text:
 9.7.2013
 RO
 Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene
 L 188/5
 REGULAMENTUL DE PUNERE ÎN APLICARE (UE) NR. 649/2013 AL COMISIEI
 din 8 iulie 2013
 de derogare de la Regulamentele (CE) nr. 1122/2009 și (UE) nr. 65/2011 în ceea ce privește reducerea cuantumului ajutoarelor în cazul depunerii cu întârziere a cererilor unice pentru pășunile alpine din zonele montane ale Austriei pentru 2013
 COMISIA EUROPEANĂ,
 având în vedere Tratatul privind funcționarea Uniunii Europene,
 având în vedere Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005 al Consiliului din 20 septembrie 2005 privind sprijinul pentru dezvoltare rurală acordat din Fondul european agricol pentru dezvoltare rurală (FEADR) (1), în special articolul 91,
 având în vedere Regulamentul (CE) nr. 73/2009 al Consiliului din 19 ianuarie 2009 de stabilire a unor norme comune pentru sistemele de ajutor direct pentru agricultori în cadrul politicii agricole comune și de instituire a anumitor sisteme de ajutor pentru agricultori, de modificare a Regulamentelor (CE) nr. 1290/2005, (CE) nr. 247/2006, (CE) nr. 378/2007 și de abrogare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1782/2003 (2), în special articolul 142 litera (c),
 întrucât:
 (1)
 Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009 al Comisiei din 30 noiembrie 2009 de stabilire a normelor de aplicare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 73/2009 al Consiliului în ceea ce privește ecocondiționalitatea, modularea și sistemul integrat de administrare și control în cadrul schemelor de ajutor direct pentru agricultori prevăzute de regulamentul respectiv, precum și de aplicare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1234/2007 al Consiliului în ceea ce privește ecocondiționalitatea în cadrul schemei de ajutoare prevăzute pentru sectorul vitivinicol (3) stabilește, la articolul 23 alineatul (1), că, în cazul depunerii cu întârziere a unei cereri de ajutor, precum și a documentelor, a contractelor și a declarațiilor de care depinde eligibilitatea pentru ajutorul respectiv, se aplică anumite reduceri.
 (2)
 În conformitate cu articolul 8 alineatul (3) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011 al Comisiei din 27 ianuarie 2011 de stabilire a normelor de punere în aplicare a Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1698/2005 al Consiliului în ceea ce privește punerea în aplicare a procedurilor de control și a ecocondiționalității în cazul măsurilor de sprijin pentru dezvoltare rurală (4), în cazul cererilor de plată introduse în temeiul părții II titlul I din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011 se aplică, mutatis mutandis, articolele 22 și 23 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009.
 (3)
 Austria a implementat un sistem de cerere unică de ajutor care acoperă, în conformitate cu articolul 19 alineatul (3) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 73/2009, mai multe cereri de plăți directe și anumite cereri de ajutoare acordate în temeiul Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1698/2005.
 (4)
 În conformitate cu articolul 11 alineatul (2) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009 și cu articolul 8 alineatul (1) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011, Austria a stabilit data de 15 mai 2013 ca dată limită până la care pot fi depuse cererile unice aferente anului 2013.
 (5)
 Pentru a permite implementarea sistemului de control, articolul 6 alineatul (1) paragraful al treilea din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009 impune statelor membre să se asigure că parcelele agricole sunt identificate în mod fiabil și să prevadă obligația ca cererea unică să fie însoțită de documentele de identificare a parcelelor.
 (6)
 Pentru a evita deficiențele constatate în trecut în ceea ce privește determinarea suprafeței eligibile a parcelelor agricole, Austria a demarat actualizarea sistemului său de identificare a parcelelor agricole (LPIS) pentru pășunile alpine, conform definiției date de Austria, din zonele montane desemnate în conformitate cu articolul 50 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005.
 (7)
 Austria s-a confruntat cu circumstanțe excepționale din cauza condițiilor meteorologice din timpul sezonului de iarnă 2012-2013, care au împiedicat autoritățile să finalizeze procesul de actualizare a LPIS pentru parcelele agricole de pășune alpină în aceste zone montane înainte de lansarea procesului de depunere a cererilor unice. Vizitele rapide pe teren necesare pentru aceste parcele situate la altitudini mari au fost întârziate de căderile de zăpadă abundente survenite spre sfârșitul sezonului. În consecință, agricultorii care intenționează să depună o cerere unică privind parcelele agricole de pășune alpină vor primi informațiile actualizate cu privire la parcele mai târziu decât era prevăzut.
 (8)
 Această situație a afectat capacitatea solicitanților de a introduce cererile de ajutor unice și cererile de plată referitoare la parcelele agricole de pășune alpină din Austria în termenele prevăzute la articolul 11 alineatul (2) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009 și la articolul 8 alineatul (1) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011.
 (9)
 Din cauza acestor dificultăți, se preconizează că procesul de introducere a cererilor în 2013 va începe mai târziu de data la care a început în anii precedenți pentru agricultorii care dețin parcele agricole de pășune alpină. Informațiile prezentate Comisiei de autoritățile austriece referitor la capacitatea lor de a finaliza procesul de actualizare a LPIS pentru zonele respective arată că este necesară o derogare până la 28 iunie 2013 pentru a permite tuturor agricultorilor și beneficiarilor afectați să își prezinte cererile unice.
 (10)
 Așadar, prin derogare de la articolul 23 alineatul (1) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009, este oportun să nu se aplice reduceri din motive de depunere cu întârziere a cererilor unice în ceea ce privește agricultorii care au depus până la 28 iunie 2013 cel târziu cererile unice privind cel puțin o parcelă agricolă de pășune alpină, conform definiției date de Austria, în zonele montane desemnate în conformitate cu articolul 50 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005.
 (11)
 În mod similar, prin derogare de la articolul 8 alineatul (3) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011 și în ceea ce privește cererile de plată în temeiul părții II titlul I din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011 privind cel puțin o parcelă agricolă de pășune alpină, conform definiției date de Austria, în zonele montane desemnate în conformitate cu articolul 50 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005, este oportun să nu se aplice reduceri pe motive de depunere cu întârziere a cererilor de plată care au fost prezentate până la 28 iunie 2013 cel târziu.
 (12)
 Deoarece derogările ar trebui să se refere la cererile unice de ajutor și la cererile de plată depuse pentru anul 2013, este oportun ca prezentul regulament să se aplice retroactiv.
 (13)
 Măsurile prevăzute în prezentul regulament sunt conforme cu avizul Comitetului pentru dezvoltare rurală și al Comitetului de gestionare a plăților directe,
 ADOPTĂ PREZENTUL REGULAMENT:
 Articolul 1
 Prin derogare de la articolul 23 alineatul (1) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009, în ceea ce privește cererile pentru anul 2013 nu se aplică nicio reducere din motive de depunere cu întârziere a cererilor în cazul agricultorilor care au depus până la 28 iunie 2013 cel târziu o cerere unică privind cel puțin o parcelă agricolă situată pe o pășune alpină, conform definiției date de Austria, în zonele montane desemnate în conformitate cu articolul 50 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005. Astfel de cereri unice depuse după 28 iunie 2013 nu vor fi admise.
 Articolul 2
 Prin derogare de la articolul 8 alineatul (3) din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011, în ceea ce privește cererile de plată pentru anul 2013 în temeiul părții II titlul I din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 65/2011, referitoare la cel puțin o parcelă agricolă situată pe pășuni alpine, conform definiției date de Austria, în zonele montane desemnate în conformitate cu articolul 50 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005, nu se aplică nicio reducere din cele prevăzute la articolul 23 alineatul (1) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1122/2009 pe motive de depunere cu întârziere a cererilor de plată dacă aceste cereri de plată au fost prezentate până la 28 iunie 2013 cel târziu. Astfel de cereri de plată depuse după 28 iunie 2013 nu vor fi admise.
 Articolul 3
 Prezentul regulament intră în vigoare la data publicării în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
 Se aplică de la 1 ianuarie 2013.
 Prezentul regulament este obligatoriu în toate elementele sale și se aplică direct în toate statele membre.
 Adoptat la Bruxelles, 8 iulie 2013.
 Pentru Comisie
 Președintele
 José Manuel BARROSO
 (1) JO L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 1.
 (2) JO L 30, 31.1.2009, p. 16.
 (3) JO L 316, 2.12.2009, p. 65.
 (4) JO L 25, 28.1.2011, p. 8.


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 30.9.2006
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 237/23
 Žaloba podaná dne 10. srpna 2006 – G v. Komise
 (Věc F-96/06)
 (2006/C 237/41)
 Jednací jazyk: francouzština
 Účastníci řízení
 Žalobce: G (Port-Vendres, Francie) (zástupci: B. Cambier a L. Cambier, advokáti)
 Žalovaná: Komise Evropských společenství
 Návrhové žádání žalobce
 —
 určit, že žalovaná je odpovědná za pochybení, kterých se dopustila vůči žalobci;
 —
 uložit žalované, aby žalobci a jeho rodině uhradila prozatímní částku 1 581 801 eur, která odpovídá polovině újmy způsobené všemi pochybeními, kterých se dopustila Komise, její zmocněnci, zaměstnanci nebo jiné instituce, které jí jsou podřízeny, přičemž druhá část musí být upřesněna znalcem;
 —
 uložit žalované, aby uhradila 8 % úrok ze všech výše uvedených částek, a to od 23. listopadu 1999, tedy data, kdy byla ukončena první zpráva o vnitřním vyšetřování vedeném Evropským úřadem pro boj proti podvodům (OLAF), ve které se objevily první náznaky podjatosti vůči žalobci, nebo podpůrně od 29. června 2005, data, ke kterému žalobce podal návrh na náhradu škody podle čl. 90 odst. 1 statutu;
 —
 ustanovit znalce;
 —
 uložit žalované náhradu nákladů řízení.
 Žalobní důvody a hlavní argumenty
 Na podporu své žaloby se žalobce dovolává osmi žalobních důvodů.
 V prvním vytýká Komisi, že ho začlenila do věci „Berthelot“ a považovala ho za hlavního strůjce v této věci, třebaže veškerá tato obvinění jsou nepravdivá a neexistuje sebemenší důkaz, na kterém by se taková obvinění vůči žalobci mohla zakládat. Komise tím nesplnila svoji povinnost péče a řádné správy a porušila legitimní očekávání žalobce.
 Ve druhém žalobním důvodu žalobce vytýká Komisi, že vážně zasáhla do jeho práv obhajoby všemi nesplněními povinností a nedostatky ve správních šetřeních spojených s věcí „Berthelot“, které nebyly vedeny nestranně.
 Ve třetím žalobním důvodu žalobce uplatňuje porušení povinnosti zachovávat důvěrnost tím, že v průběhu roku 2000 umožnila Komise novinářům vstup do kanceláří OLAF a seznámení se s důvěrnými dokumenty týkajícími se žalobce, aby některé odvysílali v televizním pořadu.
 Ve čtvrtém žalobním důvodu žalobce kritizuje rozhodnutí Komise zrušit jeho soudní imunitu.
 V pátém žalobním důvodu žalobce vytýká Komisi, že ho přeložila na pracovní místo hlavního poradce na generálním ředitelství „Technologický výzkum a vývoj“ nikoliv v zájmu služby nebo na základě politiky mobility tohoto orgánu, ale na základě zastřené disciplinární sankce.
 V šestém žalobním důvodu, týkajícím se řízení o uznání nemoci z povolání (článek 73 služebního řádu), žalobce zpochybňuje rozhodnutí Komise o okamžitém vyloučení možnosti pracovního úrazu a o předání jeho spisu Disciplinárnímu a vyšetřovacímu úřadu Komise (IDOC), aby provedl správní šetření za účelem stanovení původu jeho nemoci.
 V sedmém žalobním důvodu žalobce uplatňuje nezávislost řízení řídících se články 73 a 78 služebního řádu a zpochybňuje rozhodnutí Výboru pro otázky invalidity Komise definitivně přerušit řízení zahájené podle čl. 78 odst. 5 služebního řádu, dokud nebude přijato rozhodnutí na základě článku 73 služebního řádu.
 V osmém žalobním důvodu žalobce kritizuje skutečnost, že proti němu bylo zahájeno, a stále pokračuje, disciplinární řízení, třebaže skutkové prvky základu tohoto řízení byly belgickými soudy v rámci trestního řízení vedenému proti němu prohlášeny za neopodstatněné.
 Žalobce dochází k závěru, že výše uvedená pochybení Komise jsou příčinou jeho nervové deprese, která jej donutila předčasně ukončit jeho kariéru úředníka. Tato okolnost způsobila majetkovou a nemajetkovou újmu jak jemu samotnému, tak i jeho rodině.


