text:
 Svarīgs juridisks paziņojums
 |
 52005PC0591
 Priekšlikums Padomes regula par to, ka Kopienas vārdā tiek noslēgts nolīgums vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā par tā protokola grozījumiem, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam /* COM/2005/0591 galīgā redakcija - CNS 2005/0229 */
 [pic] | EIROPAS KOPIENU KOMISIJA |Briselē, 23.11.2005COM(2005) 591 galīgā redakcija2005/0229 (CNS)PriekšlikumsPADOMES REGULApar to, ka Kopienas vārdā tiek noslēgts nolīgums vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā par tā protokola grozījumiem, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam(iesniegusi Komisija)PASKAIDROJUMA RAKSTSŠā priekšlikuma mērķis ir grozīt esošo protokolu, kas pielikumā pievienots Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumam par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē.Balstoties uz secinājumiem, ko izdarījusi tehniskā darba grupa, kuru veidoja Mauritānijas iestāžu un Eiropas Komisijas pārstāvji un kuras tehniskās apspriedes norisinājās no 2004. gada 30. jūnija līdz 2. jūlijam un no 14. līdz 15. jūlijam Nouakchott , un no 2004. gada 7. līdz 10. septembrim Briselē, kā arī, ņemot vērā pieejamos zinātniskos atzinumus, abas puses apvienotās Komisijas sēdes laikā 2004. gada 10. septembrī Briselē nonāca pie atziņas, ka jāveic zināmi pasākumi attiecībā uz zvejas darbības pārvaldību Mauritānijas ekskluzīvajā ekonomiskajā zonā (EEZ).Nolīgumu par esošā protokola grozījumiem noformēja vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā.Iepriekšminēto pasākumu mērķis, no vienas puses, ir samazināt galvkāju nozveju, samazinot zvejas darbības intensitāti, un, no otras puses, palielināt pelaģisko zivju un tunzivju zvejas atļauju skaitu. Lai atvieglotu to zvejas flotu iekļaušanos, kas peld ar jauno dalībvalstu karogiem, un, lai Kopienas zvejas kuģiem, kas parasti darbojas saskaņā ar iepriekšminēto nolīgumu, nodrošinātu nepārtrauktu pieeju, pelaģisko zivju zvejas atļauju piešķiršana notiks, pamatojoties uz visu dalībvalstu zvejas atļauju pieteikumiem un ņemot vērā zvejas darbības, ko parasti veic saskaņā ar šo nolīgumu. Ja vajadzīgs, Komisija ierosinās sadalīt pelaģisko zivju zvejas atļaujas starp dalībvalstīm.Piecu zvejas atļauju darbības apturēšana galvkāju nozvejai, kas kopš 2004. gada marta notika saskaņā ar dalībvalstīm, tagad šīs reorganizācijas kontekstā ir kompensēta ar šīm jaunajām pelaģisko zivju zvejas atļaujām, tā tiek nodrošināta laba un atbilstīga finanšu pārvaldība un zvejas iespējas pārkārtotas atkarībā no nozares resursiem un pieprasījuma. Pateicoties šai reorganizācijai gūto jauno līdzsvaru panāca, balstoties uz 2001. gada sarunu rezultātiem par esošo protokolu, un Eiropas Savienībai izmaksu un labumu izteiksmē šis līdzsvars ir ļoti pozitīvs iznākums.Kamēr nolīgums nav galīgi stājies spēkā, Komisija, balstoties uz iepriekšminēto, ierosina, lai Padome pieņem lēmumu par šā nolīguma pagaidu piemērošanu vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā.Priekšlikums Padomes regulai par nolīguma noslēgšanu vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā attiecībā uz protokola grozījumiem ir atsevišķas procedūras priekšmets.2005/0229 (CNS)PriekšlikumsPADOMES REGULApar to, ka Kopienas vārdā tiek noslēgts nolīgums vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā par tā protokola grozījumiem, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijamEIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS PADOME,ņemot vērā Eiropas Kopienas dibināšanas līgumu, un jo īpaši tā 37. pantu saistībā ar 300. panta 2. punktu un 300. panta 3. punkta pirmo daļu,ņemot vērā Komisijas priekšlikumu[1],ņemot vērā Eiropas Parlamenta atzinumu[2],tā kā:1. Protokols, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, ir stājies spēkā 2001. gada 1. augustā, un tas ir spēkā līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam[3].2. Ievērojot zinātniskos atzinumus attiecībā uz resursu stāvokli Mauritānijas EEZ un jo īpaši Mauritānijas Okeāna pētniecības un Zvejas institūta ceturtās un piektās darba grupas, kā arī apvienotās zinātniskās darba grupas rezultātus un ņemot vērā secinājumus, ko no šiem rezultātiem 2004. gada 10. septembrī un 2004. gada 15. un 16. decembrī izdarīja apvienotā komiteja, abas puses nolēma grozīt pašreizējās zvejas iespējas.3. Šo grozījumu rezultāti ir iekļauti vēstuļu apmaiņā un attiecas uz zvejas darbības pagaidu samazinājumu galvkāju nozvejai (5. kategorija), mēnesi ilga otrā bioloģiskā pārtraukuma posma noteikšanu bentisko zivju zvejai, to kuģu skaita palielināšanu, kas nodarbojas ar tunču zveju ar āķiem no borta un jedām, ar pelaģisko zveju ar āķiem (8. kategorija), kā arī pelaģiskās zvejas saldētājtraleru (9. kategorija) skaita palielināšanu.4. Kopienas interesēs ir apstiprināt šos grozījumus.5. Lai šos zvejas iespēju grozījumus piemērotu iespējami drīz, ir jāparaksta nolīgums vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā līdz Padome to noslēgs galīgi,IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO REGULU.1. pantsKopienas vārdā tiek apstiprināts nolīgums vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā par tā protokola grozījumiem, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam.Vēstuļu apmaiņas veidā sagatavotā nolīguma teksts ir pievienots šim lēmumam.2. pantsŅemot vērā grozījumus, kas iekļauti vēstuļu apmaiņā, jaunās zvejas iespējas zvejas kuģu kategorijai „kuģi tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām un āķu zvejas kuģi pelaģiskai zvejai” (Protokola tehnisko datu tabula Nr. 8) un zvejas kuģu kategorijai „pelaģiskās zvejas saldētājtraleri” (tehnisko datu tabula Nr. 9) sadala starp dalībvalstīm, vadoties no šāda kritērija:Zvejas kuģu kategorija | Dalībvalsts | Tonnāža/Izmantojamo kuģu skaits |kuģi tunzivju zvejai ar āķiem āķu zvejas kuģi pelaģiskai zvejai (kuģi) | Spānija Portugāle Francija | 20 + 3= 23 3 + 0= 3 8 + 1= 9 |Pelaģiskās zvejas (kuģi) | 15+10= 25 |Piecu (5) zvejas atļauju darbības apturēšana galvkāju zvejas kuģu kategorijai stājas spēkā 2005. gada 1. janvārī. Lēmumu par piecu (5) zvejas atļauju darbības atsākšanu nākotnē pieņems Komisija un Mauritānijas iestādes, savstarpēji vienojoties apvienotas komitejas ietvaros un ņemot vērā zvejas resursu stāvokli.Ja zvejas atļauju pieteikumi no šīm dalībvalstīm neietver visas protokolā noteiktās zvejas iespējas, Komisija var izskatīt jebkuras citas dalībvalsts zvejas atļauju pieteikumus.3. pantsŠī regula stājas spēkā trešajā dienā pēc tās publicēšanas Eiropas Savienības Oficiālajā Vēstnesī .