Input:
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 710/2014
of 23 June 2014
laying down implementing technical standards with regard to conditions of application of the joint decision process for institution-specific prudential requirements according to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 113(5) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Efficient exchange of appropriate information is essential for reaching a joint decision on the adequacy of own funds, the supervisory measures relating to liquidity supervision, the level of liquidity and capital requirements applied to each institution of a group and the group.
(2)
In order to ensure a consistent application of the process for the reaching of a joint decision, it is important that each step is well defined. A clear process also facilitates exchange of information, promotes mutual understanding, develops relationships between supervisory authorities and promotes effective supervision.
(3)
In order to perform the risk assessment and the assessment of the liquidity risk profile for a group of institutions, the consolidating supervisor should have an overview of the activities carried out by all of the institutions within the group, including institutions operating outside the Union. Interaction between the competent authorities in the Union and third-country supervisors should therefore be promoted in order to enable the former to assess the global risks faced by the group.
(4)
Timely and realistic planning for the joint decision process is essential. Every competent authority involved should provide the consolidating supervisor with relevant information on a timely basis. In order for individual assessments to be presented and interpreted in a consistent and uniform manner, it is necessary to introduce a common template for the results of the supervisory review and evaluation processes specific to each institution.
(5)
To ensure uniform condition of application, the steps to be followed for the performance of the joint risk assessment and the reaching of the joint decision should be established, recognising that some tasks of the joint risk assessment and joint decision process may be performed in parallel and others sequentially.
(6)
To facilitate the reaching of joint decisions, it is important that the competent authorities involved in the decision-making process engage in a dialogue with each other, in particular before finalizing the risk assessment reports and joint decisions.
(7)
The consolidating supervisor should provide the competent authorities involved with all relevant information necessary for the preparation of their individual risk assessment and the reaching of the capital and liquidity joint decisions.
(8)
The report containing the risk assessment of the group is a core document enabling competent authorities to understand and record the assessment of the overall risk profile of the banking group for the purpose of reaching a joint decision on the adequacy of own funds and level of own funds that the group is required to hold. The report containing the assessment of the liquidity risk profile of the group is an important document enabling competent authorities to understand and record the assessment of the overall liquidity profile of the group. In order to present the overall risk assessment and liquidity risk assessment of the group in a consistent manner, support meaningful discussions among competent authorities and enable a robust assessment of cross border banking group risks, common templates for these reports should be established.
(9)
Whilst recognising that outcomes of the supervisory review and evaluation process specified in Article 97 of Directive 2013/36/EU may be documented differently across the Member States depending on the implementation of that Article in the national legislation while taking into account the guidelines issued by the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (EBA) in accordance with Article 107(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU, standard templates should provide consistent formats for the communication of findings and outcomes of the supervisory review process for the purposes of reaching joint decisions.
(10)
Neither the group risk assessment report nor the report containing the group liquidity risk assessment should be limited to an aggregation of individual contributions from competent authorities. Both reports should be used as a tool for performing the joint assessment of the risks of the whole group and analysing the interaction of intra-group items.
(11)
Establishing clear processes for the content and articulation of the joint decision should ensure that joint decisions are fully reasoned and facilitate the monitoring of joint decisions and their enforcement.
(12)
In order to clarify the process to be followed once the joint decision is reached, provide transparency on the treatment of the outcome of the decision and facilitate appropriate follow-up action where needed, standards regarding the communication of the fully reasoned joint decision and the monitoring of its implementation should be established.
(13)
The process to be followed for the updates of joint decisions should be established in order to ensure a consistent and transparent approach as well as appropriate involvement of competent authorities and the communication of the outcomes.
(14)
The joint decision process under Article 113 of Directive 2013/36/EU includes the process to be followed where no joint decision is reached. To ensure uniform conditions of application on this aspect of the process, the articulation of fully reasoned decisions and the treatment of views and reservations expressed by host supervisors, standards covering the timeline for taking decisions in the absence of a joint decision and the communication of the details of such decisions should be established.
(15)
This Regulation is based on the draft implementing technical standards submitted by EBA to the Commission;
(16)
EBA has conducted open public consultations on the draft implementing technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits and requested the opinion of the Banking Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2);
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
CHAPTER I
SUBJECT MATTER AND DEFINITIONS
Article 1
Subject matter
This Regulation specifies the following joint decision processes referred to in Article 113 of Directive 2013/36/EU:
(a)
the process of reaching a joint decision on matters referred to in point (a) of Article 113(1), taking account of any waiver granted pursuant to Articles 7, 10 or 15 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3);
(b)
the process of reaching a joint decision on matters referred to in point (b) of Article 113(1), taking account of any waiver granted pursuant to Articles 6, 8 or 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, and of any consolidated level of application pursuant to Article 11(3) of that Regulation.
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:
(1)
‘relevant competent authorities’ means competent authorities responsible for the supervision of subsidiaries of an EU parent institution, of an EU parent financial holding company or of an EU parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State;
(2)
‘other competent authorities’ means any of the following:
(a)
competent authorities which are not a relevant competent authority;
(b)
public authorities or bodies officially recognized by national law, which are empowered by national law to supervise financial sector entities, as defined in point 27 of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, which operate in the Member State concerned and which are neither a credit institution nor an investment firm;
(3)
‘SREP report’ means the report presenting the outcome of the supervisory review and evaluation process referred to in Article 97 of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(4)
‘liquidity risk assessment report’ means the report presenting the outcome of the part of the supervisory review and evaluation process referred to in Article 97 of Directive 2013/36/EU concerning liquidity risks;
(5)
‘group risk assessment report’ means the report containing the risk assessment of the group of institutions referred to in point (a) of Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(6)
‘group liquidity risk assessment report’ means the report containing the assessment of the liquidity risk profile of the group of institutions referred to in point (b) of Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(7)
‘capital joint decision’ means a joint decision on matters referred to in point (a) of Article 1;
(8)
‘liquidity joint decision’ means a joint decision on matters referred to in point (b) of Article 1.
CHAPTER II
JOINT DECISION PROCESS
Article 3
Planning of the steps of the joint decision process
1. Prior to the start of the joint decision process the consolidating supervisor and the relevant competent authorities shall agree on a timetable of steps to be followed in that process (hereinafter ‘joint decision timetable’). In case of disagreement, the consolidating supervisor shall set the joint decision timetable after considering the views and reservations expressed by the relevant competent authorities.
2. The joint decision timetable shall be updated at least annually and shall include the following steps:
(a)
agreement on the involvement of other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries pursuant to Article 4;
(b)
submission of the SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports from the relevant competent authorities pursuant to Article 5 and contributions from the other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries involved pursuant to Article 4(2);
(c)
submission of the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report by the consolidating supervisor to the relevant competent authorities pursuant to Article 6(6) and to other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries pursuant to Article 4(3), and Article 6(7);
(d)
dialogue between the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities on the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report pursuant to Article 7;
(e)
submission of the group risk assessment report and group liquidity risk assessment report by the consolidating supervisor to the relevant competent authorities pursuant to Article 8(2) and other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries pursuant to Article 4(3) and Article 8(5);
(f)
submission of contributions to the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision by relevant competent authorities to the consolidating supervisor pursuant to Article 9(1);
(g)
submission of the draft capital joint decision document and draft liquidity joint decision document from the consolidating supervisor to the relevant competent authorities pursuant to Article 10(6) and Article 11(5);
(h)
consultation on the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision documents with the EU parent institution and institutions of the group, where required by the legislation of a Member State;
(i)
dialogue between the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities on the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision;
(j)
reaching of the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision pursuant to Article 12;
(k)
communication of the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision by the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities to the EU parent institution and institutions of the group pursuant to Article 13;
(l)
agreement on the following year's timetable for the planning of the joint decision process.
3. The joint decision timetable shall fulfil all of the following requirements:
(a)
it shall reflect the scope and complexity of each task, taking into account the size, systemic importance, nature, scale and complexity of the activities of the group as well as its risk-profile;
(b)
it shall take account, so far as possible, of the commitments of the consolidating supervisor and the relevant competent authorities under the supervisory examination programme referred to in point (c) of the third subparagraph of Article 116(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU.
4. Where appropriate, in particular to reflect the urgency of any extraordinary update undertaken pursuant to Articles 20 and 21, the joint decision timetable shall be reviewed.
5. The consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities shall communicate to the institutions of the group for which they are respectively responsible an indicative date for the consultation referred to in point (h) of paragraph 2 on the aspects of the draft joint decision documents insofar as these institutions are concerned.
The consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities shall communicate to the institutions of the group for which they are respectively responsible an estimated date for the communication referred to in point (k) of paragraph 2.
Article 4
Involvement of other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries in the group risk assessment process
1. The consolidating supervisor may decide to involve other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries in the production of the group risk assessment report or group liquidity risk assessment report. That decision is based on the relevance of the branch or institution within the group and its significance for the local market.
Such involvement shall be subject to confidentiality requirements equivalent to those of Section II of Chapter 1 of Title VII of Directive 2013/36/EU and, where applicable, Articles 54 and 58 of Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4).
The equivalence shall be assessed by the consolidating supervisor and all relevant competent authorities.
2. Where the consolidating supervisor decides to involve another competent authority as defined in Article 2(2) or a competent authority of a third country, both authorities shall reach an agreement on the scope of involvement of the other competent authority or competent authority of the third country. Such agreements are allowed for the following purposes:
(a)
providing the consolidating supervisor with contributions to the group risk assessment report or group liquidity risk assessment report;
(b)
adding as annexes the contributions referred to in point (a) of this paragraph to the draft or final group risk assessment report or group liquidity risk assessment report.
3. Where the consolidating supervisor decides to involve other competent authorities or competent authorities of third countries, the consolidating supervisor shall not provide the draft and final group risk assessment reports and group liquidity risk assessment reports to the other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries without consent from all relevant competent authorities.
4. The consolidating supervisor shall keep the relevant competent authorities fully informed on the scope, level and nature of involvement of other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries in the group risk assessment process and the extent to which the group risk assessment report has benefited from their contributions.
Article 5
Preparation of the SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports
1. In order to facilitate due consideration of the risk assessment of subsidiaries in the joint decision in accordance with Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU, the relevant competent authorities shall provide the consolidating supervisor with their SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (b) of Article 3(2).
2. The SREP reports shall be prepared using the template in Annex I. These reports shall be supplemented with the summaries of scores using Table 1 of Annex II and the summary of capital adequacy assessment using Table 2 of Annex II.
