Pending: 32016D0715
| 13.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 125/16 |
| (1) | Guignardia citricarpaKiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus) is listed in point (c)11 of Section I of Part A of Annex II to Directive 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism not known to occur in the Union. Since 2011, following the approval of a new code for fungal nomenclature by the International Botanical Congress, that organism has been referred to asPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, hereinafter ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’. |
| (2) | Due to the recurrent high number of interceptions on citrus fruits originating in Brazil and in South Africa, citrus fruits have been subject to specific measures for introduction into the Union. Those measures have been put in place by Commission Decision 2004/416/EC(2)for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, and by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU(3)for citrus fruits originating in South Africa. |
| (3) | In view of the recurrent interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpaon citrus fruits originating in Brazil, appropriate conditions should be set out concerning registration and documentation prior to export of those fruits. Those conditions should apply in the case where the citrus fruits have been produced in a place where no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed. |
| (4) | Recurrent high number of interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpahas been notified by Member States in 2015, as a result of imports of citrus fruits originating in Uruguay. It is therefore necessary to adopt measures for those fruits originating in Uruguay, which should be similar to the measures adopted for such fruits originating in South Africa. Given that many of those interceptions have been on fruits ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, those fruits should be subject to testing for latent infection in addition to the measures applying to all citrus fruits. |
| (5) | In light of the European Food Safety Authority pest risk assessment(4), the import of citrus fruits destined exclusively for processing into juice present less risk of transfer ofPhyllosticta citricarpato a suitable host plant as it is subject to official controls within the Union establishing specific requirements concerning the movement, processing, storage, containers, packages and labelling. Therefore, import may be allowed under less strict requirements. |
| (6) | In order to be introduced into the Union the complete traceability of the specified fruits should be ensured. The field of production, packing facilities and operators participating in the handling of the specified fruits should be subject to official registration. Throughout their movement from the field of production to the Union, the specified fruits should be accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the relevant National Plant Protection Organisation. |
| (7) | For reasons of clarity, the requirements laid down in Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should be replaced by a new set of requirements for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay in one act. Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should therefore be repealed. |
| (8) | The measures set out in this Decision should apply from 1 June 2016 to allow the National Plant Protection Organisations, responsible official bodies and operators concerned sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements. |
| (9) | This Decision should apply until 31 March 2019. |
| (10) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, |
| (a) | ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’ meansPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, also namedGuignardia citricarpaKiely under Directive 2000/29/EC; |
| (b) | ‘specified fruits’ means fruits ofCitrusL.,FortunellaSwingle,PoncirusRaf., and their hybrids, other than fruits ofCitrus aurantiumL. andCitrus latifoliaTanaka, originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay. |
| (a) | a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production which has been subjected to treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation; |
| (b) | a statement that an appropriate official inspection has been carried out in the field of production during the growing season, and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruit since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation; |
| (c) | a statement that a sample has been taken along the line between arrival and packaging in the packing facilities of at least 600 fruits of each species per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected as much as possible on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa, and all sampled fruits showing symptoms have been tested and found free of that harmful organism; |
| (d) | in the case ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, in addition to the statements referred to in (a), (b) and (c): a statement that a sample per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, has been tested for latent infection and found free ofPhyllosticta citricarpa. |
| (a) | the field of production, the packing facilities, exporters and any other operator involved in the handling of the specified fruits have been officially registered for that purpose; |
| (b) | throughout their movement, from the field of production to the point of entry to the Union, the specified fruits have been accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the National Plant Protection Organisation; |
| (c) | in the case of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay, in addition to points (a) and (b), detailed information on the pre- and post-harvest treatments has been kept. |
| (a) | a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production subjected to appropriate treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time; |
| (b) | a statement that an appropriate official visual inspection has been carried out during packaging and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruits harvested in the field of production in that inspection; |
| (c) | the words ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice’. |
| (a) | the volume of the specified citrus fruits; |
| (b) | the identification numbers of the containers; |
| (c) | the expected date of introduction and point of entry into the Union; |
| (d) | the names, addresses and the locations of the premises referred to in Article 15. |
| (a) | they are included in individual packages in a container; |
| (b) | a label is attached to each container and individual package referred to in point (a), bearing the following information:(i)a unique number on each individual package;(ii)the declared net weight of the fruit;(iii)a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’. | (i) | a unique number on each individual package; | (ii) | the declared net weight of the fruit; | (iii) | a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’. |
| (i) | a unique number on each individual package; | ||||||
| (ii) | the declared net weight of the fruit; | ||||||
| (iii) | a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’. |
| (i) | a unique number on each individual package; |
| (ii) | the declared net weight of the fruit; |
| (iii) | a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’. |
| (a) | the amounts of the specified fruits processed in their territory under this Decision during the previous import season; |
| (b) | the volumes of waste and by-products destroyed and detailed information on the method of their use or destruction as refer to in Article 15(3). |
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3) thereof,
(1) Guignardia citricarpaKiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus) is listed in point (c)11 of Section I of Part A of Annex II to Directive 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism not known to occur in the Union. Since 2011, following the approval of a new code for fungal nomenclature by the International Botanical Congress, that organism has been referred to asPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, hereinafter ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’.
(2) Due to the recurrent high number of interceptions on citrus fruits originating in Brazil and in South Africa, citrus fruits have been subject to specific measures for introduction into the Union. Those measures have been put in place by Commission Decision 2004/416/EC(2)for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, and by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU(3)for citrus fruits originating in South Africa.
(3) In view of the recurrent interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpaon citrus fruits originating in Brazil, appropriate conditions should be set out concerning registration and documentation prior to export of those fruits. Those conditions should apply in the case where the citrus fruits have been produced in a place where no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed.
(4) Recurrent high number of interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpahas been notified by Member States in 2015, as a result of imports of citrus fruits originating in Uruguay. It is therefore necessary to adopt measures for those fruits originating in Uruguay, which should be similar to the measures adopted for such fruits originating in South Africa. Given that many of those interceptions have been on fruits ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, those fruits should be subject to testing for latent infection in addition to the measures applying to all citrus fruits.
(5) In light of the European Food Safety Authority pest risk assessment(4), the import of citrus fruits destined exclusively for processing into juice present less risk of transfer ofPhyllosticta citricarpato a suitable host plant as it is subject to official controls within the Union establishing specific requirements concerning the movement, processing, storage, containers, packages and labelling. Therefore, import may be allowed under less strict requirements.
(6) In order to be introduced into the Union the complete traceability of the specified fruits should be ensured. The field of production, packing facilities and operators participating in the handling of the specified fruits should be subject to official registration. Throughout their movement from the field of production to the Union, the specified fruits should be accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the relevant National Plant Protection Organisation.
(7) For reasons of clarity, the requirements laid down in Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should be replaced by a new set of requirements for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay in one act. Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should therefore be repealed.
(8) The measures set out in this Decision should apply from 1 June 2016 to allow the National Plant Protection Organisations, responsible official bodies and operators concerned sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements.
(9) This Decision should apply until 31 March 2019.
(10) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3) thereof,
(1) Guignardia citricarpaKiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus) is listed in point (c)11 of Section I of Part A of Annex II to Directive 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism not known to occur in the Union. Since 2011, following the approval of a new code for fungal nomenclature by the International Botanical Congress, that organism has been referred to asPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, hereinafter ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’.
(2) Due to the recurrent high number of interceptions on citrus fruits originating in Brazil and in South Africa, citrus fruits have been subject to specific measures for introduction into the Union. Those measures have been put in place by Commission Decision 2004/416/EC(2)for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, and by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU(3)for citrus fruits originating in South Africa.
(3) In view of the recurrent interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpaon citrus fruits originating in Brazil, appropriate conditions should be set out concerning registration and documentation prior to export of those fruits. Those conditions should apply in the case where the citrus fruits have been produced in a place where no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed.
(4) Recurrent high number of interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpahas been notified by Member States in 2015, as a result of imports of citrus fruits originating in Uruguay. It is therefore necessary to adopt measures for those fruits originating in Uruguay, which should be similar to the measures adopted for such fruits originating in South Africa. Given that many of those interceptions have been on fruits ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, those fruits should be subject to testing for latent infection in addition to the measures applying to all citrus fruits.
(5) In light of the European Food Safety Authority pest risk assessment(4), the import of citrus fruits destined exclusively for processing into juice present less risk of transfer ofPhyllosticta citricarpato a suitable host plant as it is subject to official controls within the Union establishing specific requirements concerning the movement, processing, storage, containers, packages and labelling. Therefore, import may be allowed under less strict requirements.
(6) In order to be introduced into the Union the complete traceability of the specified fruits should be ensured. The field of production, packing facilities and operators participating in the handling of the specified fruits should be subject to official registration. Throughout their movement from the field of production to the Union, the specified fruits should be accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the relevant National Plant Protection Organisation.
(7) For reasons of clarity, the requirements laid down in Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should be replaced by a new set of requirements for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay in one act. Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should therefore be repealed.
(8) The measures set out in this Decision should apply from 1 June 2016 to allow the National Plant Protection Organisations, responsible official bodies and operators concerned sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements.
(9) This Decision should apply until 31 March 2019.
(10) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Subject-matter
Article 1
This Decision lays down measures in respect of certain fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay to prevent the introduction into and the spread within the Union ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Definitions
Article 2
For the purpose of this Decision, the following definitions shall apply:
(a)
‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’ meansPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, also namedGuignardia citricarpaKiely under Directive 2000/29/EC;
(b)
‘specified fruits’ means fruits ofCitrusL.,FortunellaSwingle,PoncirusRaf., and their hybrids, other than fruits ofCitrus aurantiumL. andCitrus latifoliaTanaka, originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits, other than fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice
Article 3
1. By way of derogation from points 16.4(c) and (d) of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, specified fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay, other than fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice, shall be introduced into the Union in accordance with Articles 4 to 7 of this Decision.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits originating in Brazil
Article 4
Specified fruits originating in Brazil shall only be introduced into the Union if they are accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC, officially stating under the heading ‘Additional declaration’ that no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed in the place of production since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation, and that none of the fruits harvested in the place of production has shown, in an appropriate official examination, symptoms of that harmful organism.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay
Article 5
Specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay shall be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC, including under the heading ‘Additional declaration’ the following elements:
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production which has been subjected to treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official inspection has been carried out in the field of production during the growing season, and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruit since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(c)
a statement that a sample has been taken along the line between arrival and packaging in the packing facilities of at least 600 fruits of each species per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected as much as possible on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa, and all sampled fruits showing symptoms have been tested and found free of that harmful organism;
(d)
in the case ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, in addition to the statements referred to in (a), (b) and (c): a statement that a sample per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, has been tested for latent infection and found free ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Requirements concerning inspection of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay within the Union
Article 6
1. Specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay shall be visually inspected at the point of entry or at the place of destination established in accordance with Commission Directive 2004/103/EC(5). Those inspections shall be carried out on samples of at least 200 fruits of each species of the specified fruits by batch of 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections referred to in paragraph 1, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing of the fruits showing symptoms.
3. If the presence ofPhyllosticta citricarpais confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
Traceability requirements
Article 7
For traceability purposes, the specified fruits shall be introduced into the Union only if they fulfil the following conditions:
(a)
the field of production, the packing facilities, exporters and any other operator involved in the handling of the specified fruits have been officially registered for that purpose;
(b)
throughout their movement, from the field of production to the point of entry to the Union, the specified fruits have been accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the National Plant Protection Organisation;
(c)
in the case of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay, in addition to points (a) and (b), detailed information on the pre- and post-harvest treatments has been kept.
Introduction into, and movement within, the Union of specified fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice
Article 8
1. By way of derogation from point 16.4(d) of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, specified citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay, destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice, shall only be introduced into, and moved within, the Union in accordance with Articles 9 to 17 of this Decision.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
Phytosanitary certificates
Article 9
1. The specified fruits shall be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC. The phytosanitary certificate shall include the following elements under the heading ‘Additional Declaration’:
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production subjected to appropriate treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official visual inspection has been carried out during packaging and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruits harvested in the field of production in that inspection;
(c)
the words ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice’.
2. The phytosanitary certificate shall include the identification numbers of the containers and the unique numbers of the labels on the individual packages as referred to in Article 17.
Traceability requirements and movement of the specified fruits within the third country of origin
Article 10
For traceability purposes, the specified fruits shall only be introduced into the Union if they originate in an officially registered place of production, and there has been an official registration of the movement of those fruits from the place of production to the point of export into the Union. The registered production unit code shall be mentioned on the phytosanitary certificate referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC under the heading ‘Additional declaration’.
Points of entry of the specified fruits
Article 11
1. The specified fruits shall be introduced through points of entry, designated by the Member State in which those points of entry are situated.
2. Member States shall notify the designated points of entry and the name and address of the official body of each point of entry sufficiently in advance to the other Member States, the Commission and the third countries concerned.
Inspections at the points of entry of the specified fruits
Article 12
1. The specified fruits shall be visually inspected by the responsible official body at the point of entry.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing. If the presence of the harmful organism is confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
Requirements for importers
Article 13
1. The importers of the specified fruits shall notify details of each container prior to its arrival at the point of entry to the responsible official body in the Member State in which the point of entry is situated, and where applicable, to the responsible official body of the Member State where the processing will take place.
That notification shall provide the following information:
(a)
the volume of the specified citrus fruits;
(b)
the identification numbers of the containers;
(c)
the expected date of introduction and point of entry into the Union;
(d)
the names, addresses and the locations of the premises referred to in Article 15.
2. The importers shall inform the responsible official bodies referred to in paragraph 1 of any changes to the information listed in that paragraph, as soon as they are known and, in any case, prior to the arrival of the consignment at the point of entry.
Movement of the specified fruits within the Union
Article 14
1. Specified fruits shall not be moved to a Member State other than the Member State through which they were introduced into the Union unless the responsible official bodies of the Member States concerned agree that such movement takes place.
2. After the inspections referred to in Article 12 are carried out, the specified fruits shall be directly and without delay transported into the processing premises referred to in Article 15 or to a storage facility. Any movement of the specified fruits shall be under the supervision of the responsible official body of the Member State where the point of entry is situated and, where appropriate, of the Member State where the processing will take place.
3. The Member States concerned shall cooperate to ensure that this Article is complied with.
Requirements concerning processing of the specified fruits
Article 15
1. The specified fruits shall be processed into juice at premises situated in an area where no citrus fruit is produced. The premises shall be officially registered and approved for that purpose by the responsible official body of the Member State in which the premises are situated.
2. Waste and by-products of the specified fruits shall be used or destroyed in the territory of the Member State where those fruits have been processed in an area where no citrus fruit is produced.
3. The waste and by-products shall be destroyed by deep burial or used by a method approved by the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed and under the supervision of that official body, in a way to prevent any potential risk for spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
4. The processor shall keep records of the specified fruits that are processed and make them available to the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed. Those records shall indicate the numbers and distinguishing marks of containers, the volumes of the specified fruits imported, the volumes of waste and by-products used or destroyed and detailed information on their use or destruction.
Requirements concerning storage of the specified fruits
Article 16
1. Where the specified fruits are not processed immediately, they shall be stored at a facility registered and approved for that purpose by the responsible official body of the Member State where the facility is situated.
2. The batches of specified fruits shall remain separately identifiable.
3. The specified fruits shall be stored in a way which prevents any potential risk of spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Containers, packages and labelling
Article 17
The specified fruits shall be introduced into, and moved within, the Union if the following conditions have been fulfilled:
(a)
they are included in individual packages in a container;
(b)
a label is attached to each container and individual package referred to in point (a), bearing the following information:
(i)
a unique number on each individual package;
(ii)
the declared net weight of the fruit;
(iii)
a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’.
Reporting obligations
Article 18
1. The importing Member States shall submit to the Commission and the other Member States, each year before 31 December, a report with information on the amounts of the specified fruits introduced into the Union under this Decision during the previous import season.
2. Member States in whose territory the specified fruit are processed into juice shall submit to the Commission and the other Member States, each year before 31 December, a report with all the following elements:
(a)
the amounts of the specified fruits processed in their territory under this Decision during the previous import season;
(b)
the volumes of waste and by-products destroyed and detailed information on the method of their use or destruction as refer to in Article 15(3).
3. The report referred to in the paragraph 1 shall also include the results of the plant health checks of the specified fruits carried out in accordance with Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC and this Decision.
Notifications
Article 19
Member States shall immediately notify the Commission, the other Member States and the third country concerned of a confirmed finding ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Repeals
Article 20
Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU are repealed.
Date of application
Article 21
This Decision shall apply from 1 June 2016.
Date of expiration
Article 22
This Decision shall expire on 31 March 2019.
Addressees
Article 23
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3) thereof,
(1) Guignardia citricarpaKiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus) is listed in point (c)11 of Section I of Part A of Annex II to Directive 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism not known to occur in the Union. Since 2011, following the approval of a new code for fungal nomenclature by the International Botanical Congress, that organism has been referred to asPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, hereinafter ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’.
(2) Due to the recurrent high number of interceptions on citrus fruits originating in Brazil and in South Africa, citrus fruits have been subject to specific measures for introduction into the Union. Those measures have been put in place by Commission Decision 2004/416/EC(2)for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, and by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU(3)for citrus fruits originating in South Africa.
(3) In view of the recurrent interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpaon citrus fruits originating in Brazil, appropriate conditions should be set out concerning registration and documentation prior to export of those fruits. Those conditions should apply in the case where the citrus fruits have been produced in a place where no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed.
(4) Recurrent high number of interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpahas been notified by Member States in 2015, as a result of imports of citrus fruits originating in Uruguay. It is therefore necessary to adopt measures for those fruits originating in Uruguay, which should be similar to the measures adopted for such fruits originating in South Africa. Given that many of those interceptions have been on fruits ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, those fruits should be subject to testing for latent infection in addition to the measures applying to all citrus fruits.
(5) In light of the European Food Safety Authority pest risk assessment(4), the import of citrus fruits destined exclusively for processing into juice present less risk of transfer ofPhyllosticta citricarpato a suitable host plant as it is subject to official controls within the Union establishing specific requirements concerning the movement, processing, storage, containers, packages and labelling. Therefore, import may be allowed under less strict requirements.
(6) In order to be introduced into the Union the complete traceability of the specified fruits should be ensured. The field of production, packing facilities and operators participating in the handling of the specified fruits should be subject to official registration. Throughout their movement from the field of production to the Union, the specified fruits should be accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the relevant National Plant Protection Organisation.
(7) For reasons of clarity, the requirements laid down in Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should be replaced by a new set of requirements for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay in one act. Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should therefore be repealed.
(8) The measures set out in this Decision should apply from 1 June 2016 to allow the National Plant Protection Organisations, responsible official bodies and operators concerned sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements.
(9) This Decision should apply until 31 March 2019.
(10) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3) thereof,
(1) Guignardia citricarpaKiely (all strains pathogenic to Citrus) is listed in point (c)11 of Section I of Part A of Annex II to Directive 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism not known to occur in the Union. Since 2011, following the approval of a new code for fungal nomenclature by the International Botanical Congress, that organism has been referred to asPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, hereinafter ‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’.
(2) Due to the recurrent high number of interceptions on citrus fruits originating in Brazil and in South Africa, citrus fruits have been subject to specific measures for introduction into the Union. Those measures have been put in place by Commission Decision 2004/416/EC(2)for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, and by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU(3)for citrus fruits originating in South Africa.
