text:
zo 7. novembra 2019 ( *1 )
 A. Flausch, A. Bosco, E. R. J. P. Albrespy a Somateio „Syndesmos Iiton“, Somateio „Elliniko Diktyo – Filoi tis Fysis“ a Somateio „Syllogos Prostasias kai Perithalpsis Agrias Zois – SPPAZ“, v zastúpení: G. Dellis a A. Chasapopoulos, dikigoroi,
 105 Anonimi Touristiki kai Techniki Etaireia Ekmetallefsis Akiniton, v zastúpení: G. Giannakourou a D. Valasis, dikigoroi,
 grécka vláda, v zastúpení: K. Georgiadis, G. Karipsiadis, A. Banos a G. Papadaki, splnomocnení zástupcovia,
 Európska komisia, v zastúpení: G. Gattinara, M. Noll Ehlers, M. Konstantinidis a M. Patakia, splnomocnení zástupcovia,
 Návrh na začatie prejudiciálneho konania sa týka výkladu článkov 6 a 11 smernice Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2011/92/EÚ z 13. decembra 2011 o posudzovaní vplyvov určitých verejných a súkromných projektov na životné prostredie (Ú. v. EÚ L 26, 2012, s. 1, ďalej len „smernica o PVŽP“).
 Tento návrh bol podaný v rámci sporu, ktorého účastníkmi sú páni Alain Flausch, Andrea Bosco a Estienne Roger Jean Pierre Albrespy, ako aj Somateio „Syndesmos Iiton“, Somateio „Elliniko Diktyo – Filoi tis Fysis“ a Somateio „Syllogos Prostasias kai Perithalpsis Agrias Zois – SPPAZ“ na jednej strane a Ypourgos Perivallontos kai Energeias (minister pre životné prostredie a energie, Grécko), Ypourgos Oikonomikon (minister hospodárstva, Grécko), Ypourgos Tourismou (minister cestovného ruchu, Grécko) a Ypourgos Naftilias kai Nisiotikis Politikis (minister pre námorné veci a ostrovnú politiku, Grécko) vo veci zákonnosti aktov týkajúcich sa povolenia výstavby turistického komplexu na ostrove Ios (Grécko).
 Odôvodnenia 7 a 16 smernice o PVŽP znejú:
 Účinná účasť verejnosti pri prijímaní rozhodnutí umožňuje verejnosti vyjadrovať stanoviská a záujmy, ktoré môžu byť relevantné k daným rozhodnutiam a umožňuje osobe s rozhodovacou právomocou ich zohľadňovať, a tým zvyšovať zodpovednosť a transparentnosť rozhodovacieho procesu a prispievať k verejnému povedomiu o environmentálnych otázkach a podpore prijímaných rozhodnutí.“
 Článok 1 ods. 2 tejto smernice stanovuje:
 ‚verejnosť‘ znamená jednu alebo viacero fyzických osôb alebo právnických osôb a v súlade s vnútroštátnym právnym poriadkom alebo praxou ich združenia, organizácie alebo skupiny;
 ‚dotknutá verejnosť‘ znamená verejnosť, ktorá je dotknutá alebo pravdepodobne dotknutá [je dotknutá alebo môže byť dotknutá – neoficiálny preklad], alebo má záujem na postupoch environmentálneho rozhodovania uvedeného v článku 2 ods. 2; na účely tejto definície sa predpokladá, že mimovládne organizácie, podporujúce ochranu životného prostredia a spĺňajúce požiadavky vnútroštátneho práva, majú záujem.
 Pokiaľ ide o účasť verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese, článok 6 ods. 2 až 5 smernice o PVŽP znie takto:
 podrobnosti [podrobné podmienky – neoficiálny preklad] zabezpečenia účasti verejnosti podľa odseku 5 tohto článku.
 v súlade s ustanoveniami smernice Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2003/4/ES z 28. januára 2003 o prístupe verejnosti k informáciám o životnom prostredí [(Ú. v. EÚ L 41, 2003, s. 26; Mim. vyd. 15/007, s. 375)] iné informácie, ako sú uvedené v odseku 2 tohto článku, ktoré sú relevantné pre rozhodnutie v súlade s článkom 8 tejto smernice a ktoré sa stanú dostupnými po informovaní príslušnej verejnosti v súlade s odsekom 2 tohto článku.
 Pokiaľ ide o rozhodnutie o projekte, článok 9 ods. 1 smernice o PVŽP stanovuje:
 Pokiaľ ide o opravné prostriedky, článok 11 tejto smernice stanovuje:
 ak pretrváva porušovanie [ktorá tvrdí, že došlo k porušeniu – neoficiálny preklad] práva v prípadoch, kde to právne predpisy členského štátu upravujúce správne konanie požadujú ako predbežnú podmienku,
 § 1 ods. 1 zákona č. 4014/2011 o environmentálnom povoľovaní stavebných diel a činností, environmentálnej regulácii stavieb bez stavebného povolenia a ďalších ustanoveniach v právomoci Ministerstva pre životné prostredie, energie a klimatickú zmenu (FEK Α’ 209), rozdeľuje projekty verejného sektora a súkromného sektora do dvoch tried (A a B) v závislosti od ich vplyvov na životné prostredie. Do prvej triedy (A) sú zahrnuté stavebné diela a činnosti, ktoré pravdepodobne budú mať podstatné vplyvy na životné prostredie a pre ktoré je na účely prijatia osobitných podmienok a obmedzení na ochranu životného prostredia nutné vypracovať posúdenie vplyvu na životné prostredie (ďalej len „PVŽP“). Do druhej triedy (B) patria projekty s menším vplyvom na životné prostredie.
 § 3, 4 a 19 zákona č. 4014/2011 upravujú účasť verejnosti. Podľa § 12 zákona č. 4014/2011 sa rôzne povolenia zahrnú do jedného rozhodnutia o schválení environmentálnych podmienok (ďalej len „RSEP“).
 § 30 ods. 9 zákona č. 4014/2011 obsahuje prechodné ustanovenie, podľa ktorého sa do zavedenia elektronického environmentálneho registra zachováva platnosť doterajších ustanovení týkajúcich sa konzultácií so zúčastnenými subjektmi a postupu účasti verejnosti v rámci udeľovania environmentálneho povolenia. Podľa týchto ustanovení sa tento postup začína vyvesením oznámenia s informáciami o projekte na úradnej tabuli v priestoroch úradu dotknutého kraja a uverejnením informácií o projekte v miestnej tlači spolu s výzvou, aby sa každá dotknutá osoba oboznámila s PVŽP a vyjadrila svoj názor.
 Podľa § 19a zákona č. 4014/2011 sa musí RSEP povinne uverejniť na internetovej stránke do jedného mesiaca po jeho prijatí. V prípade nedodržania tejto lehoty jeho platnosť zaniká. Uverejnenie RSEP na osobitnej internetovej stránke sa považuje za uverejnenie podľa zákona a zakladá domnienku, že ktorákoľvek dotknutá osoba sa o ňom dozvedela, takže mohla využiť svoje právo podať žalobu o neplatnosť alebo akýkoľvek iný opravný prostriedok.
 Podľa § 46 prezidentského dekrétu č. 18/1989 o kodifikácii zákonných ustanovení týkajúcich sa Štátnej rady (FEK A’ 8) pokiaľ nie je ustanovené inak, možno žalobu o neplatnosť podať v lehote 60 dní (90 dní v prípade nerezidentov) plynúcej odo dňa nasledujúceho po doručení napadnutého aktu alebo odo dňa jeho uverejnenia, ak je uverejnenie stanovené zákonom alebo od okamihu, keď žalobca nadobudol úplnú znalosť o akte. V zmysle tohto ustanovenia, ako ho vykladá ustálená judikatúra, pokiaľ zákon vyžaduje, aby bol individuálny správny akt uverejnený podľa osobitných pravidiel, lehota na podanie žaloby o neplatnosť tohto aktu začína pre dotknuté osoby plynúť od doručenia aktu alebo od dátumu, kedy sa dozvedeli o jeho obsahu, a pokiaľ ide o dotknuté tretie osoby, od uverejnenia uvedeného aktu.
 Spor vo veci samej sa týka zámeru výstavby turistického komplexu na ostrove Ios. Tento ostrov v rámci súostrovia Kyklady patriaci do regiónu Južné egejské ostrovy (Grécko), sa rozkladá na ploche približne 100 km2 obývaných približne 2000 trvalými obyvateľmi.
 Sporný projekt predpokladá výstavbu hotela, kúpeľného centra, ďalších ubytovacích priestorov a podporných stavieb a zariadení, ako je odsoľovacia jednotka, prístavné zariadenia, umelé pláže, most spájajúci ostrovček s pevninou, cestná sieť a ďalšia infraštruktúra. Projekt je naplánovaný na parcele s rozlohou 27 ha, na ktorej má byť umiestnených viac než 18 ha zastavanej plochy. Zámer zahŕňa využitie pobrežia, prílivového pobrežného pásma a námorného priestoru.
 V súlade s gréckou právnou úpravou uplatniteľnou na stavebné diela patriace do triedy projektu, o ktorý ide vo veci samej, teda triedy A, sa uskutočnilo PVŽP.
 Dňa 2. augusta 2013 bola v miestnom denníku ostrova Syros (Koini Gnomi), ako aj v kanceláriách regiónu Južné egejské ostrovy nachádzajúcich sa na ostrove Syros (Grécko) vzdialenom od ostrova Ios 55 námorných míľ, uverejnená výzva pre všetky osoby, ktoré majú záujem zúčastniť sa PVŽP. Na Syrose sa nachádzala aj dokumentácia k PVŽP a mali sa na ňom uskutočniť aj konzultácie.
