type: contracts

text:
 Avis juridique important
 |
 22004A0429(06)
 Zusatzprotokoll zum Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und dem Königreich Norwegen aus Anlass des Beitritts der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen Union
 Amtsblatt Nr. L 130 vom 29/04/2004 S. 0089 - 0092
 Zusatzprotokollzum Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und dem Königreich Norwegen aus Anlass des Beitritts der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen UnionDIE EUROPÄISCHE GEMEINSCHAFTundDAS KÖNIGREICH NORWEGEN,GESTÜTZT auf das am 14. Mai 1973 unterzeichnete Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und dem Königreich Norwegen (im Folgenden "Abkommen" genannt) und die geltenden Regelungen für den Handel mit Fisch und Fischereierzeugnissen zwischen Norwegen und der Gemeinschaft,IN ANBETRACHT des Beitritts der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen Union,GESTÜTZT auf das Übereinkommen über die Beteiligung der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik am Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum (im Folgenden "EWR-Erweiterungsübereinkommen" genannt),GESTÜTZT auf die geltende Regelung für den Handel mit Fisch und Fischereierzeugnissen zwischen Norwegen und den Beitrittsländern,HABEN BESCHLOSSEN, einvernehmlich die Anpassungen festzulegen, die aus Anlass des Beitritts der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen Union an dem Abkommen vorzunehmen sind,UND DIESES PROTOKOLL ZU SCHLIESSEN:Artikel 1Das Abkommen, die Anhänge und Protokolle, die Bestandteil des Abkommens sind, die Schlussakte und die dieser beigefügten Erklärungen werden in estnischer, lettischer, litauischer, maltesischer, polnischer, slowakischer, slowenischer, tschechischer und ungarischer Sprache abgefasst, wobei diese Fassungen gleichermaßen verbindlich sind wie die Urschriften. Der Gemischte Ausschuss genehmigt den estnischen, lettischen, litauischen, maltesischen, polnischen, slowakischen, slowenischen, tschechischen und ungarischen Wortlaut.Artikel 2Die Sonderbestimmungen, die für die Einfuhr bestimmter Fische und Fischereierzeugnisse mit Ursprung in Norwegen in die Gemeinschaft gelten, sind in diesem Protokoll und seinem Anhang festgelegt.Die im Anhang dieses Protokolls vorgesehenen jährlichen zollfreien Kontingente werden im Zeitraum vom 1. Mai 2004 bis zum 30. April 2009 angewandt. Die Höhe der Kontingente wird am Ende dieses Zeitraums unter Berücksichtigung aller relevanten Interessen überprüft.Das zusätzliche Kontingent für gefrorene geschälte Garnelen (KN-Code 1605 20 10 ) wird eröffnet, wenn die Frage der Gestattung der Durchfuhr von Fisch und Fischereierzeugnissen, die von Schiffen der Gemeinschaft in Norwegen angelandet werden, durch Norwegen in die Gemeinschaft gelöst ist.Artikel 3Für gefrorene Lappen von Heringen wird eine Taric-Unterposition des KN-Codes 0304 90 22 eingeführt, für die die gleiche Zollpräferenzmaßnahme gilt wie für Erzeugnisse des KN-Codes 0304 20 75, um für gefrorene Lappen von Heringen ab 1. Mai 2004 die gleiche Präferenzbehandlung zu gewähren wie für gefrorene Filets.Artikel 4Dieses Protokoll muss von den Vertragsparteien nach ihren eigenen Verfahren ratifiziert oder genehmigt werden. Die Ratifikations- bzw. Genehmigungsurkunden werden beim Generalsekretariat des Rates der Europäischen Union hinterlegt.Es tritt am selben Tag in Kraft wie der Vertrag vom 16. April 2003 über den Beitritt der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen Union, sofern auch die Ratifikations- bzw. Genehmigungsurkunden zu folgenden, miteinander in Beziehung stehenden Übereinkünften und Protokollen hinterlegt worden sind:a) Übereinkommen über die Beteiligung der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik am Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum,b) Abkommen zwischen dem Königreich Norwegen und der Europäischen Gemeinschaft über den Norwegischen Finanzierungsmechanismus für den Zeitraum 2004-2009,c) Zusatzprotokoll zum Abkommen zwischen der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Republik Island aus Anlass des Beitritts der Tschechischen Republik, der Republik Estland, der Republik Zypern, der Republik Lettland, der Republik Litauen, der Republik Ungarn, der Republik Malta, der Republik Polen, der Republik Slowenien und der Slowakischen Republik zur Europäischen Union undd) Abkommen in Form eines Briefwechsels zwischen der Europäischen Gemeinschaft und dem Königreich Norwegen über bestimmte landwirtschaftliche Erzeugnisse.Artikel 5Dieses Protokoll ist in zwei Urschriften in dänischer, deutscher, englischer, estnischer, finnischer, französischer, griechischer, italienischer, lettischer, litauischer, maltesischer, niederländischer, norwegischer, polnischer, portugiesischer, schwedischer, slowakischer, slowenischer, spanischer, tschechischer und ungarischer Sprache abgefasst, wobei jeder Wortlaut gleichermaßen verbindlich ist.Hecho en Luxemburgo, el catorce de octubre de dos mil tres./V Lucemburku dne ctrnáctého ríjna dva tisíce tri./Udfærdiget i Luxembourg den fjortende oktober to tusind og tre./Geschehen zu Luxemburg am vierzehnten Oktober zweitausendunddrei./Sõlmitud neljateistkümnendal oktoobril kahe tuhande kolmandal aastal Luxembourgis./Έγινε στο Λουξεμβούργο, στις δέκα τέσσερις Οκτωβρίου δύο χιλιάδες τρία./Done at Luxembourg on the fourteenth day of October in the year two thousand and three./Fait à Luxembourg, le quatorze octobre deux mille trois./Gjört í Lúxemborg fjórtánda dag októbermánaðar árið tvö Þúsund og Þrjú./Fatto a Lussemburgo, addì quattordici ottobre duemilatre./Luksemburga, divtukstos tresa gada cetrpadsmitaja oktobri./Priimta du tukstanciai treciu metu spalio keturiolikta diena Liuksemburge./Kelt Luxembourgban, kétezerhárom október tizennegyedikén./Magmul fil-Lussemburgu fl-erbatax-il jum ta' Ottubru fis-sena elfejn u tlieta./Gedaan te Luxemburg, de veertiende oktober tweeduizenddrie./Utferdiget i Luxembourg den fjortende oktober totusenogtre. /Sporzadzono w Luksemburgu dnia czternastego pazdziernika dwa tysiace trzeciego roku./Feito no Luxemburgo, em catorze de Outubro de dois mil e três./V Luxemburgu strnásteho októbra dvetisíctri./V Luxembourgu, dne stirinajstega oktobra leta dva tisoc tri./Tehty Luxemburgissa neljäntenätoista päivänä lokakuuta vuonna kaksituhattakolme./Som skedde i Luxemburg den fjortonde oktober tjugohundratre.Por la Comunidad Europea/For Det Europæiske Fællesskab/Für die Europäische Gemeinschaft/Για την Ευρωπαϊκή Κοινότητα/For the European Community/Pour la Communauté européenne/Per la Comunità europea/Voor de Europese Gemeenschap/Pela Comunidade Europeia/Euroopan yhteisön puolesta/På Europeiska gemenskapens vägnar>PIC FILE= "L_2004130DE.009101.TIF">For Kongeriket Norge>PIC FILE= "L_2004130DE.009102.TIF">ANHANGSONDERBESTIMMUNGEN NACH ARTIKEL 2 DES ZUSATZPROTOKOLLS>PLATZ FÜR EINE TABELLE>


type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 8.2.2016
 SK
 Úradný vestník Európskej únie
 C 48/63
 Žaloba podaná 13. novembra 2015 – Toth/Parlament
 (Vec T-649/15)
 (2016/C 048/71)
 Jazyk konania: angličtina
 Účastníci konania
 Žalobca: Balazs Toth (Budapešť, Maďarsko) (v zastúpení: N. Pirc Musar, advokát)
 Žalovaný: Európsky parlament
 Návrhy
 Žalobca navrhuje, aby Všeobecný súd:
 —
 zrušil rozhodnutie Európskeho parlamentu A(2015)8490 C zo 16. septembra 2015, ktorým sa zamieta opakovaná žiadosť žalobcu o prístup k niektorým dokumentom týkajúcim sa informácií o cestovných výdavkoch poslancov Európskeho parlamentu, ako aj o ich diétach, všeobecných výdavkoch a výdavkoch na personálne zabezpečenie,
 —
 uložil Parlamentu povinnosť nahradiť trovy konania žalobcu podľa článkov 134 a 140 Rokovacieho poriadku Všeobecného súdu, vrátane trov konania akéhokoľvek vedľajšieho účastníka konania.
 Dôvody a hlavné tvrdenia
 Na podporu svojej žaloby žalobca uvádza päť žalobných dôvodov.
 1.
 Prvý žalobný dôvod je založený na porušení článku 4 ods. 1 písm. b) nariadenia č. 1049/2001 (1) v spojení s článkom 8 písm. b) nariadenia č. 45/2001 (2), keďže požadované osobné údaje nie sú chránené právnymi predpismi Spoločenstva.
 2.
 Druhý žalobný dôvod je založený na porušení článku 4 ods. 1 písm. b) nariadenia č. 1049/2001 v spojení s článkom 8 písm. b) nariadenia č. 45/2001, keďže prístup k požadovaným informáciám bol odmietnutý, hoci podmienky na zverejnenie boli splnené.
 3.
 Tretí žalobný dôvod je založený na porušení všeobecnej povinnosti podľa článkov 2 a 4 nariadenia č. 1049/2001 v spojení s článkom 6 ods. 3 nariadenia č. 1049/2001, a to preskúmať každý jednotlivý dokument.
 4.
 Štvrtý žalobný dôvod je založený na porušení článku 4 ods. 6 nariadenia č. 1049/2001, keďže odmietnutie poskytnúť čiastočný prístup k požadovaným dokumentom nebolo odôvodnené.
 5.
 Piaty žalobný dôvod je založený na porušení povinnosti odôvodnenia podľa článku 7 ods. 1 a článku 8 ods. 1 nariadenia č. 1049/2001, keďže Parlament sa nezaoberal všetkými tvrdeniami žalobcu.
 (1) Nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 1049/2001 z 30. mája 2001 o prístupe verejnosti k dokumentom Európskeho parlamentu, Rady a Komisie (Ú. v. ES L 145, s. 43; Mim. vyd. 01/003, s. 331).
 (2) Nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 45/2001 z 18. decembra 2000 o ochrane jednotlivcov so zreteľom na spracovanie osobných údajov inštitúciami a orgánmi spoločenstva a o voľnom pohybe takýchto údajov (Ú. v. ES L 8, 2001, s. 1; Mim. vyd. 13/026, s. 102).


type: wikipedia

text:
Vodárenská ulica je ulica:
 v Banskej Štiavnici, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Banská Štiavnica)
 v Bardejove, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Bardejov)
 v Dolnom Kubíne, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Dolný Kubín)
 v Galante, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Galanta)
 v Gelnici, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Gelnica)
 v Hlohovci, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Hlohovec)
 v Ilave, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Ilava)
 v Košiciach, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Košice)
 v Levoči, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Levoča)
 v Novej Bani, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Nová Baňa)
 v Piešťanoch, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Piešťany)
 v Poprade, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Poprad)
 v Prešove, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Prešov)
 v Slovenskom Novom Meste, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Slovenské Nové Mesto)
 v Trenčíne, pozri Vodárenská ulica (Trenčín)
 Rozlišovacie stránky – Ulice


type: other

text:
Cascada.lt | DIP sistema: pudra - barstomas akrilas Artistic Perfect Dip Powder Wedding 2019 Collection Sheerly Devoted Chiffon & On & On ART2600227, 23 g. | Cascada.lt
 Jūs esate čia: Gelio, akrilo sistemos Akrilo pudra
 83a53f86-61d8-11e9-9fac-000c299359d5
 DIP sistema: pudra - barstomas akrilas Artistic Perfect Dip Powder Wedding 2019 Collection Sheerly Devoted Chiffon & On & On ART2600227, 23 g.