(3) In view of the recurrent interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpaon citrus fruits originating in Brazil, appropriate conditions should be set out concerning registration and documentation prior to export of those fruits. Those conditions should apply in the case where the citrus fruits have been produced in a place where no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed.
(4) Recurrent high number of interceptions ofPhyllosticta citricarpahas been notified by Member States in 2015, as a result of imports of citrus fruits originating in Uruguay. It is therefore necessary to adopt measures for those fruits originating in Uruguay, which should be similar to the measures adopted for such fruits originating in South Africa. Given that many of those interceptions have been on fruits ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, those fruits should be subject to testing for latent infection in addition to the measures applying to all citrus fruits.
(5) In light of the European Food Safety Authority pest risk assessment(4), the import of citrus fruits destined exclusively for processing into juice present less risk of transfer ofPhyllosticta citricarpato a suitable host plant as it is subject to official controls within the Union establishing specific requirements concerning the movement, processing, storage, containers, packages and labelling. Therefore, import may be allowed under less strict requirements.
(6) In order to be introduced into the Union the complete traceability of the specified fruits should be ensured. The field of production, packing facilities and operators participating in the handling of the specified fruits should be subject to official registration. Throughout their movement from the field of production to the Union, the specified fruits should be accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the relevant National Plant Protection Organisation.
(7) For reasons of clarity, the requirements laid down in Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should be replaced by a new set of requirements for citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay in one act. Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU should therefore be repealed.
(8) The measures set out in this Decision should apply from 1 June 2016 to allow the National Plant Protection Organisations, responsible official bodies and operators concerned sufficient time to adapt to the new requirements.
(9) This Decision should apply until 31 March 2019.
(10) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Subject-matter
This Decision lays down measures in respect of certain fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa and Uruguay to prevent the introduction into and the spread within the Union ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Definitions
For the purpose of this Decision, the following definitions shall apply:
(a)
‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’ meansPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, also namedGuignardia citricarpaKiely under Directive 2000/29/EC;
(b)
‘specified fruits’ means fruits ofCitrusL.,FortunellaSwingle,PoncirusRaf., and their hybrids, other than fruits ofCitrus aurantiumL. andCitrus latifoliaTanaka, originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay.
(a)
‘Phyllosticta citricarpa’ meansPhyllosticta citricarpa(McAlpine) Van der Aa, also namedGuignardia citricarpaKiely under Directive 2000/29/EC;
(b)
‘specified fruits’ means fruits ofCitrusL.,FortunellaSwingle,PoncirusRaf., and their hybrids, other than fruits ofCitrus aurantiumL. andCitrus latifoliaTanaka, originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits, other than fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice
1. By way of derogation from points 16.4(c) and (d) of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, specified fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay, other than fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice, shall be introduced into the Union in accordance with Articles 4 to 7 of this Decision.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits originating in Brazil
Specified fruits originating in Brazil shall only be introduced into the Union if they are accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC, officially stating under the heading ‘Additional declaration’ that no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been observed in the place of production since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation, and that none of the fruits harvested in the place of production has shown, in an appropriate official examination, symptoms of that harmful organism.
Introduction into the Union of specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay
Specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay shall be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC, including under the heading ‘Additional declaration’ the following elements:
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production which has been subjected to treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official inspection has been carried out in the field of production during the growing season, and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruit since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(c)
a statement that a sample has been taken along the line between arrival and packaging in the packing facilities of at least 600 fruits of each species per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected as much as possible on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa, and all sampled fruits showing symptoms have been tested and found free of that harmful organism;
(d)
in the case ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, in addition to the statements referred to in (a), (b) and (c): a statement that a sample per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, has been tested for latent infection and found free ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production which has been subjected to treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official inspection has been carried out in the field of production during the growing season, and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruit since the beginning of the last cycle of vegetation;
(c)
a statement that a sample has been taken along the line between arrival and packaging in the packing facilities of at least 600 fruits of each species per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected as much as possible on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa, and all sampled fruits showing symptoms have been tested and found free of that harmful organism;
(d)
in the case ofCitrus sinensis(L.) Osbeck ‘Valencia’, in addition to the statements referred to in (a), (b) and (c): a statement that a sample per 30 tonnes, or part thereof, has been tested for latent infection and found free ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Requirements concerning inspection of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay within the Union
1. Specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay shall be visually inspected at the point of entry or at the place of destination established in accordance with Commission Directive 2004/103/EC(5). Those inspections shall be carried out on samples of at least 200 fruits of each species of the specified fruits by batch of 30 tonnes, or part thereof, selected on the basis of any possible symptom ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections referred to in paragraph 1, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing of the fruits showing symptoms.
3. If the presence ofPhyllosticta citricarpais confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections referred to in paragraph 1, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing of the fruits showing symptoms.
3. If the presence ofPhyllosticta citricarpais confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
Traceability requirements
For traceability purposes, the specified fruits shall be introduced into the Union only if they fulfil the following conditions:
(a)
the field of production, the packing facilities, exporters and any other operator involved in the handling of the specified fruits have been officially registered for that purpose;
(b)
throughout their movement, from the field of production to the point of entry to the Union, the specified fruits have been accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the National Plant Protection Organisation;
(c)
in the case of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay, in addition to points (a) and (b), detailed information on the pre- and post-harvest treatments has been kept.
(a)
the field of production, the packing facilities, exporters and any other operator involved in the handling of the specified fruits have been officially registered for that purpose;
(b)
throughout their movement, from the field of production to the point of entry to the Union, the specified fruits have been accompanied by documents issued under the supervision of the National Plant Protection Organisation;
(c)
in the case of the specified fruits originating in South Africa and Uruguay, in addition to points (a) and (b), detailed information on the pre- and post-harvest treatments has been kept.
Introduction into, and movement within, the Union of specified fruits destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice
1. By way of derogation from point 16.4(d) of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, specified citrus fruits originating in Brazil, South Africa or Uruguay, destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice, shall only be introduced into, and moved within, the Union in accordance with Articles 9 to 17 of this Decision.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall apply without prejudice to the requirements laid down in points 16.1, 16.2, 16.3 and 16.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC.
Phytosanitary certificates
1. The specified fruits shall be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate, as referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC. The phytosanitary certificate shall include the following elements under the heading ‘Additional Declaration’:
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production subjected to appropriate treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official visual inspection has been carried out during packaging and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruits harvested in the field of production in that inspection;
(c)
the words ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice’.
2. The phytosanitary certificate shall include the identification numbers of the containers and the unique numbers of the labels on the individual packages as referred to in Article 17.
(a)
a statement that the specified fruits originate in a field of production subjected to appropriate treatments againstPhyllosticta citricarpacarried out at the appropriate time;
(b)
a statement that an appropriate official visual inspection has been carried out during packaging and no symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpahave been detected in the specified fruits harvested in the field of production in that inspection;
(c)
the words ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice’.
2. The phytosanitary certificate shall include the identification numbers of the containers and the unique numbers of the labels on the individual packages as referred to in Article 17.
Traceability requirements and movement of the specified fruits within the third country of origin
For traceability purposes, the specified fruits shall only be introduced into the Union if they originate in an officially registered place of production, and there has been an official registration of the movement of those fruits from the place of production to the point of export into the Union. The registered production unit code shall be mentioned on the phytosanitary certificate referred to in the first subparagraph of point (ii) of Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC under the heading ‘Additional declaration’.
Points of entry of the specified fruits
1. The specified fruits shall be introduced through points of entry, designated by the Member State in which those points of entry are situated.
2. Member States shall notify the designated points of entry and the name and address of the official body of each point of entry sufficiently in advance to the other Member States, the Commission and the third countries concerned.
2. Member States shall notify the designated points of entry and the name and address of the official body of each point of entry sufficiently in advance to the other Member States, the Commission and the third countries concerned.
Inspections at the points of entry of the specified fruits
1. The specified fruits shall be visually inspected by the responsible official body at the point of entry.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing. If the presence of the harmful organism is confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
2. If symptoms ofPhyllosticta citricarpaare detected during the inspections, the presence of that harmful organism shall be confirmed or refuted by testing. If the presence of the harmful organism is confirmed, the batch from which the sample has been taken shall be subjected to refusal of entry into the Union.
Requirements for importers
1. The importers of the specified fruits shall notify details of each container prior to its arrival at the point of entry to the responsible official body in the Member State in which the point of entry is situated, and where applicable, to the responsible official body of the Member State where the processing will take place.
That notification shall provide the following information:
(a)
the volume of the specified citrus fruits;
(b)
the identification numbers of the containers;
(c)
the expected date of introduction and point of entry into the Union;
(d)
the names, addresses and the locations of the premises referred to in Article 15.
2. The importers shall inform the responsible official bodies referred to in paragraph 1 of any changes to the information listed in that paragraph, as soon as they are known and, in any case, prior to the arrival of the consignment at the point of entry.
That notification shall provide the following information:
(a)
the volume of the specified citrus fruits;
(b)
the identification numbers of the containers;
(c)
the expected date of introduction and point of entry into the Union;
(d)
the names, addresses and the locations of the premises referred to in Article 15.
2. The importers shall inform the responsible official bodies referred to in paragraph 1 of any changes to the information listed in that paragraph, as soon as they are known and, in any case, prior to the arrival of the consignment at the point of entry.
Movement of the specified fruits within the Union
1. Specified fruits shall not be moved to a Member State other than the Member State through which they were introduced into the Union unless the responsible official bodies of the Member States concerned agree that such movement takes place.
2. After the inspections referred to in Article 12 are carried out, the specified fruits shall be directly and without delay transported into the processing premises referred to in Article 15 or to a storage facility. Any movement of the specified fruits shall be under the supervision of the responsible official body of the Member State where the point of entry is situated and, where appropriate, of the Member State where the processing will take place.
3. The Member States concerned shall cooperate to ensure that this Article is complied with.
2. After the inspections referred to in Article 12 are carried out, the specified fruits shall be directly and without delay transported into the processing premises referred to in Article 15 or to a storage facility. Any movement of the specified fruits shall be under the supervision of the responsible official body of the Member State where the point of entry is situated and, where appropriate, of the Member State where the processing will take place.
3. The Member States concerned shall cooperate to ensure that this Article is complied with.
Requirements concerning processing of the specified fruits
1. The specified fruits shall be processed into juice at premises situated in an area where no citrus fruit is produced. The premises shall be officially registered and approved for that purpose by the responsible official body of the Member State in which the premises are situated.
2. Waste and by-products of the specified fruits shall be used or destroyed in the territory of the Member State where those fruits have been processed in an area where no citrus fruit is produced.
3. The waste and by-products shall be destroyed by deep burial or used by a method approved by the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed and under the supervision of that official body, in a way to prevent any potential risk for spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
4. The processor shall keep records of the specified fruits that are processed and make them available to the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed. Those records shall indicate the numbers and distinguishing marks of containers, the volumes of the specified fruits imported, the volumes of waste and by-products used or destroyed and detailed information on their use or destruction.
2. Waste and by-products of the specified fruits shall be used or destroyed in the territory of the Member State where those fruits have been processed in an area where no citrus fruit is produced.
3. The waste and by-products shall be destroyed by deep burial or used by a method approved by the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed and under the supervision of that official body, in a way to prevent any potential risk for spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
4. The processor shall keep records of the specified fruits that are processed and make them available to the responsible official body of the Member State where the specified fruits have been processed. Those records shall indicate the numbers and distinguishing marks of containers, the volumes of the specified fruits imported, the volumes of waste and by-products used or destroyed and detailed information on their use or destruction.
Requirements concerning storage of the specified fruits
1. Where the specified fruits are not processed immediately, they shall be stored at a facility registered and approved for that purpose by the responsible official body of the Member State where the facility is situated.
2. The batches of specified fruits shall remain separately identifiable.
3. The specified fruits shall be stored in a way which prevents any potential risk of spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
2. The batches of specified fruits shall remain separately identifiable.
3. The specified fruits shall be stored in a way which prevents any potential risk of spreading ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Containers, packages and labelling
The specified fruits shall be introduced into, and moved within, the Union if the following conditions have been fulfilled:
(a)
they are included in individual packages in a container;
(b)
a label is attached to each container and individual package referred to in point (a), bearing the following information:
(i)
a unique number on each individual package;
(ii)
the declared net weight of the fruit;
(iii)
a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’.
(a)
they are included in individual packages in a container;
(b)
a label is attached to each container and individual package referred to in point (a), bearing the following information:
(i)
a unique number on each individual package;
(ii)
the declared net weight of the fruit;
(iii)
a mark stating: ‘Fruit destined exclusively for industrial processing into juice.’.
Reporting obligations
1. The importing Member States shall submit to the Commission and the other Member States, each year before 31 December, a report with information on the amounts of the specified fruits introduced into the Union under this Decision during the previous import season.
2. Member States in whose territory the specified fruit are processed into juice shall submit to the Commission and the other Member States, each year before 31 December, a report with all the following elements:
(a)
the amounts of the specified fruits processed in their territory under this Decision during the previous import season;
(b)
the volumes of waste and by-products destroyed and detailed information on the method of their use or destruction as refer to in Article 15(3).
3. The report referred to in the paragraph 1 shall also include the results of the plant health checks of the specified fruits carried out in accordance with Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC and this Decision.
2. Member States in whose territory the specified fruit are processed into juice shall submit to the Commission and the other Member States, each year before 31 December, a report with all the following elements:
(a)
the amounts of the specified fruits processed in their territory under this Decision during the previous import season;
(b)
the volumes of waste and by-products destroyed and detailed information on the method of their use or destruction as refer to in Article 15(3).
3. The report referred to in the paragraph 1 shall also include the results of the plant health checks of the specified fruits carried out in accordance with Article 13(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC and this Decision.
Notifications
Member States shall immediately notify the Commission, the other Member States and the third country concerned of a confirmed finding ofPhyllosticta citricarpa.
Repeals
Decision 2004/416/EC and Implementing Decision 2014/422/EU are repealed.
Date of application
This Decision shall apply from 1 June 2016.
Date of expiration
This Decision shall expire on 31 March 2019.
Addressees
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Pending: 32015D2416
| 19.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 333/128 |
| (1) | Points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC provide for special requirements concerning the introduction into the Union of certain plant products and other objects originating from certain countries. One of those special requirements is the requirement of an official statement that those plant products and other objects originate in an area recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. |
| (2) | The United States of America have requested the recognition of certain areas of their territories as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in accordance with points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV of Directive 2000/29/EC. |
| (3) | It appears from the official information submitted by the United States of America that certain areas of its territory are free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. Those areas of the United States of America should therefore be recognized as being free from that harmful organism. |
| (4) | In view of the continued spread ofAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in the United States of America, it is appropriate to limit the recognition of the areas concerned as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire to a certain period. |
| (5) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, |
| (1) | States being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaireAlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevadaNew MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming | AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming |
| AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming |
| AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming |
| (2) | Counties being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire(a)Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston(b)Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff(c)Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma(d)Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth(e)Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson(f)Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn(g)Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington(h)Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine(i)Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork(j)Counties in New Hampshire:Coos(k)Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County(l)Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley(m)Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala(n)Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk(o)Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | (a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | (b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | (c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | (d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | (e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | (f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | (g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | (h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | (i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork | (j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos | (k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | (l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | (m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | (n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk | (o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington |
| (a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| WayneWebster | WheelerYork | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington |
| (a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston |
| AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | ||||
| MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston |
| AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe |
| MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston |
| (b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff |
| BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff |
| BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff |
| (c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma |
| AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | ||||
| CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma |
| AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos |
| CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma |
| (d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth |
| ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ||||
| ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth |
| ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt |
| ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth |
| (e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson |
| AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ||||
| ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson |
| AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline |
| ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson |
| (f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn |
| AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn |
| AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn |
| (g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington |
| AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington |
| AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington |
| (h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine |
| BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine |
| BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine |
| (i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork |
| AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | ||||||
| BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | ||||||
| WayneWebster | WheelerYork |
| AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner |
| BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley |
| WayneWebster | WheelerYork |
| (j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos |
| (k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County |
| Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County |
| Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County |
| (l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley |
| CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley |
| CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley |
| (m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala |
| AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | ||||||||||
| AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | ||||||||||
| GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | ||||||||||
| MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | ||||||||||
| WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala |
| AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong |
| AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston |
| GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen |
| MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington |
| WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala |
| (n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk |
| (o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington |
| AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington |
| AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington |
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV thereof,
(1) Points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC provide for special requirements concerning the introduction into the Union of certain plant products and other objects originating from certain countries. One of those special requirements is the requirement of an official statement that those plant products and other objects originate in an area recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
(2) The United States of America have requested the recognition of certain areas of their territories as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in accordance with points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV of Directive 2000/29/EC.
(3) It appears from the official information submitted by the United States of America that certain areas of its territory are free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. Those areas of the United States of America should therefore be recognized as being free from that harmful organism.
(4) In view of the continued spread ofAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in the United States of America, it is appropriate to limit the recognition of the areas concerned as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire to a certain period.
(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV thereof,
(1) Points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC provide for special requirements concerning the introduction into the Union of certain plant products and other objects originating from certain countries. One of those special requirements is the requirement of an official statement that those plant products and other objects originate in an area recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
(2) The United States of America have requested the recognition of certain areas of their territories as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in accordance with points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV of Directive 2000/29/EC.
(3) It appears from the official information submitted by the United States of America that certain areas of its territory are free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. Those areas of the United States of America should therefore be recognized as being free from that harmful organism.
(4) In view of the continued spread ofAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in the United States of America, it is appropriate to limit the recognition of the areas concerned as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire to a certain period.
(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Recognition
Article 1
For the purposes of points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, the areas of the United States of America listed in the Annex to this Decision are recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
Expiry date
Article 2
This Decision shall expire on 31 December 2017.
Addressees
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV thereof,
(1) Points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC provide for special requirements concerning the introduction into the Union of certain plant products and other objects originating from certain countries. One of those special requirements is the requirement of an official statement that those plant products and other objects originate in an area recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
(2) The United States of America have requested the recognition of certain areas of their territories as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in accordance with points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV of Directive 2000/29/EC.
(3) It appears from the official information submitted by the United States of America that certain areas of its territory are free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. Those areas of the United States of America should therefore be recognized as being free from that harmful organism.
(4) In view of the continued spread ofAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in the United States of America, it is appropriate to limit the recognition of the areas concerned as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire to a certain period.
(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV thereof,
(1) Points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC provide for special requirements concerning the introduction into the Union of certain plant products and other objects originating from certain countries. One of those special requirements is the requirement of an official statement that those plant products and other objects originate in an area recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
(2) The United States of America have requested the recognition of certain areas of their territories as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in accordance with points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV of Directive 2000/29/EC.
(3) It appears from the official information submitted by the United States of America that certain areas of its territory are free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire. Those areas of the United States of America should therefore be recognized as being free from that harmful organism.
(4) In view of the continued spread ofAgrilus planipennisFairmaire in the United States of America, it is appropriate to limit the recognition of the areas concerned as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire to a certain period.
(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Recognition
For the purposes of points 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC, the areas of the United States of America listed in the Annex to this Decision are recognised as being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire.
Expiry date
This Decision shall expire on 31 December 2017.
