type: caselaw

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 16.11.2013
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 C 336/27
 Prasība, kas celta 2013. gada 6. septembrī — Systran/Komisija
 (Lieta T-481/13)
 2013/C 336/57
 Tiesvedības valoda — franču
 Lietas dalībnieki
 Prasītāja: Systran SA (Parīze, Francija) (pārstāvis — J. Hoss, advokāts)
 Atbildētāja: Eiropas Komisija
 Prasītājas prasījumi:
 —
 atcelt Eiropas Komisijas, alternatīvi Eiropas Savienības 2013. gada 5. jūlija un 2013. gada 21. augusta lēmumus;
 —
 piespriest Eiropas Komisijai un Eiropas Savienībai atlīdzināt visus tiesāšanās izdevumus.
 Pamati un galvenie argumenti
 Ar šo prasību prasītāja prasa atcelt Komisijas lēmumus, ar kuriem tā pēc Tiesas 2013. gada 18. aprīļa sprieduma lietā C-103/11 P Komisija/Systran un Systran Luxembourg (Krājumā vēl nav publicēts) uzsāka kompensācijas procentu piedziņu, tiem pieskaitot kavējuma naudu sākot ar 2013. gada 19. augustu, par summu, ko Komisija samaksāja prasītājai kā zaudējumus pēc Vispārējās tiesas 2010. gada 16. decembra sprieduma lietā T-19/07 Systran un Systran Luxembourg/Komisija (Krājums, II-6083. lpp.), kas ar Tiesas spriedumu tika atcelts.
 Prasības pamatošanai prasītāja izvirza trīs pamatus.
 1)
 Ar pirmo pamatu tiek apgalvots, ka Komisija nebija kompetenta pieņemt apstrīdētos lēmumus, ciktāl tā nebija kompetenta pati sev piešķirt kompensācijas procentus, jo šādus procentus varot piešķirt vienīgi tiesa gadījumā, kad šo procentu mērķis ir kompensēt zaudējumus, kas izriet no tā, ka kāds no lietas dalībniekiem nav izpildījis savus pienākumus. Prasītāja apgalvo, ka kompensācijas procentu piešķiršana neietilpst Tiesas sprieduma izpildē.
 2)
 Ar otro pamatu tiek apgalvots, ka ir pārkāpti Eiropas tiesību vispārējie principi gan ņemot vērā procentu piešķiršanu, gan vispārējo principu par nepamatotas iedzīvošanās aizliegumu. Prasītāja apgalvo, ka:
 —
 Komisija pārkāpa Eiropas tiesību vispārējo principu, alternatīvi, dalībvalstīm kopīgo principu attiecībā uz kompensācijas procentu piešķiršanu, piešķirot šos kompensācijas procentus pati sev situācijā, kad nebija nekādu faktu, kas liecinātu, ka prasītāja tai būtu nodarījusi zaudējumus;
 —
 Komisija pārkāpa vispārējo principu par nepamatotas iedzīvošanās aizliegumu, uzliekot juridiskai personai, kuras darbību regulē privāttiesības, pienākumu, kāds nav paredzēts līgumos, un, katrā ziņā, ņemot vērā procentu summas aprēķinu, piešķirot vienreizēju maksājumu, kas paaugstināts par 2 % atbilstoši inflācijai;
 3)
 Ar trešo pamatu tiek apgalvots, ka Komisija ir nepareizi izmantojusi pilnvaras, ciktāl tā nevarēja atsaukties uz LESD 299. pantu, lai prasītu kompensācijas procentu samaksu, jo šādām pilnvarām nav tiesiska pamata un nav tiesas nolēmuma, ar kuru prasītājai būtu piespriests veikt šādu samaksu.


