type: wikipedia

text:
Северна Америка е е третият по големина континент в света и четвъртият по население. Разположен е почти изцяло в Северното полукълбо и малка част – в Южното. Може да бъде описан и като северния субконтинент от целия континент Америка. Граничи на север със Северния ледовит океан, на изток с Атлантическия океан, на юг с Южна Америка и Карибско море и на запад с Тихия океан. Тъй като Гренландия се намира на Северноамериканската тактонска плоча, се приема за част от континента.
 Северна Америка покрива около 24 709 000 km2, което е около 16,5% от площта на сушата и 4,8% от цялата земна повърхност. Северна Америка е третият най-голям континент след Азия и Африка и четвъртият най-населен след Азия, Африка и Европа. През 2013 г. населението ѝ е било пресметнато на близо 579 000 000 души в двайсетте и три свободни държави, което е около 7,5% от населението на света.
 Първите хора, населили Северна Америка, са от последната ледникова епоха, които са преминали през Берингия преди около 40 000 до 17 000 години. Смята се, че така нареченият палеоиндийски период е продължил до преди около 10 000 години. Първите европейци, които стигат до Америка (ако изключим Гренландия), са викингите, стигнали тук през около 1000 г. сл. Хр. Христофор Колумб пристига през 1492 г., като предизвиква трансатлантически обмен, което води до европейска колонизация по време на Великите географски открития. Днес културните и етнически модели отразяват взаимодействието между европейските колонисти, коренното население, африканските роби, емигрантите от Европа, Азия и Южна Америка и техните потомци.
 Физическа география
 Разположение
 Северна Америка е разположена изцяло в западното полукълбо и е най-крайният западен континент на Земята. Единствено Алеутският архипелаг навлиза в Източното полукълбо. Същевременно Северна Америка се намира изцяло в северното полукълбо, заемаща северната част на сушата, наречена Америка, която понякога се разглежда като цял континент. Чрез остров Гренландия Северна Америка е най-близко разположената суша до Северния полюс. През континента минават Северната полярна и Северната тропична окръжност.
 На запад Северна Америка граничи с Тихия океан, който я отделя от Азия, а Атлантическия океан, разположен на изток от континента, го разделя от Европа. На юг Северна Америка се мие от Карибско море, където е свързана с Южна Америка чрез Панамския провлак. За граница между двата континента обикновено се приема вододелът на Дариен, по който преминава и държавната граница между Панама и Колумбия. На север Северна Америка граничи със Северния ледовит океан.
 По редица географски и културно-исторически причини в някои случаи Северна Америка се отнася само за Канада и САЩ (понякога също и Мексико), а останалите страни се отделят в Централна Америка или Мезоамерика и Антилски острови.
 Бреговата линия на Северна Америка е силно разчленена – в нея се врязват големи водни басейни, като Мексиканския залив, заливите Хъдсън и Сейнт Лорънс, Калифорнийския залив. Край бреговете на континента има множество острови – Канадският арктичен архипелаг, Бахамските острови, Търкс и Кайкос, Големите и Малките Антилски острови, Алеутските острови, Александровият архипелаг, Нюфаундленд. Гренландия, най-големият остров в света, също се смята за част от Северна Америка, тъй като е свързан с континента в геоложко отношение. Това не е така при разположените върху Средноатлантическия хребет Бермудски острови, които обаче също обикновено се причисляват към Северна Америка, поради историческите им и културни връзки с континента.
 Релеф
 Северна Америка се разделя на четири големи географски области. Вътрешните равнини са разположени в центъра на континента в ивица, свързваща Мексиканския залив на юг с Канадска Арктика на север.
 Западно от тях се намират Кордилерите, младонагънати планински вериги, успоредни на тихоокеанския бряг от Аляска до Панамския провлак. В най-широката си част Кордилерите са разделени от Големия басейн на две части – Скалистите планини на изток и Бреговите хребети на запад. В северната част на Кордилерите се намира и най-високият връх в Северна Америка – Денали (6194 m).
 Североизточната част на континента е заета от издигнатото, но относително равнинно плато на Канадския щит. Южно от него релефът е разнороден, включвайки планинската верига Апалачи и равнините по Атлантическото крайбрежие.
 Геология
 По-голямата част от Северна Америка е разположена върху Северноамериканската тектонична плоча. Основната част от Централна Америка с част от Антилските острови се намират върху Карибската плоча, което дава основание на някои учени да разглеждат Централна Америка като самостоятелен континент. Калифорнийският полуостров и части от щата Калифорния се намират върху Тихоокеанската плоча, срещаща се със Северноамериканската в разлома Сан Андреас.
 Геоложкото ядро на Северна Америка включва древната платформа Лаврентия, формирана през протерозоя преди 1,5 до 1 милиард години. Най-обширното оголване на тази платформа е Канадският щит. От късния палеозой до ранния мезозой Северна Америка е свързана с други съвременни континенти в суперконтинента Пангея. Сред ефектите от формирането на Пангея са Апалачите, формирани преди 480 милиона години, което ги прави едни от най-старите планини в света.
 Когато Пангея започва да се разделя преди около 200 милиона години, Северна Америка става част от Лавразия, а в средната креда се отделя от Евразия в самостоятелен континент. Кордилерите започват да се образуват преди между 80 и 55 милиона години при процеса, наричан Ларамидска орогенеза. Образуването на Панамския провлак свързва континента с Южна Америка преди около три милиона години. Големите езера и повечето сладководни басейни в северната част на континента са формирани сравнително скоро, при оттеглянето на ледниците преди около 10 хиляди години.
 Климат
 Климатът в Северна Америка варира от умерен (на север) до тропичен (в Централна Америка); в крайбрежните райони е океански, във вътрешността – континентален. Средна температура на въздуха: януари – от -38 °C (северната част на Канадския арктичен архипелаг) до 20 °С (полуостров Флорида и Мексико); юли – от -40 °С (Северна Канада) до 32 °С (югозападната част на САЩ). Най-много валежи падат по тихоокеанското крайбрежие на Аляска и Канада и в северозападната част на САЩ (2000 – 3000 mm годишно); в югоизточните части на Северна Америка – 1000 – 1500 mm годишно, в централните райони – 400 – 1200 mm годишно, в междупланинските долини на субтропичните и тропичните части на Кордилерите – 100 – 200 mm годишно. На север от 40° – 44° с.ш. през зимата има устойчива снежна покривка. Снежната граница е на височина от 100 m (в Гренландия) до 4600 m (склоновете на Попокатепетъл). Общата площ на ледниците е 2 млн. km2.
 Езера
 В Северна Америка има много и разнообразни езера. Там се намират Големите американски езера (Горното езеро, езерата Мичиган, Хюрън, Ери, Онтарио), Голямото робско езеро, Малкото робско езеро, езерата Шамплен, Сен Клер. Само в Канада има повече от 30 000 езера с площ над 3 km2. В централната част на Кордилерите е разположено Голямото солено езеро.
 История
 Предколумбов период
 Според преобладаващото мнение предците на индианците, коренното население на Северна Америка, се преселват на континента от Азия по време на последната ледникова епоха, най-вероятно през съществувалия по това време провлак Берингия, а може би и използвайки примитивни лодки. Възможно е заселването да е протекло на няколко вълни, включващи етнически разнородни общности. Ескимосите в най-северните части на континента вероятно се заселват значително по-късно.
 Преди достигането на Америка от европейците местните жители формират различни обществени структури – от групи от по няколко семейства до обширни империи. Те са разпределени в няколко културни зони, които приблизително съответстват на географските и екологични зони, определящи начина на живот на населението. Например, във Великите равнини основа на икономиката е ловът на бизони, а в Мезоамерика – земеделието. Индианските етнически групи могат да се класифицират и по техния език, макар че народи със сродни езици не винаги имат сходна материална култура или обществено устройство, а понякога живеят и в отдалечени един от друг региони.
 По време на няколкото хилядолетия, през които индианците обитават Северна Америка, културите се променят и изместват. Една от най-древните известни археологически култури е културата Кловис в съвременния щат Ню Мексико. Други по-късни култури са Мисисипската култура и Културата на строителите на могили в басейна на река Мисисипи и културата Анасази в югозападната част на Съединените щати. Културите южно от тях имат сравнително развито земеделие и одомашняват някои от широко разпространените днес земеделски растения, като царевицата, доматите и тиквичките.
 В резултат на развитието на земеделско стопанство в южните части на континента, именно там са достигнати много от културните постижения на предколумбова Северна Америка. Така цивилизацията на маите създава своя писменост, изгражда монументални пирамиди и храмове, използва сложен календар и развива концепцията за нулата около 400 година, само няколко столетия след месопотамците. При пристигането на първите европейци в началото на 16 век културата на маите все още съществува, но политическото надмощие в региона вече е в ръцете на ацтеките, чиято столица Теночтитлан е на север в Мексиканската долина.
 Колониална епоха
 Счита се, че първият европеец, достигнал Северна Америка, е викингът Лейф Ериксон – около 1000 г. Същинското откриване на континента обаче е осъществено в хода на Великите географски открития, когато през 1492 година испански флот, воден от Христофор Колумб, достига Бахамските острови. Вероятно до самия материк първи достига мореплавателят Джовани Кабото през 1497 г. (според някои учени – само до остров Нюфаундленд). Безспорно е, че по време на четвъртата си експедиция през 1502 г. Колумб достига до бреговете на днешна Никарагуа. Империята на ацтеките, най-силната северноамериканска държава по това време, е завладяна от испанския конкистадор Ернан Кортес през 1521 година.
 През следващите три века Испания, Англия и Франция, в по-малка степен Нидерландия, Русия и Дания, често воювайки помежду си, си разпределят цялата територия на Северна Америка.
 Колонизацията на Северна Америка променя рязко историческото развитие на континента. Числеността на местното индианско население намалява рязко, главно в резултат на европейски заразни болести, към които то няма имунитет. Местната култура се изменя драстично. Променя се и причастността на индианските общности към политически и културни групи, като някои езикови групи изчезват, а други се изменят бързо.