 Zo spisu, ktorý má Súdny dvor k dispozícii, vyplýva, že medzi ostrovmi Ios a Syros sa neprevádzkuje každodenné spojenie, pričom takéto spojenie z dôvodu neexistencie vysokorýchlostného plavidla na tejto trase trvá niekoľko hodín a cena za lístok nie je zanedbateľná.
 Dňa 8. augusta 2014 prijali minister pre životné prostredie a energie a minister cestovného ruchu RSEP, ktorými sa schvaľuje projekt výstavby turistického komplexu na ostrove Ios, a environmentálne požiadavky, ktoré sa naň vzťahujú.
 Toto rozhodnutie bolo 11. augusta 2014 umiestnené na internetový portál Diavgeia určený na zverejňovanie a 8. septembra 2014 bolo uverejnené na internetovej stránke Ministerstva životného prostredia www.aepo.ypeka.gr (ďalej len „internetová stránka Ministerstva životného prostredia“) v súlade s § 19a zákona č. 4014/2011.
 Pred vnútroštátnym súdom žalobcovia vo veci samej, teda tri fyzické osoby, ktoré sú vlastníkmi nehnuteľností na ostrove Ios, ale majú bydlisko v Belgicku, Taliansku, resp. vo Francúzsku, ako aj tri združenia, napadli RSEP z 8. augusta 2014 žalobou podanou až 19. februára 2016.
 Poslední menovaní tvrdia, že sa s RSEP z 8. augusta 2014 oboznámili až 22. decembra 2015, teda v deň, keď si mohli všimnúť začatie terénnych prác.
 Spoločnosť 105 Anonimi Touristiki kai Techniki Etaireia Ekmetallefsis Akiniton, ktorá je držiteľkou schválení a povolení týkajúcich sa projektu, vstúpila do konania ako vedľajší účastník konania a vzniesla námietku oneskoreného podania žaloby.
 Za týchto podmienok Symvoulio tis Epikrateias (Štátna rada, Grécko) rozhodla prerušiť konanie a položiť Súdnemu dvoru nasledujúce prejudiciálne otázky:
 Majú sa články 6 a 11 smernice [2011/92] v spojení s článkom 47 Charty základných práv Európskej únie vykladať v tom zmysle, že sú s nimi zlučiteľné ustanovenia vnútroštátneho práva, ako sú ustanovenia uvedené v bodoch 8, 9 a 10 [návrhu na začatie prejudiciálneho konania], podľa ktorých postupy predchádzajúce prijatiu rozhodnutia o schválení environmentálnych podmienok pre stavebné diela a činnosti, ktoré majú významný vplyv na životné prostredie (konkrétne uverejnenie štúdií posúdenia vplyvu na životné prostredie, informovanie verejnosti a účasť verejnosti na konzultáciách) v zásade uskutočňuje a kontroluje väčšia správna jednotka, ktorou je región, a nie dotknutá obec?
 Majú sa články 6 a 11 smernice [2011/92] v spojení s článkom 47 [Charty základných práv] vykladať v tom zmysle, že je s nimi zlučiteľný systém ustanovení vnútroštátneho práva opísaný v tých istých bodoch, ktorý v konečnom dôsledku stanovuje, že uverejnenie rozhodnutí o schválení environmentálnych podmienok pre stavebné diela a činnosti, ktoré majú významný vplyv na životné prostredie, ich umiestnením na osobitnej internetovej stránke zakladá domnienku o úplnom oboznámení sa s nimi pre každú dotknutú osobu na účely podania opravného prostriedku podľa účinnej právnej úpravy [podanie žaloby o neplatnosť na Symvoulio tis Epikrateias (Štátna rada)] v lehote šesťdesiat dní, ak sa zohľadnia ustanovenia právnych predpisov o uverejnení štúdií posúdenia vplyvu na životné prostredie, informovaní verejnosti a jej účasti na postupe schvaľovania environmentálnych podmienok pre takéto stavebné diela a činnosti, ktoré prisudzujú hlavnú úlohu v týchto postupoch väčšej správnej jednotke, ktorou je región, a nie dotknutej obci?“
 Svojou prvou otázkou sa vnútroštátny súd v podstate pýta, či sa má článok 6 smernice o PVŽP vykladať v tom zmysle, že členský štát môže uskutočňovať úkony účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese o projekte na úrovni sídla príslušného regionálneho správneho orgánu, a nie na úrovni jednotky obce, v ktorej sa má tento projekt uskutočniť.
 V tejto súvislosti je potrebné uviesť, že článok 6 ods. 5 smernice o PVŽP výslovne vyhradzuje členským štátom, aby určili podrobné podmienky pre informovanie verejnosti a konzultácie s dotknutou verejnosťou.
 Za týchto podmienok v prípade neexistencie pravidiel stanovených právom Únie, pokiaľ ide o procesné postupy, v súlade s ktorými by mali členské štáty postupovať, aby splnili svoje povinnosti v oblasti informovania a účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese v oblasti životného prostredia, podľa ustálenej judikatúry prináleží vnútroštátnemu právnemu poriadku každého členského štátu, aby upravil tieto postupy na základe zásady procesnej autonómie, avšak pod podmienkou, že tieto postupy nebudú menej výhodné ako postupy upravujúce podobné situácie vnútroštátnej povahy (zásada ekvivalencie) a že v praxi nebudú znemožňovať alebo nadmerne sťažovať výkon práv priznaných právnym poriadkom Únie (zásada efektivity) (pozri analogicky rozsudok z 20. októbra 2016, Danqua, C‐429/15, EU:C:2016:789, bod 29).
 Na úvod je potrebné rozptýliť všetky pochybnosti, pokiaľ ide o dodržanie podmienky týkajúcej sa zásady ekvivalencie v situácii žiadosti o vydanie environmentálneho povolenia, o akú ide vo veci samej. S výhradou overenia, ktoré prináleží vnútroštátnemu súdu, totiž zo spisu, ktorý má Súdny dvor k dispozícii, nevyplýva, a ani to nikto netvrdil, že by sa podobné situácie riadili vnútroštátnymi procesnými postupmi, ktoré sú výhodnejšie než procesné postupy stanovené na vykonanie smernice o PVŽP a použité vo veci samej.
 Naopak, pokiaľ ide o zásadu efektivity, vnútroštátny súd si kladie otázku vo vzťahu k trom aspektom postupu, o ktorý ide vo veci samej.
 V prvom rade poukazuje na spôsob, akým bola verejnosť informovaná o existencii projektu a konzultáciách, ktoré sa vo vzťahu k nemu majú uskutočniť.
 V tejto súvislosti je potrebné pripomenúť, že podľa článku 6 ods. 4 smernice o PVŽP musia príležitosti zúčastniť sa v skorom štádiu na rozhodovacom procese týkajúcom sa životného prostredia, ktoré sa majú poskytnúť dotknutej verejnosti, spĺňať podmienku účinnosti.
 V dôsledku toho, ako uviedla generálna advokátka v bode 53 svojich návrhov, nestačí použiť ľubovoľnú formu oznámenia danej veci. Príslušné orgány sa totiž musia uistiť, že použité informačné kanály je rozumne možné považovať za vhodné na to, aby sa oznámenie skutočne dostalo k dotknutej verejnosti, aby sa jej tak poskytla primeraná možnosť informovať sa o plánovaných činnostiach, rozhodovacom procese a svojich možnostiach zúčastniť sa na konaní v jeho skorom štádiu.
 Vnútroštátnemu súdu prináleží určiť, či boli tieto požiadavky dodržané v konaní, ktoré predchádzalo sporu vo veci samej.
 S cieľom poskytnúť vnútroštátnemu súdu užitočnú odpoveď je však možné uviesť, že vzhľadom na to, že ku dňu uverejnenia výzvy na účasť na PVŽP mala väčšina dotknutých osôb bydlisko alebo vlastnila nehnuteľnosť na ostrove Ios, vyvesenie oznámenia v priestoroch regionálneho správneho sídla na ostrove Syros, hoci aj sprevádzané uverejnením v miestnom denníku ostrova Syros, podľa všetkého nebolo takej povahy, aby primerane prispelo k informovanosti dotknutej verejnosti.
 Opačné posúdenie by mohlo vyplývať iba zo zistenia, že predmetný miestny denník mal na ostrove Ios značné pokrytie distribúcie a veľkú čítanosť. Ak to tak nebolo, formy oznámenia použité vo veci samej by bolo možné považovať za dostatočné len vtedy, ak by neexistovali iné vhodnejšie spôsoby oznámenia, ktoré mohli príslušné orgány použiť bez toho, aby si to od nich vyžadovalo neprimerané úsilie, ako je vyvesenie oznámenia na najnavštevovanejších miestach ostrova Ios alebo na samotnom mieste uskutočnenia tohto projektu.
 Keďže Súdny dvor nemá k dispozícii presné informácie o spôsoboch distribúcie miestneho denníka na ostrove Ios, prislúcha vnútroštátnemu súdu overiť, či vzhľadom na úvahy uvedené v predchádzajúcom bode bolo informovanie dotknutej verejnosti o predmetnom konaní primerané.
 Vnútroštátny súd má v druhom rade výhrady voči miestu, kde bola verejnosti sprístupnená dokumentácia obsahujúca informácie o projekte, o ktorý ide vo veci samej.
