(1)

On 18 June 2007 the Council authorised the Commission to negotiate a Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part (1), on a Framework Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Lebanon on the general principles for the participation of the Republic of Lebanon in Union programmes (‘the Protocol’).

(2)

The negotiations have been concluded.

(3)

The objective of the Protocol is to lay down the financial and technical rules enabling the Republic of Lebanon to participate in certain Union programmes. The horizontal framework established by the Protocol sets out principles for economic, financial and technical cooperation and allows the Republic of Lebanon to receive assistance, in particular financial assistance, from the Union pursuant to those programmes. That framework applies only to those Union programmes for which the relevant constitutive legal acts provide for the possibility of the participation of the Republic of Lebanon. The signing and provisional application of the Protocol does not therefore entail the exercise of powers under the various sectoral policies pursued by the programmes, which are exercised when establishing the programmes.

(4)

The Protocol should be signed on behalf of the Union and should be applied on a provisional basis, pending the completion of the procedures for its conclusion,

(1)

The Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lebanon, of the other part (1) (‘the Agreement’), was signed in Brussels on 1 April 2002 and entered into force on 1 April 2006.

(2)

The European Council of 17 and 18 June 2004 welcomed the European Commission's proposals for a European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and endorsed the Council conclusions of 14 June 2004.

(3)

The Council has, on numerous other occasions, endorsed that policy in its conclusions.

(4)

The Council, on 5 March 2007, expressed support for the general approach outlined in the European Commission's Communication of 4 December 2006 to enable ENP partner countries to participate in Community agencies and Community programmes on their merits and where the legal bases so allow.

(5)

Lebanon has expressed its wish to participate in a number of Union programmes.

(6)

The specific terms and conditions regarding the participation of Lebanon in each particular Union programme, in particular, the financial contributions to be paid by Lebanon as well as the reporting and evaluation procedures, should be determined by agreement between the European Commission and the competent authorities of Lebanon,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Latvia's application to register the name ‘Carnikavas nēģi’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Carnikavas nēģi’ should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Portugal's application to register the name ‘Meloa de Santa Maria — Açores’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Meloa de Santa Maria — Açores’ should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Pecorino delle Balze Volterrane’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Pecorino delle Balze Volterrane’ should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Registered consignees or authorised warehouse keepers should be prevented from claiming falsely that they have been authorised under Article 17(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC (2) to have excise goods moved to a place of direct delivery under a duty suspension arrangement.

(2)

Registered consignors and authorised warehouse keepers should therefore be able to verify, via the central register referred to in Article 19(4) of Regulation (EU) No 389/2012, whether registered consignees or authorised warehouse keepers have obtained such authorisation.

(3)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 612/2013 (3) should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

It is necessary to provide for a sufficient period of time to allow the Commission to implement changes in the register of economic operators and tax warehouses referred to in Article 19(1) of Regulation (EU) No 389/2012.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Excise Duty,

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 871/2014 (2) provides for a deduction from the 2014 Dutch fishing quota for skates and rays in Union waters of ICES areas IIa and IV (‘the 2014 Dutch quota’) on account of overfishing in the year 2013.

(2)

Following the publication of that Regulation, the Dutch authorities discovered that the data in the catch reports on which the deduction was based had not been correctly transmitted, as corroborated by the evidence available to the Commission.

(3)

On the basis of the corrected data transmitted by the Netherlands on 12 December 2014, it appears that the 2013 Dutch quota was not overfished.

(4)

The deduction from the 2014 Dutch quota should therefore be corrected.

(5)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 871/2014 should be amended accordingly.

(6)

Considering that the deduction from the 2014 Dutch quota applies from the date of entry into force of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 871/2014, this Regulation should apply retroactively from the same date,

(1)

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

On 10 February 2015 the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) approved the addition of one person to the Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee's list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply.

(3)

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 should therefore be updated accordingly.

(4)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, it should enter into force immediately,

(1)

Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 lists the persons and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP (2) identifies the natural and legal persons to whom restrictions are to apply as provided for in Article 5 of that Decision, and Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 gives effect to that Decision to the extent that action at Union level is required.

(3)

On 19 February 2015, the Council decided to remove the names of five deceased persons to whom the restrictions should apply. Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 should be amended to ensure consistency with that decision of the Council.

(4)

Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, it should enter into force immediately,

(1)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)

The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

(1)

On 15 February 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/101/CFSP (1).