 Образуване на независими държави
 В края на 18 век и началото на 19 век в Северна Америка се възникват няколко движения за независимост от европейските колониални сили, които довеждат до създаването на много от съвременните самостоятелни държави на континента. През 1776 година независимост от Великобритания обявяват 13 от нейните колонии на северния атлантически бряг, поставяйки началото на Съединените американски щати. Канада се образува след обединението на северните колонии на Великобритания и Франция. През 1810 година независимост обявява Мексико, а през 1823 година от него се отделя Гватемала.
 Най-нова история
 Политическа география
 В Северна Америка има три големи по площ и население държави – Канада, Мексико и Съединените американски щати (САЩ). В южната част на континента, често наричана Централна Америка, има няколко сравнително малки държави – Белиз, Коста Рика, Салвадор, Гватемала, Хондурас, Никарагуа и Панама. Понякога страните в Северна и Южна Америка, с изключение на САЩ и Канада, се наричат със сборния термин Латинска Америка.
 Икономика
 В икономическо отношение Канада и Съединените щати са най-развитите страни в Северна Америка, следвани от Мексико, определяна като нова индустриална страна. Страните от Централна Америка и Антилските острови се намират на различно ниво на икономическо и социално развитие. Например, някои малки островни държави, като Барбадос, Тринидад и Тобаго и Антигуа и Барбуда имат по-висок брутен вътрешен продукт (БВП) на глава от населението от Мексико. Панама и Коста Рика имат значително по-високи стойности на БВП на глава от населението и на индекса на човешко развитие от останалите централноамерикански страни.
 Култура
 Основните езици, говорени в Северна Америка, са английският, испанският и френският. Англоезични са Съединените щати, Канада (където английският и френският са официални езици), Белиз и част от държавите на Антилските острови. Мексико и повечето страни от Централна Америка са испаноезични и са част от обхващащия и почти всички страни в Южна Америка културен регион на Латинска Америка.
 Френският език играе важна роля в историята на Северна Америка, като и в наши дни запазва значението си в някои региони. Той е един от официалните езици в Канада и нейната провинция Ню Брънзуик, както и на провинция Квебек, където 95% от населението говори френски като първи или втори език. Френскоезични общности има и в някои други части на Канада, в американския щат Луизиана, Сейнт Лусия, Доминика. Френският е официалният език във френските територии на Антилите, както и в Сен Пиер и Микелон и Хаити (наред с хаитянския креолски).
 Бележки
 Библиография
 Вижте също
 Откриване на Америка
 Хронологична таблица за откриване и изследване на Северна Америка (X - XVIII в.)
 Хронологична таблица за откриване и изследване на Северна Америка (XIX - XX в.)
 Мезоамерика


type: other

jurisdiction: US

text: b"Office\xc2\xa0of Inspector General\n\n\n\n FY 2012 Financial Statement\n Management Letter\n\n A13-04A\n\n\n\n\n March 2013\n\n\nFEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION\n\x0c FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION\n 800 North Capitol Street, N.W.\n Washington, DC 20573\n\n\n March 15, 2013\n\nOffice of Inspector General\n\n\nTO: Chairman Richard A. Lidinsky Jr.\n Commissioner Mario Cordero\n Commissioner William P. Doyle\n Commissioner Rebecca F. Dye\n Commissioner Michael A. Khouri\n\n\n\nFROM: /Dana Rooney-Fisher/\n Interim Inspector General\n\n\nSUBJECT: Transmittal of the FY 2012 Management Letter\n\n When performing an audit of an agency\xe2\x80\x99s major financial systems and accounting\nprocesses, auditors often detect deficiencies in internal controls that do not rise to a level\nof seriousness to be reported in the auditor\xe2\x80\x99s opinion. These findings are communicated\nto the auditee in a management letter. Attached is a copy of the FY 2012 Financial\nStatement Management Letter that reports on such findings.\n\n During this years\xe2\x80\x99 annual review, there were no new findings or recommendations\nmade. The auditors followed up on prior year findings and closed six of seven\nrecommendations. The recommendation that remains open is for the Commission to\nimplement formal procedures to track civil penalties between the Office of General\nCounsel and the Office of Budget and Finance. The auditors will monitor and opine on\nmanagement\xe2\x80\x99s progress on this recommendation during the FY 2013 Audit of FMC\xe2\x80\x99s\nFinancial Statements.\n\n The OIG will continue to review areas vulnerable to accounting error(s) and\nreport any findings in next year\xe2\x80\x99s management letter. I am available to discuss the letter\nat your convenience.\n\n\nAttachment\n\x0cFY 2012 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS\n MANAGEMENT LETTER\n\n\n\n\n MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS &\n CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS\n\x0c MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS &\n CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS\n\n\nDecember 7, 2012\n\nFederal Maritime Commission\nWashington, D.C.\n\n\nIn planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Federal Maritime\nCommission (FMC) as of September 30, 2012, in accordance with auditing standards generally\naccepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the\nComptroller General of the United States, we considered the FMC\xe2\x80\x99s internal control over financial\nreporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purposes of expressing our\nopinion on the financial statements, and not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the\neffectiveness of the agency\xe2\x80\x99s internal control. However, based on our audit, we are providing an\nupdate on recommendations made in prior years\xe2\x80\x99 reports.\n\n\n Follow-up on Prior Year Findings\n\nFinding 1. Agency Program Officials Risk Unauthorized Commitments and Anti-deficiency\n Violations when Purchase Orders are Signed after Services Begin\n\nFederal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 1.602-3, defines an unauthorized commitment as an\nagreement that is not binding - solely because the government representative who made it lacked\nthe authority to enter into that agreement on behalf of the government.\n\nSection 13(g) of Commission Order 112, Procurement, states that no employee shall enter into a\nformal or informal agreement to acquire services unless that employee has been delegated\nspecific written authority to do so. The requesting office must not direct a contractor to perform\nservices prior to being notified that a purchase requisition has been approved.\n\nThe Anti-Deficiency Act prohibits federal agencies from obligating or expending federal funds\nin advance or in excess of an appropriation or apportionment. An Anti-Deficiency Act violation\noccurs when government officials make payments or commit the United States to make\npayments at some future time for goods or services when there are insufficient funds in the\nappropriation to cover the cost in full.\n\nDuring our fieldwork, we identified a number of unauthorized commitments by FMC managers\nand staff involving transactions processed in house and by the agency\xe2\x80\x99s procurement service\nprovider, the Bureau of Public Debt. These transactions involved purchase orders for services\nthat were \xe2\x80\x9csigned off\xe2\x80\x9d by the contracting officer (CO) after the period of service had already\nbegun. 1\n\n1\n According to FAR 2.101, a purchase order is an offer by the Government to buy supplies or services upon specified\nterms and conditions, using simplified acquisition procedures.\n\n\n 1400 Eye Street, NW, Suite 425, Washington, DC 20005 Tel 202-296-7101 Fax 202-296-7284\n\x0cFor example,\n\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The agency entered into a contract with a vendor to provide court reporting and\n transcription for Commission meetings. The order was signed by the contracting\n officer on November 7, 2009. Before funds were obligated, the vendor provided\n services for two Commission hearings on October 15th and 29th, 2009.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 The agency signed a contract (order) for cell phone services on December 3,\n 2008, for services received in October 2008 and November 2008.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 An order for document scanning services was signed by the contracting officer on\n June 13, 2009. However, the vendor provided daily services to the\n Commission in March 2009 through June 2009.\n \xe2\x80\xa2 A vendor provided keycard monitoring and maintenance services to the\n agency beginning on October 1, 2008. The contracting officer signed the order\n for these services on November 18, 2008.\n\nIn all of the above unauthorized commitments, the agency received services without a valid\nobligating document in place. This puts the vendor, the COR and the agency at risk. The vendor\nis at risk of not being paid for services provided; the COR is at risk of being personally liable for\npayment of these services and for an Anti-Deficiency Act violation if funds are not provided by\nCongress to fund the activity; and the agency at risk of a costly lawsuit if the vendor was told to\nprovide the service by agency personnel.\n\nOne cause for late authorization of purchase orders is the timing of the procurement request (PR)\nby program staff. Section 8(a) of Commission Order 112, Procurement, requires staff to prepare\na PR to initiate the acquisition of a product or service and to route it through the FMC\xe2\x80\x99s automated\nprocurement and contracting system for concurrence/approval at the required FMC management\nlevels prior to being submitted to the CO for any appropriate action. Further, all PRs shall\ninclude sufficient information and lead time to allow for preparation of the procurement\nmaterial (e.g., purchase order) in compliance with FAR time and content requirements.\n\nFor the four orders identified above, we noted that PRs for three of the four orders were dated\nafter the beginning of the performance period. The remaining PR was submitted one day before\nthe performance period, as the following table illustrates:\n\n\n PROCUREMENT PURCHASE PERFORMANCE\n SERVICE REQUEST ORDER PERIOD\n Court Reporting 09/30/08 11/07/08 10/01/08\n Cell Phone 10/15/08 12/03/08 10/01/08\n Document Scanning 06/04/08 06/13/08 03/06/08\n Keycard Monitoring 11/12/08 11/18/08 10/01/08\n\n\nIt is unclear why managers are submitting purchase requisitions after the performance period has\nalready begun. Based on discussions with staff, it appears that, in some of the cases, the timing\n\n\n\n 2\n\x0cof vendor invoices may contribute to some of the delay. Agency managers often know in\nadvance when the agency will be billed for a service. For services that bill at the end of each\nquarter, we were told that PRs and orders are often prepared just prior to invoicing. However,\nwaiting to obligate funds means that services are being provided to the agency without funding\nauthority, which creates risks to the vendor and the agency, as discussed above.