 V tejto súvislosti platí, že podmienky prístupu k dokumentácii v rámci postupu účasti verejnosti musia dotknutej verejnosti umožňovať účinne uplatniť svoje práva, z čoho vyplýva, že uvedená dokumentácia musí byť ľahko prístupná.
 Prípadné ťažkosti, s ktorými sa dotknutá verejnosť stretáva pri tomto úsilí, môžu byť napriek tomu odôvodnené existenciou neprimeranej administratívnej záťaže na strane príslušného orgánu.
 Hoci je na vnútroštátnom súde, aby určil, či boli takéto požiadavky dodržané v konaní, ktoré viedlo k sporu vo veci samej, je potrebné poukázať na to, že toto posúdenie, ako uviedla generálna advokátka v bodoch 71 a 72 svojich návrhov, bude musieť zohľadniť úsilie, ktoré musela dotknutá verejnosť vynaložiť na prekonanie vzdialenosti z ostrova Ios na ostrov Syros, ako aj možnosti, ktoré mali príslušné orgány, aby za cenu primeraného úsilia umožnili sprístupnenie dokumentácie na ostrove Ios.
 Pochybnosti vnútroštátneho súdu sa v treťom a poslednom rade týkajú toho, akým spôsobom sa uskutočnila konzultácia na ostrove Syros.
 V tejto súvislosti je potrebné pripomenúť, že podľa článku 6 ods. 5 smernice o PVŽP členské štáty určia podrobné podmienky konzultácií s dotknutou verejnosťou, pričom toto ustanovenie len ako príklad uvádza konzultácie „písomnými zásielkami alebo prostredníctvom verejnej ankety“.
 Vnútroštátnemu súdu prináleží overiť, či bola v tejto súvislosti v konaní, o ktoré ide vo veci samej dodržaná zásada efektivity, a to tak, že posúdi dodržanie podobných požiadaviek, ako sú uvedené v bodoch 38 a 39 tohto rozsudku.
 V dôsledku toho je na prvú otázku potrebné odpovedať tak, že článok 6 smernice o PVŽP sa má vykladať v tom zmysle, že bráni tomu, aby členský štát uskutočňoval úkony účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese o projekte na úrovni sídla príslušného regionálneho správneho orgánu, a nie na úrovni jednotky obce, v ktorej sa má tento projekt uskutočniť, ak konkrétne uplatňované podmienky nezaručujú dotknutej verejnosti skutočné dodržanie jej práv, čo prislúcha overiť vnútroštátnemu súdu.
 Svojou druhou otázkou sa vnútroštátny súd v podstate pýta, či sa majú články 9 a 11 smernice o PVŽP vzhľadom na odpoveď na prvú otázku vykladať v tom zmysle, že bránia takej právnej úprave, o akú ide vo veci samej, ktorá stanovuje, že oznámenie schválenia projektu na osobitnej internetovej stránke vyvoláva začiatok plynutia lehoty 60 dní na podanie opravného prostriedku.
 Na úvod je potrebné pripomenúť, že článok 11 smernice o PVŽP, ktorého sa čiastočne týka táto otázka, bol vyložený v tom zmysle, že jeho pôsobnosť sa obmedzuje na aspekty sporu spočívajúce v uplatnení práva dotknutej verejnosti zúčastniť sa na rozhodovacom procese podľa podrobných pravidiel stanovených v tejto oblasti touto smernicou. Naopak opravné prostriedky založené na akomkoľvek inom pravidle uvedenej smernice, a o to viac opravné prostriedky založené na akomkoľvek inom právnom predpise Únie alebo členských štátov, nepatria do pôsobnosti tohto článku (pozri v tomto zmysle rozsudok z 15. marca 2018, North East Pylon Pressure Campaign a Sheehy, C‐470/16, EU:C:2018:185, body 36 a 39).
 Vzhľadom na uvedené sa článok 11 smernice o PVŽP uplatní v situácii, o akú ide vo veci samej, aj keď sa opravný prostriedok týka iba rozhodnutia o povolení, a nie otázok účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese.
 Článok 11 ods. 2 smernice o PVŽP totiž stanovuje, že členské štáty určia, v akom štádiu možno napadnúť rozhodnutia, úkony alebo opomenutia podľa článku 11 ods. 1 tejto smernice.
 Z odpovede gréckej vlády na otázku Súdneho dvora položenú na pojednávaní pritom vyplýva, že helénske právo stanovuje, že prípadné nedostatky účasti verejnosti sa musia vytýkať v rámci žaloby proti konečnému rozhodnutiu o povolení.
 Ďalej je potrebné uviesť, že podľa článku 9 ods. 1 smernice o PVŽP majú príslušné orgány v súlade s príslušnými postupmi informovať verejnosť o rozhodnutí o udelení alebo zamietnutí povolenia. Hoci toto ustanovenie stanovuje určité podmienky týkajúce sa obsahu tohto oznámenia, nevyjadruje sa k postupu, ktorý sa má dodržať.
 Keďže v smernici o PVŽP nie je stanovené žiadne pravidlo týkajúce sa začiatku plynutia a počítanie lehôt na podanie opravného prostriedku, je potrebné konštatovať, že úmyslom normotvorcu Únie bolo vyhradiť tieto otázky procesnej autonómii členských štátov v súlade so zásadami ekvivalencie a efektivity uvedenými v bode 27 tohto rozsudku, pričom z dôvodov, ktoré sú analogické dôvodom uvedeným v bode 28 tohto rozsudku, ide v prejednávanej veci len o druhú z týchto dvoch zásad.
 V tejto súvislosti je potrebné rozptýliť pochybnosti vnútroštátneho súdu týkajúce sa zásady efektivity, pokiaľ ide o samotné uverejnenie rozhodnutia na internete alebo existenciu lehoty na podanie opravného prostriedku.
 Článok 6 ods. 2 smernice o PVŽP totiž ako prostriedok komunikácie na informovanie verejnosti výslovne uvádza elektronické médiá, ak sú k dispozícii.
 Pokiaľ ide o lehoty na podanie žaloby, je potrebné pripomenúť, že ako uznal Súdny dvor, stanovenie primeraných lehôt na podanie žalôb pod hrozbou zániku práva v záujme právnej istoty, ktorá chráni tak dotknutú osobu, ako aj dotknutý správny orgán, hoci ako vyplýva z podstaty takýchto lehôt, ich uplynutie spôsobuje úplné alebo čiastočné zamietnutie podanej žaloby, je v súlade so zásadou efektivity (pozri v tomto zmysle rozsudok z 20. decembra 2017, Caterpillar Financial Services, C‐500/16, EU:C:2017:996, bod 42).
 Súdny dvor nepovažuje za nadmerné sťaženie, ak sa stanoví lehota na podanie opravného prostriedku, ktorá začne plynúť až odo dňa, keď sa dotknutá osoba dozvedela o oznámení, alebo sa o ňom prinajmenšom mala dozvedieť (pozri v tomto zmysle rozsudky z 27. februára 2003, Santex, C‐327/00, EU:C:2003:109, body 55 a 57; zo 6. októbra 2009, Asturcom Telecomunicaciones, C‐40/08, EU:C:2009:615, bod 45, ako aj z 8. septembra 2011, Rosado Santana, C‐177/10, EU:C:2011:557, bod 96).
 Naopak, so zásadou efektivity by bolo nezlučiteľné vyžadovať od určitej osoby dodržanie lehoty, ak konanie vnútroštátnych orgánov spolu s existenciou lehoty viedlo k tomu, že dotknutá osoba bola úplne pozbavená možnosti uplatniť si svoje práva pred vnútroštátnymi súdmi, t. j. ak oneskorené podanie žaloby zapríčinili vnútroštátne orgány svojím správaním (pozri v tomto zmysle rozsudok z 19. mája 2011, Iaia a i., C‐452/09, EU:C:2011:323, bod 21).
 Napokon z článku 11 ods. 3 smernice o PVŽP vyplýva, že členské štáty musia pri stanovovaní pravidiel pre opravné prostriedky v oblasti účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese sledovať cieľ širokého prístupu k spravodlivosti (pozri v tomto zmysle rozsudky z 11. apríla 2013, Edwards a Pallikaropoulos, C‐260/11, EU:C:2013:221, body 31 a 44, ako aj zo 17. októbra 2018, Klohn, C‐167/17, EU:C:2018:833, bod 35).
 V tejto súvislosti možno uviesť, že ako vyplýva z odpovede na prvú otázku, dotknutá verejnosť musí byť informovaná o povoľovacom konaní a o svojich možnostiach zúčastniť sa na tomto konaní primeraným spôsobom a dostatočne vopred. Ak by to tak nebolo, členovia dotknutej verejnosti by nemohli očakávať, že budú informovaní o konečnom rozhodnutí týkajúcom sa povolenia.
 To platí najmä za takých podmienok, o aké ide vo veci samej. Samotná skutočnosť, že rozhodnutie o povolení je ex post k dispozícii na internetovej stránke Ministerstva životného prostredia, totiž nemôže byť považovaná za dostatočnú z hľadiska zásady efektivity, pretože v prípade, že neexistovali dostatočné informácie o začatí postupu účasti verejnosti, nemožno vo vzťahu k nikomu predpokladať, že sa informoval o uverejnení príslušného konečného rozhodnutia.
 V dôsledku toho je na druhú otázku potrebné odpovedať tak, že články 9 a 11 smernice o PVŽP sa majú vykladať v tom zmysle, že bránia takej právnej úprave, o akú ide vo veci samej, ktorá vedie k tomu, že voči členom dotknutej verejnosti možno namietať zmeškanie lehoty na podanie opravného prostriedku, ktorá začína plynúť od oznámenia povolenia projektu na internete, pokiaľ títo členovia dotknutej verejnosti nemali predtým primeranú možnosť informovať sa o povoľovacom konaní podľa článku 6 ods. 2 tejto smernice.