type: legislation

text:
 |
 52014PC0083
 Pasiūlymas TARYBOS SPRENDIMAS dėl pozicijos, kurios Europos Sąjungos vardu reikia laikytis 66-ajame Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje Tarptautinės konvencijos dėl taršos iš laivų prevencijos (MARPOL) VI priedo pakeitimų, susijusių su išmetamųjų NOx III lygio standartų taikymo atidėjimu, priėmimo klausimais /* COM/2014/083 final - 2014/0042 (NLE) */
 AIŠKINAMASIS MEMORANDUMAS
 1. ĮŽANGA
 Šis Komisijos pasiūlymas susijęs su
 pozicijos, kurios Sąjunga laikysis 66-ajame Tarptautinės
 jūrų organizacijos Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto
 posėdyje Tarptautinės konvencijos dėl taršos iš laivų
 prevencijos (MARPOL) VI priedo pakeitimų klausimais, nustatymu. Šiais
 MARPOL VI priedo 13 taisyklės 5.1 punkto pakeitimais penkeriems metams
 atidedamas išmetamųjų NOx III lygio standartų taikymas.
 Pakeitimai pateikti Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto ataskaitos (MEPC 65/22)
 12 priede. Šios ataskaitos 4.64 punkte nurodoma, kad minėti pakeitimai bus
 priimti 66-ajame Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje.
 2. TARPTAUTINĖS
 JŪRŲ ORGANIZACIJOS PAKEITIMŲ PRIĖMIMAS
 2.1. MARPOL VI priedo
 pakeitimų, susijusių su išmetamųjų NOx III lygio
 standartų taikymo atidėjimu, priėmimas
 Šių pakeitimų projektai patvirtinti 2013 m.
 gegužės 13–17 d. vykusiame 65-ajame Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos
 komiteto susitikime ir bus pateikti priėmimui 66-ajame minėto
 komiteto posėdyje, įvyksiančiame 2014 m. kovo 31 –
 balandžio 4 d.
 2.2. Pritarimas ir
 įsigaliojimas
 Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto
 patvirtinti ir priimti pakeitimai bus pateikti atitinkamoms
 susitariančiosioms šalims, kad šios sutiktų įsipareigoti pagal
 minėtus pakeitimus.
 3. AKTUALŪS ES TEISĖS
 AKTAI IR ES KOMPETENCIJA
 ES politika
 Pagal ES Sutartį aplinkos apsauga (MARPOL
 pakeitimų dalykas) yra kompetencijos pasidalijimo klausimas ir yra iš
 esmės reguliuojamas Sąjungos teisės aktais. Savo kompetencija ES
 aktyviai naudojasi oro ir vandens politikos srityse, tiek priimdama teisės
 aktus, tiek derindama politikos tikslus. Aplinkos apsaugos politikoje numatytas
 aiškus Sąjungos įsipareigojimas gerinti, įskaitant tarptautiniu
 lygiu, vandens ir oro kokybę.
 ES oro kokybės politikos pagrindų
 tikslas ir sandara, nustatyta, pavyzdžiui, Teminėje oro taršos
 strategijoje[1],
 yra padaryti esminę pažangą siekiant ilgalaikių ES tikslų –
 išlaikyti, saugoti ir gerinti aplinkos kokybę ir saugoti žmonių
 sveikatą (SESV 191 straipsnio 1 dalis), t. y. pasiekti „tokią
 oro kokybę, kuri neleistų pasireikšti neigiamam poveikiui ir
 nekeltų pavojaus žmonių sveikatai ir aplinkai“. Šis prieš
 dešimtmetį Šeštojoje aplinkosaugos veiksmų programoje[2] nustatytas uždavinys
 patvirtintas neseniai ES sutartoje Septintojoje aplinkosaugos veiksmų
 programoje, pagal kurią rengiama ES politika iki 2020 m.[3], taip pat pastaruoju
 metu į jį atsižvelgta Komisijos priimtoje Europos švaraus oro
 programoje[4].
 Šie politikos tikslai būtų paveikti
 neigiamai, jei išmetamųjų NOx kiekio kontrolės rajonams
 nustatytų griežtesnių NOx standartų taikymas būtų
 atidėtas.
 ES teisės aktai
 Galiojantys teisės aktai aprėpia daug
 teršalų, įskaitant NOx, taip pat daug taršos šaltinių,
 įskaitant visų rūšių transportą.
 Direktyvoje dėl tam tikrų atmosferos
 teršalų išmetimo nacionalinių ribų (2001/81/EB)[5] ir Aplinkos oro
 kokybės direktyvoje (2008/50/EB)[6]
 nustatytos ribinės NOx ore vertės. Pagal Direktyvą dėl tam
 tikrų atmosferos teršalų išmetimo nacionalinių ribų
 reikalaujama, kad būtų nustatytas jūrų laivybos
 išmetamųjų teršalų kiekis ir teikiamos jo ataskaitos.
 Nacionalinės jūrų laivybos išmetamieji teršalai ir
 tarptautinės vidaus vandenų laivybos išmetamieji teršalai yra
 įtraukti į nacionalines išmetimo ribas, taikomas pagal Direktyvą
 dėl tam tikrų atmosferos teršalų išmetimo nacionalinių
 ribų. Tačiau kiti tarptautinės jūrų laivybos
 išmetamieji teršalai neįtraukti į nacionalines išmetimo ribas, nors
 jie labai veikia ES oro kokybę. Ši išimtis padaryta atsižvelgus į
 Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos vykdomas šių
 išmetamųjų teršalų reguliavimo funkcijas. Todėl
 būtinybė imtis išorinių priemonių dėl šių
 išmetamųjų teršalų aiškiai pripažinta Direktyvos dėl tam
 tikrų atmosferos teršalų išmetimo nacionalinių ribų 11
 straipsnyje, kuriame rašoma: „Kad būtų skatinama siekti 1 straipsnyje
 nurodytų tikslų, Komisija ir valstybės narės atitinkamais
 atvejais, nepažeisdamos Sutarties 300 straipsnio, toliau tęsia
 dvišalį ir daugiašalį bendradarbiavimą su trečiosiomis
 šalimis ir konkrečiomis tarptautinėmis organizacijomis, kaip antai
 Jungtinių Tautų Europos ekonomine komisija (UNECE), Tarptautine
 jūrų organizacija (IMO) ir Tarptautine civilinės aviacijos
 organizacija (ICAO), įskaitant apsikeitimą informacija apie mokslo ir
 technikos tyrimus bei plėtrą, siekiant pagerinti bazę,
 padedančią lengviau sumažinti išmetamų teršalų kiekius.“
 Be to, 2013 m. gruodžio 18 d. Komisijos
 priimtų Švaraus oro kokybės dokumentų rinkinyje[7] patvirtintas laivybos
 išmetamųjų teršalų poveikis oro kokybei sausumoje ir
 tolesnių šiame sektoriuje taikomų priemonių ekonominis
 efektyvumas. Laivybos išmetamieji NOx tiesiogiai skatina vidaus ir jūros
 vandenų, taip pat sausumos buveinių eutrofikaciją, dėl jo
 susidaro sveikatą veikiančių (antrinių) kietųjų
 dalelių. Taigi, jei šio šaltinio klausimas nebūtų
 išspręstas, pablogėtų Baltijos ir Šiaurės jūrų
 pakrantės valstybių galimybės įvykdyti Vandens politikos
 pagrindų direktyvoje (2000/60/EB)[8],
 Jūrų strategijos pagrindų direktyvoje (2008/56/EB)[9], Buveinių
 direktyvoje (92/43/EEB)[10]
 ir Laukinių paukščių apsaugos direktyvoje (79/409/EEB)[11] nustatytą uždavinį
 mažinti neigiamą, įskaitant eutrofikacijos, poveikį vandens ir
 sausumos ekosistemoms. Be to, tai pablogintų galimybes pasiekti Aplinkos
 oro kokybės direktyvoje (2008/50/EB) žmonių sveikatos apsaugai
 nustatytas kietųjų dalelių KD10 ir KD 2,5
 ribines vertes.
 Išmetamųjų NOx III lygio standartai –
 svarstomas šios priemonės klausimas – niekada nebuvo konkrečių
 Sąjungos teisės aktų dalykas, tačiau laikoma, kad dabar
 Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos pagal MARPOL VI priedą (iš
 dalies pakeistą 2008 m.) vykdomas jų reguliavimas yra
 būtinas ir dera su bendrai sutartais ES politikos uždaviniais.
 Atidėjus standartų taikymo datą, valstybėms narėms
 būtų, visų pirma, apribotos galimybės NOx kiekio
 kontrolės rajonais naudotis siekiant spręsti oro taršos ir jo