(2)

The Council has carried out a review of Decision 2011/101/CFSP, taking into account political developments in Zimbabwe.

(3)

The restrictive measures should be renewed until 20 February 2016.

(4)

The application of the travel ban and asset freeze should be maintained for two persons and one entity set out in Annex I to Decision 2011/101/CFSP. The suspension of the travel ban and asset freeze for persons and entities as listed in Annex II to that Decision should also be renewed. The names of five deceased persons should be removed from Annex I and II to that Decision.

(5)

Decision 2011/101/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

(1)

Commission Decision 2010/221/EU of 15 April 2010 approving national measures for limiting the impact of certain diseases in aquaculture animals and wild aquatic animals in accordance with Article 43 of Council Directive 2006/88/EC (2) allows certain Member States to apply placing on the market and import restrictions on consignments of aquatic animals in order to prevent the introduction of certain diseases into their territory, provided that they have either demonstrated that their territory, or certain demarcated areas of their territory, are free of such diseases or that they have established an eradication or surveillance programme to obtain such freedom.

(2)

Decision 2010/221/EU provides that the Member States and parts thereof listed in Annex I thereto are to be regarded as free from the diseases listed in that Annex. In addition, that Decision approved the eradication programmes adopted by certain Member States in respect of the areas and the diseases listed in Annex II thereto. That Decision also approved the surveillance programmes regarding ostreid herpesvirus 1 μνar (OsHV-1 μVar) adopted by certain Member States in respect of the areas set out in Annex III thereto.

(3)

Annex I to Decision 2010/221/EU currently lists the following parts of the United Kingdom as being free of ostreid herpesvirus 1 μνar (OsHV-1 μVar): the territory of Great Britain, except Whitstable Bay in Kent, Blackwater Estuary in Essex and Poole Harbour in Dorset, the area of Larne Lough in the territory of Northern Ireland and the territory of Guernsey.

(4)

The United Kingdom notified the Commission that OsHV-1 μVar was also detected in Crassostrea gigas from the River Crouch in Essex. This incident is a new outbreak of OsHV-1 μVar in an area included in the territory of Great Britain currently being declared free of the disease. The geographical demarcation of the areas of the United Kingdom with approved national measures listed in Annex I to Decision 2010/221/EU should therefore be amended.

(5)

The United Kingdom also informed the Commission that the entry of the geographical demarcation for the parts of Northern Ireland which are declared free of OsHV-1 μVar in Annex I to Decision 2010/221/EU is not in accordance with its declaration. The correct demarcation should be ‘The territory of Northern Ireland except Dundrum Bay, Killough Bay, Lough Foyle, Carlingford Lough and Strangford Lough’. Annex I should therefore be amended accordingly.

(6)

The continental parts of the territory of Finland are listed in Annex II to Decision 2010/221/EU as a territory with an approved eradication programme as regards bacterial kidney disease (BKD).

(7)

Accordingly, Decision 2010/221/EU approves certain national measures taken by Finland in relation to the movement of consignments of aquaculture animals of susceptible species into those areas. However, to allow for a re-evaluation of the appropriateness of those national measures, Article 3(2) of that Decision limits the authorisation to apply those measures in time until 31 December 2015.

(8)

Finland informed the Commission that it decided to withdraw BKD from the list of aquatic animal diseases to be controlled and eradicated on a mandatory basis in Finland. That decision entered into force on 1 December 2014. As a result, from that date on Finland no longer has an eradication programme for BKD in place as approved in accordance with Article 43 of Directive 2006/88/EC for the whole or parts of its territory. Consequently, the entry for Finland in Annex II to Decision 2010/221/EU should be deleted, and this amendment should apply from 1 December 2014.

(9)

Annex III to Decision 2010/221/EU currently lists seven compartments within the territory of Ireland with an approved surveillance programme as regards ostreid herpesvirus 1 μvar (OsHV-1 μVar).

(10)

Ireland has notified the Commission of the detection of OsHV-1 μVar in one of those compartments, namely Askeaton Bay in compartment 6. Consequently, the geographical demarcation of compartment 6 in the entry for Ireland in Annex III to Decision 2010/221/EU should be amended.

(11)

Decision 2010/221/EU should therefore be amended accordingly.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

(1)

The supplier Asola Technologies GmbH (the ‘Applicant’) submitted an application for the approval of the battery charging Asola solar roof as an innovative technology on 12 February 2014. The completeness of the application was assessed in accordance with Article 4 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011 (2). The Commission identified certain relevant information as missing in the original application and requested the Applicant to complete it. The Applicant provided the required information on 28 May 2014. The application was found to be complete and the period for the Commission's assessment of the application started on the day following the date of official receipt of the complete information, i.e. 29 May 2014.