Šī regula uzliek saistības kopumā un ir tieši piemērojama visās dalībvalstīs.Briselē, [...]Padomes vārdā ―PriekšsēdētājsNOLĪGUMS VĒSTUĻU APMAIŅAS VEIDĀpar tā protokola grozījumiem, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijamA. Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdības vēstule,Godātais kungs,Atsaucoties uz 2001. gada 31. jūlijā parafēto protokolu, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam, un uz apvienotās komitejas 2004. gada 10. septembra un 2004. gada 15. un 16. decembra secinājumiem, man ir gods Jūs informēt, ka Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība saskaņā ar zinātniskajiem atzinumiem ir gatava uz laiku samazināt galvkāju zvejas intensitāti, nosakot to šai kategorijai tādu, kā norādīts šā protokola tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 5, uz laiku samazinot šai protokolā noteiktās zvejas iespējas par 5 atļaujām. Lēmumu par piecu (5) zvejas atļauju darbības atsākšanu nākotnē pieņems, savstarpēji vienojoties un ņemot vērā zvejas resursu stāvokli. Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība, pamatojoties uz nediskriminējošiem noteikumiem, pieņems lēmumu arī par otra mēnesi ilga bioloģiskā pārtraukuma posma noteikšanu bentisko zivju zvejai. Turklāt Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība pagaidu kārtā no 2005. gada 1. janvāra līdz Nolīguma spēkā stāšanās dienai un ar noteikumu, ka Eiropas Kopiena dara to pašu, apņemas piemērot izdarītos protokola grozījumus attiecībā uz noteikumiem par zvejas iespējām, kas zvejas kuģiem tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām un āķu zvejas kuģiem pelaģiskai zvejai noteiktas tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 8, palielinot šīs kategorijas un zvejas kuģu skaitu no 31 līdz 35 kuģiem, un kas pelaģiskās zvejas saldētājtraleriem noteiktas tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 9, palielinot šīs kategorijas zvejas kuģu skaitu no 15 līdz 25 kuģiem.Būšu Jums pateicīgs, ja atsūtīsiet man Eiropas Kopienas apstiprinājumu par šādu pagaidu pasākumu.Ar cieņu,Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdībaB. Eiropas Kopienas vēstuleGodātais kungs,Man ir gods apliecināt, ka esmu saņēmis šādu Jūsu vēstuli ar šīsdienas datumu:„Godātais kungs,Atsaucoties uz 2001. gada 31. jūlijā parafēto protokolu, ar ko nosaka zvejas iespējas un finansiālo ieguldījumu, kurš paredzēts Eiropas Kopienas un Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas Nolīgumā par sadarbību jūras zvejniecības nozarē, attiecībā uz laika posmu no 2001. gada 1. augusta līdz 2006. gada 31. jūlijam, un uz apvienotās komitejas 2004. gada 10. septembra un 2004. gada 15. un 16. decembra secinājumiem, man ir gods Jūs informēt, ka Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība saskaņā ar zinātniskajiem atzinumiem ir gatava uz laiku samazināt galvkāju zvejas intensitāti, nosakot to šai kategorijai tādu, kā norādīts šā protokola tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 5, uz laiku samazinot šai protokolā noteiktās zvejas iespējas par 5 atļaujām. Lēmumu par piecu (5) zvejas atļauju darbības atsākšanu nākotnē pieņems, savstarpēji vienojoties un ņemot vērā zvejas resursu stāvokli. Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība, pamatojoties uz nediskriminējošiem noteikumiem, pieņems lēmumu arī par otra mēnesi ilga bioloģiskā pārtraukuma posma noteikšanu bentisko zivju zvejai. Turklāt Mauritānijas Islāma Republikas valdība pagaidu kārtā no 2005. gada 1. janvāra līdz Nolīguma spēkā stāšanās dienai un ar noteikumu, ka Eiropas Kopiena dara to pašu, apņemas piemērot izdarītos protokola grozījumus attiecībā uz noteikumiem par zvejas iespējām, kas zvejas kuģiem tunču zvejai ar āķiem no borta un jedām un āķu zvejas kuģiem pelaģiskai zvejai noteiktas tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 8, palielinot šīs kategorijas un zvejas kuģu skaitu no 31 līdz 35 kuģiem, un kas pelaģiskās zvejas saldētājtraleriem noteiktas tehnisko datu tabulā Nr. 9, palielinot šīs kategorijas zvejas kuģu skaitu no 15 līdz 25 kuģiem.Būšu Jums pateicīgs, ja atsūtīsiet man Eiropas Kopienas apstiprinājumu par šādu pagaidu pasākumu”.Man ir gods Jums apstiprināt Eiropas Kopienas piekrišanu šādam pagaidu pasākumam.Ar cieņu,Eiropas Kopienas vārdāFICHE FINANCIERE SIMPLIFIEEDomaine(s) politique(s): 11 Pêches Activité(s): 1103 Accords internationaux en matière de pêche |DÉNOMINATION DE L’ACTION: ACCORD SOUS FORME D’ECHANGE DE LETTRES RELATIF AUX AMENDEMENTS MODIFIANT LE PROTOCOLE FIXANT LES POSSIBILITÉS DE PÊCHE ET LA CONTREPARTIE FINANCIÈRE PRÉVUES DANS L’ACCORD DE PÊCHE CE/ MAURITANIE POUR LA PÉRIODE 01.08.2001- 31.07.2006. |1. LIGNE(S) BUDGÉTAIRE(S) + INTITULÉ(S)110301 : « Accords internationaux en matière de pêche »2. DONNÉES CHIFFRÉES GLOBALES2.1 Enveloppe totale de l’action (partie B): 86.000.000 € en Crédits d'engagement pour l’accord CE/Mauritanie en vigueur. Cette modification du protocole n’a pas d’incidence budgétaire supplémentaire.2.2 Période d’application: 1er août 2001 au 31 juillet 20062.3 Estimation globale pluriannuelle des dépenses:a) Echéancier crédits d'engagement/crédits de paiement (intervention financière)(cf. point 6.1.1)Mio€ ( à la 3 ème décimale)Année 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | Total |Crédits d'engagement | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 430 |Crédits de paiement | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 430 |b) Assistance technique et administrative (ATA) et dépenses d’appui (DDA)(cf. point 6.1.2)CE | - | - | - | - | - | - |CP | - | - | - | - | - | - |Sous total a+b |CE | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 430 |CP | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 86 | 430 |2.4 Compatibilité avec la programmation financière et les perspectives financières( Proposition compatible avec la programmation financière existante( Cette proposition nécessite une reprogrammation de la rubrique concernée des perspectives financières,( Y compris, le cas échéant, un recours aux dispositions de l’accord interinstitutionnel.