 Prekės kodas: ART2600227
 DIP sistema: pudra - barstomas akrilas Artistic „Perfect Dip Powder Wedding 2019 Collection Sheerly Devoted Chiffon & On & On“, 23 g
 DIP sistema: pudra - barstomas akrilas Artsitic Perfect Dip... 15.90 €
 DIP sistema - viršutinis nagų lako sluoksnis Artistic Perfect Dip...
 DIP sistema - Teptukų valiklis Artistic Perfect Dip Brush... 11.60 €


text:
 IT
 Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea
 C 203/106
 PROTOCOLLO SULLE DISPOSIZIONI TRANSITORIE
 LE ALTE PARTI CONTRAENTI,
 CONSIDERANDO che, per organizzare la transizione dalle disposizioni istituzionali dei trattati applicabili prima dell'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona a quelle previste da detto trattato, è necessario prevedere disposizioni transitorie,
 HANNO CONVENUTO le disposizioni seguenti, che sono allegate al trattato sull'Unione europea, al trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea e al trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea dell'energia atomica:
 Articolo 1
 Nel presente protocollo i termini «trattati» designano il trattato sull'Unione europea, il trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea e il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea dell'energia atomica.
 TITOLO I
 DISPOSIZIONI CONCERNENTI IL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO
 Articolo 2
 1. Per il periodo della legislatura 2009-2014 restante alla data di entrata in vigore del presente articolo, e in deroga all'articolo 189, secondo comma, e all'articolo 190, paragrafo 2, del trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea e all'articolo 107, secondo comma, e all'articolo 108, paragrafo 2, del trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea dell'energia atomica, che erano in vigore al momento delle elezioni del Parlamento europeo del giugno 2009, e in deroga al numero di seggi previsti all'articolo 14, paragrafo 2, primo comma, del trattato sull'Unione europea, ai 736 seggi esistenti sono aggiunti i diciotto seggi seguenti, con conseguente aumento provvisorio del numero totale dei membri del Parlamento europeo a 754 fino alla scadenza della legislatura 2009-2014:
 Bulgaria
 1
 Paesi Bassi
 1
 Spagna
 4
 Austria
 2
 Francia
 2
 Polonia
 1
 Italia
 1
 Slovenia
 1
 Lettonia
 1
 Svezia
 2
 Malta
 1
 Regno Unito
 1
 2. In deroga all'articolo 14, paragrafo 3, del trattato sull'Unione europea, gli Stati membri interessati designano le persone che occuperanno i seggi supplementari previsti al paragrafo 1 secondo le rispettive legislazioni nazionali a condizione che tali persone siano state elette a suffragio universale diretto:
 a)
 con elezione a suffragio universale diretto ad hoc nello Stato membro interessato, secondo le disposizioni applicabili per le elezioni del Parlamento europeo;
 b)
 con riferimento ai risultati delle elezioni del Parlamento europeo del 4-7 giugno 2009, oppure
 c)
 attraverso la nomina del numero richiesto di membri da parte del parlamento nazionale dello Stato membro interessato, al proprio interno, secondo la procedura fissata da ciascuno degli Stati membri interessati.
 3. In tempo utile prima delle elezioni del Parlamento europeo del 2014, il Consiglio europeo adotta, conformemente all'articolo 14, paragrafo 2, secondo comma, del trattato sull'Unione europea, una decisione che stabilisce la composizione del Parlamento europeo.
 TITOLO II
 DISPOSIZIONI CONCERNENTI LA MAGGIORANZA QUALIFICATA
 Articolo 3
 1. Conformemente all'articolo 16, paragrafo 4 del trattato sull'Unione europea, le disposizioni di tale paragrafo e le disposizioni dell'articolo 238, paragrafo 2 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, relative alla definizione della maggioranza qualificata in seno al Consiglio europeo e al Consiglio, prendono effetto il 1o novembre 2014.
 2. Nel periodo dal 1o novembre 2014 al 31 marzo 2017, quando una deliberazione deve essere adottata a maggioranza qualificata, un membro del Consiglio può chiedere che la deliberazione sia adottata in base alla maggioranza qualificata ai sensi del paragrafo 3. In tal caso si applicano i paragrafi 3 e 4.
 3. Fino al 31 ottobre 2014 sono in vigore le disposizioni seguenti, fatto salvo l'articolo 235, paragrafo 1, secondo comma del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea.
 Per le deliberazioni del Consiglio europeo e del Consiglio che richiedono una maggioranza qualificata, ai voti dei membri è attribuita la seguente ponderazione:
 Belgio
 12
 Lituania
 7
 Bulgaria
 10
 Lussemburgo
 4
 Repubblica ceca
 12
 Ungheria
 12
 Danimarca
 7
 Malta
 3
 Germania
 29
 Paesi Bassi
 13
 Estonia
 4
 Austria
 10
 Irlanda
 7
 Polonia
 27
 Grecia
 12
 Portogallo
 12
 Spagna
 27
 Romania
 14
 Francia
 29
 Slovenia
 4
 Croazia
 7
 Slovacchia
 7
 Italia
 29
 Finlandia
 7
 Cipro
 4
 Svezia
 10
 Lettonia
 4
 Regno Unito
 29
 Le deliberazioni sono valide se hanno ottenuto almeno 260 voti che esprimano il voto favorevole della maggioranza dei membri quando, in virtù dei trattati, debbono essere adottate su proposta della Commissione. Negli altri casi le deliberazioni sono valide se hanno ottenuto almeno 260 voti che esprimano il voto favorevole di almeno due terzi dei membri.
 Un membro del Consiglio europeo o del Consiglio può chiedere che, allorché il Consiglio europeo o il Consiglio adottano un atto a maggioranza qualificata, si verifichi che gli Stati membri che compongono tale maggioranza qualificata rappresentino almeno il 62 % della popolazione totale dell'Unione. Qualora tale condizione non sia soddisfatta, l'atto non è adottato.
 4. Fino al 31 ottobre 2014, qualora, a norma dei trattati, non tutti i membri del Consiglio prendano parte alle votazioni, ossia nei casi in cui si fa riferimento alla maggioranza qualificata ai sensi dell'articolo 238, paragrafo 3 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, per maggioranza qualificata si intende una proporzione dei voti ponderati, una proporzione del numero dei membri del Consiglio ed eventualmente una percentuale della popolazione degli Stati membri interessati pari a quelle previste al paragrafo 3 del presente articolo.
 TITOLO III
 DISPOSIZIONI RELATIVE ALLE FORMAZIONI DEL CONSIGLIO
 Articolo 4
 Fino all'entrata in vigore della decisione di cui all'articolo 16, paragrafo 6, primo comma del trattato sull'Unione europea, il Consiglio può riunirsi nelle formazioni previste al secondo e terzo comma di detto paragrafo, nonché nelle altre formazioni il cui elenco è stabilito con decisione del Consiglio «Affari generali» deliberante a maggioranza semplice.
 TITOLO IV
 DISPOSIZIONI RELATIVE ALLA COMMISSIONE, INCLUSO L'ALTO RAPPRESENTANTE DELL'UNIONE PER GLI AFFARI ESTERI E LA POLITICA DI SICUREZZA
 Articolo 5
 I membri della Commissione in carica alla data di entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona rimangono in carica fino alla scadenza del loro mandato. Tuttavia, il giorno della nomina dell'alto rappresentante dell'Unione per gli affari esteri e la politica di sicurezza, giunge a termine il mandato del membro avente la stessa nazionalità dell'alto rappresentante.
 TITOLO V
 DISPOSIZIONI RELATIVE AL SEGRETARIO GENERALE DEL CONSIGLIO, ALTO RAPPRESENTANTE PER LA POLITICA ESTERA E DI SICUREZZA COMUNE, E AL SEGRETARIO GENERALE AGGIUNTO DEL CONSIGLIO
 Articolo 6
 Il mandato del segretario generale del Consiglio, alto rappresentante per la politica estera e di sicurezza comune, e del segretario generale aggiunto del Consiglio giunge a termine alla data di entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona. Il Consiglio nomina il segretario generale in conformità dell'articolo 240, paragrafo 2 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea.
 TITOLO VI
 DISPOSIZIONI CONCERNENTI GLI ORGANI CONSULTIVI
 Articolo 7
 Fino all'entrata in vigore della decisione di cui all'articolo 301 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, la ripartizione dei membri del Comitato economico e sociale è la seguente:
 Belgio
 12
 Lituania
 9
 Bulgaria
 12
 Lussemburgo
 6
 Repubblica ceca
 12
 Ungheria
 12
 Danimarca
 9
 Malta
 5
 Germania
 24
 Paesi Bassi
 12
 Estonia
 7
 Austria
 12
 Irlanda
 9
 Polonia
 21
 Grecia
 12
 Portogallo
 12
 Spagna
 21
 Romania
 15
 Francia
 24
 Slovenia
 7
 Croazia
 9
 Slovacchia
 9
 Italia
 24
 Finlandia
 9
 Cipro
 6
 Svezia
 12
 Lettonia
 7
 Regno Unito
 24
 Articolo 8
 Fino all'entrata in vigore della decisione di cui all'articolo 305 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, la ripartizione dei membri del Comitato delle regioni è la seguente:
 Belgio
 12
 Lituania
 9
 Bulgaria
 12
 Lussemburgo
 6
 Repubblica ceca
 12
 Ungheria
 12
 Danimarca
 9
 Malta
 5
 Germania
 24
 Paesi Bassi
 12
 Estonia
 7
 Austria
 12
 Irlanda
 9
 Polonia
 21
 Grecia
 12
 Portogallo
 12
 Spagna
 21
 Romania
 15
 Francia
 24
 Slovenia
 7
 Croazia
 9
 Slovacchia
 9
 Italia
 24
 Finlandia
 9
 Cipro
 6
 Svezia
 12
 Lettonia
 7
 Regno Unito
 24
 TITOLO VII
 DISPOSIZIONI TRANSITORIE RELATIVE AGLI ATTI ADOTTATI IN BASE AI TITOLI V E VI DEL TRATTATO SULL'UNIONE EUROPEA PRIMA DELL'ENTRATA IN VIGORE DEL TRATTATO DI LISBONA
 Articolo 9
 Gli effetti giuridici degli atti delle istituzioni, degli organi e degli organismi dell'Unione adottati in base al trattato sull'Unione europea prima dell'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona sono mantenuti finché tali atti non saranno stati abrogati, annullati o modificati in applicazione dei trattati. Ciò vale anche per le convenzioni concluse tra Stati membri in base al trattato sull'Unione europea.
 Articolo 10
 1. A titolo di misura transitoria e in ordine agli atti dell'Unione nel settore della cooperazione di polizia e della cooperazione giudiziaria in materia penale adottati prima dell'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona, le attribuzioni delle istituzioni alla data di entrata in vigore di detto trattato sono le seguenti: le attribuzioni della Commissione ai sensi dell'articolo 258 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea non sono applicabili e le attribuzioni della Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea ai sensi del titolo VI del trattato sull'Unione europea, nella versione vigente prima dell'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona, restano invariate, anche nel caso in cui siano state accettate in forza dell'articolo 35, paragrafo 2 di detto trattato sull'Unione europea.
 2. La modifica di un atto di cui al paragrafo 1 comporta che, con riguardo all'atto modificato e nei confronti degli Stati membri ai quali esso si applica, le attribuzioni delle istituzioni menzionate in detto paragrafo si applichino quali previste dai trattati.
 3. In ogni caso la misura transitoria di cui al paragrafo 1 cessa di avere effetto cinque anni dopo l'entrata in vigore del trattato di Lisbona.
 4. Al più tardi sei mesi prima della fine del periodo transitorio di cui al paragrafo 3 il Regno Unito può notificare al Consiglio che, riguardo agli atti di cui al paragrafo 1, non accetta le attribuzioni delle istituzioni menzionate al paragrafo 1 quali previste dai trattati. Se il Regno Unito ha effettuato la notifica, cessano di applicarsi a detto Stato tutti gli atti di cui al paragrafo 1 dalla data di fine del periodo transitorio di cui al paragrafo 3. Il presente comma non si applica nel caso degli atti modificati applicabili al Regno Unito secondo quanto indicato al paragrafo 2.
 Il Consiglio, deliberando a maggioranza qualificata su proposta della Commissione, determina gli adattamenti necessari che ne conseguono e il necessario regime transitorio. Il Regno Unito non partecipa all'adozione della decisione. Per maggioranza qualificata del Consiglio si intende quella definita conformemente all'articolo 238, paragrafo 3, lettera a) del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea.