type: other

text:
Faith (Valiant Entertainment) Vol 2 #3 Cover B Variant Marguerite Sauvage Cover - Midtown Comics
 Faith (Valiant Entertainment) Vol 2 #3
 Item #: 1560261 Diamond code: JUL162063 UPC: 85899200338300321
 Choose Qty for Faith (Valiant Entertainment) Vol 2 #3 Cover B Variant Marguerite Sauvage Cover -Remove- 1 In Cart 2 In Cart 3 In Cart 4 In Cart 5 In Cart 6 In Cart 7 In Cart 8 In Cart 9 In Cart 10 In Cart 11 In Cart 12 In Cart 13 In Cart 14 In Cart 15 In Cart 16 In Cart 17 In Cart 18 In Cart 19 In Cart 20 In Cart 21 In Cart 22 In Cart 23 In Cart 24 In Cart 25 In Cart


text:
 15.2.2014
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 45/35
 Žaloba podaná dne 4. listopadu 2013 — Real Express v. OHIM — MIP Metro (real)
 (Věc T-580/13)
 2014/C 45/61
 Jazyk, ve kterém byla podána žaloba: angličtina
 Účastníci řízení
 Žalobkyně: Real Express Srl (Bukurešť, Rumunsko) (zástupce: C. Anitoae, advokát)
 Žalovaný: Úřad pro harmonizaci na vnitřním trhu (ochranné známky a vzory)
 Další účastnice řízení před odvolacím senátem: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Německo)
 Návrhová žádání
 Žalobkyně navrhuje, aby Tribunál:
 —
 zrušil rozhodnutí čtvrtého odvolacího senátu Úřadu pro harmonizaci na vnitřním trhu (ochranné známky a vzory) (OHIM) ze dne 16. září 2013 ve věci R 1519/2012-4;
 —
 uložil žalovanému a další účastnici řízení před odvolacím senátem náhradu nákladu řízení.
 Žalobní důvody a hlavní argumenty
 Přihlašovatelka ochranné známky Společenství: další účastnice řízení před odvolacím senátem
 Dotčená ochranná známka Společenství: obrazová ochranná známka v modré a červené barvě obsahující slovní prvek „real“ pro výrobky a služby zařazené do tříd 3 a 35 — přihláška ochranné známky Společenství č. 9 512 609
 Majitelka ochranné známky nebo označení namítaných v námitkovém řízení: žalobkyně
 Namítaná ochranná známka nebo označení: rumunské ochranné známky č. 38 089 a 80 065
 Rozhodnutí námitkového oddělení: zamítnutí námitky v plném rozsahu
 Rozhodnutí odvolacího senátu: zamítnutí odvolání
 Dovolávané žalobní důvody: porušení čl. 8 odst. 1 písm. b) nařízení o ochranné známce Společenství.


text:
 10.12.2011
 SV
 Europeiska unionens officiella tidning
 C 362/20
 Talan väckt den 10 oktober 2011 — Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian mot harmoniseringsbyrån — Gulbenkian (GULBENKIAN)
 (Mål T-541/11)
 2011/C 362/31
 Rättegångsspråk: engelska
 Parter
 Sökande: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian (Lissabon, Portugal) (ombud: advokaterna G. Marín Raigal, P. López Ronda och G. Macias Bonilla)
 Svarande: Byrån för harmonisering inom den inre marknaden (varumärken, mönster och modeller)
 Motpart vid överklagandenämnden: Micael Gulbenkian (Oeiras, Portugal)
 Yrkanden
 Sökandena yrkar att tribunalen ska
 —
 ogiltigförklara det beslut som harmoniseringsbyråns andra överklagandenämnd fattade den 15 juli 2011 i ärende R 1436/2010-2,
 —
 pröva och beakta de handlingar som gavs in under invändningsförfarandet och handläggningen av överklagandet vid harmoniseringsbyrån avseende det äldre märkets renommé, eller förplikta svaranden att fatta ett nytt beslut med beaktande av dessa handlingar,
 —
 bifalla sökandens invändning i dess helhet,
 —
 förplikta harmoniseringsbyrån att slutligt avslå det omtvistade gemenskapsordmärket GULBENKIAN nr 4724647 i dess helhet för alla varor och tjänster som anges i klasserna 4, 33, 35, 36, 37, 41, 42 och 44,
 —
 förplikta svaranden att ersätta sökandens rättegångskostnader i förfarandena, och
 —
 förplikta intervenienten, för det fall denna inställer sig inför tribunalen, att ersätta rättegångskostnaderna i nu aktuellt förfarande och dem som sökanden har haft vid harmoniseringsbyrån (invändning och överklagande).
 Grunder och huvudargument
 Sökande av gemenskapsvarumärke: Motpart vid överklagandenämnden
 Sökt gemenskapsvarumärke: Ordmärket GULBENKIAN för bland annat varor och tjänster i klasserna 4, 33, 35, 36, 37 och 42 — ansökan som gemenskapsvarumärke nr 4724647
 Innehavare av det varumärke eller kännetecken som åberopats som hinder för registrering i invändningsförfarandet: Sökanden
 Varumärke eller kännetecken som åberopats: Det i Portugal välkända varumärket Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian för ”konst (plastik och musik), välgörenhet (hälsa och mänsklig utveckling), vetenskap (forskning och främjande), utbildning (stöd och utveckling), stöd- och förvaltningstjänster som har samband med oljeindustrin”, firman Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian för ”konst (plastik och musik), välgörenhet (hälsa och mänsklig utveckling), vetenskap (forskning och främjande), utbildning (stöd och utveckling), stöd- och förvaltningstjänster som har samband med oljeindustrin”, logotyper nr 5351 och 5352 Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian för ”konst (plastik och musik), välgörenhet (hälsa och mänsklig utveckling), vetenskap (forskning och främjande), utbildning (stöd och utveckling), stöd- och förvaltningstjänster som har samband med oljeindustrin”.
 Invändningsenhetens beslut: Delvist bifall till invändningen
 Överklagandenämndens beslut: Delvis upphävning av invändningsenhetens beslut och avslag på överklagandet i övrigt
 Grunder: Åsidosättande av artikel 8.1 b, 8.4 och 8.5 i rådets förordning nr 207/2009, och tillämplig rättspraxis, eftersom överklagandenämnden gjorde en oriktig bedömning av de olika omständigheter den hade att beakta vid prövningen av risken för förväxling.


type: legislation

text:
 19.10.2018
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 L 262/24
 IZVEDBENA UREDBA KOMISIJE (EU) 2018/1565
 z dne 17. oktobra 2018
 o izdaji dovoljenja za pripravek iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088), kot krmni dodatek za pitovne piščance, piščance za nesnice in manj pomembne vrste perutnine razen nesnic, pitovne purane, purane za razplod, odstavljene pujske, prašiče pitance in manj pomembne vrste prašičev (imetnik dovoljenja Elanco GmbH)
 (Besedilo velja za EGP)
 EVROPSKA KOMISIJA JE –
 ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije,
 ob upoštevanju Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (ES) št. 1831/2003 z dne 22. septembra 2003 o dodatkih za uporabo v prehrani živali (1) in zlasti člena 9(2) Uredbe,
 ob upoštevanju naslednjega:
 (1)
 Uredba (ES) št. 1831/2003 določa izdajo dovoljenj za dodatke za uporabo v prehrani živali ter razloge in postopke za izdajo takih dovoljenj.
 (2)
 V skladu s členom 7 Uredbe (ES) št. 1831/2003 je bil vložen zahtevek za izdajo dovoljenja za pripravek iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088). V skladu s členom 7(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1831/2003 so bili navedenemu zahtevku priloženi zahtevani podatki in dokumenti.
 (3)
 Navedeni zahtevek zadeva dovoljenje za pripravek iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088), kot krmni dodatek za pitovne piščance, piščance za nesnice in manj pomembne vrste perutnine razen nesnic, pitovne purane, purane za razplod, odstavljene pujske, prašiče pitance in manj pomembne vrste prašičev ter njihovo uvrstitev v kategorijo dodatkov „zootehnični dodatki“.
 (4)
 Evropska agencija za varnost hrane (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Agencija) je v mnenjih z dne 7. decembra 2016 (2) in 17. aprila 2018 (3) navedla, da pripravek iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088), pod predlaganimi pogoji uporabe nima škodljivega učinka na zdravje živali in ljudi ali na okolje. Agencija je tudi navedla, da je dodatek lahko učinkovit za pitovne piščance, pitovne purane in odstavljene pujske, prašiče pitance in manj pomembne vrste prašičev. Agencija je navedla, da se lahko te ugotovitve razširijo na piščance za nesnice in purane za razplod ter da se lahko ekstrapolirajo na manj pomembne vrste perutnine za pitanje ali za razplod ali za nesnice. Agencija meni, da ni potrebe po posebnih zahtevah v zvezi s poprodajnim nadzorom. Potrdila je tudi poročilo o analizni metodi krmnega dodatka v krmi, ki ga je predložil referenčni laboratorij, ustanovljen z Uredbo (ES) št. 1831/2003.
 (5)
 Ocena pripravka iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088), je pokazala, da so pogoji za izdajo dovoljenja iz člena 5 Uredbe (ES) št. 1831/2003 izpolnjeni. Zato bi bilo treba dovoliti uporabo navedenega pripravka, kakor je opredeljena v Prilogi k tej uredbi.
 (6)
 Ukrepi iz te uredbe so v skladu z mnenjem Stalnega odbora za rastline, živali, hrano in krmo –
 SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
 Člen 1
 Pripravek iz Priloge, ki spada v kategorijo dodatkov „zootehnični dodatki“ in funkcionalno skupino „pospeševalci prebavljivosti“, se dovoli kot dodatek v prehrani živali v skladu s pogoji iz navedene priloge.
 Člen 2
 Ta uredba začne veljati dvajseti dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
 Ta uredba je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
 V Bruslju, 17. oktobra 2018
 Za Komisijo
 Predsednik
 Jean-Claude JUNCKER
 (1) UL L 268, 18.10.2003, str. 29.
 (2) EFSA Journal 2017;15(1):4677.
 (3) EFSA Journal 2018;16(5):5270.
 PRILOGA
 Identifikacijska številka dodatka
 Ime imetnika dovoljenja
 Dodatek
 Sestava, kemijska formula, opis, analizna metoda
 Vrsta ali kategorija živali
 Najvišja starost
 Najnižja vsebnost
 Najvišja vsebnost
 Druge določbe
 Datum poteka veljavnosti dovoljenja
 Enote aktivnosti/kg popolne krmne mešanice z vsebnostjo vlage 12 %
 Kategorija zootehničnih dodatkov. Funkcionalna skupina: pospeševalci prebavljivosti
 4a29
 Elanco GmbH
 endo-1,4-beta-mananaza
 ES 3.2.1.78
 Sestava dodatka
 Pripravek iz endo-1,4-beta-mananaze, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088), z najmanjšo aktivnostjo:
 —
 1,6 × 108 U (1)/g v trdni obliki;
 —
 5,9 × 108 U/g v tekoči obliki.
 Lastnosti aktivne snovi
 Endo-1,4-beta-mananaza, ki jo proizvaja Paenibacillus lentus (DSM 28088).
 Analizne metode
 (2)
 Za določanje količine endo-1,4-beta-mananaze v krmnem dodatku, premiksih in krmi:
 kolorimetrična metoda, ki temelji na encimski hidrolizi in reakciji reducirajočih sladkorjev (ekvivalentov manoze) s 3,5-dinitrosalicilno kislino (DNS).
 pitovni piščanci
 piščanci za nesnice
 manjše vrste perutnine razen nesnic
 —
 32 000 U
 —
 1.
 V navodilih za uporabo dodatka in premiksov se navedejo pogoji skladiščenja in obstojnost pri toplotni obdelavi.
 2.
 Nosilci dejavnosti poslovanja s krmo zaradi morebitnih tveganj, ki izhajajo iz uporabe dodatka in premiksov, za uporabnike določijo postopke varnega ravnanja in organizacijske ukrepe. Kadar navedenih tveganj s takimi postopki in ukrepi ni mogoče odpraviti ali čim bolj zmanjšati, se dodatek in premiksi uporabljajo z osebno zaščitno opremo, vključno z zaščito za kožo in dihala.
 3.
 Za uporabo pri odstavljenih pujskih do približno 35 kg.
 8. november 2028
 pitovni purani
 purani za razplod
 48 000 U
 odstavljeni pujski
 48 000 U
 prašiči pitanci
 manj pomembne vrste prašičev za pitanje
 32 000 U
 (1) 1 U je količina encima, ki sprosti 0,72 mikrograma reducirajočih sladkorjev (ekvivalentov manoze) iz substrata, ki vsebuje manan (gum iz zrn rožičevca), na minuto pri pH 7,0 in 40 °C.
 (2) Podrobnosti o analiznih metodah so na voljo na naslednjem naslovu referenčnega laboratorija za krmne dodatke: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/eurl/feed-additives/evaluation-reports.


