Avis juridique important

|

32001H0331

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 providing for minimum criteria for environmental inspections in the Member States

Official Journal L 118 , 27/04/2001 P. 0041 - 0046

Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Councilof 4 April 2001providing for minimum criteria for environmental inspections in the Member States(2001/331/EC)THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community and in particular Article 175(1) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(1),Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions(2),Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty(3), and in the light of the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee on 8 January 2001,Whereas:(1) The resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 1 February 1993 on a Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development(4) and the Decision of the European Parliament and the Council on its review(5) emphasised the importance of implementation of Community environmental law through the concept of shared responsibility.(2) The Commission Communication of 5 November 1996 to the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament on implementing Community environmental law, in particular paragraph 29 thereof, proposed the establishment of guidelines at Community level in order to assist Member States in carrying out inspection tasks, thereby reducing the currently-existing wide disparity among Member States' inspections.(3) The Council in its resolution of 7 October 1997 on the drafting, implementation and enforcement of Community environmental law(6) invited the Commission to propose, for further consideration by the Council, in particular on the basis of the work of the European Union network for the implementation and enforcement of environmental law (IMPEL), minimum criteria and/or guidelines for inspection tasks carried out at Member State level and the possible ways in which their application in practice could be monitored by Member States, in order to ensure an even practical application and enforcement of environmental legislation, and the Commission's proposal has taken into account a paper produced by IMPEL in November 1997 and entitled "Minimum Criteria for Inspections".(4) The European Parliament by its resolution of 14 May 1997 on the Commission's Communication called for Community legislation on environmental inspections, and the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions gave favourable opinions on the Commission's Communication and stressed the importance of environmental inspections.(5) Different systems and practices of inspection already exist in Member States and should not be replaced by a system of inspection at Community level, as was considered in the Council resolution of 7 October 1997, and Member States should retain responsibility for environmental inspection tasks.(6) The European Environment Agency can advise the Member States on developing, setting up and extending their systems for monitoring environmental provisions and can assist the Commission and the Member States in monitoring environmental provisions by giving support in respect of the reporting process, so that reporting is coordinated.(7) The existence of inspection systems and the effective carrying out of inspections is a deterrent to environmental violations since it enables authorities to identify breaches and enforce environmental laws through sanctions or other means; thus inspections are an indispensable link in the regulatory chain and an efficient instrument to contribute to a more consistent implementation and enforcement of Community environmental legislation across the Community and to avoid distortions of competition.(8) There is currently a wide disparity in the inspection systems and mechanisms among Member States in terms not only of their capacities for carrying out inspection tasks but also of the scope and contents of the inspection tasks undertaken and even in the very existence of inspection tasks in a few Member States, and this is a situation which cannot be considered satisfactory with reference to the objective of an effective and more consistent implementation, practical application and enforcement of Community legislation on environmental protection.(9) It is necessary, therefore, to provide, at this stage, guidelines in the form of minimum criteria to be applied as a common basis for the performance of environmental inspection tasks within the Member States.(10) Community environmental legislation obliges Member States to apply requirements in relation to certain emissions, discharges and activities; minimum criteria on the organisation and carrying out of inspections should be met in the Member States, as a first stage, for all industrial installations and other enterprises and facilities whose air emissions and/or water discharges and/or waste disposal or recovery activities are subject to authorisation, permit or licensing requirements under Community law.(11) Inspections should take place taking into account the division of responsibilities in the Member States between authorisation and inspection services.(12) In order to make this system of inspections efficient, Member States should ensure that environmental inspections activities are planned in advance.(13) Site visits form an important part of environmental inspection activities.(14) The data and documentation provided by industrial operators registered under the Community eco-management and audit scheme could be a useful source of information in the context of environmental inspections.(15) In order to draw conclusions from site visits, regular reports should be established.(16) Reporting on inspection activities, and public access to information thereon, are important means to ensure through transparency the involvement of citizens, non-governmental organisations and other interested actors in the implementation of Community environmental legislation; access to such information should be in line with the provisions of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment(7).(17) Member States should assist each other administratively in operating this recommendation. The establishment by Member States in cooperation with IMPEL of reporting and advice schemes relating to inspectorates and inspection procedures would help to promote best practice across the Community.(18) Member States should report to the Council and the Commission on their experience in operating this recommendation and the Commission should regularly inform the European Parliament.(19) The Commission should keep the operation and effectiveness of this recommendation under review and report thereon to the European Parliament and the Council as soon as possible after the receipt of the Member States' reports.(20) Further work by IMPEL and Member States, in cooperation with the Commission, should be encouraged in respect of best practices concerning the qualifications and training of environmental inspectors.(21) In accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty, and given the differences in inspection systems and mechanisms in the Member States, the objectives of the proposed action can best be achieved by guidance set out at Community level.(22) In the light of the experience gained in the operation of this recommendation and taking account of IMPEL's further work, as well as of the results of any schemes provided for in this recommendation, the Commission should, upon receipt of Member States' reports, give consideration to developing the minimum criteria in terms of their scope and substance and to making further proposals which might include a proposal for a directive, if appropriate,HEREBY RECOMMEND:IPurposeEnvironmental inspection tasks should be carried out in the Member States, according to minimum criteria to be applied in the organising, carrying out, following up and publicising of the results of such tasks, thereby strengthening compliance with, and contributing to a more consistent implementation and enforcement of Community environmental law in all Member States.IIScope and definitions1. (a) This recommendation applies to environmental inspections of all industrial installations and other enterprises and facilities, whose air emissions and/or water discharges and/or waste disposal or recovery activities are subject to authorisation, permit or licensing requirements under Community law, without prejudice to specific inspection provisions in existing Community legislation.(b) For the purposes of this recommendation, all the installations and other enterprises and facilities referred to in point (a) are "controlled installations".2. For the purposes of this recommendation, "environmental inspection" is an activity which entails, as appropriate:(a) checking and promoting the compliance of controlled installations with relevant environmental requirements set out in Community legislation as transposed into national legislation or applied in the national legal order (referred to hereinafter as "EC legal requirements");(b) monitoring the impact of controlled installations on the environment to determine whether further inspection or enforcement action (including issuing, modification or revocation of any authorisation, permit or licence) is required to secure compliance with EC legal requirements;(c) the carrying out of activities for the above purposes including:- site visits,- monitoring achievement of environmental quality standards,- consideration of environmental audit reports and statements,- consideration and verification of any self monitoring carried out by or on behalf of operators of controlled installations,- assessing the activities and operations carried out at the controlled installation,- checking the premises and the relevant equipment (including the adequacy with which it is maintained) and the adequacy of the environmental management at the site,- checking the relevant records kept by the operators of controlled installations.3. Environmental inspections, including site visits, may be:(a) routine, that is, carried out as part of a planned inspections programme; or(b) non-routine, that is, carried out in such cases in response to complaints, in connection with the issuing, renewal or modification of an authorisation, permit or licence, or in the investigation of accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance.4. (a) Environmental inspections may be carried out by any public authority at either national, regional or local level, which is established or designated by the Member State and responsible for the matters covered by this recommendation.(b) The bodies referred to in point (a) may, in accordance with their national legislation, delegate the tasks provided for in this recommendation to be accomplished, under their authority and supervision, to any legal person whether governed by public or private law provided such person has no personal interest in the outcome of the inspections it undertakes.