title: Council Recommendation of 14 July 2015 on the 2015 National Reform Programme of Hungary and delivering a Council opinion on the 2015 Convergence Programme of Hungary

text:
               18.8.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 272/76

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 14 July 2015
   on the 2015 National Reform Programme of Hungary and delivering a Council opinion on the 2015 Convergence Programme of Hungary
   (2015/C 272/20)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1), and in particular Article 9(2) thereof,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (2), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission's proposal to launch a new strategy for growth and jobs, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies. The strategy focuses on the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe's potential for sustainable growth and competitiveness.

               (2)

               On 14 July 2015, the Council, on the basis of the Commission’s proposals, adopted a Recommendation on the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and the Union and, on 21 October 2010, it adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (3). Together these form the ‘integrated guidelines’ which Member States were invited to take into account in their national economic and employment policies.

               (3)

               On 8 July 2014, the Council adopted a Recommendation (4) on Hungary's National Reform Programme for 2014 and delivered its opinion on Hungary's updated Convergence Programme for 2014.

               (4)

               On 28 November 2014, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2015 European Semester for economic policy coordination. On the same day, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it identified Hungary as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out.

               (5)

               On 18 December 2014, the European Council endorsed the priorities for fostering investment, intensifying structural reforms and pursuing responsible growth-friendly fiscal consolidation.

               (6)

               On 26 February 2015, the Commission published its 2015 country report for Hungary. This assessed Hungary's progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted on 8 July 2014. The country report also includes results of the in-depth review under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. The Commission's analysis leads it to conclude that Hungary is experiencing macroeconomic imbalances which require decisive policy action and monitoring. Attention should be given, in particular, to the risks stemming from the net international position (which, despite some progress in the rebalancing of external accounts, is still highly negative), the high level of public debt, the significant regulatory burden on the financial sector and the high level of non-performing loans, which make deleveraging difficult.

               (7)

               On 30 April 2015, Hungary submitted its 2015 National Reform Programme and its 2015 Convergence Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (8)

               Hungary is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact and subject to the transitional debt rule for 2013-2015. In its 2015 Convergence Programme, the Government plans to gradually improve the headline deficit to 2,4 % of GDP in 2015 and further to 1,6 % in 2018, and according to the recalculated structural balance (5) the medium-term objective — a structural deficit of 1,7 % of GDP — is expected to be reached by 2017. According to the Convergence Programme, the Government plans to gradually reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio to 74,9 % in 2015 and to 68,9 % in 2018. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning these budgetary projections is broadly plausible until 2016 and becomes favourable thereafter. Measures to support the planned deficit targets from 2016 onwards have not been sufficiently specified, in particular beyond 2016. Based on the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, both the structural balance and net expenditure growth point to a risk of a significant deviation from the required adjustment path towards the medium-term objective in 2015 and 2016. Therefore, further measures will be needed in 2015 and 2016. At the same time, Hungary is forecast to comply with the transitional debt rule in 2015 and, following the end of the transition period, the debt reduction benchmark in 2016. Based on its assessment of the Convergence Programme and taking to account the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, the Council is of the opinion that there is a risk that Hungary will not comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact. Hungary's fiscal governance system would benefit from the rigorous application of the already legislated medium-term budgetary framework and from assigning a more prominent analytical role to the Fiscal Council.

               (9)

               The banking sector's main challenges have persisted over the last 12 months, in particular the challenges of restoring market-based lending through better capital accumulation possibilities and more efficient portfolio cleaning. Since mid-2013, bank lending has relied mainly on subsidised schemes, including for about 40 % of lending to SMEs. The combination of significant tax and regulatory burdens and a high proportion of problematic loans does not provide banks with the necessary incentives to increase their normal, non-subsidised lending activity. Hungary's external exposure and the related financial stability risks have decreased considerably due to the recent conversion of foreign exchange denominated mortgages into local currency. At the same time, the legacy left by foreign-exchange indebtedness of households remains still the major reason behind the high share of non-performing credit.The majority of the foreign exchange relief schemes adopted to date have not been targeted at distressed borrowers, with the exception of that of the national asset management agency in the household sector, and it is unlikely to resolve the problem of non-performing loans. Efficient portfolio cleaning is hindered by, inter alia, the lack of foreclosures and the inefficiency of in-court and out-of-court resolution proceedings. An agreement recently concluded with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development includes a number of commitments by the Government to tackle the challenges in the financial sector, including, inter alia, by gradually reducing the bank levy and respecting the prior consultation principle. Implementing rigorously these measures would be conducive to returning to a sound and predictable financial policy framework. Over the last year, Hungary has repeatedly extended its direct ownership in the banking sector. State intervention in the banking sector, carried out via increased direct ownership, may entail significant fiscal risks, even where it is only temporary.

               (10)

               Recent changes in the area of taxation (the introduction of new taxes and increases to existing taxes) have seen a return to the earlier trend of increasing the weight of sector-specific corporate taxes. Both the unpredictability and selectivity of these changes give rise to distortions to investment across sectors. Although a number of new measures have been introduced, the tax burden on some groups of low-income earners has remained among the highest in the Union, with single people especially affected. There appears to be scope for further shifting of the tax burden towards more growth-friendly sources of revenue. Various measures introduced over the last year are helping to tighten up systems to fight tax evasion. Following the successful completion of the programme linking retail outlets' cash registers to an online system, it is now planned to extend the programme to a number of market services in 2015. The threshold above which an itemised VAT declaration must be submitted was lowered. A system for electronic road-cargo inspection was introduced in 2015, the main aim of which is to reduce carousel VAT fraud. There is, however, still significant scope to improve the administrative efficiency of tax collection and to reduce taxation compliance costs, especially for SMEs.

               (11)

               Overall, the Hungarian labour market improved in 2014, with employment recovering in the private sector due to the economic upturn. Significant challenges remain with regard to the public work scheme, which has been significantly extended since 2011. The scheme appears to be an inefficient and ineffective active labour market policy, that risks distorting the proper functioning of the labour market. The same resources if spent differently could potentially be more beneficial to the Hungarian economy. The budgetary cost of the scheme has quadrupled over the last four years, to 0,8 % of GDP, and is expected to double again between 2015 and 2018, preventing resources from being used for essential improvements to training and to services required to facilitate participation in the open labour market. There is a risk of public works of such a magnitude creating significant ‘lock-in’ effects and permanently replacing the system of welfare benefits for the low-skilled. The scheme is not adequately coordinated with other active labour market policy measures and does not sufficiently promote the reintegration of participants into the open labour market. The rate of successful exit from the public work scheme was only 13,8 % in the first half of 2014, which suggests that public works do not sufficiently support the reintegration of participants into the labour market. Although the scheme is targeted to the long-term unemployed and low-skilled (and unemployed living in disadvantaged areas), in 2013 47 % of participants had secondary or tertiary education. The period of eligibility for unemployment benefits (three months) has not been increased and thus does not match the average time (over a year) that job seekers need to find employment. A number of programmes have been implemented to improve the inclusion of Roma in the labour market and a monitoring system has been put in place. Streamlined, coordinated policy measures, capable of significantly reducing poverty should be developed. Poverty indicators, although suggesting moderately improving trends, still show poverty to be at a worryingly high level, especially among Roma and children. Gaps remain in both the adequacy and coverage of social assistance.