 poveikio klausimus.
 Tarybos sprendimas
 Poziciją, kurios ES laikysis posėdyje,
 dera teisiškai grįsti SESV 218 straipsnio 9 dalimi, nes ji yra susijusi su
 teisinę galią turinčiais aktais. 66-ojo Jūrų aplinkos
 apsaugos komiteto posėdžio sprendimas dėl išmetamųjų NOx
 III lygio standartų įsigaliojimo datos bus teisiškai privalomas, nes
 juo bus nustatyta data, nuo kurios išmetamųjų NOx III lygio
 standartai teritorijose, laikomose NOx kiekio kontrolės rajonais, bus
 taikomi visoms Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos MARPOL VI priedo
 šalims.
 Santrauka
 Atsižvelgdama į aktualią ES
 politiką ir minėtą acquis, Komisija mano, kad su
 daliniais pakeitimais, kurie veikiausiai bus priimti 66-ajame Jūrų
 aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje, susijęs klausimas yra svarbus
 ES, todėl reikia priimti bendrą ES poziciją, kurios
 Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje Sąjungos
 interesais laikysis visos valstybės narės.
 4. IŠVADA
 Todėl Komisija siūlo Tarybos
 sprendimą dėl Europos Sąjungos vardu priimtinos pozicijos
 pirmiau 2.1 punkte nurodytais pakeitimų klausimais, kurios reikia laikytis
 66-ajame Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje.
 2014/0042 (NLE)
 Pasiūlymas
 TARYBOS SPRENDIMAS
 dėl pozicijos, kurios Europos
 Sąjungos vardu reikia laikytis 66-ajame Tarptautinės jūrų
 organizacijos Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto posėdyje
 Tarptautinės konvencijos dėl taršos iš laivų prevencijos
 (MARPOL) VI priedo pakeitimų, susijusių su išmetamųjų NOx
 III lygio standartų taikymo atidėjimu, priėmimo klausimais
 EUROPOS SĄJUNGOS TARYBA,
 atsižvelgdama į Sutartį dėl
 Europos Sąjungos veikimo, ypač į jos 192 straipsnio 1 dalį
 ir 218 straipsnio 9 dalį,
 atsižvelgdama į Europos Komisijos
 pasiūlymą,
 kadangi:
 (1) 2008 m. iš dalies
 pakeitus MARPOL VI priedą nustatyta, kad išmetamųjų NOx III
 lygio standartai nuo 2016 m. būtų taikomi po pastarosios datos
 pastatytiems laivams, plaukiantiems per išmetamų azoto oksidų kiekio
 kontrolės rajonus;
 (2) 2013 m. gegužės
 mėn. Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos Jūrų
 aplinkos apsaugos komitetas savo 65-ajame posėdyje patvirtino MARPOL VI
 priedo 13 taisyklės 5.1 punkto pakeitimų projektą. Šie
 pakeitimai bus veikiausiai priimti 66-ajame Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos
 komiteto posėdyje, įvyksiančiame 2014 m. kovo 31 – balandžio 4 d.;
 (3) MARPOL VI priedo 13
 taisyklės 5.1 punkto pakeitimais, susijusiais su išmetamųjų NOx
 III lygio standartų taikymo atidėjimu, standartų
 įsigaliojimas bus atidėtas penkeriems metams ir jie taps privalomi
 praėjus šešiems mėnesiams po to, kai pagal MARPOL 16 straipsnio 2
 dalį MARPOL VI priedo šalys pareikš pritariančios pakeitimams;
 (4) aplinkos apsauga
 (pasiūlytų pakeitimų dalykas) iš esmės reguliuojama
 Sąjungos teisės aktais. Savo kompetencija ES aktyviai naudojasi oro
 ir vandens politikos srityse, tiek priimdama teisės aktus, tiek derindama
 politikos tikslus. Galiojantys teisės aktai aprėpia daug
 teršalų, įskaitant azoto oksidus (NOx), taip pat daug taršos
 šaltinių, įskaitant visų rūšių transportą.
 Direktyva 2000/60/EB, nustatanti Bendrijos veiksmų vandens politikos
 srityje pagrindus[12],
 Direktyva 2008/56/EB, nustatanti Bendrijos veiksmų jūrų aplinkos
 politikos srityje pagrindus[13],
 Direktyva 92/43/EEB dėl natūralių buveinių ir laukinės
 faunos bei floros apsaugos[14]
 ir Direktyva 79/409/EEB dėl laukinių paukščių apsaugos[15] nustatytas uždavinys
 riboti neigiamą poveikį, įskaitant eutrofikaciją, vandens
 ir sausumos ekosistemoms, kurio vieni iš pagrindinių veiksnių yra
 NOx. Direktyva 2008/50/EB dėl aplinkos oro kokybės ir švaresnio oro
 Europoje[16]
 nustatytos kietųjų dalelių ir ozono – jo pirmtakai yra NOx –
 ribinės ir siektinos vertės;
 (5) pagal Direktyvą 2001/81/EB
 dėl tam tikrų atmosferos teršalų išmetimo nacionalinių
 ribų[17]
 reikalaujama, kad būtų nustatytas jūrų transporto
 išmetamųjų teršalų kiekis ir teikiamos jo ataskaitos,
 tačiau pripažįstama, kad tarptautinės jūrų (išskyrus
 vidaus vandenų) laivybos išmetamieji teršalai yra Tarptautinės
 jūrų organizacijos sprendžiamas klausimas;
 (6) pagal Direktyvos 2001/81/EB 11
 straipsnį, taikomą drauge su tos direktyvos 1 straipsniu, Komisija ir
 valstybės narės turi vykdyti tarptautinį bendradarbiavimą,
 kad sumažintų tam tikrų išmetamųjų atmosferos teršalų,
 įskaitant NOx, kiekius;
 (7) atsižvelgiant į
 bendruosius sutartos ES politikos tikslus ir į acquis,
 išmetamųjų NOx III lygio standartų taikymo atidėjimas,
 kuris veikiausiai bus priimtas 66-ajame Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos
 komiteto posėdyje, yra svarbus ES, todėl reikia priimti bendrą
 ES poziciją, kurios Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos komiteto
 posėdyje Sąjungos interesais laikysis visos valstybės narės;
 (8) Sąjunga nėra nei
 Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos narė, nei atitinkamų
 konvencijų ir kodeksų susitariančioji šalis. Kad Sąjungos
 interesais veikdamos valstybės narės pareikštų toliau
 pateiktą poziciją, Tarybai būtina jas tam įgalioti,
 PRIĖMĖ ŠĮ
 SPRENDIMĄ:
 1 straipsnis
 1. Sąjungos pozicija 66-ajame
 Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos Jūrų aplinkos apsaugos
 komiteto posėdyje yra nepritarti MARPOL VI priedo 13 taisyklės 5.1
 punkto pakeitimų, pateiktų Tarptautinės jūrų
 organizacijos dokumento MEPC 65/22 12 straipsnyje, priėmimui.
 2. 1 dalyje pateiktą
 Sąjungos poziciją pareiškia valstybės narės, kurios yra
 Tarptautinės jūrų organizacijos narės, bendrai veikdamos
 Sąjungos interesais.
 3. Nedideliems šios pozicijos
 pakeitimams galima pritarti nereikalaujant keisti pozicijos.
 2 straipsnis
 Šis sprendimas skirtas valstybėms
 narėms.
 Priimta Briuselyje
 Tarybos
 vardu
 Pirmininkas
 [1] KOM(2005) 446 galutinis.
 [2] OL L 242, 2002 9 10, p. 1.
 [3] Bendroji Sąjungos aplinkosaugos veiksmų
 programa „Gyventi gerai pagal mūsų planetos išgales“, COM(2012) 710 final.
 [4] COM(2013) 918 final.
 [5] OL L 309, 2001 11 27, p. 22.
 [6] OL L 152, 2008 6 11, p. 1.
 [7] Visi aktualūs dokumentai pateikti
 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air_policy.htm.
 [8] OL L 327, 2000 12 22, p. 1.
 [9] OL L 164, 2008 6 25, p. 19.
 [10] OL L 206, 1992 7 22, p. 7.
 [11] OL 103, 1979 4 25, p. 1.
 [12] OL L 327, 2000 12 22, p. 1.
 [13] OL L 164, 2008 6 25. p. 19.
 [14] OL L 206, 1992 7 22, p. 7.
 [15] OL L 103, 1979 4 25, p. 1.
 [16] OL L 152, 2008 6 11, p. 1.
 [17] OL L 309, 2001 11 27, p. 22.