(c) The bodies referred to in points (a) and (b) are defined as "inspecting authorities".5. For the purposes of this recommendation, an "operator of a controlled installation" is any natural or legal person who operates or controls the controlled installation or, where this is provided for in national legislation, to whom decisive economic power over the technical functioning of the controlled installation has been delegated.IIIOrganisation and carrying out of environmental inspections1. Member States should ensure that environmental inspections aim to achieve a high level of environmental protection and to this end should take the necessary measures to ensure that environmental inspections of controlled installations are organised and carried out in accordance with points IV to VIII of this recommendation.2. Member States should assist each other administratively in carrying out the guidelines of this recommendation by the exchange of relevant information and, where appropriate, inspecting officials.3. To prevent illegal cross-border environmental practices, Member States should encourage, in cooperation with IMPEL, the coordination of inspections with regard to installations and activities which might have significant transboundary impact.4. In order to promote best practice across the Community, Member States may, in cooperation with IMPEL, consider the establishment of a scheme, under which Member States report and offer advice on inspectorates and inspection procedures in Member States, paying due regard to the different systems and contexts in which they operate, and report to the Member States concerned on their findings.IVPlans for environmental inspections1. Member States should ensure that environmental inspection activities are planned in advance, by having at all times a plan or plans for environmental inspections providing coverage of all the territory of the Member State and of the controlled installations within it. Such a plan or plans should be available to the public according to Directive 90/313/EEC.2. Such plan or plans may be established at national, regional or local levels, but Member States should ensure that the plan or plans apply to all environmental inspections of controlled installations within their territory and that the authorities mentioned in point II(4) are designated to carry out such inspections.3. Plans for environmental inspections should be produced on the basis of the following:(a) the EC legal requirements to be complied with;(b) a register of controlled installations within the plan area;(c) a general assessment of major environmental issues within the plan area and a general appraisal of the state of compliance by the controlled installations with EC legal requirements;(d) data on and from previous inspection activities, if any.4. Plans for environmental inspections should:(a) be appropriate to the inspection tasks of the relevant authorities, and should take account of the controlled installations concerned and the risks and environmental impacts of emissions and discharges from them;(b) take into account relevant available information in relation to specific sites or types of controlled installations, such as reports by operators of controlled installations made to the authorities, self monitoring data, environmental audit information and environmental statements, in particular those produced by controlled installations registered according to the Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), results of previous inspections and reports of environmental quality monitoring.5. Each plan for environmental inspections should as a minimum:(a) define the geographical area which it covers, which may be for all or part of the territory of a Member State;(b) cover a defined time period, for example one year;(c) include specific provisions for its revision;(d) identify the specific sites or types of controlled installations covered;(e) prescribe the programmes for routine environmental inspections, taking into account environmental risks; these programmes should include, where appropriate, the frequency of site visits for different types of or specified controlled installations;(f) provide for and outline the procedures for non-routine environmental inspections, in such cases in response to complaints, accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance and for purposes of granting permission;(g) provide for coordination between the different inspecting authorities, where relevant.VSite visits1. Member States should ensure that the following criteria are applied in respect of all site visits:(a) that an appropriate check is made of compliance with the EC legal requirements relevant to the particular inspection;(b) that if site visits are to be carried out by more than one environmental inspecting authority, they exchange information on each others' activities and, as far as possible, coordinate site visits and other environmental inspection work;(c) that the findings of site visits are contained in reports made in accordance with point VI and exchanged, as necessary, between relevant inspection, enforcement and other authorities, whether national, regional or local;(d) that inspectors or other officials entitled to carry out site visits have a legal right of access to sites and information, for the purposes of environmental inspection.2. Member States should ensure that site visits are regularly carried out by inspecting authorities as part of their routine environmental inspections and that the following additional criteria are applied for such site visits:(a) that the full range of relevant environmental impacts is examined, in conformity with the applicable EC legal requirements, the environmental inspection programmes and the inspecting bodies' organisational arrangements;(b) that such site visits should aim to promote and reinforce operators' knowledge and understanding of relevant EC legal requirements and environmental sensitivities, and of the environmental impacts of their activities;(c) that the risks to and impact on the environment of the controlled installation are considered in order to evaluate the effectiveness of existing authorisation, permit or licensing requirements and to assess whether improvements or other changes to such requirements are necessary.3. Member States should also ensure that non-routine site visits are carried out in the following circumstances:(a) in the investigation by the relevant inspecting authorities of serious environmental complaints, and as soon as possible after such complaints are received by the authorities;(b) in the investigation of serious environmental accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance, and as soon as possible after these come to the notice of the relevant inspecting authorities;(c) where appropriate, as part of the determination as to whether and on what terms to issue a first authorisation, permit or licence for a process or activity at a controlled installation or the proposed site thereof or to ensure the compliance with the requirements of authorisation, permit or licence after it has been issued and before the start of activity;(d) where appropriate, before the reissue, renewal or modification of authorisations, permits or licences.VIReports and conclusions following site visits1. Member States should ensure that after every site visit the inspecting authorities process or store, in identifiable form and in data files, the inspection data and their findings as to compliance with EC legal requirements, an evaluation thereof and a conclusion on whether any further action should follow, such as enforcement proceedings, including sanctions, the issuing of a new or revised authorisation, permit or licence or follow-up inspection activities, including further site visits. Reports should be finalised as soon as possible.2. Member States should ensure that such reports are properly recorded in writing and maintained in a readily accessible database. The full reports, and wherever this is not practicable the conclusions of such reports, should be communicated to the operator of the controlled installation in question according to Directive 90/313/EEC; these reports should be publicly available within two months of the inspection taking place.VIIInvestigations of serious accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-complianceMember States should ensure that the investigation of serious accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance with EC legislation, whether these come to the attention of the authorities through a complaint or otherwise, is carried out by the relevant authority in order to:(a) clarify the causes of the event and its impact on the environment, and as appropriate, the responsibilities and possible liabilities for the event and its consequences, and to forward conclusions to the authority responsible for enforcement, if different from the inspecting authority;(b) mitigate and, where possible, remedy the environmental impacts of the event through a determination of the appropriate actions to be taken by the operator(s) and the authorities;(c) determine action to be taken to prevent further accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance;(d) enable enforcement action or sanctions to proceed, if appropriate; and(e) ensure that the operator takes appropriate follow-up actions.VIIIReporting on environmental inspection activities in general1. Member States should report to the Commission on their experience of the operation of this recommendation two years after the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities, using, to the extent possible, any data available from regional and local inspecting authorities.2. Such reports should be available to the public and should include in particular the following information:(a) data about the staffing and other resources of the inspecting authorities;(b) details of the inspecting authority's role and performance in the establishment and implementation of relevant plan(s) for inspections;(c) summary details of the environmental inspections carried out, including the number of site visits made, the proportion of controlled installations inspected (by type) and estimated length of time before all controlled installations of that type have been inspected;(d) brief data on the degree of compliance by controlled installations with EC legal requirements as appears from inspections carried out;(e) a summary, including numbers, of the actions taken as a result of serious complaints, accidents, incidents and occurrences of non-compliance;(f) an evaluation of the success or failure of the plans for inspections as applicable to the inspecting body, with any recommendations for future plans.IXReview and development of the recommendation1. The Commission should review the operation and effectiveness of this recommendation, as soon as possible after receipt of the Member States' reports mentioned in point VIII above, with the intention of developing the minimum criteria further in terms of their scope in the light of the experience gained from their application, and taking into account any further contributions from interested parties, including IMPEL and the European Environment Agency. The Commission should then submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal for a directive. The European Parliament and the Council will consider such a proposal without delay.2. The Commission is invited to draw up, as quickly as possible, in cooperation with IMPEL and other interested parties, minimum criteria concerning the qualifications of environmental inspectors who are authorised to carry out inspections for or under the authority or supervision of inspecting authorities.3. Member States should, as quickly as possible, in cooperation with IMPEL, the Commission and other interested parties, develop training programmes in order to meet the demand for qualified environmental inspectors.XImplementationMember States should inform the Commission of the implementation of this recommendation together with details of environmental inspection mechanisms already existing or foreseen not later than twelve months after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.Done at Luxembourg, 4 April 2001.For the European ParliamentThe PresidentN. FontaineFor the CouncilThe PresidentB. Rosengren(1) OJ C 169, 16.6.1999, p. 12.(2) OJ C 374, 23.12.1999, p. 48.(3) Opinion of the European Parliament of 16 September 1999 (OJ C 54, 25.2.2000, p. 92), Council Common Position of 30 March 2000 (OJ C 137, 16.5.2000, p. 1) and Decision of the European Parliament of 6 July 2000 (not yet published in the Official Journal). Decision of the European Parliament of 1 February 2001 and Council Decision of 26 February 2001.(4) OJ C 138, 17.5.1993, p. 1.(5) OJ L 275, 10.10.1998, p. 1.(6) OJ C 321, 22.10.1997, p. 1.(7) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.