               (12)

               Barriers introduced in recent years to market entry in the service sector have not been removed; rather, further barriers were introduced in 2014, hampering the efficient allocation of economic resources, increasing uncertainty for investors and restricting competition. The new barriers include, for example, the requirement for medium to large retail establishments to be centrally authorised. The corruption and lack of transparency affecting public administration, decision-making and public procurement remain a cause of concern. The low level of competition in public procurement and the extensive use of direct awarding of contracts both persisted in 2014. A reorganisation of public procurement administration was undertaken in 2014, the results of which are to be closely monitored. In November 2014, Hungary submitted an action plan for transposing the new public procurement directives and promoting competition and transparency. Several measures to improve the anti-corruption framework have also been announced.

               (13)

               Although some measures have been implemented to support the education of Roma children, a systematic approach to promoting inclusive mainstream education is yet to be developed. The proportion of Roma children attending schools or classes where the majority of pupils are Roma remains high, and the educational attainment of Roma pupils is lower than the national average. Teachers are not trained to provide sufficient support to disadvantaged groups. More needs to be done to improve the transition between different forms and stages of education, and from education to the labour market. The planned changes to the allocation of state-funded places in secondary education and the increasing admission requirements for higher education may further limit the opportunities for transition between different forms of education, especially for disadvantaged groups. Hungary has a very high drop-out rate in higher education. The Government announced the adoption of a national higher education strategy in December 2014. The strategy included raising the national target for tertiary attainment to 34 %. Overall, recent measures have failed to improve the participation of disadvantaged groups in higher education, and to tackle non-completion of education. The current funding system does not sufficiently support equitable access.

               (14)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Hungary's economic policy and published it in the 2015 country report. It has also assessed the Convergence Programme and the National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to Hungary in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Hungary but also their compliance with EU rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the overall economic governance of the Union by providing EU-level input into future national decisions. The recommendations under the European Semester are reflected in recommendations (1) to (5) below.

               (15)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the Convergence Programme, and its opinion (6) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below.

               (16)

               In the light of the Commission's in-depth review and this assessment, the Council has examined the National Reform Programme and the Convergence Programme. Its recommendations under Article 6 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 are reflected in recommendations (1) to (3) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Hungary take action in 2015 and 2016 to:

               1.

               Achieve a fiscal adjustment of 0,5 % of GDP towards the medium-term budgetary objective in 2015 and of 0,6 % of GDP in 2016.

               2.

               Take measures to restore normal lending to the real economy and remove obstacles to market-based portfolio cleaning; considerably reduce the contingent liability risks linked to increased state ownership in the banking sector.

               3.

               Reduce distortive sector-specific corporate taxes; remove the unjustified entry barriers in the service sector, including in the retail sector; reduce the tax wedge for low-income earners, including by shifting taxation to areas less distortive to growth; continue to fight tax evasion, reduce compliance costs and improve the efficiency of tax collection. Strengthen structures in public procurement that promote competition and transparency and further improve the anti-corruption framework.

               4.

               Reorient the budget resources allocated to the public work scheme to active labour market measures to foster integration into the primary labour market; and improve the adequacy and coverage of social assistance and unemployment benefits.

               5.

               Increase the participation of disadvantaged groups in particular Roma in inclusive mainstream education, and improve the support offered to these groups through targeted teacher training; strengthen measures to facilitate the transition between different stages of education and to the labour market, and improve the teaching of essential competences.

      Done at Brussels, 14 July 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. GRAMEGNA

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25.

      (3)  Maintained by Council Decision 2014/322/EU of 6 May 2014 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States for 2014 (OJ L 165, 4.6.2014, p. 49).

      (4)  Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on the National Reform Programme 2014 of Hungary and delivering a Council opinion on the Convergence Programme of Hungary, 2014 (OJ C 247, 29.7.2014, p. 77).

      (5)  The structural balance as recalculated by the Commission based on the information in the Convergence Programme, following a commonly agreed methodology.

      (6)  Under Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.


title: Commission Recommendation of 11 February 2009 on the implementation of a nuclear material accountancy and control system by operators of nuclear installations (notified under document number C(2009) 785)

text:
               12.2.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 41/17

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 11 February 2009
   on the implementation of a nuclear material accountancy and control system by operators of nuclear installations
   (notified under document number C(2009) 785)
   (2009/120/Euratom)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 77 and Article 124 thereof,

               (1)

               Whereas Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 of 8 February 2005 on the application of Euratom safeguards (1) defined the nature and extent of the requirements provided for in Article 79 of the Euratom Treaty in order to permit accounting for ores, source materials and special fissile materials used or produced.

               (2)

               Whereas Article 7 of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 requires nuclear operators to maintain a system of accountancy and control for nuclear materials, and sets out some requirements for such a system.

               (3)

               Whereas the Commission working document entitled ‘Implementing Euratom Treaty Safeguards’ (IETS) (2), contains the requirement that the Commission draw up a reference framework for high-quality nuclear material accountancy and control (NMAC) systems. It also states that auditing of nuclear operators' NMAC systems will be one of the Commission’s supervisory activities.

               (4)

               Whereas the European Safeguards Research and Development Association (Esarda) presented in 2007 a Guideline for Good Practice in Nuclear Materials Accountancy and Control Systems dealing with the elements of the NMAC system that could be audited and the possible criteria for indicating quality performance in each of these elements,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:
   Section 1 —   Purpose and scope
   This Recommendation describes the reference characteristics of an operator’s NMAC system complying with the legal obligations of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005. Some characteristics described in this Recommendation are only relevant to facilities with corresponding activities (3).
   Section 2 —   Terms and definitions

               1.

               ‘Containment’ is a structural feature of a facility, container or equipment which is used to establish the physical integrity of an area or item (including safeguards equipment or data) and to maintain the continuity of knowledge of the area or item by preventing undetected access to, or movement of, nuclear or other material, or interference with the contained items. Examples are the walls of a storage room or of a storage pool, transport flasks and storage containers.

               2.

               ‘Corrective action’ means action to eliminate the cause of a detected NMAC discrepancy, anomaly or other undesirable situation. Corrective action is taken to prevent recurrence. There is a distinction between correction and corrective action.

               3.

               ‘Data processing’ is the link between the creation of measurement results and material-tracking data and the production of a variety of regulatory reports, documents supporting Euratom verification and internal working documents related to material tracking by the facility itself.

               4.

               ‘Inventory control’ by the nuclear operator is a quality control programme aimed at ensuring agreement between records and the physical situation in a timely manner. Inventory control should include resolving and reporting on found discrepancies as well as reconciliation with other local accounts and central accounts.

               5.

               The ‘List of inventory items’ (LII) is a complete list of nuclear material (NM) items in a material balance area (MBA) or a specified location within an MBA produced as a result of applying an installation procedure. The list may include material that is handled as a batch. The list should include the identities and locations of the items or batches. The mass values and other characteristics of the items or batches should be traceable.

               6.

               ‘Material balance test’ means the method for assessing the material balance value; taking into account the justified estimation of measurement uncertainty, the balance test will decide whether the balance is acceptable or not.

               7.

               ‘Material balance discrepancy’ means a material balance value which is not accepted by the material balance test.