type: wikipedia

text:
L'église Saint-Saturnin est une église située dans le centre-ville de Cusset dans le sud-est du département français de l'Allier. Principal édifice religieux de la ville, elle a été construite entre 1857 et 1867, dans un style début du gothique.
 Histoire
 Une église romane dédiée à saint Saturnin est construite à la fin du à cet emplacement, cœur de la cité royale qu'était alors Cusset. Elle est remaniée à l'époque gothique. La municipalité de la ville décide en 1857 de la faire démolir car elle est jugée trop délabrée et trop exiguë. Elle confie la construction d'un nouvel édifice à Jean-Baptiste Lassus, un architecte parisien réputé, spécialiste de l'architecture du Moyen Âge dont il s'est déjà inspiré pour la construction d'autres églises (basilique Saint-Nicolas de Nantes, église du Sacré-Cœur de Moulins, église Saint-Pierre de Dijon...). Pour l'église de Cusset, il va s'inspirer du style gothique du début du . Mais il meurt peu après son arrivée en 1857, à 50 ans, dans la ville voisine de Vichy. L'architecte vichyssois Hugues Batilliat reprend alors ses plans quelques années plus tard, en 1861, et l'église est achevée en 1867.
 Napoléon III, qui fréquentait la station thermale voisine de Vichy et fit une visite à Cusset en 1861 ou 1862, financera la construction du clocher.
 La première messe est célébrée dans la nouvelle église le et l'année suivante, le , elle est consacrée par Monseigneur de Deux-Brézé, évêque du diocèse de Moulins.
 Le bâtiment est inscrit aux Monuments historiques par arrêté du , la protection portant sur l'intégralité de l'église dont les autels, la chaire et tous les autres éléments fixes.
 Description
 L'église est construite sur un plan basilical en pierre calcaire provenant de carrières de la région, avec un clocher carré surmonté d'une flèche et accolé au transept Ouest. La nef de six travées doublée de deux bas-côtés, est orientée au nord avec un transept non saillant et un chœur à déambulatoire et chapelles rayonnantes. Cette orientation peu fréquente est due à la densité du tissu urbain alors existant lors de sa construction.
 À l'intérieur de l'église, les hautes voûtes d'ogives de la nef retombent sur des colonnes circulaires massives à chapiteaux. Le décor se compose de chapiteaux sculptés chacun avec un décor différent, de culots de retombée des arcs inspirés des croquis de Villard de Honnecourt, un maître d'œuvre du et des tympans des portes extérieures et intérieures, où sont sculptés la bénédiction d'une cloche par saint Saturnin et le roi David jouant de la harpe. L'éclairage naturel se fait par des oculus à remplage en rosace percés dans les hauteurs de la nef et des baies en arc brisé percées dans les murs des bas-côtés.
 Les vitraux sont l'œuvre du maître-verrier auvergnat Émile Thibaud avec une grande diversité dans l'iconographie. Le mobilier est composé principalement d'éléments de style néogothique en bois ciré.
 Notes et références
 Galerie photos
 Article connexe
 Liste des monuments historiques de Cusset
 Cusset Saturnin
 Monument historique inscrit en 2013
 Monument historique à Cusset
 Cusset
 Architecture néo-gothique en Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes


text:
Il liceo Vincenzo Cuoco di Napoli è stato fondato dopo la riforma Gentile del 1923 col nome di "Regio Liceo Scientifico di Napoli".
 Oggi il liceo vanta tre diversi indirizzi di studio: liceo scientifico, liceo scientifico opzione scienze applicate e liceo linguistico. Dal 2021 fra le sezioni di liceo scientifico ne è presente una in cui è stata attivata la sperimentazione del liceo matematico.
 Storia
 L'edificio scolastico fa parte di un complesso monumentale che comprende anche la chiesa di San Carlo all'Arena, l'istituto tecnico Gian Battista Della Porta e l'istituto Benedetto Croce. Nasce in seguito alla riforma Gentile del 1923, ma la primissima pietra del complesso fu posta nel 1602.
 Nel 1926, diventa il primo liceo scientifico statale di Napoli, istituito con regio decreto col nome di Vincenzo Cuoco, staccandosi dall'istituto tecnico Gian Battista della Porta.
 Note
 Scuole a Napoli
 Licei scientifici
 Licei delle scienze applicate
 Licei linguistici


text:
 25.1.2021
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 L 23/16
 IZVEDBENA UREDBA KOMISIJE (EU) 2021/53
 z dne 22. januarja 2021
 o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1210/2003 o nekaterih posebnih omejitvah gospodarskih in finančnih odnosov z Irakom
 EVROPSKA KOMISIJA JE –
 ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije,
 ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1210/2003 z dne 7. julija 2003 o nekaterih posebnih omejitvah gospodarskih in finančnih odnosov z Irakom in razveljavitvi Uredbe (ES) št. 2465/96 (1)in zlasti člena 11(b) Uredbe,
 ob upoštevanju naslednjega:
 (1)
 V Prilogi IV k Uredbi (ES) št. 1210/2003 so navedene fizične in pravne osebe, telesa ali entitete, povezane z režimom bivšega predsednika Sadama Huseina, za katere velja zamrznitev sredstev in gospodarskih virov ter prepoved dajanja na razpolago sredstev ali gospodarskih virov.
 (2)
 Odbor za sankcije Varnostnega sveta Združenih narodov je 18. januarja 2021 sklenil s seznama oseb in subjektov, za katere velja zamrznitev sredstev in gospodarskih virov, črtati dve osebi.
 (3)
 Prilogo IV k Uredbi (ES) št. 1210/2003 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti –
 SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
 Člen 1
 Priloga IV k Uredbi (ES) št. 1210/2003 se spremeni v skladu s Prilogo k tej uredbi.
 Člen 2
 Ta uredba začne veljati dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
 Ta uredba je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
 V Bruslju, 22. januarja 2021
 Za Komisijo
 V imenu predsednice
 Generalni direktor
 Generalni direktorat za finančno stabilnost, finančne storitve in unijo kapitalskih trgov
 (1) UL L 169, 8.7.2003, str. 6.
 PRILOGA
 V Prilogi IV k Uredbi (ES) št. 1210/2003 se črtata naslednja vnosa:
 „31.
 IME: Zuhair Talib Abd-al-Sattar Al-Naqib. DATUM ROJSTVA/KRAJ ROJSTVA: okoli 1948. DRŽAVLJANSTVO: Iračan. PODLAGA RESOLUCIJE VSZN 1483: direktor vojaške obveščevalne službe.“
 „33.
 IME: Amir Rashid Muhammad Al-Ubaidi. DATUM ROJSTVA/KRAJ ROJSTVA: 1939, Bagdad. DRŽAVLJANSTVO: Iračan. PODLAGA RESOLUCIJE VSZN 1483: minister za nafto, 1996 do 2003; vodja, Organizacija za vojaško industrializacijo, začetek 1990-ih.“


text:
 7.3.2016
 HR
 Službeni list Europske unije
 C 90/20
 Tužba podnesena 23. studenoga 2015. – Novartis protiv OHIM-a (Zeleno-bijeli prikaz polumjeseca)
 (Predmet T-679/15)
 (2016/C 090/27)
 Jezik postupka: engleski
 Stranke
 Tužitelj: Novartis AG (Basel, Švicarska) (zastupnik: M. Zintler, odvjetnik)
 Tuženik: Ured za usklađivanje na unutarnjem tržištu (žigovi i dizajni) (OHIM)
 Podaci o postupku pred OHIM-om
 Predmetni sporni žig: figurativni žig Zajednice (zeleno-bijeli prikaz polumjeseca) – prijava za registraciju br. 13 189 139
 Pobijana odluka: odluka petog žalbenog vijeća OHIM-a od 23. rujna 2015. u predmetu R 78/2015-5
 Tužbeni zahtjev
 Tužitelj od Općeg suda zahtijeva da:
 —
 poništi pobijanu odluku;
 —
 utvrdi da članak 7. stavak 1. točka (b) Uredbe br. 207/2009 ne sprečava registraciju predmetnog spornog znaka (žig Zajednice br. 13 189 139) u odnosu na proizvode iz razreda 5. opisane u prijavi za registraciju;
 —
 tuženiku naloži snošenje troškova.
 Tužbeni razlog
 —
 povreda članka 7. stavka 1. točke (b) Uredbe br. 207/2009.