The liquidity risk assessment reports shall be prepared using the template in Annex V. These reports shall be supplemented with the summaries of scores using Table 1 of Annex VI and the summary of liquidity assessment using Table 2 of Annex VI.
SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports may include additional relevant information.
Article 6
Preparation of the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report
1. The consolidating supervisor shall prepare a draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report based on all of the following:
(a)
its own SREP report or liquidity risk assessment report on the EU parent institution and the group;
(b)
the SREP reports or liquidity risk assessment reports on subsidiaries provided by the relevant competent authorities pursuant to Article 5;
(c)
contributions from other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries, pursuant to Article 4(2).
2. The SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 together with contributions referred to in point (c) of that paragraph shall be added as annexes to the draft group risk assessment report or draft group liquidity risk assessment report.
3. The draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report shall contain the results of the assessment of whether the arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms implemented by the group and its institutions and the own funds and liquidity held by these ensure a sound management and coverage of their risks.
4. The draft group risk assessment report shall be prepared using the template in Annex III. This report shall be supplemented with the summaries of scores using Table 1 of Annex IV and the summary of capital adequacy assessment using Table 2 of Annex IV.
The draft group liquidity risk assessment report shall be prepared using the template in Annex VII. This report shall be supplemented with the summaries of scores using Table 1 of Annex VIII and the summary of liquidity assessment using Table 2 of Annex VIII.
5. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, the consolidating supervisor shall ensure all of the following:
(a)
the joint assessment reflects the relevance of the institutions within the group and their significance in the local market;
(b)
the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report indicate how this relevance and significance were taken into account.
6. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the draft reports to the relevant competent authorities in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (c) of Article 3(2).
7. Subject to the agreement referred to in Article 4(3), the consolidating supervisor may provide the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report to the other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries.
Article 7
Dialogue on the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report
1. The consolidating supervisor shall decide on the form and scope of the dialogue with the relevant competent authorities on the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report.
2. The consolidating supervisor and the relevant competent authorities shall discuss the reconciliation of the quantitative proposals included in the individual SREP reports and liquidity risk assessment reports referred to Article 6(1) with the quantitative proposals in the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report, as applicable.
3. The quantitative proposals referred to in paragraph 2 shall at least consist of the following proposals:
(a)
the proposed levels of own funds that a group of institutions at consolidated level and all institutions of this group at individual level are required to hold pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(b)
the proposed levels of specific liquidity requirements that a group of institutions at consolidated level and all institutions of this group at individual level are required to meet pursuant to Article 105 of Directive 2013/36/EU.
Article 8
Finalisation of the group risk assessment report and group liquidity risk assessment report
1. Based on the dialogue referred to in Article 7, the consolidating supervisor shall finalise the group risk assessment report and group liquidity risk assessment report using the format and content of the draft group risk assessment report and draft group liquidity risk assessment report, as referred to in Article 6. The consolidating supervisor shall explain any material changes introduced in the group risk assessment report or group liquidity risk assessment report. Changes shall reflect the outcome of the dialogue and include the appropriate updates of the annexes to the group risk assessment report or group liquidity risk assessment report.
2. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the group risk assessment report and group liquidity risk assessment report to the relevant competent authorities in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (e) of Article 3(2).
3. In accordance with point (a) of Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU the submission of the group risk assessment report to the relevant competent authorities shall initiate the start of the four-month period for reaching the capital joint decision.
4. In accordance with point (b) of Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU the submission of the group liquidity risk assessment report to the relevant competent authorities shall initiate the start of the one-month period for reaching the liquidity joint decision.
5. Subject to the agreement referred to in Article 4(3), the consolidating supervisor may provide the group risk assessment report and group liquidity risk assessment report to the other competent authorities and competent authorities of third countries.
Article 9
Preparation of the contributions to the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision
1. The relevant competent authorities shall provide their contributions to the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision to the consolidating supervisor in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (f) of Article 3(2). Contributions shall cover all institutions within a group of institutions falling within the scope of the joint decision process.
2. The consolidating supervisor shall contribute to the draft capital joint decision. Its contributions shall include all of the following:
(a)
all institutions of a group at individual level which are authorised in the jurisdiction of the consolidating supervisor and which fall into the scope of the joint decision process;
(b)
the group of institutions at consolidated level.
3. The consolidating supervisor shall contribute to the draft liquidity joint decision. Its contributions shall include all of the following:
(a)
all institutions of a group at individual level where these institutions are authorised in the jurisdiction of the consolidating supervisor and which fall into the scope of the joint decision process;
(b)
the group of institutions at consolidated level.
4. Contributions to the draft capital joint decision shall set out each of the items referred to in Article 10.
5. Contributions to the draft liquidity joint decision shall set out each of the items referred to in Article 11.
Article 10
Preparation of the draft capital joint decision
1. The consolidating supervisor shall prepare a fully reasoned draft capital joint decision covering the group and the institutions of this group. The draft capital joint decision shall set out each of the following items:
(a)
the names of the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities involved in the capital joint decision process;
(b)
the name of the group of institutions and a list of all institutions within the group to which the draft capital joint decision relates and applies;
(c)
the references to the applicable Union and national law relating to the preparation, finalisation and application of capital joint decisions;
(d)
the date of the draft capital joint decision and of any relevant update thereto;
(e)
the conclusion on the application of Articles 73 and 97 of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(f)
the conclusion on the adequacy of own funds held by the group of institutions at consolidated level;
(g)
the conclusion on the adequacy of own funds held by each institution of the group at individual level;
(h)
the conclusion on the level of own funds that each institution of the group is required to hold at individual level pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(i)
the conclusion on the level of own funds that the group of institutions is required to hold at consolidated level pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(j)
information on the minimum prudential requirements which apply to each institution pursuant to Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and Articles 103, 129, 130, 131 and 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU and on any other relevant prudential or macro-prudential requirements, guidelines, recommendations or warnings;
(k)
the reference date to which the conclusions referred to in points (e) to (i) relate;
(l)
the timeline for the implementation of the conclusions referred to in points (h) and (i), where applicable.
2. The conclusion referred to in point (e) of paragraph 1 shall set out each of the following items:
(a)
the assessment of whether the institutions of the group have in place sound, effective and complete strategies and processes to assess, maintain and distribute internal capital and whether such strategies and processes are up to date;
(b)
the assessment of whether the amounts, types and distribution of internal capital is adequate to cover the nature and level of risks to which the institutions of the group are exposed or might be exposed;
(c)
the assessment of whether the institutions of the group have implemented appropriate arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms to comply with all requirements of Directive 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;
(d)
the assessment of whether the arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms implemented by the institutions of the group ensure a sound management and coverage of their risks;
(e)
information on the application of supervisory measures and powers pursuant to Article 102 and points (b) to (l) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU to address deficiencies identified under points (a) to (d).
3. The conclusions referred to in points (f) and (g) of paragraph 1 shall be linked to and supported by the conclusion referred to in point (e) of paragraph 1.
4. The conclusions referred to in points (h) and (i) of paragraph 1 shall meet all of the following requirements:
(a)
they shall be formulated as an amount or a ratio or a combination of both;
(b)
they shall provide details of the quality of additional own funds required;
(c)
they shall be linked to and supported by the conclusion referred to in point (e) of paragraph 1.
5. The conclusions regarding each institution of the group at individual level and the group of institutions at consolidated level shall be clearly identifiable in the draft capital joint decision document.
6. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the draft capital joint decision document to the relevant competent authorities in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (g) of Article 3(2).
Article 11
Preparation of the draft liquidity joint decision
1. The consolidating supervisor shall prepare a fully reasoned draft liquidity joint decision covering the group and the institutions of this group. The draft liquidity joint decision shall set out each of the following items:
(a)
the names of the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities involved in the liquidity joint decision process;
(b)
the name of the group of institutions and a list of all institutions within the group to which the draft liquidity joint decision relates and applies;
(c)
the references to the applicable Union and national law relating to the preparation, finalisation and application of liquidity joint decisions;
(d)
the date of the draft liquidity joint decision and of any relevant update thereto;
(e)
the conclusion on the liquidity adequacy for the group at consolidated level;
(f)
the conclusion on the liquidity adequacy for each institution within the group at individual level;
(g)
the conclusion on measures taken to address any significant matters and material findings relating to liquidity supervision including relating to the adequacy of the organisation and the treatment of risks as required pursuant to Article 86 of Directive 2013/36/EU and relating to the need for specific liquidity requirements in accordance with Article 105 of that Directive for each institution within the group at individual level and for the group at consolidated level;
(h)
information on any other relevant prudential or macro-prudential requirements, guidelines, recommendations or warnings;
(i)
the reference date to which the conclusions referred to in point (e) to (g) relate;
(j)
the timeline for the implementation of the conclusion referred to in point (g), where applicable.
2. The conclusion referred to in points (e) and (f) of paragraph 1 shall set out each of the following items:
(a)
the assessment of whether the institutions of the group have implemented robust strategies, policies, processes and systems for the identification, measurement, management and monitoring of liquidity risk over an appropriate set of time horizons;
(b)
the assessment of whether the liquidity held by the institutions of the group at individual level and the group at consolidated level provides sufficient coverage of liquidity risks;
(c)
the assessment of whether the institutions of the group have implemented appropriate arrangements, strategies, processes and mechanisms to comply with all requirements of Directive 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
3. The conclusion referred to in point (g) of paragraph 1 shall provide details on the nature of the measures taken. Where these measures relate to the need for specific liquidity requirements in accordance with Article 105 of Directive 2013/36/EU, the conclusion shall provide details on the articulation of those specific liquidity requirements.
4. The conclusions regarding each institution of the group at individual level and the group of institutions at consolidated level shall be clearly identifiable in the draft liquidity joint decision document.
5. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the draft liquidity joint decision document to the relevant competent authorities in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (g) of Article 3(2).
Article 12
Reaching of the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision
1. Following the dialogue with the relevant competent authorities on the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision as referred to in point (i) of Article 3(2), the consolidating supervisor shall revise the draft capital joint decision and draft liquidity joint decision, as necessary, in order to finalise those decisions.
2. An agreement on the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision shall be reached by the consolidating supervisor and all relevant competent authorities.
3. The agreement shall be evidenced in writing by representatives of the consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities with appropriate authority to commit their respective competent authorities.
Article 13
Communication of the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision
1. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the capital joint decision document and liquidity joint decision document to the management body of the EU parent institution in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (k) of Article 3(2). The consolidating supervisor shall confirm this communication to the relevant competent authorities.