( Type de dépense : il s'agit de définir la classification économique des dépenses en distinguant les dépenses courantes des dépenses en capital. Cette classification permet une meilleure articulation entre la comptabilité budgétaire et la comptabilité générale( Dépenses courantes : elles sont liées aux charges de l'exercice.( Dépenses en capital: elles sont liés aux postes du bilan. Quel type d'activité, ces dépenses sont-elles destinées à financer?3. CARACTÉRISTIQUES BUDGÉTAIRESNature de la dépense | Nouvelle | Participation AELE | Participation pays candidats | Rubrique PF |DO | CD | NON | NON | NON | N° 04 |4. BASE LÉGALE- Article 37 du Traité, en liaison avec l’art. 300, par.2 et par.3, premier alinéa ;- Accord de pêche CE/Mauritanie (Règlement (CE) n° 2528/2001 du Conseil du 17.12.2001)5. DESCRIPTION ET JUSTIFICATION5.1 Nécessité d'une intervention communautaire [4]5.1.1 Objectifs poursuivisSur la base des conclusions du groupe de travail, dont les réunions techniques se sont déroulées du 30 juin au 2 juillet 2004 et du 14 au 15 juillet à Nouakchott, ainsi que du 7 au 10 septembre 2004 à Bruxelles, et à la lumière des avis scientifiques disponibles, les deux parties sont arrivées à la conclusion lors de la Commission mixte du 10 septembre 2004 à Bruxelles, qu’il convenait de fixer de nouvelles possibilités de pêche. Ces modifications portent plus particulièrement sur :- Une réduction temporaire de l’effort de pêche pour la catégorie de pêche céphalopodes (fiche technique n°5 du protocole), en réduisant temporairement de 5 licences les possibilités de pêche par rapport aux possibilités offertes par le protocole. La mobilisation future de ces 5 licences sera décidée de commun accord en fonction de l’état de la ressource.- La fixation par les autorités mauritaniennes d’une seconde période d’arrêt biologique d’un mois pour la pêche démersale.- Pour la catégorie de pêche thoniers canneurs et palangriers de surface (fiche technique n°8), le nombre de navires de cette catégorie passe de 31 à 35.- Pour la catégorie de pêche chalutiers congélateurs de pêche pélagique (fiche technique n°9) le nombre de navires de cette catégorie passe de 15 à 25.Les deux parties ont donc procédé à un échange de lettres pour amender dans ce sens le protocole en cours.Les nouvelles possibilités de pêche sont réparties parmi les Etats membres proportionnellement à la clé de répartition définie dans le protocole initial.5.1.2 Dispositions prises relevant de l’évaluation ex-anteLa modification du protocole n’ayant aucun impact sur le plan financier ni sur les objectifs poursuivis, une évaluation ex-ante des modifications apportées n’est pas pertinente.Dans le cadre de la renégociation du protocole en 2005 et 2006, une évaluation ex-ante et une analyse d’impact seront effectuées.5.1.3 Dispositions prises à la suite de l’évaluation ex-postUne évaluation ex-post portant sur l’ensemble de la période du protocole sera effectuée avant le début des négociations mentionnées au point 5.1.2.5.2 Actions envisagées et modalités de l'intervention budgétaireLa proposition a comme objectif :- Une réduction temporaire de l’effort de pêche pour la catégorie de pêche céphalopodes (fiche technique n°5 du protocole), en réduisant temporairement de 5 licences les possibilités de pêche par rapport aux possibilités offertes par le protocole. La mobilisation future de ces 5 licences sera décidée de commun accord en fonction de l’état de la ressource et sur base des avis scientifiques qui seront rendus dans le cadre du comité scientifique conjoint créé par le protocole. La partie mauritanienne et communautaire décideront, de commun accord, des modalités pratiques de mise en œuvre de cette réduction temporaire.- La fixation par les autorités mauritaniennes d’une seconde période d’arrêt biologique d’un mois pour la pêche démersale.- Pour la catégorie de pêche thoniers canneurs et palangriers de surface (fiche technique n°8), le nombre de navires de cette catégorie passe de 31 à 35.- Pour la catégorie de pêche chalutiers congélateurs de pêche pélagique (fiche technique n°9) le nombre de navires de cette catégorie passe de 15 à 25.Les modifications ainsi apportées au protocole permettront :- de mettre davantage en adéquation l’effort de pêche et la situation des stocks, pour la catégorie céphalopodière- de permettre l’augmentation du nombre de licences en raison de l’augmentation de la demande et des changements de zone opérés par les bateaux canneurs dans la région- d’assurer une uniformité de traitement et d’encadrement à l’ensemble de la flotte pélagique européenne opérant dans la ZEE mauritanienne (NL, D, LT, LV) et qui répond aux critères d’éligibilité fixé par le protocole.5.3 Modalités de mise en œuvreLa mise en œuvre du protocole concerné relève de la responsabilité exclusive de la Commission, qui s’en chargera par le moyen de ses effectifs statutaires tant dans son siège de Bruxelles que dans sa Délégation en Mauritanie.La Direction de la pêche industrielle au sein du Ministère des Pêches et de l’Economie Maritime est responsable de l’octroi des licences de pêche.Pendant l’année 2004, à la demande de la Commission, il y a eu trois Commissions Mixtes CE/RIM (14-15 février, 06-11 septembre et 15-16 décembre 2004). Egalement et dans le même contexte, deux réunions d’un groupe de travail technique CE/RIM, se sont déroulées du 30 juin au 02 juillet et du 14 au 15 juillet à Nouakchott.Au cours de la Commission Mixte de février, il avait été décidé de créer un groupe de travail technique mixte pour examiner les éléments suivants :- L’état de l’ensemble des stocks concernés par l’Accord pêche- La réglementation en matière de pêche juvénile et la commercialisation des poulpes juvéniles.- Les zonages et les interactions entre les différentes pêcheries- Les repos biologiques- Les normes techniques concernant les engins de pêcheLa réunion de la Commission Mixte du 15 et 16 décembre 2004 a abouti à la signature d’un PV ayant permis d’arriver à un accord sur l’ensemble des points ci-dessus et formalisé par l’échange de lettre amendant le protocole. [1] OV C [...],[...],[...]. lpp.[2] OV C [...],[...],[...]. lpp.[3] OV L 341, 22.12.2001. lpp[4] Pour plus d'informations, voir le document d'orientation séparé.