 Článok 6 smernice Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2011/92/EÚ z 13. decembra 2011 o posudzovaní vplyvov určitých verejných a súkromných projektov na životné prostredie sa má vykladať v tom zmysle, že bráni tomu, aby členský štát uskutočňoval úkony účasti verejnosti na rozhodovacom procese o projekte na úrovni sídla príslušného regionálneho správneho orgánu, a nie na úrovni jednotky obce, v ktorej sa má tento projekt uskutočniť, ak konkrétne uplatňované podmienky nezaručujú dotknutej verejnosti skutočné dodržanie jej práv, čo prislúcha overiť vnútroštátnemu súdu.
 Články 9 a 11 smernice 2011/92 sa majú vykladať v tom zmysle, že bránia takej právnej úprave, o akú ide vo veci samej, ktorá vedie k tomu, že voči členom dotknutej verejnosti možno namietať zmeškanie lehoty na podanie opravného prostriedku, ktorá začína plynúť od oznámenia povolenia projektu na internete, pokiaľ títo členovia dotknutej verejnosti nemali predtým primeranú možnosť informovať sa o povoľovacom konaní podľa článku 6 ods. 2 tejto smernice.


type: wikipedia

text:
Telesto (također Saturn XIII) je prirodni satelit planeta Saturn. Unutarnji pravilni satelit s oko 24 kilometra u promjeru i orbitalnim periodom od 1.887802 dana.
 Telesto je Tetijin trojanac, nastanjen u Tetijinoj vodećoj Lagrangijanskoj točki ( L4 ). Još jedan mjesec, Kalipso, nalazi se u drugoj (pratećoj) Lagrangijskoj točki Tethysa, 60 stupnjeva u drugom smjeru od Tetije. Saturnov sustav ima dva dodatna trojanska mjeseca.
 Cassini-Huygens izvršio je daleki prolet Telesta 11. listopada 2005. godine. Slike pokazuju da je njegova površina iznenađujuće glatka, bez malih kratera.
 Saturnovi prirodni sateliti


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 18.8.2012
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 250/19
 Žaloba podaná dne 2. července 2012 — Health Food Manufacturer’s Association a další v. Komise
 (Věc T-296/12)
 2012/C 250/35
 Jednací jazyk: angličtina
 Účastníci řízení
 Žalobci: The Health Food Manufacturer’s Association (East Molesey, Spojené království); Quest Vitamins Ltd (Birmingham, Spojené království); Natures Aid Ltd (Kirkham, Spojené království); Natuur- & gezonheidsProducten Nederland (Ermelo, Nizozemsko); a New Care Supplements BV (Oisterwijk, Nizozemsko) (zástupci: B. Kelly a G. Castle, Solicitors, a P. Bogaert, advokát)
 Žalovaná: Evropská komise
 Návrhová žádání
 —
 Zrušit nařízení Komise (EU) č. 432/2012 ze dne 16. května 2012, kterým se zřizuje seznam schválených zdravotních tvrzení při označování potravin jiných než tvrzení o snížení rizika onemocnění a o vývoji a zdraví dětí (Úř. věst. L 136, s. 1);
 —
 zrušit rozhodnutí Komise ze dne 16. května 2012, kterým se přijímá seznam schválených zdravotních tvrzení a zřizuje seznam tzv. stranou odložených zdravotních tvrzení, která Komise nezamítla ani neschválila;
 —
 uložit žalované náhradu nákladů řízení.
 Žalobní důvody a hlavní argumenty
 Na podporu žaloby předkládají žalobci tři žalobní důvody, na základě kterých tvrdí, že je napadené nařízení protiprávní z následujících důvodů:
 1)
 První žalobní důvod
 —
 vycházející z toho, že přijetí schváleného seznamu zdravotních tvrzení obecné funkce a ponechání některých tvrzení v režimu přechodných opatření článku 28 nařízení (ES) č. 1924/2006 (tedy rozdělení posuzovacího procesu a přijetí částečného seznamu tvrzení podle čl. 13 odst. 1) postrádá jakýkoli právní základ. Krom toho porušuje zásady řádné správy, právní jistoty a zákazu diskriminace z několika důvodů, zejména: neexistovalo žádné odůvodnění pro rozdělení procesu; rozdělení postrádalo transparentnost; neproběhla žádná konzultace nebo neexistovaly rozumné důvody pro rozdělení; některá tvrzení jsou tzv. odložena stranou a nadále využívají stávající přechodná období podle nařízení (ES) č. 1924/2006 (i přes právní nejistotu těchto přechodných období).
 2)
 Druhý žalobní důvod
 —
 vycházející z toho, že z důvodu použití nesprávných posuzovacích kritérií nebylo mnoho zdravotních tvrzení zařazeno na schválený seznam, což porušuje nařízení č. 1924/2006 i zásady řádné správy a právní jistoty, povinnost spolupráce s vnitrostátními úřady pro bezpečnost potravin a povinnost uvést odpovídající odůvodnění.
 3)
 Třetí žalobní důvod
 —
 pokud nebude výše uvedeným žalobním důvodům vyhověno, žalobci tvrdí, že samotné nařízení č. 1924/2006 je neplatné z důvodu porušení práva být vyslechnut a porušení právní jistoty. Žalobci se v této žalobě dovolávají protiprávnosti nařízení č. 1924/2006 podle článku 277 SFEU, což podporuje protiprávnost nařízení (EU) č. 432/2012.


type: contracts

text:
 Important legal notice
 |
 22008A0208(01)
 Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities
 Official Journal L 034 , 08/02/2008 P. 0005 - 0018
 ANNEX 1Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear FacilitiesTHE STATES PARTIES TO THIS CONVENTION,RECOGNISING the right of all States to develop and apply nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and their legitimate interests in the potential benefits to be derived from the peaceful application of nuclear energy,CONVINCED of the need to facilitate international cooperation and the transfer of nuclear technology for the peaceful application of nuclear energy,BEARING IN MIND that physical protection is of vital importance for the protection of public health, safety, the environment and national and international security,HAVING IN MIND the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations concerning the maintenance of international peace and security and the promotion of good-neighbourliness and friendly relations and cooperation among States,CONSIDERING that under the terms of paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations, "All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations,"RECALLING the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, annexed to General Assembly resolution 49/60 of 9 December 1994,DESIRING to avert the potential dangers posed by illicit trafficking, the unlawful taking and use of nuclear material and the sabotage of nuclear material and nuclear facilities, and noting that physical protection against such acts has become a matter of increased national and international concern,DEEPLY CONCERNED by the worldwide escalation of acts of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, and by the threats posed by international terrorism and organised crime,BELIEVING that physical protection plays an important role in supporting nuclear non-proliferation and counter-terrorism objectives,DESIRING through this Convention to contribute to strengthening worldwide the physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities use for peaceful purposes,CONVINCED that offences relating to nuclear material and nuclear facilities are a matter of grave concern and that there is an urgent need to adopt appropriate and effective measures, or to strengthen existing measures, to ensure the prevention, detection and punishment of such offences,DESIRING to strengthen further international cooperation to establish, in conformity with the national law of each State Party and with this Convention, effective measures for the physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities,CONVINCED that this Convention should complement the safe use, storage and transport of nuclear material and the safe operation of nuclear facilities,RECOGNISING that there are internationally formulated physical protection recommendations that are updated from time to time which can provide guidance on contemporary means of achieving effective levels of physical protection,RECOGNISING also that effective physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities used for military purposes is a responsibility of the State possessing such nuclear material and nuclear facilities, and understanding that such material and facilities are and will continue to be accorded stringent physical protection,HAVE AGREED as follows:Article 1For the purposes of this Convention:(a) "nuclear material" means plutonium except that with isotopic concentration exceeding 80 % in plutonium-238; uranium-233; uranium enriched in the isotope 235 or 233; uranium containing the mixture of isotopes as occurring in nature other than in the form of ore or ore-residue; any material containing one or more of the foregoing;(b) "uranium enriched in the isotope 235 or 233" means uranium containing the isotope 235 or 233 or both in an amount such that the abundance ratio of the sum of these isotopes to the isotope 238 is greater than the ratio of the isotope 235 to the isotope 238 occurring in nature;(c) "international nuclear transport" means the carriage of a consignment of nuclear material by any means of transportation intended to go beyond the territory of the State where the shipment originates beginning with the departure from a facility of the shipper in that State and ending with the arrival at a facility of the receiver within the State of ultimate destination;(d) "nuclear facility" means a facility (including associated buildings and equipment) in which nuclear material is produced, processed, used, handled, stored or disposed of, if damage to or interference with such facility could lead to the release of significant amounts of radiation or radioactive material;(e) "sabotage" means any deliberate act directed against a nuclear facility or nuclear material in use, storage or transport which could directly or indirectly endanger the health and safety of personnel, the public or the environment by exposure to radiation or release of radioactive substances.Article 1AThe purposes of this Convention are to achieve and maintain worldwide effective physical protection of nuclear material used for peaceful purposes and of nuclear facilities used for peaceful purposes; to prevent and combat offences relating to such material and facilities worldwide; as well as to facilitate cooperation among States Parties to those ends.Article 21. This Convention shall apply to nuclear material used for peaceful purposes in use, storage and transport and to nuclear facilities used for peaceful purposes, provided, however, that Articles 3 and 4 and paragraph 4 of Article 5 of this Convention shall only apply to such nuclear material while in international nuclear transport.2. The responsibility for the establishment, implementation and maintenance of a physical protection regime within a State Party rests entirely with that State.3. Apart from the commitments expressly undertaken by States Parties under this Convention, nothing in this Convention shall be interpreted as affecting the sovereign rights of a State.4. (a) Nothing in this Convention shall affect other rights, obligations and responsibilities of States Parties under international law, in particular the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and international humanitarian law.(b) The activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under international humanitarian law, which are governed by that law, are not governed by this Convention, and the activities undertaken by the military forces of a State in the exercise of their official duties, inasmuch as they are governed by other rules of international law, are not governed by this Convention.(c) Nothing in this Convention shall be construed as a lawful authorisation to use or threaten to use force against nuclear material or nuclear facilities used for peaceful purposes.(d) Nothing in this Convention condones or makes lawful otherwise unlawful acts, nor precludes prosecution under other laws.5. This Convention shall not apply to nuclear material used or retained for military purposes or to a nuclear facility containing such material.Article 2A1. Each State Party shall establish, implement and maintain an appropriate physical protection regime applicable to nuclear material and nuclear facilities under its jurisdiction, with the aim of:(a) protecting against theft and other unlawful taking of nuclear material in use, storage and transport;(b) ensuring the implementation of rapid and comprehensive measures to locate and, where appropriate, recover missing or stolen nuclear material; when the material is located outside its territory, that State Party shall act in accordance with Article 5;(c) protecting nuclear material and nuclear facilities against sabotage; and(d) mitigating or minimising the radiological consequences of sabotage.2. In implementing paragraph 1, each State Party shall:(a) establish and maintain a legislative and regulatory framework to govern physical protection;(b) establish or designate a competent authority or authorities responsible for the implementation of the legislative and regulatory framework; and(c) take other appropriate measures necessary for the physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities.3. In implementing the obligations under paragraphs 1 and 2, each State Party shall, without prejudice to any other provisions of this Convention, apply insofar as is reasonable and practicable the following Fundamental Principles of Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE A: Responsibility of the StateThe responsibility for the establishment, implementation and maintenance of a physical protection regime within a State rests entirely with that State.