text:
 EIROPAS KOMISIJA
 Briselē, 30.3.2017
 COM(2017) 150 final
 2017/0068(COD)
 Priekšlikums
 EIROPAS PARLAMENTA UN PADOMES REGULA,
 ar ko attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu nosaka tiešo maksājumu korekcijas likmi, kura paredzēta Regulā (ES) Nr. 1306/2013
 PASKAIDROJUMA RAKSTS
 1.PRIEKŠLIKUMA KONTEKSTS
 Līgumā par Eiropas Savienības darbību ir paredzēts pamatnoteikums attiecībā uz Savienības finansējumu, proti, Savienības gada budžetam ir jāatbilst daudzgadu finanšu shēmai (DFS).
 Lai atbalstītu lauksaimniecības nozari gadījumos, kad smagas krīzes ietekmē lauksaimniecisko ražošanu vai lauksaimniecības produktu izplatīšanu, būtu jāizveido rezerve krīzes situācijām, katra gada sākumā ar finanšu disciplīnas mehānismu, kas paredzēts 26. pantā Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 17. decembra Regulā (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 par kopējās lauksaimniecības politikas finansēšanu, pārvaldību un uzraudzību
 1
 , piemērojot samazinājumu tiešajiem maksājumiem. Minētās regulas 25. pantā noteikts, ka krīzes situācijām lauksaimniecības nozarē paredzētās rezerves kopējā summa 2014.–2020. gada periodam ir EUR 2800 miljoni ar vienādām ikgadējām iemaksām EUR 400 miljonu apmērā (2011. gada cenās), un to iekļauj daudzgadu finanšu shēmas 2. izdevumu kategorijā. Komisijas 2018. gada budžeta projektā iekļaujamās rezerves apjoms ir EUR 459,5 miljoni faktiskajās cenās, un to sedz, samazinot tiešos maksājumus, kuri uzskaitīti I pielikumā Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 17. decembra Regulā (ES) Nr. 1307/2013, ar ko izveido noteikumus par lauksaimniekiem paredzētiem tiešajiem maksājumiem, kurus veic saskaņā ar kopējās lauksaimniecības politikas atbalsta shēmām
 2
 .
 Turklāt, lai nodrošinātu to, ka kopējās lauksaimniecības politikas (KLP) finansēšanai paredzētās summas atbilst gada maksimālajām apakšsummām, kas ar tirgu saistītiem izdevumiem un tiešajiem maksājumiem 2. izdevumu kategorijā noteiktas Padomes 2013. gada 2. decembra Regulā (ES, Euratom) Nr. 1311/2013, ar ko nosaka daudzgadu finanšu shēmu 2014.–2020. gadam
 3
 , finanšu disciplīnas mehānisms jāpiemēro tad, ja prognozes par tiešo maksājumu un ar tirgu saistīto izdevumu finansēšanu liecina, ka tiks pārsniegtas 2. izdevumu kategorijas gada maksimālās apakšsummas, kas noteiktas daudzgadu finanšu shēmā un pielāgotas ar finanšu pārvietojumiem starp Eiropas Lauksaimniecības garantiju fondu (ELGF) un Eiropas Lauksaimniecības fondu lauku attīstībai (ELFLA). Neto atlikums, kas pieejams ELGF izdevumu finansēšanai 2018. gadā, ir noteikts ar Komisijas Īstenošanas regulu (ES) 2016/257
 4
 saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 16. pantu, un tā apjoms ir EUR 44 162 miljoni.
 Sagatavojot 2018. gada budžeta projektu, pirmās budžeta aplēses par tiešajiem maksājumiem un ar tirgu saistītajiem izdevumiem liecināja, ka neto atlikums, kas pieejams ELGF izdevumu finansēšanai 2018. gadā, visticamāk, pārsniegts netiks, tātad turpmāka finanšu disciplīna nav vajadzīga.
 Pamatojoties uz iepriekšminēto, Komisija ir sagatavojusi priekšlikumu par tiešo maksājumu korekcijas likmi attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu, kura saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. panta 3. punktu Eiropas Parlamentam un Padomei ir jāpieņem līdz 2017. gada 30. jūnijam. Ja korekcijas likme līdz 2017. gada 30. jūnijam nav noteikta, saskaņā ar minēto pantu attiecīgo likmi nosaka Komisija.
 2.JURIDISKAIS PAMATS, SUBSIDIARITĀTE UN PROPORCIONALITĀTE
 Šajā priekšlikumā ir noteikta finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas procentu likme 2017. kalendārajam gadam.
 Ņemot vērā to, ka attiecībā uz tiešajiem maksājumiem dalībvalstīm ir iespēja veikt novēlotus maksājumus lauksaimniekiem ārpus regulējumā noteiktā tiešo maksājumu perioda, un to, ka finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likme dažādos kalendārajos gados mainās, finanšu disciplīnai nevajadzētu atšķirīgi ietekmēt lauksaimniekiem piešķiramo tiešo maksājumu apjomu atkarībā no tā, kad dalībvalstis ir veikušas maksājumu lauksaimniekiem. Tātad, lai nodrošinātu vienlīdzīgu attieksmi pret lauksaimniekiem, korekcijas likmi vajadzētu piemērot tikai tām tiešo maksājumu summām, kuras lauksaimniekiem piešķiramas saskaņā ar 2017. kalendārajā gadā iesniegtajiem atbalsta pieteikumiem, neatkarīgi no tā, kad faktiski veikts maksājums lauksaimniekam.
 Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 8. panta 1. punktā noteikts, ka korekcijas likmi piemēro tikai tiem tiešajiem maksājumiem, kas pārsniedz EUR 2000. Horvātijā 2017. kalendārajā gadā notiek pakāpeniska tiešo maksājumu ieviešana. Tāpēc šai dalībvalstij finanšu disciplīnu nepiemēro.
 3.EX POST IZVĒRTĒJUMU, APSPRIEŠANĀS AR IEINTERESĒTAJĀM PERSONĀM UN IETEKMES NOVĒRTĒJUMU REZULTĀTI
 Ar šo priekšlikumu īsteno noteikumus, kas paredzēti Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. pantā un Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 8. pantā. Iepriekšēja apspriešanās ar ieinteresētajām personām un ietekmes novērtējuma sagatavošana nebija nepieciešama.
 4.IETEKME UZ BUDŽETU
 Finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likmes aprēķināšana ir daļa no 2018. gada budžeta projekta sagatavošanas procesa.
 Summa, kas paredzēta rezervei krīzes situācijām lauksaimniecības nozarē un ko paredzēts iekļaut Komisijas 2018. gada budžeta projektā, ir EUR 459,5 miljoni faktiskajās cenās. Pirmās aplēses par budžeta apropriācijām tiešajiem maksājumiem un ar tirgu saistītajiem izdevumiem liecināja, ka ELGF 2018. gada izdevumu finansēšanai pieejamais neto atlikums, visticamāk, pārsniegts netiks.
 Tātad kopējais samazinājums, kas izriet no finanšu disciplīnas piemērošanas, ir EUR 459,5 miljoni. Finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likme procentos ir 1,388149 %. Likme aprēķināta, ņemot vērā, ka tā piemērojama tikai tādām tiešo maksājumu summām, kas pārsniedz EUR 2000 vienam lauksaimniekam, un ne Horvātijā.
 Piemērojot šo korekcijas likmi, samazināsies tiešo maksājumu summas budžeta pozīcijās, kas aptver izdevumus saistībā ar atbalsta pieteikumiem, kurus lauksaimnieki iesnieguši attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu (2018. finanšu gads).
 5.CITI ELEMENTI
 Papildus korekcijas likmei, kas noteikta šajā regulā, Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. panta 4. punktā Komisijai ir dota iespēja pieņemt arī īstenošanas aktus, ar kuriem šo likmi pielāgo, pamatojoties uz tās rīcībā esošu jaunu informāciju. Komisija, 2017. gada oktobrī gatavojot 2018. gada budžeta projekta grozījumu vēstuli, pārskatīs savas prognozes par tiešajiem maksājumiem un ar tirgu saistītajiem izdevumiem un – vajadzības gadījumā – līdz 2017. gada 1. decembrim pieņems korekcijas likmes pielāgojumu.
 2017/0068 (COD)
 Priekšlikums
 EIROPAS PARLAMENTA UN PADOMES REGULA,
 ar ko attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu nosaka tiešo maksājumu korekcijas likmi, kura paredzēta Regulā (ES) Nr. 1306/2013
 EIROPAS PARLAMENTS UN EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS PADOME,
 ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Savienības darbību un jo īpaši tā 43. panta 2. punktu,
 ņemot vērā Eiropas Komisijas priekšlikumu,
 pēc leģislatīvā akta projekta nosūtīšanas valstu parlamentiem,
 ņemot vērā Eiropas Ekonomikas un sociālo lietu komitejas atzinumu
 5
 ,
 saskaņā ar parasto likumdošanas procedūru,
 tā kā:
 (1)
 Atbilstīgi Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013
 6
 25. pantam rezerve, kas paredzēta, lai lauksaimniecības nozarei sniegtu papildu atbalstu tādu nopietnu krīžu gadījumā, kuras ietekmē lauksaimniecisko ražošanu vai lauksaimniecības produktu izplatīšanu, izveidojama, katra gada sākumā ar tās pašas regulas 26. pantā minēto finanšu disciplīnas mehānismu piemērojot samazinājumu tiešajiem maksājumiem.
 (2)
 Kā paredzēts Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. panta 1. punktā, lai nodrošinātu Padomes Regulā (ES, Euratom) Nr. 1311/2013
 7
 noteikto maksimālo gada apjomu ievērošanu attiecībā uz finansējumu ar tirgu saistītiem izdevumiem un tiešajiem maksājumiem, tiešo maksājumu korekcijas likme jānosaka tad, ja prognozes attiecībā uz to pasākumu finansējumu, kuriem jāiekļaujas minētajā maksimālajā apakšapjomā konkrētajā finanšu gadā, liecina, ka maksimāli pieļaujamais gada apjoms tiks pārsniegts.
 (3)
 Summa, kas paredzēta rezervei krīzes situācijām lauksaimniecības nozarē un ko plānots iekļaut Komisijas 2018. gada budžeta projektā, ir EUR 459,5 miljoni faktiskajās cenās. Lai segtu minēto summu, finanšu disciplīnas mehānisms ir jāpiemēro tiešajiem maksājumiem, kurus attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu veic saskaņā ar Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013
 8
 I pielikumā uzskaitītajām atbalsta shēmām.
 (4)
 Sākotnējās prognozes par tiešajiem maksājumiem un ar tirgu saistītajiem izdevumiem, kas jānosaka Komisijas 2018. gada budžeta projektā, liecina, ka turpmāka finanšu disciplīna nav vajadzīga.
 (5)
 Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. panta 2. punktā prasīts, lai Komisija priekšlikumu par korekcijas likmi iesniedz Eiropas Parlamentam un Padomei ne vēlāk kā tā kalendārā gada 31. martā, uz kuru attiecas minētā korekcijas likme.
 (6)
 Parasti lauksaimnieki, kuri iesniedz tiešo maksājumu atbalsta pieteikumu par kalendāro gadu (N), maksājumu saņem noteiktā maksājumu periodā, kas ir finanšu gadā (N+1). Tomēr dalībvalstis zināmās robežās var veikt novēlotus maksājumus lauksaimniekiem pēc minētā maksājumu perioda. Šādus novēlotus maksājumus var veikt turpmākā finanšu gadā. Piemērojot finanšu disciplīnu konkrētam kalendārajam gadam, korekcijas likme nebūtu jāpiemēro maksājumiem, attiecībā uz kuriem atbalsta pieteikumi ir iesniegti citos kalendārajos gados, nevis kalendārajā gadā, kuram piemēro finanšu disciplīnu. Tāpēc, lai nodrošinātu vienlīdzīgu attieksmi pret lauksaimniekiem, ir lietderīgi noteikt, ka korekcijas likme ir jāpiemēro tikai tiem maksājumiem, attiecībā uz kuriem atbalsta pieteikumi ir iesniegti kalendārajā gadā, kuram piemēro finanšu disciplīnu, neatkarīgi no tā, kad tiek veikts maksājums lauksaimniekiem.
 (7)
 Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 8. panta 1. punktā noteikts, ka tiešajiem maksājumiem piemērotā korekcijas likme, kura noteikta saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. pantu, ir jāpiemēro tikai tiem tiešajiem maksājumiem, kas pārsniedz EUR 2 000 un kas jāpiešķir lauksaimniekiem attiecīgajā kalendārajā gadā. Turklāt Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 8. panta 2. punktā paredzēts, ka pakāpeniskas tiešo maksājumu ieviešanas rezultātā korekcijas likmi Horvātijai piemēro tikai no 2022. gada 1. janvāra. Tāpēc korekcijas likme, kas jānosaka ar šo regulu, nebūtu jāpiemēro maksājumiem, kurus saņem lauksaimnieki minētajā dalībvalstī.
 (8)
 Saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 26. panta 4. punktu Komisija līdz 2017. gada 1. decembrim, balstoties uz tās rīcībā esošu jaunu informāciju, var pielāgot šajā regulā noteikto korekcijas likmi,
 IR PIEŅĒMUŠI ŠO REGULU.
 1. pants
 1.Lai saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 25. un 26. pantu noteiktu korekcijas likmi, saskaņā ar Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 8. panta 1. punktu tiešo maksājumu summas, kas piešķiramas lauksaimniekiem atbilstīgi Regulas (ES) Nr. 1307/2013 I pielikumā uzskaitītajām atbalsta shēmām un pārsniedz EUR 2000 par atbalsta pieteikumu, kurš iesniegts attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu, samazina ar korekcijas likmi 1,388149 %.
 2.Šā panta 1. punktā minētais samazinājums neattiecas uz Horvātiju.
 2. pants
 Šī regula stājas spēkā septītajā dienā pēc tās publicēšanas Eiropas Savienības Oficiālajā Vēstnesī.
 Šī regula uzliek saistības kopumā un ir tieši piemērojama visās dalībvalstīs.
 Briselē,
 Eiropas Parlamenta vārdā –
 Padomes vārdā –
 priekšsēdētājs
 priekšsēdētājs
 FINANŠU PĀRSKATS
 FS/17/RB/
 6.15.2017.1
 DATUMS:
 1.
 BUDŽETA POZĪCIJA
 Budžeta sākotnējā prognoze pēc finanšu disciplīnas:
 05 03 Tiešie maksājumi*
 * pirms ir ņemti vērā piešķirtie ieņēmumi
 APROPRIĀCIJAS
 (miljonos EUR)
 41747
 2.
 NOSAUKUMS
 Priekšlikums
 EIROPAS PARLAMENTA UN PADOMES REGULAI, ar ko attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu nosaka tiešo maksājumu korekcijas likmi, kura paredzēta Regulā (ES) Nr. 1306/2013
 3.
 JURIDISKAIS PAMATS
 Līguma par Eiropas Savienības darbību 43. panta 2. punkts
 4.
 MĒRĶI
 Ar šo regulu nosaka finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likmi, kura jāpiemēro tādu tiešo maksājumu summām, kas jāpiešķir lauksaimniekiem, pārsniedzot EUR 2000 par atbalsta pieteikumiem, kuri iesniegti attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu.
 5.
 FINANSIĀLĀ IETEKME
 12 MĒNEŠU PERIODS
 (miljonos EUR)
 KĀRTĒJAIS FINANŠU GADS
 2017
 (miljonos EUR)
 NĀKAMAIS FINANŠU GADS
 2018
 (miljonos EUR)
 5.0.
 IZDEVUMI
 -
 KO SEDZ NO ES BUDŽETA
 (KOMPENSĀCIJAS/INTERVENCES PASĀKUMI)
 -
 VALSTU IESTĀDĒM
 -
 CITI
 - 459,5
 + 459,5
 nepiemēro
 - 459,5
 + 459,5
 5.1.
 IEŅĒMUMI
 -
 ES PAŠU RESURSI
 (MAKSĀJUMI/MUITAS NODOKĻI)
 -
 VALSTS
 2017
 2018
 2019
 2020
 5.0.1.
 PAREDZAMIE IZDEVUMI
 5.1.1.
 PAREDZAMIE IEŅĒMUMI
 5.2.
 APRĒĶINA METODE
 Skatīt piezīmes
 6.0.
 VAI PROJEKTU VAR FINANSĒT NO APROPRIĀCIJĀM, KAS IERAKSTĪTAS KĀRTĒJĀ BUDŽETA ATTIECĪGAJĀ NODAĻĀ?
 nepiemēro
 6.1.
 VAI PROJEKTU VAR FINANSĒT, VEICOT KĀRTĒJĀ BUDŽETA STARPNODAĻU PĀRVIETOJUMUS?
 nepiemēro
 6.2.
 VAI BŪS VAJADZĪGS PAPILDU BUDŽETS?
 NĒ
 6.3.
 VAI APROPRIĀCIJAS BŪS JĀIERAKSTA NĀKAMO GADU BUDŽETOS?
 NĒ
 PIEZĪMES
 Finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likmes aprēķināšana ir daļa no 2018. gada budžeta projekta sagatavošanas procesa.
 Summa, kas paredzēta rezervei krīzes situācijām lauksaimniecības nozarē un ko paredzēts iekļaut Komisijas 2018. gada budžeta projektā, ir EUR 459,5 miljoni faktiskajās cenās. Pirmās aplēses par budžeta apropriācijām tiešajiem maksājumiem un ar tirgu saistītajiem izdevumiem liecina, ka ELGF 2018. gada izdevumu finansēšanai pieejamais neto atlikums, visticamāk, pārsniegts netiks.
 Tātad kopējais samazinājums, kas izriet no finanšu disciplīnas piemērošanas, ir EUR 459,5 miljoni. Finanšu disciplīnas korekcijas likme procentos ir 1,388149 %. Likme ir aprēķināta, ņemot vērā, ka tā piemērojama tikai summām, kas pārsniedz EUR 2000, un katrai dalībvalstij, izņemot Horvātiju. Tā kā Horvātijā 2017. kalendārajā gadā tiek pakāpeniski ieviesti tiešie maksājumi, finanšu disciplīnu šai dalībvalstij nepiemēros.
 Piemērojot šo korekcijas likmi, samazināsies tiešo maksājumu summas budžeta pozīcijās, kas aptver izdevumus saistībā ar atbalsta pieteikumiem, kurus lauksaimnieki iesnieguši attiecībā uz 2017. kalendāro gadu (2018. finanšu gads).
 Ierosinātajai regulai ir ietekme uz budžetu, jo pirmās aplēses par budžeta apropriācijām tiešajiem maksājumiem (pirms ņemta vērā finanšu disciplīna) ir samazinātas par EUR 459,5 miljoniem pēc tam, kad piemērota šajā regulas projektā ierosinātā korekcijas likme. Tāpēc 05 03. nodaļai (Tiešie maksājumi) pieprasītās apropriācijas, ko paredzēts iekļaut 2018. gada budžeta projektā, nodrošina rezerves summas izveidošanu krīzes situācijām lauksaimniecībā.
 (1)
 OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 549. lpp.
 (2)
 OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 608. lpp.
 (3)
 OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 884. lpp.
 (4)
 Komisijas 2016. gada 24. februāra Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2016/257, ar kuru groza Komisijas Īstenošanas regulu (ES) Nr. 367/2014, ar ko nosaka neto atlikumu, kas pieejams ELGF izmaksu finansēšanai (OV L 49, 25.2.2016., 1. lpp.).
 (5)
 OV C [...], [...], [...]. lpp.
 (6)
 Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 17. decembra Regula (ES) Nr. 1306/2013 par kopējās lauksaimniecības politikas finansēšanu, pārvaldību un uzraudzību un Padomes Regulu (EEK) Nr. 352/78, (EK) Nr. 165/94, (EK) Nr. 2799/98, (EK) Nr. 814/2000, (EK) Nr. 1290/2005 un (EK) Nr. 485/2008 atcelšanu (OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 549. lpp.).
 (7)
 Padomes 2013. gada 2. decembra Regula (ES, Euratom) Nr. 1311/2013, ar ko nosaka daudzgadu finanšu shēmu 2014.–2020. gadam (OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 884. lpp.).
 (8)
 Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes 2013. gada 17. decembra Regula (ES) Nr. 1307/2013, ar ko izveido noteikumus par lauksaimniekiem paredzētiem tiešajiem maksājumiem, kurus veic saskaņā ar kopējās lauksaimniecības politikas atbalsta shēmām, un ar ko atceļ Padomes Regulu (EK) Nr. 637/2008 un Padomes Regulu (EK) Nr. 73/2009 (OV L 347, 20.12.2013., 608. lpp.).