type: legislation

jurisdiction: EU

text:
5.4.2000 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende L 84/47
 BERIGTIGELSER
 Berigtigelse til Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 705/2000 af 3. april 2000 om suspension af præferencetolden
 og genindførelse af tolden ifølge den fælles toldtarif ved indførsel af småblomstrede roser med oprindelse i
 Israel
 (De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende L 83 af 4. april 2000)
 Side 14, artikel 2 (datoen for ikrafttrædelsen af forordningen):
 i stedet for: »den 4. april 2000«
 læses: »den 5. april 2000«.


type: caselaw

text:
 26.5.2012
 CS
 Úřední věstník Evropské unie
 C 151/27
 Usnesení Tribunálu ze dne 22. března 2012 — Viasat Broadcasting UK v. Komise
 (Věc T-114/09) (1)
 (Státní podpory - Navrácení podpory - Zánik právního zájmu na podání žaloby - Nevydání rozhodnutí ve věci samé)
 2012/C 151/42
 Jednací jazyk: angličtina
 Účastníci řízení
 Žalobkyně: Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd (West Drayton, Middlesex, Spojené království) (zástupci: S. Kalsmose-Hjelmborg a M. Honoré, advokáti)
 Žalovaná: Evropská komise (zástupci: původně N. Khan a B. Martenczuk, poté B. Stromsky a L. Flynn, zmocněnci)
 Vedlejší účastníci podporující žalovanou: Dánské království (zástupci: původně J. Bering Liisberg, poté C. Vang, zmocněnci, ve spolupráci s P. Bieringem a K. Lundgaard Hansenem, advokáty) a TV2 Danmark A/S (Odense C, Dánsko) (zástupce: O. Koktvedgaard, advokát)
 Předmět
 Návrh na zrušení rozhodnutí Komise C(2008) 4224 final ze dne 4. srpna 2008 ve věci N 287/2008 týkající se podpory poskytnuté na záchranu společnosti TV2 Danmark A/S
 Výrok
 1)
 O žalobě již není důvodné rozhodnout.
 2)
 Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd, Evropská komise, Dánské království a TV2 Danmark A/S ponesou vlastní náklady řízení.
 (1) Úř. věst. C 141, 20.6.2009.


type: contracts

text:
 3.9.2015
 FR
 Journal officiel de l'Union européenne
 L 230/5
 DÉCISION DU COMITÉ MIXTE DE L’EEE
 No 211/2014
 du 24 octobre 2014
 modifiant l’annexe I (Questions vétérinaires et phytosanitaires) et l’annexe II (Réglementations techniques, normes, essais et certification) de l’accord EEE [2015/1435]
 LE COMITÉ MIXTE DE L’EEE,
 vu l’accord sur l’Espace économique européen (ci-après l’«accord EEE»), et notamment son article 98,
 considérant ce qui suit:
 (1)
 Le règlement (UE) no 217/2014 de la Commission du 7 mars 2014 modifiant le règlement (CE) no 2073/2005 en ce qui concerne les salmonelles dans les carcasses de porcs (1) doit être intégré dans l’accord EEE.
 (2)
 La présente décision concerne la législation relative aux questions vétérinaires et aux denrées alimentaires. Cette législation ne s’applique pas au Liechtenstein aussi longtemps que l’application de l’accord entre la Communauté européenne et la Confédération suisse relatif aux échanges de produits agricoles est étendue au Liechtenstein, comme cela est précisé dans les adaptations sectorielles de l’annexe I et dans la partie introductive du chapitre XII de l’annexe II de l’accord EEE. La présente décision ne s’applique donc pas au Liechtenstein.
 (3)
 Il convient dès lors de modifier les annexes I et II de l’accord EEE en conséquence,
 A ADOPTÉ LA PRÉSENTE DÉCISION:
 Article premier
 Le tiret suivant est ajouté au point 52 [règlement (CE) no 2073/2005 de la Commission] de la partie 6.2 du chapitre I de l’annexe I de l’accord EEE:
 «—
 32014 R 0217: règlement (UE) no 217/2014 de la Commission du 7 mars 2014 (JO L 69 du 8.3.2014, p. 93).»
 Article 2
 Le tiret suivant est ajouté au point 54zzzj [règlement (CE) no 2073/2005 de la Commission] du chapitre XII de l’annexe II de l’accord EEE:
 «—
 32014 R 0217: règlement (UE) no 217/2014 de la Commission du 7 mars 2014 (JO L 69 du 8.3.2014, p. 93).»
 Article 3
 Les textes du règlement (UE) no 217/2014 en langues islandaise et norvégienne, à publier dans le supplément EEE du Journal officiel de l’Union européenne, font foi.
 Article 4
 La présente décision entre en vigueur le 1er novembre 2014, pour autant que toutes les notifications prévues à l’article 103, paragraphe 1, de l’accord EEE aient été faites (2).
 Article 5
 La présente décision est publiée dans la partie EEE et dans le supplément EEE du Journal officiel de l’Union européenne.
 Fait à Bruxelles, le 24 octobre 2014.
 Par le Comité mixte de l’EEE
 Le président
 Kurt JÄGER
 (1) JO L 69 du 8.3.2014, p. 93.
 (2) Pas d’obligations constitutionnelles signalées.


type: other

text:
Talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari mressqa mis-Sad Najwyższy (il-Polonja) fit-3 ta’ Lulju 2019 – M.F. vs J.M.
 (Kawża C-508/19)
 Rikorrent: M.F.
 It-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 19(1), l-Artikolu 2, l-Artikolu 4(3) u l-Artikolu 6(3) TUE, moqrija flimkien mal-Artikolu 47 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali u t-tielet paragrafu tal-Artikolu 267 TFUE, għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li, fil-kuntest tal-proċeduri għall-konstatazzjoni ta’ nuqqas ta’ eżistenza ta’ relazzjoni ta’ xogħol, qorti tal-aħħar istanza ta’ Stat Membru tista’ tikkonstata li ma għandux il-kwalità ta’ mħallef id-destinatarju ta’ att li, filwaqt li jaħtar lil dan fil-kariga ta’ mħallef f’din il-qorti, ġie adottat abbażi ta’ dispożizzjonijiet li jmorru kontra l-prinċipju ta’ protezzjoni ġudizzjarja effettiva jew b’mod inkompatibbli mal-imsemmi prinċipju, meta jsir intenzjonalment ostakolu għall-eżami ta’ din il-kwistjoni qabel ma jiġi kkonsenjat l-imsemmi att?
 It-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 19(1), l-Artikolu 2, l-Artikolu 4(3) TUE u l-Artikolu 47 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali, moqrija flimkien mal-Artikolu 267 TFUE, għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li hemm ksur tal-prinċipju ta’ protezzjoni ġudizzjarja effettiva meta att ta’ ħatra għall-kariga ta’ mħallef jinħareġ wara li l-qorti nazzjonali tkun għamlet domanda preliminari għall-interpretazzjoni tad-dritt tal-Unjoni Ewropea, li r-risposta tagħha hija suġġetta għall-evalwazzjoni tal-kompatibbiltà mad-dritt tal-Unjoni tad-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li l-applikazzjoni tagħha għamlitha possibbli li jiġi kkonsenjat l-att imsemmi?
 It-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 19(1), l-Artikolu 2, l-Artikolu 4(3) u l-Artikolu 6(3) TUE kif ukoll l-Artikolu 47 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li hemm ksur tal-prinċipju ta’ protezzjoni ġudizzjarja effettiva minħabba l-assenza ta’ garanzija tad-dritt għall-qorti, meta att ta’ ħatra għall-kariga ta’ mħallef jinħareġ wara proċedura ta’ ħatra mwettqa bi ksur flagranti tad-dispożizzjonijiet legali tal-imsemmi Stat li jirregolaw il-ħatra tal-imħallfin?
 It-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 19(1), l-Artikolu 2, l-Artikolu 4(3) TUE u l-Artikolu 47 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali moqrija flimkien mat-tielet paragrafu tal-Artikolu 267 TFUE, għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li hemm ksur tal-prinċipju ta’ protezzjoni ġudizzjarja effettiva meta l-leġiżlatur nazzjonali joħloq, f’qorti tal-aħħar istanza ta’ Stat Membru, entità organizzattiva li ma tikkostitwixxix qorti fis-sens tad-dritt tal-Unjoni?
 It-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 19(1), l-Artikolu 2, l-Artikolu 4(3) TUE u l-Artikolu 47 tal-Karta tad-Drittijiet Fundamentali moqrija flimkien mat-tielet paragrafu tal-Artikolu 267 TFUE, għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li l-kwistjonijiet relatati mal-eżistenza ta’ relazzjoni ta’ xogħol u mal-kwalità ta’ mħallef tad-destinatarju ta’ att li jaħtru għall-kariga ta’ mħallef ta’ qorti tal-aħħar istanza ta’ Stat Membru ma jistgħux jiġu deċiżi minn entità organizzattiva ta’ din il-qorti tal-aħħar istanza, liema entità, kompetenti abbażi tad-dritt nazzjonali tal-imsemmi Stat, hija magħmula esklużivament minn persuni li l-atti ta’ ħatra tagħhom huma vvizzjati bid-difetti indikati fid-domandi 2 sa 4, b’mod li ma tkunx qorti fis-sens tad-dritt tal-Unjoni, iżda entità organizzattiva oħra ta’ din il-qorti tal-aħħar istanza, liema qorti tissodisfa min-naħa tagħha r-rekwiżiti li għalihom id-dritt tal-Unjoni jissuġġetta l-eżistenza ta’ qorti?