 Il Consiglio, deliberando a maggioranza qualificata su proposta della Commissione, può altresì adottare una decisione che stabilisce che il Regno Unito si fa carico delle eventuali conseguenze finanziarie dirette, derivanti necessariamente e inevitabilmente dalla cessazione della sua partecipazione agli atti suddetti.
 5. Successivamente il Regno Unito può in qualsiasi momento notificare al Consiglio che desidera partecipare ad atti che, in forza del paragrafo 4, primo comma, hanno cessato di applicarsi a detto Stato. In tale occorrenza si applicano, secondo i casi, le disposizioni pertinenti del protocollo sull'acquis di Schengen integrato nell'ambito dell'Unione europea o del protocollo sulla posizione del Regno Unito e dell'Irlanda rispetto allo spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia. Le attribuzioni delle istituzioni riguardo a tali atti sono quelle previste dai trattati. Quando agiscono nell'ambito dei protocolli in questione, le istituzioni dell'Unione e il Regno Unito si adoperano per ristabilire la più ampia partecipazione possibile del Regno Unito all'acquis dell'Unione riguardo allo spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia senza incidere profondamente sul funzionamento pratico delle varie parti dell'acquis e rispettandone la coerenza.


jurisdiction: US

text: b" DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Office of Inspector General\n\n Office of Audit Services, Region VII\n 601 East 12th Street, Room 0429\n Kansas City, MO 64106\n\n\n\n\nAugust 18, 2010\n\nReport Number: A-07-09-04146\n\nAndrew Allison, Ph.D.\nExecutive Director\nKansas Health Policy Authority\nRoom 900-N Landon State Office Building\nTopeka, KS 66612\n\nDear Dr. Allison:\n\nEnclosed is the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Office of Inspector\nGeneral (OIG), final report entitled Review of Selected Claims Included in the Kansas Medicaid\nFamily Planning Program. We will forward a copy of this report to the HHS action official\nnoted on the following page for review and any action deemed necessary.\n\nThe HHS action official will make final determination as to actions taken on all matters reported.\nWe request that you respond to this official within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your\nresponse should present any comments or additional information that you believe may have a\nbearing on the final determination.\n\nSection 8L of the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. App., requires that OIG post its publicly\navailable reports on the OIG Web site. Accordingly, this report will be posted at\nhttp://oig.hhs.gov.\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this report, please do not hesitate to call me at\n(816) 426-3591, or contact Debra Keasling, Audit Manager, at (816) 426-3213 or through email\nat Debra.Keasling@oig.hhs.gov. Please refer to report number A-07-09-04146 in all\ncorrespondence.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n\n\n /Patrick J. Cogley/\n Regional Inspector General\n for Audit Services\n\n\nEnclosure\n\x0cPage 2 \xe2\x80\x93 Andrew Allison, Ph.D.\n\nDirect Reply to HHS Action Official:\n\nMs. Jackie Garner\nConsortium Administrator\nConsortium for Medicaid and Children\xe2\x80\x99s Health Operations\nCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services\n233 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 600\nChicago, IL 60601\n\x0cDepartment of Health & Human Services\n OFFICE OF\n INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\n\n\n REVIEW OF\nSELECTED CLAIMS INCLUDED IN\n THE KANSAS MEDICAID\nFAMILY PLANNING PROGRAM\n\n\n\n\n Daniel R. Levinson\n Inspector General\n\n August 2010\n A-07-09-04146\n\x0c Office of Inspector General\n http://oig.hhs.gov\n\n\n\nThe mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as amended, is\nto protect the integrity of the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) programs, as well as the\nhealth and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. This statutory mission is carried out\nthrough a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and inspections conducted by the following\noperating components:\n\nOffice of Audit Services\n\nThe Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides auditing services for HHS, either by conducting audits with\nits own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine the performance of\nHHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their respective responsibilities and are\nintended to provide independent assessments of HHS programs and operations. These assessments help\nreduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and promote economy and efficiency throughout HHS.\n\nOffice of Evaluation and Inspections\nThe Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts national evaluations to provide HHS, Congress,\nand the public with timely, useful, and reliable information on significant issues. These evaluations focus\non preventing fraud, waste, or abuse and promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of\ndepartmental programs. To promote impact, OEI reports also present practical recommendations for\nimproving program operations.\n\nOffice of Investigations\nThe Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of fraud and\nmisconduct related to HHS programs, operations, and beneficiaries. With investigators working in all 50\nStates and the District of Columbia, OI utilizes its resources by actively coordinating with the Department\nof Justice and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities. The investigative efforts of OI\noften lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties.\n\nOffice of Counsel to the Inspector General\nThe Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG, rendering\nadvice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support for OIG\xe2\x80\x99s internal\noperations. OCIG represents OIG in all civil and administrative fraud and abuse cases involving HHS\nprograms, including False Claims Act, program exclusion, and civil monetary penalty cases. In\nconnection with these cases, OCIG also negotiates and monitors corporate integrity agreements. OCIG\nrenders advisory opinions, issues compliance program guidance, publishes fraud alerts, and provides\nother guidance to the health care industry concerning the anti-kickback statute and other OIG enforcement\nauthorities.\n\x0c Notices\n\n\n THIS REPORT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC\n at http://oig.hhs.gov\n\n Section 8L of the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. App., requires\n that OIG post its publicly available reports on the OIG Web site.\n\nOFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES FINDINGS AND OPINIONS\n\n The designation of financial or management practices as\n questionable, a recommendation for the disallowance of costs\n incurred or claimed, and any other conclusions and\n recommendations in this report represent the findings and\n opinions of OAS. Authorized officials of the HHS operating\n divisions will make final determination on these matters.\n\x0c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nPursuant to Title XIX of the Social Security Act (the Act), the Medicaid program provides\nmedical assistance to low-income individuals and individuals with disabilities. The Federal and\nState Governments jointly fund and administer the Medicaid program. At the Federal level, the\nCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administers the program. Each State\nadministers its Medicaid program in accordance with a CMS-approved State plan. Although the\nState has considerable flexibility in designing and operating its Medicaid program, it must\ncomply with applicable Federal requirements. In Kansas, the Kansas Health Policy Authority\n(State agency) is responsible for administering the Medicaid program.\n\nThe amount of funding that the Federal Government reimburses to State Medicaid agencies,\nknown as Federal financial participation (FFP) or alternatively as the Federal share, is\ndetermined by the Federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP). The State agency\xe2\x80\x99s FMAP\nranged from 59.43 percent to 68.31 percent for claims paid from July 1, 2005, through\nJune 30, 2009.\n\nFederal requirements also make provisions for various specified services to be reimbursed at\nhigher (that is, enhanced) rates of FFP. Section 1903(a)(5) of the Act and 42 CFR\n\xc2\xa7\xc2\xa7 433.10(c)(1) and 433.15(b)(2) authorize reimbursement at an enhanced 90-percent FFP rate\nfor family planning services. Section 4270 of the CMS State Medicaid Manual defines family\nplanning services as those that prevent or delay pregnancy or otherwise control family size.\n\nFor State fiscal years 2006 through 2009, the State agency was reimbursed $19,997,484\n($17,997,736 Federal share) for a variety of family planning services at the enhanced 90-percent\nFFP rate. Of this amount, we separately reviewed certain family planning costs totaling\n$13,977,885 ($12,580,097 Federal share) for specifically identified child delivery and newborn\nclaims (A-07-10-04156), family planning pharmacy claims (A-07-10-04157), and family\nplanning sterilization services (A-07-10-04162). Thus, this review covers the remaining\n$6,019,599 ($5,417,639 Federal share) for selected family planning claims, for which the State\nagency claimed reimbursement at the family planning enhanced 90-percent FFP rate.\n\nOBJECTIVE\n\nOur objective was to determine whether the $6,019,599 ($5,417,639 Federal share) in selected\nfamily planning claims submitted by providers and claimed by the State agency at the enhanced\n90-percent FFP rate from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009, were allowable pursuant to\nFederal requirements.\n\nSUMMARY OF FINDINGS\n\nNot all of the selected family planning claims submitted by providers and claimed by the State\nagency at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009, were\nallowable pursuant to Federal requirements. Of the 100 claims in our statistical sample, 51\nqualified as family planning services and could be claimed for reimbursement at the enhanced\n\n i\n\x0c90-percent FFP rate. However, the remaining 49 claims in our sample totaling $42,274 (Federal\nshare) were not allowable for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate because the\nservices in question could not be claimed as family planning services pursuant to Federal\nrequirements (1 claim had two types of errors). Specifically, of the 49 remaining claims, the\nState agency received unallowable reimbursement for:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 42 claims unrelated to family planning,\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 6 claims that did not have adequate informed consent for sterilization (these claims were\n unrelated to those made for the sterilization services that we are reviewing separately\n (A-07-10-04162)), and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 2 claims that lacked sufficient supporting documentation.\n\nBased on the results of our sample, we estimated that the State agency received $589,355 in\nunallowable Federal reimbursement. Of the 49 claims for which the State agency received\nunallowable reimbursement, 42 could have been claimed for reimbursement at the standard\nFMAP rate that was applicable at the time the claim was paid. For those 42 claims, we\ncalculated the correct Federal reimbursement using the standard FMAP rates. The remaining\n7 claims containing errors were unallowable for Federal reimbursement.\n\nThese errors occurred because the Medicaid Management Information System\xe2\x80\x99s (MMIS) edits\ndid not always correctly identify claims for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate\nand because Medicaid guidelines regarding informed consent for sterilization were not always\nfollowed.\n\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n\nWe recommend that the State agency:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 refund $589,355 to the Federal Government; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 strengthen internal controls to ensure that family planning services submitted for Federal\n reimbursement are accurate by:\n\n o ensuring that MMIS edits appropriately identify claims that are ineligible for\n reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate and\n\n o adhering to the Medicaid guidelines regarding informed consent for sterilization.\n\n\n\n\n ii\n\x0cSTATE AGENCY COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, the State agency concurred that a refund is due to the\nFederal Government and stated that it would work with CMS \xe2\x80\x9c\xe2\x80\xa6 to determine the timing and\namount of that refund.\xe2\x80\x9d The State agency also concurred with our second recommendation and\ndescribed corrective actions, in the form of strengthened internal controls, that it had\nimplemented or planned to implement. In addition, the State agency said that the strengthened\ninternal controls that it had implemented would more appropriately address a portion of our\nsecond recommendation that had appeared in our draft report.\n\nThe State agency\xe2\x80\x99s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix E.\n\nOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE\n\nAfter reviewing the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s comments, we modified our final report by removing the\nportion of our second recommendation that had appeared in the draft report and about which the\nState agency had expressed concerns. The corrective actions that the State agency described in\nits comments should, when fully implemented, adequately address our findings, but we did not\nverify those corrective actions.\n\n\n\n\n iii\n\x0c TABLE OF CONTENTS\n Page\n\nINTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1\n\n BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 1\n Medicaid Program ............................................................................................ 1\n State of Kansas Medicaid Program .................................................................. 1\n Medicaid Coverage of Family Planning Services ............................................ 1\n Medicaid Management Information System .................................................... 2\n\n OBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 2\n Objective .......................................................................................................... 