(2)

The application has been assessed in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 443/2009, Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011 and the Technical Guidelines for the preparation of applications for the approval of innovative technologies pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 (the Technical Guidelines) (3).

(3)

The application refers to the battery charging Asola solar roof. The solar roof consists of a photovoltaic (PV) panel which is installed on the vehicle roof. The photovoltaic panel converts ambient energy into electrical energy which, via a voltage controller, is stored in an on-board battery. The Commission finds that the information provided in the application demonstrates that the conditions and criteria referred to in Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 and in Articles 2 and 4 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011 have been met.

(4)

The Applicant has demonstrated that a battery charging solar roof system of the kind described in this application did not exceed 3 % of the new passenger cars registered in the reference year 2009.

(5)

In order to determine the CO2 savings that the innovative technology will deliver when fitted to a vehicle, it is necessary to define the baseline vehicle against which the efficiency of the vehicle equipped with the innovative technology should be compared as provided for in Articles 5 and 8 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011. The Commission finds that the baseline vehicle should be a vehicle variant that in all aspects is identical to the eco-innovation vehicle with the exception of the solar roof and, where applicable, without the additional battery and other appliances needed specifically for the conversion of the solar energy into electricity and its storage. For a new version of a vehicle in which the solar roof panel is installed the baseline vehicle should be the vehicle in which the solar roof panel is disconnected and the change in mass due to the installation of the solar roof is taken into account.

(6)

The Applicant has provided a methodology for testing the CO2 reductions which includes formulae which are based on the Technical Guidelines with regard to a battery charging solar roof. The Commission considers that it should moreover be demonstrated the degree to which the overall energy consumption of the vehicle with regard to its transport function is improved compared to the energy consumed for the operation of devices aimed at enhancing the comfort of the driver or the passengers.

(7)

In determining the savings it is also necessary to take into account the storage capacity of a single on-board battery or the presence of an additional battery dedicated for only storing the electricity generated by the solar roof.

(8)

The Commission finds that the testing methodology will provide testing results that are verifiable, repeatable and comparable and that it is capable of demonstrating in a realistic manner the CO2 emissions benefits of the innovative technology with strong statistical significance in accordance with Article 6 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011.

(9)

Against that background the Commission finds that the Applicant has demonstrated satisfactorily that the emission reduction achieved by the innovative technology is at least 1 g CO2/km.

(10)

Since the CO2 emissions type-approval test referred to in Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 (5) does not take into consideration the presence of a solar roof and the additional energy provided through this technology, the Commission is satisfied that the battery charged Asola solar roof is not covered by the standard test cycle. The Commission finds that the verification report has been prepared by the TÜV SÜD Auto Service GmbH, which is an independent and certified body and that the report supports the findings set out in the application.

(11)

Against that background, the Commission finds that no objections should be raised as regards the approval of the innovative technology in question.

(12)

Considering that the methodology proposed for determining the CO2 emission savings from the Asola solar roof is in all essential elements similar to that approved by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/806/EU (6), the Commission finds that it is appropriate, with a view to ensuring a coherent approach, to provide that the testing methodology specified in that Decision should apply also with regard to the Asola solar roof.

(13)

Any manufacturer wishing to benefit from a reduction of its average specific CO2 emissions, for the purpose of meeting its specific emissions target by means of the CO2 savings from the use of the innovative technology approved by this Decision, should, in accordance with Article 11(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011, refer to this Decision in its application for an EC type-approval certificate for the vehicles concerned.

(14)

For the purposes of determining the general eco-innovation code to be used in the relevant type-approval documents in accordance with Annexes I, VIII and IX to Directive 2007/46/EC, the individual code to be used for the innovative technology approved through this Implementing Decision should be specified.