jurisdiction: US

text:
 115 HR 7037 IH: State Flood Mitigation Revolving Fund Act of 2018
 U.S. House of Representatives
 2018-10-05
 text/xml
 EN
 Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.
 I115th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 7037IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESOctober 5, 2018Mr. Crist (for himself and Mr. Williams) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial ServicesA BILLTo amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to allow the Administrator of the Federal
 Emergency Management Agency to provide capitalization grants to States to
 establish revolving funds to provide funding assistance to reduce flood
 risks, and for other purposes.
 1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the State Flood Mitigation Revolving Fund Act of 2018. 2.State revolving loan funds for flood mitigationChapter I of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4011 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
 1326.State revolving loan funds for flood mitigation
 (a)DefinitionsIn this section— (1)the term Community Rating System means the community rating system carried out under section 1315(b);
 (2)the term eligible State means a State, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; (3)the term insular area means—
 (A)Guam; (B)American Samoa;
 (C)the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; (D)the Federated States of Micronesia;
 (E)the Republic of the Marshall Islands; (F)the Republic of Palau; and
 (G)the United States Virgin Islands; (4)the term intended use plan means a plan prepared under subsection (d)(1);
 (5)the term low-income geographic area means an area described in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 301(a) of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3161(a));
 (6)the term low-income homeowner means the owner of a primary residence, the household income of which in a taxable year is not more than 80 percent of the median income for the area in which the residence is located;
 (7)the term participating State means an eligible State that— (A)has entered into an agreement under subsection (b)(1); and
 (B)agrees to comply with the requirements of this section; (8)the term pre-FIRM building means a building for which construction or substantial improvement occurred before the effective date of the initial Flood Insurance Rate Map published by the Administrator under section 1360 for the area in which the building is located;
 (9)the term repetitive loss structure has the meaning given the term in section 1370(a); (10)the term severe repetitive loss property has the meaning given the term in section 1307(h);
 (11)the term State loan fund means a flood mitigation assistance revolving loan fund established by an eligible State under this section; and
 (12)the term tribal government means the recognized government of an Indian tribe, or the governing body of an Alaska Native regional or village corporation, that has been determined eligible to receive services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
 (b)General authority
 (1)In generalThe Administrator may enter into an agreement with an eligible State to provide a capitalization grant for the eligible State to establish a revolving fund that will provide funding assistance to help homeowners, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and communities reduce flood risk in order to decrease—
 (A)the loss of life and property; (B)the cost of flood insurance; and
 (C)Federal disaster payments. (2)Timing of deposit and agreements for distribution of funds (A)In generalNot later than the last day of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which a capitalization grant is made to a participating State under paragraph (1), the participating State shall—
 (i)deposit the grant in the State loan fund of the State; and (ii)enter into one or more binding agreements that provide for the State to distribute the grant funds for purposes authorized under subsection (c) such that—
 (I)in the case of the initial grant made under this section to a State, not less than 75 percent of the amount of the grant funds shall be distributed before the expiration of the 24-month period beginning upon deposit of such funds in the State loan fund of the State; and
 (II)in the case of any subsequent grant made under this section to a State, not less than 90 percent of the amount of the grant funds made under the capitalization grant shall be distributed before the expiration of the 12-month period beginning upon deposit of such funds in the State loan fund of the State.
 (B)NoncomplianceExcept as provided in subparagraph (C), if a participating State does not comply with subparagraph (A) with respect to a grant, the Administrator shall reallocate the grant in accordance with paragraph (3)(B).
 (C)ExceptionThe Administrator may not reallocate any funds under subparagraph (B) to a participating State that violated subparagraph (A) with respect to a grant made during the same fiscal year in which the funds to be reallocated were originally made available.
 (3)Allocation
 (A)In generalThe Administrator shall allocate amounts made available to carry out this section to participating States—
 (i)for the participating States to deposit in the State loan funds established by the participating States; and
 (ii)except as provided in paragraph (6), in accordance with the requirements described in subparagraph (B).
 (B)RequirementsThe requirements described in this subparagraph are as follows: (i)Fifty percent of the total amount made available under subparagraph (A) shall be allocated so that each participating State receives the percentage amount that is obtained by dividing the number of properties that were insured under the national flood insurance program in that State in the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year in which the amount is allocated by the total number of properties that were insured under the national flood insurance program in the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year in which the amount is allocated.
 (ii)Fifty percent of the total amount made available under subparagraph (A) shall be allocated so that each participating State receives a percentage of funds that is equal to the product obtained under clause (iii)(IV) with respect to that participating State after following the procedures described in clause (iii).
 (iii)The procedures described in this clause are as follows: (I)Divide the total amount collected in premiums for properties insured under the national flood insurance program in each participating State during the previous fiscal year by the number of properties insured under the national flood insurance program in that State for that fiscal year.
 (II)Add together each quotient obtained under subclause (I). (III)For each participating State, divide the quotient obtained under subclause (I) with respect to that State by the sum obtained under subclause (II).
 (IV)For each participating State, multiply the amount that is 50 percent of the total amount made available under subparagraph (A) by the quotient obtained under subclause (III).
 (4)No revolving fund required
 (A)In generalNotwithstanding any other provision of this section, and subject to subparagraph (B), a participating State that receives less than $4,000,000 under paragraph (3)(B) in a fiscal year may distribute the funds directly in the form of grants or technical assistance for a purpose described in subsection (c)(2), without regard to whether the State has established a State loan fund.
 (B)State matchingA participating State that exercises the authority under subparagraph (A) in a fiscal year shall provide matching funds from non-Federal sources in an amount that is equal to 15 percent of the amount that the State receives under paragraph (3)(B) in that fiscal year for purposes described in subparagraph (A).
 (5)Allocation of remaining fundsAfter allocating amounts made available to carry out this section for a fiscal year in accordance with paragraph (3), the Administrator shall allocate any remaining amounts made available for that fiscal year to participating States, using the procedures described in clauses (i) through (iii) of paragraph (3)(B).
 (6)Allocation for tribal governments and insular areasThe Administrator shall reserve not less than 5.0 percent of the amount made available to carry out this section in a fiscal year to enter into grant agreements with tribal governments and insular areas, with the grant funds to be distributed—
 (A)according to criteria established by the Administrator; and (B)for a purpose described in subsection (c)(2).