2\n Scope................................................................................................................ 3\n Methodology .................................................................................................... 3\n\nFINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 4\n\n UNALLOWABLE FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES ................................................. 5\n Services Unrelated to Family Planning............................................................ 5\n Inadequate Informed Consent .......................................................................... 5\n Lack of Documentation.................................................................................... 6\n\n CAUSES OF THE OVERPAYMENTS .......................................................................... 6\n\n UNALLOWABLE FAMILY PLANNING CLAIMS ..................................................... 6\n\n RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 7\n\n STATE AGENCY COMMENTS .................................................................................... 7\n\n OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE ....................................................... 7\n\nAPPENDIXES\n\n A: SAMPLE DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY\n\n B: SAMPLE RESULTS AND ESTIMATES\n\n C: SUMMARY OF THE STATISTICAL SAMPLE \xe2\x80\x93 STRATA 1\n\n D: SUMMARY OF THE STATISTICAL SAMPLE \xe2\x80\x93 STRATA 2\n\n E: STATE AGENCY COMMENTS\n\n\n\n iv\n\x0c INTRODUCTION\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nMedicaid Program\n\nPursuant to Title XIX of the Social Security Act (the Act), the Medicaid program provides\nmedical assistance to low-income individuals and individuals with disabilities. The Federal\nand State Governments jointly fund and administer the Medicaid program. At the Federal\nlevel, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administers the program. Each\nState administers its Medicaid program in accordance with a CMS-approved State plan.\nAlthough the State has considerable flexibility in designing and operating its Medicaid\nprogram, it must comply with applicable Federal requirements.\n\nState of Kansas Medicaid Program\n\nIn Kansas, the Kansas Health Policy Authority (State agency) is responsible for administering\nthe Medicaid program. The State agency contracts with HP Enterprise Services (formerly\nElectronic Data Systems) to maintain its Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS),\na computerized payment and information reporting system that processes and pays Medicaid\nclaims.\n\nThe amount of funding that the Federal Government reimburses to State Medicaid agencies,\nknown as Federal financial participation (FFP) or alternatively as the Federal share, is\ndetermined by the Federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP). The State agency\xe2\x80\x99s FMAP\nranged from 59.43 percent to 68.31 percent for claims paid from July 1, 2005, through\nJune 30, 2009. Federal requirements also make provisions for various specified services to be\nreimbursed at higher (that is, enhanced) rates of FFP.\n\nMedicaid Coverage of Family Planning Services\n\nSection 1905(a)(4)(C) of the Act requires States to furnish family planning services and\nsupplies to individuals of childbearing age (including minors who can be considered to be\nsexually active) who are eligible under the State plan and who desire such services and\nsupplies. Section 1903(a)(5) of the Act and 42 CFR \xc2\xa7\xc2\xa7 433.10(c)(1) and 433.15(b)(2)\nauthorize reimbursement at an enhanced 90-percent FFP rate for family planning services.\n\nSection 4270 of the CMS State Medicaid Manual (the manual) defines family planning\nservices as those that prevent or delay pregnancy or otherwise control family size. In\naddition, this provision of the manual generally permits an enhanced 90-percent FFP rate for\nthe following items and services: counseling services and patient education; examination and\ntreatment by medical professionals pursuant to States\xe2\x80\x99 requirements; devices to prevent\nconception; and infertility services, including sterilization reversals. The manual further\nspecifies that an abortion may not be claimed as a family planning service. Pursuant to the\nprovisions of the manual, only items and procedures clearly furnished or provided for family\nplanning purposes may be claimed at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate.\n\n\n 1\n\x0cCMS issued Financial Management Review Guide Number 20 (the guide) to the State agency\nvia Medicaid State Operations Letter 91-9. The guide states that any procedure provided to a\nwoman known to be pregnant may not be considered a family planning service reimbursable\nat the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate.\n\nThe State agency\xe2\x80\x99s requirements define family planning services as any medically approved\ntreatment, counseling, drugs, supplies, or devices which are prescribed, or furnished by a\nprovider, to individuals of child-bearing age for purposes of enabling such individuals to\nfreely determine the number and spacing of their children.\n\nFor State fiscal years 2006 through 2009, the State agency was reimbursed $19,997,484\n($17,997,736 Federal share) for a variety of family planning services at the enhanced\n90-percent FFP rate. Of this amount, we separately reviewed certain family planning costs\ntotaling $13,977,885 ($12,580,097 Federal share) for specifically identified child delivery and\nnewborn claims (A-07-10-04156), family planning pharmacy claims (A-07-10-04157), and\nfamily planning sterilization services (A-07-10-04162). Thus, this review covers the\nremaining $6,019,599 ($5,417,639 Federal share) for selected family planning claims, for\nwhich the State agency claimed reimbursement at the family planning enhanced 90-percent\nFFP rate.\n\nMedicaid Management Information System\n\nProviders enrolled in the Medicaid program submit claims for payment to the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s\nMMIS, which is maintained by the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s fiscal agent. The State agency furnishes to\nproviders an MMIS provider manual that contains instructions for the proper completion and\nsubmission of claims. The provider must complete certain fields on the electronic claim form\nto indicate the type of service provided.\n\nThe MMIS uses a variety of indicators on the electronic claim form to identify family\nplanning services that are eligible for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate.\nIn addition, the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s MMIS uses edits and logic to verify that the provider correctly\nselected the appropriate indicator. If these edits revealed that the provider selected a family\nplanning indicator for services unrelated to family planning services, the claim was returned\nto the provider for correction and resubmission. If the MMIS logic verified that the provider\ncorrectly selected the appropriate indicator, those services were reported to CMS for the\nappropriate amount of Federal reimbursement.\n\nOBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY\n\nObjective\n\nOur objective was to determine whether the $6,019,599 ($5,417,639 Federal share) in selected\nfamily planning claims submitted by providers and claimed by the State agency at the\nenhanced 90-percent FFP rate from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009, were allowable\npursuant to Federal requirements.\n\n\n\n 2\n\x0cScope\n\nWe reviewed $6,019,599 ($5,417,639 Federal share) of State agency claims related to family\nplanning services in Kansas from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009. We did not review the\noverall internal control structure of the State agency or the Medicaid program. Rather, we\nreviewed only the internal controls that pertained directly to our objective.\n\nWe performed fieldwork at the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s offices in Topeka, Kansas, from July 2009\nthrough February 2010.\n\nMethodology\n\nTo accomplish our objective, we did the following:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We reviewed Federal laws, regulations, guidance and the State plan.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We held discussions with CMS officials and acquired an understanding of CMS\n requirements and guidance furnished to State agency officials concerning Medicaid\n family planning claims.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We held discussions with State agency officials to ascertain State agency policies,\n procedures, and guidance for claiming Medicaid reimbursement for family planning\n services.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We reconciled current period and prior period family planning claims reported on the\n standard Form CMS-64, Quarterly Medicaid Statement of Expenditures for the\n Medical Assistance Program (CMS-64 report), 1 back to the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s supporting\n documentation.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We obtained a database of paid claims for the Family Planning program that were\n submitted by Medicaid providers in the State of Kansas for the period July 1, 2005,\n through June 30, 2009. The database contained 211,496 claim lines totaling\n $19,993,630. The Medicaid claim lines were extracted from the paid claims\xe2\x80\x99 database\n maintained by the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s fiscal agent. We then removed (1) claims for child\n delivery and newborn inpatient services, and for family planning prescription drugs\n because we reviewed these in separate reports, and (2) zero-paid claims which taken\n together left 48,264 claims lines totaling $6,019,599 remaining.\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We selected a stratified random sample of 100 claims from the 48,264 Family\n Planning Program claims (see Appendix A).\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 We obtained and reviewed the supporting documentation for each sampled claim to\n determine the allowability of the claim.\n\n1\n The CMS-64 report summarizes actual Medicaid expenditures for each quarter and is used by CMS to\nreimburse States for the Federal share of Medicaid expenditures.\n\n 3\n\x0c \xe2\x80\xa2 We provided the results of our review to State agency officials on March 17, 2010. In\n addition, we provided the State agency officials with the medical documents related to\n the 49 claims not eligible for the 90-percent FFP rate.\n\nAppendixes A and B contain the details of our sampling and projection methodologies.\n\nWe conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government\nauditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain\nsufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions\nbased on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable\nbasis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective.\n\n FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\n\nNot all of the selected family planning claims submitted by providers and claimed by the State\nagency at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009, were\nallowable pursuant to Federal requirements. Of the 100 claims in our sample, 51 qualified as\nfamily planning services and could be claimed for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent\nFFP rate. However, the remaining 49 claims in our sample totaling $42,274 (Federal share)\nwere not allowable for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate because the\nservices in question could not be claimed as family planning services pursuant to Federal\nrequirements (1 claim had two types of errors). Specifically, of the 49 remaining claims, the\nState agency received unallowable reimbursement for:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 42 claims unrelated to family planning,\n \xe2\x80\xa2 6 claims that did not have adequate informed consent for sterilization, 2 and\n \xe2\x80\xa2 2 claims that lacked sufficient supporting documentation.\n\nBased on the results of our sample, we estimated that the State agency received $589,355 in\nunallowable Federal reimbursement. Of the 49 claims for which the State agency received\nunallowable reimbursement, 42 could have been claimed for reimbursement at the standard\nFMAP rate that was applicable at the time the claim was paid. For those 42 claims, we\ncalculated the correct Federal reimbursement using the standard FMAP rates. The remaining\n7 claims containing errors were unallowable for Federal reimbursement.\n\nThese errors occurred because the MMIS\xe2\x80\x99s edits did not always correctly identify claims for\nreimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate and because Medicaid guidelines\nregarding informed consent for sterilization were not always followed.\n\n\n\n\n2\n These claims were unrelated to those made for the sterilization services that we are reviewing separately\n(A-07-10-04162).\n\n 4\n\x0cUNALLOWABLE FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES\n\nServices Unrelated to Family Planning\n\nSection 1903(a)(5) of the Act and 42 CFR \xc2\xa7\xc2\xa7 433.10(c)(1) and 433.15(b)(2) authorize\nenhanced 90-percent Federal reimbursement for family planning services. Section 4270 of\nthe manual defines family planning services as those that prevent or delay pregnancy or\notherwise control family size. The manual states that only items and procedures clearly\nfurnished or provided for family planning purposes may be claimed at the enhanced\n90-percent FFP rate.\n\nContrary to these Federal requirements and guidelines, the State agency improperly claimed\nFederal reimbursement for costs associated with 42 services unrelated to family planning that\nwere not allowable for reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate. The\ndocumentation contained in the medical files revealed that provider services unrelated to\nfamily planning had been rendered in these cases. For example, some of the unrelated\nservices were for infection, obstetric care, echocardiogram, and appendectomy (refer to\nAppendixes C and D for the full list of unallowable services identified). Therefore, the costs\nrelated to the 42 claims were not allowable for reimbursement at the Family Planning\nProgram\xe2\x80\x99s enhanced 90-percent FFP rate.