\n\nWe also noted that, in all cases, the agency was operating under a continuing resolution (CR) at\nprior year funding levels. During these periods, it cannot obligate funds for a full year to a\nvendor due to funding uncertainty. Rather, the agency will \xe2\x80\x9cincrementally\xe2\x80\x9d fund an activity for\nsome period of time not exceeding the CR. When interim funding runs out, or when a new CR\nor appropriation bill is enacted, program staff must revise the order for services to, again,\nobligate funds. Unless CORs actively monitor the funding timeframes in the purchase order,\nthey are unlikely to prepare PRs (and by extension, purchase orders) timely.\n\nRegardless of managers\xe2\x80\x99 intent to spend funds cautiously during CR funding, it is important to\nhave purchase orders in place at the beginning of the period of performance because the purchase\norder obligates funds for the activity. This ensures that funds will be available to pay for\nservices received, regardless of when the agency is billed.\n\nWe commend management for recognizing the seriousness of this issue. On February 4, 2010,\nthe FMC\xe2\x80\x99s Managing Director spoke to FMC participants at the annual COR refresher training\nabout the need to monitor funding to avoid unauthorized commitments.\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommended the Office of the Managing Director include specific language in the COR\xe2\x80\x99s\nperformance plan addressing funding lapses that occur when funding runs out before a new\npurchase order has been approved.\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe noted that the Office of the Managing Director included specific language in the COR's\nperformance plan addressing funding lapses that occur when funding runs out before a new purchase order\nhas been approved. Our review of procurement transactions in FY 2012 did not show any such\nfunding lapses.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n\nFinding 2. Formal Procedures Needed to Track Civil Penalties\n\nThe Bureau of Enforcement is the prosecutorial arm of the Commission. Under the direction and\nmanagement of the Bureau Director, Bureau attorneys participate as trial counsel in formal\nCommission proceedings, and work closely with the Commission\xe2\x80\x99s Area Representatives on\ninvestigations of potential violations of the Shipping Act and Commission regulations.\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0cThe Bureau prepares and serves notices of violations of the relevant shipping statutes and\nCommission regulations, and often enters into negotiations to compromise (i.e., settle) civil\npenalty demands arising out of those violations. If settlement is not reached, Bureau attorneys\nmay recommend commencement of a formal Commission proceeding seeking the assessment of\ncivil penalties or other relief for conduct or practices violating the shipping statutes. Bureau\nattorneys are designated to serve as the prosecuting attorneys on behalf of the Commission in\nsuch formal proceedings before the agency\xe2\x80\x99s Administrative Law Judge. After the penalty is\nassessed, the Office of Budget and Finance (OBF) records collections against the assessment.\n\nThe Office of General Counsel (OGC) assigns penalty cases to staff attorneys in the office to\nmonitor progress and outcomes. However, information on civil penalty judgments is not\ncentrally maintained in OGC; i.e., there is no centralized tracking system that would enable it to\neasily identify all outstanding penalty judgments, i.e., amounts assessed, amounts collected,\nbalance due and due dates. Further, OBF does not know what judgment collections to expect\nand whether amounts received represent full or partial payments unless indicated by the\ndefendant.\n\nAs a hedge against staff losing track of individual penalties assigned to it to monitor (due to\nreassignments, departures or the press of daily business), and to enhance controls over civil\npenalty receivables, OGC should centrally track all penalties assigned, noting the attorney\nassigned, the judgment amount, amounts paid, balance owed, and due date. The due date is\nimportant to ensure that the agency complies with the requirements of Debt Collection\nImprovement Act of 1996.2\n\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommended the Office of the General Counsel should maintain a database of all civil\nmonetary penalties assessed by the agency. This database should identify the date of the penalty,\nthe defendant\xe2\x80\x99s name, the monetary penalty amount, payment amount and payment date(s). The\nspreadsheet should be provided to the Office of Budget and Finance with each modification to\nenable it to record collections against the judgment and timely refer past due amounts to\nTreasury for collection in accordance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act. All payment\nactivity should be noted on the spreadsheet and shared between OGC and OBF.\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe noted that the draft Managing Directive that addresses debt collection agency wide,\nincluding civil penalties, transfers to Treasury, and maintenance of an accounts receivable\nreport has not been put in operation. We will monitor management\xe2\x80\x99s progress and we will opine\non the effectiveness of the new system in our FY 2013 letter.\n\n\n2\n The Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 centralizes the government collection of delinquent debt. Federal\ngovernment agencies are required to refer delinquent debts of fines and penalties to Treasury that exceed 180 days.\nTreasury then acts as the collection agency for the federal government agency.\n\n\n 4\n\x0cFinding 3. Human Resources Contractor Evaluation did not Follow FAR Requirements\n\nIn fiscal year 2010 the agency procured human resource services for approximately $20,000.\nThe Director of Human Resources (HR) identified three vendors from the Federal Supply\nSchedule and evaluated each for its ability to meet FMC requirements. In addition, four\ngovernment \xe2\x80\x9ccross-service\xe2\x80\x9d providers, offering some or all of the necessary HR disciplines, were\nconsidered in a prior evaluation. However, according to the HR Director, these providers did not\nfully meet the level of technical expertise necessary and/or per hour labor charges quoted for\nservices they provide exceeded quotes obtained from General Services Administration (GSA)\nvendors. Consequently, they were not considered to be viable alternatives in this procurement\naction.\n\nEach of the GSA vendors was evaluated based on the vendors\xe2\x80\x99 ability to meet three requirement\nfactors: (i) cost/pricing, (ii) technical capabilities, and (iii) past performance. The evaluation was\nperformed by the HR Director over the telephone. No vendor was provided a statement of work\n(SOW) and no written proposals were sought from the vendors.\n\nWe could not determine from our review of the file what specific services the agency sought to\nacquire. All firms provided various position classification, staffing and HR management support\nservices. Without a specific need identified, we could not assess the adequacy of the evaluation\nof the vendors. The evaluation consisted of between two-three sentences for each vendor and did\nnot provide specific examples to support a rating. For example, one firm\xe2\x80\x99s technical capabilities\n\xe2\x80\x9cranged from fair to good,\xe2\x80\x9d without describing why it was fair to good. We also noted a heavy\nreliance on price as a selection factor. 3 For the winning bidder, the evaluation noted that this\nfirm offered a discounted price from its GSA schedule, which made it the least expensive firm.4\nHowever, it was not clear whether the evaluator asked the firm for a better price or the firm\nunilaterally lowered its price. More importantly, there was no indication that the competing\nfirms were given an opportunity to lower their prices.\n\nWe also noted that there was no Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) required Statement of\nWork (SOW) prepared for this procurement. The SOW identifies the specific tasks to be\naccomplished, deliverables, timeframes and costs. The SOW and resulting bid and proposal are\nused to hold the vendor accountable should the performance on the task not meet the government\xe2\x80\x99s\nrequirements. If this contract fails to meet expectations, the government would have little\ndocumentation to support its claims.\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommended the Office of Management Services requires program offices to follow the\nFAR and prepare work statements, including deliverables and timeframes, for all service\n\n\n3\n FMC\xe2\x80\x99s cross servicing procurement agent does not consider price in the evaluation. Rather, price is considered\nafter the proposals are evaluated when identifying the best value for the government. The lowest price may not be\nthe best value. This transaction was processed within the FMC\xe2\x80\x99s procurement office.\n4\n We noted on the purchase order that the rate to be paid ($107/hr) to the vendor was the GSA schedule price. If a\ndiscount was offered, the agency did not take it.\n\n\n 5\n\x0crequirements, and that evaluations be performed by two or more employees based on the written\nresponses of the vendors.\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe obtained and reviewed the revised Commission Order 112 to determine whether it\naddresses the auditors\xe2\x80\x99 recommendation. Although, the Order is still in draft form at the\ntime of our review, we noted that it has been placed in operations, and it addresses the\nauditors\xe2\x80\x99 comments.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n\nFinding 4. Sole Source Contract Issued to Non-GSA Vendor without Performing\n Market Research\n\nIn October 2009, the FMC\xe2\x80\x99s Office of Management Services entered into a sole source contract\nwith a vendor to provide HR-related advisory and assistance services. Total contract value was\n$55,000. The file contained a detailed statement of work, identifying work description and\ndeliverables.\n\nFederal Acquisition Regulation 6.3 provides guidance on the use of sole source contracts by\nfederal agencies. Each contract awarded without full and open competition must contain a\nreference to the specific authority under which it was so awarded (Sec. 6.301{b}). Further\nwhen not providing for full and open competition, the contracting officer shall still solicit offers\nfrom as many potential sources as is practical. (6.301{d}).\n\nThe contracting officer prepared a detailed \xe2\x80\x9csole-source\xe2\x80\x9d memo, citing FAR 6.302-1, \xe2\x80\x9cOnly one\nresponsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements\xe2\x80\x9d as\njustification for the procurement method. However we found no evidence in the file to indicate\nthat other sources were solicited or even considered.\n\nFAR Part 10, Market Research, proscribes policies and procedures for conducting research to\narrive at the most suitable approach to acquiring, distributing and supporting supplies and\nservices. Agencies must conduct market research before soliciting offers for acquisitions.\nAgencies should use the results of market research to determine if sources capable of satisfying\nagency requirements exist. In other words, a determination that no other source exists has to be\nsupported by efforts to find a vendor to meet the requirement.\n\nFAR Part 8, Required Sources of Supply, requires agencies to satisfy their requirements for\nsupplies or services from or through the sources listed in FAR 8.002, Priorities for use of\nGovernment supply sources. Agencies are required to use, for example, sources listed on GSA\xe2\x80\x99s\nFederal Supply Schedules before considering open market vendors.