(1)

Directive 2014/59/EU as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/879 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) introduced certain safeguards to enhance effective resolution execution in relation to financial contracts governed by third-country law.

(2)

In accordance with Article 71a(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, institutions and entities are required to include terms that recognise the stay powers of resolution authorities in their financial contracts that they enter into and which are governed by third-country law.

(3)

In order to improve the efficiency of resolution, Article 68 of Directive 2014/59/EU lays down that certain crisis prevention measures or crisis management measures should not be deemed to be enforcement events or as insolvency proceedings. Furthermore, that article lays down that such measures should not entitle contracting counterparties in relevant contracts to exercise certain contractual rights solely as a result of the application of such measures. It is therefore necessary to include the parties’ acceptance to be bound by these requirements in the content of the contractual terms. In addition, under Articles 33a, 69, 70 and 71 of Directive 2014/59/EU, resolution authorities may, for a limited period of time, suspend contractual payment or delivery obligations due under a contract with an institution or an entity under resolution or in certain circumstances before resolution, restrict the enforcement of security interests and suspend certain rights of counterparties to, for instance, close out, net gross obligations, accelerate future payments or otherwise terminate financial contracts. As these powers of the resolution authorities might not be effective when applied to financial contracts under third-country law, they should be explicitly recognised in the terms of financial contracts.

(4)

In order to ensure the effectiveness of resolution and promote consistency in the approaches adopted by Member States, and in order to ensure that differences in their legal systems or differences arising from a particular contractual form or structure can be taken into account by resolution authorities, institutions and entities, it is appropriate to lay down the mandatory content for the contractual terms. The content of these contractual terms should take into account institutions’ and entities’ different business models. However, as financial contracts in international transactions generally do not vary in accordance with the institutions’ or the entities’ business model, it is not necessary to create different content for contractual recognition clauses.

(5)

This Regulation is based on the draft regulatory technical standards submitted to the Commission by the European Banking Authority (EBA).

(6)

The EBA has conducted open public consultations on the draft regulatory technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits and requested the advice of the Banking Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3),

(1)

Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 requires motor vehicles of categories M and N to be equipped with certain advanced vehicle systems, including driver drowsiness and attention warning (‘DDAW’) systems. It lays down in its Annex II basic requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to the driver drowsiness and attention warning systems.

(2)

Detailed rules are necessary concerning the specific test procedures and technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to driver drowsiness and attention warning systems.

(3)

Fatigue negatively affects driver’s physical, cognitive, psychomotor and sensory processing capabilities, which are needed for safe driving. Driver fatigue is a factor in 10-25 % of all road crashes in the Union.

(4)

In accordance with Article 3, point (5), of Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 the DDAW system is a system that assesses the driver’s alertness through vehicle systems analysis and warns the driver if needed via the vehicle’s human-machine interface.

(5)

DDAW systems are more effective outside the urban zones because the reduced driver alertness due to fatigue mostly occurs in long-distance driving at a constant speed. Moreover, constantly changing driving and steering pattern when driving within urban zones is difficult for assessment with the available technologies. Motor vehicles with a maximum design speed of 70 km/h or below should therefore be exempted from the obligation to be equipped with DDAW systems.

(6)

The DDAW systems assess the human physical state through indirect means, such as system analysis and recognition of driving or steering pattern of a driver exhibiting reduced alertness due to drowsiness, therefore it is not possible to fully test those systems through a set of defined tests or with a programmable machine, which reproduces human behaviour. Instead, the manufacturer should perform validation testing with human participants and present the results to the approval authority together with at least one test protocol for checking the capability of the DDAW systems to produce a warning to the drowsy driver.

(7)

Taking into account the indirect nature of the measurement, the variability in the effects of human drowsiness and the relative immaturity of existing technologies, the performance requirements for DDAW systemsshould be set at a level that is realistic and attainable. At the same time, those requirements should be technology-neutral, in order to foster development of new technologies, therefore, the assessment of the performance of DDAW systems should be based on a statistical approach, taking into account either the average efficiency among the test subjects or the minimal efficiency for 95 % of them. However, the use of the latter option should be preferred as it provides that the DDAW systems will perform equally effective to all drivers.

(8)

This Regulation should provide a reference scale to be used by manufacturers to measure driver drowsiness in the tests involving human participants. Where manufacturers choose to use an alternative measurement method, it should be duly documented and equivalence to the reference scale in this Regulation should be provided.

(9)

The table in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 containing the list of requirements referred to in Article 4(5) and Article 5(3) of that Regulation does not contain any reference to regulatory acts as regards driver drowsiness and attention warning systems. It is therefore necessary to introduce a reference to this Regulation in that Annex.

(10)

Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(11)

As Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 is to apply from 6 July 2022, this Regulation should apply from the same date.