\n\nInadequate Informed Consent\n\n42 CFR \xc2\xa7 441.253(d) requires that at least 30 days, but not more than 180 days, have passed\nbetween the date of informed consent and the date of the sterilization, except in the case of\npremature delivery or emergency abdominal surgery. These Federal regulations also state that\nan individual may consent to be sterilized at the time of a premature delivery if at least 72\nhours have passed since she gave informed consent for the sterilization. In addition, the\ninformed consent must have been given at least 30 days before the expected date of delivery.\nIn addition, 42 CFR \xc2\xa7 441.258(b) requires the consent form to be signed and dated by (1) the\nindividual to be sterilized; (2) the interpreter, if one is provided; (3) the person who obtained\nthe consent; and (4) the physician who performed the sterilization procedure. Section 8340 of\nthe Kansas Medicaid Hospital Manual states that if the informed consent guidelines are not\ncompletely followed, the claim will be denied. These guidelines require that all data fields be\ncompleted and that the physician\xe2\x80\x99s statement on the sterilization consent form be signed and\ndated no more than two days prior to the surgery.\n\nContrary to these Federal requirements and guidelines, the State agency improperly claimed\nFederal reimbursement for six claims that were not allowable for reimbursement and should\nbe denied. 3 Specifically,\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 for two claims, informed consent was given on the same day as the sterilization\n procedure;\n\n3\n Although these six claims were for sterilization procedures, our finding in this report focuses on the issue of\ninformed consent. Accordingly, neither these six claims nor the costs associated with them bear upon the claims\nfor the sterilization services that we are reviewing separately (A-07-10-04162).\n\n 5\n\x0c \xe2\x80\xa2 for one claim, the provider was not able to furnish us with a consent for sterilization;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 for one claim, the physician did not sign the consent form;\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 for one claim, the physician did not date the consent form; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 for one claim, the physician signed the consent form more than two days before the\n procedure.\n\nTherefore, the costs related to the six claims were not allowable for reimbursement and should\nhave been denied.\n\nLack of Documentation\n\nSection 1902(a)(27) of the Act and 42 CFR \xc2\xa7\xc2\xa7 431.17 and 433.32 require that services\nclaimed for Federal Medicaid reimbursement be documented.\n\nContrary to these Federal requirements, the State agency improperly claimed Federal\nreimbursement for two claims that were not allowable for reimbursement and should have\nbeen denied because the providers could not provide documentation to support the services\nbilled. Therefore, the costs related to the two claims were not allowable for reimbursement.\n\nCAUSES OF THE OVERPAYMENTS\n\nThe MMIS\xe2\x80\x99s edits did not always correctly identify claims for reimbursement at the enhanced\n90-percent FFP rate. To classify family planning claims, the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s MMIS has edits\nand logic to identify family planning claims. However, the logic and edits used by the State\nagency\xe2\x80\x99s MMIS were not sufficient to correctly identify family planning claims.\n\nUNALLOWABLE FAMILY PLANNING CLAIMS\n\nOur stratified random sample found 49 claims with errors totaling $42,274 (Federal share) of\nunallowable Federal reimbursement. Of these claims, 42 could, however, have been claimed\nfor reimbursement at the standard FMAP rate that was applicable at the time the claim was\npaid. For those 42 claims, we calculated the correct Federal reimbursement using the standard\nFMAP rates. The remaining 7 claims containing errors were unallowable for Federal\nreimbursement. 4 Based on the results of our statistical sample, we estimated that the State\nagency received $589,355 in unallowable Federal reimbursement.\n\n4\n One claim had two types of errors and thus could be included as an error in both categories of reimbursement\nallowability mentioned just above. The first error involved the fact that part of the claim was for a sterilization\nprocedure; this part of the claim was unallowable for Federal reimbursement. The second error involved the fact\nthat a service was claimed as a family planning service at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate but was actually\nallowable for Federal reimbursement only at the standard FMAP rate. (See sample item 4 in Appendix C.) For\npurposes of determining the questioned costs, this claim was included with the 42 claims that could have\nreceived reimbursement at the standard FMAP rate and was not included with the 7 claims for which Federal\nreimbursement was entirely unallowable.\n\n 6\n\x0cRECOMMENDATIONS\n\nWe recommend that the State agency:\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 refund $589,355 to the Federal Government; and\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 strengthen internal controls to ensure that family planning services submitted for\n Federal reimbursement are accurate by:\n\n o ensuring that MMIS edits appropriately identify claims that are ineligible for\n reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent FFP rate and\n\n o adhering to the Medicaid guidelines regarding informed consent for\n sterilization.\n\nSTATE AGENCY COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, the State agency concurred that a refund is due to the\nFederal Government and stated that it would work with CMS \xe2\x80\x9c\xe2\x80\xa6 to determine the timing and\namount of that refund.\xe2\x80\x9d The State agency also concurred with our second recommendation\nand described corrective actions, in the form of strengthened internal controls, that it had\nimplemented or planned to implement. Specifically, the State agency said that it had\nimplemented policy changes to correct the family planning claims process within the MMIS\nand that it would update policy requirements regarding Medicaid informed consent guidelines\nfor sterilization.\n\nIn addition, the State agency provided comments regarding a portion of the second\nrecommendation as it appeared in our draft report. The State agency said that the\nstrengthened internal controls that it had implemented would correct the MMIS edits and\nensure that services unrelated to family planning are not claimed at the 90-percent FFP rate.\nThe State agency expressed concern that that portion of our second recommendation could\nadd \xe2\x80\x9c\xe2\x80\xa6 undue burden on providers \xe2\x80\xa6\xe2\x80\x9d and create \xe2\x80\x9c\xe2\x80\xa6 a potential source of error in the state\nfunding process.\xe2\x80\x9d The State agency added that the MMIS-based methodology that formed the\nbasis of its corrective actions would more appropriately address that portion of our second\nrecommendation and would offer \xe2\x80\x9c\xe2\x80\xa6 the best mix of accuracy and efficiency in the family\nplanning claims\xe2\x80\x99 process.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nThe State agency\xe2\x80\x99s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix E.\n\nOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE\n\nAfter reviewing the State agency\xe2\x80\x99s comments, we modified our final report by removing the\nportion of our second recommendation that had appeared in the draft report and about which\nthe State agency had expressed concerns. The corrective actions that the State agency\ndescribed in its comments should, when fully implemented, adequately address our findings,\nbut we did not verify those corrective actions.\n\n 7\n\x0cAPPENDIXES\n\x0c Page 1 of2\n\n APPENDIX A: SAMPLE DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY\n\nPOPULATION\n\nThe population consists of paid family planning claims for which the Kansas Health Policy\nAuthority (State agency) received reimbursement at the enhanced 90-percent Federal financial\nparticipation (FFP) rate for services furnished to Medicaid beneficiaries and claimed during\nthe period July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2009.\n\nSAMPLING FRAME\n\nWe obtained a database of paid claims for the Kansas Medicaid Family Planning Program that\nwere submitted by the Medicaid providers of the State of Kansas, for the period July 1, 2005,\nthrough June 30, 2009. The database contained 211,496 claim lines totaling $19,993,630.\nThe Medicaid claim lines were extracted from the paid claims' database maintained by the\nState agency's fiscal agent.\n\nWe extracted 3,633 inpatient claim lines for child delivery and newborn inpatient services,\nand 133,810 prescription drug claim lines, and created a separate database. We reviewed\nclaims associated with these services in separate audits. The remaining 74,053 claim lines\nwere reduced by 4,237 zero-paid claim lines and 2,114 voided claim lines, leaving 67,675\nclaim lines, which we converted to 48,291 claims. We removed 27 claims that were less than\nzero, leaving 48,264 claims totaling $6,019,599, of which the Federal share is $5,417,639.\n\nThe claims were extracted by our advanced audit techniques staff from the State agency's\nMedicaid claim files provided to us by the State agency's fiscal agent from the Medicaid\nManagement Information System.\n\nSAMPLE UNIT\n\nSampling unit was a paid claim for Medicaid Family Planning services.\n\nSAMPLE DESIGN\n\nWe used a stratified random sample with each stratum defined by paid amounts as shown\nbelow:\n\n Stratum One: $1,000 and more - 230 paid claims \n\n Stratum Two: $999.99 and less - 48,034 paid claims. \n\n\nSAMPLE SIZE\n\nOne hundred sample units (paid claims) were selected for review.\n\x0c Page20f2\n\nSOURCE OF THE RANDOM NUMBERS\n\nWe generated the random numbers with the Office of Inspector General, Office of Audit\nServices, statistical software eRAT -STA TS).\n\nESTIMATION METHODOLOGY\n\nWe used RAT -ST ATS to estimate the unallowable payments for Medicaid family planning\nserVIces.\n\x0c APPENDIX B: SAMPLE RESULTS AND ESTIMATES\n\n Sample Results\n\n Value of\n Value of Value of Number of Incorrectly\n Frame Sample Sample Incorrectly Paid\n Stratum Frame Size\n (Federal Size (Federal Paid Claims\n Share) Share) Claims (Federal\n Share)\nPaid claims\nof $1,000 230 $928,711 30 $116,211 30 $40,797\nand more\nPaid claims\nof $999.99 48,034 4,488,928 70 6,510 19 1,477\nand less\n Totals 48,264 $5,417,639 100 $122,721 49 $42,274\n\n\n Estimated Value of Incorrectly Paid Claims\n (Limits Calculated for a 90 Percent Confidence Interval)\n\n Point Estimate: $1,326,509\n Lower Limit: $589,355\n Upper Limit: $2,063,663\n\x0c Page 1 of2\n\n APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF THE STATISTICAL SAMPLE - STRATA 1 \n\n\n\n PROCEDURE \n IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS \n NOT RELATED \n INADEQUATE \n SERVICE BASED AMOUNT \n\nSAMPLE \n FAMILY \n TO FAMILY \n INFORMED \n UPON ADMITTING OF \n\n ITEM \n CMS64 i ICN 2 \n PLANNING? \n PLANNING \n CONSENT \n DIAGNOSIS CLAIM \n\n 1\n 2006215011767 \n No X\n JOINT PAIN-PELVIS $5,443.58 \n\n SUPERVIS OTH\n 2\n 6006293006332 \n No X\n NORMALPREG $1,326.89 \n\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 3\n 6006299003198 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n 43 \n 6006025005504 \n No X\n HYPERTENSION $492.65\n 4\n 6006025005504 \n No X\n STERILIZATION $594.63\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 5\n 6006333005781 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n CENTRAL NERVOUS\n SYSTEM\n COMPLICATOIN IN\n DELIVERY \xc2\xad\n 6\n 2006361020396 \n No X\n ANTEPARTUM $5,095.90\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 7\n 6006333005778 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,496.23\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 8\n 6006159006369 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 9\n 6006125007432 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 10 \n 6007085000478 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n DELIVER-TWINS\n 11 \n 6006172000428 \n No X\n BOTH LIVE $1,496.23\n ABDMNAL PAIN\n 12 \n 5207064006088 \n No X\n UNSPCF SITE $25,129.83\n 13 \n 1106271002482 \n No X\n STERILIZATION $2,854.87\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 14 \n 6006125006875 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n 15 \n 2008330010208 \n No X\n OV ARIAN CYST $5,694.20\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 16 \n 6006349006221 \n No X\n LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n ABDMNAL PAIN\n 17 \n 2006164000130 \n No X\n UNSPCF SITE $5,515.17\n\n\n\n\n I The standard Form CMS-64, Quarterly Medicaid Statement of Expenditures for the Medical Assistance\n Program (CMS64), summarizes actual Medicaid expenditures for each quarter and is used by CMS to\n reimburse States for the Federal share of Medicaid expenditures.\n\n 2 Internal Control Number\n\n 3 Sample item 4 contained two errors.\n\x0c Page2of2\n\n PROCEDURE IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS NOT RELATED INADEQUATE SERVICE BASED AMOUNT\nSAMPLE FAMILY TO FAMILY INFORMED UPON ADMITTING OF\n ITEM CMS641CN PLANNING? PLANNING CONSENT DIAGNOSIS CLAIM\n\n ABDMNAL PAIN\n 18 6006114002829 No X UNSPCF SITE $4,448.91\n\n CELLULITIS OF\n 19 2006262019626 No X FOOT $5,095.90\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 20 6006099000333 No X LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 21 6006195005676 No X LIVEBORN $1,496.23\n SUPERVIS OTH\n 22 6006293006370 No X NORMAL PREG $1,326.89\n 23 2006156004628 No X OV ARIAN CYST $5,928.02\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 24 6006349006252 No X LIVEBORN $1,326.89\n 25 1106331005579 No X STERILIZA TION $2,843.55\n 26 2007142022014 No X PAIN IN LIMB $815.39\n NAUSEA WITH\n 27 2006354014749 No X VOMITING $20,681.41\n DELIVER-SINGLE\n 28 6006099000332 No X LIVEBORN $1,496.23\n ULCER OTHER PART\n 29 2006342031617 No X OF FOOT $1,040.80\n SHORTNESS OF\n 30 2009083009714 No X BREATH $16,867.72\n\x0c Page 1 of 4\n\n\n APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF THE STATISTICAL SAMPLE - STRATA 2 \n\n\n PROCEDURE UNABLE\n NOT TO IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS RELATED TO INADEQUATE PROVIDE SERVICE BASED AMOUNT \n\nSAMPLE \n FAMILY FAMILY INFORMED MEDICAL UPON ADMITTING OF \n\n ITEM \n CMS64 1 ICN 2 PLANNING? PLANNING CONSENT RECORDS DIAGNOSIS CLAIM \n\n\n NECROT\n 1\n 1005151002447 No X ENTEROCOLITIS $136.48\n ARTIFICIAL\n RUPTURE\n MEMBRANE \xc2\xad\n 2\n 1005151003 109 No X DELIVERY $378.58\n ALLOWABLE\n F AMIL Y PLANNING\n 3\n 1005152001144 Yes SERVICE $40.50\n 4\n 1005158003431 No X STERILIZATION $607.09\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 5 1005166002493 Yes SERVICE $10.13\n CONTRACEPTIVE\n 6 1005175001263 No X MAN GMT $7.43\n 7 1005175001665 No X CERVICALGIA $7.43\n ECTOPIC\n 8 5205242000001 No X PREGNANCY $170.60\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 9 1005175002274 Yes SERVICE $46.68\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 10 1005175002453 Yes SERVICE $46.68\n 11 1005175002529 No X OV ARIAN CYST $52.30\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 12 1005175002767 Yes SERVICE $54.13\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 13 1005175002771 Yes SERVICE $17.