text:
 18.6.2011
 ES
 Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea
 C 179/2
 Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia (Gran Sala) de 12 de abril de 2011 (petición de decisión prejudicial planteada por la Cour de cassation — Francia) — DHL Express France SAS, anteriormente DHL International SA/Chronopost SA
 (Asunto C-235/09) (1)
 (Propiedad intelectual - Marca comunitaria - Reglamento (CE) no 40/94 - Artículo 98, apartado 1 - Prohibición de actos de violación de la marca comunitaria dictada por un tribunal de marcas comunitarias - Alcance territorial - Multas coercitivas que acompañan a tal prohibición - Efectos en el territorio de Estados miembros distintos al del tribunal que las adopta)
 2011/C 179/02
 Lengua de procedimiento: francés
 Órgano jurisdiccional remitente
 Cour de cassation
 Partes en el procedimiento principal
 Demandante: DHL Express France SAS, anteriormente DHL International SA
 Demandada: Chronopost SA
 Objeto
 Petición de decisión prejudicial — Cour de cassation — Interpretación del artículo 98 del Reglamento (CE) no 40/94 del Consejo, de 20 de diciembre de 1993, sobre la marca comunitaria (DO 1994, L 11, p. 1), en relación con los artículos 1, 14 y 94 del mismo Reglamento — Demanda por violación de marca — Ámbito de aplicación territorial de una prohibición dictada por un tribunal de marcas comunitarias — Posibilidad, para un tal tribunal, de acompañar la prohibición con medidas coercitivas aplicables en el territorio de todos los Estados miembros en los cuales la prohibición de continuar los actos de violación surtirá efecto.
 Fallo
 1)
 El artículo 98, apartado 1, del Reglamento (CE) no 40/94 del Consejo, de 20 de diciembre de 1993, sobre la marca comunitaria, modificado por el Reglamento (CE) no 3288/94 del Consejo, de 22 de diciembre de 1994, debe interpretarse en el sentido de que el alcance de la prohibición de continuar cometiendo actos de violación o de intento de violación de una marca comunitaria, dictada por un tribunal de marcas comunitarias cuya competencia se base en los artículos 93, apartados 1 a 4, y 94, apartado 1, de este Reglamento, se extiende, en principio, al conjunto del territorio de la Unión Europea.
 2)
 El artículo 98, apartado 1, segunda frase, del Reglamento no 40/94, modificado por el Reglamento no 3288/94, debe interpretarse en el sentido de que una medida coercitiva, como una multa, adoptada por un tribunal de marcas comunitarias, en aplicación de su legislación nacional, para garantizar el respeto de una prohibición de continuar cometiendo actos de violación o de intento de violación que haya dictado, produce efectos en los Estados miembros, distintos del Estado miembro al que pertenece el tribunal, a los que se extiende el alcance territorial de tal prohibición, cuando concurran los requisitos previstos en el capítulo III del Reglamento (CE) no 44/2001 del Consejo, de 22 de diciembre de 2000, relativo a la competencia judicial, el reconocimiento y la ejecución de resoluciones judiciales en materia civil y mercantil, por lo que se refiere al reconocimiento y ejecución de las resoluciones judiciales. En el caso de que el Derecho nacional de uno de estos otros Estados miembros no prevea ninguna medida coercitiva análoga a la dictada por dicho tribunal, el órgano jurisdiccional competente de ese Estado miembro deberá atender al objetivo perseguido por dicha medida recurriendo a las disposiciones pertinentes de su Derecho nacional que garanticen de forma equivalente el cumplimiento de dicha prohibición.
 (1) DO C 205, de 29.8.2009.


type: contracts

text:
 30.3.2017
 FR
 Journal officiel de l'Union européenne
 L 85/22
 DÉCISION DU COMITÉ MIXTE DE L'EEE
 No 208/2015
 du 25 septembre 2015
 modifiant l'annexe II (Réglementations techniques, normes, essais et certification) de l'accord EEE [2017/515]
 LE COMITÉ MIXTE DE L'EEE,
 vu l'accord sur l'Espace économique européen (ci-après l'«accord EEE»), et notamment son article 98,
 considérant ce qui suit:
 (1)
 La directive (UE) 2015/254 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 11 février 2015 abrogeant la directive 93/5/CEE du Conseil concernant l'assistance des États membres à la Commission et leur coopération en matière d'examen scientifique des questions relatives aux denrées alimentaires (1) doit être intégrée dans l'accord EEE.
 (2)
 La directive (UE) 2015/254 abroge la directive 93/5/CEE du Conseil (2), qui est intégrée dans l'accord EEE et doit donc en être supprimée.
 (3)
 La présente décision concerne la législation relative aux denrées alimentaires. Cette législation ne s'applique pas au Liechtenstein aussi longtemps que l'application de l'accord entre la Communauté européenne et la Confédération suisse relatif aux échanges de produits agricoles est étendue au Liechtenstein, comme cela est précisé dans la partie introductive du chapitre XII de l'annexe II de l'accord EEE. La présente décision ne s'applique donc pas au Liechtenstein.
 (4)
 Il convient dès lors de modifier l'annexe II de l'accord EEE en conséquence,
 A ADOPTÉ LA PRÉSENTE DÉCISION:
 Article premier
 Le texte du point 54g (directive 93/5/CEE du Conseil) du chapitre XII de l'annexe II de l'accord EEE est remplacé par le texte suivant:
 «54g.
 32015 L 0254: directive (UE) 2015/254 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 11 février 2015 abrogeant la directive 93/5/CEE du Conseil concernant l'assistance des États membres à la Commission et leur coopération en matière d'examen scientifique des questions relatives aux denrées alimentaires (JO L 43 du 18.2.2015, p. 1).»
 Article 2
 Les textes de la directive (UE) 2015/254 en langues islandaise et norvégienne, à publier dans le supplément EEE du Journal officiel de l'Union européenne, font foi.
 Article 3
 La présente décision entre en vigueur le 26 septembre 2015, pour autant que toutes les notifications prévues à l'article 103, paragraphe 1, de l'accord EEE aient été faites (*1).
 Article 4
 La présente décision est publiée dans la partie EEE et dans le supplément EEE du Journal officiel de l'Union européenne.
 Fait à Bruxelles, le 25 septembre 2015.
 Par le Comité mixte de l'EEE
 La présidente
 Ingrid SCHULERUD
 (1) JO L 43 du 18.2.2015, p. 1.
 (2) JO L 52 du 4.3.1993, p. 18.
 (*1) Pas d'obligations constitutionnelles signalées.


type: wikipedia

text:
I Marine Raiders sono forze per operazioni speciali originariamente istituite dall'United States Marine Corps durante il periodo della seconda guerra mondiale per condurre assalti di fanteria leggera anfibia, e ripristinate nel 2006.
 Storia
 Creati nel 1942 sul modello dei British Commandos, furono la prima unità di forze speciali statunitensi. I Raiders erano intesi come un'unità scelta incaricata delle missioni più rischiose, quali incursioni, colpi di mano e ricognizioni anfibie.
 Impiegati operativamente nel teatro bellico del Pacifico, i due battaglioni di Marine Raiders parteciparono a numerose azioni nel corso della campagna di Guadalcanal, della campagna della Nuova Georgia e della campagna di Bougainville; le unità furono poi sciolte nel 1944 e riassorbite nei restanti reggimenti di marines.
 Le tradizioni e l'eredità dei Marine Raiders sono stati rispristinati dal Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command (MARSOC).
 Il MARSOC è stato attivato nel febbraio 2006 presso la Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Carolina del Nord, ma la piena capacità operativa è stata raggiunta nell'ottobre 2008. Il reggimento di Marine Raiders è stato creato con il contemporaneo scioglimento del 1o e 2o battaglione di ricognizione dei Marine Corps Special Operations Command "Detachment One".
 Organizzazione
 La struttura odierna è la seguente:
 Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command
 Marine Raider Regiment (MRR), reggimento operazioni speciali dei Marine.
 Compagnia comando
 1o Marine Special Operations Battalion
 2o Marine Special Operations Battalion
 3o Marine Special Operations Battalion
 Marine Raider Support Group (MRSG). Unità di supporto al MARSOC.
 Marine Raider Training Center (MRTC). Ha il compito di addestrare il personale inquadrato nel MARSOC.
 Note
 Bibliografia
 Voci correlate
 Marine Recon
 United States Marine Corps
 United States Special Operations Command
 Altri progetti
 Forze armate della seconda guerra mondiale
 United States Marine Corps
 Forze speciali statunitensi
 Unità militari anfibie statunitensi