2. The relevant competent authorities in a Member State shall provide to the management bodies of institutions which are authorised in that Member State the respective parts of the capital joint decision document and liquidity joint decision document that are relevant to each of those institutions in a timely manner and in any event by the deadline specified in the joint decision timetable pursuant to point (k) of Article 3(2).
3. The consolidating supervisor shall, where appropriate, discuss the capital joint decision document and liquidity joint decision document with the EU parent institution to explain the details of the decisions and their application.
4. The relevant competent authorities in a Member State shall, where appropriate, discuss with the institutions established in this Member State the respective parts of the capital joint decision document and liquidity joint decision document that are relevant to each of these institutions to explain the details of the decisions and their application.
Article 14
Monitoring of the application of the capital joint decision and liquidity joint decision
1. The consolidating supervisor shall communicate the outcome of the discussion referred to in Article 13(3) to the relevant competent authorities where an EU parent institution is required to take any of the following actions:
(a)
to meet additional own funds requirements pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU at individual or consolidated level,
(b)
to address significant matters or material findings relating to liquidity supervision or to meet specific liquidity requirements pursuant to Article 105 of Directive 2013/36/EU, at individual or consolidated level.
2. The relevant competent authorities in a Member State shall communicate the outcome of the discussion referred to in Article 13(4) to the consolidating supervisor where an institution authorised in that Member State is required to take any of the following actions:
(a)
to meet additional own funds requirements pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU at individual level;
(b)
to address significant matters or material findings relating to liquidity supervision or to meet specific liquidity requirements pursuant to Article 105 of Directive 2013/36/EU at individual level.
3. The consolidating supervisor shall forward the outcome of the discussion referred to in paragraph 2 to the other relevant competent authorities.
4. The consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities shall monitor the application of the capital joint decisions and liquidity joint decisions that are relevant to each of the institutions of the group for which they are respectively responsible.
CHAPTER III
DISAGREEMENTS AND DECISIONS TAKEN IN THE ABSENCE OF JOINT DECISION
Article 15
Decision process in the absence of joint decision
1. In the absence of a capital joint decision or a liquidity joint decision between the consolidating supervisor and the relevant competent authorities within the time periods referred to in Article 8(3) or 8(4), respectively, the decisions referred to in Article 113(3) of Directive 2013/36/EU shall be evidenced in writing and shall be taken by the latest of the following dates:
(a)
the date one month after the expiry of the time period referred to in Article 8(3) or (4), as applicable;
(b)
the date one month after the provision of any advice by the EBA following a request for consultation in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 113(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(c)
the date one month after any decision taken by the EBA in accordance with the first or second subparagraphs of Article 113(3) of Directive 2013/36/EU or any other date set by the EBA in such a decision.
2. The relevant competent authorities shall communicate to the consolidating supervisor the decisions they have taken at individual level in the absence of a joint decision.
3. The consolidating supervisor shall include the decisions referred to in paragraph 2 with its decisions taken at individual and consolidated levels into a single document and shall provide this document to all relevant competent authorities.
4. Where the EBA has been consulted, the document referred to in paragraph 3 shall include an explanation of any deviations from the advice of the EBA.
Article 16
Drafting of the capital decisions taken in the absence of capital joint decision
1. A capital decision taken in the absence of capital joint decision shall be set out in a document that contains all of the following items:
(a)
the name of the consolidating supervisor or relevant competent authority taking the capital decision;
(b)
the name of the group of institutions or the institution of the group to which the capital decision relates and applies;
(c)
the references to the applicable Union and national law relating to the preparation, finalisation and application of capital decisions;
(d)
the date of the capital decision;
(e)
the conclusion on the application of Articles 73 and 97 of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(f)
for capital decisions taken on a consolidated basis, the conclusion on the adequacy of own funds held by the group of institutions at consolidated level;
(g)
for capital decisions taken on an individual basis, the conclusion on the adequacy of own funds held by the relevant institution at individual level;
(h)
for capital decisions taken on a consolidated basis, the conclusion on the level of own funds that the group of institutions is required to hold at consolidated level pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(i)
for capital decisions taken on an individual basis, the conclusion on the level of own funds that the relevant institution is required to hold at individual level pursuant to point (a) of Article 104(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
(j)
information on the minimum prudential requirements which apply to the relevant institutions pursuant to Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and Articles 103, 129, 130, 131 and 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU and on any other relevant prudential or macro-prudential requirements, guidelines, recommendations or warnings;
(k)
the reference date to which the conclusions referred to in points (e) to (i) relate;
(l)
the description of how the risk assessment, views and reservations expressed by the other relevant competent authorities or consolidating supervisor are considered, where applicable;
(m)
the timeline for the implementation of the conclusions referred to in points (h) and (i), where applicable.
2. The capital decisions taken in the absence of a capital joint decision at individual or consolidated level shall meet the requirements set out in Article 10(2) to (4), where applicable.
Article 17
Drafting of the liquidity decisions taken in the absence of a liquidity joint decision
1. A liquidity decision taken in the absence of liquidity joint decision shall be set out in a document that contains all of the following items:
(a)
the name of the consolidating supervisor or relevant competent authority taking the liquidity decision;
(b)
the name of the group of institutions or the institution of the group to which the liquidity decision relates and applies;
(c)
the references to the applicable Union and national law relating to the preparation, finalisation and application of liquidity decisions;
(d)
the date of the liquidity decision;
(e)
for liquidity decisions taken on a consolidated basis, the conclusion on the liquidity adequacy for the group of institutions at consolidated level;
(f)
for liquidity decisions taken on an individual basis, the conclusion on the liquidity adequacy for the relevant institution at individual level;
(g)
for liquidity decisions taken on a consolidated basis, the conclusion on measures taken to address any significant matters and material findings relating to liquidity supervision including relating to the adequacy of the organisation and the treatment of risks as required pursuant to Article 86 of Directive 2013/36/EU and relating to the need for specific liquidity requirements in accordance with Article 105 of that Directive for the group at consolidated level;
(h)
for liquidity decisions taken on an individual basis, the conclusion on measures taken to address any significant matters and material findings relating to liquidity supervision including relating to the adequacy of the organisation and the treatment of risks as required pursuant to Article 86 of Directive 2013/36/EU and relating to the need for liquidity requirements specific to the relevant institution at individual level in accordance with Article 105 of that Directive;
(i)
the reference date to which the conclusions referred to in points (e) to (h) relate;
(j)
information on any other relevant prudential or macro-prudential requirements, guidelines, recommendations or warnings;
(k)
a description of how the risk assessment, views and reservations expressed by the other relevant competent authorities or consolidating supervisor are considered, where applicable;
(l)
the timeline for the implementation of the conclusions referred to in points (g) to (h), as applicable.
2. The liquidity decisions taken in the absence of a liquidity joint decision at individual or consolidated level shall meet the requirements set out in Articles 11(2) to (3).
Article 18
Communication of capital decisions and liquidity decisions taken in the absence of capital joint decision or liquidity joint decision
1. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the decision document referred to in Article 15(3) to the management body of the EU parent institution.
2. The relevant competent authorities in a Member State shall provide to the management bodies of institutions which are authorised in that Member State the respective parts of the decision document referred to in paragraph 1 that are relevant to each of these institutions.
3. The consolidating supervisor shall, where appropriate, discuss the decision document with the EU parent institution to explain the details and application of the capital decisions or liquidity decisions taken in the absence of a capital joint decision or liquidity joint decision.
4. The relevant competent authorities in a Member State shall, where appropriate, discuss with the institutions established in this Member State the respective parts of the decision document that are relevant to each of these institutions to explain the details and application of the capital decisions or liquidity decisions taken in the absence of a capital joint decision or a liquidity joint decision.
Article 19
Monitoring of the application of the capital decisions and liquidity decisions taken in the absence of capital joint decision or liquidity joint decision
The consolidating supervisor and relevant competent authorities shall monitor the application of the capital decisions and liquidity decisions, taken in the absence of a capital joint decision or liquidity joint decision, that are relevant to each of the institutions of the group for which they are respectively responsible.
CHAPTER IV
UPDATE AND EXTRAORDINARY UPDATE OF JOINT DECISIONS AND DECISIONS TAKEN IN THE ABSENCE OF JOINT DECISION
Article 20
Extraordinary update of joint decisions
1. Where a request for an extraordinary update of a capital joint decision or a liquidity joint decision is initiated by the consolidating supervisor or a relevant competent authority pursuant to Article 113(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU, the consolidating supervisor shall communicate this request to all relevant competent authorities. The extraordinary update shall follow the process set out in Articles 9 to 14.
2. Where a relevant competent authority requests to update a joint decision in relation to an institution other than an EU parent institution, an EU parent financial holding company or an EU parent mixed financial holding company with the consolidating supervisor on a bilateral basis, the request shall be made in writing and be fully reasoned.
The consolidating supervisor shall communicate the request referred to in the first subparagraph to all relevant competent authorities. The request shall include a draft capital joint decision document that complies with the requirements set out in Article 10 or a draft liquidity joint decision that complies with the requirements set out in Article 11. The consolidating supervisor shall set a deadline for relevant competent authorities to comment whether the update should be addressed on a bilateral basis.
Where none of the relevant competent authorities requests to address the update on a non-bilateral basis within the specified deadline, the consolidating supervisor and the relevant competent authority which requested the extraordinary update shall contribute to and reach an agreement on the joint decision on a bilateral basis.
3. Where a relevant competent authority does not wish to submit a contribution to the updated joint decision in accordance with Article 9, the consolidating supervisor shall prepare the updated joint decision on the basis of the most recent contribution to the joint decision document received from the relevant competent authority.
Article 21
Annual and extraordinary update of decisions taken in the absence of joint decision
1. The annual update of decisions taken in the absence of joint decision shall follow the steps pursuant to Article 3(2), in so far as each step is relevant for the application of Article 97(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU.
2. Any extraordinary update of decisions taken in the absence of joint decision pursuant to Article 113(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU shall follow the process set out in Articles 9 to 14.
CHAPTER V
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 22
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 June 2014.


Input:
NÕUKOGU OTSUS (ÜVJP) 2015/236,
12. veebruar 2015,
millega muudetakse otsust 2010/413/ÜVJP, mis käsitleb Iraani vastu suunatud piiravaid meetmeid
EUROOPA LIIDU NÕUKOGU,
võttes arvesse Euroopa Liidu lepingut, eriti selle artiklit 29,
võttes arvesse nõukogu 26. juuli 2010. aasta otsust 2010/413/ÜVJP, mis käsitleb Iraani vastu suunatud piiravaid meetmeid ning millega tunnistatakse kehtetuks ühine seisukoht 2007/140/ÜVJP, (1) eriti selle artiklit 23,
ning arvestades järgmist:
(1)
Nõukogu võttis 26. juulil 2010 vastu otsuse 2010/413/ÜVJP.