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 14 1005175002773 Yes SERVICE $24.43\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 15 1005178001407 Yes SERVICE $54.00\n CONTRACEPT PILL\n 16 1005178001408 No X SURVEILLANCE $37.43\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 17 1005178001409 Yes SERVICE $50.00\n\n\n\n 1 The standard Form CMS-64, Quarterly Medicaid Statement of Expenditures for the Medical Assistance\n Program (CMS64), summarizes actual Medicaid expenditures for each quarter and is used by CMS to\n reimburse States for the Federal share of Medicaid expenditures.\n\n 2 Internal Control Number\n\x0c Page 2 of 4\n\n\n PROCEDURE UNABLE\n NOT TO IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS RELATED TO INADEQUATE PROVIDE SERVICE BASED AMOUNT\nSAMPLE FAMILY FAMILY INFORMED MEDICAL UPON ADMITTING OF\n ITEM CMS64 i lCN 2 PLANNING? PLANNING CONSENT RECORDS DIAGNOSIS CLAIM\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 18 1005178001430 Yes SERVICE $52.80\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 19 1005178001463 Yes SERVICE $82.44\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 20 1005178001791 Yes SERVICE $52.30\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 21 1005178001797 Yes SERVICE $40.00\n 22 5205242000002 No X APPENDICITIS $168.30\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 23 1005178003203 Yes SERVICE $52.80\n 24 5205242000003 No X OV ARIAN CYST $238.84\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 25 1005179001195 Yes SERVICE $3 I.70\n MILD DYSPLASIA OF\n 26 5205242000005 No X CERVIX $119.42\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 27 1005179002166 Yes SERVICE $23.34\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 28 1005179003759 Yes SERVICE $59.44\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 29 1005179003805 Yes SERVICE $43 I. 09\n 30 1005179004043 No X STERILIZATI ON $17.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 31 1005179004049 Yes SERVICE $59.44\n 32 5205242000006 No X UTERINE PROLAPSE $238.84\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 33 1005180001283 Yes SERVICE $7.43\n PREGNA TE STATE\n 343 1005180001336 No X INCIDENTAL $106.68\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 34 1005180001336 Yes SERVICE $23.34\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 35 1005180001354 Yes SERVICE $23.34\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 36 1005180001561 Yes SERVICE $50.00\n\n\n\n\n 3 Sample item 34 included two procedures.\n\x0c Page 3 of4\n\n\n PROCEDURE UNABLE\n NOT TO IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS RELATED TO INADEQUATE PROVIDE SERVICE BASED AMOUNT\nSAMPLE FAMILY FAMILY INFORMED MEDICAL UPON ADMITTING OF\n ITEM CMS64 1 ICN 2 PLANNING? PLANNING CONSENT RECORDS DIAGNOSIS CLAIM\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 37 1005180001576 Yes SERVICE $36.35\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 38 1005180001582 Yes SERVICE $50.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 39 1005180001589 Yes SERVICE $50.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 40 1005180001590 Yes SERVICE $24.04\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 41 1005180001592 Yes SERVICE $465.54\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 42 1005180001594 Yes SERVICE $24.04\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 43 1005180001595 Yes SERVICE $465.54\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 44 5905228001091 Yes SERVICE $31.47\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 45 1005180001712 Yes SERVICE $46.68\n FEMALE GENITAL\n 46 5205242000007 No X SYMPTOMS $187.66\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 47 1005181000543 Yes SERVICE $31. 70\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 48 1005181000555 Yes SERVICE $31. 70\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 49 1005181000557 Yes SERVICE $31.70\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 50 1005181001048 Yes SERVICE $52.80\n ROUTINE\n 51 1005181002283 No X GYNECOLOGICAL $17.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 52 1005181002340 Yes SERVICE $47.55\n 53 5205242000010 No X HEMATURIA $102.36\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 54 1005182001031 Yes SERVICE $67.86\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 55 1005182001307 Yes SERVICE $36.00\n\x0c Page 4 of4\n\n\n PROCEDURE UNABLE\n NOT TO IDENTIFIED\n QUALIFY AS RELATED TO INADEQUATE PROVIDE SERVICE BASED AMOUNT\nSAMPLE FAMILY FAMILY INFORMED MEDICAL UPON ADMITTING OF\n ITEM CMS64 1 1CN 2 PLANNING? PLANNING CONSENT RECORDS DIAGNOSIS CLAIM\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 56 1005182001322 Yes SERVICE $40.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 57 1005186001089 Yes SERVICE $82.44\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 58 1005186001550 Yes SERVICE $40.00\n ALLOWABLE\n F AMIL Y PLANNING\n 59 1005186001746 Yes SERVICE $20.00\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 60 1005186001780 Yes SERVICE $67.86\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 61 1005187001681 Yes SERVICE $69.80\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 62 1005187001683 Yes SERVICE $81.58\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 63 1005188000395 Yes SERVICE $40.00\n ACUTE\n 64 5205242000011 No X APPENDICITIS $170.60\n ABSCESS OF\n 65 5205242000012 No X APPENDIX $187.66\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 66 1005188000545 Yes SERVICE $52.80\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 67 1005188000848 Yes SERVICE $431.09\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 68 1005188000938 Yes SERVICE $74.47\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMIL Y PLANNING\n 69 1005188001457 Yes SERVICE $378.58\n ALLOWABLE\n FAMILY PLANNING\n 70 1005 1880020 II Yes SERVICE $76.84\n\x0c Page 1 of 2\n\n\nAPPENDIX E: STATE AGENCY COMMENTS\n\x0cPage 2 of 2\n\x0c"


type: legislation

text:
 21.7.2015
 IT
 Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea
 L 193/124
 REGOLAMENTO DI ESECUZIONE (UE) 2015/1192 DELLA COMMISSIONE
 del 20 luglio 2015
 che approva la sostanza attiva terpenoid blend QRD 460, in conformità al regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo all'immissione sul mercato dei prodotti fitosanitari, e che modifica l'allegato del regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011 della Commissione
 (Testo rilevante ai fini del SEE)
 LA COMMISSIONE EUROPEA,
 visto il trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea,
 visto il regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 21 ottobre 2009, relativo all'immissione sul mercato dei prodotti fitosanitari e che abroga le direttive 79/117/CEE e 91/414/CEE del Consiglio (1), in particolare l'articolo 13, paragrafo 2,
 considerando quanto segue:
 (1)
 In conformità all'articolo 7, paragrafo 1, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, il 14 settembre 2011 la società AgraQuest Inc. (ora Bayer CropScience AG) ha presentato ai Paesi Bassi una domanda di approvazione della sostanza attiva terpenoid blend QRD 460. Conformemente all'articolo 9, paragrafo 3, di detto regolamento il 4 ottobre 2011 i Paesi Bassi, in qualità di Stato membro relatore, hanno informato la Commissione dell'ammissibilità della domanda.
 (2)
 Il 30 luglio 2013 lo Stato membro relatore ha presentato un progetto di rapporto di valutazione alla Commissione, con copia all'Autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare (di seguito «l'Autorità»), in cui si valuta se sia prevedibile che tale sostanza attiva soddisfi i criteri di approvazione di cui all'articolo 4 del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009.
 (3)
 L'Autorità ha seguito le disposizioni dell'articolo 12, paragrafo 1, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009. In conformità all'articolo 12, paragrafo 3, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, essa ha chiesto al richiedente di fornire informazioni supplementari agli Stati membri, alla Commissione e all'Autorità stessa. La valutazione delle informazioni supplementari da parte dello Stato membro relatore è stata presentata all'Autorità sotto forma di progetto aggiornato di rapporto di valutazione nel maggio 2014.
 (4)
 Il 26 agosto 2014 l'Autorità ha trasmesso al richiedente, agli Stati membri e alla Commissione le sue conclusioni, in cui precisa se sia prevedibile che la sostanza attiva terpenoid blend QRD 460 soddisfi i criteri di approvazione di cui all'articolo 4 del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009 (2). L'Autorità ha messo le sue conclusioni a disposizione del pubblico.
 (5)
 Al richiedente è stata data la possibilità di presentare osservazioni sul rapporto di riesame.
 (6)
 Il 29 maggio 2015 la Commissione ha presentato al comitato permanente per le piante, gli animali, gli alimenti e i mangimi il rapporto di riesame per la sostanza terpenoid blend QRD 460 e un progetto di regolamento inteso ad approvare tale sostanza.
 (7)
 Per quanto riguarda uno o più impieghi rappresentativi di almeno un prodotto fitosanitario contenente la sostanza attiva, in particolare gli impieghi che sono stati esaminati e descritti nel rapporto di riesame della Commissione, è stato stabilito che i criteri di approvazione di cui all'articolo 4 del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009 sono soddisfatti. Si ritiene quindi che tali criteri di approvazione siano soddisfatti. È pertanto opportuno approvare la sostanza terpenoid blend QRD 460.
 (8)
 Ai sensi dell'articolo 13, paragrafo 2, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, in combinato disposto con l'articolo 6 del medesimo e alla luce delle attuali conoscenze scientifiche e tecniche, è tuttavia necessario fissare alcune condizioni e restrizioni. È in particolare opportuno chiedere ulteriori informazioni di conferma.
 (9)
 In conformità all'articolo 13, paragrafo 4, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, l'allegato del regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011 della Commissione (3) dovrebbe essere modificato di conseguenza.
 (10)
 Le misure di cui al presente regolamento sono conformi al parere del comitato permanente per le piante, gli animali, gli alimenti e i mangimi,
 HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO:
 Articolo 1
 Approvazione della sostanza attiva
 La sostanza attiva terpenoid blend QRD 460 di cui all'allegato I è approvata alle condizioni stabilite nel medesimo.
 Articolo 2
 Modifiche del regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011
 L'allegato del regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011 è modificato conformemente all'allegato II del presente regolamento.
 Articolo 3
 Entrata in vigore e data di applicazione
 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il ventesimo giorno successivo alla pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea.
 Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri.
 Fatto a Bruxelles, il 20 luglio 2015
 Per la Commissione
 Il presidente
 Jean-Claude JUNCKER
 (1) GU L 309 del 24.11.2009, pag. 1.
 (2) EFSA Journal 2014;12(10):3816. Disponibile online all'indirizzo: www.efsa.europa.eu
 (3) Regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011 della Commissione, del 25 maggio 2011, recante disposizioni di attuazione del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio per quanto riguarda l'elenco delle sostanze attive approvate (GU L 153 dell'11.6.2011, pag. 1).
 ALLEGATO I
 Nome comune, numeri di identificazione
 Denominazione IUPAC
 Purezza (1)
 Data di approvazione
 Scadenza dell'approvazione
 Disposizioni specifiche
 Terpenoid blend QRD 460
 Numero CIPAC: 982
 Terpenoid blend QRD 460 è una miscela di tre componenti:
 —
 α-terpinene: 1-isopropil-4-metilcicloesa-1,3-diene;
 —
 p-cimene: 1-isopropil-4-metilbenzene;
 —
 d-limonene: (R)-4-isopropenil-1-metilcicloesene.
 La concentrazione nominale di ogni componente nella sostanza attiva così come prodotta dovrebbe essere la seguente:
 —
 α-terpinene: 59,7 %;
 —
 p-cimene: 22,4 %;
 —
 d-limonene: 17,9 %;
 Ogni componente dovrebbe avere la purezza minima seguente:
 —
 α-terpinene: 89 %;
 —
 p-cimene: 97 %;
 —
 d-limonene: 93 %;
 10 agosto 2015
 10 agosto 2025
 Per l'attuazione dei principi uniformi di cui all'articolo 29, paragrafo 6, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, occorre tener conto delle conclusioni del rapporto di riesame sul terpenoid blend QRD-460, in particolare delle relative appendici I e II.
 In questa valutazione generale gli Stati membri prestano particolare attenzione:
 a)
 alla stabilità delle formulazioni durante il magazzinaggio;
 b)
 alla protezione degli operatori e dei lavoratori, vigilando affinché le condizioni d'impiego prescrivano all'occorrenza l'utilizzo di adeguati dispositivi di protezione individuale;
 c)
 alla protezione delle acque sotterranee quando la sostanza viene impiegata in regioni sensibili dal punto di vista del terreno e/o delle condizioni climatiche;
 d)
 alla protezione di uccelli, mammiferi e organismi acquatici;
 e)
 alla protezione delle api e degli artropodi non bersaglio.
 Le condizioni d'impiego comprendono, se del caso, misure di attenuazione dei rischi.
 Il richiedente presenta informazioni di conferma riguardanti:
 1)
 le specifiche tecniche della sostanza attiva così come prodotta (dovrebbero essere fornite 5 analisi dei lotti per la miscela), corredate di metodi di analisi accettabili e convalidati. È opportuno confermare che nel materiale tecnico non siano presenti impurità rilevanti;
 2)
 l'equivalenza del materiale utilizzato negli studi tossicologici ed ecotossicologici con la specifica tecnica confermata.