Addressees
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
LIST OF AREAS, AS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1
ANNEX
(1) | States being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaireAlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevadaNew MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming | AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming
AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming
(2) | Counties being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire(a)Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston(b)Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff(c)Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma(d)Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth(e)Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson(f)Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn(g)Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington(h)Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine(i)Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork(j)Counties in New Hampshire:Coos(k)Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County(l)Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley(m)Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala(n)Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk(o)Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | (a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | (b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | (c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | (d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | (e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | (f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | (g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | (h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | (i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork | (j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos | (k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | (l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | (m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | (n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk | (o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
(a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston
AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe
MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston
(b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff
BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff
(c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma
AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos
CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma
(d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth
ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt
ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth
(e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson
AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline
ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson
(f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn
AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn
(g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington
AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington
(h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine
BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine
(i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork
AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner
BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley
WayneWebster | WheelerYork
(j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos
(k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County
Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County
(l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley
CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley
(m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala
AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong
AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston
GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen
MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington
WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala
(n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk
(o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
(1) | States being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaireAlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevadaNew MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming | AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming
AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaFloridaHawaiiIdahoMississippiMontanaNevada | New MexicoNorth DakotaOklahomaOregonSouth DakotaUtahWashingtonWyoming
(2) | Counties being free fromAgrilus planipennisFairmaire(a)Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston(b)Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff(c)Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma(d)Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth(e)Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson(f)Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn(g)Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington(h)Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine(i)Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork(j)Counties in New Hampshire:Coos(k)Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County(l)Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley(m)Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala(n)Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk(o)Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | (a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | (b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | (c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | (d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | (e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | (f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | (g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | (h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | (i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork | (j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos | (k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | (l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | (m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | (n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk | (o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
(a) | Counties in Alabama:AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallasDeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroeMontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. ClairSumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston | AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe | MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston
AutaugaBaldwinBarbourBibbBlountBullockButlerCalhounChambersChiltonChoctawClarkeClayCoffeeColbertConecuhCoosaCovingtonCrenshawCullmanDaleDallas | DeKalbElmoreEscambiaEtowahFayetteFranklinGenevaGreeneHaleHenryHoustonJeffersonLamarLawrenceLeeLowndesMaconMarengoMarionMarshallMobileMonroe
MontgomeryMorganPerryPickensPikeRussellShelbySt. Clair | SumterTalladegaTallapoosaTuscaloosaWalkerWashingtonWilcoxWinston
(b) | Counties in Arkansas:BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLoganMadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff | BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff
BaxterBentonBooneCarrollClayCleburneConwayCraigheadCrawfordCrittendenCrossFaulknerFranklinFultonGreeneIndependenceIzardJacksonJohnsonLawrenceLeeLogan | MadisonMarionMississippiMonroeNewtonPhillipsPoinsettPolkPopePrairieRandolphSt. FrancisScottSearcySebastianSharpStoneVan BurenWashingtonWhiteWoodruff
(c) | Counties in Colorado:AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBentBroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejosCostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesaMineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma | AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos | CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma
AlamosaArapahoeArchuletaBacaBent | BroomfieldChaffeeCheyenneClear CreekConejos
CostillaCrowleyCusterDeltaDenverDoloresDouglasEagleEl PasoElbertFremontGarfieldGunnisonHinsdaleHuerfanoJacksonKiowaKit CarsonLa PlataLakeLas AnimasLincolnLoganMesa | MineralMoffatMontezumaMontroseMorganOteroOurayParkPhillipsPitkinProwersPuebloRio BlancoRio GrandeRouttSaguacheSan JuanSan MiguelSedgwickSummitTellerWashingtonYuma
(d) | Counties in Georgia:ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryanBullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquittColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMillerMitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth | ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt | ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth
ApplingAtkinsonBaconBakerBaldwinBen HillBerrienBibbBleckleyBrantleyBrooksBryan | BullochBurkeCalhounCamdenCandlerCharltonChathamChattahoocheeClayClinchCoffeeColquitt
ColumbiaCookCrawfordCrispDecaturDodgeDoolyDoughertyEarlyEcholsEffinghamEmanuelEvansGlascockGlynnGradyHancockHarrisHoustonIrwinJeff DavisJeffersonJenkinsJohnsonJonesLanierLaurensLeeLibertyLincolnLongLowndesMaconMarionMcDuffieMcIntoshMiller | MitchellMontgomeryMorganMuscogeePeachPiercePulaskiQuitmanRandolphRichmondSchleySeminoleStewartSumterTalbotTaliaferroTattnallTaylorTelfairTerrellThomasTiftToombsTreutlenTurnerTwiggsUpsonWareWarrenWashingtonWayneWebsterWheelerWilcoxWilkinsonWorth
(e) | Counties in Kansas:AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgemanJewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSalineScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevensSumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson | AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline | ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson
AllenAndersonBarberBartonBourbonButlerChaseChautauquaCherokeeCheyenneClarkClayCloudCoffeyComancheCowleyCrawfordDecaturDickinsonEdwardsElkEllisEllsworthFinneyFordGearyGoveGrahamGrantGrayGreeleyGreenwoodHamiltonHarperHarveyHaskellHodgeman | JewellKearnyKingmanKiowaLabetteLaneLincolnLinnLoganLyonMcPhersonMarionMarshallMeadeMitchellMontgomeryMorrisMortonNemahaNeoshoNessNortonOsborneOttawaPawneePhillipsPottawatomiePrattRawlinsRenoRepublicRiceRileyRooksRushRussellSaline
ScottSedgwickSewardSheridanShermanSmithStaffordStantonStevens | SumnerThomasTregoWabaunseeWallaceWashingtonWichitaWilsonWoodson
(f) | Counties (Parishes) in Louisiana:AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingstonNatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn | AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn
AcadiaAllenAscensionAssumptionAvoyellesBeauregardCalcasieuCaldwellCameronCatahoulaConcordiaDe SotoEast Baton RougeEast FelicianaEvangelineFranklinGrantIberiaIbervilleJefferson DavisJeffersonLafayetteLafourcheLa SalleLivingston | NatchitochesOrleansPlaqueminesPointe CoupeeRapidesRed RiverSabineSt. BernardSt. CharlesSt. HelenaSt. JamesSt. John the BaptistSt. LandrySt. MartinSt. MarySt. TammanyTangipahoaTensasTerrebonneVermilionVernonWashingtonWest Baton RougeWest FelicianaWinn
(g) | Counties in Maine:AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincolnPenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington | AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington
AroostookFranklinHancockKennebecKnoxLincoln | PenobscotPiscataquisSomersetWaldoWashington
(h) | Counties in Minnesota:BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartinMeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine | BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine
BeckerBeltramiBig StoneBlue EarthBrownCassChippewaClayClearwaterCookCottonwoodCrow WingDouglasFaribaultGrantHubbardJacksonKandiyohiKittsonKoochichingLac qui ParleLake of the WoodsLincolnLyonMahnomenMartin | MeekerMorrisonMurrayNicolletNoblesNormanOtter TailPenningtonPipestonePolkPopeRed LakeRedwoodRenvilleRockRoseauStearnsStevensSwiftToddTraverseWabashaWadenaWatonwanWilkinYellow Medicine
(i) | Counties in Nebraska:AdamsAntelopeArthurBannerBlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcockHoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValleyWayneWebsterWheelerYork | AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner | BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley | WayneWebster | WheelerYork
AdamsAntelope | ArthurBanner
BlaineBooneBox ButteBoydBrownBuffaloBurtButlerCedarChaseCherryCheyenneClayColfaxCumingCusterDakotaDawesDawsonDeuelDixonDodgeDundyFillmoreFranklinFrontierFurnasGageGardenGarfieldGosperGrantGreeleyHallHamiltonHarlanHayesHitchcock | HoltHookerHowardJeffersonKearneyKeithKeya PahaKimballKnoxLancasterLincolnLoganLoupMadisonMcPhersonMerrickMorrillNanceNuckollsPerkinsPhelpsPiercePlattePolkRed WillowRockSalineSaundersSewardScotts BluffSheridanShermanSiouxStantonThayerThomasThurstonValley
WayneWebster | WheelerYork
(j) | Counties in New Hampshire:Coos
(k) | Counties in South Carolina:Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown CountyGreenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County | Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County
Aiken CountyAllendale CountyBamberg CountyBarnwell CountyBeaufort CountyBerkeley CountyCalhoun CountyCharleston CountyChesterfield CountyClarendon CountyColleton CountyDarlington CountyDillon CountyDorchester CountyEdgefield CountyFairfield CountyFlorence CountyGeorgetown County | Greenwood CountyHampton CountyHorry CountyJasper CountyKershaw CountyLancaster CountyLaurens CountyLee CountyLexington CountyMarion CountyMarlboro CountyMcCormick CountyNewberry CountyOrangeburg CountyRichland CountySaluda CountySumter CountyWilliamsburg County
(l) | Counties in Tennessee:CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHendersonLakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley | CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley
CrockettDecaturDyerFayetteGibsonHardemanHardinHaywoodHenderson | LakeLauderdaleMadisonMcNairyObionShelbyTiptonWeakley
(m) | Counties in Texas:AndersonAndrewsAngelinaAransasArcherArmstrongAtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComalComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalvestonGarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJeffersonJim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullenMedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRuskSabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashingtonWebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilsonWinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala | AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong | AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston | GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen | MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington | WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala
AndersonAndrewsAngelina | AransasArcherArmstrong
AtascosaAustinBaileyBanderaBastropBaylorBeeBellBexarBlancoBordenBosqueBrazoriaBrazosBrewsterBriscoeBrooksBrownBurlesonBurnetCaldwellCalhounCallahanCameronCampCarsonCastroChambersCherokeeChildressClayCochranCokeColemanCollinCollingsworthColoradoComal | ComancheConchoCookeCoryellCottleCraneCrockettCrosbyCulbersonDallamDallasDawsonDe WittDeaf SmithDeltaDentonDickensDimmitDonleyDuvalEastlandEctorEdwardsEl PasoEllisErathFallsFanninFayetteFisherFloydFoardFort BendFranklinFreestoneFrioGainesGalveston
GarzaGillespieGlasscockGoliadGonzalesGrayGraysonGreggGrimesGuadalupeHaleHallHamiltonHansfordHardemanHardinHarrisHartleyHaskellHaysHemphillHendersonHidalgoHillHockleyHoodHopkinsHoustonHowardHudspethHuntHutchinsonIrionJackJacksonJasperJeff DavisJefferson | Jim HoggJim WellsJohnsonJonesKarnesKaufmanKendallKenedyKentKerrKimbleKingKinneyKlebergKnoxLa SalleLamarLambLampasasLavacaLeeLeonLibertyLimestoneLipscombLive OakLlanoLovingLubbockLynnMadisonMartinMasonMatagordaMaverickMcCullochMcLennanMcMullen
MedinaMenardMidlandMilamMillsMitchellMontagueMontgomeryMooreMorrisMotleyNacogdochesNavarroNewtonNolanNuecesOchiltreeOldhamOrangePalo PintoParkerParmerPecosPolkPotterPresidioRainsRandallReaganRealRed RiverReevesRefugioRobertsRobertsonRockwallRunnelsRusk | SabineSan AugustineSan JacintoSan PatricioSan SabaSchleicherScurryShackelfordShelbyShermanSmithSomervellStarrStephensSterlingStonewallSuttonSwisherTarrantTaylorTerrellTerryThrockmortonTitusTom GreenTravisTrinityTylerUpshurUptonUvaldeVal VerdeVan ZandtVictoriaWalkerWallerWardWashington
WebbWhartonWheelerWichitaWilbargerWillacyWilliamsonWilson | WinklerWiseWoodYoakumYoungZapataZavala
(n) | Counties in Wisconsin:Rusk
(o) | Counties in Vermont:AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklinGrand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington | AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
AddisonCaledoniaChittendenEssexFranklin | Grand IsleLamoilleOrleansWashington
Pending: 32015D2052
| 17.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 300/22 |
| (1) | On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo. The mandate of the EUSR was last amended by Council Decision 2014/400/CFSP(2). The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 31 October 2015. |
| (2) | The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months. |
| (3) | The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union. |
| (4) | Any possible alterations to the tasks and objectives of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX KOSOVO) having an impact on the tasks and objectives of the EUSR should be considered, in relation to the EUSR's mandate, as appropriate in due course, |
| (a) | offer the Union's advice and support in the political process; |
| (b) | promote overall Union political coordination in Kosovo; |
| (c) | strengthen the presence of the Union in Kosovo and ensure its coherence and effectiveness; |
| (d) | provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities; |
| (e) | ensure consistency and coherence of Union action in Kosovo, including in guiding locally the EULEX transition; |
| (f) | support Kosovo's European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions, through targeted public communication and Union outreach activities designed to ensure a broader understanding and support from the Kosovo public on issues related to the Union, including the work of EULEX; |
| (g) | monitor, assist and facilitate progress on political, economic and European priorities, in line with respective institutional competencies and responsibilities; |
| (h) | contribute to the development and consolidation of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Kosovo, including with regard to women and children and protection of minorities, in accordance with the Union's human rights policy and Union Guidelines on Human Rights; |
| (i) | assist in the implementation of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue facilitated by the Union. |
| (a) | establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility, as well as the management of security incidents and a contingency and evacuation plan; |
| (b) | ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high risk insurance as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility; |
| (c) | ensuring that all members of the EUSR's team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS; |
| (d) | ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and mandate implementation reports. |
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo. The mandate of the EUSR was last amended by Council Decision 2014/400/CFSP(2). The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union.
(4) Any possible alterations to the tasks and objectives of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX KOSOVO) having an impact on the tasks and objectives of the EUSR should be considered, in relation to the EUSR’s mandate, as appropriate in due course,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo. The mandate of the EUSR was last amended by Council Decision 2014/400/CFSP(2). The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union.
(4) Any possible alterations to the tasks and objectives of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX KOSOVO) having an impact on the tasks and objectives of the EUSR should be considered, in relation to the EUSR’s mandate, as appropriate in due course,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
European Union Special Representative
Article 1
The mandate of Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo is hereby extended until 28 February 2017. The Council may decide that the mandate of the EUSR be terminated earlier, based on an assessment by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).
Policy objectives
Article 2
The mandate of the EUSR shall be based on the policy objectives of the Union in Kosovo. These include playing a leading role in promoting a stable, viable, peaceful, democratic and multi-ethnic Kosovo; strengthening stability in the region and contributing to regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations in the Western Balkans; promoting a Kosovo that is committed to the rule of law and to the protection of minorities and of cultural and religious heritage; supporting Kosovo’s European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions.
Mandate
Article 3
In order to achieve the policy objectives, the mandate of the EUSR shall be to:
(a)
offer the Union’s advice and support in the political process;
(b)
promote overall Union political coordination in Kosovo;
(c)
strengthen the presence of the Union in Kosovo and ensure its coherence and effectiveness;
(d)
provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities;
(e)
ensure consistency and coherence of Union action in Kosovo, including in guiding locally the EULEX transition;
(f)
support Kosovo’s European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions, through targeted public communication and Union outreach activities designed to ensure a broader understanding and support from the Kosovo public on issues related to the Union, including the work of EULEX;
(g)
monitor, assist and facilitate progress on political, economic and European priorities, in line with respective institutional competencies and responsibilities;
(h)
contribute to the development and consolidation of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Kosovo, including with regard to women and children and protection of minorities, in accordance with the Union’s human rights policy and Union Guidelines on Human Rights;
(i)
assist in the implementation of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue facilitated by the Union.
Implementation of the mandate
Article 4
1. The EUSR shall be responsible for the implementation of the mandate, acting under the authority of the HR.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and its relevant departments.
Financing
Article 5
1. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR during the period from 1 November 2015 to 28 February 2017 shall be EUR 3 135 000.
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union. Participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts by the EUSR shall be open without limitations. Furthermore, no rule of origin for the goods purchased by the EUSR shall apply.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
Constitution and composition of the team
Article 6
1. A dedicated staff shall be assigned to assist the EUSR to implement the mandate and to contribute to the coherence, visibility and effectiveness of Union action in Kosovo overall. Within the limits of the mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting the team. The team shall include the expertise on specific policy issues as required by the mandate. The EUSR shall keep the Council and the Commission promptly informed of the composition of the team.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of staff to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. International contracted staff shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and of the EUSR’s staff
Article 7
The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the mission of the EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s staff shall be agreed with the host parties, as appropriate. Member States and the EEAS shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
Security of EU classified information
Article 8
1. The EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2013/488/EU(3).
2. The HR shall be authorised to release to NATO/KFOR EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL’ generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information.
3. The HR shall be authorised to release to the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), in accordance with the operational needs of the EUSR, EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘RESTREINT UE/EU RESTRICTED’ which are generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information. Local arrangements shall be drawn up for that purpose.
4. The HR shall be authorised to release to third parties associated with this Decision EU non-classified documents related to the deliberations of the Council with regard to the action covered by the obligation of professional secrecy pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure(4).
Access to information and logistical support
Article 9
1. Member States, the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
2. The Union delegation and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
Security
Article 10
In accordance with the Union’s policy on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty, the EUSR shall take all reasonably practicable measures, in accordance with the EUSR’s mandate and the security situation in the area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under the direct authority of the EUSR, in particular by:
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility, as well as the management of security incidents and a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high risk insurance as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and mandate implementation reports.
Reporting
Article 11
The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with reports. The EUSR shall also report to Council working parties, as necessary. Regular reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. The EUSR may also provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports. In accordance with Article 36 of the Treaty, the EUSR may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
Coordination
Article 12
1. The EUSR shall contribute to the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the Union’s action and shall help ensure that all Union instruments and Member States’ actions are engaged consistently, to attain the Union’s policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with those of the Commission, as well as those of other EUSRs active in the region, as appropriate. The EUSR shall provide regular briefings to Member States’ missions and Union delegations.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Mission and the Heads of Union delegations in the region. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required.
3. The EUSR shall also liaise with relevant local bodies and other international and regional actors in the field.
4. The EUSR, with other Union actors present in the field, shall ensure the dissemination and sharing of information among Union actors in theatre with a view to achieving a high degree of common situation awareness and assessment.
Assistance in relation to claims
Article 13
The EUSR and the EUSR’s staff shall assist in providing elements to respond to any claims and obligations arising from the mandates of the previous EUSRs in Kosovo, and shall provide administrative assistance and access to relevant files for such purposes.
Review
Article 14
The implementation of this Decision and its consistency with other contributions from the Union to the region shall be kept under regular review. The EUSR shall present the Council, the HR, and the Commission with a progress report by the end of June 2016 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report by the end of November 2016.
Entry into force
Article 15
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo. The mandate of the EUSR was last amended by Council Decision 2014/400/CFSP(2). The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union.
(4) Any possible alterations to the tasks and objectives of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX KOSOVO) having an impact on the tasks and objectives of the EUSR should be considered, in relation to the EUSR’s mandate, as appropriate in due course,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 25 January 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/39/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo. The mandate of the EUSR was last amended by Council Decision 2014/400/CFSP(2). The mandate of the EUSR is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union.
(4) Any possible alterations to the tasks and objectives of the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX KOSOVO) having an impact on the tasks and objectives of the EUSR should be considered, in relation to the EUSR’s mandate, as appropriate in due course,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
European Union Special Representative
The mandate of Mr Samuel ŽBOGAR as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Kosovo is hereby extended until 28 February 2017. The Council may decide that the mandate of the EUSR be terminated earlier, based on an assessment by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).
Policy objectives
The mandate of the EUSR shall be based on the policy objectives of the Union in Kosovo. These include playing a leading role in promoting a stable, viable, peaceful, democratic and multi-ethnic Kosovo; strengthening stability in the region and contributing to regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations in the Western Balkans; promoting a Kosovo that is committed to the rule of law and to the protection of minorities and of cultural and religious heritage; supporting Kosovo’s European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions.