text:
Ο υπερρεαλισμός ή σουρεαλισμός, από τις γαλλικές λέξεις sur (επάνω, επί) και réalisme (ρεαλισμός, πραγματικότητα) όπου στα ελληνικά θα μπορούσε να αποδοθεί ως «πάνω ή πέρα από την πραγματικότητα», ήταν ένα κίνημα που αναπτύχθηκε κυρίως στο χώρο της λογοτεχνίας αλλά εξελίχθηκε σε ένα ευρύτερο καλλιτεχνικό και πολιτικό ρεύμα. Άνθισε κατά κύριο λόγο στη Γαλλία των αρχών του 20ου αιώνα, κατά την περίοδο του μεσοπολέμου. Στη φύση του επαναστατικό κίνημα, ο υπερρεαλισμός επιδίωξε πολλές ριζοσπαστικές αλλαγές στο χώρο της τέχνης αλλά και της σκέψης γενικότερα, ασκώντας επίδραση σε μεταγενέστερες γενιές καλλιτεχνών. Τα μέλη του αντέδρασαν σε αυτό που οι ίδιοι ερμήνευαν ως μία βαθιά κρίση του Δυτικού πολιτισμού, προτείνοντας μία ευρύτερη αναθεώρηση των αξιών, σε κάθε πτυχή της ανθρώπινης ζωής, στηριζόμενοι στις ψυχαναλυτικές θεωρίες του Φρόυντ και στα πολιτικά ιδεώδη του Μαρξισμού. Ως κύριο μέσο έκφρασης, τόσο στη λογοτεχνία όσο και στις εικαστικές τέχνες, προέβαλαν τον «αυτοματισμό», επιδιώκοντας τη διερεύνηση του ασυνειδήτου, την απελευθέρωση της φαντασίας «με την απουσία κάθε ελέγχου από τη λογική» και διακηρύτοντας τον απόλυτο μη κομφορμισμό.
 Οι καλλιτέχνες που διαμόρφωσαν το κίνημα καταγράφηκαν στο πρώτο Μανιφέστο του υπερρεαλισμού (1924) του Αντρέ Μπρετόν, καθώς και στην πραγματεία Une Vague de rêves (1924) του Λουί Αραγκόν, ενώ συμμετείχαν ενεργά στα περιοδικά La Révolution surréaliste και Litterature που εξέδιδε η υπερρεαλιστική ομάδα. Ο Μπρετόν αναγνωρίζεται ως κεντρική φυσιογνωμία και ένας από τους σημαντικότερους θεωρητικούς τού κινήματος, ενώ άλλα διακεκριμένα μέλη υπήρξαν οι ποιητές Πωλ Ελυάρ, Ρενέ Κρεβέλ, Ρομπέρ Ντεσνός, Μπενζαμίν Περέ, Ροζέ Βιτράκ, όπως και οι καλλιτέχνες Μαξ Ερνστ, Μαν Ραίη, Ζαν Αρπ, Αντρέ Μασόν και Χουάν Μιρό. Πολλοί από τους πρώιμους υπερρεαλιστές προήλθαν από το προγενέστερο κίνημα του Ντανταϊσμού.
 Ορισμός
 Ο όρος Σουρεαλισμός ή Υπερρεαλισμός επινοήθηκε το 1917 από το Γάλλο ποιητή Γκιγιώμ Απολλιναίρ, ο οποίος τον χρησιμοποίησε χαρακτηρίζοντας το παράδοξο θεατρικό έργο του Οι Μαστοί του Τειρεσία (Les Mamelles de Tiresias), ως «υπερρεαλιστικό δράμα» (drame surrealiste). Κατά τον Απολλιναίρ, ο όρος αυτός δήλωνε τον αναλογικό τρόπο με τον οποίο μπορεί να αποδοθεί η πραγματικότητα. Όταν λόγου χάρη ο άνθρωπος θέλησε να μιμηθεί το βάδισμα δεν εφηύρε τα μηχανικά πόδια αλλά τον τροχό. Με τον ίδιο τρόπο ερμήνευε τη συμπεριφορά του ποιητή, ο οποίος προκειμένου να μεταδώσει κάποιες ιδέες, δεν αντιγράφει τον κόσμο και τις καταστάσεις του στατικά και νατουραλιστικά, αλλά δυναμικά, με τρόπο αναλογικό και δημιουργική φαντασία. Ο Απολλιναίρ εισήγαγε τον όρο περισσότερο αφηρημένα, χωρίς να προτείνει μία νέα καλλιτεχνική σχολή ή θεωρία και ενδεχομένως ο σουρρεαλισμός να είχε παραμείνει ένας πολύ ειδικός και ακαδημαϊκός όρος (όπως π.χ ο Γκονγκορισμός ή ο Ευφυϊσμός), αν ο Αντρέ Μπρετόν δεν είχε ενσωματώσει μετέπειτα στον υπερρεαλισμό όλα εκείνα τα χαρακτηριστικά που θεμελίωσαν το υπερρεαλιστικό κίνημα, όπως τις θεωρίες του Φρόυντ για τα όνειρα ή το ασυνείδητο και κυρίως τον αυτοματισμό.
 Ο όρος χρησιμοποιήθηκε επίσης το 1920 από τον Πωλ Ντερμέ στην επιθεώρηση L' Esprit Nouveau και τέσσερα χρόνια αργότερα από τον Yvan Goll, ως τίτλος ενός βραχύβιου περιοδικού που εξέδωσε. Στο ίδιο το Σουρρεαλιστικό Μανιφέστο που δημοσιεύτηκε το 1924, ο Μπρετόν έδωσε στη λέξη τον ακόλουθο ορισμό:
 Σουρρεαλισμός, ουσ. αρ. Αυτοματισμός ψυχικός, καθαρός, με τον οποίο προτίθεται κανείς να εκφράσει είτε προφορικά είτε γραπτά, είτε με οποιονδήποτε άλλο τρόπο, την πραγματική λειτουργία της σκέψης. Υπαγόρευση της σκέψης, με την απουσία κάθε ελέγχου από τη λογική, έξω από κάθε προκατάληψη αισθητική ή ηθική.
 Εγκυκλ. Φιλοσ. Ο σουρεαλισμός στηρίζεται στην πίστη στην ανώτερη πραγματικότητα ορισμένων τύπων συσχετισμών αγνοημένων ως τώρα, στην παντοδυναμία του ονείρου. Στο αδιάφορο παιχνίδι της σκέψης. Τείνει να καταλύσει όλους τους άλλους ψυχικούς μηχανισμούς και να υποκατασταθεί στη θέση της στη λύση των κυριότερων προβλημάτων της ζωής.
 Συχνά ο όρος χρησιμοποιείται με διαφορετικούς τρόπους για να υποδηλώσει κάτι φανταστικό, αλλόκοτο, παράλογο ή τρελό. Η απλοϊκή αυτή χρήση του όρου είναι ανεπαρκής για την περιγραφή του υπερρεαλιστικού κινήματος, έχει παρ'όλα αυτά ενσωματωθεί στην καθομιλουμένη (π.χ. "...ήταν μια εντελώς σουρρεαλιστική σκηνή!").
 Ιστορία
 Η γέννηση του υπερρεαλισμού
 Ο υπερρεαλισμός γεννήθηκε στο Παρίσι και αναπτύχθηκε ως επί το πλείστον από νεαρούς ποιητές της εποχής, κυρίως από την ομάδα που διηύθυνε το λογοτεχνικό περιοδικό Litterature στο διάστημα 1919-1924, διαμορφώνοντας την τάση που αργότερα οδήγησε στη δημοσίευση ενός Μανιφέστου που ανήγγειλε τη δημιουργία ενός νέου κινήματος. Βασικές επιρροές αυτής της πρώιμης υπερρεαλιστικής ομάδας υπήρξαν οι Ρεμπώ, Λωτρεαμόν και Μαλλαρμέ, αλλά και σύχρονοι λογοτέχνες της εποχής όπως ο Απολλιναίρ και Πιέρ Ρεβερντύ. Άλλες σαφείς επιρροές προήλθαν από τον γερμανικό Ρομαντισμό αλλά και το αγγλικό γοτθικό μυθιστόρημα. Το περιοδικό Litterature ήταν αρχικά υπό την διεύθυνση των Λουί Αραγκόν, Αντρέ Μπρετόν και Φιλίπ Σουπώ και συνεργάστηκε με πρωτοποριακούς αλλά και περισσότερο παραδοσιακούς καλλιτέχνες. Σε σύντομο χρονικό διάστημα, και με τον ερχομό στο Παρίσι του Τριστάν Τζαρά, ενός από τους πρωτεργάτες του κινήματος του ντανταϊσμού, το περιοδικό ακολούθησε ένα δρόμο περισσότερο επαναστατικό, αντίθετα σε όλα τα ρεύματα της τέχνης που προηγήθηκαν και κυρίως αντίθετα στο κατεστημένο της εποχής και την αδρανή αστική τάξη. Η δυσπιστία απέναντι στον ορθολογισμό και τις τυπικές συμβάσεις που αποτελούσαν «ιερές» αξίες για την εποχή και για αρκετούς καλλιτέχνες της πρωτοπορίας, αποτέλεσε τη βάση για την εξερεύνηση του χώρου του ασυνείδητου και του ονείρου. Υπό αυτές τις συνθήκες καθιερώθηκε και η μέθοδος της αυτόματης γραφής, η οποία έδωσε το πρώτο γνήσια υπερρεαλιστικό έργο, τα Μαγνητικά Πεδία (Les Champs Magnetiques, 1920) των Αντρέ Μπρετόν και Φιλίπ Σουπώ. Πυρήνα των υπερρεαλιστικών ιδεών αποτέλεσαν παράλληλα οι θεωρίες του Φρόυντ, αν και οι υπερρεαλιστές δεν ενδιαφέρονταν για τις θεραπευτικές δυνατότητες της ψυχαναλυτικής μεθόδου, αλλά για τα όνειρα ως καταστάσεις απελευθέρωσης της ανθρώπινης φαντασίας.
 Από τον Μάρτιο του 1922, ο Αντρέ Μπρετόν ανέλαβε αποκλειστικά τη διεύθυνση της Litterature και οδήγησε στην οριστική ρήξη τού περιοδικού με την πρωτοπορία της εποχής όπως και με τον ντανταϊσμό, τον οποίο αποκήρυξε δημόσια (Littérature, no. 2, Απρίλιος 1922). Κύρια αιτία της ρήξης με το Νταντά ήταν η διαφωνία σχετικά με το αν υπάρχει κάτι που μπορεί να γίνει αποδεκτό ή όχι, με δεδομένη την προσήλωση των υπερρεαλιστών στον αυτοματισμό και στις φροϋδικές θεωρίες. Παρά το γεγονός πως ο υπερρεαλισμός διαμορφώθηκε όντας άρρηκτα συνδεδεμένος με το ρεύμα τού ντανταϊσμού, τα μέλη του δεν χαρακτηρίζονταν από τον αρνητισμό των ντανταϊστών, αλλά αναζητούσαν ένα κοινωνικό όραμα και μια κατεύθυνση έκφρασης απαλλαγμένη από κάθε είδους λογικά τεχνάσματα. Κατά την περίοδο αυτή, η ομάδα των υπερρεαλιστών εμπλουτίστηκε με τη συμμετοχή αρκετών καλλιτεχνών, όπως του φωτογράφου Μαν Ραίη από τη Νέα Υόρκη, του ζωγράφου Φράνσις Πικαμπιά που επιμελήθηκε όλα τα εξώφυλλα της Litterature, του ποιητή Πωλ Ελυάρ, του Μαρσέλ Ντυσάν και του Μαξ Ερνστ από την Κολωνία, διαμορφώνοντας τον πρώτο πολύ ισχυρό πυρήνα του υπερρεαλισμού. Η Litterature υπήρξε όργανο τού κινήματος και μέσα από τις σελίδες του εκφράστηκαν τα ιδεώδη του υπερρεαλισμού, δημοσιεύοντας ποικίλα κείμενα – κυρίως ποιήματα – που αποτελούσαν ως επί το πλείστον προϊόντα αυτόματης γραφής. Την ίδια περίοδο, η ομάδα των υπερρεαλιστών ξεκίνησε να διοργανώνει τακτικές συγκεντρώσεις των μελών αλλά και να εμφανίζεται σε ομαδικές εκδηλώσεις, καθιερώνοντας ομαδικά παιχνίδια και ενισχύοντας με αυτό τον τρόπο τη συνοχή της.
 Τον Ιούνιο του 1924 το κίνημα περιλάμβανε επιπλέον στους κόλπους του, τους ποιητές Μπεντζαμέν Περέ, Ρομπέρ Ντεσνός, Ροζέ Βιτράκ, Μαξ Μορίζ, Ζωρζ Λεμπούρ, Ζοζέφ Ντελτέιγ, Ζακ Μπαρόν και Ρενέ Κρεβέλ. Στην πορεία των επόμενων χρόνων συνέβησαν αρκετές ανακατατάξεις, με αποχωρήσεις μελών και συμμετοχή νέων προσώπων. Στο Βέλγιο διαμορφώθηκε παράλληλα μία αυτόνομη υπερρεαλιστική ομάδα που έλαβε επίσημη αναγνώριση το 1926. Μέλη της υπήρξαν οι εκδότες των ντανταϊστικών περιοδικών œsophage (1925) και Marie (1926), ο ζωγράφος Ρενέ Μαγκρίτ, ο καλλιτέχνης και ποιητής ΕLT Messens, οι Paul Nougé (1895–1967), Marcel Lecomte (1900–66) και Camille Goemans (1900–60), καθώς και ο μουσικός André Souris. Οι Goemans και Μαγκρίτ εγκαταστάθηκαν αργότερα στο Παρίσι έχοντας αξιοσημείωτη συμβολή στην υπερρεαλιστική ομάδα της πρωτεύουσας. Ο πρώτος υπήρξε ο ιδρυτής μίας ομώνυμης γκαλερί όπου διοργανώνονταν υπερρεαλιστικές εκθέσεις, ενώ ο Μαγκρίτ αποτέλεσε σημαντικό εκπρόσωπο της ομάδας, συνεισφέροντας στην επιθεώρηση La Révolution surréaliste.
 Η περίοδος του Β' Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου
 Η άνοδος του ναζισμού και τα γεγονότα της περιόδου 1939-1945 επισκίασαν κάθε άλλη δραστηριότητα. Το 1941 ο Μπρετόν επισκέπτεται την Αμερική όπου δημιουργεί το περιοδικό VVV και προωθεί τον υπερρεαλισμό, κυρίως χάρη στη βοήθεια του Αμερικανού ποιητή Τσάρλς Χένρι Φόρντ ο οποίος εκείνο τον καιρό εκδίδει το περιοδικό View- σε αυτό θα δημοσιευθούν και εκτεταμένες αναφορές σε έργα υπερρεαλιστών.
 Πολλοί ιστορικοί θεωρούν πάντως αυτή την περίοδο ως την αρχή της πτώσης του υπερρεαλιστικού κινήματος. Με τη λήξη του πολέμου, ο Μπρετόν επιστρέφει στο Παρίσι όπου ξεκινά ένας νέος κύκλος δραστηριοτήτων. Κύριος στόχος του είναι να αποσυνδεθεί ο υπερρεαλισμός από τον χαρακτήρα ενός απλώς αισθητικού κινήματος και να προβάλλει περισσότερο ένα ιδεολογικό περιεχόμενο. Συχνά επισημαίνει την ανάγκη του να ζεί κανείς τον υπερρεαλισμό.
 Τα Μανιφέστα του Υπερρεαλισμού
 Το Σουρρεαλιστικό Μανιφέστο του Αντρέ Μπρετόν εμφανίστηκε το 1924. Μέσα σε αυτό το εκτεταμένο κείμενο αποτυπώνονται οι φιλοδοξίες και οι σκοποί του υπερρεαλισμού. Η φαντασία, η τρέλα, το ασυνείδητο και η παντοδυναμία του ονειρικού στοιχείου αποτελούν τα προπύργια της υπερρεαλιστικής οπτικής. Αποδίδονται ακόμα ιδιαίτερες τιμές στον Σίγκμουντ Φρόυντ, που είναι ο πρώτος αναλυτής των ονείρων, ως μέσο για την κατανόηση του ατόμου. Ο σουρρεαλισμός γίνεται κήρυκας της απαλλαγής του ανθρώπου από τον έλεγχο της λογικής και από κάθε επιταγή ηθικής τάξης. Βασικό στοιχείο του αποτελεί ακόμα η αντίθεση στον Χριστιανισμό και τον καρτεσιανισμό, που σύμφωνα με τη θεωρία του υπερρεαλισμού παραλύουν όλη την σκέψη της Δύσης. Το 1930 παρουσιάστηκε το Δεύτερο Μανιφέστο. Αυτό στρέφεται πιο έντονα στην ερμητική και αλχημιστική παράδοση, χωρίς βέβαια να εγκαταλείπεται ο αντιχριστιανισμός και ο αριστερισμός.
 Το τέλος του Υπερρεαλισμού
 Πολλοί ιστορικοί θεωρούν την περίοδο του Β' Παγκοσμίου πολέμου ως την αρχή του τέλους για τον υπερρεαλισμό. Ως οργανωμένο κίνημα θα περάσει κρίση μετά το θάνατο του Αντρέ Μπρετόν το 1966, και θα υπάρξουν κάποιοι που θα αναγγείλουν το τέλος του ως οργανωμένη δραστηριότητα το 1969. Παρ' όλα αυτά, ο υπερρεαλισμός, αποκεντρωμένος πια, συνεχίζεται μέχρι σήμερα με διάφορες ομάδες ανά τον κόσμο (Πράγα, Σικάγο, Λονδίνο, Παρίσι, Στοκχόλμη, Μαδρίτη, Αθήνα κ.ά.).
 Πολιτική και Υπερρεαλισμός
 Το υπερρεαλιστικό κίνημα, πέρα από την καλλιτεχνική του διάσταση, χαρακτηρίστηκε και από έντονη πολιτική δράση. Οι υπερρεαλιστές είχαν δύο κύρια συνθήματα: "Να αλλάξουμε τη ζωή" (Ρεμπώ) και "Να αλλάξουμε τον κόσμο" (Καρλ Μαρξ). Η πολιτική θέση του υπερρεαλισμού, αν και αρχικά είχε αναρχική απόχρωση, δεν άργησε να προσανατολιστεί στα κόμματα της άκρας αριστεράς διεκδικώντας δεσμούς με το μαρξισμό. Στα τέλη του 1929 μάλιστα, προσχωρούν επίσημα στο γαλλικό κομμουνιστικό κόμμα, γεγονός που σφραγίζεται και με την έκδοση του περιοδικού "Ο Σουρρεαλισμός στην υπηρεσία της Επανάστασης" (Le Surrealisme au service de la Revolution).
 Το υπερρεαλιστικό κίνημα δεν είχε ποτέ κάποιο αποτέλεσμα σε ότι αφορά τις πολιτικές του τοποθετήσεις και προσπάθειες. Εξάλλου η κομματική γραφειοκρατία ουδέποτε έδειξε εμπιστοσύνη στους υπερρεαλιστές, κατηγορώντας τους για την αστική τους καταγωγή. Επιπλέον η πολιτική αποτέλεσε βασική πηγή διαφωνιών μεταξύ των μελών του υπερρεαλισμού. Ο Αντρέ Μπρετόν υπήρξε από τους πρώτους που τάχθηκαν στην υπηρεσία του κομμουνιστικού κόμματος, βρίσκοντας σχετικά λίγους μιμητές. Ακόμα και εκείνος όμως, αποχώρησε λίγο καιρό αργότερα αφού δεν άντεξε τον τρόπο λειτουργίας των κομματικών πυρήνων. Λίγο αργότερα, πέρασε στον τροτσκισμό. Ο Μπρετόν είχε και προσωπική συνάντηση με τον Λέοντα Τρότσκι στο Μεξικό το 1938.
 Μετά από αυτή την περίοδο και το ξέσπασμα του Β' Παγκοσμίου πολέμου, οι πολιτικές θέσεις του κινήματος χαρακτηρίστηκαν από έντονες διακυμάνσεις. Ανάμεσα σε άλλα, έχουμε συμφιλίωση με τον αναρχισμό, υποστήριξη του ειρηνιστικού κινήματος του Γκάρυ Ντέηβις (1949) καθώς και επίσημη τοποθέτηση κατά του πολέμου στην Αλγερία και του Γκωλλισμού (1958-1962).
 Αυτoματισμός
 Ο υπερρεαλιστικός αυτοματισμός αποτελεί τη διαδικασία γραφής ή σχεδίασης κατά την οποία ο δημιουργός λειτουργεί αυθόρμητα, προβάλλοντας με αυτό τον τρόπο το ασυνείδητο, χωρίς κανένα στοιχείο αυτολογοκρισίας ή ηθικού και αισθητικού περιορισμού.
 Ο αυτοματισμός αναπτύχθηκε κυρίως στη γραφή και τη ζωγραφική. Η αυτόματη γραφή προέρχεται από τον μυστικιστικό αυτοματισμό και ειδικότερα την πρακτική των μελλοντολόγων κατά την οποία, όπως ισχυρίζονται, καταγράφουν τα μηνύματα που λαμβάνουν από πνεύματα. Στην περίπτωση του υπερρεαλισμού ωστόσο, αποτελεί απλά μέσο έκφρασης του ασυνειδήτου, μέσω της χρήσης λέξεων με τυχαίο και αυθόρμητο τρόπο, επιτυγχάνοντας έτσι τη δημιουργία παράλογων και φανταστικών εικόνων, χωρίς απαραίτητα λογική σύνδεση μεταξύ τους. Χαρακτηριστικότερο παράδειγμα αυτόματης γραφής αποτελούν τα Μαγνητικά Πεδία των Αντρέ Μπρετόν και Φιλίπ Σουπώ, το πρώτο αμιγώς αυτόματο υπερρεαλιστικό κείμενο.
 Στην Ελλάδα, η Υψικάμινος του Ανδρέα Εμπειρίκου αποτελεί ίσως το μοναδικό κείμενο αυτόματης γραφής.
 Στο σχέδιο, η αυτόματη μέθοδος συνίσταται σε ένα είδος τυχαίας μετακίνησης του πινέλου πάνω στο χαρτί. Ο Αντρέ Μασόν φαίνεται πως ήταν από τους πρώτους χρήστες της μεθόδου, η οποία επεκτάθηκε και στην ζωγραφική με κύριως εκφραστές τους Χουάν Μιρό και Ζαν Αρπ.
 Υπερρεαλιστές καλλιτέχνες
 Καλλιτέχνες που δραστηριοποιήθηκαν στις τάξεις του υπερρεαλιστικού κινήματος στις αρχές του:
 Λουί Αραγκόν
 Αντονέν Αρτώ
 Ζωρζ Μπατάιγ
 Αντρέ Μπρετόν
 Τζόρτζιο ντε Κίρικο
 Ρενέ Κρεβέλ
 Σαλβαντόρ Νταλί
 Πωλ Ελυάρ
 Μαξ Ερνστ
 Μαρκ Σαγκάλ
 Βαλεντίν Ουγκό
 Αλμπέρτο Τζιακομέτι
 Ρενέ Μαγκρίτ
 Χουάν Μιρό
 Μερέ Όπενχαϊμ
 Μαν Ραίη
 Υβ Τανγκύ
 Λουίς Μπουνιουέλ
 Ανδρέας Εμπειρίκος
 Νίκος Εγγονόπουλος
 Νίκος Γκάτσος
 Οδυσσέας Ελύτης
 Αλέξανδρος Σχινάς
 Παραπομπές
 Βιβλιογραφία
 Achraf Baznani, History of Surrealism. Edilivre, France 2018, ISBN 978-2-414-21510-2
 Αντρέ Μπρετόν, Μανιφέστα του Σουρρεαλισμού, Εκδόσεις Δωδώνη, 1983
 André Breton, Conversations: The Autobiography of Surrealism, Gallimard, 1952 (Paragon House 1993). ISBN 1-56924-970-9.
 Πάτρικ Βάλντμπεργκ, Σουρρεαλισμός, Υποδομή, 1982
 What is Surrealism?: Selected Writings of André Breton (ed. Franklin Rosemont). ISBN 0-87348-822-9.
 Gerard Durozoi, History of the Surrealist Movement, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-17411-5.
 Franklin Rosemont, Surrealism and Its Popular Accomplices San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books, 1980. ISBN 0-87286-121-X.
 Melly, George, Paris and the Surrealists Thames & Hudson, 1991
 Helena Lewis, The Politics Of Surrealism, New York: Paragon House, 1988
 Reymond Spiteri, Donald Lacoss, Surrealism, Politics and Culture, Ashgate Publishing, 2003
 Mary Ann CawsSurrealist Painters and Poets: An Anthology, MIT Press, 2001
 Φ. Οντουάν, Οι Σουρρεαλιστές, Μετάφραση: Δ. Δημούλης, Β. Παπαοικονόμου - Επιμέλεια: Μπ. Γεωργαντίδης, Θεμέλιο, 1990
 Σωτήρης Τριβιζάς, Το Σουρρεαλιστικό Σκάνδαλο: Χρονικό της υποδοχής του υπερρεαλιστικού κινήματος στην Ελλάδα, εκδ. Καστανιώτη, 2005. ISBN 960-03-3799-3
 Michael Lowy, Το Άστρο του Πρωινού: Υπερρεαλισμός και Μαρξισμός, εκδ. Ερατώ, 2005. ISBN 960-229-141-9
 Maurice Nadeau (μτφρ. Α. Παπαθανασοπούλου), Ιστορία του Σουρεαλισμού, εκδ. Πλέθρον, 1978.
 Δείτε επίσης
 Ντανταϊσμός
 Κυβισμός
 Φουτουρισμός
 Μοντέρνα τέχνη
 Εξωτερικοί σύνδεσμοι
 Το Μανιφέστο του Υπερρεαλισμού από τον Αντρέ Μπρετόν
 "Τί είναι ο Υπερρεαλισμός?", διάλεξη του Μπρετόν, 1934
 Ο Υπερρεαλισμός στο διαδίκτυο
 The surrealism server
 Ο υπερρεαλισμός στα καινούρια ποιήματα του Τζίμη Πανούση
 Ο υπερρεαλισμός στον κινηματογράφο
 Υπερρεαλιστικές ομάδες
 Υπερρεαλιστική ομάδα Λονδίνου (περιοδικό: Arcturus)
 Υπερρεαλιστική ομάδα στο Παρίσι (περιοδικό: S.U.RR.)
 Υπερρεαλιστικές ομάδες Τσεχίας και Σλοβακίας (περιοδικό: Analogon)
 Το Υπερεραλιστικό κίνημα στην Σερβία
 Το Υπερρεαλιστικό κίνημα στις Η.Π.Α
 Διακήρυξη της Υπερρεαλιστικής Ομάδας Αθηνών
 Ψηφιακό αρχείο ΕΡΤ
 Καλλιτεχνικά ρεύματα