               8.

               ‘Measurement’ means the activity to determine the quantity and the characterisation of accounted nuclear material.

               9.

               ‘Nuclear material accountancy and control’ (NMAC) means all activities in a nuclear installation concerning the accountancy and control of nuclear material, including the determination and processing of data and the reporting to the Commission.

               10.

               ‘NMAC discrepancy’ means any discrepancy between two or more pieces of NMAC information (e.g. records) where this discrepancy cannot be justified after taking account of legitimate measurement variation or legitimate uncertainty estimation. NMAC discrepancies include measurement discrepancies, material balance discrepancies and nuclear material control discrepancies.

               11.

               ‘NMAC anomaly’ is an NMAC discrepancy or series of discrepancies that are consistent with the absence or gain of a significant amount of nuclear material. An NMAC anomaly can be detected during an investigation of NMAC discrepancies of whatever kind.

               12.

               ‘Nuclear material control discrepancy’ means a non-conformance in the identification or location of nuclear material.

               13.

               ‘Nuclear material tracking’ means the documentation of the identification, the movements, the location and the basic characteristics of every item of nuclear material in the MBA. In particular, tracking includes operating records that are the basis for re-batching, new measurement, shipper-receiver difference and category change declarations.

               14.

               ‘Nuclear operator’ means a person or undertaking setting up or operating an installation for the production, separation, reprocessing, storage or other use of source material or special fissile material. The term is also used to refer to the organisation ultimately responsible for NMAC compliance with Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005.

               15.

               ‘Performance indicator’ means a leading indicator of attainment achieved by an individual, team, organisation or an action.

               16.

               ‘Physical inventory taking’ (PIT) means the process to produce a complete list of the nuclear material items for an MBA as a basis for allowing verification of physical inventory by Commission inspectors.

               17.

               ‘Physical inventory verification’ (PIV) means an inspection activity that verifies the validity of the operator’s physical inventory taking and closes the material balance period. The basis for a PIV is the list of inventory items (LII) drawn up by the operator. The LII data are correlated with the physical inventory listing reports.

               18.

               ‘Quality control’ (QC) means a control designed to ensure that the quality requirements are fulfilled.

               19.

               ‘Quality management system’ means coordinated activities to direct and control an organisation with regard to quality.

               20.

               ‘Quality assurance’ (QA) means the part of the quality management system focused on providing confidence regarding fulfilment of the quality requirements.

               21.

               ‘Traceability’ means the ability to trace the history, application or location of that which is under consideration.

         Section 3 —   The management of an NMAC system
   Organisation and responsibilities

               1.

               Senior management should ensure that responsibilities and authorities are defined and communicated within the organisation. A member of the management should be appointed who, irrespective of other responsibilities, should have responsibility for annually assuring the chief executive officer, in writing, that the entire NMAC system is fit for purpose.

               2.

               Management roles and responsibilities taken together should also comprise organisational procedures and communication patterns that:

                           (a)

                           transmit information about NMAC performance both hierarchically and across functional responsibility areas;

                           (b)

                           assign responsibilities for improvement of NMAC as required based on criteria for recognising when improvement is needed;

                           (c)

                           provide the NMAC Manager with NMAC anomalies information;

                           (d)

                           ensure staff involved in NMAC activities have the appropriate competences;

                           (e)

                           ensure appropriate awareness of the legal obligations concerning safeguards.

         Quality management and control

               3.

               The key tasks should incorporate quality assurance and quality control measures. The objectives of these measures should include:

                           (a)

                           reduction of the intrinsic risk of human errors;

                           (b)

                           ensuring the correct functioning of instrumentation and software;

                           (c)

                           provision of a variety of indicators designed to alert management to any sign of inadequate performance (performance indicators);

                           (d)

                           internal assessment in order to detect poor performance;

                           (e)

                           a corrective action mechanism for cases of poor performance.

         Section 4 —   Measurement and measurement control
   Measurement programme

               1.

               Where measurements are performed, a programme should be established for providing sufficiently accurate and precise quantification and characterisation of the material that has to be referred to in accounting declarations. The measurement activities should be conducted so as to have traceability in the event of investigation of an anomaly. Measurement activities should include the measurement of material but also the processes whereby measured material is selected as representative of a set of material and all subsequent treatment of this sample material (sampling, sample shipment and preparation) and the required data treatment processes. It also should include measurement activities required for measurement control and quality assurance.

         Accountancy data requirements

               2.

               In order to ensure appropriate performance of the measurements, the following should be taken into account:

                           (a)

                           validation of the applied measurements methods;

                           (b)

                           traceability of measurement results;

                           (c)

                           precision and accuracy;

                           (d)

                           that each measurement result is approved by a responsible person;

                           (e)

                           that sampling is representative of the material.

               3.

               In cases where accounting data are based on calculations that are not direct measurements, the values should be validated, traceable and approved. Similar requirements apply to item counting.

         Measurement control

               4.

               A measurement control programme should be in place in order to ensure the validity of the measurement results and their uncertainties used for accountancy declarations.

               5.

               The measurement control programme should include:

                           (a)

                           measures to ensure that the instrumentation is performing as required;

                           (b)

                           assurance that accountancy mass values are free from any significant measurement bias and that the measurement uncertainty is appropriately estimated;

                           (c)

                           records of all data of the measurement control programme;

                           (d)

                           description of the measurement equipment and methods;

                           (e)

                           approval of the measurement procedures.

         Section 5 —   Nuclear material tracking

               1.

               The nuclear material tracking should document any movement of and the location of every item of nuclear material. It also should imply knowledge of the characteristics of the material and its containment. Any action involving nuclear material that affects the location, the identification, the nature or the quantity of the nuclear material should be documented. In particular, nuclear material tracking should include records that are the basis for re-batching, new measurement, shipper-receiver difference and category change declarations.

         Identity

               2.

               Nuclear material should, where practical, be in containers having a recorded unique identity. When nuclear material is not in a transportable container, a well delimited process location may be considered both as the identity of the ‘container’ and as the location of the container/material. This includes material in process vessels or other equipment. Identities of containers should be permanent and readily legible for inventory checking. If the identity of the item needs to be changed, the link between old and new identities should be recorded. If nuclear material is in some form of double containment, the nature and characteristics of the material in any container or location should be traceable through identification control.

         Identification of storage location

               3.

               The locations in which nuclear material can be held should have identities that are a basis for recording the location and transfers of material. Specific positions within areas should be mentioned, where appropriate, as part of the specification of the exact location. The records for storage control should ensure that the identities of the contents of each storage location are known and that the location of any identified item can be derived. The nature and characteristics of the material in any location should be available through identification control or other means.

         Material tracking during production

               4.

               When nuclear material enters a process (or is repackaged), the production records should allow identification of the items from which the material has been fed into the process (or into new containers). This is intended to provide traceability of the relevant nuclear characteristics of the material in process.
               Production records should specify the amount of material fed into the process or repackaged and, as mentioned, traceability of information related to the nature of the nuclear material should be maintained.
               When new items or sets of material arise as a result of processing or repackaging, mass values and identities should be established for these items and their identity should be linked to the relevant mass results and measurement history.

         Inventory control

               5.