Mandate
In order to achieve the policy objectives, the mandate of the EUSR shall be to:
(a)
offer the Union’s advice and support in the political process;
(b)
promote overall Union political coordination in Kosovo;
(c)
strengthen the presence of the Union in Kosovo and ensure its coherence and effectiveness;
(d)
provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities;
(e)
ensure consistency and coherence of Union action in Kosovo, including in guiding locally the EULEX transition;
(f)
support Kosovo’s European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions, through targeted public communication and Union outreach activities designed to ensure a broader understanding and support from the Kosovo public on issues related to the Union, including the work of EULEX;
(g)
monitor, assist and facilitate progress on political, economic and European priorities, in line with respective institutional competencies and responsibilities;
(h)
contribute to the development and consolidation of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Kosovo, including with regard to women and children and protection of minorities, in accordance with the Union’s human rights policy and Union Guidelines on Human Rights;
(i)
assist in the implementation of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue facilitated by the Union.
(a)
offer the Union’s advice and support in the political process;
(b)
promote overall Union political coordination in Kosovo;
(c)
strengthen the presence of the Union in Kosovo and ensure its coherence and effectiveness;
(d)
provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities;
(e)
ensure consistency and coherence of Union action in Kosovo, including in guiding locally the EULEX transition;
(f)
support Kosovo’s European perspective and rapprochement with the Union in line with the perspective of the region and in accordance with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and the Council Decision on its signing, and in line with the relevant Council Conclusions, through targeted public communication and Union outreach activities designed to ensure a broader understanding and support from the Kosovo public on issues related to the Union, including the work of EULEX;
(g)
monitor, assist and facilitate progress on political, economic and European priorities, in line with respective institutional competencies and responsibilities;
(h)
contribute to the development and consolidation of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Kosovo, including with regard to women and children and protection of minorities, in accordance with the Union’s human rights policy and Union Guidelines on Human Rights;
(i)
assist in the implementation of the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue facilitated by the Union.
Implementation of the mandate
1. The EUSR shall be responsible for the implementation of the mandate, acting under the authority of the HR.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and its relevant departments.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and its relevant departments.
Financing
1. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR during the period from 1 November 2015 to 28 February 2017 shall be EUR 3 135 000.
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union. Participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts by the EUSR shall be open without limitations. Furthermore, no rule of origin for the goods purchased by the EUSR shall apply.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union. Participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts by the EUSR shall be open without limitations. Furthermore, no rule of origin for the goods purchased by the EUSR shall apply.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
Constitution and composition of the team
1. A dedicated staff shall be assigned to assist the EUSR to implement the mandate and to contribute to the coherence, visibility and effectiveness of Union action in Kosovo overall. Within the limits of the mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting the team. The team shall include the expertise on specific policy issues as required by the mandate. The EUSR shall keep the Council and the Commission promptly informed of the composition of the team.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of staff to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. International contracted staff shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of staff to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. International contracted staff shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and of the EUSR's staff
The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the mission of the EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s staff shall be agreed with the host parties, as appropriate. Member States and the EEAS shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
Security of EU classified information
1. The EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2013/488/EU(3).
2. The HR shall be authorised to release to NATO/KFOR EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL’ generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information.
3. The HR shall be authorised to release to the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), in accordance with the operational needs of the EUSR, EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘RESTREINT UE/EU RESTRICTED’ which are generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information. Local arrangements shall be drawn up for that purpose.
4. The HR shall be authorised to release to third parties associated with this Decision EU non-classified documents related to the deliberations of the Council with regard to the action covered by the obligation of professional secrecy pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure(4).
2. The HR shall be authorised to release to NATO/KFOR EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL’ generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information.
3. The HR shall be authorised to release to the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), in accordance with the operational needs of the EUSR, EU classified information and documents up to the level ‘RESTREINT UE/EU RESTRICTED’ which are generated for the purposes of the action, in accordance with the security rules for protecting EU classified information. Local arrangements shall be drawn up for that purpose.
4. The HR shall be authorised to release to third parties associated with this Decision EU non-classified documents related to the deliberations of the Council with regard to the action covered by the obligation of professional secrecy pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure(4).
Access to information and logistical support
1. Member States, the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
2. The Union delegation and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
2. The Union delegation and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
Security
In accordance with the Union’s policy on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty, the EUSR shall take all reasonably practicable measures, in accordance with the EUSR’s mandate and the security situation in the area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under the direct authority of the EUSR, in particular by:
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility, as well as the management of security incidents and a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high risk insurance as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and mandate implementation reports.
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility, as well as the management of security incidents and a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high risk insurance as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and mandate implementation reports.
Reporting
The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with reports. The EUSR shall also report to Council working parties, as necessary. Regular reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. The EUSR may also provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports. In accordance with Article 36 of the Treaty, the EUSR may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
Coordination
1. The EUSR shall contribute to the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the Union’s action and shall help ensure that all Union instruments and Member States’ actions are engaged consistently, to attain the Union’s policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with those of the Commission, as well as those of other EUSRs active in the region, as appropriate. The EUSR shall provide regular briefings to Member States’ missions and Union delegations.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Mission and the Heads of Union delegations in the region. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required.
3. The EUSR shall also liaise with relevant local bodies and other international and regional actors in the field.
4. The EUSR, with other Union actors present in the field, shall ensure the dissemination and sharing of information among Union actors in theatre with a view to achieving a high degree of common situation awareness and assessment.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Mission and the Heads of Union delegations in the region. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide local political guidance to the Head of EULEX KOSOVO, including on the political aspects of issues relating to executive responsibilities. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required.
3. The EUSR shall also liaise with relevant local bodies and other international and regional actors in the field.
4. The EUSR, with other Union actors present in the field, shall ensure the dissemination and sharing of information among Union actors in theatre with a view to achieving a high degree of common situation awareness and assessment.
Assistance in relation to claims
The EUSR and the EUSR’s staff shall assist in providing elements to respond to any claims and obligations arising from the mandates of the previous EUSRs in Kosovo, and shall provide administrative assistance and access to relevant files for such purposes.
Review
The implementation of this Decision and its consistency with other contributions from the Union to the region shall be kept under regular review. The EUSR shall present the Council, the HR, and the Commission with a progress report by the end of June 2016 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report by the end of November 2016.
Entry into force
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
Pending: 32015D2005
| 11.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 294/53 |
| (1) | On 22 July 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/393/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Afghanistan. The EUSR's mandate is to expire on 31 October 2015. |
| (2) | The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months. |
| (3) | The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty, |
| (a) | contribute to the implementation of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016 and, as appropriate, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD); |
| (b) | support Union-Afghanistan political dialogue; |
| (c) | support the pivotal role played by the United Nations (UN) in Afghanistan with particular emphasis on contributing to better coordinated international assistance, thereby promoting the implementation of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués, as well as relevant UN Resolutions. |
| (a) | promote the views of the Union on the political process and developments in Afghanistan; |
| (b) | maintain close contact with, and support the development of, relevant Afghan institutions, in particular the Government and the Parliament as well as the local authorities. Contact should also be maintained with other Afghan political groups and other relevant actors in Afghanistan, in particular relevant civil society actors; |
| (c) | maintain close contact with relevant international and regional stakeholders in Afghanistan, in particular the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the UN and the Senior Civilian Representative of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and other key partners and organisations; |
| (d) | advise on the progress achieved in meeting the objectives of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, of the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD) and of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués in particular in the following areas:(i)civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level;(ii)good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary;(iii)electoral and constitutional reforms,(iv)security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service;(v)promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development;(vi)respect for Afghanistan's international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children;(vii)respect of democratic principles and the rule of law;(viii)fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process;(ix)respect for Afghanistan's international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials;(x)facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and(xi)enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council; | (i) | civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level; | (ii) | good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary; | (iii) | electoral and constitutional reforms, | (iv) | security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service; | (v) | promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development; | (vi) | respect for Afghanistan's international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children; | (vii) | respect of democratic principles and the rule of law; | (viii) | fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process; | (ix) | respect for Afghanistan's international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials; | (x) | facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and | (xi) | enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council; |
| (i) | civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (ii) | good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (iii) | electoral and constitutional reforms, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (iv) | security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (v) | promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (vi) | respect for Afghanistan's international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (vii) | respect of democratic principles and the rule of law; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (viii) | fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (ix) | respect for Afghanistan's international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials; | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (x) | facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (xi) | enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council; |
| (i) | civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level; |
| (ii) | good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary; |
| (iii) | electoral and constitutional reforms, |
| (iv) | security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service; |
| (v) | promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development; |
| (vi) | respect for Afghanistan's international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children; |
| (vii) | respect of democratic principles and the rule of law; |
| (viii) | fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process; |
| (ix) | respect for Afghanistan's international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials; |
| (x) | facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and |
| (xi) | enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council; |
| (e) | actively participate in local coordination fora such as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, while keeping non-participating Member States fully informed of decisions taken at these levels; |
| (f) | advise on the participation and the positions of the Union in international conferences with regard to Afghanistan, and in particular on the next international Ministerial Conference on Afghanistan, to be co-hosted by the Union in Brussels, in close liaison with the Afghan authorities and the main international partners; |
| (g) | take an active role in promoting regional cooperation through relevant initiatives including the Istanbul Process and the Regional Economic Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA); |
| (h) | contribute to the implementation of the Union's human rights policy and the EU Guidelines on Human Rights, in particular with regard to women and children in conflict-affected areas, especially by monitoring and addressing developments in this regard; |
| (i) | provide, as appropriate, support to an inclusive and Afghan-led peace process leading to a political settlement consistent with the ‘red lines’ agreed at the Bonn Conference. |
| (a) | establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility as well as the management of security incidents and including a contingency and evacuation plan; |
| (b) | ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high-risk insurance, as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility; |
| (c) | ensuring that all members of the EUSR's team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS; |
| (d) | ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and the mandate implementation reports. |
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 22 July 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/393/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Afghanistan. The EUSR’s mandate is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 22 July 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/393/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Afghanistan. The EUSR’s mandate is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
European Union Special Representative
Article 1
The mandate of Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the EUSR in Afghanistan is extended until 28 February 2017. The Council may decide that the mandate of the EUSR be terminated earlier, based on an assessment by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).
Policy objectives
Article 2
The EUSR shall represent the Union and promote Union policy objectives in Afghanistan, in close coordination with Member States’ representatives in Afghanistan. More specifically, the EUSR shall:
(a)
contribute to the implementation of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016 and, as appropriate, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD);
(b)
support Union-Afghanistan political dialogue;
(c)
support the pivotal role played by the United Nations (UN) in Afghanistan with particular emphasis on contributing to better coordinated international assistance, thereby promoting the implementation of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués, as well as relevant UN Resolutions.
Mandate
Article 3
In order to fulfil the mandate, the EUSR shall, in close cooperation with Member States’ representatives in Afghanistan:
(a)
promote the views of the Union on the political process and developments in Afghanistan;
(b)
maintain close contact with, and support the development of, relevant Afghan institutions, in particular the Government and the Parliament as well as the local authorities. Contact should also be maintained with other Afghan political groups and other relevant actors in Afghanistan, in particular relevant civil society actors;
(c)
maintain close contact with relevant international and regional stakeholders in Afghanistan, in particular the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the UN and the Senior Civilian Representative of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and other key partners and organisations;
(d)
advise on the progress achieved in meeting the objectives of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, of the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD) and of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués in particular in the following areas:
(i)
civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level;
(ii)
good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary;
(iii)
electoral and constitutional reforms,
(iv)
security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service;
(v)
promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development;
(vi)
respect for Afghanistan’s international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children;
(vii)
respect of democratic principles and the rule of law;
(viii)
fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process;
(ix)
respect for Afghanistan’s international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials;
(x)
facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and
(xi)
enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council;
(e)
actively participate in local coordination fora such as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, while keeping non-participating Member States fully informed of decisions taken at these levels;
(f)
advise on the participation and the positions of the Union in international conferences with regard to Afghanistan, and in particular on the next international Ministerial Conference on Afghanistan, to be co-hosted by the Union in Brussels, in close liaison with the Afghan authorities and the main international partners;
(g)
take an active role in promoting regional cooperation through relevant initiatives including the Istanbul Process and the Regional Economic Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA);
(h)
contribute to the implementation of the Union’s human rights policy and the EU Guidelines on Human Rights, in particular with regard to women and children in conflict-affected areas, especially by monitoring and addressing developments in this regard;
(i)
provide, as appropriate, support to an inclusive and Afghan-led peace process leading to a political settlement consistent with the ‘red lines’ agreed at the Bonn Conference.
Implementation of the mandate
Article 4
1. The EUSR shall be responsible for the implementation of the mandate, acting under the authority of the HR.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the relevant departments thereof.
Financing
Article 5
1. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR in the period from 1 November 2015 to 28 February 2017 shall be EUR 7 625 000
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
Constitution and composition of the team
Article 6
1. Within the limits of the EUSR’s mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting a team. The team shall include the expertise on specific policy issues as required by the mandate. The EUSR shall promptly and regularly inform the Council and the Commission of the composition of the team.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of personnel to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. Internationally contracted personnel shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, the sending institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and the staff of the EUSR
Article 7
The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the mission of the EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s staff shall be agreed with the host country, as appropriate. Member States and the EEAS shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
Security of EU classified information
Article 8
The EUSR and the members of his team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2013/488/EU(2).
Access to information and logistical support
Article 9
1. Member States, the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
2. The Union delegations and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
Security
Article 10
In accordance with the Union’s policy on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty, the EUSR shall take all reasonably practicable measures, in accordance with the EUSR’s mandate and the security situation in the area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under the EUSR’s direct authority, in particular by:
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility as well as the management of security incidents and including a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high-risk insurance, as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and the mandate implementation reports.
Reporting
Article 11
The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with reports. The EUSR shall also report to Council working parties as necessary. Regular reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. The EUSR may provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports. In accordance with Article 36 of the Treaty, the EUSR may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
Coordination
Article 12
1. The EUSR shall contribute to the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the Union’s action and shall help ensure that all Union instruments and Member States’ actions are engaged consistently, to attain the Union’s policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with those of the Commission, as well as with the Union’s Delegation in Pakistan. The EUSR shall provide Member States’ missions and Union delegations with regular briefings.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Missions and Heads of the Union delegations. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide the Head of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL Afghanistan) with local political guidance. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required. The EUSR shall also liaise with other international and regional actors in the field.
Assistance in relation to claims
Article 13
The EUSR and his staff shall assist in providing elements to respond to any claims and obligations arising from the mandates of the previous EUSRs in Afghanistan, and shall provide administrative assistance and access to relevant files for such purposes.
Review
Article 14
The implementation of this Decision and its consistency with other contributions from the Union to the region shall be kept under regular review. The EUSR shall present the Council, the HR and the Commission with a progress report by the end of June 2016 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report by the end of November 2016.
Entry into force
Article 15
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 22 July 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/393/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Afghanistan. The EUSR’s mandate is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 33 and Article 31(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
(1) On 22 July 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/393/CFSP(1)appointing Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the European Union Special Representative (EUSR) in Afghanistan. The EUSR’s mandate is to expire on 31 October 2015.
(2) The mandate of the EUSR should be extended for a further period of 16 months.
(3) The EUSR will implement the mandate in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
European Union Special Representative
The mandate of Mr Franz-Michael SKJOLD MELLBIN as the EUSR in Afghanistan is extended until 28 February 2017. The Council may decide that the mandate of the EUSR be terminated earlier, based on an assessment by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).
Policy objectives
The EUSR shall represent the Union and promote Union policy objectives in Afghanistan, in close coordination with Member States’ representatives in Afghanistan. More specifically, the EUSR shall:
(a)
contribute to the implementation of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016 and, as appropriate, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD);
(b)
support Union-Afghanistan political dialogue;
(c)
support the pivotal role played by the United Nations (UN) in Afghanistan with particular emphasis on contributing to better coordinated international assistance, thereby promoting the implementation of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués, as well as relevant UN Resolutions.
(a)
contribute to the implementation of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016 and, as appropriate, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD);
(b)
support Union-Afghanistan political dialogue;
(c)
support the pivotal role played by the United Nations (UN) in Afghanistan with particular emphasis on contributing to better coordinated international assistance, thereby promoting the implementation of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués, as well as relevant UN Resolutions.
Mandate
In order to fulfil the mandate, the EUSR shall, in close cooperation with Member States’ representatives in Afghanistan:
(a)
promote the views of the Union on the political process and developments in Afghanistan;
(b)
maintain close contact with, and support the development of, relevant Afghan institutions, in particular the Government and the Parliament as well as the local authorities. Contact should also be maintained with other Afghan political groups and other relevant actors in Afghanistan, in particular relevant civil society actors;
(c)
maintain close contact with relevant international and regional stakeholders in Afghanistan, in particular the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the UN and the Senior Civilian Representative of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and other key partners and organisations;
(d)
advise on the progress achieved in meeting the objectives of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, of the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD) and of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués in particular in the following areas:
(i)
civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level;
(ii)
good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary;
(iii)
electoral and constitutional reforms,
(iv)
security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service;
(v)
promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development;
(vi)
respect for Afghanistan’s international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children;
(vii)
respect of democratic principles and the rule of law;
(viii)
fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process;
(ix)
respect for Afghanistan’s international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials;
(x)
facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and
(xi)
enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council;
(e)
actively participate in local coordination fora such as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, while keeping non-participating Member States fully informed of decisions taken at these levels;
(f)
advise on the participation and the positions of the Union in international conferences with regard to Afghanistan, and in particular on the next international Ministerial Conference on Afghanistan, to be co-hosted by the Union in Brussels, in close liaison with the Afghan authorities and the main international partners;
(g)
take an active role in promoting regional cooperation through relevant initiatives including the Istanbul Process and the Regional Economic Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA);
(h)
contribute to the implementation of the Union’s human rights policy and the EU Guidelines on Human Rights, in particular with regard to women and children in conflict-affected areas, especially by monitoring and addressing developments in this regard;
(i)
provide, as appropriate, support to an inclusive and Afghan-led peace process leading to a political settlement consistent with the ‘red lines’ agreed at the Bonn Conference.