 Il richiedente presenta tali informazioni alla Commissione, agli Stati membri e all'Autorità entro il 10 febbraio 2016
 (1) Ulteriori dettagli sull'identità e sulle specifiche della sostanza attiva sono contenuti nel rapporto di riesame.
 ALLEGATO II
 Alla parte B dell'allegato del regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 540/2011, è aggiunta la seguente voce:
 Nome comune, numeri di identificazione
 Denominazione IUPAC
 Purezza (1)
 Data di approvazione
 Scadenza dell'approvazione
 Disposizioni specifiche
 «84
 Terpenoid blend QRD 460
 Numero CIPAC: 982
 Terpenoid blend QRD 460 è una miscela di tre componenti:
 —
 α-terpinene: 1-isopropil-4-metilcicloesa-1,3-diene;
 —
 p-cimene: 1-isopropil-4-metilbenzene;
 —
 d-limonene: (R)-4-isopropenil-1-metilcicloesene.
 La concentrazione nominale di ogni componente nella sostanza attiva così come prodotta dovrebbe essere la seguente:
 —
 α-terpinene: 59,7 %;
 —
 p-cimene: 22,4 %;
 —
 d-limonene: 17,9 %;
 Ogni componente dovrebbe avere la purezza minima seguente:
 —
 α-terpinene: 89 %;
 —
 p-cimene: 97 %;
 —
 d-limonene: 93 %;
 10 agosto 2015
 10 agosto 2025
 Per l'attuazione dei principi uniformi di cui all'articolo 29, paragrafo 6, del regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009, occorre tener conto delle conclusioni del rapporto di riesame sul terpenoid blend QRD-460, in particolare delle relative appendici I e II.
 In questa valutazione generale gli Stati membri prestano particolare attenzione:
 a)
 alla stabilità delle formulazioni durante il magazzinaggio;
 b)
 alla protezione degli operatori e dei lavoratori, vigilando affinché le condizioni d'impiego prescrivano all'occorrenza l'utilizzo di adeguati dispositivi di protezione individuale;
 c)
 alla protezione delle acque sotterranee quando la sostanza viene impiegata in regioni sensibili dal punto di vista del terreno e/o delle condizioni climatiche;
 d)
 alla protezione di uccelli, mammiferi e organismi acquatici;
 e)
 alla protezione delle api e degli artropodi non bersaglio.
 Le condizioni d'impiego comprendono, se del caso, misure di attenuazione dei rischi.
 Il richiedente presenta informazioni di conferma riguardanti:
 1)
 le specifiche tecniche della sostanza attiva così come prodotta (dovrebbero essere fornite 5 analisi dei lotti per la miscela), corredate di metodi di analisi accettabili e convalidati. È opportuno confermare che nel materiale tecnico non siano presenti impurità rilevanti;
 2)
 l'equivalenza del materiale utilizzato negli studi tossicologici ed ecotossicologici con la specifica tecnica confermata.
 Il richiedente presenta tali informazioni alla Commissione, agli Stati membri e all'Autorità entro il 10 febbraio 2016»
 (1) Ulteriori dettagli sull'identità e sulle specifiche della sostanza attiva sono contenuti nel rapporto di riesame.


text:
Svarbus teisinis pranešimas
 |
 22001A1031(01)
 Oficialusis leidinys L 287 , 31/10/2001 p. 0024 - 0029
 Susitarimastarp Europos atominės energijos bendrijos ir Rusijos Federacijos dėl bendradarbiavimo branduolinės saugos srityjeEUROPOS ATOMINĖS ENERGIJOS BENDRIJAtoliau – Bendrija, irRUSIJOS FEDERACIJOS Vyriausybė,toliau – Šalis arba Šalys,PRISIMINDAMOS, kad 1997 m. gruodžio 1 d. įsigaliojęs Partnerystės ir bendradarbiavimo susitarimas tarp Europos Bendrijų bei valstybių narių ir Rusijos Federacijos nustato, kad Šalys bendradarbiauja branduolinio sektoriaus srityje, inter alia, įgyvendindamos du susitarimus dėl termobranduolinės sintezės ir branduolinės saugos,PRISIMINDAMOS, kad Europos Bendrijų Komisija atsako už, inter alia, pagrindinių radiacinės apsaugos standartų nustatymą, jų įgyvendinimo užtikrinimą bei duomenų apie radiaciją rinkimą ir kontrolę Bendrijos lygiu,PRISIMINDAMOS, kad svarbu saugoti aplinką ir bendradarbiauti su trečiosiomis šalimis,ATSIŽVELGDAMOS į tai, kad Europos Bendrijų Komisija vykdo Bendrijos tyrimo programas branduolinės saugos srityje, įskaitant reaktorių saugą, atliekų valdymą ir branduolinių jėgainių eksploatacijos užbaigimą ir išmontavimą, taip pat – branduolinių medžiagų apsaugos srityje, ir norėdama palaikyti tarptautiniu mastu pripažintus branduolinės saugos principus ir rekomendacijas, siekia plėtoti šių sričių mokslinį ir technologinį bendradarbiavimą su trečiosiomis šalimis,ATSIŽVELGDAMOS į tai, kad Rusijos Federacija deda dideles pastangas vykdant tyrimų ir plėtros programas, skirtas esamų ir projektuojamų branduolinių jėgainių saugos pagerinimui, siekiant, kad ji atitiktų šiuolaikinius branduolinės saugos reikalavimus, taip pat sprendžiant radioaktyvių atliekų valdymo ir branduolinių jėgainių eksploatacijos užbaigimo problemas,PRISIMINDAMOS, kad Rusijos Federacijos branduolinio sektoriaus reglamentavimo veikla yra skirta aplinkos ir gyventojų bendros apsaugos užtikrinimui, taip pat darbuotojų apsaugai nuo radiacijos, laikantis tarptautiniu mastu pripažintų principų ir rekomendacijų,PRIPAŽINDAMOS, kad būsimas branduolinės energijos indėlis tenkinant visos Europos energetinius poreikius, tinkamai atsižvelgiant į diversifikaciją, ekonomiką ir aplinką, taip pat priklauso nuo tinkamų sprendimų aukščiau minėtais saugos aspektais priėmimo ir taip pat esamų branduolinių reaktorių saugos lygio įvertinimo bei iš jo sekančio būtino jų tobulinimo,ATSIŽVELGDAMOS į Šalių vykdomus įvairių formų koordinuotus branduolinės saugos veiksmus, visų pirma – pagal TACIS programą,NUSPRENDUSIOS sustiprinti savo bendradarbiavimą ir naudotis reguliariomis konsultacijomis branduolinės saugos srityje,SUSITARĖ:1 straipsnisAtsižvelgiant į abipusę naudą, bendradarbiavimas pagal šį Susitarimą prisideda prie branduolinės saugos gerinimo.2 straipsnisBendradarbiavimas apima šias sritis:a) Reaktorių saugos tyrimasSaugos reikalų, visų pirma – reaktorių saugos poveikio branduolinės energetikos plėtrai patikrinimas ir analizė; reikiamos metodikos reaktorių saugai pagerinti nustatymas, atliekant tyrimus, vertinimo studijas ir vystant veikiančius bei planuojamus branduolinius reaktorius.b) Radiacinė apsaugaSaugos standartų tyrimai, reglamentavimo aspektai, vystymas, personalo rengimas ir švietimas, ypatingą dėmesį kreipiant mažų dozių poveikiui, pramoniniam poveikiui ir valdymui, įvykus avarijai.c) Branduolinių atliekų valdymasIlgaamžių atliekų geologinio pašalinimo įvertinimas, optimizavimas ir moksliniai aspektai.d) Branduolinės įrangos eksploatacijos užbaigimas, dezaktyvacija ir išmontavimasBranduolinės įrangos eksploatacijos užbaigimo ir išmontavimo strategija, įskaitant radiologinius aspektus.e) Branduolinės medžiagos sąskaitybos ir kontrolės tyrimai bei vystymasBranduolinės medžiagos matavimo metodikos ir etaloninių medžiagų apibūdinimo sąskaitybos ir kontrolės veiklai sukūrimas ir įvertinimas bei branduolinių medžiagų sąskaitybos ir kontrolė sistemų tobulinimas.3 straipsnis1. Bendradarbiavimas šio Susitarimo 2 straipsnyje nurodytose srityse visų pirma vyksta šiais būdais:- keičiantis technine informacija ataskaitų, vizitų, seminarų techninių posėdžių pagalba ir kt.,- įskaitant mokymo tikslus, keičiantis laboratorijų ir (arba) institucijų personalu,- eksperimentiniais tikslais keičiantis mėginiais, medžiagomis, priemonėmis bei prietaisais,- subalansuotai dalyvaujant jungtinėse studijose ir veikloje.2. Šalys ir (arba) institucijos, kurioms Šalys gali patikėti atlikti aukščiau nurodytą veiklą, prireikus, gali sudaryti reikiamos apimties vykdomuosius susitarimus, nustatančius konkrečios bendradarbiavimo veiklos taikymo sritį, terminus ir sąlygas.Tokie vykdomieji susitarimai gali, inter alia, apimti finansavimo, vadovavimo pareigų paskirstymo ir išsamias informacijos platinimo ir intelektinės nuosavybės teisių nuostatas.Įgyvendinant šį Susitarimą, Rusijai atstovauja Rusijos Federacijos atominės energetikos ministerija.3. Siekdamos sumažinti dubliavimą, Šalys koordinuoja savo pagal šį Susitarimą vykdomą veiklą su kita tarptautine veikla branduolinės saugos srityje, kurioje jos dalyvauja.4 straipsnis1. Veiklos pagal šį Susitarimą vykdymas finansuojamas iš kiekvienos Šalies tam skirtų lėšų.2. Kiekviena Šalis dengia visas jos pačios turėtas su bendradarbiavimu susijusias išlaidas.3. Šis Susitarimas nenumato pramoninės veiklos finansavimo.5 straipsnis1. Šis Susitarimas taikomas teritorijoms, kurių atžvilgiu taikoma Europos atominės energijos bendrijos steigimo sutartis – laikantis toje sutartyje nustatytų sąlygų, ir Rusijos Federacijos teritorijai.2. Bendradarbiavimas pagal šį Susitarimą vykdomas laikantis kiekvienoje iš Šalių galiojančių įstatymų ir kitų teisės aktų.3. Kiekviena Šalis, laikydamasi galiojančių vidaus įstatymų ir kitų teisės aktų, deda visas pastangas, siekdama palengvinti formalumus, susijusius su bendradarbiavimui vykdyti reikalingu asmenų judėjimu, medžiagų ir įrangos perdavimu bei valiutos pervedimu.4. Nuostoliai, patirti įgyvendinant šį Susitarimą, kompensuojami laikantis kiekvienoje iš Šalių galiojančių įstatymų ir kitų teisės aktų.6 straipsnisVykdant bendradarbiavimo veiklą pagal šį Susitarimą gautos informacijos, pramoninės nuosavybės ir autorinių teisių atžvilgiu taikomi neatsiejama šio Susitarimo dalimi esantys I, II ir III priedai.7 straipsnisVisus su šiuo Susitarimu susijusius klausimus, įskaitant jo taikymą ir interpretavimą, šalys stengiasi išspręsti tarpusavio konsultacijomis, laikydamosi savo įstatymų irkitų teisės aktų.8 straipsnis1. Šio Susitarimo įgyvendinimo priežiūrai vykdyti įsteigiamas iš vienodo skaičiaus abiejų Šalių paskirtų narių sudarytas Koordinacinis komitetas.2. Koordinacinio komiteto reguliarūs posėdžiai kasmet vyksta pakaitomis Bendrijoje ir Rusijos Federacijoje, siekiant:- peržiūrėti ir įvertinti pagal šį Susitarimą vykdomą bendradarbiavimą ir parengti jo metines ataskaitas,- bendru sutarimu nustatyti specialias pagal šį Susitarimą atliktinas užduotis.3. Siekiant išspręsti ypatingus klausimus arba susidarius ypatingai situacijai, Bendru susitarimu gali būti šaukiami Neeiliniai Koordinacinio komiteto posėdžiai.9 straipsnis1. Susitarimas įsigalioja tą dieną, kurią Susitariančiosios Šalys raštu informuoja viena kitą apie jo įsigaliojimui būtinų procedūrų užbaigimą. Jis galioja pradinį 10 metų laikotarpį.2. Vėliau Susitarimo galiojimas automatiškai pratęsiamas papildomiems penkerių metų laikotarpiams, nebent kuri nors Šalis ne vėliau kaip prieš šešis mėnesius iki jo galiojimo pasibaigimo datos raštu pareikalauja jį nutraukti arba persvarstyti.3. Nutraukus arba persvarsčius šį Susitarimą, jo iki nutraukimo arba persvarstymo galiojusios nuostatos lieka galioti tai bendradarbiavimo veiklai, kuri pradėta iki pareikalavimo nutraukti arba persvarstyti Susitarimą, kol veikla bus užbaigta ir įvykdyti su ja susiję vykdomieji susitarimai arba vienerius kalendorinius metus po šio Susitarimo pirminės formos galiojimo pabaigos (atsižvelgiant į tai, kuris iš šių terminų baigiasi anksčiau).4. Šio Susitarimo nutraukimas nedaro įtakos pagal šio Susitarimo 6 straipsnį Šalių įgytų teisių ir įsipareigojimų galiojimui.