(15)

The period for the assessment of the innovative technology referred to in Article 10(2) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 725/2011 is due to expire. It is therefore appropriate that the Implementing Decision enters into force as soon as possible,

(1)

Article 128(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter the ‘Treaty’) and Article 16 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank (hereinafter the ‘Statute of the ESCB’) grants the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB) the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes within the Union. This exclusive right includes the competence to set the legal framework for the production and procurement of euro banknotes. The ECB may allocate the responsibility for producing euro banknotes to the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro (hereinafter the ‘NCBs’) in accordance with the percentage shares held by the NCBs in the ECB's subscribed capital for the relevant financial year, calculated using the weightings in the key referred to in Article 29.1 of the Statute of the ESCB (hereinafter the ‘capital key’). The legal framework for the production and procurement of euro banknotes must, on the one hand, comply with the requirement laid down in Article 127(1) of the Treaty and in Article 2 of the Statute of the ESCB for the Eurosystem to act in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition, favouring an efficient allocation of resources, and, on the other hand, take into account the particular nature of euro banknotes, which are produced in order to be issued by the Eurosystem as a safe means of payment. The legal framework for the production and procurement of euro banknotes must also take into account the fact that some NCBs use their own in-house printing works to produce euro banknotes.

(2)

In view of the abovementioned principles, the Governing Council decided on 10 July 2003 that a common Eurosystem competitive approach to tendering (hereinafter the ‘single Eurosystem tender procedure’) should apply to the procurement of euro banknotes from 1 January 2012 onwards, as set out in Guideline ECB/2004/18 (1). In March 2011 the Governing Council decided to postpone the start of the single Eurosystem tender procedure until 1 January 2014, unless a different start date was fixed by it in the meantime and subject to further review of the situation (2). In December 2013, the Governing Council further decided that the single Eurosystem tender procedure would start on a date to be set by it owing to a change in the assumptions on which the expected single Eurosystem tender procedure start date had been based (3).

(3)

Taking into account the fact that the market has become more competitive since 2004 and that there is currently no perceived advantage in using the single Eurosystem tender procedure in place of the current arrangements, the Governing Council decided that a Eurosystem production and procurement system (hereinafter the ‘EPPS’) should be considered as a possible alternative.

(4)

In order to ensure continuity of supply, maintain internal know-how within the Eurosystem, foster competition and reduce costs at the Eurosystem level, and take advantage of innovation from the private and public sector, the EPPS should consist of two pillars: a group of NCBs producing their euro banknotes using an in-house printing works (hereinafter ‘in-house group NCBs’), and a group of NCBs which procure their euro banknotes (hereinafter ‘tendering group NCBs’). The EPPS should promote the efficient production of euro banknotes in the Eurosystem. Furthermore, the EPPS will require the further alignment of the legal requirements applicable to tendering group NCBs, such as in relation to the use of eligibility criteria in the tendering process and contractual terms and conditions. The requirements set in relation to the EPPS should aim to ensure a level playing field in tenders for the production of euro banknotes.

(5)

Tendering group NCBs will remain responsible for the production and procurement of the euro banknotes that have been allocated to them in accordance with the capital key. To fulfil their obligations, those NCBs will tender for the production of euro banknotes, and carry out tender procedures individually or jointly with other NCBs in accordance with applicable procurement rules. In order to ensure a level playing field, tendering group NCBs should seek to align their tendering requirements, in accordance with the requirements of Union and national procurement law.

(6)

In-house group NCBs will remain responsible for the production of the euro banknotes that have been allocated to them in accordance with the capital key. Taking into account the need to ensure a level playing field between all printing works, such NCBs should ensure that in-house printing works do not participate in any tender procedures for the production of euro banknotes organised and carried out within the Union and do not accept orders for the production of euro banknotes from third parties outside the in-house group NCBs.

(7)

If they enter into a form of cooperation, in-house group NCBs must comply with applicable national laws and with Union law. Where a separate legal person is established in order to achieve this cooperation, an NCB may become an in-house group NCB if it jointly controls this legal person within the meaning of this Guideline.

(8)

Euro banknotes are of a sensitive and technologically advanced nature. They therefore have to be produced in a fully secure, controlled and confidential environment that guarantees a reliable, high-quality and sustained supply over time. In addition, the Eurosystem needs to pay due regard to the possible impact of the production of euro banknotes on public health and safety and on the environment.

(9)

The Governing Council will monitor developments with respect to all key raw materials and factors of production involved in the procurement and production of euro banknotes and, if necessary, take adequate measures to ensure that they are selected and/or procured so as to ensure the continuity of supply of euro banknotes, and, without prejudice to Union competition law and the European Commission's powers, to prevent the abuse of a dominant market position by any contractor or supplier.

(10)

The provisions of this Guideline should be interpreted, where necessary, in accordance with the rules contained in Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and, from 18 April 2016, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (5),