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE B: Responsibilities during international transportThe responsibility of a State for ensuring that nuclear material is adequately protected extends to the international transport thereof, until that responsibility is properly transferred to another State, as appropriate.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE C: Legislative and regulatory frameworkThe State is responsible for establishing and maintaining a legislative and regulatory framework to govern physical protection. This framework should provide for the establishment of applicable physical protection requirements and include a system of evaluation and licensing or other procedures to grant authorisation. This framework should include a system of inspection of nuclear facilities and transport to verify compliance with applicable requirements and conditions of the license or other authorising document, and to establish a means to enforce applicable requirements and conditions, including effective sanctions.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE D: Competent authorityThe State should establish or designate a competent authority which is responsible for the implementation of the legislative and regulatory framework, and is provided with adequate authority, competence and financial and human resources to fulfil its assigned responsibilities. The State should take steps to ensure an effective independence between the functions of the State's competent authority and those of any other body in charge of the promotion or utilisation of nuclear energy.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE E: Responsibility of the licence holdersThe responsibilities for implementing the various elements of physical protection within a State should be clearly identified. The State should ensure that the prime responsibility for the implementation of physical protection of nuclear material or of nuclear facilities rests with the holders of the relevant licences or of other authorising documents (e.g. operators or shippers).FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE F: Security cultureAll organisations involved in implementing physical protection should give due priority to the security culture, to its development and maintenance necessary to ensure its effective implementation in the entire organisation.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE G: ThreatThe State's physical protection should be based on the State's current evaluation of the threat.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE H: Graded approachPhysical protection requirements should be based on a graded approach, taking into account the current evaluation of the threat, the relative attractiveness, the nature of the material and potential consequences associated with the unauthorised removal of nuclear material and with the sabotage against nuclear material or nuclear facilities.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE I: Defence in depthThe State's requirements for physical protection should reflect a concept of several layers and methods of protection (structural or other technical, personnel and organisational) that have to be overcome or circumvented by an adversary in order to achieve his objectives.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE J: Quality assuranceA quality assurance policy and quality assurance programmes should be established and implemented with a view to providing confidence that specified requirements far all activities important to physical protection are satisfied.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE K: Contingency plansContingency (emergency) plans to respond to unauthorised removal of nuclear material or sabotage of nuclear facilities or nuclear material, or attempts thereof, should be prepared and appropriately exercised by all licence holders and authorities concerned.FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE L: ConfidentialityThe State should establish requirements for protecting the confidentiality of information, the unauthorised disclosure of which could compromise the physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities.4. (a) The provisions of this Article shall not apply to any nuclear material which the State Party reasonably decides does not need to be subject to the physical protection regime established pursuant to paragraph 1, taking into account the nature of the material, its quantity and relative attractiveness and the potential radiological and other consequences associated with any unauthorised act directed against it and the current evaluation of the threat against it.(b) Nuclear material which is not subject to the provisions of this Article pursuant to subparagraph (a) should be protected in accordance with prudent management practice.Article 3Each State Party shall take appropriate steps within the framework of its national law and consistent with international law to ensure as far as practicable that, during international nuclear transport, nuclear material within its territory, or on board a ship or aircraft under its jurisdiction insofar as such ship or aircraft is engaged in the transport to or from that State, is protected at the levels described in Annex I.Article 41. Each State Party shall not export or authorise the export of nuclear material unless the State Party has received assurances that such material will be protected during the international nuclear transport at the levels described in Annex I.2. Each State Party shall not import or authorise the import of nuclear material from a State not party to this Convention unless the State Party has received assurances that such material will during the international nuclear transport be protected at the levels described in Annex I.3. A State Party shall not allow the transit of its territory by land or internal waterways or through its airports or seaports of nuclear material between States that are not parties to this Convention unless the State Party has received assurances as far as practicable that this nuclear material will be protected during international nuclear transport at the levels described in Annex I.4. Each State Party shall apply within the framework of its national law the levels of physical protection described in Annex I to nuclear material being transported from a part of that State to another part of the same State through international waters or airspace.5. The State Party responsible for receiving assurances that the nuclear material will be protected at the levels described in Annex I according to paragraphs 1 to 3 shall identify and inform in advance States which the nuclear material is expected to transit by land or internal waterways, or whose airports or seaports it is expected to enter.6. The responsibility for obtaining assurances referred to in paragraph 1 may be transferred, by mutual agreement, to the State Party involved in the transport as the importing State.7. Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted as in any way affecting the territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction of a State, including that over its airspace and territorial sea.Article 51. States Parties shall identify and make known to each other directly or through the International Atomic Energy Agency their point of contact in relation to matters within the scope of this Convention.2. In the case of theft, robbery or any other unlawful taking of nuclear material or credible threat thereof, States Parties shall, in accordance with their national law, provide cooperation and assistance to the maximum feasible extent in the recovery and protection of such material to any State that so requests. In particular:(a) a State Party shall take appropriate steps to inform as soon as possible other States which appear to it to be concerned, of any theft, robbery or other unlawful taking of nuclear material or credible threat thereof, and to inform, where appropriate, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations;(b) in doing so, as appropriate, the States Parties concerned shall exchange information with each other, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations with a view to protecting threatened nuclear material, verifying the integrity of the shipping container or recovering unlawfully taken nuclear material and shall:(i) coordinate their efforts through diplomatic and other agreed channels;(ii) render assistance, if requested;(iii) ensure the return of recovered nuclear material stolen or missing as a consequence of the above mentioned events.The means of implementation of this cooperation shall be determined by the States Parties concerned.3. In the case of a credible threat of sabotage of nuclear material or a nuclear facility or in the case of sabotage thereof, States Parties shall, to the maximum feasible extent, in accordance with their national law and consistent with their relevant obligations under international law, cooperate as follows:(a) if a State Party has knowledge of a credible threat of sabotage of nuclear material or a nuclear facility in another State the former shall decide on appropriate steps to be taken in order to inform that State as soon as possible and, where appropriate, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations of that threat, with a view to preventing the sabotage;(b) in the case of sabotage of nuclear material or a nuclear facility in a State Party and if in its view other States are likely to be radiologically affected, the former, without prejudice to its other obligations under international law, shall take appropriate steps to inform as soon as possible the State or the States which are likely to be radiologically affected and to inform, where appropriate, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations, with a view to minimising or mitigating the radiological consequences thereof;(c) if in the context of subparagraphs (a) and (b), a State Party requests assistance, each State Party to which a request for assistance is directed shall promptly decide and notify the requesting State Party, directly or through the International Atomic Energy Agency, whether it is in a position to render the assistance requested and the scope and terms of the assistance that may be rendered;(d) coordination of the cooperation under subparagraphs (a) to (c) shall be through diplomatic or other agreed channels. The means of implementation of this cooperation shall be determined bilaterally or multilaterally by the States Parties concerned.4. States Parties shall cooperate and consult, as appropriate, with each other directly or through the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations, with a view to obtaining guidance on the design, maintenance and improvement of systems of physical protection of nuclear material in international transport.5. A State Party may consult and cooperate as appropriate, with other States Parties directly or through the International Atomic Energy Agency and other relevant international organisations, with a view to obtaining their guidance on the design, maintenance and improvement of its national system of physical protection of nuclear material in domestic use, storage and transport and of nuclear facilities.Article 61. States Parties shall take appropriate measures consistent with their national law to protect the confidentiality of any information which they receive in confidence by virtue of the provisions of this Convention from another State Party or through participation in an activity carried out for the implementation of this Convention. If States Parties provide information to international organisations or to States that are not parties to this Convention in confidence, steps shall be taken to ensure that the confidentiality of such information is protected. A State Party that has received information in confidence from another State Party may provide this information to third parties only with the consent of that other State Party.2. State Parties shall not