 (7)Administrative costs; technical assistanceThe Administrator shall reserve not more than 2.5 percent of the amount made available to carry out this section in a fiscal year—
 (A)for administrative costs incurred in carrying out this section; and (B)to provide technical assistance to recipients of grants under this section.
 (c)Use of funds
 (1)In generalAmounts deposited in a State loan fund, including repayments of loans made from the fund and interest earned on the amounts in the fund, shall be used—
 (A)consistent with paragraphs (2) and (3) and subsection (g), to provide financial assistance for— (i)homeowners, businesses, and nonprofit organizations that are eligible to participate in the national flood insurance program; and
 (ii)any local government that participates in the national flood insurance program; (B)as a source of revenue and security for leveraged loans, the proceeds of which shall be deposited in the State loan fund; or
 (C)for the sale of bonds as security for payment of the principal and interest on revenue or general obligation bonds issued by the participating State to provide matching funds under subsection (g), if the proceeds from the sale of the bonds are deposited in the State loan fund.
 (2)PurposesA recipient of financial assistance provided through amounts from a State loan fund— (A)shall use the amounts to reduce—
 (i)flood risk; or (ii)potential flood claims submitted under the national flood insurance program;
 (B)shall use the amounts in a cost-effective manner under requirements established by the State, which may require an applicant for financial assistance to submit any information that the State considers relevant or necessary before the date on which the applicant receives the assistance;
 (C)shall use the amounts for projects that— (i)meet design and construction standards established by the Administrator;
 (ii)are located in communities that— (I)participate in the national flood insurance program; and
 (II)have developed a State, local, or tribal government hazard mitigation plan that has been approved by the Administrator under section 1366;
 (iii)
 (I)address a repetitive loss structure or a severe repetitive loss property; or (II)address flood risk in the 500-year floodplain, areas of residual flood risk, or other areas of potential flood risk, as identified by the Administrator; and
 (iv)address current risk and anticipate future risk, such as sea-level rise; (D)may use the amounts—
 (i)for projects relating to— (I)structural elevation;
 (II)floodproofing; (III)the relocation or removal of buildings from the 100-year floodplain or other areas of flood risk, including the acquisition of properties for such a purpose;
 (IV)environmental restoration activities that directly reduce flood risk; (V)any eligible activity described in subparagraphs (A) through (G) of section 1366(c)(3); or
 (VI)other activities determined appropriate by the Administrator; (ii)with respect to a project described in clause (i), only for expenditures directly related to a project described in that clause, including expenditures for planning, design, and associated pre-construction activities; and
 (iii)to acquire, for the purposes of permanent protection, land, buildings, or a conservation easement from a willing seller or grantor;
 (E)may not use the amounts— (i)to construct buildings or expand existing buildings unless the activity is for the purpose of flood mitigation;
 (ii)to improve any structure, unless the recipient has obtained flood insurance coverage in an amount at least equal to the lesser of the eligible project costs or the maximum insurable limit for the structure under the national flood insurance program coverage for the structure, which coverage shall be maintained for the useful life of the structure;
 (iii)to improve a residential property with an appraised value that is not less than 125 percent of the limitation on the maximum original principal obligation of a conventional mortgage that may be purchased by the Federal National Mortgage Association or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation in the area in which the property is located, as established under section 302(b)(2) of the Federal National Mortgage Association Charter Act (12 U.S.C. 1717(b)(2)) and section 305(a)(2) of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act (12 U.S.C. 1454(a)(2));
 (iv)for the direct benefit of a homeowner if the annual household adjusted gross income of the homeowner during the previous fiscal year was not less than $200,000, as annually adjusted by the Administrator to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor and rounded to the nearest $25; or
 (v)to acquire real property or an interest in real property unless the property is purchased from a willing seller; and
 (F)shall, in the use of such amounts, give priority to the maximum extent practicable to projects that assist low-income homeowners and low-income geographical areas.
 (d)Intended use plans
 (1)In generalAfter providing the opportunity for public review and comment, each participating State shall annually prepare a plan that identifies, for the year following the date of issuance of the intended use plan, the intended uses of the amounts available in the State loan fund of the participating State.
 (2)Consultation during preparationEach participating State, in preparing an intended use plan, shall ensure that the State agency with primary responsibility for floodplain management—
 (A)provides oversight with respect to the preparation of the intended use plan; and (B)consults with any other appropriate State agency, including agencies responsible for coastal and environmental management.
 (3)ContentsA participating State shall, in each intended use plan— (A)include—
 (i)an explanation of the mitigation and resiliency benefits the State intends to achieve, including by—
 (I)reducing future damage and loss associated with flooding; (II)reducing the number of severe repetitive loss properties and repetitive loss structures in the State;
 (III)decreasing the number of flood insurance claims in the State; and (IV)increasing the rating under the Community Rating System for communities in the State;
 (ii)information with respect to the availability of, and the application process for receiving, financial assistance from the State loan fund of the State;
 (iii)the criteria and methods established for the distribution of amounts from the State loan fund of the State;
 (iv)the amount of financial assistance that the State anticipates allocating to— (I)local government projects; and
 (II)projects for homeowners, business, or nonprofit organizations; (v)the expected terms of the assistance provided under clause (iv); and
 (vi)a description of the financial status of the State loan fund and the short-term and long-term goals of the State loan fund; and
 (B)provide, to the maximum extent practicable, that priority for the use of amounts from the State loan fund shall be given to projects that—
 (i)address severe repetitive loss properties and repetitive loss structures; (ii)assist low-income homeowners and low-income geographic areas; and
 (iii)address flood risk for pre-FIRM buildings. (4)PublicationEach participating State shall publish and periodically update a list of all projects receiving funding from the State loan fund of the State, which shall include identification of—
 (A)the community in which the project is located; (B)the type and amount of assistance provided for each project; and
 (C)the expected funding schedule and date of completion of each project. (e)Fund managementAmounts in a State loan fund shall—
 (1)remain available for providing financial assistance under this section until distributed; (2)if the amounts are not required for immediate distribution or expenditure, be invested in interest-bearing obligations; and
 (3)except as provided in subsection (i), include only— (A)amounts received from capitalization grants made under this section;
 (B)repayments of loans made from the fund; and (C)interest earned on amounts in the fund.
 (f)Matching funds
 (1)Full grantOn or before the date on which a participating State receives a capitalization grant, the State shall deposit into the State loan fund of the State, in addition to the amount of the capitalization grant, an amount from non-Federal sources that is not less than 10 percent of the total amount of the capitalization grant.
