3)(a) and (b) of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement in exceptional circumstances where such assistance cannot be financed from the Community budget.
 (5)
 The regionalised B-envelope for Eastern and Southern Africa and the Indian Ocean is a net amount after the deduction of EUR 20 million to compensate for the ad hoc increase in the B-envelope of Sudan funded out of the long-term development reserve; no regionalised B-envelope is being set up for the Pacific as the balances of the B-envelopes have already been used to a large extent for a regional natural disaster mitigation programme.
 (6)
 Additional resources should be allocated to replenish the African Peace Facility for the year 2007.
 (7)
 Additional resources should be allocated to finance part of the running costs of the ACP Secretariat for the year 2008 to bridge the period until the entry into force of the Tenth EDF.
 (8)
 Additional resources should be allocated to reinforce the intra-ACP technical cooperation facility, which is primarily used to cover technical assistance needs, especially for project preparation.
 (9)
 An additional contribution to the Global Fund against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) has been requested.
 (10)
 A need for a further contribution to the Caribbean Knowledge and Learning Network has been identified at the ACP-EC Council of 2 June 2006 for capacity building and institutional support.
 (11)
 A small prudential reserve must be established to be able to meet new and unexpected intra-ACP needs in the period to 31 December 2007, including possible post natural disaster rehabilitation needs in the Pacific region which can be committed before the end of 2007 and cannot be covered by a regionalised B-envelope for unforeseen needs, and to meet possible additional transitional needs in 2008.
 (12)
 Funds under the Ninth EDF, including expected decommitments, can no longer be committed beyond 31 December 2007 and a mechanism has to be found to commit available balances before that date in an efficient and effective way in support of the overall objectives of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement,
 HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
 Article 1
 Replenishment of the intra-ACP reserve in the envelope for regional cooperation and integration
 1. All funds available in the long-term development reserve on 31 March 2007 and adjusted for the results of the end of term decisions which had not yet been processed in the accounts at that date, with the exception of the funds to support the Centre for the Development of Enterprise (CDE) and the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) budgets for 2008 (EUR 32 million), the funds for ‘high risk programmes’ in countries with a signed country strategy paper (EUR 72,4 million as of 1 March 2007), the funds for political priorities in countries without a signed country strategy paper (EUR 30,2 million as of 1 March 2007) and the funds for the Somalia special assistance programme (EUR 36,1 million), shall be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve in the envelope for regional cooperation and integration.
 2. All funds set aside under the reserve to support the CDE and CTA budgets for 2008 to fund ‘high risk programmes’ in countries with a signed country strategy paper and to fund political priorities in countries without a signed country strategy paper as referred to in paragraph 1 that have not been committed by 31 October 2007 shall be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve in the envelope for regional cooperation and integration.
 3. All decommitments from the Ninth EDF and previous EDFs initiated in the accounting system of the Commission as from 1 April until 31 December 2007 which accrue to the long-term development reserve shall be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve in the envelope for regional cooperation and integration.
 4. All remaining funds under the national indicative programmes that become available under the long-term development reserve between 1 August and 31 December 2007 shall be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve in the envelope for regional cooperation and integration.