               Inventory control by the nuclear operator should:

                           (a)

                           ensure that all nuclear material transfers from stores to process areas and vice versa are recorded (Key Measurement Points, KMP);

                           (b)

                           verify regularly that stock records correspond to KMP flow records, storage location records and processing records, and regularly reconcile local records and central MBA records;

                           (c)

                           take into account the operating records of the inventory control measures that ensure continuity of knowledge about the nuclear material contents of items;

                           (d)

                           regularly check the agreement between the information of material present and the physical reality;

                           (e)

                           resolve and report on found discrepancies and reconciliation with other local accounts or central accounts.

                     In the event of a transfer of nuclear material that is not a transfer of a contained item, the amount of the transfer material should be measured.

         Management of discrepancies

               6.

               The installation should have an approach that recognises and investigates NMAC discrepancies, and documents their treatment. The approach should:

                           (a)

                           indicate for each discrepancy type the investigative actions to be taken and the conditions in each case that are considered to resolve the discrepancy. Actions to be taken should include personnel responsibilities and the additional data to be employed;

                           (b)

                           make the appropriate correction of records and regulatory declarations when a discrepancy has been resolved;

                           (c)

                           record when a discrepancy remains unresolved and the action taken to resolve it.

         Management of anomalies

               7.

               The installation should have an approach in place that corresponds to the reporting obligations under Article 6 and Article 14 (Special reports) of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005. In addition to the management of discrepancies described in point 6 of Section 5 of this Recommendation, the approach should:

                           (a)

                           recognise, investigate and document the treatment of NMAC anomalies corresponding to Article 15(a) of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005. Such NMAC investigations should aim to establish in a timely manner the accountancy evidence showing that all material is accounted for;

                           (b)

                           recognise, investigate and document the treatment of other situations corresponding to Article 15(b) of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005;

                           (c)

                           define personnel responsibilities and the form of internal communication required when actions under Article 15(a) or (b) of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 are required. The approach should also define the mechanisms under which the personnel will inform the Commission;

                           (d)

                           define personnel responsibilities and authority in order to provide ‘further details or explanations’ when requested under Article 14 of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005.

         Section 6 —   Data processing and control

               1.

               A data-processing system should be implemented producing:

                           (a)

                           safe and secure storage of all data required for the proper working of the NMAC system;

                           (b)

                           declarations required by Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 (inventory change reports, material balance reports, physical inventory listings, special reports, advanced notifications);

                           (c)

                           material balance standard deviation for material balance tests (if appropriate);

                           (d)

                           various types of documents linked to inventory change (IC) declarations such as shipping documentation;

                           (e)

                           working documents for routine inventory control;

                           (f)

                           working documents for PIT;

                           (g)

                           a list of inventory items (LII) resulting from PIT and used during PIV or other verification.

               2.

               Data-processing procedures should be in place to correct records and generate correction declarations as appropriate for any situation where a discrepancy has been detected. Traceability should be maintained during such correction processes. Quality control and quality assurance measures should ensure the completeness and the correctness of the data-processing system.

               3.

               The data-processing capabilities should also include:

                           (a)

                           provision of inventory lists permitting inventory checking by the operator;

                           (b)

                           inventory lists providing any information necessary for identifying discrepancies between the locations described in the records and the real physical location;

                           (c)

                           support of regular reconciliation of local records and central MBA records, when the accountancy of nuclear material in process involves separate storage of these records;

                           (d)

                           the possibility of including corrections arising from discrepancy investigation for inventory checking and reconciliation;

                           (e)

                           documentation of the results of inventory checking and database reconciliation, including documentation of discrepancies encountered for the purpose of performance indicators.

               4.

               The procedures for data-processing execution activities should provide the NMAC system manager with supervisory information. This should include the staff members initiating each software execution, identification of the application program(s) involved as well as identification of the location of the data inputs used and the location of the data outputs created. It should also be possible to identify any execution of application software or access to records and data which do not conform to the authorised data processing policy.

         Traceability

               5.

               The data-processing system should produce the information required by Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 and also maintain traceability for all the information provided. It should be possible to identify any information or data that could be needed to resolve discrepancies and anomalies arising from the requirements of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005.

         Section 7 —   Material balance
   Receipts and shipments

               1.

               Nuclear operators should apply reception procedures, including:

                           (a)

                           check of shipper information (completeness, self-consistency);

                           (b)

                           check of the nature, identity and integrity of the transport container and seals and initial check on the nature of nuclear material (when appropriate);

                           (c)

                           introduction of the received material into the accountancy process;

                           (d)

                           recognition and treatment of shipper-receiver differences;

                           (e)

                           corrective actions in the event of discrepancies;

                           (f)

                           recording in a manner that guarantees traceability;

                           (g)

                           ensuring that the obligations laid down in Articles 21 and 22 of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 are respected.

               2.

               Nuclear operators should apply shipping procedures defining:

                           (a)

                           the content of the information being sent to the recipient;

                           (b)

                           how the accountancy should be updated;

                           (c)

                           corrective actions and the appropriate response to situations of discrepancy indicated by the recipient;

                           (d)

                           the preparation and execution of the shipment process;

                           (e)

                           recordkeeping in a manner that guarantees traceability;

                           (f)

                           activities to ensure that the obligations laid down in Articles 21 and 22 of Regulation (Euratom) No 302/2005 are respected.

         Physical inventory taking (PIT)

               3.

               A physical inventory of each MBA should be taken every calendar year and the period between two successive physical inventory takings should not exceed 14 months. The PIT procedures should include those for reporting to the Commission and providing the list of inventory items for physical inventory verifications (PIV). In particular, nuclear operators should have PIT procedures taking account of the following needs:

                           (a)

                           definition of PIT working methods and responsibilities for each storage area and process area;

                           (b)

                           establishment of a reliable itemised list of all the material in each location of the MBA. Such procedures should be designed to ensure that no material is overlooked;

                           (c)

                           the execution of the physical inventory taking needs to be recorded;

                           (d)

                           if there are PIT activities involving physical checks (tag-check or measurement), the procedures should include rules for defining the necessary corrections to the information in the data-processing systems (when discrepancies are found) as well as rules for transmitting such corrections to the data-processing department;

                           (e)

                           the MBA list of inventory items presented to Commission inspectors as a basis for PIV should be authenticated by the signature of a responsible person before being handed over;

                           (f)

                           in a PIT approach for a storage area relying entirely on transfer records, the credibility of the approach should be enhanced by having:

                                       (i)

                                       QC and QA provisions for the creation of records of transfers;

                                       (ii)

                                       QC and QA measures ensuring reliable records of storage locations;

                                       (iii)

                                       routine recording of the fact that these QA and QC provisions and measures have been carried out;

                                       (iv)

                                       assurance of material integrity during presence within the area;

                                       (v)

                                       independent confirmation that transfer records are complete.

               4.

               The list of inventory items for formal verification purposes should include for each item:

                           (a)

                           location and storage position within location;

                           (b)

                           type of container and identity of container (if relevant);

                           (c)

                           material type;

                           (d)

                           mass of nuclear material per item (gross, tare and net weight);

                           (e)

                           enrichment of uranium;

                           (f)

                           isotopic composition of plutonium (if available).