(a)
promote the views of the Union on the political process and developments in Afghanistan;
(b)
maintain close contact with, and support the development of, relevant Afghan institutions, in particular the Government and the Parliament as well as the local authorities. Contact should also be maintained with other Afghan political groups and other relevant actors in Afghanistan, in particular relevant civil society actors;
(c)
maintain close contact with relevant international and regional stakeholders in Afghanistan, in particular the Special Representative of the Secretary-General of the UN and the Senior Civilian Representative of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and other key partners and organisations;
(d)
advise on the progress achieved in meeting the objectives of the EU-Afghanistan Joint Declaration, of the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, the EU-Afghan Cooperation Agreement on Partnership and Development (CAPD) and of the Bonn, Chicago, Tokyo and London Conference Communiqués in particular in the following areas:
(i)
civilian capacity building, especially at sub-national level;
(ii)
good governance and the establishment of institutions necessary for the existence of the rule of law, in particular an independent judiciary;
(iii)
electoral and constitutional reforms,
(iv)
security sector reforms, including the strengthening of judicial institutions and the rule of law, the national army and the police force, and in particular the development of the civilian police service;
(v)
promotion of growth, namely through agriculture and rural development;
(vi)
respect for Afghanistan’s international human rights obligations, including respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities and the rights of women and children;
(vii)
respect of democratic principles and the rule of law;
(viii)
fostering participation of women in public administration, civil society and, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1325(2000), the peace process;
(ix)
respect for Afghanistan’s international obligations, including cooperation in international efforts to combat terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings and proliferation of arms and weapons of mass destruction and related materials;
(x)
facilitation of humanitarian assistance and the orderly return of refugees and internally displaced persons; and
(xi)
enhancing the effectiveness of Union presence and activities in Afghanistan and contributing to the formulation of the regular implementation reports on the EU Strategy in Afghanistan 2014-2016, as requested by the Council;
(e)
actively participate in local coordination fora such as the Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, while keeping non-participating Member States fully informed of decisions taken at these levels;
(f)
advise on the participation and the positions of the Union in international conferences with regard to Afghanistan, and in particular on the next international Ministerial Conference on Afghanistan, to be co-hosted by the Union in Brussels, in close liaison with the Afghan authorities and the main international partners;
(g)
take an active role in promoting regional cooperation through relevant initiatives including the Istanbul Process and the Regional Economic Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA);
(h)
contribute to the implementation of the Union’s human rights policy and the EU Guidelines on Human Rights, in particular with regard to women and children in conflict-affected areas, especially by monitoring and addressing developments in this regard;
(i)
provide, as appropriate, support to an inclusive and Afghan-led peace process leading to a political settlement consistent with the ‘red lines’ agreed at the Bonn Conference.
Implementation of the mandate
1. The EUSR shall be responsible for the implementation of the mandate, acting under the authority of the HR.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the relevant departments thereof.
2. The PSC shall maintain a privileged link with the EUSR and shall be the EUSR’s primary point of contact with the Council. The PSC shall provide the EUSR with strategic guidance and political direction within the framework of the mandate, without prejudice to the powers of the HR.
3. The EUSR shall work in close coordination with the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the relevant departments thereof.
Financing
1. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the mandate of the EUSR in the period from 1 November 2015 to 28 February 2017 shall be EUR 7 625 000
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
2. The expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the procedures and rules applicable to the general budget of the Union.
3. The management of the expenditure shall be subject to a contract between the EUSR and the Commission. The EUSR shall be accountable to the Commission for all expenditure.
Constitution and composition of the team
1. Within the limits of the EUSR’s mandate and the corresponding financial means made available, the EUSR shall be responsible for constituting a team. The team shall include the expertise on specific policy issues as required by the mandate. The EUSR shall promptly and regularly inform the Council and the Commission of the composition of the team.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of personnel to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. Internationally contracted personnel shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, the sending institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
2. Member States, institutions of the Union and the EEAS may propose the secondment of personnel to work with the EUSR. The salary of such seconded personnel shall be covered by the Member State, the institution of the Union concerned or the EEAS, respectively. Experts seconded by Member States to the institutions of the Union or the EEAS may also be posted to work with the EUSR. Internationally contracted personnel shall have the nationality of a Member State.
3. All seconded personnel shall remain under the administrative authority of the sending Member State, the sending institution of the Union or the EEAS and shall carry out their duties and act in the interest of the mandate of the EUSR.
Privileges and immunities of the EUSR and the staff of the EUSR
The privileges, immunities and further guarantees necessary for the completion and smooth functioning of the mission of the EUSR and the members of the EUSR’s staff shall be agreed with the host country, as appropriate. Member States and the EEAS shall grant all necessary support to such effect.
Security of EU classified information
The EUSR and the members of his team shall respect the security principles and minimum standards established by Council Decision 2013/488/EU(2).
Access to information and logistical support
1. Member States, the Commission and the General Secretariat of the Council shall ensure that the EUSR is given access to any relevant information.
2. The Union delegations and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
2. The Union delegations and/or Member States, as appropriate, shall provide logistical support in the region.
Security
In accordance with the Union’s policy on the security of personnel deployed outside the Union in an operational capacity under Title V of the Treaty, the EUSR shall take all reasonably practicable measures, in accordance with the EUSR’s mandate and the security situation in the area of responsibility, for the security of all personnel under the EUSR’s direct authority, in particular by:
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility as well as the management of security incidents and including a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high-risk insurance, as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and the mandate implementation reports.
(a)
establishing a specific security plan based on guidance from the EEAS, including specific physical, organisational and procedural security measures, governing the management of the secure movement of personnel to, and within, the area of responsibility as well as the management of security incidents and including a contingency and evacuation plan;
(b)
ensuring that all personnel deployed outside the Union are covered by high-risk insurance, as required by the conditions in the area of responsibility;
(c)
ensuring that all members of the EUSR’s team to be deployed outside the Union, including locally contracted personnel, have received appropriate security training before or upon arriving in the area of responsibility, based on the risk ratings assigned to that area by the EEAS;
(d)
ensuring that all agreed recommendations made following regular security assessments are implemented, and providing the Council, the HR and the Commission with written reports on their implementation and on other security issues within the framework of the progress and the mandate implementation reports.
Reporting
The EUSR shall regularly provide the HR and the PSC with reports. The EUSR shall also report to Council working parties as necessary. Regular reports shall be circulated through the COREU network. The EUSR may provide the Foreign Affairs Council with reports. In accordance with Article 36 of the Treaty, the EUSR may be involved in briefing the European Parliament.
Coordination
1. The EUSR shall contribute to the unity, consistency and effectiveness of the Union’s action and shall help ensure that all Union instruments and Member States’ actions are engaged consistently, to attain the Union’s policy objectives. The activities of the EUSR shall be coordinated with those of the Commission, as well as with the Union’s Delegation in Pakistan. The EUSR shall provide Member States’ missions and Union delegations with regular briefings.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Missions and Heads of the Union delegations. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide the Head of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL Afghanistan) with local political guidance. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required. The EUSR shall also liaise with other international and regional actors in the field.
2. In the field, close liaison shall be maintained with the Member States’ Heads of Missions and Heads of the Union delegations. They shall make every effort to assist the EUSR in the implementation of the mandate. The EUSR shall provide the Head of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL Afghanistan) with local political guidance. The EUSR and the Civilian Operations Commander shall consult each other as required. The EUSR shall also liaise with other international and regional actors in the field.
Assistance in relation to claims
The EUSR and his staff shall assist in providing elements to respond to any claims and obligations arising from the mandates of the previous EUSRs in Afghanistan, and shall provide administrative assistance and access to relevant files for such purposes.
Review
The implementation of this Decision and its consistency with other contributions from the Union to the region shall be kept under regular review. The EUSR shall present the Council, the HR and the Commission with a progress report by the end of June 2016 and a comprehensive mandate implementation report by the end of November 2016.
Entry into force
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
It shall apply from 1 November 2015.
Pending: 32015D1937
| 28.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 282/37 |
| (1) | The Stability and Growth Pact aims to secure budgetary discipline across the Union and sets out the framework for preventing and correcting excessive government deficits, whereas strengthened surveillance of budgetary policies applies to Member States whose currency is the euro. |
| (2) | The related competences conferred upon the Commission and the Council with regard to the multilateral surveillance framework are rooted in the Treaties and Union secondary legislation. |
| (3) | The Five Presidents' Report ‘Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union’ proposes to strengthen the current economic governance framework through the creation of an advisory European Fiscal Board. It should contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission's functions in the multilateral surveillance in the euro area. This is without prejudice to the Treaty-based competences of the Commission. |
| (4) | The Board should provide the Commission with an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level. |
| (5) | As the Stability and Growth Pact centres on national budgets and does not specify the aggregate fiscal stance, the Board should also contribute to a more informed discussion within the Commission of the overall implications of budgetary policies at euro area and national level, with a view to achieving an appropriate fiscal stance for the euro area, within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. |
| (6) | The European Fiscal Board should perform its tasks independently and prepare its opinions autonomously from any national or European institution, body, office or agency. Its secretariat should be administratively attached to the Commission's Secretariat-General, |
| (a) | The Board shall provide to the Commission an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level. In this evaluation, the Board may also make suggestions for the future evolution of the Union fiscal framework. |
| (b) | The Board shall advise the Commission on the prospective fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area as a whole based on an economic judgment. It may advise the Commission on the appropriate national fiscal stances that are consistent with its advice on the aggregate fiscal stance of the euro area within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. Where it identifies risks jeopardising the proper functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, the Board shall accompany its advice with a specific consideration of the policy options available under the Stability and Growth Pact. |
| (c) | The Board shall cooperate with the national fiscal councils as referred to in Article 6(1)(b) of Council Directive 2011/85/EU(1). The cooperation between the Board and the national fiscal councils shall in particular aim at exchanging best practices and facilitating common understanding on matters related to the Union fiscal framework. |
| (d) | On the request of the President, the Board shall provide ad-hoc advice. |
| (a) | assist in the decision-making process of the Board by preparing the meetings of the Board, reviewing the documents to be discussed and monitoring the progress of work against the priorities set out by the Board; |
| (b) | provide high-quality analytical, statistical, administrative and logistical support to the Board under the direction of the Chair; |
| (c) | ensure cooperation with the national fiscal councils as necessary for supporting the mission and tasks of the Board in line with Article 2. |
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
(1) The Stability and Growth Pact aims to secure budgetary discipline across the Union and sets out the framework for preventing and correcting excessive government deficits, whereas strengthened surveillance of budgetary policies applies to Member States whose currency is the euro.
(2) The related competences conferred upon the Commission and the Council with regard to the multilateral surveillance framework are rooted in the Treaties and Union secondary legislation.
(3) The Five Presidents’ Report ‘Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union’ proposes to strengthen the current economic governance framework through the creation of an advisory European Fiscal Board. It should contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral surveillance in the euro area. This is without prejudice to the Treaty-based competences of the Commission.
(4) The Board should provide the Commission with an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level.
(5) As the Stability and Growth Pact centres on national budgets and does not specify the aggregate fiscal stance, the Board should also contribute to a more informed discussion within the Commission of the overall implications of budgetary policies at euro area and national level, with a view to achieving an appropriate fiscal stance for the euro area, within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact.
(6) The European Fiscal Board should perform its tasks independently and prepare its opinions autonomously from any national or European institution, body, office or agency. Its secretariat should be administratively attached to the Commission’s Secretariat-General,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
(1) The Stability and Growth Pact aims to secure budgetary discipline across the Union and sets out the framework for preventing and correcting excessive government deficits, whereas strengthened surveillance of budgetary policies applies to Member States whose currency is the euro.
(2) The related competences conferred upon the Commission and the Council with regard to the multilateral surveillance framework are rooted in the Treaties and Union secondary legislation.
(3) The Five Presidents’ Report ‘Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union’ proposes to strengthen the current economic governance framework through the creation of an advisory European Fiscal Board. It should contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral surveillance in the euro area. This is without prejudice to the Treaty-based competences of the Commission.
(4) The Board should provide the Commission with an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level.
(5) As the Stability and Growth Pact centres on national budgets and does not specify the aggregate fiscal stance, the Board should also contribute to a more informed discussion within the Commission of the overall implications of budgetary policies at euro area and national level, with a view to achieving an appropriate fiscal stance for the euro area, within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact.
(6) The European Fiscal Board should perform its tasks independently and prepare its opinions autonomously from any national or European institution, body, office or agency. Its secretariat should be administratively attached to the Commission’s Secretariat-General,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Establishment
Article 1
An independent European Fiscal Board (‘the Board’) is established.
Mission and tasks
Article 2
1. The Board shall contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral fiscal surveillance as set out in Articles 121, 126 and 136 TFEU as far as the euro area is concerned.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Board shall carry out the following tasks.
(a)
The Board shall provide to the Commission an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level. In this evaluation, the Board may also make suggestions for the future evolution of the Union fiscal framework.
(b)
The Board shall advise the Commission on the prospective fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area as a whole based on an economic judgment. It may advise the Commission on the appropriate national fiscal stances that are consistent with its advice on the aggregate fiscal stance of the euro area within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. Where it identifies risks jeopardising the proper functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, the Board shall accompany its advice with a specific consideration of the policy options available under the Stability and Growth Pact.
(c)
The Board shall cooperate with the national fiscal councils as referred to in Article 6(1)(b) of Council Directive 2011/85/EU(1). The cooperation between the Board and the national fiscal councils shall in particular aim at exchanging best practices and facilitating common understanding on matters related to the Union fiscal framework.
(d)
On the request of the President, the Board shall provide ad-hoc advice.
Composition
Article 3
1. The Board shall be composed of a Chair and four members.
2. The Chair shall be responsible for overseeing the performance of tasks entrusted to the Board and ensuring its proper functioning. He/She shall convene and chair meetings of the Board. The Chair and one member shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the Vice-President for the Euro and Social Dialogue and the Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs. The other three members shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the national fiscal councils, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup Working Group. For all Board members, including the Chair, an equal opportunities policy shall apply.
3. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be renowed international experts appointed on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of macroeconomics and public finances, and experience relevant to fiscal policy and budgetary management.
4. The members of the Board shall be appointed for a period of 3 years, renewable once.
5. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be appointed as Special Advisors, whose status and remuneration are defined pursuant to Articles 5, 123 and 124 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.
6. Travel and subsistence expenses incurred by the Chair and the members shall be reimbursed by the Commission in accordance with the provisions in force within the Commission. Those expenses shall be reimbursed within the limits of the available appropriations allocated under the annual procedure for the allocation of resources.
7. The Board shall be supported by a secretariat consisting of a Head of secretariat and dedicated supporting staff members. The secretariat is attached, for administrative purposes, to the Secretariat-General and shall be responsible for the following activities:
(a)
assist in the decision-making process of the Board by preparing the meetings of the Board, reviewing the documents to be discussed and monitoring the progress of work against the priorities set out by the Board;
(b)
provide high-quality analytical, statistical, administrative and logistical support to the Board under the direction of the Chair;
(c)
ensure cooperation with the national fiscal councils as necessary for supporting the mission and tasks of the Board in line with Article 2.
8. The Chief Economic Analyst established by Decision C(2015) 2665 shall exercise the function of Head of Secretariat. His/Her tasks shall include preparing the setting up of the Board. The other members of the secretariat shall be officials, temporary agents, contract agents, and seconded national experts, selected by the Head of Secretariat in agreement with the Chair. All members of the secretariat shall be selected on the basis of high levels of qualification and experience in areas relevant for the Board’s activity and be assigned or attached (mis à disposition).
Independence
Article 4
1. In the performance of their tasks, the members of the Board shall act independently and shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union’s institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public or private body. The members of the secretariat shall take instructions only from the Board.
2. The members of the Board shall disclose any potential conflict of interest with respect to a particular assessment or opinion to the Chair, who shall take any appropriate measure, and may decide that the member concerned shall not participate in the preparation and adoption of that assessment or opinion. As regards the Chair, any such difficulty shall be settled by decision of the Board.
Functioning
Article 5
1. The Board shall adopt its advice only when at least three members, including the Chair, are present. The Board shall seek to adopt advice as much as possible by consensus. If no consensus can be reached, it shall decide by a simple majority of its members present at the meeting including the Chair, abstentions not counting as a vote. In the event of a tie, the Chair shall have the casting vote.
2. The Board shall establish its Rules of Procedure.
3. The Board shall operate in accordance with its Rules of Procedure. The meetings of the Board shall not be open to the public.
4. A memorandum of understanding laying down practical modalities regarding the scope and means of cooperation, including in particular the access to relevant information, shall be concluded between the Board and relevant Commission services.
Transparency
Article 6
The Board shall publish an annual report of its activities, which shall include summaries of its advice and evaluations rendered to the Commission.
Final provisions
Article 7
This decision takes effect on 1 November 2015.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
(1) The Stability and Growth Pact aims to secure budgetary discipline across the Union and sets out the framework for preventing and correcting excessive government deficits, whereas strengthened surveillance of budgetary policies applies to Member States whose currency is the euro.
(2) The related competences conferred upon the Commission and the Council with regard to the multilateral surveillance framework are rooted in the Treaties and Union secondary legislation.
(3) The Five Presidents’ Report ‘Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union’ proposes to strengthen the current economic governance framework through the creation of an advisory European Fiscal Board. It should contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral surveillance in the euro area. This is without prejudice to the Treaty-based competences of the Commission.
(4) The Board should provide the Commission with an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level.
(5) As the Stability and Growth Pact centres on national budgets and does not specify the aggregate fiscal stance, the Board should also contribute to a more informed discussion within the Commission of the overall implications of budgetary policies at euro area and national level, with a view to achieving an appropriate fiscal stance for the euro area, within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact.
(6) The European Fiscal Board should perform its tasks independently and prepare its opinions autonomously from any national or European institution, body, office or agency. Its secretariat should be administratively attached to the Commission’s Secretariat-General,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
(1) The Stability and Growth Pact aims to secure budgetary discipline across the Union and sets out the framework for preventing and correcting excessive government deficits, whereas strengthened surveillance of budgetary policies applies to Member States whose currency is the euro.
(2) The related competences conferred upon the Commission and the Council with regard to the multilateral surveillance framework are rooted in the Treaties and Union secondary legislation.
(3) The Five Presidents’ Report ‘Completing Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union’ proposes to strengthen the current economic governance framework through the creation of an advisory European Fiscal Board. It should contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral surveillance in the euro area. This is without prejudice to the Treaty-based competences of the Commission.
(4) The Board should provide the Commission with an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level.
(5) As the Stability and Growth Pact centres on national budgets and does not specify the aggregate fiscal stance, the Board should also contribute to a more informed discussion within the Commission of the overall implications of budgetary policies at euro area and national level, with a view to achieving an appropriate fiscal stance for the euro area, within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact.
(6) The European Fiscal Board should perform its tasks independently and prepare its opinions autonomously from any national or European institution, body, office or agency. Its secretariat should be administratively attached to the Commission’s Secretariat-General,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Establishment
An independent European Fiscal Board (‘the Board’) is established.
Mission and tasks
1. The Board shall contribute in an advisory capacity to the exercise of the Commission’s functions in the multilateral fiscal surveillance as set out in Articles 121, 126 and 136 TFEU as far as the euro area is concerned.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Board shall carry out the following tasks.
(a)
The Board shall provide to the Commission an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level. In this evaluation, the Board may also make suggestions for the future evolution of the Union fiscal framework.
(b)
The Board shall advise the Commission on the prospective fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area as a whole based on an economic judgment. It may advise the Commission on the appropriate national fiscal stances that are consistent with its advice on the aggregate fiscal stance of the euro area within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. Where it identifies risks jeopardising the proper functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, the Board shall accompany its advice with a specific consideration of the policy options available under the Stability and Growth Pact.
(c)
The Board shall cooperate with the national fiscal councils as referred to in Article 6(1)(b) of Council Directive 2011/85/EU(1). The cooperation between the Board and the national fiscal councils shall in particular aim at exchanging best practices and facilitating common understanding on matters related to the Union fiscal framework.
(d)
On the request of the President, the Board shall provide ad-hoc advice.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Board shall carry out the following tasks.
(a)
The Board shall provide to the Commission an evaluation of the implementation of the Union fiscal framework, in particular regarding the horizontal consistency of the decisions and implementation of budgetary surveillance, cases of particularly serious non-compliance with the rules, and the appropriateness of the actual fiscal stance at euro area and national level. In this evaluation, the Board may also make suggestions for the future evolution of the Union fiscal framework.
(b)
The Board shall advise the Commission on the prospective fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area as a whole based on an economic judgment. It may advise the Commission on the appropriate national fiscal stances that are consistent with its advice on the aggregate fiscal stance of the euro area within the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact. Where it identifies risks jeopardising the proper functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union, the Board shall accompany its advice with a specific consideration of the policy options available under the Stability and Growth Pact.