text:
 12.10.2013
 PL
 Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej
 C 298/10
 Skarga wniesiona w dniu 21 sierpnia 2013 r. — Sea Handling przeciwko Komisji
 (Sprawa T-456/13)
 2013/C 298/17
 Język postępowania: włoski
 Strony
 Strona skarżąca: Sea Handling SpA (Somma Lombardo, Włochy) (przedstawiciele: B. Nascimbene i M. Merola, avvocati)
 Strona pozwana: Komisja Europejska
 Żądania
 Strona skarżąca wnosi do Sądu o:
 —
 stwierdzenie nieważności zaskarżonej decyzji, w której Komisja odmówiła SEA Handling S.p.A. dostępu do dokumentów, których dotyczy wniosek z dnia 27 lutego 2013 r.;
 —
 nakazanie Komisji przedstawienia żądanych dokumentów stronie skarżącej;
 —
 obciążenie Komisji kosztami postępowania.
 Zarzuty i główne argumenty
 Skarga jest skierowana przeciwko decyzji Komisji odmawiającej udzielenia skarżącej dostępu do znajdujących siew posiadaniu strony pozwanej dokumentów dotyczących postępowania administracyjnego, które doprowadziło do wydania decyzji Komisji z dnia 19 grudnia 2012 r. w sprawie podwyższenia kapitału dokonanego przez spółkę SEA handling S.p.A. na rzecz spółki SEA Handling (postępowanie SA.21420 — Włochy/SEA Handling)
 Na poparcie skargi strona skarżąca podnosi pięć zarzutów.
 1)
 Zarzut pierwszy dotyczący naruszeń proceduralnych
 —
 W tym względzie strona skarżąca podnosi naruszenie art. 7 ust. 1 i 3 oraz art. 8 ust. 1 i 2 rozporządzenia (WE) nr 1049/2001 Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady z dnia 30 maja 2001 r. w sprawie publicznego dostępu do dokumentów Parlamentu Europejskiego, Rady i Komisji(Dz.U. L 145, s. 43), jak również art. 41 i 47 Karty praw podstawowych Unii europejskiej, ponieważ, po pierwsze, postępowanie, które doprowadziło do wydania zaskarżonej decyzji, charakteryzowały okresy nieuzasadnionej ciszy i nie uzasadnione we właściwy sposób przedłużenia, a po drugie, nieprzestrzeganie wyznaczonych terminów naruszyło prawo strony skarżącej do obrony.
 2)
 Zarzut drugi dotyczący naruszenia art. 4 ust. 2 rozporządzenia nr 1049/2001
 —
 Strona skarżąca podnosi w tym względzie, że zaskarżona decyzja jest obarczona oczywistym błędem w ocenie i naruszeniem obowiązku uzasadnienia, ponieważ jest oparta na założeniu, że dostęp do dokumentów poważnie zaszkodziłby dochodzeniu Komisji, jak również już zakończonym dochodzeniom, bez wskazania charakteru tej szkody.
 3)
 Zarzut trzeci dotyczący naruszenia art. 4 ust. 2 rozporządzenia nr 1049/2001
 —
 W tym względzie strona skarżąca twierdzi, ze zaskarżona decyzja jest obarczona oczywistym błędem w ocenie i naruszeniem obowiązku uzasadnienia, ponieważ stanowi, że przyznanie dostępu do dokumentów zagrażałoby interesom handlowym podmiotu wnoszącego skargę do Komisji, bez wyjaśnienia, o jakie interesy chodzi, przez co pośrednio przynosi szkodę postępowaniu kontrolnemu w dziedzinie pomocy państwa; ponieważ myli interesy prywatne i interes publiczny dotyczący prawidłowego przebiegu dochodzenia zbyt szeroko interpretuje interesy chronione w art. 4 ust. 2 wspomnianego rozporządzenia.
 4)
 Zarzut czwarty dotyczący naruszenia art. 4 ust. 6 rozporządzenia nr 1049/2001 oraz zasady proporcjonalności
 —
 W tym względzie strona skarżąca twierdzi, że zaskarżona decyzja jest również obarczona brakiem oceny możliwości przyznania stronie skarżącej jedynie częściowego dostępu do żądanych dokumentów.
 5)
 Zarzut piąty dotyczący naruszenia art. 4 ust. 2 i 3 rozporządzenia nr 1049/2001 oraz zasady proporcjonalności również w związku z art. 42 Karty praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej
 —
 Strona skarżąca twierdzi w tym względzie, że zaskarżona decyzja jest obarczona błędem w ocenie wyjątków mających zastosowanie w interesie publicznym. W szczególności Komisja odmówiła dostępu do dokumentów bez uwzględnienia istnienia nadrzędnego interesu publicznego związanego z ujawnieniem żądanych dokumentów i bez zbadania znaczenia rzeczywistych skutków, jakie ujawnienie to miałoby dla interesów handlowych osób trzecich oraz dla dochodzenia chronionego w art. 4 ust. 2 przytoczonego rozporządzenia.


type: contracts

text:
 26.10.2012
 BG
 Официален вестник на Европейския съюз
 C 326/1
 ПРОТОКОЛ (No 18)
 ОТНОСНО ФРАНЦИЯ
 ВИСОКОДОГОВАРЯЩИТЕ СЕ СТРАНИ,
 КАТО ЖЕЛАЯТ да вземат предвид специфична особеност, свързана с Франция,
 СЕ СПОРАЗУМЯХА по следните разпоредби, които са приложени към Договора за Европейския съюз и към Договора за функционирането на Европейския съюз:
 Франция запазва привилегията си да осъществява парична емисия в Нова Каледония, във Френска Полинезия и в Уолис и Футуна при условията, създадени от националното й законодателство и единствена ще има право да определя курса на CFР – франка.


text:
 3.3.2012
 ET
 Euroopa Liidu Teataja
 C 65/7
 Seven for all mankind LLC 20. detsembril 2011 esitatud apellatsioonkaebus Üldkohtu (kuues koda) 6. oktoobri 2011. aasta otsuse peale kohtuasjas T-176/10: Seven SpA versus Siseturu Ühtlustamise Amet (kaubamärgid ja tööstusdisainilahendused)
 (Kohtuasi C-655/11 P)
 2012/C 65/14
 Kohtumenetluse keel: inglise
 Pooled
 Apellant: Seven for all mankind LLC (esindaja: avocat A. Gautier-Sauvagnac)
 Teine menetlusosaline: Siseturu Ühtlustamise Amet (kaubamärgid ja tööstusdisainilahendused)
 Apellandi nõuded
 Apellant palub Euroopa Kohtul:
 —
 tühistada Üldkohtu 6. oktoobri 2011. aasta otsus (kohtuasi T-176/10), mis tehti teatavaks 7. oktoobril 2011;
 —
 jätta jõusse Siseturu Ühtlustamise Ameti teise apellatsioonikoja 28. jaanuari 2010. aasta otsus (asi R 1514/2008-2), mis tehti teatavaks 15. veebruaril 2010;
 —
 mõista Seven for all mankind LLC kohtukulud ja Siseturu Ühtlustamise Ameti menetluse kulud välja Seven SpA-lt ning jätta viimase kohtukulud tema enda kanda.
 Väited ja peamised argumendid
 Apellant väidab, et vaidlustatud kohtuotsus tuleb tühistada järgmistel põhjustel:
 —
 esiteks rikkus Üldkohus sõna SEVEN eristusvõime hindamisel menetlusnormi, mis mõjutas apellandi huve;
 —
 teiseks ei täitnud Üldkohus määruse (EÜ) nr 207/2009 artikli 8 lõike 1 punktis b sisalduva sarnasuse mõiste hindamisel väljakujunenud kohtupraktikast tulenevaid nõudeid ning ei arvestanud juhtumi kõigi asjaoludega.