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

text:
               18.8.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 272/91

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 14 July 2015
   on the 2015 National Reform Programme of Poland and delivering a Council opinion on the 2015 Convergence Programme of Poland
   (2015/C 272/24)
   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 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 (2). 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 (3) on Poland's National Reform Programme for 2014 and delivered its opinion on Poland'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 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which Poland was not identified 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 Poland. This assessed Poland's progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted on 8 July 2014.

               (7)

               On 29 April 2015, Poland submitted its 2015 National Reform Programme and on 30 April 2015 its 2015 Convergence Programme. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (8)

               Poland is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact following the abrogation of the Excessive Deficit Procedure in June 2015 (5). In its 2015 Convergence Programme, the Government plans to gradually reduce the headline deficit from 3,2 % of GDP to 2,7 % of GDP in 2015 and further to 1,2 % of GDP in 2018. Based on the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, the excessive deficit can be considered to have been already corrected in 2014, one year ahead of the deadline, taking into account that the excess over the 3 %-of-GDP Treaty reference value is explained by the net budgetary cost of the systemic pension reform. According to the Convergence Programme, the Government plans to reach the medium-term objective — a structural deficit of 1 % of GDP — by 2019. After a peak of 51,7 % in the government debt-to-GDP ratio in 2015 the Government plans to reduce it to 49,1 % in 2018. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning these budgetary projections is plausible in 2015 and favourable in 2016. On the basis of an overall assessment, Poland is projected to comply with the required adjustment towards the medium-term objective in 2015 since net expenditure growth is below the benchmark. Measures to support the planned deficit targets from 2016 have not been sufficiently specified. In the light of the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, there is a risk of some deviation from the required adjustment in 2016 as the structural adjustment falls short of the requirement. Therefore, further measures will be needed in 2016. Based on its assessment of the Convergence Programme and taking into account the Commission's 2015 spring forecast, the Council is of the opinion that Poland is expected to broadly comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact. Tax revenues could be increased by reducing the extensive use currently made of reduced VAT rates and by increasing the efficiency of the tax administration.

               (9)

               Poland's fiscal framework would benefit from the creation of an independent body, either as a stand-alone institution or within an existing institution, responsible for carrying out ex ante and ex post assessments of compliance with fiscal rules, assessment of macroeconomic and budgetary forecasts, and analysis of the long-term sustainability of public finances.

               (10)

               Poland reversed the systemic pension reform of 1999 at the end of 2013. While producing some budgetary relief in the short term, the reversal of the systemic pension reform of 1999 does not improve the long-term sustainability of public finances, as the short-term benefits from higher social contributions and lower interest payments will be offset by higher future pension payments from the public pension pillar. Overall the reversal of the systemic pension reform of 1999 carries some risks for Polish public finance in the long run.

               (11)

               The social security privileges granted to farmers and miners continue to hamper professional mobility and impose significant costs on public finances. These preferential schemes deter people from moving to more productive sectors, create hidden unemployment and, due to low contributions, are heavily subsidised by taxpayers. In 2014 Poland's agricultural sector employs 11,5 % of the workforce, more than double the EU average, while generating only 3,3 % of national gross value added. State subsidies to the social security scheme for farmers are worth almost 1 % of GDP, and those to miners' pensions 0,5 % of GDP. The link between contributions and benefits is weak and contributions are mostly based on a flat rate. Farmers on high incomes cannot be systematically excluded from the scheme, and the system is therefore open to abuse. Introducing a system for recording and assessing farmers' incomes would constitute an indispensable first step towards a reform of the social security scheme for farmers.

               (12)

               Labour market segmentation persists in Poland. The incidence of temporary contracts is the highest in the Union, while the transition rate from temporary to permanent employment is low and the wage differential the highest in the Union. Rigid dismissal provisions, long judicial proceedings and other burdens placed on employers encourage the use of fixed-term and non-standard employment contracts. Furthermore, the perceived high cost of contracts covered by the Labour Code leads to excessive use of civil law contracts (umowy cywilnoprawne), which are attractive to employers due to the associated lower social security contributions. The high proportion of contracts of this type, i.e. associated with lower contributions, may, however, reduce the quality of employment available, especially for young workers. Youth unemployment is high, partly as a result of the mismatch between candidates' qualifications and skills, on the one hand, and labour market needs, on the other. Continued efforts are therefore needed to reform the system of vocational education and training and to increase the low level of participation in lifelong learning. Female labour market participation remains low. In order to address this issue, Poland has increased the availability of pre-school education, but still ranks among the poorest-performing Member States for the availability of early childcare services.

               (13)

               The railway sector suffers as a result of high track-access charges and inadequate national financing. Procedures for designing and implementing projects tend to be lengthy and cumbersome, as a result of the regulatory and administrative environment. While the recent legislative changes may have a positive effect on railway transport, they are unlikely to affect investment projects launched during the 2007-2013 programming period. Over the period 2014-2020, however, EU funding for the railway sector is to be significantly increased.

               (14)

               In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Poland'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 Poland in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Poland 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 (4) 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.

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

               1.

               Following the correction of the excessive deficit, achieve a fiscal adjustment of 0,5 % of GDP towards the medium-term budgetary objective both in 2015 and 2016. Establish an independent fiscal council. Broaden the tax base, in particular by limiting the use of the extensive system of reduced VAT rates.

               2.

               Start the process of aligning the pension arrangements for farmers and miners with those for other workers, and adopt a timetable for progressive full alignment; put in place a system for assessing and recording farmers' incomes.

               3.

               Take measures to reduce the excessive use of temporary and civil law contracts in the labour market.

               4.

               Remove obstacles to investment in railway projects.

      Done at Brussels, 14 July 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. GRAMEGNA

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  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).