 Article 2
 Allocation of the intra-ACP funds
 1. The funds available in the intra-ACP reserve shall be used for the following purposes:
 (a)
 setting up:
 (i)
 one intra-ACP reserve open to all ACP States for emergency assistance under Article 72(3)(a) and (b) of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement in exceptional circumstances where such assistance cannot be financed from the Community budget; this envelope shall amount to EUR 26 741 326 and shall be constituted by taking 15 % of the amounts of uncommitted balances remaining in the B-envelopes of the constituent countries of those regions referred to under point (ii) at the date the end-of-term reallocation decisions entered into force;
 (ii)
 five regionalised B-envelopes amounting to EUR 17 511 615 for the Southern African region, EUR 48 920 391 for the region of Eastern and Southern Africa and the Indian Ocean, EUR 31 945 340 for the West African region, EUR 16 139 355 for the Central African region and EUR 35 422 478 for the Caribbean region, based on 85 % of the amounts of uncommitted balances remaining in the B-envelopes of the constituent countries of those regions at the date the end-of-term reallocation decisions entered into force;
 the regionalised B-envelopes shall be mobilised for contributions to internationally agreed debt relief initiatives as provided for in Article 3(2)(b) of Annex IV to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and for humanitarian and emergency assistance in accordance to Articles 72 and 73 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement on the basis of regional solidarity in exceptional circumstances where such assistance cannot be financed from the Community budget;
 (b)
 setting up an intra-ACP FLEX programme of EUR 50 million for 2006 (application year 2005) in order to ensure minimal support to those countries subject to the adverse effects of instability in export earnings regardless of the level of the uncommitted balances under their national B-envelopes before the end-of-term review reallocation decisions entered into force;
 (c)
 replenishing the African Peace Facility for an amount of up to EUR 100 million as a further EDF contribution to bridge the financial gap until the entry into force of the Tenth EDF, for various peace support, training and capacity-building activities, of which EUR 45 million on the basis of the available intra-ACP funds before its replenishment referred to in Article 1 and EUR 35 million after this replenishment, and an additional amount of up to EUR 20 million which may be financed by uncommitted funds from the prudential reserves referred to in points (h) and (i) or by decommitments transferred to the intra-ACP reserve under Article 1(3) and (4) in excess of initial estimates;
 (d)
 complementing the institutional support given to the ACP Secretariat in order to bridge the period until the entry into force of the Tenth EDF with an amount of EUR 5,5 million to contribute to the running costs of the ACP Secretariat for the year 2008;
 (e)
 adding EUR 2,5 million to the intra-ACP technical cooperation facility;
 (f)
 mobilising EUR 4 million as an urgent carry-over of a rinderpest eradication programme in Africa (PACE);
 (g)
 contributing an additional EUR 5 million to the Caribbean Knowledge and Learning Network (CKLN) trust fund for capacity building and institutional support;
 (h)
 setting up a regional prudential reserve of EUR 10 million to supplement the regional indicative programme for the Southern African region in the case of the Milange–Mocuba road upgrading programme (Mozambique) being appraised and passing the management procedure of the EDF Committee before 1 August 2007; if this programme cannot be appraised in time, this prudential reserve shall be transferred to the intra-ACP reserve;
 (i)
 setting up an intra-ACP prudential reserve of EUR 15 million for new and unexpected needs which cannot be funded from the regionalised B-envelopes, including for post natural-disaster rehabilitation programmes in the Pacific region and possible additional priority transitional needs in 2008;
 (j)
 setting up an intra-ACP FLEX programme, provisionally fixed at EUR 35 million for 2007 (application year 2006) in order to ensure minimal support to those countries subject to the adverse effects of instability in export earnings after the regionalisation of the B-envelopes for humanitarian and emergency assistance referred to in paragraph 1(a); this programme may be supplemented by up to EUR 15 million by uncommitted funds from the prudential reserves referred to in points (h) and (i) or by decommitments transferred to the intra-ACP reserve under Article 1(3) and (4) in excess of initial estimates and the need to complement the contribution to the African Peace Facility by EUR 20 million as referred to in point (c);
 (k)
 complementing the support given to the Global Fund against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM) with an amount of EUR 38 million.
 2. Should the amounts accrued to the intra-ACP reserve be insufficient to cover all needs identified, the programme referred to in paragraph 1(j) shall be reduced accordingly. Should the shortfall of funds be larger than the amount referred to in point (j), the prudential reserve referred to in paragraph 1, point (i) shall be reduced accordingly. A further shortfall of funds shall lead to a reduction of the amount referred to in paragraph 1(c).
 3. Should the amounts accrued to the intra-ACP reserve exceed the initial estimates or should funds earmarked under paragraph 1, points (c), (d), (e), (g) and/or (i) be under-used, the additional funds becoming available above the ceiling set for the programmes referred to in paragraph 1, points (c) and (j) will be mobilised to top up the CKLN trust fund with an additional amount of up to EUR 5 million, if feasible, and subsequently, if excess funds are still available, to top up the EU-ACP Infrastructure Trust Fund as an advance on the allocations foreseen under the Tenth EDF.
 Article 3
 Request for support
 In accordance with Article 13(2) of Annex IV of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, the ACP-EC Council of Ministers calls on the Commission to finance the actions laid down in Article 2.
 Article 4
 Entry into force
 This Decision shall enter into force on the day it is adopted.
 Done at Brussels, 25 May 2007.
 For the ACP-EC Council of Ministers
 The President
 Mohlabi K. TSEKOA
 (1) OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.
 (2) OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 27. Agreement provisionally applied pursuant to Decision No 5/2005 (OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 1).