text:
 4.5.2020
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 L 140/31
 A BIZOTTSÁG (EU) 2020/597 VÉGREHAJTÁSI RENDELETE
 (2020. április 30.)
 a vajra vonatkozó magántárolási támogatás nyújtásáról és a támogatás összegének előzetes rögzítéséről
 AZ EURÓPAI BIZOTTSÁG,
 tekintettel az Európai Unió működéséről szóló szerződésre,
 tekintettel a mezőgazdasági termékpiacok közös szervezésének létrehozásáról és a 922/72/EGK, a 234/79/EGK, az 1037/2001/EK és az 1234/2007/EK tanácsi rendelet hatályon kívül helyezéséről szóló, 2013. december 17-i 1308/2013/EU európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletre (1) és különösen annak 18. cikke (2) bekezdésére,
 tekintettel a mezőgazdasági termékpiacok közös szervezésével kapcsolatos egyes támogatások és visszatérítések megállapítására vonatkozó intézkedések meghatározásáról szóló, 2013. december 16-i 1370/2013/EU tanácsi rendeletre (2) és különösen annak 4. cikke (2) bekezdésének b) pontjára,
 tekintettel a közös agrárpolitika finanszírozásáról, irányításáról és monitoringjáról és a 352/78/EGK, a 165/94/EK, a 2799/98/EK, a 814/2000/EK, az 1290/2005/EK és a 485/2008/EK tanácsi rendelet hatályon kívül helyezéséről szóló, 2013. december 17-i 1306/2013/EU európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletre (3) és különösen annak 62. cikke (2) bekezdésének b) pontjára,
 mivel:
 (1)
 A tagállamokban a COVID19-világjárvány kezelése érdekében bevezetett széles körű szállítási korlátozások miatt a tej- és tejtermékágazatban bizonyos termékek iránt csökkent a kereslet. A betegség terjedése és a bevezetett intézkedések korlátozzák a munkaerő rendelkezésre állását, ami különösen a tejtermelés, -begyűjtés és -feldolgozás szakaszait veszélyezteti. Ezenkívül az üzletek, szabadtéri piacok, éttermek és más vendéglátóipari létesítmények kötelező bezárása megbénította a vendéglátóipar működését, aminek következtében jelentősen megváltozott a tej és a tejtermékek iránti kereslet szerkezete. Terméktől függően hagyományosan a vendéglátóipar részesedése az uniós tej- és tejtermékfogyasztásban körülbelül 10–20 %. Emellett az uniós és világpiaci felvásárlók körében a szerződések felmondása, valamint – további áresésekre számítva – az új szerződések megkötésének elhalasztása jellemző.
 (2)
 Ennek következtében a nyerstej-feldolgozás a szokásos piaci kereslet kielégítésén felül részben az ömlesztett, hosszú eltarthatósági idejű, kevésbé munkaigényes, raktározható termékek, például a sovány tejpor és a vaj előállítása felé mozdult el.
 (3)
 A kereslet és a kínálat közötti egyensúlyhiány csökkentése érdekében helyénvaló magántárolási támogatást nyújtani a vajra.
 (4)
 Az (EU) 2016/1238 felhatalmazáson alapuló bizottsági rendelet (4) és az (EU) 2016/1240 bizottsági végrehajtási rendelet (5) megállapítja a magántárolási támogatás végrehajtására vonatkozó szabályokat. Amennyiben e rendelet másként nem rendelkezik, a vajra nyújtandó magántárolási támogatásra az (EU) 2016/1238 felhatalmazáson alapuló rendelet és az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet rendelkezéseit kell alkalmazni.
 (5)
 A rendszer gyors és rugalmas működésének biztosítása érdekében a támogatás összegét előzetesen rögzíteni kell. Az 1370/2013/EU rendelet 4. cikkének megfelelően az előzetesen rögzített magántárolási támogatás összegének a tárolási költségeken és más releváns piaci szempontokon kell alapulnia. Indokolt megállapítani az érintett termékek be- és kitárolásának fix költségeire vonatkozó támogatás összegét, és rögzíteni a tárolás és a finanszírozás költségeire a tárolási napok száma alapján nyújtandó támogatás összegét.
 (6)
 Az adminisztratív hatékonyság és az egyszerűsítés érdekében indokolt, hogy a kérelmek csak a már betárolt vajra vonatkozzanak, és célszerű eltekinteni a biztosítéki kötelezettségtől. Ehhez helyénvaló meghatározni a tárolási időszakot.
 (7)
 Az adminisztratív hatékonyság és az egyszerűsítés érdekében meg kell határozni az egyes kérelmekben feltüntetett termékek minimális mennyiségét.
 (8)
 A COVID19-világjárvány terjedésének korlátozása érdekében hozott intézkedések megnehezíthetik az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet 60. cikkében előírt, a magántárolási támogatás tekintetében végzendő helyszíni ellenőrzésekre vonatkozó követelményeknek való megfelelést. Ezért helyénvaló rugalmasságot biztosítani az intézkedések által érintett tagállamok számára és meghosszabbítani a betároláskor esedékes ellenőrzések elvégzésére rendelkezésre álló időszakot, vagy lehetővé tenni azok helyett egyéb releváns bizonyítékok felhasználását, illetve az előre be nem jelentett ellenőrzések kötelezettségének megszüntetését. Ezért e rendelet alkalmazásában el kell térni az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet egyes rendelkezéseitől.
 (9)
 Annak érdekében, hogy az intézkedés azonnali hatást gyakoroljon a piacra és hozzájáruljon az árak stabilizálásához, indokolt előírni, hogy e rendelet az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában való kihirdetése napját követő napon lépjen hatályba,
 (10)
 Az e rendeletben előírt intézkedések összhangban vannak a mezőgazdasági piacok közös szervezésével foglalkozó bizottság véleményével,
 ELFOGADTA EZT A RENDELETET:
 1. cikk
 Tárgy és hatály
 (1) Ez a rendelet az 1308/2013/EU rendelet 17. cikke első albekezdésének e) pontja szerinti, a vajra nyújtott magántárolási támogatásról (a továbbiakban: támogatás) rendelkezik.
 (2) Amennyiben e rendelet másképp nem rendelkezik, az (EU) 2016/1238 felhatalmazáson alapuló rendelet és az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet rendelkezéseit kell alkalmazni.
 2. cikk
 Támogatható termékek
 A támogatásra való jogosultsághoz a vajnak megbízható és kifogástalan kereskedelmi minőségűnek, illetve uniós eredetűnek kell lennie. A terméknek meg kell felelnie az (EU) 2016/1238 felhatalmazáson alapuló rendelet VI. mellékletének IV. szakaszában meghatározott követelményeknek.
 3. cikk
 A kérelmek benyújtása és elfogadhatósága
 (1) A támogatási kérelmeket 2020. május 7-től lehet benyújtani. A kérelmek benyújtásának határideje 2020. június 30.
 (2) A kérelmeknek a már betárolt termékekre kell vonatkozniuk.
 (3) A legkisebb mennyiség kérelmenként 10 tonna.
 4. cikk
 A támogatás összege és a tárolási időszak
 (1) A támogatás összege a következőképpen kerül megállapításra:
 a)
 a fix tárolási költségekre 9,83 EUR/tárolt tonna;
 b)
 a szerződéses tárolási időszakra 0,43 EUR/nap.
 (2) A szerződéses tárolási időszak vége a kitárolás napját megelőző nap.
 (3) Támogatás csak akkor nyújtható, ha a szerződéses tárolási időszak hossza 90 és 180 nap között van.
 5. cikk
 Ellenőrzések
 (1) Az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet 60. cikkének (1) és (2) bekezdésétől eltérve, amennyiben a COVID19-világjárvány kezelése érdekében bevezetett intézkedések (a továbbiakban: intézkedések) miatt a kifizető ügynökség nem tudja kellő időben elvégezni az említett rendelet 60. cikkének (1) és (2) bekezdésében említett ellenőrzéseket, az érintett tagállam:
 a)
 a 60. cikk (1) bekezdésének első albekezdése értelmében az említett ellenőrzések elvégzésére rendelkezésre álló időszakot az intézkedések végét követő legfeljebb 30 nappal meghosszabbítja; vagy
 b)
 az intézkedések alkalmazási időszaka alatt az ellenőrzéseket releváns bizonyítékokkal – többek között földrajzi koordinátákkal ellátott fényképekkel vagy egyéb, elektronikus formátumú bizonyítékokkal – helyettesíti.
 (2) Az (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelet 60. cikke (3) bekezdésének első albekezdésétől eltérve a kifizető ügynökség, amennyiben az intézkedések miatt nem tudja elvégezni az előre be nem jelentett helyszíni ellenőrzéseket, az intézkedések végrehajtásának időtartama alatt nem köteles előre be nem jelentett ellenőrzéseket végezni.
 6. cikk
 Hatálybalépés
 Ez a rendelet az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában való kihirdetését követő napon lép hatályba.
 Ez a rendelet teljes egészében kötelező és közvetlenül alkalmazandó valamennyi tagállamban.
 Kelt Brüsszelben, 2020. április 30-án.
 a Bizottság részéről
 az elnök
 Ursula VON DER LEYEN
 (1) HL L 347., 2013.12.20., 671. o.
 (2) HL L 346., 2013.12.20., 12. o.
 (3) HL L 347., 2013.12.20., 549. o.
 (4) A Bizottság (EU) 2016/1238 felhatalmazáson alapuló rendelete (2016. május 18.) az 1308/2013/EU európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletnek az állami intervenció és a magántárolási támogatás tekintetében történő kiegészítéséről (HL L 206., 2016.7.30., 15. o.).
 (5) A Bizottság (EU) 2016/1240 végrehajtási rendelete (2016. május 18.) az 1308/2013/EU európai parlamenti és tanácsi rendeletnek az állami intervenció és a magántárolási támogatás tekintetében történő alkalmazására vonatkozó szabályok megállapításáról (HL L 206., 2016.7.30., 71. o.).


text:
 4.2.2016
 PL
 Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej
 L 28/15
 ROZPORZĄDZENIE WYKONAWCZE KOMISJI (UE) 2016/144
 z dnia 3 lutego 2016 r.
 ustanawiające standardowe wartości w przywozie dla ustalania ceny wejścia niektórych owoców i warzyw
 KOMISJA EUROPEJSKA,
 uwzględniając Traktat o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej,
 uwzględniając rozporządzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) nr 1308/2013 z dnia 17 grudnia 2013 r. ustanawiające wspólną organizację rynków produktów rolnych oraz uchylające rozporządzenia Rady (EWG) nr 922/72, (EWG) nr 234/79, (WE) nr 1037/2001 i (WE) nr 1234/2007 (1),
 uwzględniając rozporządzenie wykonawcze Komisji (UE) nr 543/2011 z dnia 7 czerwca 2011 r. ustanawiające szczegółowe zasady stosowania rozporządzenia Rady (WE) nr 1234/2007 w odniesieniu do sektorów owoców i warzyw oraz przetworzonych owoców i warzyw (2), w szczególności jego art. 136 ust. 1,
 a także mając na uwadze, co następuje:
 (1)
 Rozporządzenie wykonawcze (UE) nr 543/2011 przewiduje – zgodnie z wynikami wielostronnych negocjacji handlowych Rundy Urugwajskiej – kryteria, na których podstawie Komisja ustala standardowe wartości dla przywozu z państw trzecich, w odniesieniu do produktów i okresów określonych w części A załącznika XVI do wspomnianego rozporządzenia.
 (2)
 Standardowa wartość w przywozie jest obliczana każdego dnia roboczego, zgodnie z art. 136 ust. 1 rozporządzenia wykonawczego (UE) nr 543/2011, przy uwzględnieniu podlegających zmianom danych dziennych. Niniejsze rozporządzenie powinno zatem wejść w życie z dniem jego opublikowania w Dzienniku Urzędowym Unii Europejskiej,
 PRZYJMUJE NINIEJSZE ROZPORZĄDZENIE:
 Artykuł 1
 Standardowe wartości celne w przywozie, o których mowa w art. 136 rozporządzenia wykonawczego (UE) nr 543/2011, są ustalone w załączniku do niniejszego rozporządzenia.
 Artykuł 2
 Niniejsze rozporządzenie wchodzi w życie z dniem jego opublikowania w Dzienniku Urzędowym Unii Europejskiej.
 Niniejsze rozporządzenie wiąże w całości i jest bezpośrednio stosowane we wszystkich państwach członkowskich.
 Sporządzono w Brukseli dnia 3 lutego 2016 r.
 W imieniu Komisji,
 za Przewodniczącego,
 Jerzy PLEWA
 Dyrektor Generalny ds. Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Obszarów Wiejskich
 (1) Dz.U. L 347 z 20.12.2013, s. 671.
 (2) Dz.U. L 157 z 15.6.2011, s. 1.
 ZAŁĄCZNIK
 Standardowe wartości w przywozie dla ustalania ceny wejścia niektórych owoców i warzyw
 (EUR/100 kg)
 Kod CN
 Kod państw trzecich (1)
 Standardowa wartość w przywozie
 0702 00 00
 EG
 162,9
 IL
 236,2
 MA
 86,2
 TN
 85,0
 TR
 94,8
 ZZ
 133,0
 0707 00 05
 MA
 85,6
 TR
 166,7
 ZZ
 126,2
 0709 93 10
 MA
 46,6
 TR
 143,2
 ZZ
 94,9
 0805 10 20
 EG
 49,2
 MA
 60,2
 TN
 45,6
 TR
 53,9
 ZZ
 52,2
 0805 20 10
 IL
 131,8
 MA
 76,3
 TR
 102,3
 ZZ
 103,5
 0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70, 0805 20 90
 EG
 72,6
 IL
 143,3
 MA
 122,8
 TR
 71,9
 ZZ
 102,7
 0805 50 10
 TR
 99,4
 ZZ
 99,4
 0808 10 80
 CL
 86,9
 US
 161,8
 ZZ
 124,4
 0808 30 90
 CL
 224,0
 CN
 69,1
 TR
 200,0
 ZA
 96,0
 ZZ
 147,3
 (1) Nomenklatura krajów ustalona w rozporządzeniu Komisji (UE) nr 1106/2012 z dnia 27 listopada 2012 r. w sprawie wykonania rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (WE) nr 471/2009 w sprawie statystyk Wspólnoty dotyczących handlu zagranicznego z państwami trzecimi, w odniesieniu do aktualizacji nazewnictwa państw i terytoriów (Dz.U. L 328 z 28.11.2012, s. 7). Kod „ZZ” odpowiada „innym pochodzeniom”.