(c)
The Board shall cooperate with the national fiscal councils as referred to in Article 6(1)(b) of Council Directive 2011/85/EU(1). The cooperation between the Board and the national fiscal councils shall in particular aim at exchanging best practices and facilitating common understanding on matters related to the Union fiscal framework.
(d)
On the request of the President, the Board shall provide ad-hoc advice.
Composition
1. The Board shall be composed of a Chair and four members.
2. The Chair shall be responsible for overseeing the performance of tasks entrusted to the Board and ensuring its proper functioning. He/She shall convene and chair meetings of the Board. The Chair and one member shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the Vice-President for the Euro and Social Dialogue and the Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs. The other three members shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the national fiscal councils, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup Working Group. For all Board members, including the Chair, an equal opportunities policy shall apply.
3. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be renowed international experts appointed on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of macroeconomics and public finances, and experience relevant to fiscal policy and budgetary management.
4. The members of the Board shall be appointed for a period of 3 years, renewable once.
5. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be appointed as Special Advisors, whose status and remuneration are defined pursuant to Articles 5, 123 and 124 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.
6. Travel and subsistence expenses incurred by the Chair and the members shall be reimbursed by the Commission in accordance with the provisions in force within the Commission. Those expenses shall be reimbursed within the limits of the available appropriations allocated under the annual procedure for the allocation of resources.
7. The Board shall be supported by a secretariat consisting of a Head of secretariat and dedicated supporting staff members. The secretariat is attached, for administrative purposes, to the Secretariat-General and shall be responsible for the following activities:
(a)
assist in the decision-making process of the Board by preparing the meetings of the Board, reviewing the documents to be discussed and monitoring the progress of work against the priorities set out by the Board;
(b)
provide high-quality analytical, statistical, administrative and logistical support to the Board under the direction of the Chair;
(c)
ensure cooperation with the national fiscal councils as necessary for supporting the mission and tasks of the Board in line with Article 2.
8. The Chief Economic Analyst established by Decision C(2015) 2665 shall exercise the function of Head of Secretariat. His/Her tasks shall include preparing the setting up of the Board. The other members of the secretariat shall be officials, temporary agents, contract agents, and seconded national experts, selected by the Head of Secretariat in agreement with the Chair. All members of the secretariat shall be selected on the basis of high levels of qualification and experience in areas relevant for the Board’s activity and be assigned or attached (mis à disposition).
2. The Chair shall be responsible for overseeing the performance of tasks entrusted to the Board and ensuring its proper functioning. He/She shall convene and chair meetings of the Board. The Chair and one member shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the Vice-President for the Euro and Social Dialogue and the Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs. The other three members shall be appointed by the Commission upon proposal of the President, after having consulted the national fiscal councils, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup Working Group. For all Board members, including the Chair, an equal opportunities policy shall apply.
3. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be renowed international experts appointed on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of macroeconomics and public finances, and experience relevant to fiscal policy and budgetary management.
4. The members of the Board shall be appointed for a period of 3 years, renewable once.
5. The Chair and the members of the Board shall be appointed as Special Advisors, whose status and remuneration are defined pursuant to Articles 5, 123 and 124 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.
6. Travel and subsistence expenses incurred by the Chair and the members shall be reimbursed by the Commission in accordance with the provisions in force within the Commission. Those expenses shall be reimbursed within the limits of the available appropriations allocated under the annual procedure for the allocation of resources.
7. The Board shall be supported by a secretariat consisting of a Head of secretariat and dedicated supporting staff members. The secretariat is attached, for administrative purposes, to the Secretariat-General and shall be responsible for the following activities:
(a)
assist in the decision-making process of the Board by preparing the meetings of the Board, reviewing the documents to be discussed and monitoring the progress of work against the priorities set out by the Board;
(b)
provide high-quality analytical, statistical, administrative and logistical support to the Board under the direction of the Chair;
(c)
ensure cooperation with the national fiscal councils as necessary for supporting the mission and tasks of the Board in line with Article 2.
8. The Chief Economic Analyst established by Decision C(2015) 2665 shall exercise the function of Head of Secretariat. His/Her tasks shall include preparing the setting up of the Board. The other members of the secretariat shall be officials, temporary agents, contract agents, and seconded national experts, selected by the Head of Secretariat in agreement with the Chair. All members of the secretariat shall be selected on the basis of high levels of qualification and experience in areas relevant for the Board’s activity and be assigned or attached (mis à disposition).
Independence
1. In the performance of their tasks, the members of the Board shall act independently and shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union’s institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public or private body. The members of the secretariat shall take instructions only from the Board.
2. The members of the Board shall disclose any potential conflict of interest with respect to a particular assessment or opinion to the Chair, who shall take any appropriate measure, and may decide that the member concerned shall not participate in the preparation and adoption of that assessment or opinion. As regards the Chair, any such difficulty shall be settled by decision of the Board.
2. The members of the Board shall disclose any potential conflict of interest with respect to a particular assessment or opinion to the Chair, who shall take any appropriate measure, and may decide that the member concerned shall not participate in the preparation and adoption of that assessment or opinion. As regards the Chair, any such difficulty shall be settled by decision of the Board.
Functioning
1. The Board shall adopt its advice only when at least three members, including the Chair, are present. The Board shall seek to adopt advice as much as possible by consensus. If no consensus can be reached, it shall decide by a simple majority of its members present at the meeting including the Chair, abstentions not counting as a vote. In the event of a tie, the Chair shall have the casting vote.
2. The Board shall establish its Rules of Procedure.
3. The Board shall operate in accordance with its Rules of Procedure. The meetings of the Board shall not be open to the public.
4. A memorandum of understanding laying down practical modalities regarding the scope and means of cooperation, including in particular the access to relevant information, shall be concluded between the Board and relevant Commission services.
2. The Board shall establish its Rules of Procedure.
3. The Board shall operate in accordance with its Rules of Procedure. The meetings of the Board shall not be open to the public.
4. A memorandum of understanding laying down practical modalities regarding the scope and means of cooperation, including in particular the access to relevant information, shall be concluded between the Board and relevant Commission services.
Transparency
The Board shall publish an annual report of its activities, which shall include summaries of its advice and evaluations rendered to the Commission.
Final provisions
This decision takes effect on 1 November 2015.
Pending: 32015D1849
| 15.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 268/33 |
| (1) | Plant health checks carried out by Member States on consignments of certain plants and plant products originating in Ghana revealed that a high number of these plants and plant products were infested with harmful organisms, mainly non-EuropeanTephritidae, likeCeratitis cosyra(Walker),Thrips palmiKarny orBemisia tabaci(Genn.). The number of consignments from Ghana intercepted with harmful organisms in the Union has shown a significant upward trend since 2009. Most of the interceptions concern plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL. other thanS. lycopersicumL. (hereinafter ‘the specified commodities’). |
| (2) | Audits carried out by the Commission in Ghana in 2012 and 2015 revealed shortcomings in the phytosanitary export certification system. Despite assurances and action announced by the competent authorities of Ghana, the number of interceptions increased further. |
| (3) | In the light of the outcome of those audits and the number of interceptions, the Commission concluded that the current phytosanitary safeguards of Ghana are insufficient to ensure that consignments of plants and plant products originating in Ghana are free from harmful organisms or to avoid the risk of introduction of harmful organisms into the Union through the import of the specified commodities. |
| (4) | Measures should be taken to address the risk posed by the import into the Union of the specified commodities. Consequently, the introduction into the Union of the specified commodities should be prohibited. |
| (5) | The measures should remain in place until 31 December 2016 in order to address the ongoing risk of introduction, while allowing Ghana to upgrade its certification system. |
| (6) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, |
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3), thereof,
(1) Plant health checks carried out by Member States on consignments of certain plants and plant products originating in Ghana revealed that a high number of these plants and plant products were infested with harmful organisms, mainly non-EuropeanTephritidae, likeCeratitis cosyra(Walker),Thrips palmiKarny orBemisia tabaci(Genn.). The number of consignments from Ghana intercepted with harmful organisms in the Union has shown a significant upward trend since 2009. Most of the interceptions concern plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL. other thanS. lycopersicumL. (hereinafter ‘the specified commodities’).
(2) Audits carried out by the Commission in Ghana in 2012 and 2015 revealed shortcomings in the phytosanitary export certification system. Despite assurances and action announced by the competent authorities of Ghana, the number of interceptions increased further.
(3) In the light of the outcome of those audits and the number of interceptions, the Commission concluded that the current phytosanitary safeguards of Ghana are insufficient to ensure that consignments of plants and plant products originating in Ghana are free from harmful organisms or to avoid the risk of introduction of harmful organisms into the Union through the import of the specified commodities.
(4) Measures should be taken to address the risk posed by the import into the Union of the specified commodities. Consequently, the introduction into the Union of the specified commodities should be prohibited.
(5) The measures should remain in place until 31 December 2016 in order to address the ongoing risk of introduction, while allowing Ghana to upgrade its certification system.
(6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3), thereof,
(1) Plant health checks carried out by Member States on consignments of certain plants and plant products originating in Ghana revealed that a high number of these plants and plant products were infested with harmful organisms, mainly non-EuropeanTephritidae, likeCeratitis cosyra(Walker),Thrips palmiKarny orBemisia tabaci(Genn.). The number of consignments from Ghana intercepted with harmful organisms in the Union has shown a significant upward trend since 2009. Most of the interceptions concern plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL. other thanS. lycopersicumL. (hereinafter ‘the specified commodities’).
(2) Audits carried out by the Commission in Ghana in 2012 and 2015 revealed shortcomings in the phytosanitary export certification system. Despite assurances and action announced by the competent authorities of Ghana, the number of interceptions increased further.
(3) In the light of the outcome of those audits and the number of interceptions, the Commission concluded that the current phytosanitary safeguards of Ghana are insufficient to ensure that consignments of plants and plant products originating in Ghana are free from harmful organisms or to avoid the risk of introduction of harmful organisms into the Union through the import of the specified commodities.
(4) Measures should be taken to address the risk posed by the import into the Union of the specified commodities. Consequently, the introduction into the Union of the specified commodities should be prohibited.
(5) The measures should remain in place until 31 December 2016 in order to address the ongoing risk of introduction, while allowing Ghana to upgrade its certification system.
(6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The introduction into the territory of the Union of plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL., other thanS. lycopersicumL. originating in Ghana shall be prohibited.
Article 2
Article 1 shall apply until 31 December 2016.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3), thereof,
(1) Plant health checks carried out by Member States on consignments of certain plants and plant products originating in Ghana revealed that a high number of these plants and plant products were infested with harmful organisms, mainly non-EuropeanTephritidae, likeCeratitis cosyra(Walker),Thrips palmiKarny orBemisia tabaci(Genn.). The number of consignments from Ghana intercepted with harmful organisms in the Union has shown a significant upward trend since 2009. Most of the interceptions concern plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL. other thanS. lycopersicumL. (hereinafter ‘the specified commodities’).
(2) Audits carried out by the Commission in Ghana in 2012 and 2015 revealed shortcomings in the phytosanitary export certification system. Despite assurances and action announced by the competent authorities of Ghana, the number of interceptions increased further.
(3) In the light of the outcome of those audits and the number of interceptions, the Commission concluded that the current phytosanitary safeguards of Ghana are insufficient to ensure that consignments of plants and plant products originating in Ghana are free from harmful organisms or to avoid the risk of introduction of harmful organisms into the Union through the import of the specified commodities.
(4) Measures should be taken to address the risk posed by the import into the Union of the specified commodities. Consequently, the introduction into the Union of the specified commodities should be prohibited.
(5) The measures should remain in place until 31 December 2016 in order to address the ongoing risk of introduction, while allowing Ghana to upgrade its certification system.
(6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community(1), and in particular the third sentence of Article 16(3), thereof,
(1) Plant health checks carried out by Member States on consignments of certain plants and plant products originating in Ghana revealed that a high number of these plants and plant products were infested with harmful organisms, mainly non-EuropeanTephritidae, likeCeratitis cosyra(Walker),Thrips palmiKarny orBemisia tabaci(Genn.). The number of consignments from Ghana intercepted with harmful organisms in the Union has shown a significant upward trend since 2009. Most of the interceptions concern plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL. other thanS. lycopersicumL. (hereinafter ‘the specified commodities’).
(2) Audits carried out by the Commission in Ghana in 2012 and 2015 revealed shortcomings in the phytosanitary export certification system. Despite assurances and action announced by the competent authorities of Ghana, the number of interceptions increased further.
(3) In the light of the outcome of those audits and the number of interceptions, the Commission concluded that the current phytosanitary safeguards of Ghana are insufficient to ensure that consignments of plants and plant products originating in Ghana are free from harmful organisms or to avoid the risk of introduction of harmful organisms into the Union through the import of the specified commodities.
(4) Measures should be taken to address the risk posed by the import into the Union of the specified commodities. Consequently, the introduction into the Union of the specified commodities should be prohibited.
(5) The measures should remain in place until 31 December 2016 in order to address the ongoing risk of introduction, while allowing Ghana to upgrade its certification system.
(6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The introduction into the territory of the Union of plants other than seeds, ofCapsicumL.,LagenariaSer.,LuffaMill.,MomordicaL. andSolanumL., other thanS. lycopersicumL. originating in Ghana shall be prohibited.
Article 1 shall apply until 31 December 2016.
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Pending: 32015D1601
| 24.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 248/80 |
| (1) | According to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned. |
| (2) | According to Article 80 TFEU, the policies of the Union in the area of border checks, asylum and immigration and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, and Union acts adopted in this area are to contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle. |
| (3) | The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in that region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate action to be taken in response to the crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism. |
| (4) | At its meeting of 23 April 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, to reinforce internal solidarity and responsibility and committed itself in particular to increasing emergency assistance to frontline Member States and to considering options for organising emergency relocation between Member States on a voluntary basis, as well as to deploying European Asylum Support Office (EASO) teams in frontline Member States for the joint processing of applications for international protection, including registration and fingerprinting. |
| (5) | In its resolution of 28 April 2015, the European Parliament reiterated the need for the Union to base its response to the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and to step up its efforts in this area towards those Member States which receive the highest number of refugees and applicants for international protection in either absolute or relative terms. |
| (6) | Besides measures in the area of asylum, Member States at the frontline should increase their efforts to set up measures to cope with mixed migration flows at the external borders of the European Union. Such measures should safeguard the rights of those in need of international protection and prevent irregular migration. |
| (7) | At its meeting of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/resettlement, return/readmission/reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. The European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over 2 years, from Italy and from Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection, in which all Member States would participate. |
| (8) | The specific situations of the Member States result in particular from migratory flows in other geographical regions, such as the Western Balkans migratory route. |
| (9) | Several Member States were confronted with a significant increase in the total number of migrants, including applicants for international protection, arriving on their territories in 2014 and some continue to be so confronted in 2015. Emergency financial assistance by the Commission and operational support by EASO were provided to several Member States to help them cope with this increase. |
| (10) | Among the Member States witnessing situations of considerable pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems. |
| (11) | On 20 July 2015, reflecting the specific situations of Member States, a Resolution of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on relocating from Greece and Italy 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection was adopted by consensus. Over a period of 2 years, 24 000 persons will be relocated from Italy and 16 000 persons will be relocated from Greece. On 14 September 2015, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2015/1523(2), which provided for a temporary and exceptional relocation mechanism from Italy and Greece to other Member States of persons in clear need of international protection. |
| (12) | During recent months, the migratory pressure at the southern external land and sea borders has again sharply increased, and the shift of migration flows has continued from the central to the eastern Mediterranean and towards the Western Balkans route, as a result of the increasing number of migrants arriving in and from Greece. In view of the situation, further provisional measures to relieve the asylum pressure from Italy and Greece should be warranted. |
| (13) | According to data of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (Frontex), the central and eastern Mediterranean routes were the main areas for irregular border crossing into the Union in the first 8 months of 2015. Since the beginning of 2015, approximately 116 000 migrants arrived in Italy in an irregular manner, (including approximately 10 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 34 691 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August, 42 356, an increase of 20 %. A strong increase was also witnessed by Greece in 2015, with more than 211 000 irregular migrants reaching the country (including approximately 28 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 53 624 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August 137 000, an increase of 250 %). A significant proportion of the total number of irregular migrants detected in those two regions included migrants of nationalities which, based on the Eurostat data, meet a high Union-level recognition rate. |
| (14) | According to Eurostat and EASO figures, 39 183 persons applied for international protection in Italy between January and July 2015, compared to 30 755 in the same period of 2014 (an increase of 27 %). A similar increase in the number of applications was witnessed by Greece with 7 475 applicants (an increase of 30 %). |
| (15) | Many actions have been taken so far to support Italy and Greece in the framework of the migration and asylum policy, including by providing them with substantial emergency assistance and EASO operational support. Italy and Greece were the second and third largest beneficiaries of funding disbursed during the period 2007-2013 under the General Programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’ (SOLID), and, in addition, received substantial emergency funding. Italy and Greece will likely continue to be the main beneficiaries of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in 2014-2020. |
| (16) | Due to the ongoing instability and conflicts in the immediate neighbourhood of Italy and Greece, and the repercussions in migratory flows on other Member States, it is very likely that a significant and increased pressure will continue to be put on their migration and asylum systems, with a significant proportion of the migrants who may be in need of international protection. This demonstrates the critical need to show solidarity towards Italy and Greece and to complement the actions taken so far to support them with provisional measures in the area of asylum and migration. |
| (17) | On 22 September 2015, the Council noted the willingness and readiness of Member States to take part, in accordance with the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, which govern the Union policy on asylum and migration, in the relocation of 120 000 persons in clear need of international protection. The Council therefore decided to adopt this Decision. |
| (18) | It should be recalled that Decision (EU) 2015/1523 sets out an obligation for Italy and Greece to provide structural solutions to address exceptional pressures on their asylum and migration systems, by establishing a solid and strategic framework for responding to the crisis situation and intensifying the ongoing reform process in these areas. The roadmaps which Italy and Greece have presented to that end should be updated to take this Decision into account. |
| (19) | Bearing in mind that the European Council agreed on a set of interlinked measures, the Commission should be entrusted with the power to suspend, where appropriate and having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, the application of this Decision for a limited period where Italy or Greece does not respect its commitments in this regard. |
| (20) | As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants should be proportionally relocated from Italy and Greece to other Member States. The Council and the Commission should keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States. The Commission should submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to address the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States. In doing so, it should take into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State.Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State, that Member State should, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending Decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which should include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in those areas, as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision with a view to allowing it better to cope, after the end of the application of this Decision, with a possible increased inflow of migrants on its territory. |
| (21) | If any Member State should be confronted with a similar emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, on the basis of Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the obligations of that Member State provided for in this Decision. |
| (22) | In accordance with Article 78(3) TFEU, the measures envisaged for the benefit of Italy and of Greece should be of a provisional nature. A period of 24 months is reasonable in view of ensuring that the measures provided for in this Decision have a real impact in respect of supporting Italy and Greece in dealing with the significant migration flows on their territories. |
| (23) | The measures to relocate from Italy and from Greece, provided for in this Decision, entail a temporary derogation from the rule set out in Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3)according to which Italy and Greece would otherwise have been responsible for the examination of an application for international protection based on the criteria set out in Chapter III of that Regulation, as well as a temporary derogation from the procedural steps, including the time limits, laid down in Articles 21, 22 and 29 of that Regulation. The other provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, including the implementing rules set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003(4)and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014(5), remain applicable, including the rules contained therein on the obligation for the transferring Member States to meet the costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation and on the cooperation on transfers between Member States, as well as on transmission of information through the DubliNet electronic communication network. This Decision also entails a derogation from the consent of the applicant for international protection as referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6). |
| (24) | Relocation measures do not absolve Member States from applying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 in full, including the provisions related to family reunification, the special protection of unaccompanied minors, and the discretionary clause on humanitarian grounds. |
| (25) | A choice had to be made in respect of the criteria to be applied when deciding which and how many applicants are to be relocated from Italy and from Greece, without prejudice to decisions at national level on asylum applications. A clear and workable system is envisaged based on a threshold of the average rate at Union level of decisions granting international protection in the procedures at first instance, as defined by Eurostat, out of the total number at Union level of decisions on applications for international protection taken at first instance, based on the latest available statistics. On the one hand, this threshold would have to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that all applicants in clear need of international protection would be in a position to fully and swiftly enjoy their protection rights in the Member State of relocation. On the other hand, it would have to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, applicants who are likely to receive a negative decision on their application from being relocated to another Member State, and therefore from prolonging unduly their stay in the Union. A threshold of 75 %, based on the latest available updated Eurostat quarterly data for decisions at first instance, should be used in this Decision. |