 (2)Reduced grantNotwithstanding paragraph (1), if a State deposits in the State loan fund of the State in connection a capitalization grant an amount from non-Federal sources that is less than 10 percent of the total amount of the capitalization grant that would otherwise be received by the State, the Administrator shall reduce the amount of the capitalization grant received by the State to the amount that is 10 times the amount so deposited and shall allocate such remaining grant amounts under subsection (b)(5) together with the amounts allocated under such subsection.
 (g)Types of assistanceUnless otherwise prohibited by State law, a participating State may use the amounts deposited into a State loan fund under this section only—
 (1)to make a loan, on the condition that— (A)the interest rate for the loan is not more than the market interest rate;
 (B)the recipient of the loan will begin making principal and interest payments on the loan not later than 1 year after the date on which the project for which the loan was made is completed;
 (C)the loan will be fully amortized not later than 20 years after the date on which the project for which the loan was made is completed, except that, in the case of a loan made for a project in a low-income geographic area or to a low-income homeowner, the State may provide a longer amortization period for the loan if that longer period—
 (i)ends on a date that is not later than 30 years after the date on which the project is completed; and
 (ii)is not longer than the expected design life of the project; (D)the recipient of the loan demonstrates, based on verified and documented information that, at the time the loan is consummated, that the recipient has a reasonable ability to repay the loan, according to its terms, except that this subparagraph may not be construed to authorize any reduction or limitation in efforts to comply with the requirements of subsection (c)(2)(E) (relating to priority for assistance for low-income homeowners and low-income geographical areas); and
 (E)payments of principal and interest with respect to the loan will be deposited into the State loan fund;
 (2)to buy or refinance the debt obligation of a local government at an interest rate that is not more than the market interest rate;
 (3)to guarantee, or purchase insurance for, a local obligation, the proceeds of which finance a project eligible for assistance under this section, if the guarantee or purchase, as applicable, would—
 (A)improve credit market access; or (B)reduce the interest rate with respect to the obligation;
 (4)as a source of revenue or as security for the payment of principal and interest on revenue or general obligation bonds issued by the State if the proceeds of the sale of the bonds will be deposited into the State loan fund; or
 (5)to earn interest on those amounts. (h)Assistance for low-Income homeowners and low-Income geographic areas (1)In generalNotwithstanding any other provision of this section, if a participating State uses amounts from a State loan fund to provide financial assistance under subsection (c) in a low-income geographic area or to a low-income homeowner, the State may provide additional subsidization to the recipient of the assistance, including forgiveness of the principal of a loan.
 (2)LimitationFor each fiscal year, the total amount of additional subsidization provided by a participating State under paragraph (1) may not exceed 30 percent of the amount of the capitalization grant allocated to the State for that fiscal year.
 (i)Administration of fund
 (1)In generalA participating State may combine the financial administration of a State loan fund with the financial administration of any other revolving fund established by the State if—
 (A)combining the administration of the funds would— (i)be convenient and avoid administrative costs; and
 (ii)not violate the law of the State; and (B)the Administrator determines that—
 (i)amounts obtained from a grant made under this section, amounts obtained from the repayment of a loan made from a State loan fund, and interest earned on amounts in a State loan fund will be—
 (I)accounted for separately from amounts from other revolving funds; and (II)used only for purposes authorized under this section; and
 (ii)after consulting with the appropriate State agencies, the authority to establish assistance priorities and carry out oversight and related activities, other than financial administration, with respect to flood assistance remains with the State agency with primary responsibility for floodplain management.
 (2)Administrative and technical costs
 (A)In generalFor each fiscal year, a participating State may use the amount described in subparagraph (B) to— (i)pay the reasonable costs of administration of the programs under this section, including the recovery of reasonable costs incurred in establishing a State loan fund;
 (ii)provide appropriate oversight of projects authorized under this section; and (iii)provide technical assistance and outreach to recipients in the State of amounts under this section, including with respect to updating hazard mitigation plans and participating in the Community Rating System, in an amount that is not more than 4 percent of the funds made available to the State under this section.
 (B)DescriptionThe amount described in this subparagraph is an amount equal to the sum of— (i)any fees collected by a participating State to recover the costs described in subparagraph (A)(i), regardless of the source; and
 (ii)the greatest of— (I)$400,000;
 (II)0.2 percent of the value of the State loan fund of a State, as of the date on which the valuation is made; and
 (III)an amount equal to 7 percent of all grant awards made to a participating State for the State loan fund of the State under this section for the fiscal year.
 (3)Audit and report
 (A)Audit requirementNot less frequently than biennially, each participating State shall conduct an audit of the State loan fund of the State.
 (B)ReportEach participating State shall submit to the Administrator a biennial report regarding the activities of the State under this section during the period covered by the report, including—
 (i)the result of any audit conducted by the State under subparagraph (A); and (ii)a review of the effectiveness of the State loan fund of the State with respect to—
 (I)the intended use plans of the State; and (II)meeting the objectives described in subsection (b)(1).
 (4)OversightIn conducting oversight with respect to State loan funds established under this section, the Administrator—
 (A)shall— (i)periodically audit the funds in accordance with procedures established by the Comptroller General of the United States; and
 (ii)not less frequently than once every 4 years, review each State loan fund to determine the effectiveness of the fund in reducing flood risk; and
 (B)may, at any time— (i)make recommendations to a participating State with respect to the administration of the State loan fund of the State; or
 (ii)require specific changes with respect to a State loan fund in order to improve the effectiveness of the fund.
 (j)Liability protectionsThe Federal Government shall not be liable for any claim based upon the exercise or performance of, or the failure to exercise or perform, a discretionary function or duty on the part of the Federal agency, or an employee of the Federal Government, in carrying out the provision of this section.
 (k)RegulationsThe Administrator shall promulgate such guidance or regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section, including guidance or regulations that—
 (1)ensure that each participating State to which funds are allocated under this section uses the funds as efficiently as possible;
 (2)reduce, to the maximum extent practicable, waste, fraud, and abuse with respect to the implementation of this section; and
 (3)require any party that receives funds directly or indirectly under this section, including a participating State and a recipient of amounts from a State loan fund, to use procedures with respect to the management of the funds that conform to generally accepted accounting standards.
 (l)Authorization of appropriationsThere are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for fiscal years 2019 through 2028..
 3.Consideration of mitigation measures funded by State loan funds in flood insurance premium rates
 (a)Estimated ratesClause (ii) of section 1307(a)(1)(A) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(1)(A)(ii)) is amended by inserting and any activities assisted through amounts from a State loan fund established pursuant to section 1326, after similar measures,.
 (b)Chargeable ratesParagraph (1) of section 1308(b) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4015(b)(1)) is amended by striking and similar measures and inserting similar measures, and any activities assisted through amounts from a State loan fund established pursuant to section 1326.