      (3)  Council Recommendation of 8 July 2014 on National Reform Programme 2014 of Poland and delivering a Council opinion on the Convergence Programme of Poland, 2014 (OJ C 247, 29.7.2014, p. 97).

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

      (5)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/1026 of 19 June 2015 abrogating Decision 2009/589/EC on the existence of an excessive deficit in Poland (OJ L 163, 30.6.2015, p. 37).

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


				|

		52014PC0156

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION approving the conclusion by the Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part /* COM/2014/0156 final */

			   	EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1.           CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
This proposal is prepared in view of the
envisaged signing, provisional application and conclusion of the EU-Georgia
Association Agreement, in order to approve the conclusion of the Association
Agreement by the Commission on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community
(EAEC).
Since the EAEC is also a Party to the
Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the
one part, and Georgia, of the other part, the Commission makes a separate
recommendation for Council approval of the conclusion by the Commission of the
parts of the Agreement which fall under the Treaty establishing the (EAEC).
Different procedures apply to the signature
and conclusion of international agreements by the EAEC. In particular, in
accordance with Article 101 EAEC Treaty, such agreements have to be concluded by
the Commission with the approval of the Council. It is therefore necessary to
adopt separate Decisions for both the signature and conclusion of the Association
Agreement by the EU and by the EAEC.
For the conclusion of the Association
Agreement on behalf of the EAEC, the Commission recommends that the Council
give its approval, pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 101 of the
Treaty establishing the EAEC.
In the light of the results
of the negotiations mentioned in the Proposal for a Council Decision on the
signing, on behalf of the EU, and provisional application of the Association
Agreement between the EU and Georgia, as well as in the Proposal for a Council
Decision on the conclusion of the Association Agreement between the EU and
Georgia, the Commission proposes that the Council decides that the Association
Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community
and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part,
should be signed on behalf of the Union and establishes appointment of the
person(s) duly empowered to sign on behalf of the Union.
Given the approval of
the Council and the appropriate Commission decision, the Commission will be
able to sign and conclude the Association Agreement on behalf of the EAEC.
2.           RESULTS AND LEGAL
ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
The Commission recommends that the Council
approve, pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 101 of the Treaty
establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, the conclusion of the
Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy
Community and its Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other
part, as regards matters falling proper to the EAEC.
The text of the Agreement is attached to
the present Recommendation.
On the part of the Union, the legal basis for the
conclusion of this Agreement is Article 217, in conjunction with Article 218(6)(a) and the second
subparagraph of Article 218(8) of TFEU.
For the EAEC, the legal basis for this Agreement is Article
101 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community.
The attached proposal constitutes, together with the
Commission decision on conclusion, the legal instrument for conclusion of the
Association Agreement on behalf of the EAEC.
The fact that the Commission has
submitted its proposal as an agreement between the Union and its Member States and Georgia is related to the genesis of this agreement under the rules of the
Treaty before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.
According to Article 102 of the Euratom
Treaty, an Agreement may not enter into force for the EAEC
until the Commission has been notified by the Member States that the agreement
has become applicable in accordance with the provisions of their respective
national laws.
Recommendation for a
COUNCIL DECISION
approving the conclusion by the
Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Association
Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community
and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing
the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second paragraph of
Article 101 thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation from
the Commission,
Whereas:
(1)       On 10 May 2010, the
Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with Georgia for the conclusion of a new Agreement between the European Union and Georgia to
replace the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.[1]
(2)       Taking into account the
close historical relationship and progressively closer links between the
Parties, as well as their desire to strengthen and widen relations in an
ambitious and innovative way, the negotiations on the Association Agreement
between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their
Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (hereinafter
"the Agreement") were successfully finalised by the initialling of
the Agreement on 29 November 2013.
(3)       The Commission proposes to
the Council that the Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union and applied on a provisional basis in accordance with Article 429 of the Agreement,
pending its conclusion at a later date.
(4)       The Agreement also covers
matters falling under Euratom competences, namely Article 298(k).
(5)       The signature and
conclusion of the Agreement is subject to a separate procedure as regards
matters falling under the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union.
(6)       The Agreement should therefore
also be concluded, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, as
regards matters falling under the Euratom Treaty.
(7)       According to Article 102
of the Euratom Treaty, the Agreement may not enter into force for the European
Atomic Energy Community until the European Commission has been notified by the
Member States that such agreement has become applicable in accordance with the
provisions of their respective national laws.
(8)       The conclusion of the
Agreement by the European Commission, acting on behalf of the European Atomic
Energy Community, should be approved.
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The conclusion by the European Commission,
on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Association Agreement
between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part, is hereby approved.[2] [3]
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the
date following that of its adoption.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 205, 4.8.1999, p. 1-52.
[2]               The text of the Agreement is attached to the Decision
on the signing, on behalf of the European Union and provisional application of
the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic
Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part. (OJ…)
[3]               OJ: Please insert in the footnote above the
publication reference of the Decision in document […].


Avis juridique important

|

32003H0179

Council Recommendation of 7 March 2003 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 2001

Official Journal L 071 , 15/03/2003 P. 0015 - 0015

Council Recommendationof 7 March 2003concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 2001(2003/179/EC)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, as amended by the Agreement signed at Mauritius on 4 November 1995,Having regard to Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25 July 1991 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community(1),Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid(2), signed in Brussels on 16 July 1990, and in particular Article 33(3) thereof,Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 29 July 1991 applicable to the Seventh European Development Fund(3), 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 European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) as at 31 December 2001 and the Court of Auditors' report relating to the financial year 2001 together with the Commission's replies(4),Whereas:(1) Pursuant to Article 33(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the management of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) must be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on a recommendation from the Council.(2) The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) during the financial year 2001 has been satisfactory,HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1989) (Seventh EDF) for the financial year 2001.Done at Brussels, 7 March 2003.For the CouncilThe PresidentN. Christodoulakis(1) OJ L 263, 19.9.1991, p. 1.(2) OJ L 229, 17.8.1991, p. 288.(3) OJ L 266, 21.9.1991, p. 1.(4) OJ C 295, 28.11.2002, p. 289.


title: Council Recommendation of 11 July 2017 on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Estonia and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Stability Programme of Estonia

text:
               9.8.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 261/23

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 11 July 2017
   on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Estonia and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Stability Programme of Estonia
   (2017/C 261/06)
   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 5(2) 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 16 November 2016, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2017 European Semester for economic policy coordination. The priorities of the Annual Growth Survey were endorsed by the European Council on 9-10 March 2017. On 16 November 2016, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it did not identify Estonia as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out. On the same date, the Commission also adopted a recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area, which was endorsed by the European Council on 9-10 March 2017. On 21 March 2017, the Council adopted the Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (‘Recommendation for the euro area’) (3).

               (2)

               As a Member State whose currency is the euro and in view of the close interlinkages between the economies in the economic and monetary union, Estonia should ensure the full and timely implementation of the Recommendation for the euro area, as reflected in recommendation (1) below.

               (3)

               The 2017 country report for Estonia was published on 22 February 2017. It assessed Estonia’s progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Council on 12 July 2016, the follow-up given to the country-specific recommendations adopted in previous years and Estonia’s progress towards its national Europe 2020 targets.