\n\n\n\n\n 6\n\x0cMarket research, when used in conjunction with FAR, Part 8, guarantees that agencies will be\nable to document their sole source decisions. For example, an agency could identify efforts\nmade to use required sources and explain why these sources do not meet its need. The sole\nsource justification would then be supported. We found no documentation in the file, including\nin the sole source justification memo, that indicated that the agency attempted to address its\nrequirement by using other required sources first. The vendor selected is not on the GSA\nschedule and is considered to be an \xe2\x80\x9copen market\xe2\x80\x9d source by the FAR. Open market sources are\nto be the last option considered by federal agencies when selecting vendors.\n\nThe OIG raised similar concerns in a FY 2007 report on a contract for consulting services 5 ;\nspecifically that a sole source contract was used to improperly used to justify not seeking a\ncompetitive bid on needed services.\n\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommend management ensure that all future sole source actions are properly documented\nwith market research results following FAR-required sources of services (FAR Parts 10 & 8,\nrespectively).\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe obtained and reviewed the revised Commission Order 112. Although, the Commission\nOrder 112 is in draft at the time of our review, we noted that it has been revised and placed into\noperation, and it addresses auditors\xe2\x80\x99 comments.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n\nFinding 5. Conflict Management: Needs Assessment and Training\n\nAccording to Commission Order 112, Procurement, all procurement transactions, whether by\nsealed bids or by negotiation and without regard to dollar value, shall be conducted in a manner\nthat provides for, and promotes, to the maximum extent practicable, full and open competition as\nexpressed in the FAR.\n\nIn August 2011, the FMC identified a requirement for a conflict resolution seminar for FMC\nmanagers. FMC procurement staff performed market research by meeting with one potential\nvendor (Vendor #1). A proposal was prepared, dated August 2011, by Vendor #1 to address this\nrequirement. On September 21, 2011, the agency provided three vendors, including Vendor #1,\nwith a Statement of Objectives (SOO) that described the training requirement (objectives) as\nfollows:\n\n\n\n5\n See A07-02, Audit of Contracts\n\n\n 7\n\x0c The workshop shall provide participants with an understanding of the dynamics of\n conflict and how to resolve conflict effectively with individuals or with groups. The\n emphasis of the workshop should be on developing skills and tools to understand the\n causes of conflict and to reach satisfactory outcomes.\n\n This workshop provides (sic) participants with skills and tools to resolve conflicts with\n individuals and with groups, both internally with a working group, with peers and\n bosses, across departments and divisions, as well as outside individuals or groups with\n interests and concerns.\n\nA purchase request to fund this requirement was prepared on September 23, 2011, in the amount\nof $4,000,6 the estimated cost submitted by Vendor #1. According to the requisition, the training\nwould be provided over two days for 24 agency employees.\n\nAccording to FAR 37.602, Performance Work Statement (PWS), a PWS may be prepared by the\nGovernment or result from an SOO prepared by the Government where the offeror proposes the\nPWS. The requests for proposal that were provided to the three vendors requested a PWS,\nincluding an agenda of content and activities.\n\nCommission Order (CO) 112, Procurement, requires that each technical proposal include\ninstructions for the preparation and evaluation of technical and cost proposals. The weights\nassigned to the factors are to be established on a case-by-case basis. Examples of evaluation\ncriteria include: (1) the prospective contractor's understanding of the statement of work as\nshown by its proposed technical approach; (2) the availability and experience of technical\npersonnel to be employed on the project; (3) relevant experience of the organization (e.g., size\nand dollar value of similar projects); and (4) prospective contractor's proposed method of\nassuring the achievement of timely and acceptable performance of the work, as proposed.\n\nIn its request for proposal, the agency notified vendors in the SOO that the \xe2\x80\x9cGovernment will\naward a contract... based on the best overall value, to the responsible offeror whose offer\nconfirming to the solicitation will be the most advantageous to the Government, price and other\nfactors considered.\xe2\x80\x9d The SOO did not identify what \xe2\x80\x9cother factors\xe2\x80\x9d would be considered.\n\nThree proposals were received on September 26 and 27. A technical evaluation was performed\non September 28 by the FMC training coordinator, indicating that all proposals were technically\nacceptable. Once this determination was made, price became the determining factor. The\nvendor the agency met with in August 2011 was the lowest bidder and was selected.\n\nAnalysis\n\nWe believe that this requirement lacked \xe2\x80\x9ccompetition, to the maximum extent possible\xe2\x80\x9d as\nrequired by CO 112. We believe further that the winning vendor had a competitive advantage\nover the two other proposals for reasons discussed below.\n\n\n\n6 7\n On November 17, 2011, the task amount was increased by $6,000 to a total of $10,000.\n\n\n 8\n\x0cThe FMC met with Vendor #1 in August 2011. Although we do not have minutes of the\nmeeting, we found a proposal in the file, dated August 2011, for a two day seminar in conflict\nresolution. The agency used the meeting as an opportunity to perform market research,\naccording to the CO, to learn about vendor offerings. The meeting and resulting proposal, in\nthemselves, are not necessarily problematic.\n\nRather, we are concerned that language describing the agency\xe2\x80\x99s conflict resolution workshop\nrequirement in its request for proposal was copied, almost verbatim, from Vendor #1\xe2\x80\x99s August\n2011 proposal. For example, the first two paragraphs in Vendor #1\xe2\x80\x99s proposal read as follows:\n\n This workshop is designed to provide participants with an understanding of the dynamics\n of conflict and how to resolve conflict effectively with individuals or with groups. The\n emphasis of the workshop is on developing skills and tools to understand the causes of\n conflict and to reach satisfactory outcomes, even when emotions are high.\n\n This workshop provides participants with skills and tools to resolve conflicts with\n individuals and with groups, both internally with a working group, with peers and\n bosses, across departments and divisions, as well as outside individuals or groups with\n interests and concerns.\n\nA comparison with the two paragraphs identifying FMC\xe2\x80\x99s training requirement near the\nbeginning of this finding (see previous page) shows a very strong correlation between the first\nparagraphs, and, in the second paragraph, a verbatim relationship.\n\nVendor #2 and Vendor #3 were not given a clear understanding in the SOO as to how their\nproposals would be evaluated. \xe2\x80\x9c(P)rice and other factors\xe2\x80\x9d do not enable these vendors to tailor\ntheir proposals to what the FMC considered to be important, whereas the first vendor knew, or\nwas in a better position to know, based on an August 2011 meeting with FMC staff, what the\nagency was looking for. Vendor #1\xe2\x80\x99s bid was tailored to the FMC\xe2\x80\x99s specific needs. The FMC\xe2\x80\x99s\ncontracting officer pointed out that he spoke with the two vendors prior to soliciting a proposal\nfrom them. While this mitigates some of the disparity, we believe it best to provide all vendors\nwith the same opportunity to discuss the requirement. In this instance, the vendor who visited\nthe FMC and provided a description of the requirement that was used in the SOO would, at least\nin appearance, have a competitive advantage.\n\nAccording to one contracting officer we spoke with from a sister agency, allowing vendors to\npropose the PWS leaves the door open for numerous evaluation inconstancies since the content\nof proposals could range from one end of the spectrum to the other. As such, evaluation\ndocumentation and award justification for this type of procurement is extremely important to\nguard against potential challenges by unsuccessful bidders.\n\nThe technical evaluation panel consisted of one agency staff. Her results indicated that \xe2\x80\x9call\nproposals met the performance criteria.\xe2\x80\x9d No additional information about the relative strengths or\nweaknesses of the approaches, past experience or technical merit was included in the technical\nevaluation. A price analysis by the CO and contract specialist followed the technical evaluation.\nAs previously stated, the lowest bid was chosen.\n\n\n\n 9\n\x0cThe agency did not adequately plan to meet this requirement. Sending out proposals on\nSeptember 21, with a one week turnaround, provides vendors with little time to prepare a\ncomprehensive proposal and the agency even less time to follow an evaluation plan to review for\ntechnical content \xe2\x80\x93 given the September 30 fiscal year end. The agency simply ran out of time.\nIf price was the overriding factor, the agency could have adopted a \xe2\x80\x9clow price, technically\nacceptable\xe2\x80\x9d approach, where each proposal is reviewed, one at a time, beginning with the lowest\nprice proposal. Once an acceptable technical proposal is found, the evaluation concludes and that\nproposal is accepted. A \xe2\x80\x9cbest value\xe2\x80\x9d approach is generally far more time consuming and\ninvolves the assignment of points to evaluation factors. Only after these technical scores are\nconsidered is price considered. The FMC did not assign evaluation points to any proposal.\n\nWith an agency the size of the FMC, with most of its appropriation going to salaries, it is\nsometimes necessary to delay many procurements until near the end of the year to ensure that\nbasic requirements are addressed. In this particular instance, however, the agency was aware of\nthis need in August but chose to wait until September 21.\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommended OMS adhere to FAR and CO 112, Procurement, principles of full and open\ncompetition and provide all prospective vendors with equal opportunities to compete.\nSpecifically, if one vendor is asked to meet with agency procurement staff, all vendors should\nhave this opportunity.\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe obtained and reviewed the revised Commission Order 112. Although, the Commission\nOrder 112 is in draft form at the time of our review, we noted that it has been revised and\nplaced into operation, and it addresses auditors\xe2\x80\x99 comments.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n\nFinding 6. Accounts Payable is Understated\n\nAccounts payable (or payables) represent amounts owed for purchases of goods or services.