(12)

The provisions of this Regulation are closely linked as they deal with rules concerning the specific test procedures and technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to their driver drowsiness and attention warning systems. As a result of the rules laid down in this Regulation, it is necessary to add a reference to this Regulation in Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2019/2144. It is therefore appropriate to lay down those provisions in a single Delegated Regulation,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 48(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/848, the recognition of third countries for the purposes of equivalence under Article 33(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (2) for imports of organic products into the Union will expire on 31 December 2026.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 57(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/848, the recognition of control authorities and control bodies for the purposes of equivalence under Article 33(3) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 for imports of organic products into the Union will expire on 31 December 2024.

(3)

When placed on the Union market until the end of those transitional periods, organic products imported into the Union under those import schemes have to be produced in accordance with the production rules and subject to control arrangements equivalent to those laid down in Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 as well as with the associated implementing rules laid down in Commission Regulations (EC) No 889/2008 (3) and (EC) No 1235/2008 (4).

(4)

Therefore, at all stages of production, preparation and distribution in third countries, operators should continue to submit their activities either to a control system of a third country recognised for the purposes of equivalence as referred to in Article 48(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/848, or to a control authority or control body as referred to in Article 57(1) of that Regulation.

(5)

In order to ensure the appropriate supervision of such third countries or the control authorities and control bodies concerned, it is necessary to lay down rules on the procedures for the regular review of their recognition during the transitional periods. For that purpose, this Regulation should specify, in particular, the information to be provided by the third countries or the control authorities and control bodies to the Commission for the exercise of that supervision, including through on-the-spot examination. In addition, this Regulation should set out the measures to be taken by the Commission in the exercise of that supervision, including suspension or withdrawal of recognised third countries or control authorities and control bodies from the lists established pursuant to Articles 48(3) and 57(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/848.

(6)

In the interest of clarity and legal certainty, this Regulation should apply from the date of application of Regulation (EU) 2018/848 until the expiry of the recognition of the third countries or control authorities and control bodies,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 21 in conjunction with Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission has examined Hungary’s application of 18 April 2017 for the approval of amendments to the technical file for the geographical indication ‘Újfehértói meggypálinka’, protected under Regulation (EC) No 110/2008.

(2)

Regulation (EU) 2019/787, which replaces Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, entered into force on 25 May 2019. Under Article 49(1) thereof, Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 on geographical indications is repealed with effect from 8 June 2019. Under Article 22(2) of Regulation (EU) 2019/787, technical files submitted as part of any application before 8 June 2019 under Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 shall be deemed to be product specifications.

(3)

After concluding that the application complied with Regulation (EC) No 110/2008, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 17(6) of that Regulation, in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 50(4) of Regulation (EU) 2019/787.

(4)

As no notice of opposition under Article 27(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/787 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved pursuant to Article 30(2) of that Regulation, which applies mutatis mutandis to product specification amendments,

(1)

The Commission needs to operate in a safe and secure environment. Accordingly, it needs a coherent, integrated approach as regards its security, providing appropriate levels of protection for persons, assets and information that are commensurate with identified risks, and ensuring the efficient and timely delivery of security. The Commission faces major threats and challenges in the field of security, in particular as regards terrorism, and political and commercial espionage.

(2)

In order to ensure the security of persons, assets and information, the Commission, in particular the Security Directorate of its Directorate General for Human Resources and Security, takes measures pursuant to Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/443 which apply to all Commission departments and in all Commission premises. Those measures include limited measures concerning persons posing a threat to security, including banning persons from the Commission’s premises for a period of time pursuant to Article 12(1), point (b) of that Decision.

(3)

Commission staff duly mandated in accordance with Articles 5 and 12 of Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/443, should, in deciding on banning a person or persons from Commission premises where, pursuant to Article 12(1), point (b) of that Decision, it is considered that they pose a threat to its security, assess that threat on a case-by-case basis, respecting the relevant individual circumstances.

(4)

The restriction of access may apply to one, several or even all Commission premises.

(5)

The period of the ban should take into account the likelihood, seriousness and duration of the threat.

(6)

This Decision should not apply to a ban to the Commission’s premises adopted in the context of suspension proceedings pursuant to Article 23 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations.

(7)

This Decision should not apply to Commission staff working in Union Delegations, who should be subject to the security rules for the European External Action Service.

(8)

In accordance with the internal rules of procedure, the member of the Commission responsible for security matters has been empowered, by means of Commission Decision C(2016) 2797 (2), to establish implementing rules establishing the criteria necessary for defining the periods of time applicable to a ban on access to the Commission’s premises pursuant to Article 12 of Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/443. That power has been sub-delegated to the Director-General of the Directorate General for Human Resources and Security by means of Commission Decision C(2021) 2684 (3).

(9)

Security measures pursuant to this Decision should comply with the principles for security in the Commission laid down in Article 3 of Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/443, in particular respecting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,