type: wikipedia

text:
Eger (pronunție „Egher”) este un oraș în districtul Eger, județul Heves, Ungaria, având o populație de de locuitori (2011).
 Demografie
 Conform recensământului din 2011 orașul Eger avea de locuitori. Din punct de vedere etnic majoritatea locuitorilor (%) erau maghiari, cu o minoritate de romi (%). Apartenența etnică nu este cunoscută în cazul a % din locuitori. Majoritatea locuitorilor sunt romano-catolici (%), cu minorități de persoane fără religie (%), reformați (%) și atei (%). Pentru % din locuitori nu este cunoscută apartenența confesională.
 Monumente
 Catedrala Sfântul Ioan din Eger
 Minaretul din Eger
 Personalități născute aici
 Alexandru Ziffer (1880 – 1962), pictor.
 Note
 Orașe din județul Heves
 Eponime ale asteroizilor
 Eger


text:
 23.11.2013
 SV
 Europeiska unionens officiella tidning
 C 344/54
 Tribunalens dom av den 8 oktober 2013 — Rådet mot AY
 (Mål T-167/12 P) (1)
 (Överklagande - Personalmål - Tjänstemän - Befordran - Befordringsförfarandet 2010 - Jämförelse av kvalifikationerna - Fortbildning - Framgångsrikt avlagt prov efter deltagande i det utbildningsprogram som genomgås inom ramen för förfarandet för certifiering av tjänstemän i tjänstegruppen AST för tillsättning i tjänstegrupp AD - Missuppfattning av bevisning)
 2013/C 344/96
 Rättegångsspråk: franska
 Parter
 Klagande: Europeiska unionens råd (ombud: M. Bauer och A. Jensen)
 Övrig part i målet: AY (Bousval, Belgien) (ombud: advokaten É. Boigelot)
 Saken
 Överklagande av personaldomstolens (första avdelningen) dom av den 8 februari 2012 i mål F-23/11, AY mot rådet (REUP 2012, I-A-0000 och II-A-0000), med yrkande om delvis upphävande av denna dom.
 Domslut
 1.
 Personaldomstolens (första avdelningen) dom av den 8 februari 2012 i mål F-23/11, AY mot rådet, upphävs i den del personaldomstolen ogiltigförklarade rådets beslut att inte befordra AY till lönegrad AST 9 under befordringsförfarandet 2010 och i den del personaldomstolen förpliktade rådet att ersätta samtliga rättegångskostnader (punkterna 1 och 4 i domslutet).
 2.
 Målet återförvisas till personaldomstolen.
 3.
 Beslut om rättegångskostnader kommer att meddelas senare.
 (1) EUT C 180, 27.7.2012


text:
 7.9.2015
 MT
 Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea
 C 294/10
 Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-Ġustizzja (It-Tieni Awla) tat-2 ta’ Lulju 2015 (talba għal deċiżjoni preliminari tal-Vrhovno sodišče – is-Slovenja) – NLB Leasing d.o.o. vs Republika Slovenija
 (Kawża C-209/14) (1)
 ((Rinviju għal deċiżjoni preliminari - VAT - Direttiva 2006/112/KE - Kunsinna ta’ oġġetti jew provvista ta’ servizzi - Kuntratt ta’ kiri (leasing) - Restituzzjoni lil sid il-kera ta’ proprjetà immobbli li hija s-suġġett ta’ kuntratt ta’ leasing - Kunċett ta’ “kanċellazzjoni, ċaħda jew nuqqas ta’ pagament totali jew parzjali” - Dritt ta’ sid il-kera għat-tnaqqis tal-bażi taxxabbli - Taxxa doppja - Provvisti distinti - Prinċipju ta’ newtralità fiskali))
 (2015/C 294/13)
 Lingwa tal-kawża: is-Sloven
 Qorti tar-rinviju
 Vrhovno sodišče
 Partijiet fil-kawża prinċipali
 Rikorrenti: NLB Leasing d.o.o.
 Konvenuta: Republika Slovenija
 Dispożittiv
 1)
 L-Artikoli 2(1), 14 u 24(1) tad-Direttiva tal-Kunsill 2006/112/KE, tat-28 ta’ Novembru 2006, dwar is-sistema komuni ta’ taxxa fuq il-valur miżjud, għandhom jiġu interpretati fis-sens li fil-każ li kuntratt ta’ leasing dwar proprjetà immobbli jkun jipprovdi jew it-trasferiment tad-dritt tal-proprjetà lil min ikun qiegħed jikri fit-tmiem dan il-kuntratt, jew li jitqiegħdu għad-dispożizzjoni ta’ min ikun qiegħed jikri l-karatteristiċi essenzjali tad-dritt tal-proprjetà ta’ din il-proprjetà immobbli, b’mod partikolari billi tiġi ttrasferita lil dan tal-aħħar il-parti l-kbira tal-benefiċċji u tar-riskji inerenti għall-proprjetà legali tal-imsemmija proprjetà immobbli, u s-somma aġġornata tal-pagamenti tkun prattikament identika għall-valur fis-suq tal-proprjetà, it-tranżazzjoni li tirriżulta minn tali kuntratt għandha tkun ekwivalenti għal tranżazzjoni ta’ akkwist ta’ investiment.
 2)
 L-Artikolu 90(1) tad-Direttiva 2006/112 għandu jiġi interpretat fis-sens li huwa ma jippermettix lil persuna taxxabbli li tnaqqas il-bażi taxxabbli tagħha meta din tal-aħħar effettivament tkun irċeviet il-ħlasijiet kollha bħala korrispettiv tal-provvista li hija pprovdiet jew meta, mingħajr ma l-kuntratt ġie miċħud jew ikkanċellat, il-parti l-oħra għall-kuntratt ma għadhiex responsabbli li tħallasha l-prezz miftiehem.
 3)
 Il-prinċipju ta’ newtralità fiskali għandu jiġi interpretat fis-sens li huwa ma jipprekludix li, minn naħa, provvista ta’ leasing li tirrigwarda beni immobbli u, min-naħa l-oħra, it-trasferiment ta’ dawn il-beni immobbli lil terz (għall-kuntratt ta’ leasing) ikunu suġġetti għal tassazzjoni distinta għal-finijiet tat-taxxa fuq il-valur miżjud, sa fejn dawn it-tranżazzjonijiet ma jkunux jistgħux jitqiesu bħala li jiffurmaw provvista unika, u dan għandu jiġi evalwat mill-qorti tar-rinviju.
 (1) ĠU C 202, 30.06.2014.