| (26) | The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure on Italy and on Greece, in particular by relocating a significant number of applicants in clear need of international protection who will have arrived in the territory of Italy or Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third-country nationals who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in 2015, and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 120 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 43 % of the total number of third-country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in July and August 2015. The relocation measure foreseen in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other, given the overall available figures on irregular border crossings in 2015. Given the figures at stake, 13 % of these applicants should be relocated from Italy, 42 % from Greece and 45 % should be relocated as provided for in this Decision. |
| (27) | Within 3 months of the entry into force of this Decision, a Member State may, in exceptional circumstances and giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, notify the Council and the Commission that it is unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with this Decision. Such exceptional circumstances include, in particular, a situation characterised by a sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a magnitude as to place extreme pressure even on a well prepared asylum system otherwise functioning in line with the relevant Unionacquison asylum or a risk of sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a high probability that it warrants an immediate action. Following an assessment, the Commission should submit proposals to the Council for an implementing decision regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocation of the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the duration of this Decision. |
| (28) | In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the relocation in the case of proportional relocation of 54 000 applicants from Italy and Greece to the other Member States, in the case where the participation of one or more Member States in the relocation of applicants should be suspended, or in the case where, following relevant notifications to the Council, other Member State(s) or Associated States take part in the relocation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council.The conferral of those powers upon the Council is justified in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures, which touch on national powers regarding the admission of third country nationals on the territory of the Member States and the need to be able to adapt swiftly to rapidly evolving situations. |
| (29) | The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) set up by Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides support to burden-sharing operations agreed between Member States, and is open to new policy developments in that field. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides for the possibility for Member States to implement actions related to the transfer of applicants for international protection as part of their national programmes, while Article 18 of that Regulation provides for the possibility of a lump sum payment of EUR 6 000 for the transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from another Member State. |
| (30) | With a view to implementing the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and taking into account that this Decision constitutes a further policy development in this field, it is appropriate to ensure that the Member States that relocate, pursuant to this Decision, applicants from Italy and Greece who are in clear need of international protection, receive a lump sum for each relocated person which is identical to the lump sum provided for in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014, namely EUR 6 000, and is implemented by applying the same procedures. This entails a limited, temporary derogation from Article 18 of that Regulation because the lump sum should be paid in respect of relocated applicants rather than in respect of beneficiaries of international protection. Such a temporary extension of the scope of potential recipients of the lump sum appears indeed to be an integral part of the emergency scheme set up by this Decision. Moreover, with regard to the costs for the transfer of persons relocated pursuant to this Decision, it is appropriate to provide that Italy and Greece receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500 for each person relocated from their respective territories, taking into account the actual costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation. Member States should be entitled to receive additional pre-financing to be paid in 2016 following the revision of their national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund to implement actions under this Decision. |
| (31) | It is necessary to ensure that a swift relocation procedure is put in place and to accompany the implementation of the provisional measures by close administrative cooperation between Member States and operational support provided by EASO. |
| (32) | National security and public order should be taken into consideration throughout the relocation procedure, until the transfer of the applicant is implemented. In full respect of the fundamental rights of the applicant, including the relevant rules on data protection, where a Member State has reasonable grounds for regarding an applicant as a danger to its national security or public order, it should inform the other Member States thereof. |
| (33) | When deciding which applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and from Greece, priority should be given to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(7). In this respect, any special needs of applicants, including health, should be of primary concern. The best interests of the child should always be a primary consideration. |
| (34) | The integration of applicants in clear need of international protection into the host society is the cornerstone of a properly functioning Common European Asylum System. Therefore, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the specific qualifications and characteristics of the applicants concerned, such as their language skills and other individual indications based on demonstrated family, cultural or social ties which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and to the necessity of ensuring a fair distribution of those applicants among Member States. With due respect for the principle of non-discrimination, Member States of relocation may indicate their preferences for applicants based on the above information on the basis of which Italy and Greece, in consultation with EASO and, where applicable, liaison officers, may compile lists of possible applicants identified for relocation to that Member State. |
| (35) | The legal and procedural safeguards set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 remain applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision. In addition, applicants should be informed of the relocation procedure set out in this Decision and be notified with the relocation decision which constitutes a transfer decision within the meaning of Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. Considering that an applicant does not have the right under Union law to choose the Member State responsible for his or her application, the applicant should have the right to an effective remedy against the relocation decision in line with Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, only in view of ensuring respect for his or her fundamental rights. In line with Article 27 of that Regulation, Member States may provide in their national law that the appeal against the transfer decision does not automatically suspend the transfer of the applicant but that the person concerned has the opportunity to request a suspension of the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal. |
| (36) | Before and after being transferred to the Member States of relocation, applicants enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in Directive 2013/32/EU(8)and Directive 2013/33/EU(9)of the European Parliament and of the Council, including in relation to their special reception and procedural needs. In addition, Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10)remains applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision, and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(11)is applicable for the returning of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory. The above is subject to the limitations in the application of those Directives. |
| (37) | In line with the Unionacquis, a robust mechanism of identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure should be ensured by Italy and Greece so as to quickly identify the persons in need of international protection who are eligible for relocation and to identify the migrants who do not qualify for international protection and should therefore be returned. This should also apply to persons who arrived on the territory of Italy or Greece between 24 March and 25 September 2015 in order for them to be eligible for relocation. When voluntary return is not practicable and other measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC are not adequate to prevent secondary movements, detention measures in line with Chapter IV of that Directive should be applied urgently and effectively. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure should be excluded from relocation. |
| (38) | Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States which could hamper the efficient application of this Decision. In particular, Member States should take the necessary preventive measures in the field of access to social benefits and legal remedies, in accordance with Union law. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of irregular onward movement within the Member States and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, they are entitled to the rights attached to international protection only in that Member State. |
| (39) | Additionally, in line with the objectives set out in Directive 2013/33/EU, the harmonisation of reception conditions amongst Member States should help to limit secondary movements of applicants for international protection influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception. With a view to reaching the same objective, Member States should consider imposing reporting obligations, and providing applicants for international protection with material reception conditions that include housing, food and clothing only in kind, as well as, where appropriate, ensuring that applicants are directly transferred to the Member State of relocation. Likewise, during the period of the examination of applications for international protection, as provided for in the asylum and Schengenacquis, except for serious humanitarian reasons, Member States should neither provide applicants with national travel documents, nor give them other incentives, such as financial ones, which could facilitate their irregular movements to other Member States. In case of irregular movements to other Member States, applicants for or beneficiaries of international protection should be required to go back to the Member State of relocation, and that Member State should take those persons back without delay. |
| (40) | In order to avoid secondary movements of beneficiaries of international protection, Member States should also inform the beneficiaries about the conditions under which they may legally enter and stay in another Member State, and should be able to impose reporting obligations. Pursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC, Member States should require a beneficiary of international protection who is staying irregularly on their territories to go back immediately to the Member State of relocation. In case the person refuses to return voluntarily, return to the Member State of relocation should be enforced. |
| (41) | Furthermore, if provided for in national law, in the case of enforced return to the Member State of relocation, the Member State which enforced the return may decide to issue a national entry ban that would prevent the beneficiary, for a certain period of time, from re-entering the territory of that specific Member State. |
| (42) | As the purpose of this Decision is to address an emergency situation and to support Italy and Greece in reinforcing their asylum systems, it should allow them to make, with the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland on the relocation of persons falling within the scope of this Decision. Such arrangements should also reflect the core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants as well as those relating to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. |
| (43) | The specific support provided to Italy and to Greece through the relocation scheme should be complemented by additional measures, from the arrival of third-country nationals on the territory of Italy or of Greece until the completion of all applicable procedures, coordinated by EASO and other relevant Agencies, such as Frontex coordinating the return of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC. |
| (44) | Since the objectives of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. |
| (45) | This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
| (46) | In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application. |
| (47) | In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application. |
| (48) | In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council should fix the number of applicants to be relocated to that Member State. The Council should also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion. |
| (49) | In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application. |
| (50) | In view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force on the date following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union, |
| (a) | ‘application for international protection’ means an application for international protection as defined in point (h) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(12); |
| (b) | ‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken; |
| (c) | ‘international protection’ means refugee status and subsidiary protection status as defined in points (e) and (g), respectively, of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU; |
| (d) | ‘family members’ means family members as defined in point (g) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013; |
| (e) | ‘relocation’ means the transfer of an applicant from the territory of the Member State which the criteria laid down in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 indicate as responsible for examining his or her application for international protection to the territory of the Member State of relocation; |
| (f) | ‘Member State of relocation’ means the Member State which becomes responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of an applicant following his or her relocation in the territory of that Member State. |
| (a) | 15 600 applicants shall be relocated from Italy to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex I; |
| (b) | 50 400 applicants shall be relocated from Greece to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex II; |
| (c) | 54 000 applicants shall be relocated to the territory of the other Member States, proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II, either in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article or through an amendment of this Decision, as referred to in Article 1(2) and in paragraph 3 of this Article. |
| (a) | the screening of the third-country nationals arriving in Italy and Greece, including their clear identification, fingerprinting and registration, and, where applicable, the registration of their application for international protection and, upon request by Italy or Greece, their initial processing; |
| (b) | the provision to applicants or potential applicants that could be subject to relocation pursuant to this Decision of information and specific assistance that they may need; |
| (c) | the preparation and organisation of return operations for third-country nationals who either did not apply for international protection or whose right to remain on the territory has ceased. |
| (a) | the Member State of relocation shall receive a lump sum of EUR 6 000; |
| (b) | Italy or Greece shall receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500. |
| Allocation per Member State (15 600 applicants relocated) | |
| Austria | 462 |
| Belgium | 579 |
| Bulgaria | 201 |
| Croatia | 134 |
| Cyprus | 35 |
| Czech Republic | 376 |
| Estonia | 47 |
| Finland | 304 |
| France | 3 064 |
| Germany | 4 027 |
| Hungary | 306 |
| Latvia | 66 |
| Lithuania | 98 |
| Luxembourg | 56 |
| Malta | 17 |
| Netherlands | 922 |
| Poland | 1 201 |
| Portugal | 388 |
| Romania | 585 |
| Slovakia | 190 |
| Slovenia | 80 |
| Spain | 1 896 |
| Sweden | 567 |
| Allocation per Member State (50 400 applicants relocated) | |
| Austria | 1 491 |
| Belgium | 1 869 |
| Bulgaria | 651 |
| Croatia | 434 |
| Cyprus | 112 |
| Czech Republic | 1 215 |
| Estonia | 152 |
| Finland | 982 |
| France | 9 898 |
| Germany | 13 009 |
| Hungary | 988 |
| Latvia | 215 |
| Lithuania | 318 |
| Luxembourg | 181 |
| Malta | 54 |
| Netherlands | 2 978 |
| Poland | 3 881 |
| Portugal | 1 254 |
| Romania | 1 890 |
| Slovakia | 612 |
| Slovenia | 257 |
| Spain | 6 127 |
| Sweden | 1 830 |
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 78(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),
(1) According to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned.
(2) According to Article 80 TFEU, the policies of the Union in the area of border checks, asylum and immigration and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, and Union acts adopted in this area are to contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.
(3) The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in that region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate action to be taken in response to the crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism.
(4) At its meeting of 23 April 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, to reinforce internal solidarity and responsibility and committed itself in particular to increasing emergency assistance to frontline Member States and to considering options for organising emergency relocation between Member States on a voluntary basis, as well as to deploying European Asylum Support Office (EASO) teams in frontline Member States for the joint processing of applications for international protection, including registration and fingerprinting.
(5) In its resolution of 28 April 2015, the European Parliament reiterated the need for the Union to base its response to the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and to step up its efforts in this area towards those Member States which receive the highest number of refugees and applicants for international protection in either absolute or relative terms.
(6) Besides measures in the area of asylum, Member States at the frontline should increase their efforts to set up measures to cope with mixed migration flows at the external borders of the European Union. Such measures should safeguard the rights of those in need of international protection and prevent irregular migration.
(7) At its meeting of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/resettlement, return/readmission/reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. The European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over 2 years, from Italy and from Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection, in which all Member States would participate.
(8) The specific situations of the Member States result in particular from migratory flows in other geographical regions, such as the Western Balkans migratory route.
(9) Several Member States were confronted with a significant increase in the total number of migrants, including applicants for international protection, arriving on their territories in 2014 and some continue to be so confronted in 2015. Emergency financial assistance by the Commission and operational support by EASO were provided to several Member States to help them cope with this increase.
(10) Among the Member States witnessing situations of considerable pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems.
(11) On 20 July 2015, reflecting the specific situations of Member States, a Resolution of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on relocating from Greece and Italy 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection was adopted by consensus. Over a period of 2 years, 24 000 persons will be relocated from Italy and 16 000 persons will be relocated from Greece. On 14 September 2015, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2015/1523(2), which provided for a temporary and exceptional relocation mechanism from Italy and Greece to other Member States of persons in clear need of international protection.
(12) During recent months, the migratory pressure at the southern external land and sea borders has again sharply increased, and the shift of migration flows has continued from the central to the eastern Mediterranean and towards the Western Balkans route, as a result of the increasing number of migrants arriving in and from Greece. In view of the situation, further provisional measures to relieve the asylum pressure from Italy and Greece should be warranted.
(13) According to data of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (Frontex), the central and eastern Mediterranean routes were the main areas for irregular border crossing into the Union in the first 8 months of 2015. Since the beginning of 2015, approximately 116 000 migrants arrived in Italy in an irregular manner, (including approximately 10 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 34 691 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August, 42 356, an increase of 20 %. A strong increase was also witnessed by Greece in 2015, with more than 211 000 irregular migrants reaching the country (including approximately 28 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 53 624 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August 137 000, an increase of 250 %). A significant proportion of the total number of irregular migrants detected in those two regions included migrants of nationalities which, based on the Eurostat data, meet a high Union-level recognition rate.
(14) According to Eurostat and EASO figures, 39 183 persons applied for international protection in Italy between January and July 2015, compared to 30 755 in the same period of 2014 (an increase of 27 %). A similar increase in the number of applications was witnessed by Greece with 7 475 applicants (an increase of 30 %).
(15) Many actions have been taken so far to support Italy and Greece in the framework of the migration and asylum policy, including by providing them with substantial emergency assistance and EASO operational support. Italy and Greece were the second and third largest beneficiaries of funding disbursed during the period 2007-2013 under the General Programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’ (SOLID), and, in addition, received substantial emergency funding. Italy and Greece will likely continue to be the main beneficiaries of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in 2014-2020.
(16) Due to the ongoing instability and conflicts in the immediate neighbourhood of Italy and Greece, and the repercussions in migratory flows on other Member States, it is very likely that a significant and increased pressure will continue to be put on their migration and asylum systems, with a significant proportion of the migrants who may be in need of international protection. This demonstrates the critical need to show solidarity towards Italy and Greece and to complement the actions taken so far to support them with provisional measures in the area of asylum and migration.
(17) On 22 September 2015, the Council noted the willingness and readiness of Member States to take part, in accordance with the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, which govern the Union policy on asylum and migration, in the relocation of 120 000 persons in clear need of international protection. The Council therefore decided to adopt this Decision.
(18) It should be recalled that Decision (EU) 2015/1523 sets out an obligation for Italy and Greece to provide structural solutions to address exceptional pressures on their asylum and migration systems, by establishing a solid and strategic framework for responding to the crisis situation and intensifying the ongoing reform process in these areas. The roadmaps which Italy and Greece have presented to that end should be updated to take this Decision into account.
(19) Bearing in mind that the European Council agreed on a set of interlinked measures, the Commission should be entrusted with the power to suspend, where appropriate and having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, the application of this Decision for a limited period where Italy or Greece does not respect its commitments in this regard.
(20) As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants should be proportionally relocated from Italy and Greece to other Member States. The Council and the Commission should keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States. The Commission should submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to address the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States. In doing so, it should take into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State.Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State, that Member State should, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending Decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which should include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in those areas, as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision with a view to allowing it better to cope, after the end of the application of this Decision, with a possible increased inflow of migrants on its territory.
(21) If any Member State should be confronted with a similar emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, on the basis of Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the obligations of that Member State provided for in this Decision.
(22) In accordance with Article 78(3) TFEU, the measures envisaged for the benefit of Italy and of Greece should be of a provisional nature. A period of 24 months is reasonable in view of ensuring that the measures provided for in this Decision have a real impact in respect of supporting Italy and Greece in dealing with the significant migration flows on their territories.
(23) The measures to relocate from Italy and from Greece, provided for in this Decision, entail a temporary derogation from the rule set out in Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3)according to which Italy and Greece would otherwise have been responsible for the examination of an application for international protection based on the criteria set out in Chapter III of that Regulation, as well as a temporary derogation from the procedural steps, including the time limits, laid down in Articles 21, 22 and 29 of that Regulation. The other provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, including the implementing rules set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003(4)and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014(5), remain applicable, including the rules contained therein on the obligation for the transferring Member States to meet the costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation and on the cooperation on transfers between Member States, as well as on transmission of information through the DubliNet electronic communication network. This Decision also entails a derogation from the consent of the applicant for international protection as referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6).
(24) Relocation measures do not absolve Member States from applying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 in full, including the provisions related to family reunification, the special protection of unaccompanied minors, and the discretionary clause on humanitarian grounds.
(25) A choice had to be made in respect of the criteria to be applied when deciding which and how many applicants are to be relocated from Italy and from Greece, without prejudice to decisions at national level on asylum applications. A clear and workable system is envisaged based on a threshold of the average rate at Union level of decisions granting international protection in the procedures at first instance, as defined by Eurostat, out of the total number at Union level of decisions on applications for international protection taken at first instance, based on the latest available statistics. On the one hand, this threshold would have to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that all applicants in clear need of international protection would be in a position to fully and swiftly enjoy their protection rights in the Member State of relocation. On the other hand, it would have to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, applicants who are likely to receive a negative decision on their application from being relocated to another Member State, and therefore from prolonging unduly their stay in the Union. A threshold of 75 %, based on the latest available updated Eurostat quarterly data for decisions at first instance, should be used in this Decision.
(26) The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure on Italy and on Greece, in particular by relocating a significant number of applicants in clear need of international protection who will have arrived in the territory of Italy or Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third-country nationals who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in 2015, and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 120 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 43 % of the total number of third-country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in July and August 2015. The relocation measure foreseen in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other, given the overall available figures on irregular border crossings in 2015. Given the figures at stake, 13 % of these applicants should be relocated from Italy, 42 % from Greece and 45 % should be relocated as provided for in this Decision.