text:
Deginimosi losjonų tiesioginis pristatymas | Didmeninės kainos
 Norite įsigyti saulės įdegį skatinančių 100 % originalių markių priemonių didmeninėmis kainomis? Mūsų plačiame saulės įdegio produktų kataloge jūsų klientai suras labiausiai jų odos tipui tinkantį produktą, kuris taip pat puikiai atitiks kiekvieno asmeninius įdegimo lygio pageidavimus.
 Rodyti kitas prekes iš Prekių nuo Saulės Linija Nerodyti prekių
 35 prekės iš Įdegio losjonai
 grožiui pusryčiams saulės energija / ekologija vasarai
 Sun Uva losjonas deginimusi SPF50
 Bronzeris Perfect Tanning Collistar Spf 30 (50 ml)
 Įdegio purkštuvas Lait Fluide Clarins Spf 20
 Saulės losjonas Instant Bronzer Australian Gold SPF 30 (237 ml)
 Įdegio purkštuvas Express Anne Möller Spf 15 (200 ml)
 Purškiklis saulės apsauga Instant Bronzer Australian Gold SPF 6 (237 ml)
 Įdegio aliejus Spf 30 Nivea 1256
 Įdegio aliejus Intensifier Australian Gold (237 ml)
 Gelis nuo saulės Instant Bronzer Australian Gold SPF 30 (237 ml)
 Įdegio aliejus Delial (200 ml)
 Saulės losjonas Tan & Protect Piz Buin Spf 30 (150 ml)
 Įdegio purkštuvas Perfect Tanning Collistar
 Įdegio purkštuvas Delial SPF 30 (200 ml)
 Saugantis aliejus Spf 20 Nivea 3557
 Bronzeris Express Anne Möller Spf 15 (200 ml)
 Saulės losjonas Instant Bronzer Australian Gold SPF 50 (237 ml)
 Purškiklis saulės apsauga Instant Bronzer Australian Gold SPF 10 (237 ml)
 Bronzeris Sun Beauty Lancaster SPF 15 (50 ml)
 Itin greito įdegio losjonas be SPF Sun Uva
 Įdegio purkštuvas Express Babaria Spf 20 (200 ml)
 Įdegio purkštuvas Accelerator Australian Gold (237 ml)
 Bronzeris Perfect Tanning Collistar (200 ml)
 Savaiminio įdegio kremas Sun UVA FPS30 200ml
 Įdegio aliejus Glowing Effect Babaria (200 ml)
 Įdegio purkštuvas Perfect Tanning Collistar Spf 15 (200 ml)