               (4)

               Estonia submitted its 2017 Stability Programme on 28 April 2017 and its 2017 National Reform Programme on 4 May 2017. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (5)

               Relevant country-specific recommendations have been addressed in the programming of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) for the 2014-2020 period. As provided for in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), where it is necessary to support the implementation of relevant Council recommendations, the Commission may request a Member State to review and propose amendments to its Partnership Agreement and relevant programmes. The Commission has provided further details on how it would make use of that provision in guidelines on the application of the measures linking effectiveness of the ESI Funds to sound economic governance.

               (6)

               Estonia is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact. In its 2017 Stability Programme, the Government lowered its medium-term budgetary objective from a structural balance to a deficit of 0,5 % of GDP. The Government plans to move from a general government surplus of 0,3 % of GDP in 2016 to a deficit of 0,5 % of GDP in 2017 and 0,8 % of GDP in 2018. According to the estimates of the 2017 Stability Programme, this corresponds to a structural surplus of 0,2 % of GDP in 2017 and a deficit of 0,5 % of GDP in 2018, respecting the medium-term budgetary objective. However, based on the recalculated (5) structural balance, the deficit is projected to amount to 0,1 % of GDP in 2017 and 0,9 % of GDP in 2018, below the new medium-term budgetary objective. According to the 2017 Stability Programme, general government debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to remain below 10 % of GDP in 2017 and 2018. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning those budgetary projections is plausible for 2017 and 2018, but it is favourable for the later years of the programme. At the same time, there are risks linked to the revenue yield assumptions related to the various new tax measures taking effect in 2018.

               (7)

               Based on the Commission 2017 spring forecast, the structural balance is projected to register a deficit of 0,3 % of GDP in 2017, remaining above the medium-term budgetary objective. In 2018, Estonia is recommended to remain at the medium-term budgetary objective. Under unchanged policies, there is a risk of some deviation from that requirement. Overall, the Council is of the opinion that Estonia needs to stand ready to take further measures to ensure compliance in 2018.

               (8)

               Estonia has taken action to ensure the provision and accessibility of high-quality services, including social services at local level as part of its local government reform. In particular, Estonia has adopted the Administrative Reform Act with a view to making it easier to create viable local municipalities that can finance their own activities, to plan development and growth, and to offer quality services. It successfully completed the voluntary phase of the merger of local municipalities and it is implementing the Social Welfare Act. Some key steps to complete the local government reform have not yet been taken. The revision of the financing scheme for municipalities is still pending. Further legislative acts on the responsibilities and division of tasks between municipalities and central government are still in preparation. Adopting these proposals is critical to ensuring the provision of quality public services in areas such as education, youth work, health promotion and transport.

               (9)

               The gender pay gap in Estonia fell from 28,3 % in 2014 to 26,9 % in 2015 but is still the highest in the Union. The Government is taking steps to further narrow the gender pay gap. In particular, the 2016-2023 Welfare Plan has been adopted and is being implemented to tackle gender segregation in the labour market and to fight stereotypes. The modification of the Gender Equality Act to give the labour inspectorates the task of more closely monitoring gender equality in the private sector has still to be adopted. The revision of the parental leave system to allow a more flexible take-up of parental leave is also being considered. The legislative change has not yet been adopted.

               (10)

               Income inequality in Estonia is high. The ratio of incomes of the richest 20 % of households to that of the poorest 20 % rose from 5,4 in 2012 to 6,2 in 2015, and is now the seventh highest in the Union. The key driver appears to be the high wage dispersion as a result of strong income growth among the higher-skilled. In absolute terms, the incomes of the poorest 10 % of households have lagged behind growth in median incomes, leading to problems with the adequacy of the social safety net. A contributing factor is that benefits (particularly pensions and social assistance) are not keeping pace with the growth in market incomes. This has also resulted in a gradual increase in the at-risk-of-poverty rate from 15,8 % in 2010 to 21,6 % in 2015. Substantial efforts have been undertaken to make the tax system more progressive as of 2018, in particular for low-income earners, by raising the basic allowance of the personal income tax system.

               (11)

               Business enterprise expenditure in research, technology and innovation increased in 2015 to 0,69 %, but its overall level remains below Union average of 1,3 %. The share of high-technology and knowledge-intensive companies remains limited and the number of new doctoral graduates is low. Wage growth has consistently exceeded productivity growth in recent years, affecting profits and thereby pulling investment growth downwards. Subdued investment in technological development may cause the value-added of exports, especially goods, to increase less than expected, and poses a risk to output growth. The volume of contract research between academia and businesses increased in 2015. However, cooperation between the two sectors remained limited despite the measures taken by the Government. Estonia has further improved its business environment, but the lengthy insolvency proceedings and recovery rate for secured creditors remain barriers to investment. A project to improve the insolvency framework was launched in 2016 to make the process faster and more efficient and to improve the rate of successful applications. However, amendments to the legislative framework have not yet been adopted.

               (12)

               In the context of the 2017 European Semester, the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Estonia’s economic policy and published it in the 2017 country report. It has also assessed the 2017 Stability Programme, the 2017 National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to Estonia in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Estonia, but also their compliance with Union rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the Union’s overall economic governance by providing Union-level input into future national decisions.

               (13)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the 2017 Stability Programme and its opinion (6) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Estonia take action in 2017 and 2018 to:

               1.

               Pursue its fiscal policy in line with the requirements of the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact, which entails remaining at its medium-term budgetary objective in 2018. Improve the adequacy of the social safety net. Take measures to reduce the gender pay gap, in particular by improving wage transparency and reviewing the parental leave system.

               2.

               Promote private investment in research, technology and innovation, including by implementing measures for strengthening the cooperation between academia and businesses.

      Done at Brussels, 11 July 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         T. TÕNISTE

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

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

      (3)  OJ C 92, 24.3.2017, p. 1.

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

      (5)  Cyclically-adjusted balance net of one-off and temporary measures, recalculated by the Commission using the commonly agreed methodology.

      (6)  Under Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.


Avis juridique important

|

32000H0417

2000/417/EC: Commission Recommendation of 25 May 2000 on unbundled access to the local loop: enabling the competitive provision of a full range of electronic communications services including broadband multimedia and high-speed Internet (notified under document number C(2000) 1259) (Text with EEA relevance)