(2)
Otsusega 2010/413/ÜVJP lubatakse muu hulgas kohustuste täitmist, mis on ettenähtud enne 23. jaanuari 2012 sõlmitud lepingutes või selliste kohustuste täitmiseks vajalikes lisalepingutes, kui Iraani toornafta ja naftasaaduste tarned või nimetatud tarnetest saadud tulu seoses enne 23. jaanuari 2012 sõlmitud lepingutega on ette nähtud liikmesriigi territooriumil asuvatele või liikmesriigi jurisdiktsiooni alla kuuluvatele isikutele või üksustele tasumata summade hüvitamiseks, kui see hüvitamine on nimetatud lepingutega spetsiaalselt ette nähtud.
(3)
Otsusega 2010/413/ÜVJP sätestatakse samuti, et nimetatud otsuses ettenähtud varade külmutamise meetmeid ei kohaldata nimetatud otsuse II lisas loetletud üksuste tegevuse ja tehingute suhtes niivõrd, kui see on vajalik asjakohaste kohustuste täitmiseks kuni 31. detsembrini 2014.
(4)
Nõukogu on seisukohal, et nimetatud erandit tuleks pikendada kuni 30. juunini 2015.
(5)
Otsuses sisalduvate meetmete rakendamiseks on vaja täiendavaid liidu meetmeid.
(6)
Euroopa Liidu Üldkohus tühistas oma 12. detsembri 2013. aasta otsusega kohtuasjas T-58/12 nõukogu otsuse lisada Gholam Golparvar, Ghasem Nabipour, Mansour Eslami, Mohamad Talai, Mohammad Fard, Alireza Ghezelayagh, Hassan Zadeh, Mohammad Pajand, Ahmad Sarkandi, Seyed Rasool ja Ahmad Tafazoly otsuse 2010/413/ÜVJP II lisas esitatud loetellu isikutest ja üksustest, kelle suhtes kohaldatakse piiravaid meetmeid.
(7)
Gholam Golparvar tuleks uue põhjenduse alusel uuesti lisada nende isikute ja üksuste loetellu, kelle suhtes kohaldatakse piiravaid meetmeid.
(8)
Euroopa Liidu Üldkohus tühistas oma 3. juuli 2014. aasta otsusega kohtuasjas T-565/12 nõukogu otsuse lisada National Iranian Tanker Company otsuse 2010/413/ÜVJP II lisas esitatud nende isikute ja üksuste loetellu, kelle suhtes kohaldatakse piiravaid meetmeid.
(9)
National Iranian Tanker Company tuleks uue põhjenduse alusel uuesti lisada nende isikute ja üksuste loetellu, kelle suhtes kohaldatakse piiravaid meetmeid.
(10)
Otsust 2010/413/ÜVJP tuleks seepärast vastavalt muuta,
ON VASTU VÕTNUD KÄESOLEVA OTSUSE:
Artikkel 1
Otsuse 2010/413/ÜVJP artikli 20 lõige 14 asendatakse järgmisega:
„14. Lõikeid 1 ja 2 ei kohaldata II lisas loetletud üksuste tegevuse ja tehingute suhtes, kui see on vajalik artikli 3c lõikes 2 osutatud kohustuste täitmiseks kuni 30. juunini 2015, tingimusel et asjaomane liikmesriik on nimetatud tegevuse ja tehingute jaoks andnud igal üksikjuhul eraldi eelneva loa. Asjaomane liikmesriik teavitab teisi liikmesriike ja komisjoni oma kavatsusest anda luba.”
Artikkel 2
Otsuse 2010/413/ÜVJP II lisa muudetakse vastavalt käesoleva otsuse lisale.
Artikkel 3
Käesolev otsus jõustub selle Euroopa Liidu Teatajas avaldamise kuupäeval.
Brüssel, 12. veebruar 2015


Input:
DURCHFÜHRUNGSRICHTLINIE 2012/37/EU DER KOMMISSION
vom 22. November 2012
zur Änderung bestimmter Anhänge der Richtlinien 66/401/EWG und 66/402/EWG des Rates in Bezug auf die Anforderungen an das Saatgut von Galega orientalis Lam., das Höchstgewicht einer Saatgutpartie bestimmter Futterpflanzenarten und den Probenumfang von Sorghum spp.
(Text von Bedeutung für den EWR)
DIE EUROPÄISCHE KOMMISSION -
gestützt auf den Vertrag über die Arbeitsweise der Europäischen Union,
gestützt auf die Richtlinie 66/401/EWG des Rates vom 14. Juni 1966 über den Verkehr mit Futterpflanzensaatgut (1), insbesondere auf Artikel 21a,
gestützt auf die Richtlinie 66/402/EWG des Rates vom 14. Juni 1966 über den Verkehr mit Getreidesaatgut (2), insbesondere auf Artikel 21a,
in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe:
(1)
Hartschalige Körner sind ein typisches Merkmal von Galega orientalis Lam. Daher sollten die Qualitätsanforderungen an diese Art hinsichtlich der Mindestkeimfähigkeit durch bestimmte Angaben zu diesem Merkmal ergänzt werden.
(2)
In der Richtlinie 66/401/EWG wurde das Höchstgewicht einer Partie im Hinblick auf die Saatgutprüfung festgelegt, um Abweichungen zwischen den geprüften Partien zu vermeiden.
(3)
Da Veränderungen in der Saatguterzeugung und in den Vermarktungspraktiken für Saatgut, insbesondere die gestiegene Saatgutgröße und die Art der Saatgutbeförderung, nahelegten, dass eine Anhebung des vorgeschriebenen Höchstgewichts für Grassaatgutpartien wünschenswert sein könnte, wurde ein zeitlich begrenzter Versuch gemäß der Entscheidung 2007/66/EG der Kommission (3) durchgeführt.
(4)
Dieser Versuch ergab, dass Saatgutbetriebe unter den neuen Bedingungen ausreichend homogene Saatgutpartien größeren Umfangs herstellen können. Daher sollte es den Mitgliedstaaten gestattet werden, die Anhebung des Höchstgewichts von Grassaatgutpartien zu genehmigen.
(5)
Die in der Richtlinie 66/402/EWG festgelegten Bedingungen für die Saatguterzeugung, Feldbesichtigungen, die Saatgutprobenahme und die Saatgutprüfung basieren auf international anerkannten Methoden und Standards, etwa auf denen der Internationalen Vereinigung für Saatgutprüfung (ISTA).
(6)
Bei der Festlegung der Qualitätsanforderungen für Sorghum spp. diente hauptsächlich die Art Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench als Grundlage. Im Zuge des neu entstandenen Marktes für Grünfutter- und Biomasseproduktion ist die Nachfrage nach anderen Unterarten und Hybriden von Sorghum spp. mit einer geringeren Korngröße sowie einer dünneren und flacheren Form gestiegen. Dementsprechend sollten die Anforderungen an einzelne Unterarten weiterentwickelt werden, um deren Saatguteigenschaften Rechnung zu tragen.
(7)
Sorghum spp. sollte unterschieden werden in Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench, Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf und deren Hybriden, und ihr Probenumfang sollte an die ISTA-Standards angepasst werden.
(8)
Die Richtlinien 66/401/EWG und 66/402/EWG sollten daher entsprechend geändert werden.
(9)
Die in dieser Richtlinie vorgesehenen Maßnahmen entsprechen der Stellungnahme des Ständigen Ausschusses für das landwirtschaftliche, gartenbauliche und forstliche Saat- und Pflanzgutwesen -
HAT FOLGENDE RICHTLINIE ERLASSEN:
Artikel 1
Änderung der Richtlinie 66/401/EWG
Die Richtlinie 66/401/EWG wird wie folgt geändert:
1.
In Anhang II Abschnitt I Nummer 2 Tabelle A wird beim Eintrag zu „Galega orientalis Lam.“ in Spalte 2 die Zahl „60“ ersetzt durch
„60 a) b)“
.
2.
In Anhang III Spalte 1 erhält der Eintrag zu „Poaceae (Gramineae)“ folgenden Wortlaut:
„ Poaceae (Gramineae)
(4)
Artikel 2
Änderung der Richtlinie 66/402/EWG
Anhang III der Richtlinie 66/402/EWG wird wie folgt geändert:
1.
Die Einträge zu „Sorghum bicolor und Sorghum bicolor x Sorghum sudanense“ und „Sorghum sudanense“ erhalten folgenden Wortlaut:
1
2
3
4
„Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench
30
900
900
Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf
10
250
250“
2.
Folgender Eintrag wird nach dem Eintrag zu „Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf“ eingefügt:
1
2
3
4
„Hybriden von Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench x Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf
30
300
300“
Artikel 3
Umsetzung
(1) Die Mitgliedstaaten setzen die Rechts- und Verwaltungsvorschriften in Kraft, die erforderlich sind, um dieser Richtlinie spätestens zum 31. Dezember 2013 nachzukommen. Sie teilen der Kommission unverzüglich den Wortlaut dieser Rechtsvorschriften mit und fügen eine Entsprechungstabelle dieser Rechtsvorschriften und der vorliegenden Richtlinie bei.
Bei Erlass dieser Vorschriften nehmen die Mitgliedstaaten in den Vorschriften selbst oder durch einen Hinweis bei der amtlichen Veröffentlichung auf diese Richtlinie Bezug. Die Mitgliedstaaten regeln die Einzelheiten dieser Bezugnahme.
(2) Die Mitgliedstaaten teilen der Kommission den Wortlaut der wichtigsten innerstaatlichen Rechtsvorschriften mit, die sie auf dem unter diese Richtlinie fallenden Gebiet erlassen.
Artikel 4
Inkrafttreten
Diese Richtlinie tritt am siebten Tag nach ihrer Veröffentlichung im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union in Kraft.
Artikel 5
Adressaten
Diese Richtlinie ist an die Mitgliedstaaten gerichtet.
Brüssel, den 22. November 2012


Input:
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1238/2014
of 19 November 2014
amending Regulation (EU) No 59/2011 as regards tariff quotas for wines originating in Serbia
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Articles 184 and 187 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
The Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and Serbia, of the other part (‘the SAA’), was signed in Luxembourg on 29 April 2008 and entered into force on 1 September 2013.