\nDuring the year, payables are recorded when an invoice, packing slip or receiving report is\nreceived by the agency. The Office of Management Services (OMS) reviews all obligations at\nyear-end and establishes an accrual for all services and goods received by year-end (e.g., to\nrecognize that money is owed in the period that the goods were received). For example, an\ninvoice for computer monitors that were delivered on September 15th (FY 2011) may not be sent\nby the manufacturer until October 10th (FY 2012). The expense should be recorded on the FY\n2011 books because the monitors were received in FY 2011.\n\nWe reviewed accounts payable at year-end to ensure that all expenses for goods and services\nwere properly recorded in the appropriate period. During our review, we identified\n\n\n\n 10\n\x0capproximately $150,000 in additional FY 2011 payables that were not recorded by the agency in\nFY 2011. Since the adjustments were not made the agency\xe2\x80\x99s payables and expenses for FY 2011\nwere understated on the agency\xe2\x80\x99s financial statements.\n\nIdentifying expenses when they occur near the end of the fiscal year is a two-step process\nrequiring agency staff (generally finance or procurement staff) (i) to identify large contract and\npurchase items and to follow-up with the Contracting Officer\xe2\x80\x99s Representatives (COR) or other\ncontact points to inquire whether goods were received, and (ii) to identify or estimate the dollar\namount of services or goods that were received since the prior invoice up through the end of the\nfiscal year (September 30). The amounts are then accrued as payables.\n\nOMS has established a standard operating procedure which reviews all procurements over\n$10,000 at year end with the COR to determine any amounts that should be accrued. This\nprocess is normally performed by sending an e-mail to the COR requesting a statement as to\nwhether any of the goods or services in the open obligation have been received as of September\n30th. If services or goods have been received the COR will then provide an estimate of these\nitems to be accrued. The audit team noted that, due to transition in OMS staff members, CORs\nwere not contacted and no accruals were established.\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommend that the Director of OMS review year-end procedures with his staff to ensure\nthat all necessary accruals are made at year-end.\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nAs part of our audit procedures, we obtained and reviewed monthly, quarterly and year-end\nclosing activities. We also interviewed responsible personnel in OMS and the Office of\nBudget and Finance (OBF). We noted that the responsibility to revise procedures for ensuring\nrecordation of accruals was transferred from OMS to OBF in June 2012. OBF developed and\nimplemented an SOP, End of Quarter Review of Open Obligations and Establishing Accruals for\nLarge Procurements. Our review of quarterly and year-end closing activities showed that this\nrecommendation has been implemented effectively.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n\nFinding 7. Procurement Controls are Needed for Recurring Services\n\nThe Bona Fide Needs rule is a fundamental principle of appropriations law. It states that a fiscal\nyear appropriation may be obligated only to meet a legitimate or bona fide need arising in, or in\nsome cases arising prior to but continuing to exist in, the fiscal year for which the appropriation\nwas made. Recurring services are considered \xe2\x80\x9cseverable\xe2\x80\x9d and are charged in the fiscal year in\nwhich the services are performed.\n\n\n\n\n 11\n\x0cIn August 2011 the agency procured $5,000 for recurring shredding services for FY 2011. At the\nend of the year approximately $300 of shredding services was used. In October 2011 this\ncontract was modified to extend the period of performance to April 2012. Since shredding\nservices are a recurring severable service, FY 2011 funds should not be used for a FY 2012 need.\nThis was discussed with director of OMS who agreed that shredding services was a severable\nservice and that funds under this contract should be deobligated. In addition the director of OMS\nplans to establish a new FY 2012 obligation for shredding services.\n\nRecommendation\n\nWe recommended that the director of OMS put procedures in place to identify the bona fide\nneed of each contract and only approve obligations in the year that need exists.\n\n\nFY 2012 Follow-up\n\nWe obtained and reviewed the revised Commission Order 112. Although, the Commission\nOrder 112 is in draft form at the time of our review, we noted that it has been revised and\nplaced into operation, and it addresses auditors\xe2\x80\x99 comments.\n\nWe consider this comment closed.\n\n\n Current Year Comments\n\nThere are no findings and recommendations in the current year.\n\nWhile this report is intended solely for the information and use of the management of the\nFederal Maritime Commission, it is also a matter of public record, and its distribution is,\ntherefore, not restricted.\n\n\n\nRegis & Associates, PC\nWashington, DC\n\n\n\n\n 12\n\x0c"


type: legislation

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 EVROPSKÁ KOMISE
 V Bruselu dne 3.2.2017
 COM(2017) 54 final
 2017/0017(COD)
 Návrh
 NAŘÍZENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU A RADY,
 kterým se mění směrnice 2003/87/ES, aby dále platila stávající omezení rozsahu činností v oblasti letectví a aby se připravilo provádění celosvětového tržního opatření od roku 2021
 (Text s významem pro EHP)
 {SWD(2017) 30 final}{SWD(2017) 31 final}
 DŮVODOVÁ ZPRÁVA
 1.SOUVISLOSTI NÁVRHU
 •Odůvodnění a cíle návrhu
 Emise skleníkových plynů z činností v oblasti letectví významně rostou. Odhaduje se, že bez dalších opatření se emise oxidu uhličitého (CO2) pocházejícího z mezinárodní letecké dopravy v porovnání s rokem 2010 do roku 2050 téměř zečtyřnásobí. Několik studií ukazuje, že pouhá technická a provozní opatření, včetně norem pro CO2 pro letadla nebo využívání udržitelných biopaliv, nepostačují pro omezení emisí z letecké dopravy, a ke snížení jejich růstu je tedy nutné použít tržní opatření. Hrozí, že výrazný nárůst emisí skleníkových plynů z odvětví letecké dopravy zmaří úsilí EU i ostatního světa, pokud jde o účinný boj proti změně klimatu.
 V roce 2008 stála EU v čele při řešení emisí skleníkových plynů z letecké dopravy a do systému EU pro obchodování s emisemi („EU ETS“) zařadila rovněž lety mezi letišti v Evropském hospodářském prostoru („lety uvnitř EHP“) a lety mezi letišti v Evropském hospodářském prostoru („EHP“) a letišti ve třetích zemí („lety mimo EHP“). To napomohlo dosažení dohody v rámci Mezinárodní organizace pro civilní letectví („ICAO“) ohledně postupu pro zavedení celosvětového tržního opatření pro řešení otázky emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy, který byl zahájen v roce 2013. Letecká doprava díky tomu také může přispět k cíli EU v oblasti klimatu, kterým je snížení emisí o 20 % do roku 2020 ve srovnání s úrovněmi z roku 1990. V očekávání přijetí dohody v rámci ICAO a s cílem podpořit celosvětové opatření pro omezení emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy v rámci ICAO EU dočasně, do roku 2016, omezila oblast působnosti EU ETS na lety uvnitř EHP. EU čeká na výsledky ICAO, na jejichž základě posoudí oblast působnosti EU ETS, pokud jde o lety mimo EHP. Pokud nedojde k žádným změnám směrnice o EU ETS, bude od roku 2017 automaticky znovu uplatněna plná oblast působnosti EU ETS.
 V říjnu 2014 se Evropská rada dohodla na rámci politiky v oblasti klimatu a energetiky do roku 2030. Ústředním bodem tohoto rámce do roku 2030 je závazný cíl snížit v EU do roku 2030 celkové emise skleníkových plynů z EU nejméně o 40 %, pod úroveň z roku 1990. Abychom tohoto cíle dosáhli hospodárně, budou odvětví, na která se vztahuje systém EU pro obchodování s emisemi (EU ETS), muset snížit své emise o 43 % ve srovnání s rokem 2005 a odvětví mimo systém obchodování s emisemi budou muset snížit své emise o 30 % ve srovnání s rokem 2005. Díky tomu mohla EU v rámci Pařížské dohody uskutečnit svůj příspěvek, který je závazkem platným pro celé hospodářství a vztahuje se také na emise z letectví. EU je odhodlána svým dílem přispět k cíli v oblasti klimatu podle Pařížské dohody, kterým je udržet globální oteplování výrazně pod 2 stupni Celsia ve srovnání s úrovní před průmyslovou revolucí, a bude dál usilovat o to, aby udržela nárůst teploty do 1,5 stupně Celsia. Stejně tak je EU odhodlána přispět k ambicióznímu cíli stanovenému Mezinárodní organizací pro civilní letectví, podle kterého by celosvětové čisté emise CO2 z mezinárodní letecké dopravy již neměly přesáhnout úroveň z roku 2020 („uhlíkově neutrální růst“ neboli „CNG 2020“).
 V říjnu 2016 se ICAO na svém 39. shromáždění dohodla na usnesení o celosvětovém tržním opatření („global market-based measure“ neboli „GMBM“), kterým se má globálně řešit nárůst emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy od roku 2021, a to prostřednictvím systému vyrovnání, jehož cílem je dosáhnout ambiciózní cíl stabilizace emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy na úrovni roku 2020. Během první fáze GMBM (2021–2026) je účast na tomto opatření výslovně dobrovolná. Od počátku druhé fáze v roce 2027 by GMBM měly uplatňovat všechny země se silně rozvinutou leteckou dopravou. EU a její členské státy vyjádřily úmysl uplatňovat GMBM již během jeho dobrovolné fáze. Zatímco ohledně ambiciózního cíle a základního prvku GMBM (vyrovnání) bylo dosaženo dohody, v rámci ICAO je stále ještě nutné rozpracovat a dohodnout řadu důležitých otázek, které jsou klíčové pro účinnost a ekologickou vyváženost GMBM z hlediska klimatu, a to ještě před jeho provedením v roce 2021. Případná zpoždění při schvalování těchto otázek představují riziko pro zavedení GMBM. Tím by se rovněž zpozdilo provedení v právních předpisech zemí, které je klíčové, jelikož konkrétní zavedení GMBM vychází z těchto vnitrostátních a regionálních opatření.
 Podle stávajících právních předpisů musí Komise posoudit výsledky 39. shromáždění ICAO a v této souvislosti přezkoumat oblast působnosti EU ETS, pokud jde o lety do EHP a z EHP. Pokud nedojde ke změně stávajících právních předpisů, začne znovu platit původní oblast působnosti EU ETS (tj. včetně letů mimo EHP). Jelikož se ICAO dohodla na GMBM, EU podporuje jeho dokončení a včasné zavedení a zamýšlí provést GMBM od roku 2021, považovalo se za nutné přezkoumat právní předpisy týkající se EU ETS.
 Aby se mezinárodním jednáním o nevyřešených otázkách ohledně pravidel a řízení nutných pro provedení GMBM dodal další impuls, navrhuje se uplatňovat EU ETS s omezenou oblastí působnosti i po roce 2016 (tj. pokud jde o lety mezi letišti v EHP, jak je stanoveno v nařízení č. 421/2014). Jakmile budeme vědět více o povaze a obsahu právních nástrojů přijatých ICAO pro provedení GMBM a o záměrech našich mezinárodních partnerů, pokud jde o provádění GMBM, bude provedeno další posouzení a přezkum EU ETS pro období po roce 2020. Tím se také náležitě zohlední nezbytná soudržnost se závazkem platným pro celé hospodářství, který EU přijala v rámci Pařížské dohody, a jí dohodnutý cíl, kterým je snížit emise skleníkových plynů v EU do roku 2030 o 40 % ve srovnání s úrovní roku 1990.
 Aby se zaručila právní jistota ohledně dodržování právních předpisů upravujících ETS v roce 2017, je důležité, aby Evropský parlament a Rada tento návrh urychleně schválily, nejlépe do konce roku 2017.