Official Journal L 156 , 29/06/2000 P. 0044 - 0050

Commission Recommendationof 25 May 2000on unbundled access to the local loop: enabling the competitive provision of a full range of electronic communications services including broadband multimedia and high-speed Internet(notified under document number C(2000) 1259)(Text with EEA relevance)(2000/417/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 211,Whereas:(1) The conclusions of the special European Council of Lisbon on 23 and 24 March 2000 note that for Europe to fully seize the growth and job potential of the digital, knowledge-based economy, it is required that businesses and citizens have access to an inexpensive, world-class communications infrastructure and a wide range of services, and to provide this calls on the Member States, together with the Commission, "to work towards introducing greater competition in local access networks before the end of 2000 and unbundling the local loop, in order to help bring about a substantial reduction in the costs of using the Internet".(2) The Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 on interconnection in telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service and interoperability through application of the principles of open network provision (ONP)(1) as amended by Directive 98/61/CE(2), and in particular Articles 4(2),7,9 and 11, lays down principles on access to networks including collocation, and gives national regulatory authorities powers to exercise their responsibility in this regard.(3) The Directive 98/10/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 1998 on the application of open network provision to voice telephony and on universal service for telecommunications in a competitive environment(3), and in particular Article 16, establish conditions on special network access in order to stimulate the development of new types of telecommunication services.(4) The Council Directive 92/44/EEC of 5 June 1992 on the application of open network provision to leased lines(4), as amended by Directive 97/51/EC(5) and Commission Decision No 80/98/EC of 7 January 1998(6) and in particular Article 8(2) establish conditions on the provision of leased lines.(5) The Commission Directive 90/388/EEC(7) as last amended by Directive 99/64/EC(8) and in particular Article 4(c) lays down requirements for the rebalancing of tariffs in a fully liberalised market.(6) The "local loop" refers to the physical copper line circuit in the local access network connecting the customer's premises to the operator's local switch, concentrator or equivalent facility. As noted in the Commission fifth report on the implementation of the telecommunications regulatory package(9), the local access network remains one of the least competitive segments of the liberalised telecommunications market, because new entrants do not have wide-spread alternative network infrastructures and are unable with traditional technologies to match the economies of scale and scope of operators notified as having significant market power in the fixed network (hereinafter referred to as "notified operators"). This results from the fact that operators rolled out their old copper local access networks over significant periods of time protected by exclusive rights and were able to fund its investment costs through monopoly rents.(7) The provision of new loops with high capacity optical fibre directly to major users is a specific market that is developing under competitive conditions with new investments and therefore this recommendation does not address unbundled access to fibre local loops.(8) It would not be economically viable to new entrants to duplicate the incumbent's copper local loop access infrastructure in its entirety and in a reasonable time period, and alternative infrastructures (e.g. cable television, satellite, wireless local loops) do not generally offer the same functionality or ubiquity.(9) Notified operators are already rolling out their own broadband high speed bit stream services for Internet access in their copper loops, but may delay the introduction of some types of digital subscriber loop (DSL) technologies and services in the local loop, where these could substitute for their current offerings. Any such delays would be at the expense of users. Therefore it is appropriate to allow third parties to have unbundled access to the local loop of the notified operator, in particular, as noted in point 5 of Commission Recommendation on leased lines interconnection pricing(10), to meet users' needs for the competitive provision of leased lines and highspeed Internet access.(10) In accordance with Article 4(2) of Directive 97/33/EC and Article 16 of Directive 98/10/EC, notified operators shall deal with reasonable requests for network access from new entrants, in particular for shared access(11) to the copper line, and should seek to agree commercial and technical conditions. However, the availability of only shared access to the local loop does not meet all market demands and therefore, it is considered appropriate that the notified operator provides also full local loop unbundling(12), in parallel to shared access, to reinforce competition and improve choice for all types of users, by allowing the market to decide which unbundled access offerings best meet the customers' needs.(11) Notified operators should provide information and unbundled access to third parties under the same conditions and of the same quality as they provide for their own services or those of their subsidiaries or partners, and to this end, the publication by the notified operator of a reference offer for unbundled access to the local loop, within a short time-frame and ideally on Internet, and under the supervisory control of the national regulatory authority (NRA), would contribute, to create transparent and non-discriminatory market conditions.(12) Although commercial negotiation is the preferred method for reaching agreement on technical and pricing issues for local loop access, experience shows that in most of the cases regulatory intervention is necessary due to imbalance in the negotiation power between the new entrant and the notified operator, and lack of other alternatives. The national regulatory authority, in accordance with Article 9 of Directive 97/33/EC and Article 16(4) of Directive 98/10/EC, may intervene at its own initiative to specify issues, including pricing, designed to ensure interoperability of services, maximise economic efficiency and benefit end users.(13) Costing and pricing rules for local loops and associated facilities (such as collocation and leased transmission capacity) should be transparent, non-discriminatory and be objective to ensure fairness. Pricing rules should ensure that the local loop provider is able to cover its appropriate costs in this regard plus a reasonable return. Pricing rules for local loops should ensure that there is no distortion of competition, in particular no margin squeeze between prices of wholesale and retail services of the notified operator. In this regard it is considered important that competition authorities are consulted.(14) The Directive 98/10/EC requires Member States to ensure that all reasonable requests for connection to the fixed public telephone network at a fixed location and access to fixed public telephone services are met by at least one operator. Where a customer decides to enter into a contractual agreement with a new entrant for exclusive provision of services by means of full unbundled local loop, then it is considered that the notified operator has fulfilled its obligation under Article 5 of Directive 98/10/EC. Users should be fully informed of such conditions in their contracts in accordance with Article 10 of Directive 98/10/EC and this without prejudice to the application of Community law regarding consumer protection.(15) The Licensing Directive 97/13/EC foresees the use of general authorisations for telecommunications services, except under certain conditions as set out in Article 7 thereof. Companies using DSL technology on unbundled local loops to provide services to customers should be authorised in accordance with the Directive 97/13/EC on the basis of the activities they undertake and, in line with the principle of technological neutrality, no specific regulatory restrictions should be placed on services provided in this way. Authorised data network operators or voice telephony network operators should be entitled to operate shared access and/or full unbundled local loops from notified operators without additional authorisations or being subject to additional restrictions.(16) It is appropriate that the Commission reviews this recommendation periodically on the basis of market developments and the experience acquired, in particular as regards pricing issues and the content of the reference offer included in the Annex.(17) The Community competition rules apply beside the present recommendation,HEREBY RECOMMENDS:Article 1Provision of access to the local loop1. In the context of the promotion of an advanced, harmonised and competitive electronic communications market that provides a wide choice for users for a full range of communications services, including broadband multimedia and high-speed Internet services, this recommendation concerns conditions for the provision to new entrants of unbundled access to the local loop and associated facilities, by public fixed network operators designated by the national regulatory authority as having significant market power (hereinafter referred to as "notified operators") in accordance with Directive 97/33/EC, Directive 92/44/EEC, and, Directive 98/10/EC.2. Without prejudice to the application of Community competition rules, it is recommended that in Member States where full unbundled access is not yet available, appropriate legal and regulatory measures be adopted to mandate, by 31 December 2000, full unbundled access to the copper local loop of notified operators under transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory conditions.3. The recommended provision of full unbundled access to the local loop of notified operators is without prejudice to the obligations under ONP Directives 97/33/EC and 98/10/EC for notified operators to(13):- meet requests for other forms of access including shared access to the local loop, in accordance with Article 4(2) of Directive 97/33/EC and Article 16 of Directive 98/10/EC;- comply with the principle of non-discrimination when using the fixed public telephone network to deliver high speed bit stream services to third parties as provided to its own services, in accordance with Article 16(7) of Directive 98/10/EC.Roll-out of new services4. In applying the principle of non-discrimination imposed on notified operators under Community law, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities ensure that a notified operator provides its competitors with the same facilities as those that it provides to itself or to its associated companies, and with the same conditions and time-scales. This applies in particular to the roll-out of new service in the local access network, access to unbundled local loops, availability of collocation space, provision of leased transmission capacity for access to collocation sites, ordering, provisioning, quality and maintenance procedures.Pricing5. In order to avoid lengthy disputes on pricing between new entrants and notified operators that would delay the effective implementation of local loop unbundling, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities specify the pricing methodology and the relevant parameters used to calculate prices. Where appropriate, Member States may set the actual prices where compatible with Community law(14), and for this purpose it is appropriate that a competition analysis is carried out.6. For as long as the level of competition in the local access network is insufficient to prevent excessive pricing of unbundled access to local loops, it is recommended that prices for unbundled access to local loops follow the principle of cost orientation. In principle a forward-looking approach based on current costs(15) will foster fair and sustainable competition and provide alternative investment incentives; however, if this could result in distortions of competition in the short term, for example where the