text:
 19.10.2017
 HR
 Službeni list Europske unije
 L 270/23
 ODLUKA ZAJEDNIČKOG ODBORA EGP-a
 br. 54/2016
 od 18. ožujka 2016.
 o izmjeni Priloga XIII. (Promet) Sporazumu o EGP-u [2017/1884]
 ZAJEDNIČKI ODBOR EGP-A,
 uzimajući u obzir Sporazum o Europskom gospodarskom prostoru (Sporazum o EGP-u), a posebno njegov članak 98.,
 budući da:
 (1)
 Provedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2015/1998 оd 5. studenoga 2015. o utvrđivanju detaljnih mjera za provedbu zajedničkih osnovnih standarda iz područja zaštite zračnog prometa (1) treba se uključiti u Sporazum o EGP-u.
 (2)
 Provedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2015/2426 od 18. prosinca 2015. o izmjeni Uredbe (EU) 2015/1998 u pogledu trećih zemalja za koje se priznaje da primjenjuju standarde zaštite jednakovrijedne zajedničkim osnovnim standardima zaštite civilnog zračnog prometa (2) treba se uključiti u Sporazum o EGP-u.
 (3)
 Provedbena odluka Komisije C(2015) 8005 od 16.11.2015. o utvrđivanju detaljnih mjera za provedbu zajedničkih osnovnih standarda iz područja zaštite zračnog prometa koje sadržavaju informacije iz članka 18. točke (a) Uredbe (EZ) br. 300/2008 treba se uključiti u Sporazum o EGP-u.
 (4)
 Provedbenom uredbom (EU) 2015/1998 stavlja se izvan snage Uredba Komisije (EU) br. 185/2010 (3) koja je uključena u Sporazum o EGP-u i koja se stoga treba isključiti iz njega.
 (5)
 Provedbenom odlukom C(2015) 8005 stavlja se izvan snage Odluka Komisije C(2010) 774 koja je uključena u Sporazum o EGP-u i koja se stoga treba isključiti iz njega.
 (6)
 Prilog XIII. Sporazumu o EGP-u trebalo bi stoga na odgovarajući način izmijeniti,
 DONIO JE OVU ODLUKU:
 Članak 1.
 Prilog XIII. Sporazumu o EGP-u mijenja se kako slijedi:
 1.
 Tekst točke 66.he (Uredba Komisije (EU) br. 185/2010) zamjenjuje se sljedećim:
 „32015 R 1998: Provedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2015/1998 оd 5. studenoga 2015. o utvrđivanju detaljnih mjera za provedbu zajedničkih osnovnih standarda iz područja zaštite zračnog prometa (SL L 299, 14.11.2015., str. 1.), kako je izmijenjena:
 —
 32015 R 2426: Provedbenom uredbom Komisije (EU) 2015/2426 od 18. prosinca 2015. (SL L 334, 22.12.2015., str. 5.).”
 2.
 Tekst točke 66.hf (Odluka Komisije C (2010) 774 final) zamjenjuje se sljedećim:
 „C(2015) 8005: Provedbena odluka Komisije C(2015) 8005 od 16.11.2015. o utvrđivanju detaljnih mjera za provedbu zajedničkih osnovnih standarda iz područja zaštite zračnog prometa koje sadržavaju informacije iz članka 18. točke (a) Uredbe (EZ) br. 300/2008.”
 Članak 2.
 Vjerodostojni su tekstovi provedbenih uredbi (EU) 2015/1998 i (EU) 2015/2426 na islandskom i norveškom jeziku koji se objavljuju u Dodatku o EGP-u Službenom listu Europske unije.
 Članak 3.
 Ova Odluka stupa na snagu 19. ožujka 2016. pod uvjetom da su sva priopćenja iz članka 103. stavka 1. Sporazuma o EGP-u poslana (*1).
 Članak 4.
 Ova se Odluka objavljuje u odjeljku o EGP-u Službenog lista Europske unije i u Dodatku o EGP-u Službenom listu Europske unije.
 Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 18. ožujka 2016.
 Za Zajednički odbor EGP-a
 Predsjednik
 Claude MAERTEN
 (1) SL L 299, 14.11.2015., str. 1.
 (2) SL L 334, 22.12.2015., str. 5.
 (3) SL L 55, 5.3.2010., str. 1.
 (*1) Ustavni zahtjevi nisu navedeni.


text:
 Dôležité právne oznámenie
 |
 21996A0330(17)
 Úradný vestník L 081 , 30/03/1996 S. 0311 - 0317
 Agreementin the form of an Exchange of Letters amending the Additional Protocol on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of BulgariaLetter from the Council of the European UnionSir,1. I have the honour to refer to the negotiations held on 27–28 November 1995 between our respective Delegations with a view to amending the Additional Protocol on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria, applied since 31 December 1993, as last amended by the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters initialled on 6 December 1994. These negotiations were held in the context of Article 1, paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Additional Protocol.2. During these negotiations both Parties noted with satisfaction the way in which the Additional Protocol has, in general, been implemented. Moreover, the European Community noted with satisfaction the progress being made in the opening of the Bulgarian market and in particular the Bulgarian undertaking to accelerate its tariff concessions in favour of textiles and clothing products originating within the European Community and exported to the Republic of Bulgaria as outlined in Appendix 1 attached, with application from 1 January 1996. The Republic of Bulgaria undertakes to inform the European Community before 1 January 1996 that the necessary steps have been taken to implement the concessions outlined in Appendix 1.3. In order to foster the development of further mutually beneficial trade flows it was agreed to amend the Additional Protocol as follows:3.1. The first subparagraph of Article 2, paragraph 3 of the Protocol is replaced by the following:"3. The origin of the products covered by this Protocol shall be determined in accordance with the rules of non-preferential origin in force in the Community."3.2. Article 2, paragraph 3 of Appendix A is replaced by the following:"The certificate of origin referred to in paragraph 1 above is not required for the importation of goods covered by a movement certificate EUR1 or a form EUR2 issued in conformity with Protocol 4 to the Europe Agreement in cases where those documents clearly establish that the Republic of Bulgaria is to be considered as the country of origin on the basis of the rules on non-preferential origin in force in the Community."3.3. Annex II (EU direct quotas) is replaced by Appendix 2 attached.3.4. The Annex to Appendix B concerning outward processing traffic is replaced by Appendix 3 attached (OPT quotas).4. I should be obliged if you would kindly confirm the acceptance of your Government of the foregoing. Should this be the case, this letter, completed by its Appendices and your written confirmation, will constitute an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the Community and the Republic of Bulgaria. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the month following that in which the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria notify each other that they have completed the necessary internal procedures to this effect. In the meantime, the amendments to the Additional Protocol will apply on a provisional basis from 1 January 1996, provided that they are applied on a reciprocal basis.Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.For the Council of the European UnionAppendix 1Bulgarian tariff undertakingThe Government of the Republic of Bulgaria undertakes to implement the following tariff concessions in favour of textiles and clothing products originating within the European Community and imported into the Republic of Bulgaria, to be applied from 1 January 1996.a) The products listed below are transferred from Annex VI to Annex IV of the Europe Agreement:51 01 11 0051 01 19 0053 01 10 0053 01 21 0053 01 29 0053 02 10 00b) The products listed below are transferred from Annex V to Annex IV of the Europe Agreement:51 01 21 0051 01 29 0051 05 30 0053 03 10 0053 03 90 0054 02 43 0054 03 31 0056 04 90 0063 01 10 00c) The products listed below are transferred from Annex VI to Annex V of the Europe Agreement:53 06 10 0053 06 20 0055 15 11 0055 15 13 0055 15 99 0055 16 11 0055 16 23 0055 16 43 0058 01 22 0058 01 24 0058 01 25 0058 01 34 0058 01 35 0058 01 36 0058 04 29 0058 06 10 0060 01 10 0060 01 21 0060 02 10 0060 02 92 9060 02 93 9061 01 10 0061 09 90 2061 11 10 0061 15 91 0061 15 92 0062 11 12 9062 16 00 9063 02 10 0063 03 11 0063 03 19 0063 04 11 0063 04 91 0058 01 33 0061 06 90 0051 02 10 00Appendix 2ANNEX II(The full product descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Protocol)Community quantitative limits(in tonnes or 1000 pieces) |Category | Unit | 1996 | 1997 |2 | tonnes | 4722 | 4816 |2a | tonnes | 1495 | 1525 |5 | pieces | 5185 | 5418 |6 | pieces | 2500 | 2625 |7 | pieces | 1909 | 1995 |8 | pieces | 5662 | 5860 |73 | pieces | 3388 | 3591 |(in 1000 pieces) |Category | Unit | 1996 | 1997 |5 | pieces | 6492 | 6930 |6 | pieces | 9251 | 9945 |7 | pieces | 13286 | 14183 |8 | pieces | 6223 | 6550 |73 | pieces | 3375 | 3679 |Letter from the Government of the Republic of BulgariaSir,I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of ... which reads as follows:"Sir1. I have the honour to refer to the negotiations held on 27–28 November 1995 between our respective Delegations with a view to amending the Additional Protocol on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria, applied since 31 December 1993, as last amended by the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters initialled on 6 December 1994. Theses negotiations were held in the context of Article 1, paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Additional Protocol.2. During these negotiations both Parties noted with satisfaction the way in which the Additional Protocol has, in general, been implemented. Moreover, the European Community noted with satisfaction the progress being made in the opening of the Bulgarian market and in particular the Bulgarian undertaking to accelerate its tariff concessions in favour of textiles and clothing products originating within the European Community and exported to the Republic of Bulgaria as outlined in Appendix 1 attached, with application from 1 January 1996. The Republic of Bulgaria undertakes to inform the European Community before 1 January 1996 that the necessary steps have been taken to implement the concessions outlined in Appendix 1.3. In order to foster the development of further mutually beneficial trade flows it was agreed to amend the Additional Protocol as follows:3.1. The first subparagraph of Article 2, paragraph 3 of the Protocol is replaced by the following:"3. The origin of the products covered by this Protocol shall be determined in accordance with the rules of non-preferential origin in force in the Community."3.2. Article 2, paragraph 3 of Appendix A is replaced by the following:"The certificate of origin referred to in paragraph 1 above is not required for the importation of goods covered by a movement certificate EUR1 or a form EUR2 issued in conformity with Protocol 4 of the Europe Agreement in cases where those documents clearly establish that the Republic of Bulgaria is to be considered as the country of origin on the basis of the rules on non-preferential origin in force in the Community."3.3. Annex II (EU direct quotas) is replaced by Appendix 2 attached.3.4. The Annex to Appendix B concerning outward processing traffic is replaced by Appendix 3 attached (OPT quotas).4. I should be obliged if you would kindly confirm the acceptance of your Government of the foregoing. Should this be the case, this letter, completed by its Appendices and your written confirmation, will constitute an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the Community and the Republic of Bulgaria. This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the month following that in which the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria notify each other that they have completed the necessary internal procedures to this effect. In the meantime, the amendments to the Additional Protocol will apply on a provisional basis from 1 January 1996, provided that they are applied on a reciprocal basis.Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration."I have the honour to confirm that my Government is in agreement with the contents of your letter.Please accept, Sir, the assurance of my highest consideration.For the Government of the Republic of BulgariaAppendix 1Bulgarian tariff undertakingThe Government of the Republic of Bulgaria undertakes to implement the following tariff concessions in favour of textiles and clothing products originating within the European Community and imported into the Republic of Bulgaria, to be applied from 1 January 1996.a) The products listed below are transferred from Annex VI to Annex IV of the Europe Agreement:51 01 11 0051 01 19 0053 01 10 0053 01 21 0053 01 29 0053 02 10 00b) The products listed below are transferred from Annex V to Annex IV of the Europe Agreement:51 01 21 0051 01 29 0051 05 30 0053 03 10 0053 03 90 0054 02 43 0054 03 31 0056 04 90 0063 01 10 00c) The products listed below are transferred from Annex VI to Annex V of the Europe Agreement:53 06 10 0053 06 20 0055 15 11 0055 15 13 0055 15 99 0055 16 11 0055 16 23 0055 16 43 0058 01 22 0058 01 24 0058 01 25 0058 01 34 0058 01 35 0058 01 36 0058 04 29 0058 06 10 0060 01 10 0060 01 21 0060 02 10 0060 02 92 9060 02 93 9061 01 10 0061 09 90 2061 11 10 0061 15 91 0061 15 92 0062 11 12 9062 16 00 9063 02 10 0063 03 11 0063 03 19 0063 04 11 0063 04 91 0058 01 33 0061 06 90 0051 02 10 00Appendix 2ANNEX II(The full product descriptions of the categories listed in this Annex are to be found in Annex I to the Protocol)Community quantitative limits(in tonnes or 1000 pieces) |Category | Unit | 1996 | 1997 |2 | tonnes | 4722 | 4816 |2a | tonnes | 1495 | 1525 |5 | pieces | 5185 | 5418 |6 | pieces | 2500 | 2625 |7 | Pieces | 1909 | 1995 |8 | Pieces | 5662 | 5860 |73 | Pieces | 3388 | 3591 |(in 1000 pieces) |Category | Unit | 1996 | 1997 |5 | pieces | 6492 | 6930 |6 | pieces | 9251 | 9945 |7 | pieces | 13286 | 14183 |8 | pieces | 6223 | 6550 |73 | pieces | 3375 | 3679 |Joint DeclarationIn the context of the negotiations held on 27–28 November 1995 in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 3 of the Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement on Trade in Textile Products between the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria, the following declarations were made:a) the Delegation of the Republic of Bulgaria declared that the Republic of Bulgaria is prepared to accelerate by one year its tariff dismantling for products of Chapters 50–63 of the Bulgarian Customs Tariff listed in Annex VI to the Europe Agreement, to reach zero duty on 1 January 2001, provided that the European Community reduces its preferential customs duties to a rate equal to two-sevenths of the basic duty rate from 1 January 1996 andb) the Commission of the European Communities declared that it was willing to give careful consideration to the Bulgarian proposal outlined in a) above.--------------------------------------------------