jurisdiction: US

text: b' Department of Homeland Security\n\n\n\n\n Independent Review of U.S. Coast Guard\'s Reporting \n\n of FY 2012 Drug Control Performance Summary Report \n\n\n\n\n\nOIG-13-27 January 2013\n\n\x0c @\n .\'.~" , OF.FICE OF INSPECTOR GEI\\I\xc2\xa3RAL\n Departm ent of Homeland S~~uri(y\n\n\n\n\n JAN 2 9 2013\nMEMORANDUM FOR: Rear Admiral Stephen P. Metruck\n Chief Financial Officer\n U.S. Coast Guard\n\nFROM: Anne l. Richards eM.L;l.UJ\n Assistant Inspector General f or Audits\n\nSUBJECT: Independent Revie w of u.s. Coost Guard\', RI!pGrtinr; of\n FY 1012 Drug Control Performance Summary Report\n\n Independent Review of u.s. Coost\nAttached for your information is our final report,\nGuard\'s Reporting of FY 2012 Drug Control Performonce Summary Report. U.s. Coast\nGuard\'s management pr~pared the Performance Summary Report and management\nassertions to comply with the requirements afthe Office of National Drug Control Policy\nCircular, Drug Control Acwunting, dated May 1, 2007.\n\nWe contracted with the independent public "ccounting firm KPMG LLP to perform the\nreview. KPMG LLP is responsible for the ~tt~ched independent accountants\' report,\ndated January 18, 2013, and the conclusions eKpressed in it. We do not eKpress an\nopinion on the Performance Summary Report and management\'s assertions. This\nreport contains no recommendations.\n\nConsistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we are providing\ncopies of our report to appropriate congressional committees with oversight and\nappropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post\nthe report on our website for public dissemination.\n\nPlease call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Mark Bell, Deputy Assistant\nInspector General for Audits, at (202) 254\xc2\xb7 4100.\n\nAttachment\n\x0c KPMG LLP\n Suite 12000\n 1801 K Street, NW\n Washington, DC 20006\n\n\n\n\n Independent Accountants\xe2\x80\x99 Report\n\n\nDeputy Inspector General\nU.S. Department of Homeland Security\n\nWe have reviewed the accompanying Performance Summary Report of the U.S. Department of Homeland\nSecurity\xe2\x80\x99s (DHS) United States Coast Guard (USCG) for the year ended September 30, 2012. We have\nalso reviewed the accompanying management\xe2\x80\x99s assertions for the year ended September 30, 2012.\nUSCG\xe2\x80\x99s management is responsible for the Performance Summary Report and the assertions.\n\nOur review was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute\nof Certified Public Accountants, and applicable standards contained in Government Auditing Standards,\nissued by the Comptroller General of the United States. A review is substantially less in scope than an\nexamination, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the Performance Summary Report\nand management\xe2\x80\x99s assertions. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.\n\nManagement of USCG prepared the Performance Summary Report and management\xe2\x80\x99s assertions to\ncomply with the requirements of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Circular, Drug\nControl Accounting, dated May 1, 2007 (the Circular).\n\nBased on our review, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that (1) the Performance\nSummary Report for the year ended September 30, 2012, is not presented, in all material respects, in\nconformity with the Circular, or that (2) management\xe2\x80\x99s assertions referred to above are not fairly stated, in\nall material respects, based on the criteria set forth in the Circular.\n\nThis report is intended solely for the information and use of management of DHS and USCG, the DHS\nInspector General, the ONDCP, and the U.S. Congress, and is not intended to be and should not be used by\nanyone other than these specified parties.\n\n\n\n\nJanuary 18, 2013 \n\n\n\n\n\n KPMG LLP is a Delaware limited liability partnership,\n the U.S. member firm of KPMG International Cooperative\n (\xe2\x80\x9cKPMG International\xe2\x80\x9d), a Swiss entity.\n\x0cU.S. Department of Commandant 2100 Second Street. S.W .\nHomeland Security United States Coast Guard Washington, DC 20593-7681\n Staff Symbol: DC0-81\n Phone: (202) 372-1340\nUnited States Email:timothy.g.meyers@uscg.mil\nCoast Guard\n\n\n 7110\n January 18,2013\n\nMs. Sandra John\nDepartment of Homeland Security\nDirector of Financial Management\nOffice of the Inspector General\n\n\nDear Ms. John,\n\nIn accordance with the Office of National Drug Control Policy Circular: Annual Accounting of\nDrug Conlrol Funds dated May 1,2007, enclosed is the Coast Guard\' s final FY 2012\nPerformance Summary Report.\n\nIf you require further assistance on this information, please contact LCDR Timothy Meyers,\n202-372-1340.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n rtc~ , c.. o fl. U5-( cr\n H. L. MORRlSON\n Commander, U.S. Coast Guard\n Acting Chief, Office of Performance Management\n & Assessment\n\nEnclosure (I) FY 2012 Performance Summary Report\n\nCopy: DHS Budget Office\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\n\n\n\n Drug Budget\n\n\n United States Department of Homeland Security\n\n\n United States Coast Guard\n\n\n Performance Summary Report FY 2012 \n\n\n\n\n\n01/17/2013 Created by DCO-81\n\n\n Page 1 of 6\n\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\nI. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION\n\nDecision Units: Primary Outcome Measure\n\nNOTE: Although the Coast Guard appropriation is apportioned along budget decision\nunit lines (i.e., Acquisitions, Construction & Improvements (AC&I), Operating Expenses\n(OE), Research Development Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E), and Reserve Training\n(RT)), the Coast Guard does not manage performance along decision unit lines. This is\nimpractical due to the multi-mission performance of our assets, which transcends budget\ndecision units.\n\nThe Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s drug interdiction performance is best summarized by the lead outcome\nmeasure of the program. This measure is the central focus of its Performance Summary\nReport. The Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Program has a suite of metrics that\nsupport the lead outcome measure. The lead outcome measure and its supporting metrics\nsuite were validated during a 2007 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Program\nAssessment and Rating Tool (PART) Evaluation. The Coast Guard uses the Consolidated\nCounterdrug Database (CCDB) as the authoritative source for estimating illicit drug flow\nthrough the transit zone. Use of the CCDB permits the Coast Guard to evaluate its\nperformance on a quarterly basis. It should be noted that CCDB cocaine movement\nestimates include all confidence maritime flow, which translates to a lower performance\nresult for cocaine removal rate. DHS leadership reviewed and approved this metric as a\nCoast Guard Management metric in 2010. This metric is included as part of the Coast\nGuard\xe2\x80\x99s annual budget submission.\n\nMeasure: Cocaine Removal Rate (Removal rate for cocaine from non-commercial vessels\nin the maritime transit zone (CCDB)).\n\nTable 1: Cocaine Removal Rate\n\n FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2012 FY 2013\n Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Target\n 13.2% 15.0% 13.5% 11.6% 13.4% 16.5% 14.1%\n\n (1) Describe the measure. In doing so, provide an explanation of how the measure (a) reflects the purpose of\nthe program, (b) contributes to the National Drug Control Strategy, and (c) is used by management of the\nprogram. This description should include sufficient detail to permit non-experts to understand what is being\nmeasured and why it is relevant to the agency\xe2\x80\x99s drug control activities. 1\n\nThe goal of the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s Drug Interdiction program is to reduce the supply of illegal\ndrugs within the United States by denying smugglers the use of air and maritime routes by\nprojecting an effective law enforcement presence in and over the six million square mile\ntransit zone of the Caribbean Sea, the Gulf of Mexico and the Eastern Pacific Ocean. The\nCoast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s primary outcome measure, the Cocaine Removal Rate, indicates how\n1\n Requirements 1 through 4 in this section are drawn from the Office of National Drug Control Policy\nCircular: Drug Control Accounting, dated May 1, 2007.\n\n01/17/2013 Created by DCO-81\n\n Page 2 of 6\n\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\neffective the program is at disrupting the flow of cocaine traveling via non-commercial\nmaritime means toward the United States. The more cocaine bound for the United States\nthat the Coast Guard removes, the less supply of cocaine available within the United States.\nThe cocaine removal rate is calculated by dividing the total amount of cocaine removed\n(drugs interdicted, jettisoned, scuttled) by the Coast Guard by the total estimated non\xc2\xad\ncommercial maritime movement of cocaine towards the United States. Both of these\nassessments are captured and validated in the CCDB.\n\nThe 2012 National Drug Control Strategy maintains the interagency, transit zone removal\nrate goal for cocaine at 40% by 2015; a goal originally set in the 2007 National Drug\nControl Strategy. With over 80% of the cocaine moving through the transit zone via non\xc2\xad\ncommercial maritime means, the national goal is achievable with a higher Coast Guard\ncocaine removal rate, assuming no decrease in domestic and international partner agency\nperformance to achieve that 40% goal. Maritime Law Enforcement program managers\nmonitor the cocaine removal rate, watching for both changes in Coast Guard removals as\nwell as increases or decreases in flow. Any changes are diagnosed to determine the cause\nand to develop strategies and tactics to continue to increase the removal rate. Factors that\ncan impact the removal rate include, but are not limited to, changing modes, tactics and\nroutes by the transnational criminal organizations (TCOs); increased or decreased patrol\neffort by the Coast Guard or its drug interdiction partner agencies/nations; the availability,\nquality and timeliness of tactical intelligence; new or upgraded diplomatic and legal tools;\nand the fielding of new capabilities (National Security Cutter, Fast Response Cutter and\nHC-144A aircraft, for example).\n(2) Provide narrative that examines the FY 2012 actual performance results with the FY 2012 target, as well\nas prior year actual results. If the performance target was not achieved for FY 2012, the agency should\nexplain why this is the case. If the agency has concluded it is not possible to achieve the established target\nwith available resources, the agency should include recommendations on revising or eliminating the target.\n\nIn FY 2012, there was an observed increase in cocaine flow being smuggled through the\ntransit zone via non-commercial maritime means\xe2\x80\x94796 Metric Tons (MT) in FY 2012\ncompared to 652 MT in FY 2011. Of the FY 2012 non-commercial maritime flow, the\nCoast Guard removed 107 MT of cocaine, up from its FY 2011 total of 75.5 MT. Relative\nto the total estimated movement of non-commercial maritime cocaine destined for the\nUnited States in FY 2012 captured in the CCDB, the Coast Guard removed 13.4% of this\nestimated flow, falling short of its target of 16.5%. Comparatively, the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s\ncocaine removal rate was 11.6% in FY 2011. The total number of Coast Guard removal\nevents increased in FY 2012 (129 in FY 2011 to 162 in FY 2012), as did the number of\nCoast Guard cocaine removal events in FY 2012 (90 in FY 2011 to 108 in FY 2012).\n\nReduced availability and reliability of air and surface (detection and interdiction) assets\ncontinued to hinder counter-drug mission performance in the drug transit zone. The\nadvancing age of the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s cutter fleet led to increased unscheduled maintenance\ndays and casualties, reducing the number of deployable assets available to support Joint\nInteragency Task Force South (JIATF-S). Through the 2012 Department of Homeland\nSecurity (DHS) Statement of Intent, the Coast Guard planned to provide 2,190 cutter days,\n1,460 Aviation Use of Force (AUF) deployed days at seas (DDAS), and 4,700 Maritime\n01/17/2013 Created by DCO-81\n\n Page 3 of 6\n\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\nPatrol Aircraft (MPA) hours to JIATF-S, but was only able to provide 1,947 cutter days,\n1,046 AUF DDAS, and 3,834 MPA hours for FY 2012 or approximately 89% of intended\ncutter days, 72% of AUF days, and 82% of intended MPA hours.\n\nSince FY 2011, the Coast Guard has decommissioned four of its twelve 378\xe2\x80\x99 high\nendurance cutters (WHEC), yet only two operational national security cutters (NSC) and\nless capable medium endurance cutters are available to fill the resulting transit zone patrol\nhour gap. Prior to the NSC, WHECs were historically the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s most effective\nsurface asset for cocaine removals due to their greater endurance and more robust\ncommand and control suite compared to other Coast Guard surface platforms. Cutter\nendurance is a key contributor to countering the maritime cocaine threat in the remote, vast\nEastern Pacific transit zone vector. The reduction in WHEC available cutter days reduced\nthe opportunity for additional cocaine removals and may have contributed to the Coast\nGuard missing its FY 2012 Cocaine Removal Rate target. As more capable NSCs continue\nto replace the aging WHEC fleet and close the major cutter patrol hour gap, it is expected\nthat cocaine removal rate performance will increase.\n\nIn addition to reduced asset and resource availability, the following also contributed to the\nCoast Guard missing its FY 2012 Cocaine Removal Rate target:\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Increased flow of cocaine smuggled through the transit zone with no corresponding\n increase in Coast Guard assets on scene for detection and interdiction;\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Reduced maritime domain awareness throughout the JIATF-S operating area; and\n \xe2\x80\xa2\t Increasingly sophisticated and evolving Transnational Criminal Organization\n tactics (e.g. greater use of self-propelled semi- and fully-submersibles).\n\n(3) The agency should describe the performance target for FY 2013 and how the agency plans to meet this\ntarget. If the target in FY 2012 was not achieved, this explanation should detail how the agency plans to\novercome prior year challenges to meet targets in FY 2013.\n\nThe Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s target for FY 2013 is to remove 14.1% percent of the cocaine moving\nvia non-commercial maritime means towards the United States. This target was developed\nby examining historical trends, as well as forecasting asset and resource availability along\nwith the estimated flow of cocaine. The Coast Guard works cooperatively with other\nfederal agencies to carry out the National Drug Control Strategy, including support for the\nJIATF-S counter drug detection and monitoring mission. To increase interdiction capacity\nand capability, the Coast Guard has several initiatives which are expected to come to\nfruition in FY 2013. A third National Security Cutter (STRATTON) will be available for\ndeployment to the JIATF-S Area of Responsibility. The Coast Guard will continue to\ndeploy surface and aviation assets and law enforcement teams in support of\nSOUTHCOM\xe2\x80\x99s OP MARTILLO, designed to push drug traffickers out of the littorals and\nfarther off shore where they are more vulnerable to interdiction and prosecution in the\nUnited States. The Coast Guard and the U.S. Navy (USN) will continue to pursue\nexpansion of Airborne Use of Force capability with the USN expecting to deploy AUF\nhelicopters capable of nighttime operations in FY 2013 to improve the interdiction and\n\xe2\x80\x9cend game\xe2\x80\x9d prosecution of drug traffickers using go-fast vessels. The Coast Guard will\ncontinue its counter drug hidden compartment detection course at the Maritime Law\nEnforcement Academy in FY 2013, increasing the number of specially trained boarding\n01/17/2013 \t Created by DCO-81\n\n Page 4 of 6\n\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\nteam personnel able to investigate, search, locate and access hidden compartments on\nsuspect vessels. With go-fast type vessels remaining the primary means of conveyance by\nTCOs operating in and around the littorals, the Coast Guard will continue to strengthen\ninternational partnerships through bilateral agreements, as well as provide training\nprograms and engage in professional exchanges to enhance partner nation capability and to\nsupport Theater Security Cooperation initiatives. Such engagement strengthens ties with\nsource and transit zone partner nations and increases their maritime law enforcement\ncompetency and capability throughout the transit zone. Based on its baseline of\nperformance and the expanded capabilities mentioned, the Coast Guard expects that it can\nachieve its FY 2013 target.\n(4) The agency should describe the procedures used to ensure performance data for this measure are accurate,\ncomplete, and unbiased in presentation and substance. The agency should also describe the methodology used\nto establish targets and actual results, as well as the data source(s) used to collect information.\n\nThe data used to calculate the Cocaine Removal Rate is drawn from the interagency-\nvalidated CCDB. The amount of cocaine removed by the Coast Guard is the sum of all\ncocaine that is physically seized by Coast Guard personnel 2 and all cocaine lost to the\nTCOs due to the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s actions. The latter amount is, at times, an intelligence-\nbased estimate of the quantity of cocaine onboard a given vessel that is burned, jettisoned,\nor scuttled in an attempt to destroy evidence when Coast Guard presence is detected.\nCocaine removals are drawn from the CCDB. Data entered into the CCDB is validated\nthrough a quarterly, interagency vetting process. The estimated non-commercial maritime\nflow of cocaine towards the United States is extracted from the CCDB. All data contained\nin the CCDB are deemed to be as accurate, complete and unbiased in presentation and\nsubstance as possible.\n\nAt least annually, the Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s Maritime Law Enforcement Program and Deputy\nCommandant for Operations\xe2\x80\x99 Office of Performance Management and Assessment review\nall the assumptions that factor into the setting of its out-year targets, and make adjustments\nas necessary. Revisions to the targets are reported via the Department of Homeland\nSecurity\xe2\x80\x99s Future Year Homeland Security Program database.\n\nThe Maritime Law Enforcement Program last updated its out-year performance targets in\nMarch 2012 in conjunction with normal target setting timelines. The key factors that drive\nthe target setting process are the estimated out-year cocaine flow, the projected availability\nof Coast Guard resources (major cutters, long range MPA, Law Enforcement Detachments\n(LEDET) and Airborne Use of Force (AUF) helicopters), and any anticipated changes in\nCoast Guard capabilities, authorities, or partnerships that may impact cocaine removals.\n\nII. MANAGEMENT\xe2\x80\x99S ASSERTIONS\n\nThe following assertions, supported by the information presented above, satisfy the data,\nestimation methods, and reporting systems criteria outlined in paragraph 7.b. of the\nONDCP Drug Budget Accounting Circular dated May 1, 2007:\n2\n The final amount is determined by the receiving Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces agency.\n\n01/17/2013 Created by DCO-81\n\n Page 5 of 6\n\n\x0cEnclosure (1) to letter dated January 18, 2013 \n\n\n\n (1) Performance reporting system is appropriate and applied \xe2\x80\x93 The agency has a\n system to capture performance information accurately and that system was properly\n applied to generate the performance data.\n\nThe Coast Guard performance reporting system is appropriate and applied. It was\nreviewed in a 2007 Independent Program Evaluation by the Center for Naval Analyses and\na 2007 OMB PART evaluation. Both reviews verified the appropriateness and application\nof the performance reporting system, and the Coast Guard has made all significant changes\nrecommended to ensure continued validity.\n\n (2) Explanations for not meeting performance targets are reasonable \xe2\x80\x93 The \n\n explanation(s) offered for failing to meet a performance target and for any \n\n recommendations concerning plans and schedules for meeting future targets are \n\n reasonable.\n\n\nThe Coast Guard did not meet its FY12 performance target. The explanations offered for\nfailing to meet the target are reasonable. The Coast Guard\xe2\x80\x99s FY 2012 performance target\nsatisfied OMB Circular A-11 guidance for establishing targets.\n\n (3) Methodology to establish performance targets is reasonable and applied \xe2\x80\x93 The\n methodology described above to establish performance targets for the current year is\n reasonable given past performance and available resources.\n\nThe Coast Guard methodology to establish performance targets is reasonable and applied.\nThe Coast Guard uses a quantitative and qualitative process that reviews intelligence,\nlogistics, strategic and operational policy, capability, emerging trends, past performance,\nand capacity variables impacting mission performance to establish performance targets.\nTargets generated by the program manager are reviewed independently by performance\nand budget oversight offices at Coast Guard Headquarters, as well as the DHS Office of\nProgram Analysis and Evaluation, prior to entry into budget documents and the DHS\nFuture Year Homeland Security Program database.\n\n (4) Adequate performance measures exist for all significant drug control activities\n\nThe 2007 OMB PART of the Coast Guard Drug Interdiction Program and 2007\nIndependent Program Evaluation by the Center for Naval Analyses validated the adequacy\nof Coast Guard performance measures.\n\nThe agency has established one acceptable performance measure that covers all four\nbudget decision units for which a significant amount of obligations ($1,000,000 or 50\npercent of the agency drug budget, whichever is less) were incurred in the previous fiscal\nyear. The metric was also reviewed and approved by DHS leadership in 2010.\n\n\n\n\n01/17/2013 Created by DCO-81\n\n\n Page 6 of 6\n\n\x0c OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL\n Department of Homeland Security\n\n\n Appendix A\n Report Distribution\n Department of Homeland Security\n\n Secretary\n Deputy Secretary\n Chief of Staff\n Deputy Chief of Staff\n General Counsel\n Executive Secretary\n Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office\n Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy\n Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs\n Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs\n Acting Chief Privacy Officer\n\n Office of Management and Budget\n\n Chief, Homeland Security Branch\n DHS OIG Budget Examiner\n\n Office of National Drug Control Policy\n\n Associate Director for Planning and Budget\n\n U.S. Coast Guard\n\n Commandant\n Chief Financial Officer\n Chief Information Officer\n\n Congress\n\n Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as appropriate\n\n\n \xef\xbf\xbd\n\n\n\n\nwww.oig.dhs.gov OIG-13-27\n\n\x0cADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES\n\nTo obtain additional copies of this document, please call us at (202) 254-4100, fax your\nrequest to (202) 254-4305, or e-mail your request to our Office of Inspector General\n(OIG) Office of Public Affairs at: DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@oig.dhs.gov.\n\nFor additional information, visit our website at: www.oig.dhs.gov, or follow us on Twitter\nat: @dhsoig.\n\nOIG HOTLINE\n\nTo expedite the reporting of alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any\nother kinds of criminal or noncriminal misconduct relative to Department of Homeland\nSecurity (DHS) programs and operations, please visit our website at www.oig.dhs.gov\nand click on the red tab titled "Hotline" to report. You will be directed to complete and\nsubmit an automated DHS OIG Investigative Referral Submission Form. Submission\nthrough our website ensures that your complaint will be promptly received and\nreviewed by DHS OIG.\n\nShould you be unable to access our website, you may submit your complaint in writing\nto: DHS Office of Inspector General, Attention: Office of Investigations Hotline, 245\nMurray Drive, SW, Building 410/Mail Stop 2600, Washington, DC, 20528; or you may\ncall 1 (800) 323-8603; or fax it directly to us at (202) 254-4297.\n\nThe OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.\n\x0c'