notified operator's enduser tariffs remain unbalanced on the basis of current costs, then it is recommended that the national regulatory authority, following the procedure of point 5, specify the reasonable time period necessary for the gradual adjustment to current costs of the price of local loops, while keeping consistency with the cost system used when regulating retail services.7. In accordance with the principle of non-discrimination, where notified operators are already providing their own high speed digital subscriber loop (DSL) services using unbundled access to the local loop, national regulatory authorities may require that competitors are given access to the local loops at the same price which the notified operator imputes to its own DSL services. This 'non-discrimination' pricing rule would also apply to the access by new entrants of associated facilities such as collocation and leased transmission capacity in the core network as used by the notified operator to support its own DSL services or those of a subsidiary or associated company.8. To provide confidence in the fair pricing of facilities, and to demonstrate compliance with the obligations for non-discrimination, it is recommended that appropriate and detailed cost accounting information, including internal transfer pricing consistent with the guidelines in Commission Recommendation 98/322(16), is made available to the national regulatory authority who may make it available to interested parties under a non-disclosure agreement, while taking account of considerations of commercial confidentiality.9. It is recommended that national regulatory authorities conduct periodic reviews of the market conditions on local access, adjusting pricing principles and obligations as necessary or removing price regulation once the market offers sufficient competition and choice of alternative offerings. The review period should be announced in advance in order to provide predictability to market players.Technical conditions and collocation10. Physical access should be provided to any feasible termination point of the copper local loop where the new entrant can collocate and connect its own network equipment and facilities to deliver services to its customer, either in the local switch, concentrator or equivalent facility. In principle collocating companies should be allowed to place any equipment necessary to access the unbundled local loop using available collocation space, and, to deploy or rent transmission links from there up to the point of presence of the new entrant. It is recommended that national regulatory authorities ensure that collocation space is offered to competitors in a way that is transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory.11. With regard to technologies and services used with unbundled local loops, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities ensure that any restrictions designed to protect network integrity, and in the case of shared access to the local loop to protect the voice telephony channel, are non-discriminatory and based on objective criteria identified in advance, in accordance with Article 13(2)(b) of Directive 98/10/EC. In line with the principle of technological neutrality for the access to copper local loops, no additional or specific regulatory restrictions should be placed on companies that use new DSL technologies on the local loop as a means to provide customer services.Transparency and coordination12. So as to minimise the time for deployment of competitive DSL services by new entrants, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities ensure that notified operators make available as soon as possible, and ideally on Internet, a reference offer for full unbundled access and shared access to the local loop, containing a description of the offerings and the associated terms and conditions, including prices.The Annex provides an indicative list of items to be included in the reference offer for unbundled access to the local loop.13. In addition, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities ensure easy availability of the following information concerning communications services over unbundled local loops:- licensing conditions for operators,- information for users who take service from operators using unbundled local loop access, including all contractual conditions, specially tariffs, users' rights, minimum rental periods and universal service aspects, termination of service, complaints and redress procedures.14. National regulatory authorities are recommended to set up national coordination groups of interested parties, including user representatives, to refine the requirements under points 12 and 13, and to advise on an ongoing basis on the degree of detail in the information to be published in the reference offer. Notified operators should report regularly to their NRA on their implementation of local loop unbundling, including statistical information for the items identified in the reference offer.15. It is recommended that Member States ensure that national coordination groups take note of similar activities being undertaken in other Member States and relevant international organisations. In order to facilitate coordination, it is recommended that national regulatory authorities report periodically to the ONP committee on issues associated with implementation of unbundled access to the local loop.Review16. This recommendation, and in particular the Annex, will be reviewed by the Commission in the light of market development, and updated where necessary.Article 2This Recommendation is addressed to Member States.Done at Brussels, 25 May 2000.For the CommissionErkki Liikanenand Mario MontiMembers of the Commission(1) OJ L 199, 26.7.1997, p. 32.(2) OJ L 268, 3.10.1998, p. 37.(3) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998, p. 24.(4) OJ L 165, 19.6.1992, p. 32.(5) OJ L 295, 29.10.1997, p. 23.(6) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 27.(7) OJ L 192, 24.7.1990, p. 10.(8) OJ L 175, 10.7.1999, p. 39.(9) COM( 1999)537(10) (not yet published)(11) "Shared use of the copper line" allows access to the unused high frequency part of the spectrum to deploy limited ADSL services (i.e. data rates up to 8 Mbit/s), while the lower frequency part of the spectrum continues to be used by the notified operator to provide basic voice telephone service over the same copper line. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has worked out technical specifications for ADSL full rate - with speeds up to 8 Mbit/s downstream and 1 Mbit/s upstream - in its Recommendation 6.992.1. This includes a number of country-specific variants in order to accommodate regional local loop infrastructure differences. ADSL can achieve its highest speeds at a distance of 4 km or less. The connection also allows the provision of voice phone service on the basic frequency band of the same line. In addition ITU has worked out a variant ADSL solution in its Recommendation G.992.2, also known as G.Lite, that is very easy to deploy in the customer premises because is "splitter-less" (it needs a very simple serial filter that separates voice and data and does not call for any rewiring at the customer premises). Speeds are up to 1,5 Mbit/s downstream to the user and 385 kbit/s upstream. Some PC suppliers are already marketing PC equipment with integrated G.Lite-ADSL modems so that standard universal solutions can be rolled-out in a large scale in the residential market.(12) "Full local loop unbundling" gives the new entrant exclusive use of the full frequency spectrum available on the copper line, thus enabling the most innovative and advanced DSL technologies and services, i.e. data rates of up to 60 Mbit/s to the user using VDSL (Very high speed DSL). Work on standardisation on VDSL is currently taking place in ITU and ETSI.(13) See also Commission communication on Unbundled Access to the local loop (in the Official Journal).(14) See footnote 13.(15) Current costs are the costs of building an efficient modern equivalent infrastructure and providing such a service today.(16) See methodology for implementation of accounting separation and a current cost-accounting approach in Commission Recommendation 98/322/EC (OJ L 141, 13.5,1998, p. 6).ANNEXINDICATIVE LIST OF ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED A REFERENCE OFFER(1) FOR UNBUNDLED ACCESS TO THE LOCAL LOOP TO BE PUBLISHED BY NOTIFIED OPERATORSA. Conditions for unbundled access to the local loop1. Network elements to which access is offered:covering in particular the following elements:- access to raw copper local loops (copper terminating at the local switch) and subloops (copper terminating at the remote concentrator or equivalent facility), in the case of full unbundling,- access to non-voice frequencies of a local loop, in the case of shared access to the local loop,- access to space within a main distribution frame (MDF) site of the notified operator for attachment of DSL access multiplexors (DSLAMs) and similar types of equipment to the local loop of the notified operator.2. Availability: all relevant detail regarding local network architecture, information concerning the locations of physical access sites, availability of copper pairs in specific parts of the access network;3. Technical conditions: technical characteristics of copper pairs in the local loop; lengths, wire diameters, loading coils and bridged taps; line testing and conditioning procedures. Specifications for DSL equipment, splitters etc, with reference to relevant international standards or recommendations; spectrum limitations and electromagnetic compatibility requirements designed to prevent interference with other systems;4. Provisioning procedures: line investigations for specific DSL technologies, ordering and provisioning procedures, usage restrictions,B. Collocation services5. Information on collocation sites: in particular the precise locations(2) of the notified operator's relevant sites; including switches, main distribution frame (MDF), concentrators, and remote distribution points such as street cabinets, pedestals and vaults; specification of the Website(s) where the updated list of locations is published; availability of alternatives when physical collocation is not available.6. Collocation options at the sites indicated under point 5: the types of collocation available e.g. shared, caged/cageless, physical, or virtual); availability of power and air-conditioning facilities at these sites; rules for subleasing of collocation space.7. Equipment characteristics: restrictions, if any, on equipment that can be collocated.8. Security Issues: measures put in place by notified operators to ensure the security of their locations; conditions for access by the staff of competitive operators in order to identify and repair service problems.9. Safety Standards: (In principle safety standards used by the incumbent and its affiliates should be deemed adequate for competitive operators' equipment).10. Inspections: conditions for competitive operators and NRAs to inspect the locations at which physical collocation is available, or sites where collocation has been refused on grounds of lack of capacity.C. Operational support systems11. Conditions for access to be notified operator's operational support systems, information systems or databases for pre-ordering, provisioning, ordering, maintenance and repair requests and billing.12. In principle the operational support system (OSS) elements listed should cover access to all loop qualification information, including information on whether a particular loop is capable of supporting advanced services.D. Supply conditions13. Timeframes: lead time for responding to requests for supply of services and facilities, as well as contractual compensation provided in case of failure to meet those time frames, service level agreements, fault resolution and escalation procedures.14. Prices for each feature, function and facility listed above, shown separately, including on time payments and recurring rental payments.(1) A reference offer for unbundled local loop access includes the basic set of technical facilities, including terms and conditions, and prices, offered to market players.(2) Availability of this information may be restricted to only interested parties to avoid concerns on public security.