 •Soulad s platnými předpisy v této oblasti politiky
 Tento návrh obecně zachovává přístup platných politických ustanovení pro oblast ETS, která stanoví směrnice o EU ETS, nicméně patřičně zohledňuje nový a další vývoj v ICAO, zejména dohodu, které bylo dosaženo ohledně GMBM. Evropská rada výslovně vyzvala k pokračování stávající struktury politiky EU ETS a poskytla pokyny ke konkrétním otázkám, které je třeba vyjasnit v období 2021 až 2030. V souladu s obdrženými pokyny navrhla Evropská komise v červenci 2015 legislativní návrh na revizi EU ETS, pokud jde o stacionární zařízení pro období po roce 2020. Tento návrh se nezabýval otázkami ohledně zahrnutí letectví do EU ETS, jelikož bylo považováno za nevhodné učinit tak před 39. shromážděním ICAO, které se konalo v říjnu 2016. Tento návrh, který se zabývá emisemi z letectví, nyní, v souladu se závěry Evropské rady, zachovává přístup k řešení emisí z vnitroevropských letů v rámci EU ETS. Stávající návrh doplňuje širší přezkum ETS, který navrhla Komise v červenci 2015 a který je nyní předmětem postupu spolurozhodování.
 •Soulad s ostatními politikami Unie
 Návrh stanoví provádění části rámce politiky v oblasti klimatu a energetiky do roku 2030 jako klíčový prvek pro vybudování odolné energetické unie s progresivní politikou v oblasti změny klimatu. Doplňující legislativní návrhy již byly vypracovány, aby se napomohlo dosažení různých cílů, na nichž se dohodla Evropská rada. Tyto návrhy by měly usnadnit dosažení cílů v oblasti klimatu, které se týkají ETS, i cílů, které s ETS nesouvisejí. Kromě toho se strategie Komise v oblasti letectví a strategie pro nízkoemisní mobilitu zabývají opatřeními k dalšímu snižování emisí skleníkových plynů v dopravě, která jsou součástí úsilí EU o dekarbonizaci, ke které se EU zavázala, a to i s ohledem na program Horizont 2030.
 2.PRÁVNÍ ZÁKLAD, SUBSIDIARITA A PROPORCIONALITA
 •Právní základ
 Články 191 až 193 Smlouvy o fungování Evropské unie (SFEU) potvrzují a upřesňují pravomoci EU v oblasti změny klimatu. Právním základem tohoto návrhu je článek 192 Smlouvy o fungování EU.
 •Subsidiarita (v případě nevýlučné pravomoci)
 Směrnice o EU ETS je stávajícím politickým nástrojem EU, jenž bude platit i po roce 2020. V souladu se zásadou subsidiarity stanovenou v článku 5 Smlouvy o fungování Evropské unie lze cílů návrhu, který tento nástroj mění, dosáhnout pouze prostřednictvím návrhu Komise na úrovni EU.
 Opatření na úrovni EU a tam, kde je to možné, na celosvětové úrovni jsou účinnější než opatření na úrovni členských států z důvodu přeshraničních vlivů změny klimatu a z důvodu povahy letectví, která je z velké části nadnárodní. Opatřením na úrovni EU lze nejúčinněji dosáhnout vlastních cílů EU i mezinárodních cílů v oblasti klimatu a zajistit harmonizované provádění GMBM v EU. Tím lze zajistit, aby odvětví letectví přiměřeně přispělo ke snižování dopadů změny klimatu, a zároveň zachovat mezinárodní konkurenceschopnost odvětví letectví EU a na vnitřním trhu EU nadále zachovat rovné podmínky.
 •Proporcionalita
 Návrh je v souladu se zásadou proporcionality, protože nepřesahuje rámec toho, co je nezbytné pro dosažení cílů EU v oblasti snižování emisí skleníkových plynů do roku 2020 a 2030, a současně nákladově efektivním způsobem zajišťuje řádné fungování vnitřního trhu a usnadňuje dokončení pravidel pro provádění GMBM.
 •Volba nástroje
 Tento návrh nařízení navazuje na nařízení (EU) č. 421/2014, které bylo přijato v návaznosti na shromáždění ICAO v roce 2013. Stejně jako u nařízení (EU) č. 421/2014 je důležité, aby tento návrh urychleně přijal Evropský parlament a Rada, aby mohl být účinný již v době, kdy začnou platit příští závazky týkající se souladu s předpisy v rámci EU ETS, k čemuž má dojít v březnu a dubnu 2018. Pokud k revizi nedojde, ETS získá zpět svou původní oblast působnosti. Je tedy zapotřebí, aby tento návrh přijal Evropský parlament a Rada a aby vstoupil v platnost nejpozději začátkem roku 2018, aby měli provozovatelé letadel právní jistotu a srozumitelnost, neboť by jinak museli v souladu se směrnicí 2003/87/ES vyřadit do 30. dubna 2018 povolenky na všechny své emise z letů do třetích zemí a ze třetích zemí.
 Má se za to, že vzhledem k tomu, že je k dispozici málo času, lze cíle tohoto návrhu dosáhnout nejlépe prostřednictvím nařízení. Nařízení jsou přímo použitelná ve všech členských státech a jsou závazná v celém rozsahu, a tudíž jsou nejvhodnější pro dosažení včasného a jednotného provedení změn ještě předtím, než skončí lhůty týkající se souladu s předpisy pro rok 2017, tj. v březnu a dubnu 2018.
 3.VÝSLEDKY HODNOCENÍ EX POST, KONZULTACÍ SE ZÚČASTNĚNÝMI STRANAMI A POSOUZENÍ DOPADŮ
 •Hodnocení ex post / kontroly účelnosti platných právních předpisů
 V rámci přezkumu EU ETS pro období 2021–2030 byla v rámci posouzení dopadů vyhodnocena i stávající směrnice o ETS a toto vyhodnocení bylo zohledněno při posuzování různých možností politiky. K hodnocení ex post či kontrole účelnosti EU ETS, pokud jde konkrétně o oblast letectví, nedošlo, jelikož EU ETS nebyl nikdy v této oblasti uplatněn v plném rozsahu, třebaže byl tak původně navržen. Změny oblasti působnosti EU ETS, pokud jde o oblast letectví, byly provedeny na základě rozsáhlého posouzení, které mělo vyřešit obavy a zohlednit námitky vznesené vůči tomuto opatření, jak bylo původně navrženo, a zároveň zachovat rovné zacházení se všemi provozovateli na stejných trasách. Posouzení dopadů z roku 2013
 1
 , které je připojeno k návrhu nařízení (EU) č. 421/2014, jakož i posouzení dopadů, které je připojeno k tomuto návrhu, spolu se zprávami o trhu s uhlíkem, jež připravila Komise, a akčním plánem EU pro ICAO, který Komise předložila ICAO, účinně hodnotí a posuzují účinnost a fungování směrnice o EU ETS s ohledem na oblast letectví. Ty jsou považovány za dostatečné, pokud jde o zpětné hodnocení a kontrolu účelnosti směrnice o EU ETS v souvislosti s letectvím.
 •Konzultace se zúčastněnými stranami
 Ohledně přezkumu EU ETS v návaznosti na shromáždění organizace ICAO v roce 2016 se konala veřejná internetová konzultace, která trvala dvanáct týdnů, od 7. března do 30. května 2016. Většina skupin zúčastněných stran celkově souhlasila s tím, že by měly být dohodnuty ambiciózní cíle pro snížení emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy a že tržní opatření jsou vhodné nástroje ke snížení emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy. Objevily se však odlišné názory ohledně žádoucí úrovně ambicí a konkrétních mechanismů ke snížení emisí. Některé zúčastněné strany se domnívají, že EU ETS by měl i po roce 2017 mít současnou oblast působnosti omezenou na lety uvnitř EHP, zatímco jiné strany se domnívaly, že by měl zpět získat plnou oblast působnosti (včetně letů do třetích zemí a ze třetích zemí). Pokud jde o období po roce 2020, řada respondentů uvedla, že možnosti, které se ohledně EU ETS zvolí, by měly záviset na úrovni ambicí, povaze, rozsahu a environmentální integritě nebo účinnosti dohody, které bylo dosaženo na shromáždění ICAO v roce 2016. Na rozvoji konstruktivních dvoustranných a mnohostranných vztahů se zúčastněnými stranami a třetími zeměmi se bude Komise podílet i nadále.
 •Sběr a využití výsledků odborných konzultací
 Pokud jde o odhady celkových světových emisí skleníkových plynů, posouzení dopadů použilo zprávu „United Nations Enironmental Programme’s Emission Gap Report 2015“ a pátou hodnotící zprávu Mezivládního panelu pro změnu klimatu (IPCC). Co se týče prognóz celkových emisí skleníkových plynů v EU, vycházelo se ze zpráv Evropské agentury pro životní prostředí. Studie vycházela z příslušných údajů uvedených ve zprávách ICAO týkajících se životního prostředí, zejména pokud jde o emise a prognózy emisí z mezinárodní letecké dopravy, stejně jako o možnost, jak u mezinárodní letecké dopravy snížit emise pomocí technických a operačních opatření. Při vytváření podkladových ekonometrických modelů a analýz byly použity údaje o očekávaném růstu odvětví letecké dopravy uvedené ve zprávě ICAO o životním prostředí.
 •Posouzení dopadů
 Posouzení dopadů analyzuje různé možnosti, jak pro období před rokem 2020, tak pro období od roku 2021. Pokud jde o období před rokem 2020, posuzuje se pokračování působnosti uvnitř EHP a alternativní postup, při kterém by se EU ETS vztahoval na všechny lety odlétající z EHP, tyto možnosti se také srovnávají se základním scénářem, kterým je plná působnost. Co se týče období po roce 2020, všechny možnosti předpokládají, že GMBM se bude vztahovat na lety ze třetích zemí a do třetích zemí. Jedna z možností rovněž předpokládá, že emise vypouštěné v EHP jsou kompenzovány prostřednictvím GMBM, zatímco druhá možnost zachovává povinnosti EU ETS týkající se letů uvnitř EHP. Další možnosti zvažují změny EU ETS, pokud jde o lety uvnitř EHP, s cílem dosáhnout určitého sblížení s GMBM (v tom případě funguje EU ETS na základě vyrovnání), nebo kombinovat oba systémy (v tom případě se EU ETS vztahuje na emise, které nejsou předmětem GMBM).