Šis Susitarimas sudarytas Briuselyje, du tūkstančiai pirmųjų metų spalio trečią dieną dviem egzemplioriais danų, olandų, anglų, suomių, prancūzų, vokiečių, graikų, italų, portugalų, rusų, ispanų ir švedų kalbomis. Visi tekstai yra autentiški.Europos atominės energijos bendrijos varduPhilippe BusquinRusijos Federacijos Vyriausybės varduAleksander Rumyantsev--------------------------------------------------I PRIEDASPagrindiniai Intelektinės nuosavybės, atsiradusios vykdant jungtinę tyrimų veiklą pagal Susitarimą dėl bendradarbiavimo branduolinės saugos srityje, teisių priskyrimo principaiI. NUOSAVYBĖS TEISĖ, TEISIŲ PRISKYRIMAS IR NAUDOJIMASIS JOMIS1. Šis priedas taikomas pagal Susitarimą vykdomai jungtinei tyrimų veiklai, nebent Šalys susitartų kitaip. Dalyviai kartu parengia technologijos valdymo planus (TVP) dėl nuosavybės teisių ir naudojimosi jomis, įskaitant informacijos ir intelektinės nuosavybės (toliau – intelektinės veiklos rezultatai (IVR)), sukuriamos vykdant jungtinį tyrimą, publikavimą. TVP turi būti patvirtinti Šalių prieš joms sudarant bet kokius su TVP susijusius tyrimų ir plėtros bendradarbiavimo susitarimus. TVP rengiami atsižvelgiant į jungtinio tyrimo tikslus, dalyvių indėlį, licencijavimo pagal teritoriją arba pagal konkrečią panaudojimo sritį ypatumus, taikytinų įstatymų reikalavimus ir kitus veiksnius, kurie dalyviams atrodo tinkami. Jungtiniai TVP taip pat reguliuoja su IVR susijusias teises ir įsipareigojimus dėl tyrimų, kuriuos atlieka su vizitu besilankantys tyrinėtojai.2 Atliekant jungtinį tyrimą gauti IVR, neaptarti TVP, Šalims pritarus, priskiriami laikantis TVP įtvirtintų principų. Kilus nesutarimams, tokie IVR priklauso visiems jungtinio tyrimo, kuriame jie buvo gauti, dalyviams. Kiekvienas dalyvis, kurio atžvilgiu taikoma ši nuostata, turi teisę be jokių geografinių apribojimų naudoti tokius IVR savo komercinėms reikmėms.3. Kiekviena Šalis užtikrina kitos Šalies ir jos dalyvių pagal šiuos principus jiems priskirtas teises į IVR.4. Siekdama šio Susitarimo reglamentuojamose srityse išsaugoti konkurencijos sąlygas, kiekviena Šalis stengiasi užtikrinti, kad pagal šį Susitarimą ir juo remiantis sudarytus susitarimus įgytomis teisėmis būtų naudojamasi siekiant:i) platinti ir naudoti pagal Susitarimą sukurtą, teisėtai atskleistą ar kitaip teisėtu būdu tapusią prieinama informaciją;ii) priimti ir įgyvendinti tarptautinius techninius standartus.II. AUTORINĖS TEISĖS SAUGOMI DARBAI1. Šalims arba jų dalyviams priklausančių autorinių teisių atžvilgiu taikomas Berno konvenciją dėl literatūros ir meno kūrinių apsaugos atitinkantis režimas (1971 m. Paryžiaus Aktas).2. Nepažeidžiant šio priedo III dalies ir jei TVP nėra susitarta kitaip, tyrimo rezultatus tyrime dalyvaujančios Šalys ar dalyviai skelbia kartu. Įgyvendinant minėtą principą, skelbiama tokia tvarka:a) tuo atveju, kai viena Šalis ar kiti tos Šalies dalyviai publikuoja mokslinius ir techninius žurnalus, straipsnius, ataskaitas, knygas, įskaitant vaizdo įrašus ir programinę įrangą, sukurtus pagal šį Susitarimą atliekant jungtinį tyrimą, kita Šalis ar kiti tos Šalies dalyviai įgyja pasaulinę, neišskirtinę, neatšaukiamą, be atskaitymų už pardavimus licenciją versti, reprodukuoti, pritaikyti, perduoti ir viešai platinti tokius darbus;b) Šalys užtikrina kiek galima platesnį mokslinio pobūdžio literatūros darbų, sukurtų pagal šį Susitarimą atliekant jungtinį tyrimą, ir publikuojamų nepriklausomų leidėjų, išplatinimą;c) ant visų viešai platinamų ir pagal šio Susitarimo nuostatas parengtų darbų, kurių autoriaus teisės yra saugomos, kopijų nurodoma (-os) autoriaus (-ių) pavardė (-s) arba pseudonimas (-ai), nebent autorius (-iai) aiškiai atsisako būti paminėtas (-i). Ant jų taip pat pateikiama aiškiai matoma nuoroda į bendrą Šalių, jų atstovų ir (arba) organizacijų paramą.III. NEATSKLEIDŽIAMA INFORMACIJA1. Dokumentinė neatskleidžiama informacijaa) prireikus, kiekviena Šalis ir jos dalyviai kuo anksčiau ir, pageidautina, technologijos valdymo plane, nurodo informaciją, kurios jie pageidauja neatskleisti, atsižvelgiant, inter alia, į šiuos kriterijus:- informacijos konfidencialumą ta prasme, kad informacija kaip vientisa arba kaip tiksli jos komponentų konfigūracija ar rinkinys nėra visuotinai žinoma ar lengvai teisėtomis priemonėmis prieinama tos srities ekspertams,- dėl jos slaptumo esamą ar potencialią komercinę informacijos vertę trečiajai šaliai,- ankstesnę informacijos apsaugą, kai teisėtai ją kontroliuojantis asmuo, siekdamas išsaugoti informacijos konfidencialumą dėl jos ėmėsi tomis aplinkybėmis pagrįstų priemonių,Šalys ir jų dalyviai, tam tikrais atvejais, prireikus, gali sutarti, kad dalis arba visa pagal šį Susitarimą atliekant bendrą tyrimą suteikta, pasikeista ar sukurta informacija nebūtų atskleista, jei nėra nurodoma kitaip;b) kiekviena Šalis užtikrina, kad pagal šį Susitarimą neatskleidžiama informacija ir privilegijuotas jos pobūdis būtų aiškiai atpažįstamas kitai Šaliai, pvz., atitinkamu ženklinimu arba ribojančiuoju grifu. Ši nuostata taip pat taikoma bet kokiam tokios informacijos ar jos dalies kopijavimui;Šalis ar jos dalyvis, pagal šį Susitarimą gaunantis neatskleidžiamą informaciją, privalo atsižvelgti į jos ypatingą statusą. Šie apribojimai automatiškai nustoja galioti, informacijos savininkui ją be apribojimų išplatinus srities ekspertams;c) pagal šį Susitarimą perduotą neatskleidžiamą informaciją gaunančioji Šalis gali perduoti ją toje Šalyje esantiems ar joje dirbantiems asmenims ir kitiems informaciją gaunančiosios Šalies susijusiems departamentams ar agentūroms, turinčioms specialius įgaliojimus dėl vykdomo jungtinio tyrimo, jei bet kokią taip paskleistą informaciją reglamentuoja konfidencialumo susitarimas ir ji yra lengvai atpažįstama kaip tokia (kaip nurodyta aukščiau);d) gavusi išankstinį rašytinį neatskleidžiamą informaciją pagal šį Susitarimą pateikiančios Šalies sutikimą, gaunančioji Šalis gali paskleisti tokią informaciją plačiau nei leidžiama pagal c punktą. Šalys bendradarbiauja rengiant tokio prašymo ir išankstinio sutikimo dėl platesnio paskleidimo gavimo tvarką ir kiekviena Šalis duoda tokį sutikimą, kiek tai leidžia jos vidaus politika, įstatymai ir kiti teisės aktai.2. Nedokumentinė neatskleidžiama informacijaNedokumentinės neatskleidžiamos informacijos arba kitokios konfidencialios ar privilegijuotos seminaruose ir kitokiuose pagal šį Susitarimą surengtuose susitikimuose gautos informacijos, ar informacijos, gautos dalyvaujant personalui, panaudojant priemones ar vykdant jungtinius projektus, atžvilgiu, Šalys arba jų dalyviai taiko šiame priede dokumentinei informacijai nustatytus principus, su sąlyga, kad tokios neatskleidžiamos arba kitos konfidencialios ar privilegijuotos informacijos gavėjas jos perdavimo metu yra informuojamas apie perduodamos informacijos konfidencialų pobūdį.3. KontrolėKiekviena Šalis stengiasi užtikrinti, kad jos pagal šį Susitarimą gauta neatskleidžiama informacija būtų kontroliuojama kaip nurodyta Susitarime. Jei viena iš Šalių žino, kad ji nesugebės arba pagrįstai tikisi nesugebėsianti laikytis šios dalies 1 ir 2 skyrių nuostatų dėl informacijos neatskleidžiamumo, ji turi nedelsiant informuoti apie tai kitą Šalį. Po to Šalys konsultuojasi tarpusavyje, siekdamos nustatyti tinkamą veiksmų planą.--------------------------------------------------II PRIEDASSąvokų apibrėžimai1. INTELEKTINĖ NUOSAVYBĖ – tai nuosavybė, apibrėžta 1967 m. liepos 14 d. Stokholme pasirašytos Konvencijos, steigiančios Pasaulinę intelektinės nuosavybės organizaciją, 2 straipsnyje.2. DALYVIS – tai bet kuris pagal šį Susitarimą projekte dalyvaujantis fizinis ar juridinis asmuo, įskaitant pačias Šalis.3. JUNGTINIS TYRIMAS – tai tyrimas, atliekamas ir (arba) finansuojamas bendrai abiejų Šalių, ir, prireikus, bendradarbiaujant abiejų Šalių dalyviams.4. INFORMACIJA – tai tyrimų ir plėtros moksliniai arba techniniai duomenys, bendrais tyrimais gaunami rezultatai ir metodika, ir bet kokia kita informacija, kurią jungtiniame tyrime dalyvaujančios Šalys ir (arba) dalyviai pagal šį Susitarimą ar dėl pagal jį vykdomo tyrimo laiko būtina suteikti ar pasikeisti.5. INTELEKTINĖS VEIKLOS REZULTATAI – tai informacija ir (arba) intelektinė nuosavybė.--------------------------------------------------III PRIEDASTechnologijos valdymo plano (TVP) skiriamieji požymiaiTVP – tai specialus tarp dalyvių sudaromas susitarimas, dėl jungtinio tyrimo įgyvendinimo ir atitinkamų dalyvių teisių ir įsipareigojimų vykdymo. Kalbant apie IVR, TVP paprastai įtvirtina, inter alia, nuosavybės teisę, jos apsaugą, naudotojo teises tyrimų ir plėtros tikslais, naudojimą ir platinimą, įskaitant susitarimus dėl bendro publikavimo, su vizitu besilankančių tyrinėtojų teises bei pareigas ir ginčų sprendimo tvarką. TVP taip pat gali reglamentuoti prioritetinę ir pagalbinę informaciją, licencijavimą ir pateiktinus dalykus.--------------------------------------------------