title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2015/682 of 29 April 2015 on the monitoring of the presence of perchlorate in food (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
               30.4.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 111/32

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2015/682
   of 29 April 2015
   on the monitoring of the presence of perchlorate in food
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Perchlorate occurs naturally in the environment, in deposits of nitrate and potash, and can be formed in the atmosphere and precipitate into soil and groundwater. It also occurs as an environmental contaminant arising from the use of nitrate fertilisers and from the manufacture, use and disposal of ammonium perchlorate used in rocket propellants, explosives, fireworks, flares and air-bag inflators and in other industrial processes. Perchlorate can also be formed during the degradation of sodium hypochlorite used to disinfect water and can contaminate the water supply. Water, soil and fertilisers are considered to be potential sources of perchlorate contamination in food.

               (2)

               The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (Contam Panel) has provided a scientific opinion on the risks for public health related to the presence of perchlorate in food (1). The Contam Panel concluded that the chronic dietary exposure to perchlorate is of potential concern, in particular for the high consumers in the younger age groups of the population with mild to moderate iodine deficiency. Furthermore, it is possible that short-term exposure to perchlorate is of concern for breast-fed infants and young children with low iodine intake.

               (3)

               The Contam Panel recommended that there is a need for more data on the occurrence of perchlorate in food in Europe, especially for vegetables, infant formula, milk and dairy products, to further reduce the uncertainty in the risk assessment. High levels have been found in Cucurbitaceae and leaf vegetables especially those grown in glasshouse/under cover. There are not sufficient occurrence data on the presence of perchlorate in food in particular from food sampled after 1 September 2013. The analysis of perchlorate in drinking water should include, if possible, also drinking water not falling under the definition of food as provided for in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2). Mitigation measures have been put in place since 1 September 2013 and the data on perchlorate from samples taken thereafter reflect better the principle ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ following good practices (i.e. use of fertilisers containing low levels of perchlorate) and the current presence of perchlorate in food.

               (4)

               It is therefore appropriate to recommend the monitoring of the presence of perchlorate in food,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

               1.

               Member States should, with the active involvement of food business operators, perform monitoring for the presence of perchlorate in food, and particularly in:

                           (a)

                           fruits, vegetables and processed products thereof, including juices;

                           (b)

                           foods for particular nutritional uses intended for infants and young children as defined in Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3);

                           (c)

                           dried herbs and spices; tea; herbal and fruit infusions;

                           (d)

                           beverages, including drinking water.

               2.

               In order to ensure that the samples are representative for the sampled lot, Member States should follow the sampling procedures laid down in Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1882/2006 (4) for leafy vegetables and Part B of the Annex to the Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007 (5) for other foods within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 333/2007.

               3.

               The following method of analysis provides reliable results:
               ‘Quick Method for the Analysis of Residues of numerous Highly Polar Pesticides in Foods of Plant Origin involving Simultaneous Extraction with Methanol and LC-MS/MS Determination (QuPPe-Method) — Version 7.1’ The method can be downloaded from: http://www.crl-pesticides.eu/library/docs/srm/meth_QuPPe.pdf
               In addition the article ‘Analysis of Perchlorate in Food Samples of Plant Origin Applying the QuPPe-Method and LC-MS/MS’ should be consulted in which it is reported how to integrate the environmental contaminant perchlorate into the abovementioned QuPPe multiresidue method. The article can be downloaded from http://www.analytik-news.de/Fachartikel/Volltext/cvuase2.pdf
               The Limit of Quantification (LOQ) should be targeted not be higher than 2 μg/kg for the analysis of perchlorate in foods for infants and young children, 10 μg/kg in other foods and 20 μg/kg in dried herbs, spices, tea and herbal and fruit infusions.

               4.

               Member States with the active involvement of the food business operators, should perform investigations to identify the factors resulting in the presence of perchlorate in food. In particular, the analysis of the presence of perchlorate in fertiliser, soil, irrigation and processing water is appropriate in situations where these factors are relevant.

               5.

               Member States should ensure that the analytical results are provided on a regular basis and at the latest by the end of February 2016 to EFSA in the EFSA data submission format in line with the requirements of EFSA's Guidance on Standard Sample Description (SSD) for Food and Feed (6) and the additional EFSA's specific reporting requirements.

      Done at Brussels, 29 April 2015.

            For the Commission

         Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  EFSA Contam Panel (EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain), 2014. Scientific Opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of perchlorate in food, in particular fruits and vegetables. EFSA Journal 2014; 12(10):3869, 106 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3869

      (2)  Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of 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 (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1).

      (3)  Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on food intended for infants and young children, food for special medical purposes, and total diet replacement for weight control and repealing Council Directive 92/52/EEC, Commission Directives 96/8/EC, 1999/21/EC, 2006/125/EC and 2006/141/EC, Directive 2009/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 41/2009 and (EC) No 953/2009 (OJ L 181, 29.6.2013, p. 35).

      (4)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1882/2006 of 19 December 2006 laying down methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of the levels of nitrates in certain foodstuffs (OJ L 364, 20.12.2006, p. 25).

      (5)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 333/2007 of 28 March 2007 laying down the methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of the levels of lead, cadmium, mercury, inorganic tin, 3-MCPD and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in foodstuffs (OJ L 88, 29.3.2007, p. 29).

      (6)  http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/datex/datexsubmitdata.htm