                     The list of inventory items should include entries for material that is difficult to measure either due to its location (process vessel hold-up) or because it is in a form unsuitable for measurement. In such cases, the operator should declare an estimated range of mass for each item and traceability should provide the link to the data used for the estimate. Mass estimates for material that is inaccessible or in process vessels should include the location of the material. The mass values for measured discards, accidental losses and transfers to waste should have a traceable history.

         Material balance tests

               5.

               In an MBA involving processing or re-measurement, the material balance derived from a PIT, and also the process area material balances forming part of an inventory control approach, should be tested for acceptance using balance standard deviations that take into account justified measurement uncertainty and in the case of estimated amounts, the process and measurement uncertainty. These tests should be an integral part of the QA system.
               The procedures for any balance test should take into account the following:

                           (a)

                           software for computing the standard deviation of any balance should come under the quality approach for software and its use;

                           (b)

                           accountancy and measurement method data used for computing the standard deviation of any balance should come under the quality approach for data and its use;

                           (c)

                           the algorithms used to compute standard deviation should be described in a technical document;

                           (d)

                           the method should provide balance standard deviations which correctly reflect the pattern of processing during the balance interval and which also correctly reflect the measurement history (or estimation method) of the mass values used to compute the balance;

                           (e)

                           where estimates of in-process material are based on historical information or on modelling of some kind, the estimation method and the method of establishing the uncertainty should be described in a technical document;

                           (f)

                           the work procedures for balance testing, the software user guide, the software description and the technical method documents should be written in such a manner that their completeness and mutual consistency can be recognised.

      This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.
      Done at Brussels, 11 February 2009.

            For the Commission

         Andris PIEBALGS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 54, 28.2.2005, p. 1.

      (2)  SEC(2007) 293.

      (3)  The references to measurement and material balance testing will be irrelevant in an item facility which involves no measurement.


Avis juridique important

|

E1995C0608(01)

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY of 17 March 1995 concerning a coordinated programme for the official control of foodstuffs for 1995

Official Journal L 125 , 08/06/1995 P. 0026 - 0027

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY of 17 March 1995 concerning a coordinated programme for the official control of foodstuffs for 1995 THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,Having regard to the European Economic Area Agreement, and in particular Article 109 and Protocol 1 thereof,Having regard to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, and in particular Article 5 (2) (b) and Protocol 1 thereof,Having regard to the Act referred to in Point 50 of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 89/397/EEC of 14 June 1989 on the official control of foodstuffs (1)), and in particular Article 14 (3) thereof,Whereas it is necessary, with a view to the sound operation of the European Economic Area, to arrange for coordinated food inspection programmes within the EEA;Whereas the EFTA States have been consulted within the EFTA Foodstuffs Committee assisting the EFTA Surveillance Authority on 17 November 1994;Whereas such programmes should not only establish compliance with the legislation in force under the EEA Agreement but also serve for checking that the food is fit for consumption;Whereas simultaneous implementation of national programmes and coordinated programmes can provide experience which is still widely lacking at present,HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:1. It is recommended that the EFTA States take samples of the following products and analyse the specified parameters in 1995:1. adulteration of soluble coffee with non-bean material;2. Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli and Aeromonas in refrigerated salads and seasoned crudités;3. botanic and geographical claims on honey, both produced within the EEA as well as imported from third countries;4. temperature of quick frozen foodstuffs, sold in the retail sector.2. A coordinated programme of inspections is recommended to the EFTA States as a consequence of Article 14 (3) of Council Directive 89/397/EEC. The subjects have been discussed with the EFTA States, and the subjects chosen cover the protection of public health and consumer interests, as well as fair trade.3. Where appropriate, for each subject, a method of analysis is suggested. As far as sampling is concerned, no uniform rates have been set. The number of samples taken should be extensive enough to provide an overview of the market in the foodstuffs concerned in each EFTA State.4. The number of samples and the methods of analysis used should be mentioned or described briefly on the model report forms.I. Adulteration of soluble coffee Soluble coffee may sometimes be adulterated with non-bean matter from the coffee plant such as husks, skins, stems and stacks or maltodextrins. This is not in conformity with the Act referred to in point 14 of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement (Council Directive 77/436/EEC (2)).II. Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli and Aeromonas in refrigerated salads and seasoned crudités Epidemiological studies show cases of listerosis associated with consumption of crude vegetables and various scientific publications refer to a possible contamination of these products with Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes and Acromonas spp.III. Botanic and geographical claims on honey, both produced within the EEA and imported from third countries Lately, the market for honey in the EEA has become subject to severe competition and surveys suggest that false claims are made both to the botanical origin of the product as well as to the area it stems from.IV. Temperature of quick frozen foodstuffs, sold in the retail sector In view of the relationship between the shelf-life and storage temperature of perishable foodstuffs, it seems appropriate to monitor the temperature of quick frozen foodstuffs, especially where handling operations are critical.Done at Brussels, 17 March 1995.For the EFTA Surveillance AuthorityThe PresidentKnut ALMESTAD(1) OJ No L 186, 30. 6. 1989, p. 23.(2) OJ No L 172, 12. 7. 1977, p. 20.


title: Recommendation No 93/13/COL of the EFTA Surveillance Authority of 21 February 2013 concerning a coordinated control plan with a view to establish the prevalence of fraudulent practices in the marketing of certain foods

text:
               30.4.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 118/44

         RECOMMENDATION No 93/13/COL OF THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY
   of 21 February 2013
   concerning a coordinated control plan with a view to establish the prevalence of fraudulent practices in the marketing of certain foods
   THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,
   Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 109 and Protocol 1 thereof,
   Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, and in particular Article 5(2)(b) and Protocol 1 thereof,
   Having regard to the Act referred to at point 54zzzi of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement (Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules), as corrected and amended, and in particular Article 53 thereof,
   Having regard to Decision 75/13/COL of the EFTA Surveillance Authority of 19 February 2013 empowering the competent College Member to adopt the final Recommendation as approved by the EFTA Veterinary and Phytosanitary Committee (Event No 663341),
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 empowers the EFTA Surveillance Authority (the Authority) to recommend coordinated plans where considered necessary, organised on an ad hoc basis, in particular with a view to establishing the prevalence of hazards in feed, food or animals.

               (2)

               Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs (1) sets out EEA rules on food labelling applicable to all foods.

               (3)

               According to Directive 2000/13/EC, the labelling and methods used should not mislead the consumer, particularly as to the characteristics of the food, including its true nature and its identity. Furthermore, in the absence of specific EEA or national rules, the name under which a food is sold should be the name customary in the EEA State in which it is sold, or a description of the food which is clear enough to let the purchaser know its true nature.

               (4)

               Moreover, all ingredients must be mentioned on the label of pre-packaged foodstuffs intended for the final consumer or mass caterers. In particular, foods containing meat as an ingredient, when intended for the final consumer or mass caterers, must also indicate the animal species from which the meat originates directly on the package or on a label attached thereto. If an ingredient is mentioned in the name of the food, its quantity expressed as a percentage must also be provided in the list of ingredients in order to avoid the consumer being misled as regards the identity and the composition of the food.

               (5)

               Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (2) provides for additional labelling requirements applicable to specific foods. In particular, it provides that packages intended for supply to the final consumer containing minced meat, amongst others, from solipeds are to bear a notice indicating that such products should be cooked before consumption, if, and to the extent that, national rules in the Member State in the territory of which the product is placed on the market so require.