(2)
The Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (2) (‘the Protocol’) was signed on 25 June 2014. Its signature on behalf of the European Union and its Member States has been authorised by Council Decision 2014/517/EU (3) and its conclusion on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community has been approved by Council Decision 2014/518/Euratom (4). The Protocol has been provisionally applied with effect from 1 August 2014.
(3)
Article 7 of the Protocol and Annex III thereto provide for changes to the existing tariff quotas for wines originating in Serbia with effect from 1 August 2014.
(4)
In accordance with Article 11 of the Protocol, for the year 2014 the volumes of the new tariff quotas and the increases of the volumes of existing tariff quotas are to be calculated as a pro rata of the basic annual volumes specified in the Protocol, taking into account the part of the period elapsed before 1 August 2014.
(5)
To implement the tariff quotas for wine laid down in the Protocol, it is necessary to adapt Commission Regulation (EU) No 59/2011 (5).
(6)
Regulation (EU) No 59/2011 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(7)
Since the Protocol applies from 1 August 2014, this Regulation should apply from the same date and enter into force on the day of its publication.
(8)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EU) No 59/2011 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 August 2014.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 November 2014.


Input:
KOMISIJAS ĪSTENOŠANAS REGULA (ES) Nr. 975/2013
(2013. gada 11. oktobris)
par atkāpēm no izcelsmes noteikumiem, kas izklāstīti II pielikumā Nolīgumam, ar ko izveido asociāciju starp Eiropas Savienību un tās dalībvalstīm, no vienas puses, un Centrālameriku, no otras puses, un to piemērošanu kvotu ietvaros konkrētiem izstrādājumiem no Hondurasas
EIROPAS KOMISIJA,
ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Savienības darbību,
ņemot vērā Padomes 2012. gada 25. jūnija Lēmumu 2012/734/ES par to, lai Eiropas Savienības vārdā parakstītu Nolīgumu, ar ko izveido asociāciju starp Eiropas Savienību un tās dalībvalstīm, no vienas puses, un Centrālameriku, no otras puses, un provizoriski piemērotu tā IV daļu par tirdzniecības jautājumiem (1), un jo īpaši tā 6. pantu,
tā kā:
(1)
Ar Lēmumu 2012/734/ES Padome pilnvaroja Savienības vārdā parakstīt Nolīgumu, ar ko izveido asociāciju starp Eiropas Savienību un tās dalībvalstīm, no vienas puses, un Centrālameriku, no otras puses (turpmāk “nolīgums”). Saskaņā ar Lēmumu 2012/734/ES šis nolīgums jāpiemēro provizoriski, kamēr nav pabeigtas procedūras tā noslēgšanai.
(2)
Nolīguma II pielikums attiecas uz jēdziena “noteiktas izcelsmes izstrādājumi” definīciju un administratīvās sadarbības metodēm. Attiecībā uz vairākiem minētā pielikuma 2.A papildinājumā minētajiem izstrādājumiem gada kvotu ietvaros paredzēta iespēja izmantot atkāpes no izcelsmes noteikumiem, kas izklāstīti II pielikuma 2. papildinājumā. Savienība ir lēmusi izmantot atkāpes, tādēļ ir jāizstrādā nosacījumi minēto atkāpju piemērošanai attiecībā uz importu no Hondurasas.
(3)
Kvotas, kas noteiktas II pielikuma 2.A papildinājumā, būtu jāpārvalda, ievērojot rindas kārtības principu saskaņā ar Komisijas 1993. gada 2. jūlija Regulu (EEK) Nr. 2454/93, ar ko nosaka īstenošanas noteikumus Padomes Regulai (EEK) Nr. 2913/92 par Kopienas Muitas kodeksa izveidi (2).
(4)
Lai izmantotu tiesības uz tarifu koncesijām, būtu jāuzrāda attiecīgs izcelsmes apliecinājums muitas iestādēm, kā paredzēts nolīgumā.
(5)
Tā kā nolīgumu piemēro no 2013. gada 1. augusta, šī regula būtu jāpiemēro no tās pašas dienas.
(6)
Šajā regulā paredzētie pasākumi ir saskaņā ar Muitas kodeksa komitejas atzinumu,
IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO REGULU.
1. pants
1. Izcelsmes noteikumi, kas izklāstīti 2.A papildinājumā II pielikumam, kurš pievienots Nolīgumam, ar ko izveido asociāciju starp Eiropas Savienību un tās dalībvalstīm, no vienas puses, un Centrālameriku, no otras puses (turpmāk “nolīgums”), attiecas uz izstrādājumiem, kas uzskaitīti šīs regulas pielikumā.
2. Atkāpjoties no nolīguma II pielikuma 2. papildinājumā izklāstītajiem izcelsmes noteikumiem, šīs regulas pielikumā noteikto kvotu ietvaros piemēro 1. punktā minētos izcelsmes noteikumus.
2. pants
Lai piemērotu 1. pantā paredzēto atkāpi, pielikumā uzskaitītajiem izstrādājumiem pievieno izcelsmes apliecinājumu, kā noteikts nolīguma II pielikumā.
3. pants
Pielikumā minētās kvotas pārvalda saskaņā ar Regulas (EEK) Nr. 2454/93 308.a, 308.b un 308.c pantu.
4. pants
Šī regula stājas spēkā trešajā dienā pēc tās publicēšanas Eiropas Savienības Oficiālajā Vēstnesī.
To piemēro no 2013. gada 1. augusta.
Šī regula uzliek saistības kopumā un ir tieši piemērojama visās dalībvalstīs.
Briselē, 2013. gada 11. oktobrī


Input:
UITVOERINGSBESLUIT 2014/238/GBVB VAN DE RAAD
van 28 april 2014
tot uitvoering van Besluit 2014/145/GBVB betreffende beperkende maatregelen met betrekking tot acties die de territoriale integriteit, soevereiniteit en onafhankelijkheid van Oekraïne ondermijnen of bedreigen
DE RAAD VAN DE EUROPESE UNIE,
Gezien het Verdrag betreffende de Europese Unie, en met name artikel 31, lid 2,
Gezien Besluit 2014/145/GBVB van de Raad van 17 maart 2014 betreffende beperkende maatregelen met betrekking tot acties die de territoriale integriteit, soevereiniteit en onafhankelijkheid van Oekraïne ondermijnen of bedreigen (1), en met name artikel 3, lid 1,
Overwegende hetgeen volgt:
(1)
Op 17 maart 2014 heeft de Raad Besluit 2014/145/GBVB vastgesteld.
(2)
Gezien de ernst van de situatie, is de Raad van oordeel dat bijkomende personen moeten worden toegevoegd aan de in de bijlage bij Besluit 2014/145/GBVB opgenomen lijst van personen, entiteiten en lichamen die onderworpen zijn aan beperkende maatregelen.
(3)
De bijlage bij Besluit 2014/145/GBVB moet derhalve dienovereenkomstig worden gewijzigd,
HEEFT HET VOLGENDE BESLUIT VASTGESTELD:
Artikel 1
De in de bijlage bij dit besluit genoemde personen worden toegevoegd aan de lijst in de bijlage bij Besluit 2014/145/GBVB.
Artikel 2
Dit besluit treedt in werking op de dag van de bekendmaking ervan in het Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie.
Gedaan te Brussel, 28 april 2014.


Input:
PROVEDBENA UREDBA KOMISIJE (EU) br. 888/2013
оd 16. rujna 2013.
o upisu naziva u registar zaštićenih oznaka izvornosti i zaštićenih oznaka zemljopisnog podrijetla [Oignon de Roscoff (ZOI)]
EUROPSKA KOMISIJA,
uzimajući u obzir Ugovor o funkcioniranju Europske unije,
uzimajući u obzir Uredbu (EU) br. 1151/2012 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 21. studenoga 2012. o sustavima kvalitete za poljoprivredne i prehrambene proizvode (1), a posebno njezin članak 52. stavak 2.,
budući da:
(1)
Uredbom Vijeća (EU) br. 1151/2012 stavljena je izvan snage i zamijenjena Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 510/2006 od 20. ožujka 2006. o zaštiti oznaka zemljopisnog podrijetla i oznaka izvornosti za poljoprivredne i prehrambene proizvode (2).
(2)
(5) U skladu s člankom 6. stavkom 2. Uredbe (EZ) br. 510/2006 zahtjev kojim je Francuska zatražila registraciju naziva „Oignon de Roscoff” objavljen je u Službenom listu Europske unije (3).
(3)
Kako Komisija nije primila ni jedan prigovor u smislu članka 7. Uredbe (EZ) br. 510/2006, naziv „Oignon de Roscoff” potrebno je upisati u registar,
DONIJELA JE OVU UREDBU:
Članak 1.
Naziv naveden u Prilogu ovoj Uredbi ovime se upisuje u registar.
Članak 2.
Ova Uredba stupa na snagu dvadesetog dana od dana objave u Službenom listu Europske unije.
Ova je Uredba u cijelosti obvezujuća i izravno se primjenjuje u svim državama članicama.
Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 16. rujna 2013.


Input:
DECISÃO DE EXECUÇÃO DA COMISSÃO
de 17 de dezembro de 2013
que institui a Agência de Execução para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas e que revoga as Decisões 2004/20/CE e 2007/372/CE
(2013/771/UE)
A COMISSÃO EUROPEIA,
Tendo em conta o Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia,
Tendo em conta o Regulamento (CE) n.o 58/2003 do Conselho, de 19 de dezembro de 2002, que define o estatuto das agências de execução encarregadas de determinadas funções de gestão de programas comunitários (1), nomeadamente o artigo 3.o,
Considerando o seguinte:
(1)
O Regulamento (CE) n.o 58/2003 confere à Comissão o poder de delegar nas agências de execução a execução da totalidade ou de parte de um programa ou projeto da União, em seu nome e sob a sua responsabilidade.
(2)
O propósito de confiar às agências de execução funções de execução de programas é permitir à Comissão centrar-se nas suas atividades e funções prioritárias, que não são passíveis de externalização, sem todavia perder o controlo e a responsabilidade última pelas ações geridas pelas agências de execução.
(3)
A delegação numa agência de execução de funções relacionadas com a execução dos programas exige uma separação clara entre as fases de programação, que pressupõem um amplo poder discricionário na realização de escolhas ditadas por considerações políticas, fase esta que é da competência da Comissão, e a execução do programa, que deve ser confiada à agência de execução.