be required by this Convention to provide any information which they are not permitted to communicate pursuant to national law or which would jeopardise the security of the State concerned or the physical protection of nuclear material or nuclear facilities.Article 71. The intentional commission of:(a) an act without lawful authority which constitutes the receipt, possession, use, transfer, alteration, disposal or dispersal of nuclear material and which causes or is likely to cause death or serious injury to any person or substantial damage to property or to the environment;(b) a theft or robbery of nuclear material;(c) an embezzlement or fraudulent obtaining of nuclear material;(d) an act which constitutes the carrying, sending, or moving of nuclear material into or out of a State without lawful authority;(e) an act directed against a nuclear facility, or an act interfering with the operation of a nuclear facility, where the offender intentionally causes, or where he knows that the act is likely to cause, death or serious injury to any person or substantial damage to property or to the environment by exposure to radiation or release of radioactive substances, unless the act is undertaken in conformity with the national law of the State Party in the territory of which he nuclear facility is situated;(f) an act constituting a demand for nuclear material by threat or use of force or by any other form of intimidation;(g) a threat:(i) to use nuclear material to cause death or serious injury to any person or substantial damage to property or to the environment or to commit the offence described in subparagraph (e), or(ii) to commit an offence described in subparagraphs (b) and (e) in order to compel a natural or legal person, international organisation or State to do or to refrain from doing any act;(h) an attempt to commit any offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (e);(i) an act which constitutes participation in any offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (h);(j) an act of any person who organises or directs others to commit an offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (h); and(k) an act which contributes to the commission of any offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (h) by a group of persons acting with a common purpose; such act shall be intentional and shall either:(i) be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of an offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (g), or(ii) be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit an offence described in subparagraphs (a) to (g) shall be made a punishable offence by each State Party under its national law.2. Each State Party shall make the offences described in this Article punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.Article 81. Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences set forth in Article 7 in the following cases:(a) when the offence is committed in the territory of that State or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State;(b) when the alleged offender is a national of that State.2. Each State Party shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over these offences in cases where the alleged offender is presented in its territory and it does not extradite him pursuant to Article 11 to any of the States mentioned in paragraph 1.3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law.4. In addition to the States Parties mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2, each State Party may, consistent with international law, establish its jurisdiction over the offences set forth in Article 7 when it is involved in international nuclear transport as the exporting or importing State.Article 9Upon being satisfied that the circumstances so warrant, the State Parties in whose territory the alleged offender is present shall take appropriate measures, including detention, under its national law to ensure his presence for the purpose of prosecution or extradition. Measures taken according to this Article shall be notified without delay to he States required to establish jurisdiction pursuant to Article 8 and, where appropriate, all other States concerned.Article 10The State Party in whose territory the alleged offender is present shall, if it does not extradite him, submit, without exception whatsoever and without undue delay, the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, through proceedings in accordance with the laws of that State.Article 111. The offences in Article 7 shall be deemed to be included as extraditable offences in any extradition treaty existing between States Parties. States Parties undertake to include those offences in every future extradition treaty to be concluded between them.2. If a State Party which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it has no extradition treaty, it may at its option consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition in respect of those offences. Extradition shall be subject to the other conditions provided by the law of the requested State.3. States Parties which do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognise those offences as extraditable offences between themselves subject to the conditions provided by the law of the requested State.4. Each of the offences shall be treated, for the purpose of extradition between States Parties, as if it had been committed not only in the place in which it occurred but also in the territories of the States Parties required to establish their jurisdiction in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 8.Article 11ANone of the offences set forth in Article 7 shall be regarded for the purposes of extradition or mutual legal assistance, as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence or as an offence inspired by political motives. Accordingly, a request for extradition or for mutual legal assistance based on such an offence may not be refused on the sole ground that it concerns a political offence or an offence connected with a political offence or an offence inspired by political motives.Article 11BNothing in this Convention shall be interpreted as imposing an obligation to extradite or to afford mutual legal assistance, if the requested State Party has substantial grounds for believing that the request for extradition for offences set forth in Article 7 or for mutual legal assistance with respect to such offences has been made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of that person’s race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin or political opinion or that compliance with the request would cause prejudice to that person’s position for any of these reasons.Article 12Any person regarding whom proceedings are being carried out in connection with any of the offences set forth in Article 7 shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of the proceedings.Article 131. States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of the offences set forth in Article 7, including the supply of evidence at their disposal necessary for the proceeding. The law of the State requested shall apply in all cases.2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not affect obligations under any other treaty, bilateral or multilateral, which governs or will govern, in whole or in part, mutual assistance in criminal matters.Article 13ANothing in this Convention shall affect the transfer of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes that is undertaken to strengthen the physical protection of nuclear material and nuclear facilities.Article 141. Each State Party shall inform the depositary of its laws and regulations which give effect to this Convention. The depositary shall communicate such information periodically to all States Parties.2. The State Party where an alleged offender is prosecuted shall, wherever practicable, first communicate the final outcome of the proceedings to the States directly concerned. The State Party shall also communicate the final outcome to the depositary who shall inform all States.3. Where an offence involves nuclear material in domestic use, storage or transport, and both the alleged offender and the nuclear material remain in the territory of the State Party in which the offence was committed, or where an offence involves a nuclear facility and the alleged offender remains in the territory of the State Party in which the offence was committed, nothing in this Convention shall be interpreted as requiring that State Party to provide information concerning criminal proceedings arising out of such an offence.Article 15The Annexes constitute an integral part of this Convention.Article 161. A conference of States Parties shall be convened by the depositary five years after the entry into force of the Amendment adopted on 8 July 2005 to review the implementation of this Convention and its adequacy as concerns the preamble, the whole of the operative part and the annexes in the light of the then prevailing situation.2. At intervals of not less than five years thereafter, the majority of States Parties may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to the depositary, the convening of further conferences with the same objective.Article 171. In the event of a dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention, such States Parties shall consult with a view to the settlement of the dispute by negotiation, or by any other peaceful means of settling disputes acceptable to all parties to the dispute.2. Any dispute of this character which cannot be settled in the manner prescribed in paragraph 1 shall, at the request of any party to such dispute, be submitted to arbitration or referred to the International Court of Justice for decision. Where a dispute is submitted to arbitration, if, within six months from the date of the request, the parties to the dispute are unable to agree on the organisation of the arbitration, a party may request the President of the International Court of Justice or the Secretary-General of the United Nations to appoint one or more arbitrators. In case of conflicting requests by the parties to the dispute, the request to the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall have priority.3. Each State Party may at the time of signature, ratification, acceptance or approval of this Convention or accession thereto declare that it does not consider itself bound by either or both of the dispute settlement procedures provided for in paragraph 2. The other States Parties shall not be bound by a dispute settlement procedure provided for in paragraph 2, with respect to a State Party which has made a reservation to that procedure.4. Any State Party which has made a reservation in accordance with paragraph 3 may at any time withdraw that reservation by notification to the depositary.Article 181. This Convention shall be open for signature by all States at the Headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna and at the Headquarters of the United Nations in New York from 3 March 1980 until its entry into force.2. This Convention is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by the signatory States.3. After its entry into force, this Convention will be open for accession by all States.4. (a) This Convention shall be open for signature or accession by international organisations and regional organisations of an integration or other nature, provided that any such organisation is constituted by sovereign States and has competence in respect of the negotiation, conclusion and application of international agreements in matters covered by this Convention.(b) In matters within their competence, such organisation shall, on their own behalf, exercise the rights and fulfil the responsibilities which this Convention attributes to States Parties,(c) When becoming party to this Convention such an organisation shall communicate to the depositary a declaration indicating which States are members thereof and which Articles of this Convention do not apply to it.