 Z posouzení dopadů vyplynulo, že zachování současné oblasti působnosti EU ETS vztahující se na lety uvnitř EHP by bylo nejvhodnější možností pro období 2017–2020 a díky ní by letectví mohlo podle očekávání přispět ke splnění cíle v oblasti klimatu do roku 2020. Tuto možnost by rovněž uvítaly třetí země a pro ICAO by poskytla impuls k dokončení zbývajících pravidel nezbytných k provedení GMBM a byla by proveditelná s velmi nízkými správními náklady, neboť tento systém je již zaveden a všemi velmi uspokojivě respektován. Globální opatření na snížení emisí z tohoto odvětví by se maximalizovalo tím, že se usnadní skutečné provedení GMBM, které se očekává od roku 2021.
 V posouzení dopadů byly rovněž analyzovány různé možnosti pro období po roce 2020 a bylo ukázáno, zda a jak by přispěly ke splnění cílů EU v oblasti klimatu pro rok 2030. Nicméně vzhledem k nejistotám, které dosud negativně ovlivňují konkrétní provedení GMBM, se v této fázi považuje za předčasné přijímat rozhodnutí o režimu po roce 2020, avšak jsme připraveni přezkoumat situaci včas předtím, než podle očekávání začne fungovat GMBM.
 •Účelnost a zjednodušování právních předpisů
 Aby se pro nejmenší provozovatele letadel snížila administrativní zátěž, výjimka pro provozovatele letadel neobchodní letecké dopravy, kteří ročně vypouštějí méně než 1 000 tun CO2, by měla platit po dobu dalších deseti let.
 •Základní práva
 Návrh dodržuje základní práva a zásady uznávané zejména Listinou základních práv Evropské unie. Zejména přispívá k cíli vysoké úrovně ochrany životního prostředí v souladu se zásadou udržitelného rozvoje, jak je stanovena v článku 37 Listiny základních práv Evropské unie.
 4.ROZPOČTOVÉ DŮSLEDKY
 Návrh nemá žádné důsledky pro rozpočet Společenství.
 5.OSTATNÍ PRVKY
 •Podrobné vysvětlení konkrétních ustanovení návrhu
 V reakci na pokrok, jehož bylo dosaženo na 39. zasedání shromáždění ICAO, a s cílem urychlit úspěšné provedení GMBM, jehož cílem je snížit od roku 2021 emise z mezinárodní letecké dopravy, se navrhuje změnit činnosti v oblasti letectví, na které se vztahuje EU ETS. Navrhuje se prodloužit platnost stávajícího přístupu k uplatňování EU ETS, jak je stanoveno v nařízení č. 421/2014, na období po roce 2016, dokud nebude dostatečně jasná povaha a obsah právních nástrojů přijatých ICAO k provádění GMBM, aby Evropská komise mohla provést další posouzení EU ETS a přezkoumat jej pro období po roce 2020. V důsledku tohoto přístupu by mělo být provozovatelům letadel od roku 2017 přiděleno stejné množství povolenek jako v roce 2016. Očekává se, že tato opatření by měla být uplatňována již na přidělování povolenek na rok 2017. Provádění EU ETS v tomto roce, dokud pozměňovací návrh nevstoupí v platnost, by s ním tedy mělo být co nejvíce konzistentní a mělo by být v souladu s očekávaným konečným výsledkem procesu spolurozhodování.
 Cílem tohoto návrhu je udržet současný vysoce pozitivní dopad na životní prostředí systému EU ETS, který ke snížení emisí každý rok přispívá přibližně 17 miliony tun CO2. To znamená, že letecká doprava v rámci Evropského hospodářského prostoru přispívá k úsilí o snížení emisí v EHP jako ostatní hospodářská odvětví. Návrh má současně zajistit, aby EU i nadále dosahovala významných snížení emisí z letecké dopravy prostřednictvím EU ETS, a v souladu s cíli EU v oblasti klimatu zachovává dynamiku práce v ICAO na skutečném zavedení GMBM s cílem maximalizovat výsledek globálního snižování emisí. Ustanovení o změnách je pozitivním signálem svědčícím o záměru EU uplatňovat GMBM.
 •Článek 1, kterým se mění směrnice 2003/87/ES
 Tímto návrhem se mění článek 28a směrnice, doplňují dva další články (28b a 28c) a mění její příloha I.
 Článek 28a
 Dochází ke změnám článku 28a směrnice o EU ETS týkajícího se odchylek platných před provedením mezinárodní dohody o uplatňování jednotného celosvětového tržního opatření. Podle stejného přístupu, který je v nařízení (EU) č. 421/2014 stanoven pro období 2013–2016, byly lety do a z nejvzdálenějších regionů a třetích zemí vyňaty pro období od roku 2016 a po něm z působnosti směrnice o EU ETS, přičemž lety mezi letišti v EHP zůstávají plně pokryty. Vzhledem k tomu, že oblast působnosti zůstává stejná jako v roce 2016, obdrží provozovatelé letadel stejné množství bezplatných povolenek jako v roce 2016, poměrně k letecké činnosti uvnitř EHP, a lineární faktor snížení použitelný na všechna odvětví, na která se vztahuje směrnice o EU ETS, bude platit až od roku 2021. Přidělování povolenek ze zvláštní rezervy by mělo být upraveno stejně, a tudíž musí být množství vydaných povolenek přizpůsobeno oblasti působnosti uvnitř EHP. Částky, které mají být přiděleny v dražbě, by měly také zůstat stejné jako v roce 2016. Systém se bude vztahovat na lety se zeměmi, s nimiž bude dosaženo dvoustranné dohody o propojení obchodních systémů stanovujících stropy emisí, a to pouze v souladu s podmínkami takové dohody.
 Článek 28b
 Nový článek 28b se do směrnice o EU ETS zavádí s cílem připravit provedení celosvětového tržního opatření od roku 2021. Podle tohoto článku musí Komise podávat Evropskému parlamentu a Radě zprávu o mezinárodním vývoji, který má význam pro provedení GMBM, jakož i o opatřeních přijatých třetími zeměmi za účelem provedení GMBM. Komise proto musí zvážit možnosti, jak prostřednictvím revize směrnice o EU ETS provést příslušné nástroje ICAO do práva Unie. Ke zprávě mohou být případně přiloženy legislativní návrhy.
 Článek 28c
 Rovněž za účelem přípravy provedení GMBM je Komise zmocněna přijmout akty v přenesené pravomoci, aby pro provozovatele letadel stanovila náležité monitorování, podávání zpráv a ověřování týkající se emisí pro účely provádění celosvětového tržního opatření, které se připravuje v ICAO.
 Příloha I
 Příloha I směrnice 2003/87/ES se mění tím, že se prodlužuje platnost výjimky pro provozovatele letadel neobchodní letecké dopravy, kteří vypouštějí méně než 1 000 tun CO2 ročně, a to z roku 2020 na rok 2030. Tento přístup se ukázal být účinným opatřením, které značně snižuje administrativní zátěž nutnou pro provádění EU ETS, a zároveň se prostřednictvím EU ETS dále dosahuje podstatného snížení emisí. Tato výjimka sníží počet provozovatelů letadel regulovaných členskými státy přibližně o 2 200, na které připadá pouze 0,2 % emisí.
 2017/0017 (COD)
 Návrh
 NAŘÍZENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU A RADY,
 kterým se mění směrnice 2003/87/ES, aby dále platila stávající omezení rozsahu činností v oblasti letectví a aby se připravilo provádění celosvětového tržního opatření od roku 2021
 (Text s významem pro EHP)
 EVROPSKÝ PARLAMENT A RADA EVROPSKÉ UNIE,
 s ohledem na Smlouvu o fungování Evropské unie, a zejména na čl. 192 odst. 1 této smlouvy,
 s ohledem na návrh Evropské komise,
 po postoupení návrhu legislativního aktu vnitrostátním parlamentům,
 s ohledem na stanovisko Evropského hospodářského a sociálního výboru
 2
 ,
 s ohledem na stanovisko Výboru regionů
 3
 ,
 v souladu s řádným legislativním postupem,
 vzhledem k těmto důvodům:
 (1)Na 21. konferenci smluvních stran Rámcové úmluvy Organizace spojených národů o změně klimatu (UNFCCC), která se konala v Paříži ve dnech 30. listopadu až 12. prosince 2015, byla přijata mezinárodní dohoda, která má posílit celosvětovou reakci na změnu klimatu. Pařížská dohoda stanoví mimo jiné dlouhodobý cíl v souladu s cílem udržet globální nárůst teploty výrazně pod úrovní 2 °C ve srovnání s úrovní před průmyslovou revolucí a usilovat o to, aby tento nárůst nepřesáhl 1,5 °C. Pařížská dohoda byla schválena jménem Unie rozhodnutím Rady (EU) 2016/1841. Pařížská dohoda vstoupila v platnost dne 4. listopadu 2016. V zájmu dosažení cíle Pařížské dohody smluvní strany připraví, oznámí a zachovají po sobě jdoucí vnitrostátně stanovené příspěvky.
 (2)Environmentálními cíli Unie, jak je uvedeno v článku 191 Smlouvy, je zachování, ochrana a zlepšování kvality životního prostředí, ochrana lidského zdraví a podpora opatření na mezinárodní úrovni určených k řešení regionálních a celosvětových problémů životního prostředí, a zejména boj proti změně klimatu.
 (3)Závazný cíl ve výši minimálně 40% snížení domácích emisí skleníkových plynů z celého hospodářství do roku 2030 ve srovnání s rokem 1990 stanovila Evropská rada ve dnech 23. – 24. října 2014. Rada na svém zasedání dne 6. března 2015 formálně schválila tento příspěvek Unie a jejích členských států jako jejich zamýšlený vnitrostátně stanovený příspěvek v rámci Pařížské dohody. Závěry Evropské rady z října 2014 předpokládaly, že tohoto cíle Unie dosáhne společně a co nejhospodárnějším způsobem a ke snížením dojde do roku 2030 v porovnání s rokem 2005 v rámci EU ETS (o 43 %) a v odvětvích mimo EU ETS o 30 %. K dosažení tohoto snížení emisí by měla přispět všechna odvětví ekonomiky.