(4)
Pela Decisão 2004/20/CE (2), a Comissão instituiu a Agência de Execução de Energia Inteligente (a seguir denominada «agência»), para a gestão da ação comunitária no domínio das energias renováveis e da eficiência energética.
(5)
Subsequentemente, a Comissão alterou o mandato da agência por Decisão 2007/372/CE (3), para o alargar à gestão de novos projetos e programas no domínio da inovação, do empreendedorismo e da mobilidade e alterou a sua designação para Agência de Execução para a Competitividade e a Inovação.
(6)
A agência instituída pela Decisão 2004/20/CE demonstrou que a externalização da gestão de programas operacionais específicos veio permitir que as Direções-Gerais responsáveis pudessem centrar-se nos aspetos relacionados com as políticas dos programas. Dados os contínuos condicionalismos orçamentais da UE, a delegação nas agências de execução revelou-se mais eficiente em termos de custos. As duas avaliações intercalares da agência mostraram que, em termos globais, a agência funciona bem e constitui um instrumento eficiente e eficaz para implementar as iniciativas atribuídas.
(7)
Na sua Comunicação de 29 de junho de 2011«Um orçamento para a Europa 2020» (4), a Comissão propôs optar por um recurso mais amplo às agências de execução existentes para a execução de programas da União no próximo quadro financeiro plurianual.
(8)
A análise custos/benefícios (5) realizada em conformidade com o artigo 3.o, n.o 1, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 58/2003 apresenta uma previsão de custos de 295 milhões de EUR, em vez dos 399 milhões de EUR previstos para a realização pela Comissão. Do lado dos benefícios, a execução pela agência permite um ganho de 104 milhões de EUR em relação à execução interna. Além disso, a melhor articulação dos programas com as competências essenciais da agência e as suas características específicas deverá trazer importantes benefícios qualitativos. A análise mostrou que, reunindo a gestão do programa-quadro Horizonte 2020 - Programa-quadro de investigação e inovação (2014-2020) (6) (seguidamente designado programa-quadro Horizonte 2020), o programa para a competitividade das empresas e pequenas e médias empresas 2014-2020 (7) (a seguir designado programa COSME) e o programa para o Ambiente e a Ação Climática (LIFE) (8), a Agência irá tirar partido de sinergias, simplificação e economias de escala. A congregação de todos os aspetos do programa-quadro Horizonte 2020 «Instrumento a favor das PME» permitirá, ainda, disponibilizar um ponto único de acesso aos potenciais beneficiários e garantir a coerência da prestação de serviços. No âmbito do Fundo Europeu dos Assuntos Marítimos e das Pescas (9) (FEAMP), em especial as ações previstas na vertente da Política Marítima Integrada correspondem bem ao atual perfil da agência relacionado com a inovação e a competitividade. A transferência da gestão do legado do programa Marco Polo (2007-2013) para a Agência de Execução para a Inovação e as Redes virá ainda centralizar a gestão dos programas de infraestruturas de transportes nessa mesma agência e, por conseguinte, disponibilizar aos beneficiários um ponto de acesso único ao financiamento.
(9)
Ao definir os novos mandatos das agências de execução e a fim de lhes conceder uma identidade coerente, a Comissão tem, tanto quanto possível, agrupado os trabalhos em domínios de intervenção temáticos.
(10)
Deverá ser confiada à agência a gestão do programa LIFE, sucessor do anterior programa LIFE+, que no âmbito do Quadro Financeiro Plurianual (2007-2013) é gerido internamente pela Comissão. A gestão do programa LIFE visa a execução de projetos de caráter técnico que não implicam a tomada de decisões de natureza política e exige um elevado nível de competências técnicas e financeiras ao longo de todo o ciclo dos projetos. O programa LIFE é caracterizado por projetos que geram um grande número de operações tipificadas e homogéneas.
(11)
A agência deve ser responsável pela gestão de certas partes do programa COSME na continuidade do Programa para o Espírito Empresarial e a Inovação (PEEI), no âmbito do Programa-Quadro para a Competitividade e a Inovação de 2007-2013 (10) (designado seguidamente PCI), cuja gestão é atualmente partilhada pela agência e pela Comissão. A gestão parcial do programa COSME, a delegar na agência, tem por objetivo a execução de projetos de cariz técnico que não implicam a tomada de decisões de natureza política e exige um elevado nível de competências técnicas e financeiras ao longo de todo o ciclo do projeto. Algumas partes do programa COSME caracterizam-se ainda por projetos que geram um grande número de operações tipificadas e homogéneas.
(12)
A gestão de partes do FEAMP deve ser confiada à agência no respeitante à área da Política Marítima Integrada (PMI), Controlo e Consultoria e Conhecimentos Científicos, na sequência de atividades semelhantes que, a título do Quadro Financeiro Plurianual (2007-2013), são geridas internamente pela Comissão. A gestão do FEAMP inclui a execução de projetos técnicos que não implicam a tomada de decisões de natureza política e exige um elevado nível de competências técnicas e financeiras ao longo de todo o ciclo do projeto.
(13)
A Agência deve ser responsável pela gestão das seguintes partes do «Horizonte 2020»:
a)
partes de «Parte II - Liderança Industrial», caracterizadas por projetos que geram um grande número de operações tipificadas e homogéneas;
b)
partes de «Parte III - Desafios Societais», que incluem a execução de projetos técnicos que não implicam a tomada de decisões de natureza política e exigem um elevado nível de competências técnicas e financeiras ao longo de todo o ciclo do projeto.
(14)
A agência deve ser responsável pela gestão do legado das ações de que já foi encarregada no âmbito do PCI, a título do Quadro Financeiro Plurianual (2007-2013): «Energia Inteligente - Europa (IEE II)», «Rede Europeia de Empresas», «Portal A sua Europa - Empresas», «Helpdesk DPI Europa», «Iniciativa Ecoinovação» e «Projeto IPorta».
(15)
A agência deve ser responsável pela prestação de apoio administrativo e logístico, em especial sempre que a centralização desses serviços de apoio permita obter um aumento da eficiência de custos e das economias de escala.
(16)
É necessário instituir a Agência de Execução para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas. Esta deve substituir e suceder à agência criada pela Decisão 2004/20/CE, com a redação que lhe foi dada pela Decisão 2007/372/CE. A agência deve funcionar em conformidade com o estatuto geral estabelecido pelo Regulamento (CE) n.o 58/2003.
(17)
As Decisões 2004/20/CE e 2007/372/CE devem ser revogadas e devem ser previstas disposições transitórias.
(18)
As medidas previstas na presente decisão estão em conformidade com o parecer do Comité das Agências de Execução,
ADOTOU A PRESENTE DECISÃO:
Artigo 1.o
Criação
É instituída a Agência Executiva para as Pequenas e Médias Empresas (a seguir denominada «agência»), que substitui e sucede à agência de execução criada pela Decisão 2004/20/CE, com a redação que lhe foi dada pela Decisão 2007/372/CE, por um período compreendido entre 1 de janeiro de 2014 e 31 de dezembro de 2024, sendo os seus estatutos regidos pelo Regulamento (CE) n.o 58/2003.
Artigo 2.o
Localização
A agência ficará localizada em Bruxelas.
Artigo 3.o
Objetivos e funções
1. A agência é responsável pela execução de determinadas partes dos seguintes programas da União:
a)
Programa para a Competitividade das Empresas e Pequenas e Médias Empresas (COSME) 2014-2020 (11);
b)
Programa para o Ambiente e a Ação Climática (LIFE) 2014-2020 (12);
c)
Fundo Europeu dos Assuntos Marítimos e das Pescas (FEAMP) (13), incluindo a Política Marítima Integrada (PMI), Controlo e Consultoria e Conhecimentos Científicos;
d)
Programa-Quadro de Investigação e Inovação 2014-2020 (Horizonte 2020) (14) - partes de «Parte II - Liderança Industrial» e «Parte III - Desafios Societais».
O n.o 1 é aplicável sob reserva e a partir da data de entrada em vigor de cada um destes programas.
2. A presente decisão confia à agência a execução do legado das seguintes ações no âmbito do CPI:
a)
Energia Inteligente - Europa (EIE);
b)
Iniciativa «Ecoinovação»;
c)
«Rede Europeia de Empresas»;
d)
«Portal A sua Europa - Empresas»;
e)
«Helpdesk DPI Europa»;
f)
«Projeto IPorta».
3. No âmbito da execução das partes dos programas da União mencionados nos n.os 1 e 2, à Agência incumbem as seguintes funções:
a)
a gestão de algumas ou de todas as fases da execução do programa e de algumas ou de todas as fases do ciclo de projetos específicos com base nos programas de trabalho pertinentes adotados pela Comissão, caso a Comissão lhe tenha conferido poderes para o efeito no ato de delegação;
b)
a adoção dos atos de execução orçamental referentes às receitas e despesas e a realização de todas as operações necessárias para a gestão do programa, caso a Comissão lhe tenha conferido poderes para o efeito no ato de delegação;
c)
a concessão de apoio à execução do programa, caso a Comissão lhe tenha conferido poderes para o efeito no ato de delegação.
4. A Agência pode ser responsável pela prestação de serviços de apoio administrativo e logístico se tal estiver previsto no ato de delegação, em prol dos órgãos de execução dos programas e no âmbito dos programas referidos.
Artigo 4.o
Duração das nomeações
1. Os membros do comité de direção são nomeados por dois anos.
2. O diretor é nomeado por cinco anos.
Artigo 5.o
Controlo e prestação de contas
A agência está sujeita ao controlo da Comissão e deve prestar regularmente contas da execução dos programas ou partes dos programas da União que lhe são confiados, segundo as modalidades e com a periodicidade definidas no ato de delegação.
Artigo 6.o
Execução do orçamento de funcionamento
A agência executa o seu orçamento de funcionamento em conformidade com as disposições do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1653/2004 da Comissão (15).
Artigo 7.o
Revogação e disposições transitórias
1. As Decisões 2004/20/CE e 2007/372/CE são revogadas com efeitos a partir de 1 de janeiro de 2014. As referências às decisões revogadas devem ser entendidas como sendo feitas à presente decisão.
2. A agência deve ser considerada como sucessor legal da agência de execução instituída pela Decisão 2004/20/CE com a redação que lhe foi dada pela Decisão 2007/372/CE.
3. Sem prejuízo da revisão da classificação dos funcionários destacados prevista pelo ato de delegação, a presente decisão não afeta os direitos e as obrigações do pessoal empregado pela agência, incluindo o seu diretor.
Artigo 8.o
Entrada em vigor
A presente decisão entra em vigor no dia seguinte ao da sua publicação no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia.