(d) Such an organisation shall not hold any vote additional to those of its Member States.5. Instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession shall be deposited with the depositary.Article 191. This Convention shall enter into force on the 30th day following the date of deposit of the 21st instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval with the depositary.2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to the Convention after the date of deposit of the 21st instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, the Convention shall enter into force on the 30th day after the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.Article 201. Without prejudice to Article 16 a State Party may propose amendments to this Convention. The proposed amendment shall be submitted to the depositary who shall circulate it immediately to all States Parties. If a majority of States Parties request the depository to convene a conference to consider the proposed amendments, the depository shall invite all States Parties to attend such a conference to begin not sooner than 30 days after the invitations are issued. Any amendment adopted the conference by a two-thirds majority of all States Parties shall be promptly circulated by the depository to all States Parties.2. The amendment shall enter into force for each State Party that deposits its instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of the amendment on the 30th day after the date on which two thirds of the States Parties have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval with the depositary. Thereafter, the amendment shall enter into force for any other State Party on the day on which that State Party deposits its instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval of the amendment.Article 211. Any State Party may denounce this Convention by written notification to the depositary.2. Denunciation shall take effect 180 days following the date on which notification is received by the depositary.Article 22The depositary shall promptly notify all States of:(a) each signature of this Convention;(b) each deposit of an instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession;(c) any reservation or withdrawal in accordance with Article 17;(d) any communication made by an organisation in accordance with paragraph 4(c) of Article 18;(e) the entry into force of this Convention;(f) the entry into force of any amendment to this Convention; and(g) any denunciation made under Article 21.Article 23The original of this Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency who shall send certified copies thereof to all States.ANNEX ILevels of physical protection to be applied in international transport of nuclear material as categorised in Annex II1. Levels of physical protection for nuclear material during storage incidental to international nuclear transport include:(a) For Category III materials, storage within an area to which access is controlled;(b) For Category II materials, storage within an area under constant surveillance by guards or electronic devices, surrounded by a physical barrier with a limited number of points of entry under appropriate control or any area with an equivalent level of physical protection;(c) For Category I material, storage within a protected area as defined for Category II above, to which, in addition, access is restricted to persons whose trustworthiness has been determined, and which is under surveillance by guards who are in close communication with appropriate response forces. Specific measures taken in this context should have as their object the detection and prevention of any assault, unauthorised access or unauthorised removal of material.2. Levels of physical protection for nuclear material during international transport include:(a) For Category II and III materials, transportation shall take place under special precautions including prior arrangements among sender, receiver, and carrier, and prior agreement between natural or legal persons subject to the jurisdiction and regulation of exporting and importing States, specifying time, place and procedures for transferring transport responsibility;(b) For Category I materials, transportation shall take place under special precautions identified above for transportation of Category II and III materials, and in addition, under constant surveillance by escorts and under conditions which assure close communication with appropriate response forces;(c) For natural uranium other than in the form of ore or ore-residue; transportation protection for quantities exceeding 500 kilograms uranium shall include advance notification of shipment specifying mode of transport, expected time of arrival and confirmation of receipt of shipment.ANNEX IITable: Categorisation of nuclear materialMaterial | Form | Category |I | II | III [3] |1.Plutonium [1] | Unirradiated [2] | 2 kg or more | Less than 2 kg but more than 500 g | 500 g or less but more than 15 g |2.Uranium-235 | Unirradiated [2] | | | |—Uranium enriched to 20 % 235U or more | 5 kg or more | Less than 5 kg but more than 1 kg | 1 kg or less but more than 15 g |—Uranium enriched to 10 % 235U but less than 20 % | | 10 kg or more | Less than 10 kg but more than 1 kg |—Uranium enriched above natural, but less than 10 % 235U | | | 10 kg or more |3.Uranium-233 | Unirradiated [2] | 2 kg or more | Less than 2 kg but more than 500 g | 500 g or less but more than 15 g |4.Irradiated fuel | | | Depleted or natural uranium, thorium or low-enriched fuel (less than 10 % fissile content) [4] [5] | |[1] All plutonium except that with isotopic concentration exceeding 80 % in plutonium-238.[2] Material not irradiated in a reactor or material irradiated in a reactor but with a radiation level equal to or less than 1 gray/hour (100 rads/hour) at one metre unshielded.[3] Quantities not falling in Category III and natural uranium should be protected in accordance with prudent management practice.[4] Although this level of protection is recommended, it would be open to States, upon evaluation of the specific circumstances, to assign a different category of physical protection.[5] Other fuel which by virtue of its original fissile material content is classified as Category I and II before irradiation may be reduced one category level while the radiation level from the fuel exceeds 1 gray/hour (100 rads/hour) at one metre unshielded.--------------------------------------------------ANNEX 2Declaration by the European Atomic Energy Community according to Articles 18(4) and 17(3) of the ConventionThe following States are presently members of the European Atomic Energy Community: the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.The Community declares that Articles 8 to 13 and Article 14(2) and (3) of the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities do not apply to it.Furthermore, pursuant to Article 17(3) of the Convention, the Community also declares that since only States may be parties in cases before the International Court of Justice, the Community is only bound by the arbitration procedure referred to in 17(2).--------------------------------------------------ANNEX 3FULL POWERSI, the undersigned, ..., Member of the Commission of the European Communities responsible for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy, do hereby confirm the appointment of:Mr/Ms ...Head of the Delegation of the European Commissionto the International Organisations in Viennato deposit with the Director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, the instrument of accession to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities.Brussels,--------------------------------------------------


text:
 10.4.2008
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 L 100/49
 AZ EGT VEGYES BIZOTTSÁG
 136/2007 határozata
 (2007. október 26.)
 az EGT-megállapodás I. mellékletének (Állat- és növény-egészségügyi kérdések) módosításáról
 AZ EGT VEGYES BIZOTTSÁG,
 tekintettel az Európai Gazdasági Térségről szóló megállapodás kiigazításáról szóló jegyzőkönyvvel módosított, az Európai Gazdasági Térségről szóló megállapodásra (a továbbiakban: a megállapodás) és különösen annak 98. cikkére,
 mivel:
 (1)
 A megállapodás I. mellékletét a 2007. szeptember 28-i 99/2007 EGT vegyes bizottsági határozat (1) módosította.
 (2)
 Az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletnek az egyes dögevő madarak 1. kategóriába tartozó anyaggal való etetése tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról szóló, 2003. május 12-i 2003/322/EK bizottsági határozatot (2) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (3)
 Az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet szerinti, a prémes állatokra vonatkozó fajon belüli újrahasznosítási tilalomtól való eltérésről szóló, 2003. május 12-i 2003/324/EK bizottsági határozatot (3) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (4)
 Az egyes harmadik országokból a fotózselatin behozatalát illetően az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet szerinti átmeneti egészségügyi és minősítési szabályokról szóló, 2004. április 26-i 2004/407/EK bizottsági határozatot (4) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (5)
 Az Észtország csatlakozása következtében az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet szerinti, a prémes állatokra vonatkozó fajon belüli újrahasznosítási tilalomtól való eltérésről szóló 2003/324/EK határozat kiigazításáról szóló, 2004. április 29-i 2004/434/EK bizottsági határozatot (5) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (6)
 A Ciprus csatlakozása következtében az 1774/2002/EK rendeletnek az egyes dögevő madarak 1. kategóriába tartozó anyaggal való etetése tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról szóló 2003/322/EK határozat kiigazításáról szóló, 2004. április 29-i 2004/455/EK bizottsági határozatot (6) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (7)
 Az 1774/2002/EK rendeletben a 3. kategóriába tartozó anyagként meghatározott tej, tejalapú termékek és tejből származó termékek felhasználása tekintetében az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet alkalmazásáról szóló, 2005. január 19-i 79/2005/EK bizottsági rendeletet (7) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (8)
 Az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet XI. mellékletének a műszaki felhasználásra szánt egyes állati melléktermékek Japánból történő behozatala tekintetében történő módosításáról szóló, 2005. március 11-i 416/2005/EK bizottsági rendeletet (8) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (9)
 Az egyes dögevő madarak 1. kategóriába tartozó anyaggal való etetéséről szóló 2003/322/EK határozat módosításáról szóló, 2005. november 25-i 2005/830/EK bizottsági határozatot (9) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (10)
 Az 1774/2002/EK rendeletnek a trágyától eltérő szerves trágyák és talajjavító szerek tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról és a rendelet módosításáról szóló, 2006. február 1-jei 181/2006/EK bizottsági rendeletet (10) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (11)
 A korábban élelmiszerként használt termékek összegyűjtése, szállítása, kezelése, felhasználása és ártalmatlanítása tekintetében az 1774/2002/EK rendelet szerinti átmeneti intézkedésekről szóló, 2006. február 3-i 197/2006/EK bizottsági rendeletet (11) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (12)
 Az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet VI. és VIII. mellékletének a biogáz- és komposztálóüzemekre vonatkozó feldolgozási előírások és a trágyára vonatkozó követelmények tekintetében történő módosításáról szóló, 2006. február 7-i 208/2006/EK bizottsági rendeletet (12) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (13)
 A fotózselatin behozatalát illetően a 2004/407/EK bizottsági rendelet módosításáról szóló, 2006. április 21-i 2006/311/EK bizottsági határozatot (13) bele kell foglalni a megállapodásba.
 (14)
 E határozat Liechtenstein esetében nem alkalmazandó.
 (15)
 Ez a határozat Izland esetében az I. melléklet I. fejezete bevezető részének (2) bekezdésében meghatározott átmeneti időszakkal alkalmazandó azokon a területeken, amelyeket az e fejezet 2007. október 26-i 133/2007 EGT vegyes bizottsági határozat általi felülvizsgálatát megelőzően nem alkalmaztak Izlandra,
 A KÖVETKEZŐKÉPPEN HATÁROZOTT:
 1. cikk
 A megállapodás I. mellékletének I. fejezete az e határozat mellékletében meghatározottak szerint módosul.
 2. cikk
 A 79/2005/EK, a 416/2005/EK, a 181/2006/EK, a 197/2006/EK és a 208/2006/EK rendeletnek, valamint a 2003/322/EK, a 2003/324/EK, a 2004/407/EK, a 2004/434/EK, a 2004/455/EK, a 2005/830/EK és a 2006/311/EK határozatnak az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja EGT-kiegészítésében közzéteendő izlandi és norvég nyelvű szövege hiteles.
 3. cikk
 Ez a határozat 2007. október 27-én lép hatályba, feltéve, hogy az EGT Vegyes Bizottság a megállapodás 103. cikkének (1) bekezdésében előírt összes bejelentést megkapta (14), vagy pedig a 2007. október 26-i 133/2007 EGT vegyes bizottsági határozat hatálybalépése napján, attól függően, melyik a későbbi időpont.
 4. cikk
 Ezt a határozatot az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjának EGT-re vonatkozó részében és EGT-kiegészítésében kell közzétenni.