 (4)Unie a její členské státy se snaží prosazovat mezinárodní dohody o snížení dopadů emisí skleníkových plynů z letecké dopravy od roku 1997 a od roku 2008 mají platnou právní úpravu, která má omezit dopady změny klimatu způsobené činnostmi v oblasti letectví prostřednictvím systému EU pro obchodování s emisemi (EU ETS), který funguje od roku 2005. S cílem dosáhnout pokroku v rámci Mezinárodní organizace pro civilní letectví (ICAO) Unie přijala dvakrát časově omezené odchylky od EU ETS s cílem omezit povinnosti dodržování předpisů, pokud jde o emise z letů mezi letišti nacházejícími se v zemích Evropského hospodářského prostoru (EHP), přičemž s provozovateli letadel na stejných trasách bylo zacházeno stejně bez ohledu na to, kde jsou usazeni. Nejnovější odchylka od EU ETS, nařízení Evropského parlamentu a Rady (EU) č. 421/2014, omezila povinnosti dodržování předpisů pro lety uvnitř EHP v období 2013 až 2016 a předpokládala možné změny oblasti působnosti systému, pokud jde o činnosti prováděné na letiště a z letišť nacházejících se mimo EHP od 1. ledna 2017 v návaznosti na přezkum stanovený v uvedeném nařízení.
 (5)S ohledem na usnesení přijaté na 39. shromáždění ICAO v říjnu 2016 o provádění celosvětového tržního opatření od roku 2021 s cílem vyrovnat emise z mezinárodní letecké dopravy, které překračují úroveň roku 2020, se považuje za vhodné, aby i nadále platila stávající odchylka, dokud nebude dosaženo dalšího pokroku ohledně skladby a provádění celosvětového tržního opatření. V tomto ohledu plánuje ICAO přijetí norem a doporučených postupů s cílem doplnit uvedené usnesení a provést celosvětový systém na rok 2018. Pro jeho konkrétní zavedení však budou muset členové ICAO přijmout opatření na vnitrostátní úrovni. ICAO musí také vyvinout mechanismy řízení, včetně systému registru. V této souvislosti by měla být prodloužena stávající odchylka od povinností EU ETS pro lety do třetích zemí a ze třetích zemí, s výhradou přezkumu provádění režimu ICAO, s cílem podpořit dynamiku v ICAO a usnadnit zavedení režimu ICAO. Prodloužení platnosti odchylky by mělo vést k tomu, že množství povolenek, které mají být vydraženy a bezplatně vydány (včetně povolenek ze zvláštní rezervy), by mělo být stejné jako množství v roce 2016 a mělo by být v poměru ke snížení počtu povinně vyřazených povolenek.
 (6)Vzhledem k tomu, že klíčové prvky celosvětového tržního opatření musí být ještě vypracovány a že jeho provádění závisí na vnitrostátních právních předpisech, které mají přijmout jednotlivé státy a regiony, považuje se za vhodné, aby před začátkem fungování celosvětového tržního opatření ICAO, až bude jasná povaha a obsah těchto právních nástrojů, proběhl přezkum a aby byla podána zpráva Evropskému parlamentu a Radě. Uvedená zpráva by se měla zabývat všemi normami nebo jinými nástroji přijatými v rámci ICAO, opatřeními přijatými třetími zeměmi k provedení celosvětového tržního opatření, jež má být na emise uplatňováno od roku 2021, a dalším důležitým mezinárodním vývojem (např. pravidly Rámcové úmluvy Organizace spojených národů o změně klimatu a Pařížskou dohodou o trzích s uhlíkem a uhlíkovém účetnictví). Tato zpráva by měla také uvádět, jak by mohly být tyto nástroje prostřednictvím revize směrnice o EU ETS provedeny do práva Unie. Případně by měla také posoudit pravidla platná pro lety uvnitř EHP. K této zprávě by měl být případně připojen příslušný návrh Evropskému parlamentu a Radě, který bude v souladu s požadavkem zajistit příspěvek letectví k závazku Unie snížit emise skleníkových plynů do roku 2030, který platí pro celé hospodářství.
 (7)Za účelem přijímání nelegislativních aktů s obecnou působností, kterými se doplňují nebo mění některé nepodstatné prvky legislativního aktu, by měla být Komisi svěřena pravomoc přijímat akty v souladu s článkem 290 Smlouvy, aby mohla přijmout opatření pro monitorování, podávání zpráv a ověřování emisí platná pro provozovatele letadel pro účely celosvětového tržního opatření, které se připravuje v ICAO. Je obzvláště důležité, aby Komise v rámci přípravné činnosti vedla odpovídající konzultace, a to i na odborné úrovni, a aby tyto konzultace probíhaly v souladu se zásadami stanovenými v interinstitucionální dohodě o zdokonalení tvorby právních předpisů ze dne 13. dubna 2016. Zejména v zájmu zajištění rovné účasti na vypracovávání aktů v přenesené pravomoci obdrží Evropský parlament a Rada veškeré dokumenty současně s odborníky z členských států, přičemž odborníci těchto dvou orgánů mají systematicky přístup na zasedání odborných skupin Komise, jež se věnují přípravě aktů v přenesené pravomoci.
 (8)V rámci zjednodušení a s cílem snížit nejmenším provozovatelům letadel administrativní zátěž by provozovatelé letadel neobchodní letecké dopravy, kteří vypouštějí méně než 1000 tun CO2 ročně, měli být i nadále považováni za provozovatele splňující požadavky směrnice 2003/87/ES, a to v období příštích deseti let, během kterých by mělo být vypracováno opatření tak, aby v budoucnu ke snížení emisí přispívali všichni provozovatelé.
 (9)Je nezbytné poskytnout provozovatelům letadel a vnitrostátním orgánům právní jistotu s ohledem na uplynutí lhůty pro vyřazení povolenek (dne 30. dubna 2018), jak je uvedeno ve směrnici 2003/87/ES. Toto nařízení by tedy mělo být uplatňováno ode dne jeho vyhlášení v Úředním věstníku Evropské unie.
 (10)Směrnice 2003/87/ES by proto měla být odpovídajícím způsobem změněna,
 PŘIJALY TOTO NAŘÍZENÍ:
 Článek 1
 Směrnice 2003/87/ES se mění takto:
 1)Článek 28a se mění takto:
 a)odstavec 1 se mění takto:
 i.písmena a) a b) se nahrazují tímto:
 a)„veškeré emise z letů na letiště nebo z letišť v zemích mimo Evropský hospodářský prostor (EHP) za každý kalendářní rok, a to od 1. ledna 2013, s výhradou přezkumu uvedeného v článku 28b;
 b)veškeré emise z letů mezi letištěm, které se nachází v některém z nejvzdálenějších regionů ve smyslu článku 349 Smlouvy o fungování EU, a letištěm nacházejícím se v jiném regionu EHP za každý kalendářní rok, a to od 1. ledna 2013, s výhradou přezkumu uvedeného v článku 28b.“;
 ii.písmeno c) se zrušuje;
 b)odstavec 2 se mění takto:
 i.první pododstavec se nahrazuje tímto:
 „Odchylně od ustanovení článků 3d až 3f, a dokud nevstoupí v platnost změny v návaznosti na přezkum podle článku 28b, se od 1. ledna 2017 provozovatelům letadel každý rok vydá počet povolenek, který odpovídá množství roku 2016. Od roku 2021 se na tento počet povolenek uplatní lineární faktor podle článku 9.“;
 ii.třetí pododstavec se zrušuje;
 c)odstavec 4 se nahrazuje tímto:
 „4. Odchylně od čl. 3d odst. 3 se počet povolenek, které mají být jednotlivými členskými státy vydraženy od 1. ledna 2013, sníží tak, aby odpovídal podílu přidělených emisí z letecké dopravy u letů, které nepodléhají odchylkám stanoveným v odst. 1 písm. a) a b) tohoto článku.“;
 d)odstavec 7 se nahrazuje tímto:
 „Odstavec 1 se použije na země, s nimiž bylo dosaženo dohody podle článku 25 nebo článku 25a, pouze v souladu s podmínkami této dohody“.
 2)Vkládají se nové články 28b a 28c, které znějí:
 „Článek 28b
 Předkládání zpráv Komisí o provádění celosvětového tržního opatření ICAO
 1.Komise podá Evropskému parlamentu a Radě zprávu o příslušných normách ICAO nebo jiných právních nástrojích, jakož i o opatřeních přijatých třetími zeměmi na vnitrostátní úrovni s cílem provést celosvětové tržní opatření, aby se začalo uplatňovat na emise od roku 2021, a o dalším relevantním vývoji na mezinárodní úrovni.
 2.Zpráva by se měla zabývat způsoby, jak prostřednictvím revize této směrnice provést tyto nástroje ICAO v právu Unie. Zpráva případně posoudí také pravidla platná pro lety uvnitř Evropského hospodářského prostoru (EHP).
 3.Ke zprávě mohou být případně připojeny návrhy určené Evropskému parlamentu a Radě, kterými se mění, ruší, rozšiřují nebo nahrazují odchylky podle článku 28a, v souladu se závazkem Unie snížit do roku 2030 emise skleníkových plynů v celém hospodářství.
 Článek 28c
 Ustanovení pro monitorování, podávání zpráv a ověřování za účelem provádění celosvětového tržního opatření
 1.Komise přijme ustanovení pro náležité monitorování, podávání zpráv a ověřování emisí pro účely provádění celosvětového tržního opatření, které se připravuje v ICAO. Tato ustanovení jsou založena na stejných zásadách jako nařízení uvedené v čl. 14 odst. 1 a zajišťují, aby byly předkládané zprávy o emisích ověřeny v souladu s článkem 15.
 2.Komisi je svěřena pravomoc přijmout akt v přenesené pravomoci v souladu s článkem [23].“.
 3)V písmeni k) přílohy I se rok „2020“ nahrazuje rokem „2030“.
 Článek 2
 Toto nařízení vstupuje v platnost dnem vyhlášení v Úředním věstníku Evropské unie.
 Toto nařízení je závazné v celém rozsahu a přímo použitelné ve všech členských státech.
 V Bruselu dne
 Za Evropský parlament
 Za Radu
 předseda / předsedkyně
 předseda / předsedkyně
 (1)
 Pracovní dokument útvarů Komise SWD (2013) 430 final.
 (2)
 Úř. věst. C , , s. .
 (3)
 Úř. věst. C , , s. .