A presente decisão é aplicável a partir de 1 de janeiro de 2014.
Feito em Bruxelas, em 17 de dezembro de 2013.


Input:
UREDBA KOMISIJE (EU) 2015/45
оd 14. siječnja 2015.
o izmjeni Direktive 2007/46/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća i Uredbe Komisije (EZ) br. 692/2008 u pogledu inovativnih tehnologija za smanjenje emisija CO2 iz lakih gospodarskih vozila
(Tekst značajan za EGP)
EUROPSKA KOMISIJA,
uzimajući u obzir Ugovor o funkcioniranju Europske unije,
uzimajući u obzir Uredbu (EZ) br. 715/2007 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 20. lipnja 2007. o homologaciji tipa motornih vozila u odnosu na emisije iz lakih osobnih i gospodarskih vozila (Euro 5 i Euro 6) i pristupu podacima za popravke i održavanje vozila (1), a posebno njezin članak 5. stavak 3.,
uzimajući u obzir Direktivu 2007/46/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 5. rujna 2007. o uspostavi okvira za homologaciju motornih vozila i njihovih prikolica te sustava, sastavnih dijelova i zasebnih tehničkih jedinica namijenjenih za takva vozila (Okvirna direktiva) (2), a posebno njezin članak 39. stavak 2.,
budući da:
(1)
Uredbom (EU) br. 510/2011 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća (3) predviđa se da bi se uštede CO2 koje se postižu primjenom inovativnih tehnologija trebale uzeti u obzir za izračun prosječnih specifičnih emisija CO2 svakog proizvođača. Detaljna pravila za odobravanje i certifikaciju inovativnih tehnologija za smanjivanje emisija CO2 iz lakih gospodarskih vozila utvrđena su u Provedbenoj uredbi Komisije (EU) br. 427/2014 (4).
(2)
Kako bi se uzele u obzir uštede CO2 koje se postižu primjenom inovativnih tehnologija za izračun ciljne vrijednosti specifičnih emisija CO2 svakog proizvođača i kako bi se osiguralo učinkovito praćenje specifičnih CO2 ušteda pojedinačnih vozila, vozila s ugrađenim eko-inovacijama trebala bi se certificirati u okviru homologacije vozila i uštede bi se trebale, u skladu s člankom 11. stavkom 2. Provedbene uredbe (EU) br. 427/2014, navoditi odvojeno u dokumentaciji o homologaciji i potvrdi o sukladnosti u skladu s Direktivom 2007/46/EZ.
(3)
Stoga je potrebno izmijeniti dokumente koji se upotrebljavaju u postupku homologacije kako bi na odgovarajući način odražavali informacije povezane s eko-inovacijama.
(4)
S jedne strane cilj izmjene dokumenata koji se upotrebljavaju za homologaciju jest pružanje odgovarajućih podataka o certificiranju lakih gospodarskih vozila s ugrađenim eko-inovacijama tijelima za homologaciju, a s druge strane uključivanje ušteda CO2 zbog eko-inovacija u reprezentativne informacije za određeni tip, varijantu ili izvedbu vozila.
(5)
Uredbom Komisije (EZ) br. 692/2008 (5) utvrđuju se administrativne odredbe za provjeru sukladnosti vozila u pogledu emisija CO2 i zahtjevi za mjerenje emisija CO2 i potrošnje goriva takvih vozila.
(6)
Stoga je Direktivu 2007/46/EZ i Uredbu (EZ) br. 692/2008 potrebno na odgovarajući način izmijeniti.
(7)
Proizvođačima i nadležnim nacionalnim tijelima trebalo bi dati dovoljno vremena kako bi svoje postupke prilagodili novim pravilima.
(8)
Proizvođači bi trebali imati mogućnost na dobrovoljnoj osnovi podnijeti zahtjev za certifikaciju ušteda CO2 zbog uvođenja inovativnih tehnologija prije dana primjene novih pravila.
(9)
Mjere predviđene ovom Uredbom usklađene su s mišljenjem Tehničkog odbora za motorna vozila,
DONIJELA JE OVU UREDBU:
Članak 1.
Prilozi I. i IX. Direktivi 2007/46/EZ mijenjaju se u skladu s Prilogom I. ovoj Uredbi.
Članak 2.
Prilozi I. i XII. Uredbi (EZ) br. 692/2008 mijenjaju se u skladu s Prilogom II. ovoj Uredbi.
Članak 3.
S učinkom od dana stupanja na snagu ove Uredbe nacionalna nadležna tijela ne smiju odbiti dodjeljivanje homologacije EZ-a ili nacionalne homologacije za tipove vozila koji su u skladu s ovom Uredbom.
Od 1. siječnja 2016. homologacije tipova vozila s ugrađenim inovativnim tehnologijama za smanjenje emisija CO2 dodjeljuju se u skladu s Direktivom 2007/46/EZ i Uredbom (EZ) br. 692/2008 kako su izmijenjene ovom Uredbom.
Najkasnije od 1. siječnja 2016. proizvođači za sva nova vozila izdaju potvrde o sukladnosti u skladu s Direktivom 2007/46/EZ i Uredbom (EZ) br. 692/2008 kako su izmijenjene ovom Uredbom.
Članak 4.
Ova Uredba stupa na snagu dvadesetog dana od dana objave u Službenom listu Europske unije.
Ova je Uredba u cijelosti obvezujuća i izravno se primjenjuje u svim državama članicama.
Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 14. siječnja 2015.


Input:
NÕUKOGU OTSUS,
16. detsember 2013,
sõrmejälgede andmeid käsitleva automatiseeritud andmevahetuse alustamise kohta Soomega
(2013/792/EL)
EUROOPA LIIDU NÕUKOGU,
võttes arvesse nõukogu 23. juuni 2008. aasta otsust 2008/615/JSK piiriülese koostöö tõhustamise kohta, eelkõige seoses terrorismi- ja piiriülese kuritegevuse vastase võitlusega, (1) eelkõige selle artiklit 25,
võttes arvesse nõukogu 23. juuni 2008. aasta otsust 2008/616/JSK, millega rakendatakse otsust 2008/615/JSK, (2) eriti selle artiklit 20 ja lisa 4. peatükki,
ning arvestades järgmist:
(1)
Vastavalt Euroopa Liidu lepingule, Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingule ja Euroopa Aatomienergiaühenduse asutamislepingule lisatud protokollile üleminekusätete kohta säilib liidu institutsioonide, organite ja asutuste poolt enne Lissaboni lepingu jõustumist vastuvõetud õigusaktide õiguslik toime kuni asjaomaste õigusaktide kehtetuks tunnistamise, tühiseks tunnistamise või muutmiseni aluslepingute kohaldamisel.
(2)
Seega kohaldatakse otsuse 2008/615/JSK artiklit 25 ja nõukogu peab otsustama ühehäälselt, kas liikmesriigid on rakendanud nimetatud otsuse 6. peatüki sätteid.
(3)
Otsuse 2008/616/JSK artiklis 20 on sätestatud, et otsuse 2008/615/JSK artikli 25 lõikes 2 nimetatud otsused tuleb teha küsimustikul põhineva hindamisaruande alusel. Otsuse 2008/615/JSK 2. peatüki kohase automatiseeritud andmevahetuse osas peab hindamisaruanne põhinema hindamiskülastusel ja süsteemi katselisel kasutamisel.
(4)
Vastavalt otsuse 2008/616/JSK lisa 4. peatüki punktile 1.1 koostab asjaomane nõukogu töörühm iga andmekategooria puhul automatiseeritud andmevahetust käsitleva küsimustiku ja niipea kui liikmesriik leiab, et tema puhul on täidetud vastavasse andmekategooriasse kuuluvate andmete vahetamise tingimused, peab ta küsimustiku täitma.
(5)
Soome on täitnud andmekaitset käsitleva küsimustiku ja sõrmejälgede andmete vahetamist käsitleva küsimustiku.
(6)
Soome on koos Austriaga sooritanud eduka katselise kasutamise.
(7)
Soomes on toimunud hindamiskülastus ning Austria hindamisrühm on koostanud hindamiskülastuse aruande ja edastanud selle asjaomasele nõukogu töörühmale.
(8)
Nõukogule on esitatud üldine hindamisaruanne, milles võetakse kokku sõrmejälgede andmete vahetamist käsitleva küsimustiku, hindamiskülastuse ja katselise kasutamise tulemused,
ON VASTU VÕTNUD KÄESOLEVA OTSUSE:
Artikkel 1
Soome on sõrmejälgede andmete automatiseeritud otsinguks täielikult rakendanud otsuse 2008/615/JSK 6. peatüki andmekaitset käsitlevad üldsätted ning tal on õigus saada ja edastada isikuandmeid vastavalt nimetatud otsuse artiklile 9 alates käesoleva otsuse jõustumise päevast.
Artikkel 2
Käesolev otsus jõustub selle vastuvõtmise päeval.
Brüssel, 16. detsember 2013


Input:
DIRECTIVA (UE) 2015/254 A PARLAMENTULUI EUROPEAN ȘI A CONSILIULUI
din 11 februarie 2015
de abrogare a Directivei 93/5/CEE a Consiliului privind asistența ce trebuie acordată Comisiei și colaborarea dintre statele membre în domeniul examinării științifice a problemelor legate de produsele alimentare
(Text cu relevanță pentru SEE)
PARLAMENTUL EUROPEAN ȘI CONSILIUL UNIUNII EUROPENE,
având în vedere Tratatul privind funcționarea Uniunii Europene, în special articolul 114,
având în vedere propunerea Comisiei Europene,
după transmiterea proiectului de act legislativ către parlamentele naționale,
având în vedere avizul Comitetului Economic și Social European (1),
hotărând în conformitate cu procedura legislativă ordinară (2),
întrucât:
(1)
În cadrul Programului privind o reglementare adecvată și funcțională (REFIT), Comisia și-a luat angajamentul să realizeze un cadru de reglementare simplu, clar, stabil și previzibil pentru întreprinderi, lucrători și cetățeni.
(2)
Directiva 93/5/CEE a Consiliului (3) urmărește asigurarea bunei funcționări a Comitetului științific pentru alimentație prin promovarea sprijinului științific din partea statelor membre către respectivul comitet și prin organizarea cooperării cu organismele naționale relevante în ceea ce privește aspectele științifice referitoare la siguranța produselor alimentare.