text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 22001D0002
 Decisión del Comité Mixto del EEE n° 2/2001, de 31 de enero de 2001, por la que se modifica el anexo II (Reglamentaciones técnicas, normas, ensayos y certificación) del Acuerdo EEE
 Diario Oficial n° L 066 de 08/03/2001 p. 0044 - 0044
 Decisión del Comité Mixto del EEEno 2/2001de 31 de enero de 2001por la que se modifica el anexo II (Reglamentaciones técnicas, normas, ensayos y certificación) del Acuerdo EEEEL COMITÉ MIXTO DEL EEE,Visto el Acuerdo sobre el Espacio Económico Europeo, adaptado por el Protocolo por el que se adapta el Acuerdo sobre el Espacio Económico Europeo, en lo sucesivo denominado "el Acuerdo", y, en particular, su artículo 98,Considerando lo siguiente:(1) El anexo II del Acuerdo fue modificado por la Decisión del Comité Mixto del EEE n° 76/2000, de 2 de octubre de 2000(1).(2) Deberá incorporarse al Acuerdo el Reglamento (CE) n° 1286/2000 de la Comisión, de 19 de junio de 2000, que modifica los anexos II y III del Reglamento (CEE) n° 2377/90 del Consejo por el que se establece un procedimiento comunitario de fijación de los límites máximos de residuos de medicamentos veterinarios en los alimentos de origen animal(2).(3) Deberá incorporarse al Acuerdo el Reglamento (CE) n° 1295/2000 de la Comisión, de 20 de junio de 2000, por el que se modifican los anexos II y III del Reglamento (CEE) n° 2377/90 del Consejo por el que se establece un procedimiento comunitario de fijación de los límites máximos de residuos de medicamentos veterinarios en los alimentos de origen animal(3).DECIDE:Artículo 1En el punto 14 [Reglamento (CEE) n° 2377/90 del Consejo] del capítulo XIII del anexo II del Acuerdo se añadirán los guiones siguientes:"- 32000 R 1286: Reglamento (CE) n° 1286/2000 de la Comisión, de 19 de junio de 2000 (DO L 145 de 20.6.2000, p. 15),- 32000 R 1295: Reglamento (CE) n° 1295/2000 de la Comisión, de 20 de junio de 2000 (DO L 146 de 21.6.2000, p. 11).".Artículo 2Los textos de los Reglamentos (CE) n° 1286/2000 y (CE) n° 1295/2000 en lenguas islandesa y noruega, que se publicarán en el Suplemento EEE del Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas, son auténticos.Artículo 3La presente Decisión entrará en vigor el 1 de febrero de 2001, siempre que se hayan efectuado al Comité Mixto del EEE todas las notificaciones establecidas en el apartado 1 del artículo 103 del Acuerdo(4).Artículo 4La presente Decisión se publicará en la sección EEE y en el Suplemento EEE del Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas.Hecho en Bruselas, el 31 de enero de 2001.Por el Comité Mixto del EEEEl PresidenteP. Westerlund(1) DO L 315 de 14.12.2000, p. 14.(2) DO L 145 de 20.6.2000, p. 15.(3) DO L 146 de 21.6.2000, p. 11.(4) No se han indicado preceptos constitucionales.