jurisdiction: US

text:
 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
 49 CFR Part 544
 [Docket No.: NHTSA-2006-24175]
 RIN 2127-AJ88
 Insurer Reporting Requirements; List of Insurers Required To File Reports
 AGENCY:
 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
 ACTION:
 Notice of proposed rulemaking.
 SUMMARY:
 This document proposes to amend Appendices A, B, and C of 49 CFR part 544, insurer reporting requirements. The appendices list those passenger motor vehicle insurers that are required to file reports on their motor vehicle theft loss experiences. An insurer included in any of these appendices would be required to file three copies of its report for the 2003 calendar year before October 25, 2006. If the passenger motor vehicle insurers remain listed, they must submit reports by each subsequent October 25. We are proposing to add and remove several insurers from relevant appendices.
 DATES:
 Comments must be submitted not later than June 2, 2006. Insurers listed in the appendices are required to submit reports on or before October 25, 2006.
 ADDRESSES:
 You may submit comments, identified by docket number: NHTSA-2006-24175 and/or RIN number: 2127-AJ88, by any of the following methods:
 • Federal eRulemaking Portal:
 http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
 • Agency Web Site:
 http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Docket Management System.
 • Fax: (202) 493-2251
 • Mail: Dockets, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
 • Hand Delivery/Courier: Plaza Level Room 401, (PL #401), of the Nassif Building, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: 1-800-647-5527
 You may visit the Docket from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
 Deborah Mazyck, Office of International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, by electronic mail to deborah.mazyck@nhtsa.dot.gov. Ms. Mazyck's telephone number is (202) 366-4139. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.
 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
 I. Background
 Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33112, Insurer reports and information, NHTSA requires certain passenger motor vehicle insurers to file an annual report with the agency. Each insurer's report includes information about thefts and recoveries of motor vehicles, the rating rules used by the insurer to establish premiums for comprehensive coverage, the actions taken by the insurer to reduce such premiums, and the actions taken by the insurer to reduce or deter theft. Under the agency's regulation, 49 CFR Part 544, the following insurers are subject to the reporting requirements:
 (1) Issuers of motor vehicle insurance policies whose total premiums account for 1 percent or more of the total premiums of motor vehicle insurance issued within the United States;
 (2) Issuers of motor vehicle insurance policies whose premiums account for 10 percent or more of total premiums written within any one state; and
 (3) Rental and leasing companies with a fleet of 20 or more vehicles not covered by theft insurance policies issued by insurers of motor vehicles, other than any governmental entity.
 Pursuant to its statutory exemption authority, the agency exempted certain passenger motor vehicle insurers from the reporting requirements.
 A. Small Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles
 Section 33112(f)(2) provides that the agency shall exempt small insurers of passenger motor vehicles if NHTSA finds that such exemptions will not significantly affect the validity or usefulness of the information in the reports, either nationally or on a state-by-state basis. The term “small insurer” is defined, in Section 33112(f)(1)(A) and (B), as an insurer whose premiums for motor vehicle insurance issued directly or through an affiliate, including pooling arrangements established under state law or regulation for the issuance of motor vehicle insurance, account for less than 1 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the United States. However, that section also stipulates that if an insurance company satisfies this definition of a “small insurer,” but accounts for 10 percent or more of the total premiums for all motor vehicle insurance issued in a particular state, the insurer must report about its operations in that state.
 In the final rule establishing the insurer reports requirement (52 FR 59; January 2, 1987), 49 CFR part 544, NHTSA exercised its exemption authority by listing in Appendix A each insurer that must report because it had at least 1 percent of the motor vehicle insurance premiums nationally. Listing the insurers subject to reporting, instead of each insurer exempted from reporting because it had less than 1 percent of the premiums nationally, is administratively simpler since the former group is much smaller than the latter. In Appendix B, NHTSA lists those insurers required to report for particular states because each insurer had a 10 percent or greater market share of motor vehicle premiums in those states. In the January 1987 final rule, the agency stated that it would update Appendices A and B annually. NHTSA updates the appendices based on data voluntarily provided by insurance companies to A.M. Best, which A.M. Best,1
 publishes in its State/Line Report each spring. The agency uses the data to determine the insurers' market shares nationally and in each state.
 1 A.M. Best Company is a well-recognized source of insurance company ratings and information. 49 U.S.C. 33112(i) authorizes NHTSA to consult with public and private organizations as necessary.
 B. Self-Insured Rental and Leasing Companies
 In addition, upon making certain determinations, NHTSA grants exemptions to self-insurers, i.e., any person who has a fleet of 20 or more motor vehicles (other than any governmental entity) used for rental or lease whose vehicles are not covered by theft insurance policies issued by insurers of passenger motor vehicles, 49 U.S.C. 33112(b)(1) and (f). Under 49 U.S.C. 33112(e)(1) and (2), NHTSA may exempt a self-insurer from reporting, if the agency determines:
 (1) The cost of preparing and furnishing such reports is excessive in relation to the size of the business of the insurer; and 33112(e)(1) and (2),
 (2) The insurer's report will not significantly contribute to carrying out the purposes of Chapter 331.
 In a final rule published June 22, 1990 (55 FR 25606), the agency granted a class exemption to all companies that rent or lease fewer than 50,000 vehicles, because it believed that the largest companies' reports sufficiently represent the theft experience of rental and leasing companies. NHTSA concluded that smaller rental and leasing companies' reports do not significantly contribute to carrying out NHTSA's statutory obligations and that exempting such companies will relieve an unnecessary burden on them. As a result of the June 1990 final rule, the agency added Appendix C, consisting of an annually updated list of the self-insurers subject to Part 544. Following the same approach as in Appendix A, NHTSA included, in Appendix C, each of the self-insurers subject to reporting instead of the self-insurers which are exempted.
 NHTSA updates Appendix C based primarily on information from Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto Rental News.2
 2 Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto Rental News are publications that provide information on the size of fleets and market share of rental and leasing companies.
 C. When a Listed Insurer Must File a Report
 Under Part 544, as long as an insurer is listed, it must file reports on or before October 25 of each year.
 Thus, any insurer listed in the appendices must file a report before October 25, and by each succeeding October 25, absent an amendment removing the insurer's name from the appendices.
 II. Proposal
 1. Insurers of Passenger Motor Vehicles
 Appendix A lists insurers that must report because each had 1 percent of the motor vehicle insurance premiums on a national basis. The list was last amended in a final rule published on July 25, 2005 (70 FR 42505). Based on the 2003 calendar year data market shares from A.M. Best, we propose to remove California State Auto Association from Appendix A.
 Each of the 18 insurers listed in Appendix A are required to file a report before October 25, 2006, setting forth the information required by Part 544 for each State in which it did business in the 2003 calendar year. As long as these 18 insurers remain listed, they will be required to submit reports by each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before.
 Appendix B lists insurers required to report for particular States for calendar year 2003, because each insurer had a 10 percent or greater market share of motor vehicle premiums in those States. Based on the 2003 calendar year data for market shares from A.M. Best, we propose to remove Nodak Mutual Group (North Dakota) and add Safety Group (Massachusetts) to Appendix B.
 The nine insurers listed in Appendix B are required to report on their calendar year 2003 activities in every State where they had a 10 percent or greater market share. These reports must be filed by October 25, 2006, and set forth the information required by Part 544. As long as these nine insurers remain listed, they would be required to submit reports on or before each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before.
 2. Rental and Leasing Companies
 Appendix C lists rental and leasing companies required to file reports. Based on information in Automotive Fleet Magazine and Auto Rental News for 2003, NHTSA proposes to remove Avis Rent-A-Car, Budget Rent-A-Car Corporation, Dollar Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. and ANC Rental Corporation and add the Cendant Car Rental Group3
 , Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group 4
 and Vanguard Car Rental USA 5
 . Each of the 13 companies (including franchisees and licensees) listed in Appendix C would be required to file reports for calendar year 2003 no later than October 25, 2006, and set forth the information required by Part 544. As long as those 13 companies remain listed, they would be required to submit reports before each subsequent October 25 for the calendar year ending slightly less than 3 years before.
 3 Cendant Car Rental acquired ownership of Avis and Budget Rent-A-Car in 2002.
 4 Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group acquired ownership of Dollar Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. and Thrifty, Inc. in 2001.
 5 Vanguard Car Rental USA acquired ownership of ANC Rental Corporation in 2003.
 III. Regulatory Impacts
 1. Costs and Other Impacts
 This notice has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. NHTSA has considered the impact of this proposed rule and determined that the action is not “significant” within the meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This proposed rule implements the agency's policy of ensuring that all insurance companies that are statutorily eligible for exemption from the insurer reporting requirements are in fact exempted from those requirements. Only those companies that are not statutorily eligible for an exemption are required to file reports.
 NHTSA does not believe that this proposed rule, reflecting current data, affects the impacts described in the final regulatory evaluation prepared for the final rule establishing Part 544 (52 FR 59; January 2, 1987). Accordingly, a separate regulatory evaluation has not been prepared for this rulemaking action. Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for 2005 (see http://www.bls.gov/cpi), the cost estimates in the 1987 final regulatory evaluation were adjusted for inflation. The agency estimates that there is $97,650 decrease in the cost of compliance for any insurer added to Appendix A, no cost of compliance for any insurer added to Appendix B, and a $11,269 decrease in the cost of compliance for any insurer added to Appendix C. If this proposed rule is made final, for Appendix A, the agency would propose to remove one company; for Appendix B, the agency would propose to remove one company and add one company; and for Appendix C, the agency would propose to remove four companies and add three companies. The agency estimates that the net effect of this proposal, if made final, would be a cost decrease to insurers, as a group of approximately $108,919.
 Interested persons may wish to examine the 1987 final regulatory evaluation. Copies of that evaluation were placed in Docket No. T86-01; Notice 2. Any interested person may obtain a copy of this evaluation by writing to NHTSA, Docket Section, Room 5109, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, or by calling (202) 366-4949.
 2. Paperwork Reduction Act
 The information collection requirements in this proposed rule were submitted and approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This collection of information is assigned OMB Control Number 2127-0547 (“Insurer Reporting Requirements”) and approved for use through July 31, 2006, and the agency will seek to extend the approval afterwards.
 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
 The agency also considered the effects of this rulemaking under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). I certify that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale for the certification is that none of the companies proposed for Appendices A, B, or C are construed to be a small entity within the definition of the RFA. “Small insurer” is defined, in part under 49 U.S.C. 33112, as any insurer whose premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance account for less than 1 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the United States, or any insurer whose premiums within any State, account for less than 10 percent of the total premiums for all forms of motor vehicle insurance issued by insurers within the State. This notice would exempt all insurers meeting those criteria. Any insurer too large to meet those criteria is not a small entity. In addition, in this rulemaking, the agency proposes to exempt all “self insured rental and leasing companies” that have fleets of fewer than 50,000 vehicles. Any self-insured rental and leasing company too large to meet that criterion is not a small entity.
 4. Federalism
 This action has been analyzed according to the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined that the proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
 5. Environmental Impacts
 In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, NHTSA has considered the environmental impacts of this proposed rule and determined that it would not have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
 6. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
 The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading, at the beginning, of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
 7. Plain Language
 Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration of the following questions:
 • Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
 • Are the requirements in the proposal clearly stated?
 • Does the proposal contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
 • Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
 • Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
 • Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
 • What else could we do to make the proposal easier to understand?
 If you have any responses to these questions, you can forward them to me several ways:
 a. Mail: Deborah Mazyck, Office of International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590;
 b. E-mail: deborah.mazyck@nhtsa.dot.gov; or
 c. Fax: (202) 493-2290.
 IV. Comments
 Submission of Comments
 1. How Can I Influence NHTSA's Thinking on This Proposed Rule?
 In developing our rules, NHTSA tries to address the concerns of all our stakeholders. Your comments will help us improve this rule. We invite you to provide views on our proposal, new data, a discussion of the effects of this proposal on you, or other relevant information. We welcome your views on all aspects of this proposed rule. Your comments will be most effective if you follow the suggestions below:
 • Explain your views and reasoning clearly.
 • Provide solid technical and cost data to support your views.
 • If you estimate potential costs, explain how you derived the estimate.
 • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
 • Offer specific alternatives.
 • Include the name, date, and docket number with your comments.
 2. How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?
 Your comments must be written in English. To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket number of this document in your comments.
 Your comments must not exceed 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21). We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary comments concisely. You may attach necessary documents to your comments. We have no limit on the attachments' length.
 Please submit two copies of your comments, including the attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
 Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by logging onto the Dockets Management System Web site at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on “Help & Information” or “Help/Info” to obtain instructions for filing the document electronically.
 3. How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?
 If you wish Docket Management to notify you, upon its receipt of your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will mail the postcard.
 4. How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?
 If you wish to submit any information under a confidentiality claim, you should submit three copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim as confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. In addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed to be confidential business information, you should include a cover letter addressing the information specified in our confidential business information regulation (49 CFR Part 512).
 5. Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?
 NHTSA will consider all comments that Docket Management receives before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket Management receives a comment too late for us to consider, in developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.
 6. How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?
 You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are indicated above, in the same location. You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, take the following steps:
 1. Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).
 2. On that page, click on “search.”
 3. On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the four-digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Example: If the docket number was “NHTSA 1998-1234,” you would type “1234.” After typing the docket number, click on “search.”
 4. On the next page, which contains docket summary information for the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. The “pdf” versions of the documents are word searchable.
 V. Conclusion
 Based on the foregoing, we are proposing to amend Appendices A, B, and C of 49 CFR 544, insurer reporting requirements.
 List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 544
 Crime insurance, insurance, insurance companies, motor vehicles, reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
 In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 544 is proposed to be amended as follows:
 PART 544—[AMENDED]
 1. The authority citation for part 544 continues to read as follows:
 Authority:
 49 U.S.C. 33112; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
 2. Paragraph (a) of § 544.5 is revised to read as follows:
 § 544.5
 General requirements for reports.
 (a) Each insurer to which this part applies shall submit a report annually before October 25, beginning on October 25, 1986. This report shall contain the information required by § 544.6 of this part for the calendar year 3 years previous to the year in which the report is filed (e.g., the report due by October 25, 2006 will contain the required information for the 2003 calendar year).
 3. Appendix A to part 544 is revised to read as follows:
 Appendix A—Insurers of Motor Vehicle Insurance Policies Subject to the Reporting Requirements in Each State in Which They Do Business
 Allstate Insurance Group
 American Family Insurance Group
 American International Group
 Auto-Owners Insurance Group
 CNA Insurance Companies
 Erie Insurance Group
 Berkshire Hathaway/GEICO Corporation Group
 Hartford Insurance Group
 Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies
 Metropolitan Life Auto & Home Group
 Mercury General Group
 Nationwide Group
 Progressive Group
 Safeco Insurance Companies
 State Farm Group
 Travelers PC Group
 USAA Group
 Farmers Insurance Group
 4. Appendix B to Part 544 is revised to read as follows:
 Appendix B—Issuers of Motor Vehicle Insurance Policies Subject to the Reporting Requirements Only in Designated States
 Alfa Insurance Group (Alabama)
 Arbella Mutual Insurance (Massachusetts)
 Auto Club (Michigan)
 Commerce Group, Inc. (Massachusetts)
 Kentucky Farm Bureau Group (Kentucky)
 New Jersey Manufacturers Group (New Jersey)
 Safety Group (Massachusetts) 1
 1 Indicates a newly listed company, which must file a report beginning with the report due October 25, 2006.
 Southern Farm Bureau Group (Arkansas, Mississippi)
 Tennessee Farmers Companies (Tennessee)
 5. Appendix C to Part 544 is revised to read as follows:
 Appendix C—Motor Vehicle Rental and Leasing Companies (Including Licensees and Franchisees) Subject to the Reporting Requirements of Part 544
 ARI (Automotive Resources International)
 Cendant Car Rental 1
 1 Cendant Car Rental acquired ownership of Avis and Budget Rent-A-Car in 2002.
 Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group 2
 2 Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group acquired ownership of Dollar Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. and Thrifty, Inc. in 2001.
 Donlen Corporation
 Enterprise Rent-A-Car
 Enterprise Fleet Services
 GE Capital Fleet Services
 Hertz Rent-A-Car Division (subsidiary of The Hertz Corporation)
 Lease Plan USA, Inc.
 PHH Vehicle Management Services/PHH Arval
 U-Haul International, Inc. (subsidiary of AMERCO)
 Vanguard Car Rental USA 3
 3 Vanguard Car Rental USA acquired ownership of ANC Rental Corporation in 2003.
 Wheels Inc.
 Issued on: March 23, 2006.
 Stephen R. Kratzke,
 Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. 06-3015 Filed 3-31-06; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P