(3)
În temeiul Regulamentului (CE) nr. 178/2002 al Parlamentului European și al Consiliului (4), atribuțiile Comitetului științific pentru alimentație menționate în Directiva 93/5/CEE au fost transferate Autorității Europene pentru Siguranța Alimentară (EFSA) și sunt prevăzute în prezent de Regulamentul (CE) nr. 178/2002.
(4)
Decizia 97/579/CE a Comisiei (5) care a instituit Comitetul științific pentru alimentație a fost ulterior abrogată prin Decizia 2004/210/CE a Comisiei (6).
(5)
În temeiul Regulamentului (CE) nr. 178/2002, EFSA a devenit, de asemenea, organismul competent să promoveze cooperarea științifică cu statele membre și cu organismele naționale relevante care își desfășoară activitatea în domeniile de competență ale EFSA. În special, articolul 22 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 178/2002 prevede că EFSA acționează în strânsă cooperare cu organismele competente din statele membre și că statele membre cooperează cu EFSA pentru a asigura îndeplinirea misiunii sale.
(6)
Prin urmare, Directiva 93/5/CEE a devenit caducă și ar trebui abrogată,
ADOPTĂ PREZENTA DIRECTIVĂ:
Articolul 1
Directiva 93/5/CEE se abrogă.
Articolul 2
(1) Statele membre asigură intrarea în vigoare a actelor cu putere de lege și a actelor administrative necesare pentru a se conforma prezentei directive până la 29 februarie 2016. Statele membre informează de îndată Comisia cu privire la aceasta.
Atunci când statele membre adoptă aceste dispoziții, ele conțin o trimitere la prezenta directivă sau sunt însoțite de o asemenea trimitere la data publicării lor oficiale. Statele membre stabilesc modalitatea de efectuare a acestei trimiteri.
(2) Statele membre comunică Comisiei textul principalelor dispoziții de drept intern pe care le adoptă în domeniul reglementat de prezenta directivă.
Articolul 3
Prezenta directivă intră în vigoare în a douăzecea zi de la data publicării în Jurnalul Oficial al Uniunii Europene.
Articolul 4
Prezenta directivă se adresează statelor membre.
Adoptată la Strasbourg, 11 februarie 2015.


Input:
DECISÃO DE EXECUÇÃO DA COMISSÃO
de 28 de abril de 2014
relativa ao reconhecimento do enquadramento legal e de supervisão do Brasil como equivalente aos requisitos do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo às agências de notação de risco
(Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE)
(2014/245/UE)
A COMISSÃO EUROPEIA,
Tendo em conta o Tratado sobre o Funcionamento da União Europeia,
Tendo em conta o Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 16 de setembro de 2009, relativo às agências de notação de risco (1), nomeadamente o artigo 5.o, n.o 6,
Considerando o seguinte:
(1)
Em 22 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão conferiu um mandato à Autoridade Europeia dos Valores Mobiliários e dos Mercados (ESMA) solicitando o seu parecer quanto à avaliação técnica do enquadramento legal e de supervisão do Brasil aplicável às agências de notação de risco (ANR).
(2)
No seu parecer técnico, emitido em 31 de maio de 2013, a ESMA indicou que, em termos de resultados, o enquadramento legal e de supervisão das agências de notação de risco no Brasil é comparável ao estabelecido no Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009.
(3)
Nos termos do artigo 5.o, n.o 6, segundo parágrafo, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009, para que o enquadramento legal e de supervisão de um país terceiro possa ser considerado equivalente a esse regulamento, cumprindo os requisitos nele previstos, devem ser satisfeitas três condições.
(4)
A primeira condição é que as agências de notação de risco de países terceiros estejam sujeitas a autorização ou registo e a supervisão e controlo de cumprimento eficazes de forma permanente. O enquadramento legal e regulamentar brasileiro aplicável às agências de notação de risco é constituído pelo Regulamento ICVM 521 da Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (CVM) do Brasil, adotado em 25 de abril de 2012 com base na Lei n.o 6.385 de 1976. O quadro regulamentar obriga as ANR a cumprir todas as disposições do Código de Conduta da Organização Internacional das Comissões de Valores Mobiliários (International Organisation of Securities Commissions - IOSCO). Toda a legislação e regulamentação relevantes entraram em vigor. De acordo com este enquadramento regulamentar, as ANR devem ser registadas e supervisionadas numa base contínua pela CVM. O enquadramento legal e de supervisão do Brasil confere à CVM um leque alargado de competências que lhe permitem investigar se as ANR respeitam as suas obrigações legais. A CVM pode examinar e extrair exemplos dos registos, livros ou documentos contabilísticos, bem como de quaisquer outros ficheiros e solicitar informações ou esclarecimentos, sob pena da imposição de uma coima, sem prejuízo de outras sanções. As competências da CVM incluem também a realização de inspeções, com ou sem aviso prévio, a fim de assegurar uma supervisão e execução eficazes das ANR, bem como a aplicação de sanções às ANR que infrinjam as regras aplicáveis. A CVM pode impor uma série de sanções às ANR e a qualquer outra pessoa diretamente envolvida no processo de notação, desde advertências, coimas e suspensões até ao cancelamento do registo da ANR. Se a CVM verificar que foi cometida uma infração penal, deve remeter a questão para o Gabinete do Procurador Público («Ministério Público»). A CVM também pode, mediante pedido, participar na resolução de litígios que envolvam o mercado de valores mobiliários, podendo as suas atividades neste contexto variar desde a recolha de provas até à emissão de pareceres jurídicos. As ANR devem apresentar à CVM um formulário de informação anual, bem como informações sobre certos eventos concretos, por exemplo, no caso de uma alteração significativa introduzida na metodologia, de qualquer decisão de pôr termo a uma notação de risco ou quando um parecer preliminar não foi utilizado por um emitente aquando da divulgação de uma transação. Desde setembro de 2013, todas as ANR apresentam formulários de informações atualizadas à CVM, bem como informações sobre eventos concretos. A CVM analisou os documentos apresentados, tendo solicitado a uma ANR que esclarecesse um determinado conflito de interesses, o que foi cumprido pela ANR. O acordo de cooperação celebrado pela ESMA e a CVM prevê o intercâmbio de informações a respeito das medidas de execução ou supervisão de que sejam objeto as ANR com atividades transfronteiras. Nesta base, deve considerar-se que as ANR no Brasil estão sujeitas a requisitos em matéria de autorização ou de registo equivalentes aos estabelecidos no Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009 e que as disposições de supervisão e de execução aplicáveis às ANR no Brasil são efetivamente aplicadas e executadas.
(5)
Nos termos da segunda condição, as ANR do país terceiro devem estar sujeitas a regras juridicamente vinculativas equivalentes às estabelecidas nos artigos 6.o a 12.o e no anexo I do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009, à exceção dos artigos 6.o-A, 6.o-B, 8.o-A, 8.o-B, 8.o-C e 11.o-A, do ponto 3, alínea b-A), e dos pontos 3-A e 3-B do anexo I, secção B, do referido regulamento. Aquando da avaliação do cumprimento desta condição, deve ser devidamente tido em conta o disposto no artigo 2.o, n.o 1, do Regulamento (UE) n.o 462/2013 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho (2) no que respeita à data de aplicação de certas disposições do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009. Em relação ao governo das sociedades, o enquadramento legal e de supervisão brasileiro obriga as ANR, no âmbito do respetivo processo de registo, a dispor de uma estrutura de gestão empresarial composta por dois diretores, no mínimo, um dos quais deve ser independente e responsável por garantir a conformidade com as regras. O enquadramento legal e de supervisão brasileiro, que impõe a obrigatoriedade de cumprimento do código IOSCO, obriga as ANR a dispor de mecanismos adequados para a gestão dos conflitos de interesses. O código de conduta de uma ANR deve prever a adoção de mecanismos para a identificação, eliminação, gestão e divulgação de situações que envolvam conflitos de interesses. O enquadramento brasileiro estabelece também normas pormenorizadas em matéria de externalização, conservação de registos e confidencialidade. As ANR devem estabelecer uma função de análise das metodologias de notação e o enquadramento brasileiro prevê um vasto leque de requisitos em matéria de divulgação de informações no que respeita às notações de risco e às atividades de notação, por exemplo, a obrigação de emitir atempadamente as suas decisões de notação, publicar um documento com base no desempenho histórico das notações e divulgar ao público um relatório anual com informações sobre as suas atividades. O enquadramento legal e de supervisão do Brasil deve assim alcançar os mesmos resultados que os previstos pelo Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009 no que respeita à gestão dos conflitos de interesses, aos processos organizativos e procedimentos que as ANR devem estabelecer, à qualidade das notações e das metodologias de notação, à divulgação das notações e à divulgação geral e periódica de informações sobre as atividades de notação de risco. Deverá proporcionar uma proteção equivalente em termos de integridade, transparência e bom governo das ANR, bem como de fiabilidade das atividades de notação.
(6)
A terceira condição é que o regime regulamentar em vigor no país terceiro proíba a interferência das autoridades de supervisão e de outras autoridades públicas do país no conteúdo e nas metodologias de notação do risco. Qualquer interferência desse tipo seria contrária ao princípio da legalidade, consagrado na Constituição brasileira, que prevê que as autoridades públicas só podem intervir nos casos estabelecidos por lei. Tanto quanto é possível determinar, não vigora qualquer disposição legal que confira competência à CVM ou a outra autoridade pública para influenciar o conteúdo das notações de risco ou as metodologias de notação.
(7)
Tendo em conta os fatores analisados, pode considerar-se que o enquadramento legal e de supervisão brasileiro aplicável às agências de notação de risco cumpre as condições estabelecidas no artigo 5.o, n.o 6, segundo parágrafo, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009. O enquadramento legal e de supervisão aplicado pelo Brasil às ANR deve assim ser considerado equivalente ao estabelecido pelo Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009. A Comissão, com base nas informações prestadas pela ESMA, deve continuar a acompanhar a evolução do enquadramento legal e de supervisão aplicado pelo Brasil às ANR e o cumprimento das condições com base nas quais se adotou a presente decisão.
(8)
As medidas previstas na presente decisão estão em conformidade com o parecer do Comité Europeu dos Valores Mobiliários,
ADOTOU A PRESENTE DECISÃO:
Artigo 1.o
Para efeitos do artigo 5.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009, o enquadramento legal e de supervisão aplicável às agências de notação de risco que vigora no Brasil é considerado equivalente aos requisitos do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1060/2009.
Artigo 2.o
A presente decisão entra em vigor no vigésimo dia seguinte ao da sua publicação no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia.
Feito em Bruxelas, em 28 de abril de 2014.