               (6)

               Section III of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 requires the food business operators operating slaughterhouses to request, receive, check and act upon food chain information in respect of all animals, other than wild game, sent or intended to be sent to the slaughterhouse. The relevant food chain information is to cover, in particular, veterinary medicinal products administered to the animals within a relevant period and with a withdrawal period greater than zero, together with their dates of administration and withdrawal periods. Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (3) requires inter alia the official veterinarian to perform auditing and inspection tasks. In particular, the official veterinarian is to check and analyse relevant information from the records of the holding of provenance of animals intended for slaughter, including food chain information and to take account of the documented results of this check and analysis when carrying out ante- and post-mortem inspection.

               (7)

               Following official controls being carried out since December 2012 in a number of European Union Member States, it appeared that certain pre-packaged products contained horse meat, which was not declared in the list of ingredients appearing directly on the package or on a label attached thereto. Instead, the name of certain such foods and/or the accompanying list of ingredients misleadingly referred solely to the presence of beef.

               (8)

               In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (4), food business operators at all stages of production, processing and distribution within their businesses under their control must ensure that foods satisfy the requirements of food law which are relevant to their activities and must verify that such requirements are met.

               (9)

               Horses are animal species that can be ‧food producing‧ or ‧non-food producing‧. Phenylbutazone is a veterinary drug whose use is allowed only in non-food producing animals pursuant to Commission Regulation (EU) No 37/2010 of 22 December 2009 on pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits in foodstuffs of animal origins (5). Accordingly, non-food producing horses, which have been treated with phenylbutazone at some point in their life, cannot enter the food chain. Considering the fraudulent practices relating to the unlabelled presence of horse meat in certain food products, it is appropriate, for preventive purposes, to ascertain whether non-food producing horses treated with phenylbutazone have entered the food chain.

               (10)

               It is therefore necessary for the Authority to recommend to Norway and Iceland to carry out a coordinated control plan with a view to establish the prevalence of fraudulent practices in the marketing of certain foods for a period of one month. This period may be extended by an additional period of two months.

               (11)

               The recommended control plan should consist of two actions.

               (12)

               The first action should consist of appropriate controls carried out at retail level, on foods destined for the final consumer or mass caterers, which are marketed and/or labelled as containing beef. These controls could also be extended to other establishments (e.g. cold stores). The objective of these controls would be to establish whether such products contain horse meat, which is not properly labelled on the packaging or, in the case of non pre-packaged foodstuffs, information relating to its presence is not made available to the consumer or mass caterers. Such controls should be carried out on a representative sample.

               (13)

               Reliable methods exist which allow with a sufficient degree of accuracy the detection of the presence of proteins of undeclared species in a sample. The European Union Reference Laboratory for animal proteins in feedstuffs can provide useful advice on those methods and their use. The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should be invited to rely on the advice of that laboratory as to the methods that can be used.

               (14)

               The second action should consist of appropriate controls being carried out in establishments handling horse meat destined for human consumption, including foods originating from third countries, for the detection of phenylbutazone residues. These controls should also be carried out on a representative sample, taking into account production and import figures. It is appropriate in this case to refer to methods provided for by Commission Decision 2002/657/EC implementing Council Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the interpretation of results (6).

               (15)

               Norway and Iceland should communicate the results of these controls to the Authority on a regular basis, in order to assess the findings and decide on an appropriate course of action. These results will be transmitted to the European Commission.
               The measures provided for in this Recommendation are in accordance with the opinion of the EFTA Veterinary and Phytosanitary Committee assisting the Authority,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
   Norway and Iceland should apply a coordinated control plan, in accordance with the Annex to this Recommendation, consisting of the following actions:

               (a)

               official controls on foods destined for the final consumer or mass caterers, which are marketed and/or labelled as containing beef; and,

               (b)

               official controls on horse meat destined for human consumption to detect phenylbutazone residues.

      Done at Brussels, 21 February 2013.

            For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

         Sverrir Haukur GUNNLAUGSSON

            College Member

         Xavier LEWIS

            Director

      (1)  Act referred to at point 18 of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement

      (2)  Act referred to at point 6.1.17 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement

      (3)  Act referred to at point 1.1.12 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement

      (4)  Act referred to at point 54zzzc of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement

      (5)  Act referred to at point 13 of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement

      (6)  Act referred to at point 7.2.19 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement

      ANNEX

         Coordinated control plan with a view to establish the prevalence of fraudulent practices in the marketing of certain foods

      I.   ACTIONS AND SCOPE OF COORDINATED CONTROL PLAN
      The coordinated control plan should consist of two actions:

         ACTION 1:   Controls of foods marketed and/or labelled as containing beef

      A.   Product scope

                  1.

                  Foodstuffs marketed and/or labelled as containing beef (e.g. minced meat, meat products, and meat preparations) falling within the following categories:

                              (a)

                              Pre-packaged foodstuffs destined for the final consumer or mass caterers, which are labelled as containing beef;

                              (b)

                              Foodstuffs offered for sale to the final consumer or to mass caterers without pre-packaging and foodstuffs packaged on the sales premises at the consumer's request or pre-packaged for direct sale, which are marketed and/or otherwise indicated as containing beef.

                  2.

                  For the purpose of this coordinated control plan, the definition of ‧prepackaged foodstuffs‧ in Article 1(3)(b) of Directive 2000113/EC shall apply.

                  3.

                  For the purpose of this coordinated control plan, the definitions of ‧minced meat‧, ‧meat preparations‧ and ‧meat products‧ in points 1.13, 1.15 and 7.1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 shall apply.

            B.   Objective

      The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should carry out official controls in order to establish whether the products referred in point A contain horse meat, which is not properly labelled on the packaging or, in the case of non pre-packaged foodstuffs, information relating to its presence is not made available to the consumer or mass caterers, in accordance with EEA law and, where appropriate, national provisions.
      C.   Sampling points and procedure

                  1.

                  The sample should be representative of the products concerned and covering a variety of products.

                  2.

                  The sampling of the products should be carried out at retail level (e.g. supermarkets, smaller shops, butchers) and could also be extended to other establishments (e.g. cold stores).

            D.   Sample numbers and modalities

      The table below gives an overview on the indicative recommended minimum number of samples to be taken within the period provided in Section II. The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland are invited to take more samples when possible. The distribution of samples per country is based on population figures with a minimum number of 10 samples of the products concerned per country per calendar month as indicated in Section II.

                  Foodstuffs marketed and/or labelled as containing beef

                  Country of sale

                  Indicative monthly recommended sample numbers

                  Norway

                  50

                  Iceland

                  10

            E.   Methods

      The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should preferably use the method(s) recommended by the European Union Reference Laboratory for animal proteins in feedstuffs.