 Kelt Brüsszelben, 2007. október 26-án.
 az EGT Vegyes Bizottság részéről
 az elnök
 Stefán Haukur JÓHANNESSON
 (1) HL L 47., 2008.2.21., 10. o.
 (2) HL L 117., 2003.5.13., 32. o.
 (3) HL L 117., 2003.5.13., 37. o.
 (4) HL L 151., 2004.4.30., 11. o.
 (5) HL L 154., 2004.4.30., 54. o.
 (6) HL L 156., 2004.4.30., 41. o.
 (7) HL L 16., 2005.1.20., 46. o.
 (8) HL L 66., 2005.3.12., 10. o.
 (9) HL L 311., 2005.11.26., 40. o.
 (10) HL L 29., 2006.2.2., 31. o.
 (11) HL L 32., 2006.2.4., 13. o.
 (12) HL L 36., 2006.2.8., 25. o.
 (13) HL L 115., 2006.4.28., 40. o.
 (14) Alkotmányos követelmények fennállását jelezték.
 MELLÉKLET
 A megállapodás I. mellékletének I. fejezete a következőképpen módosul:
 1.
 A 7.1. rész 9b. pontja (1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet) a következő francia bekezdésekkel egészül ki:
 „—
 32005 R 0416: a Bizottság 2005. március 11-i 416/2005/EK rendelete (HL L 66., 2005.3.12., 10. o.),
 —
 32006 R 0181: a Bizottság 2006. február 1-jei 181/2006/EK rendelete (HL L 29., 2006.2.2., 31. o.),
 —
 32006 R 0208: a Bizottság 2006. február 7-i 208/2006/EK rendelete (HL L 36., 2006.2.8., 25. o.).”
 2.
 A 7.2. rész a 41. pont (2007/2006/EK bizottsági rendelet) után a következő szöveggel egészül ki:
 „42.
 32004 D 0407: az egyes harmadik országokból a fotózselatin behozatalát illetően az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet szerinti átmeneti egészségügyi és minősítési szabályokról szóló, 2004. április 26-i 2004/407/EK bizottsági határozat (HL L 151., 2004.4.30., 11. o.), az alábbi módosítással:
 —
 32006 D 0311: a Bizottság 2006. április 21-i 2006/311/EK határozata (HL L 115., 2006.4.28., 40. o.).
 43.
 32005 R 0079: a Bizottság 2005. január 19-i 79/2005/EK rendelete az 1774/2002/EK rendeletben a 3. kategóriába tartozó anyagként meghatározott tej, tejalapú termékek és tejből származó termékek felhasználása tekintetében az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet alkalmazásáról (HL L 16., 2005.1.20., 46. o.).
 44.
 32006 R 0181: a Bizottság 2006. február 1-jei 181/2006/EK rendelete az 1774/2002/EK rendeletnek a trágyától eltérő szerves trágyák és talajjavító szerek tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról és a rendelet módosításáról (HL L 29., 2006.2.2., 31. o.).
 45.
 32006 R 0197: a Bizottság 2006. február 3-i 197/2006/EK rendelete a korábban élelmiszerként használt termékek összegyűjtése, szállítása, kezelése, felhasználása és ártalmatlanítása tekintetében az 1774/2002/EK rendelet szerinti átmeneti intézkedésekről (HL L 32., 2006.2.4., 13. o.).”
 3.
 A 7.2. rész „JOGI AKTUSOK, AMELYEKET AZ EFTA-ÁLLAMOK ÉS AZ EFTA FELÜGYELETI HATÓSÁG KELLŐKÉPPEN FIGYELEMBE VESZNEK” címsora alatti 41. pont (2005/598/EK bizottsági határozat) után a következő szöveggel egészül ki:
 „Nem emberi fogyasztásra szánt állati melléktermékek
 42.
 32003 D 0322: a Bizottság 2003. május 12-i 2003/322/EK határozata az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletnek az egyes dögevő madarak 1. kategóriába tartozó anyaggal való etetése tekintetében történő végrehajtásáról (HL L 117., 2003.5.13., 32. o.), az alábbi módosítással:
 —
 32004 D 0455: a Bizottság 2004. április 29-i 2004/455/EK határozata (HL L 156., 2004.4.30., 41. o.),
 —
 32005 D 0830: a Bizottság 2005. november 25-i 2005/830/EK határozata (HL L 311., 2005.11.26., 40. o.).
 43.
 32003 D 0324: a Bizottság 2003. május 12-i 2003/324/EK határozata az 1774/2002/EK európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendelet szerinti, a prémes állatokra vonatkozó fajon belüli újrahasznosítási tilalomtól való eltérésről (HL L 117., 2003.5.13., 37. o.), az alábbi módosítással:
 —
 32004 D 0434: a Bizottság 2004. április 29-i 2004/434/EK határozata (HL L 154., 2004.4.30., 54. o.).”


type: legislation

jurisdiction: US

text:
 115 HR 5824 IH: Assist Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Act of 2018
 U.S. House of Representatives
 2018-05-15
 text/xml
 EN
 Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.
 I115th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 5824IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESMay 15, 2018Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico (for herself and Mr. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on AgricultureA BILLTo amend the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 to improve assistance for
 socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and veteran farmers and
 ranchers, and for other purposes.
 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Assist Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Act of 2018. 2.Outreach and assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and veteran farmers and ranchersSection 2501(a) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 2279(a)) is amended—
 (1)in paragraph (1)(B), by striking agricultural and inserting agricultural, forestry, and related; (2)in paragraph (3)—
 (A)by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (D) as subparagraphs (E) through (G), respectively; (B)by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
 (B)Maximum term and amount of grant, contract, or agreementA grant, contract, or agreement entered into under this paragraph shall be— (i)for a term that is not more than 3 years; and
 (ii)in an amount that is not more than $200,000 for each year of the grant, contract, or agreement. (C)Peer reviewThe Secretary shall establish a fair and efficient external peer review process that—
 (i)the Secretary shall use in making grants and entering into contracts and other agreements under subparagraph (A); and
 (ii)shall include a broad representation of peers of the eligible entity. (D)Input from eligible entitiesThe Secretary shall seek input from eligible entities providing technical assistance under this subsection not less than once each year to ensure that the program is responsive to the eligible entities providing that technical assistance.; and
 (C)in subsection (G) (as so redesignated), by adding at the end the following: (v)The number of farms or ranches started, maintained, or improved as a result of funds made available under the program.
 (vi)Actions taken by the Secretary in partnership with eligible entities to enhance participation in agricultural programs by veteran farmers or ranchers and socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers.
 (vii)The effectiveness of the actions described in clause (vi).; and (3)in paragraph (4)—
 (A)in subparagraph (A)— (i)in the subparagraph heading, by striking 2018 and inserting 2023;
 (ii)in clause (ii), by striking and at the end; (iii)in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; and; and
 (iv)by adding at the end the following: (iv)$10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023, to remain available until expended.; and
 (B)in subparagraph (E), by striking 2018 and inserting 2023. 3.Transparency and accountability for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and veteran farmers and ranchersSection 2501A of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 2279–1) is amended—
 (1)in the section heading, by inserting and veteran farmers and ranchers before the period at the end; (2)in subsection (a), by inserting and veteran farmers and ranchers before in programs;
 (3)in subsection (b)— (A)by striking the subsection designation and heading and all that follows through the term the first place it appears and inserting the following:
 (b)DefinitionsIn this section: (1)Socially disadvantaged farmer or rancherThe term; and
 (B)by adding at the end the following: (2)Veteran farmer or rancherThe term veteran farmer or rancher has the meaning given the term in section 2501(e).; and
 (4)in subsection (c)— (A)in paragraph (1)—
 (i)in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting and veteran farmers or ranchers after ranchers; and (ii)in subparagraph (A), by striking and gender and inserting gender, and veteran status;
 (B)by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4) as paragraphs (3) through (5), respectively; (C)by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
 (2)5-year requirementNot later than March 31, 2020, and every 5 years thereafter, for each county and State in the United States, the Secretary shall—
 (A)compile data on— (i)the number of base acres of each program crop owned by farmers or ranchers;
 (ii)payment yields for each program crop made by farmers or ranchers; (iii)the number of fee waivers and premium reductions provided to farmers or ranchers under the noninsured crop disaster assistance program established by section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333);
 (iv)the number of loans guaranteed by the Secretary to farmers or ranchers; (v)the allocation of grazing permits by the Forest Service to farmers or ranchers; and
 (vi)the race, ethnicity, gender, and veteran status of each farmer or rancher under clauses (i) through (v), subject to appropriate privacy protections, as determined by the Secretary; and
 (B)organize the data compiled under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A) according to the categories described in clause (vi) of that subparagraph.;
 (D)in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated)— (i)by striking and ethnicity and inserting ethnicity, and veteran status; and
 (ii)by striking paragraph (1) and inserting paragraphs (1) and (2); (E)in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated)—
 (i)by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as clauses (i) through (iii), respectively, and indenting appropriately;
 (ii)by striking the paragraph designation and heading and all that follows through Using and inserting the following: (4)Reports (A)In generalUsing;
 (iii)in subparagraph (A) (as so redesignated), in the matter preceding clause (i) (as so redesignated), by striking under paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
 under—(i)paragraph (1); and (ii)in a separate report, under paragraph (2).
 (B)ContentsEach report submitted under subparagraph (A) shall contain data; (iv)in subparagraph (B) (as so redesignated), in the matter preceding clause (i) (as so redesignated), by striking that paragraph and inserting paragraphs (1) and (2), as applicable,; and
 (F)in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated), by striking the report described in paragraph (3) and inserting the reports described in paragraph (4).