         ACTION 2:   Controls of horse meat destined for human consumption

      A.   Product scope

      Meat of horses, asses, mules or hinnies, fresh chilled or frozen, classified under the Combined Nomenclature Code 0205 and which are destined for human consumption.
      B.   Objective

      The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should carry out official controls in order to detect the possible presence of phenylbutazone residues in the products referred to in point A.
      C.   Sampling points and procedure

      The sampling of the products should be carried out in establishments handling the products referred to in point A (e.g. slaughterhouses, border inspection posts).
      D.   Sample numbers and modalities

      The recommended minimum number of samples to be taken within the period provided in Section II should be set at 1 sample every 50 tonnes of the products referred to in point A, with a minimum of 5 samples per country.
      E.   Methods

      The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should use methods validated according to Commission Decision 2002/657/EC. Such methods are available at the website of the European Reference Laboratory for the residues of veterinary medicines and contaminants in food of animal origin for residues listed in Annex I, Group A (5) and Group B (2)(a), (b), (e) to Directive 96/23/EC
          (1).
      II.   DURATION OF COORDINATED CONTROL PLAN
      The coordinated control plan should be carried out for a period of one month starting from the date of adoption of this Recommendation or at the latest by 1 March 2013.
      III.   REPORTING OF RESULTS

                  1.

                  The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should report the summary of the following information for each of the actions referred to in Section I of this Annex:

                              (a)

                              number of samples taken, per category of products;

                              (b)

                              the method(s) used for the analysis and the type of analysis performed;

                              (c)

                              number of positive findings;

                              (d)

                              follow-up controls performed with respect to positive findings in products referred to in point A under Action 1 in cases where the detected presence of horse meat exceeds 1 %;

                              (e)

                              follow-up controls performed with respect to positive findings in products in point A under Action 2;

                              (f)

                              results of follow-up controls;

                              (g)

                              with respect to positive findings in products referred to in point A under Action 2, the country where the animal concerned was certified for slaughter.

                        The report should be communicated to the Authority within 15 days from the end of the one-month period referred to in Section II.
                  The report should be presented in accordance with the format to be provided by the Authority.

                  2.

                  The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should immediately report to the Authority any positive results of the official controls carried out with respect to Actions 1 and 2 mentioned in Section I through the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed.

                  3.

                  The competent authorities of Norway and Iceland should also report to the Authority the results of any own checks carried out at their request by food business operators. Such information should be accompanied by the details referred to in point 1 and presented in accordance with the format to be provided by the Authority.

         (1)  Act referred to at point 2 of Part 7.1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement


				|

		52014DC0401

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the implementation of the broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States whose currency is the euro /* COM/2014/0401 final */

			   	Recommendation for a
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
on the implementation of the broad
guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States whose currency is the
euro
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 136 in conjunction
with Article 121(2) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No
1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary
positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies[1], and in particular
Article 5(2) thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No
1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on
the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances[2], and in particular
Article 6(1) thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation of the
European Commission[3],
Having regard to the conclusions of the
European Council,
Having regard to the opinion of the
Economic and Financial Committee,
Having regard to the
opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
Whereas:
(1)
The current economic environment of the euro area is
characterised by a gradual, but
still fragile economic recovery. In 2013 and in early 2014, euro
area inflation declined markedly and is expected to
increase only very gradually over the forecast horizon,
reflecting the existing slack together with the ongoing relative price
adjustments in the vulnerable economies and continued appreciation of the euro
exchange rate. Furthermore, while the recovery is
becoming more broad-based, divergences between euro area countries
remain high.
(2)
The euro area is more than
just the sum of its members. The economic and financial
crisis clearly exposed the close interrelations in the euro area and
underscored the need for stronger coordination of
fiscal, financial and structural policies among euro area members to
ensure a coherent  policy stance for the euro area as a whole. The Member States of
the euro area have committed themselves to a set of far-reaching policy reforms
and policy coordination by signing the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and
Governance (TSCG) in the Economic and Monetary Union on 2 March 2012. The entry
into force of the "Two Pack" regulations in 2013 has further deepened
budgetary and economic policy coordination within the euro area. Euro area
members have a specific responsibility for an effective implementation of the
new governance framework. This calls for increased peer
pressure to support national reform implementation and fiscal prudence, greater
assessment of national reforms from a euro area perspective, internalising
potential spillovers and stimulating policies of particular importance for a
well functioning EMU.
 (3)      Given
the high interdependence between euro area
Member States there are potentially large spillovers
related to the implementation of structural reforms
which need to be taken into account in order to secure optimal policy design
and implementation for euro area members individually and for the euro area as
a whole.  For example, more concerted action in
the implementation of reforms would facilitate the necessary convergence
between Member States. Early discussion of reform plans of the euro area Member
States, building on existing practices and effective implementation of the
macroeconomic imbalances procedure are of key importance in this regard.
(4)       One of the key policy challenges facing the Euro area is to reduce
government debt by pursuing differentiated,
growth-friendly fiscal policies while boosting the
growth potential of the euro area.
Thanks to the consolidation efforts of the past years, the euro area fiscal situation
has improved but a number of Euro Area members still need to continue with
fiscal adjustment to bring down very high levels of debt. All euro area members
should improve the quality of public finances with the aim of boosting
productivity and employment.
(5)      Investment in the euro area fell strongly in the initial phase of the
crisis and has not yet recovered to its long term average. Sluggish investment
trends are being driven by the combined impact of private sector deleveraging, financial fragmentation,
and necessary fiscal consolidation efforts which have led to a reduction in public investment.  Increasing investment in
infrastructure and skills is essential to sustain the recovery and boost
potential growth. Much of the investment must come from the private sector, but
public authorities can play an important role in creating supporting
conditions.
(6)       In the euro area, the flow of credit to the real economy
remains subdued and financial market
fragmentation is still high in spite of reduced stress on sovereign debt. Access to finance, in particular for SMEs,
remains challenging in many Member States which risks undermining economic
recovery. This calls for initiatives aimed at restoring credit flows, deepening capital markets and boosting the long term
financing of the economy. Actions
such as completing banks' balance sheets repair, continuing to
strengthen equity buffers, where needed, asset quality reviews and stress tests
help identify any remaining pockets of vulnerability and reinforce confidence
in the sector as a whole. Significant progress has been achieved as regards the
Banking Union, notably with the establishment of the Single Supervisory Mechanism
and the agreement on the Single Resolution Mechanism.
(7)      The
financial crisis has exposed gaps in the architecture of Economic and Monetary
Union. On 28 November 2012, the Commission presented a blueprint for a deep and
genuine economic and monetary union with the aim of launching a European
debate. On 5 December 2012, the President of the European Council in close
collaboration with the President of the European Commission, the President of
the Eurogroup and the President of the European Central Bank, presented a
report building on a number of ideas from the Commission's blueprint, and
including a timeframe and a stage-based process towards the completion of the
Economic and Monetary Union. The European Parliament expressed its views in its
resolution of 20 November 2012. Significant steps have been taken since then.
Further developing EMU will require a step by step approach combining
discipline with solidarity.  The Six Pack and Two pack legislation foresee a
first review of their implementation by the end of 2014.
HEREBY RECOMMENDS that euro area
Member States take action, individually and collectively, without prejudice to
the competences of the Council as regards the coordination of economic policies
of the Member States, but in particular in the context of economic policy
coordination in the framework of the Eurogroup, within the period 2014-2015 to:
1.            Promote and monitor, in
close cooperation with the Commission, the implementation of structural reforms
in those areas most relevant for the smooth functioning of the euro area in
order to foster convergence and adjustment of
internal and external imbalances. Assess and
stimulate progress in reform implementation in euro area Member States
experiencing excessive imbalances and in the euro area Member States with
imbalances requiring decisive action, to limit negative spillovers to the rest
of the euro area, and foster appropriate policies in countries with large
surpluses to optimise positive spillovers. Regularly hold thematic discussions
on structural policies with potentially large spillovers, focussing on reducing
the high tax wedge on labour and reforming services markets.
2.           Coordinate fiscal policies
of the euro area Member States, in close cooperation
with the Commission, in particular when assessing draft budgetary plans
to ensure a coherent and growth friendly fiscal stance across the euro area.
Improve the quality and sustainability of public finances by stepping up
material and immaterial investment at national and EU level. Ensure that
national fiscal frameworks, including national fiscal councils, are
strengthened.
3.           Ensure the resilience of the
banking system, in particular by taking the necessary
action in the follow up of the asset quality review and the stress tests, and
by implementing the Banking Union regulations
including on the further work foreseen in the SRM transition period. Stimulate private sector
investment and increase
the flow of credit to the economy via actions
to improve access to credit by SMEs,
deepening of capital markets, restarting the securitisation market, in line with the proposals and the calendar in the Commission Communication on long-term financing of the
European economy.
4.           Take forward work on
deepening Economic and Monetary Union and contribute to the improvement of the
economic surveillance framework in the context of the review foreseen for end
2014.

Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.
[2]               OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25.
[3]               COM(2014) 401 final.


Avis juridique important

|

31982H0922

82/922/EEC: Commission Recommendation of 17 December 1982 to national railway undertakings on the definition of a high-quality international passenger transport system

Official Journal L 381 , 31/12/1982 P. 0038 - 0039 Spanish special edition: Chapter 07 Volume 3 P. 0149  Portuguese special edition Chapter 07 Volume 3 P. 0149

*****COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATION  of 17 December 1982  to national railway undertakings on the definition of a high-quality international passenger transport system  (82/922/EEC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,  Having regard to the importance of international passenger transport for both railway undertakings and users,  Having regard to the need to improve still further the services provided,  Having regard to the range of high-quality international passenger transport services;  Having noted the efforts made by the railway undertakings in these areas,  Invites the national railway undertakings to:  - study the possibility and means of providing a high-quality international passenger network in accordance with the guidelines laid down in the Annex,  - inform the Commission before 1 May 1983 of progress made in giving effect to this recommendation.  This recommendation is addressed to:  Société nationale des chemins de fer belges  85, rue de France  B-1070 Bruxelles  (Belgium);  De danske Statsbaner  Generaldirektionen  Soelvgade 40  DK-1307 Koebenhavn K  (Denmark);  Société nationale des chemins de fer français  88, rue Saint-Lazare  F-75436, Paris, Cedex 09  (France);  Deutsche Bundesbahn  Hauptverwaltung  Friedrich-Ebert-Anlage 43-45  D-Frankfurt/Main  (Federal Republic of Germany);  oeOrganismós Sidirodrómon Elládos, AE  Kentrikí Diéfthynsi  Karóloy 1  oeAthína 107  (Greece);  Coras Iompair  Heuston Station  IRL-Dublin 8  (Republic of Ireland);  Azienda Autonoma delle Ferrovie dello Stato  Piazza della Croce Rossa  I-Roma  (Italy);  Société nationale des chemins de fer luxembourgeois  9, Place de la Gare  Boîte postale, 1803  L-Luxembourg  (Grand Duchy of Luxembourg);  N. Nederlandse Spoorwegen  Moreelsepark 1  NL-3500 HA Utrecht  (Netherlands);  British Railways Board  222 Maryleborne Road  UK-London NW1 6JJ  (United Kingdom);  Northern Ireland Railways Company Limited  (Central Station)  East Bridge Street  UK-Belfast BT1 3PB  (Northern Ireland).  Done at Brussels, 17 December 1982.  For the Commission  Giorgios CONTOGEORGIS  Member of the Commission  ANNEX  Factors taken into account for a high-quality international day-time and night-time passenger service network  1. Market surveys should continue to be carried out on a permanent basis for each route on the main network of inter-urban routes in Europe.  2. These surveys should also consider the possibilities of developing night and rail-road services.  3. The overriding objective should be to establish a high-quality international network the technical, financial and commercial management of which is as free as possible from the constraints affecting domestic railway services whilst ensuring the necessary consistency with these services.  4. Undertakings should conclude, as soon as possible after the market surveys, agreements on high-quality international passenger services, particularly concerning:  - frequency and higher commercial speeds,  - use of the most up-to-date techniques to provide a high-quality service (make-up of trains, engines),  - assurance of good connections,  - customer service (dining facilities, information, telecommunications, liaison with other modes).  5. National railway undertakings of the Community shall coordinate their efforts with those of interested railway undertakings from third countries.


title: Council Recommendation of 19 March 2007 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 2005

text:
               8.5.2007

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 103/2

      COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

   of 19 March 2007
   concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 2005
   (2007/C 103/02)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to the Fourth ACP-EC Convention, signed at Lomé on 15 December 1989 (1), as amended by the Agreement signed in Mauritius on 4 November 1995 (2),
   Having regard to Internal Agreement 91/401/EEC on the financing and administration of Community aid under the fourth ACP-EC Convention (3), setting up, amongst others, the Seventh European Development Fund (Seventh EDF) and in particular Article 33(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 29 July 1991 applicable to development finance cooperation under the Fourth ACP-EC Convention (4), and in particular Articles 69 to 77 thereof,
   Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the Seventh EDF as at 31 December 2005 and the Court of Auditors' report concerning the financial year 2005 together with the Commission's replies (5),
   Whereas

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 33(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the Seventh EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

               (2)

               The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the Seventh EDF during the financial year 2005 has been satisfactory,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the Seventh EDF for the financial year 2005.

      Done at Brussels, on 19 March 2007.

            For the Council

            The President

         H. SEEHOFER

      (1)  OJ L 229, 17.8.1991, p. 3.

      (2)  OJ L 156, 29.5.1998, p. 3.

      (3)  OJ L 229, 17.8.1991, p. 288.

      (4)  OJ L 266, 21.9.1991, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ C 263, 31.10.2006, p. 205.


Avis juridique important

|

31985H0386

85/386/EEC: Council Recommendation of 10 June 1985 concerning holders of a diploma in architecture awarded in a third country

Official Journal L 223 , 21/08/1985 P. 0028 - 0028 Spanish special edition: Chapter 06 Volume 3 P. 0022  Portuguese special edition Chapter 06 Volume 3 P. 0022

*****COUNCIL  RECOMMENDATION  of 10 June 1985  concerning holders of a diploma in architecture awarded in a third country  (85/386/EEC)  THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  In adopting Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services (1);  Noting that the said Directive refers only to diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications awarded to nationals of Member States by other Member States;  Anxious, however, to take account of the special position of nationals of Member States who have studied in a third country and who hold a diploma in architecture recognized under the legislation of a Member State,  HEREBY  recommends the Governments of the Member States to facilitate the taking up and pursuit of activities in the field of architecture within the Community by persons referred to above by recognizing these diplomas in their territories.  Done at Luxembourg, 10 June 1985.  For the Council  The President  M. FIORET  (1) See page 15 of this Official Journal.