(27) Within 3 months of the entry into force of this Decision, a Member State may, in exceptional circumstances and giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, notify the Council and the Commission that it is unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with this Decision. Such exceptional circumstances include, in particular, a situation characterised by a sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a magnitude as to place extreme pressure even on a well prepared asylum system otherwise functioning in line with the relevant Unionacquison asylum or a risk of sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a high probability that it warrants an immediate action. Following an assessment, the Commission should submit proposals to the Council for an implementing decision regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocation of the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the duration of this Decision.
(28) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the relocation in the case of proportional relocation of 54 000 applicants from Italy and Greece to the other Member States, in the case where the participation of one or more Member States in the relocation of applicants should be suspended, or in the case where, following relevant notifications to the Council, other Member State(s) or Associated States take part in the relocation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council.The conferral of those powers upon the Council is justified in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures, which touch on national powers regarding the admission of third country nationals on the territory of the Member States and the need to be able to adapt swiftly to rapidly evolving situations.
(29) The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) set up by Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides support to burden-sharing operations agreed between Member States, and is open to new policy developments in that field. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides for the possibility for Member States to implement actions related to the transfer of applicants for international protection as part of their national programmes, while Article 18 of that Regulation provides for the possibility of a lump sum payment of EUR 6 000 for the transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from another Member State.
(30) With a view to implementing the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and taking into account that this Decision constitutes a further policy development in this field, it is appropriate to ensure that the Member States that relocate, pursuant to this Decision, applicants from Italy and Greece who are in clear need of international protection, receive a lump sum for each relocated person which is identical to the lump sum provided for in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014, namely EUR 6 000, and is implemented by applying the same procedures. This entails a limited, temporary derogation from Article 18 of that Regulation because the lump sum should be paid in respect of relocated applicants rather than in respect of beneficiaries of international protection. Such a temporary extension of the scope of potential recipients of the lump sum appears indeed to be an integral part of the emergency scheme set up by this Decision. Moreover, with regard to the costs for the transfer of persons relocated pursuant to this Decision, it is appropriate to provide that Italy and Greece receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500 for each person relocated from their respective territories, taking into account the actual costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation. Member States should be entitled to receive additional pre-financing to be paid in 2016 following the revision of their national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund to implement actions under this Decision.
(31) It is necessary to ensure that a swift relocation procedure is put in place and to accompany the implementation of the provisional measures by close administrative cooperation between Member States and operational support provided by EASO.
(32) National security and public order should be taken into consideration throughout the relocation procedure, until the transfer of the applicant is implemented. In full respect of the fundamental rights of the applicant, including the relevant rules on data protection, where a Member State has reasonable grounds for regarding an applicant as a danger to its national security or public order, it should inform the other Member States thereof.
(33) When deciding which applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and from Greece, priority should be given to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(7). In this respect, any special needs of applicants, including health, should be of primary concern. The best interests of the child should always be a primary consideration.
(34) The integration of applicants in clear need of international protection into the host society is the cornerstone of a properly functioning Common European Asylum System. Therefore, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the specific qualifications and characteristics of the applicants concerned, such as their language skills and other individual indications based on demonstrated family, cultural or social ties which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and to the necessity of ensuring a fair distribution of those applicants among Member States. With due respect for the principle of non-discrimination, Member States of relocation may indicate their preferences for applicants based on the above information on the basis of which Italy and Greece, in consultation with EASO and, where applicable, liaison officers, may compile lists of possible applicants identified for relocation to that Member State.
(35) The legal and procedural safeguards set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 remain applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision. In addition, applicants should be informed of the relocation procedure set out in this Decision and be notified with the relocation decision which constitutes a transfer decision within the meaning of Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. Considering that an applicant does not have the right under Union law to choose the Member State responsible for his or her application, the applicant should have the right to an effective remedy against the relocation decision in line with Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, only in view of ensuring respect for his or her fundamental rights. In line with Article 27 of that Regulation, Member States may provide in their national law that the appeal against the transfer decision does not automatically suspend the transfer of the applicant but that the person concerned has the opportunity to request a suspension of the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal.
(36) Before and after being transferred to the Member States of relocation, applicants enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in Directive 2013/32/EU(8)and Directive 2013/33/EU(9)of the European Parliament and of the Council, including in relation to their special reception and procedural needs. In addition, Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10)remains applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision, and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(11)is applicable for the returning of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory. The above is subject to the limitations in the application of those Directives.
(37) In line with the Unionacquis, a robust mechanism of identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure should be ensured by Italy and Greece so as to quickly identify the persons in need of international protection who are eligible for relocation and to identify the migrants who do not qualify for international protection and should therefore be returned. This should also apply to persons who arrived on the territory of Italy or Greece between 24 March and 25 September 2015 in order for them to be eligible for relocation. When voluntary return is not practicable and other measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC are not adequate to prevent secondary movements, detention measures in line with Chapter IV of that Directive should be applied urgently and effectively. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure should be excluded from relocation.
(38) Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States which could hamper the efficient application of this Decision. In particular, Member States should take the necessary preventive measures in the field of access to social benefits and legal remedies, in accordance with Union law. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of irregular onward movement within the Member States and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, they are entitled to the rights attached to international protection only in that Member State.
(39) Additionally, in line with the objectives set out in Directive 2013/33/EU, the harmonisation of reception conditions amongst Member States should help to limit secondary movements of applicants for international protection influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception. With a view to reaching the same objective, Member States should consider imposing reporting obligations, and providing applicants for international protection with material reception conditions that include housing, food and clothing only in kind, as well as, where appropriate, ensuring that applicants are directly transferred to the Member State of relocation. Likewise, during the period of the examination of applications for international protection, as provided for in the asylum and Schengenacquis, except for serious humanitarian reasons, Member States should neither provide applicants with national travel documents, nor give them other incentives, such as financial ones, which could facilitate their irregular movements to other Member States. In case of irregular movements to other Member States, applicants for or beneficiaries of international protection should be required to go back to the Member State of relocation, and that Member State should take those persons back without delay.
(40) In order to avoid secondary movements of beneficiaries of international protection, Member States should also inform the beneficiaries about the conditions under which they may legally enter and stay in another Member State, and should be able to impose reporting obligations. Pursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC, Member States should require a beneficiary of international protection who is staying irregularly on their territories to go back immediately to the Member State of relocation. In case the person refuses to return voluntarily, return to the Member State of relocation should be enforced.
(41) Furthermore, if provided for in national law, in the case of enforced return to the Member State of relocation, the Member State which enforced the return may decide to issue a national entry ban that would prevent the beneficiary, for a certain period of time, from re-entering the territory of that specific Member State.
(42) As the purpose of this Decision is to address an emergency situation and to support Italy and Greece in reinforcing their asylum systems, it should allow them to make, with the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland on the relocation of persons falling within the scope of this Decision. Such arrangements should also reflect the core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants as well as those relating to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
(43) The specific support provided to Italy and to Greece through the relocation scheme should be complemented by additional measures, from the arrival of third-country nationals on the territory of Italy or of Greece until the completion of all applicable procedures, coordinated by EASO and other relevant Agencies, such as Frontex coordinating the return of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC.
(44) Since the objectives of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(45) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(46) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(47) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(48) In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council should fix the number of applicants to be relocated to that Member State. The Council should also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
(49) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(50) In view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force on the date following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 78(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),
(1) According to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned.
(2) According to Article 80 TFEU, the policies of the Union in the area of border checks, asylum and immigration and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, and Union acts adopted in this area are to contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.
(3) The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in that region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate action to be taken in response to the crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism.
(4) At its meeting of 23 April 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, to reinforce internal solidarity and responsibility and committed itself in particular to increasing emergency assistance to frontline Member States and to considering options for organising emergency relocation between Member States on a voluntary basis, as well as to deploying European Asylum Support Office (EASO) teams in frontline Member States for the joint processing of applications for international protection, including registration and fingerprinting.
(5) In its resolution of 28 April 2015, the European Parliament reiterated the need for the Union to base its response to the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and to step up its efforts in this area towards those Member States which receive the highest number of refugees and applicants for international protection in either absolute or relative terms.
(6) Besides measures in the area of asylum, Member States at the frontline should increase their efforts to set up measures to cope with mixed migration flows at the external borders of the European Union. Such measures should safeguard the rights of those in need of international protection and prevent irregular migration.
(7) At its meeting of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/resettlement, return/readmission/reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. The European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over 2 years, from Italy and from Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection, in which all Member States would participate.
(8) The specific situations of the Member States result in particular from migratory flows in other geographical regions, such as the Western Balkans migratory route.
(9) Several Member States were confronted with a significant increase in the total number of migrants, including applicants for international protection, arriving on their territories in 2014 and some continue to be so confronted in 2015. Emergency financial assistance by the Commission and operational support by EASO were provided to several Member States to help them cope with this increase.
(10) Among the Member States witnessing situations of considerable pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems.
(11) On 20 July 2015, reflecting the specific situations of Member States, a Resolution of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on relocating from Greece and Italy 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection was adopted by consensus. Over a period of 2 years, 24 000 persons will be relocated from Italy and 16 000 persons will be relocated from Greece. On 14 September 2015, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2015/1523(2), which provided for a temporary and exceptional relocation mechanism from Italy and Greece to other Member States of persons in clear need of international protection.
(12) During recent months, the migratory pressure at the southern external land and sea borders has again sharply increased, and the shift of migration flows has continued from the central to the eastern Mediterranean and towards the Western Balkans route, as a result of the increasing number of migrants arriving in and from Greece. In view of the situation, further provisional measures to relieve the asylum pressure from Italy and Greece should be warranted.
(13) According to data of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (Frontex), the central and eastern Mediterranean routes were the main areas for irregular border crossing into the Union in the first 8 months of 2015. Since the beginning of 2015, approximately 116 000 migrants arrived in Italy in an irregular manner, (including approximately 10 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 34 691 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August, 42 356, an increase of 20 %. A strong increase was also witnessed by Greece in 2015, with more than 211 000 irregular migrants reaching the country (including approximately 28 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 53 624 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August 137 000, an increase of 250 %). A significant proportion of the total number of irregular migrants detected in those two regions included migrants of nationalities which, based on the Eurostat data, meet a high Union-level recognition rate.
(14) According to Eurostat and EASO figures, 39 183 persons applied for international protection in Italy between January and July 2015, compared to 30 755 in the same period of 2014 (an increase of 27 %). A similar increase in the number of applications was witnessed by Greece with 7 475 applicants (an increase of 30 %).
(15) Many actions have been taken so far to support Italy and Greece in the framework of the migration and asylum policy, including by providing them with substantial emergency assistance and EASO operational support. Italy and Greece were the second and third largest beneficiaries of funding disbursed during the period 2007-2013 under the General Programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’ (SOLID), and, in addition, received substantial emergency funding. Italy and Greece will likely continue to be the main beneficiaries of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in 2014-2020.
(16) Due to the ongoing instability and conflicts in the immediate neighbourhood of Italy and Greece, and the repercussions in migratory flows on other Member States, it is very likely that a significant and increased pressure will continue to be put on their migration and asylum systems, with a significant proportion of the migrants who may be in need of international protection. This demonstrates the critical need to show solidarity towards Italy and Greece and to complement the actions taken so far to support them with provisional measures in the area of asylum and migration.
(17) On 22 September 2015, the Council noted the willingness and readiness of Member States to take part, in accordance with the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, which govern the Union policy on asylum and migration, in the relocation of 120 000 persons in clear need of international protection. The Council therefore decided to adopt this Decision.
(18) It should be recalled that Decision (EU) 2015/1523 sets out an obligation for Italy and Greece to provide structural solutions to address exceptional pressures on their asylum and migration systems, by establishing a solid and strategic framework for responding to the crisis situation and intensifying the ongoing reform process in these areas. The roadmaps which Italy and Greece have presented to that end should be updated to take this Decision into account.
(19) Bearing in mind that the European Council agreed on a set of interlinked measures, the Commission should be entrusted with the power to suspend, where appropriate and having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, the application of this Decision for a limited period where Italy or Greece does not respect its commitments in this regard.
(20) As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants should be proportionally relocated from Italy and Greece to other Member States. The Council and the Commission should keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States. The Commission should submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to address the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States. In doing so, it should take into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State.Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State, that Member State should, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending Decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which should include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in those areas, as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision with a view to allowing it better to cope, after the end of the application of this Decision, with a possible increased inflow of migrants on its territory.
(21) If any Member State should be confronted with a similar emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, on the basis of Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the obligations of that Member State provided for in this Decision.
(22) In accordance with Article 78(3) TFEU, the measures envisaged for the benefit of Italy and of Greece should be of a provisional nature. A period of 24 months is reasonable in view of ensuring that the measures provided for in this Decision have a real impact in respect of supporting Italy and Greece in dealing with the significant migration flows on their territories.
(23) The measures to relocate from Italy and from Greece, provided for in this Decision, entail a temporary derogation from the rule set out in Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3)according to which Italy and Greece would otherwise have been responsible for the examination of an application for international protection based on the criteria set out in Chapter III of that Regulation, as well as a temporary derogation from the procedural steps, including the time limits, laid down in Articles 21, 22 and 29 of that Regulation. The other provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, including the implementing rules set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003(4)and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014(5), remain applicable, including the rules contained therein on the obligation for the transferring Member States to meet the costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation and on the cooperation on transfers between Member States, as well as on transmission of information through the DubliNet electronic communication network. This Decision also entails a derogation from the consent of the applicant for international protection as referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6).
(24) Relocation measures do not absolve Member States from applying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 in full, including the provisions related to family reunification, the special protection of unaccompanied minors, and the discretionary clause on humanitarian grounds.
(25) A choice had to be made in respect of the criteria to be applied when deciding which and how many applicants are to be relocated from Italy and from Greece, without prejudice to decisions at national level on asylum applications. A clear and workable system is envisaged based on a threshold of the average rate at Union level of decisions granting international protection in the procedures at first instance, as defined by Eurostat, out of the total number at Union level of decisions on applications for international protection taken at first instance, based on the latest available statistics. On the one hand, this threshold would have to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that all applicants in clear need of international protection would be in a position to fully and swiftly enjoy their protection rights in the Member State of relocation. On the other hand, it would have to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, applicants who are likely to receive a negative decision on their application from being relocated to another Member State, and therefore from prolonging unduly their stay in the Union. A threshold of 75 %, based on the latest available updated Eurostat quarterly data for decisions at first instance, should be used in this Decision.
(26) The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure on Italy and on Greece, in particular by relocating a significant number of applicants in clear need of international protection who will have arrived in the territory of Italy or Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third-country nationals who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in 2015, and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 120 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 43 % of the total number of third-country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in July and August 2015. The relocation measure foreseen in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other, given the overall available figures on irregular border crossings in 2015. Given the figures at stake, 13 % of these applicants should be relocated from Italy, 42 % from Greece and 45 % should be relocated as provided for in this Decision.
(27) Within 3 months of the entry into force of this Decision, a Member State may, in exceptional circumstances and giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, notify the Council and the Commission that it is unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with this Decision. Such exceptional circumstances include, in particular, a situation characterised by a sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a magnitude as to place extreme pressure even on a well prepared asylum system otherwise functioning in line with the relevant Unionacquison asylum or a risk of sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a high probability that it warrants an immediate action. Following an assessment, the Commission should submit proposals to the Council for an implementing decision regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocation of the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the duration of this Decision.
(28) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the relocation in the case of proportional relocation of 54 000 applicants from Italy and Greece to the other Member States, in the case where the participation of one or more Member States in the relocation of applicants should be suspended, or in the case where, following relevant notifications to the Council, other Member State(s) or Associated States take part in the relocation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council.The conferral of those powers upon the Council is justified in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures, which touch on national powers regarding the admission of third country nationals on the territory of the Member States and the need to be able to adapt swiftly to rapidly evolving situations.
(29) The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) set up by Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides support to burden-sharing operations agreed between Member States, and is open to new policy developments in that field. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides for the possibility for Member States to implement actions related to the transfer of applicants for international protection as part of their national programmes, while Article 18 of that Regulation provides for the possibility of a lump sum payment of EUR 6 000 for the transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from another Member State.
(30) With a view to implementing the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and taking into account that this Decision constitutes a further policy development in this field, it is appropriate to ensure that the Member States that relocate, pursuant to this Decision, applicants from Italy and Greece who are in clear need of international protection, receive a lump sum for each relocated person which is identical to the lump sum provided for in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014, namely EUR 6 000, and is implemented by applying the same procedures. This entails a limited, temporary derogation from Article 18 of that Regulation because the lump sum should be paid in respect of relocated applicants rather than in respect of beneficiaries of international protection. Such a temporary extension of the scope of potential recipients of the lump sum appears indeed to be an integral part of the emergency scheme set up by this Decision. Moreover, with regard to the costs for the transfer of persons relocated pursuant to this Decision, it is appropriate to provide that Italy and Greece receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500 for each person relocated from their respective territories, taking into account the actual costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation. Member States should be entitled to receive additional pre-financing to be paid in 2016 following the revision of their national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund to implement actions under this Decision.
(31) It is necessary to ensure that a swift relocation procedure is put in place and to accompany the implementation of the provisional measures by close administrative cooperation between Member States and operational support provided by EASO.
(32) National security and public order should be taken into consideration throughout the relocation procedure, until the transfer of the applicant is implemented. In full respect of the fundamental rights of the applicant, including the relevant rules on data protection, where a Member State has reasonable grounds for regarding an applicant as a danger to its national security or public order, it should inform the other Member States thereof.
(33) When deciding which applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and from Greece, priority should be given to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(7). In this respect, any special needs of applicants, including health, should be of primary concern. The best interests of the child should always be a primary consideration.
(34) The integration of applicants in clear need of international protection into the host society is the cornerstone of a properly functioning Common European Asylum System. Therefore, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the specific qualifications and characteristics of the applicants concerned, such as their language skills and other individual indications based on demonstrated family, cultural or social ties which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and to the necessity of ensuring a fair distribution of those applicants among Member States. With due respect for the principle of non-discrimination, Member States of relocation may indicate their preferences for applicants based on the above information on the basis of which Italy and Greece, in consultation with EASO and, where applicable, liaison officers, may compile lists of possible applicants identified for relocation to that Member State.
(35) The legal and procedural safeguards set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 remain applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision. In addition, applicants should be informed of the relocation procedure set out in this Decision and be notified with the relocation decision which constitutes a transfer decision within the meaning of Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. Considering that an applicant does not have the right under Union law to choose the Member State responsible for his or her application, the applicant should have the right to an effective remedy against the relocation decision in line with Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, only in view of ensuring respect for his or her fundamental rights. In line with Article 27 of that Regulation, Member States may provide in their national law that the appeal against the transfer decision does not automatically suspend the transfer of the applicant but that the person concerned has the opportunity to request a suspension of the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal.
(36) Before and after being transferred to the Member States of relocation, applicants enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in Directive 2013/32/EU(8)and Directive 2013/33/EU(9)of the European Parliament and of the Council, including in relation to their special reception and procedural needs. In addition, Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10)remains applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision, and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(11)is applicable for the returning of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory. The above is subject to the limitations in the application of those Directives.
(37) In line with the Unionacquis, a robust mechanism of identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure should be ensured by Italy and Greece so as to quickly identify the persons in need of international protection who are eligible for relocation and to identify the migrants who do not qualify for international protection and should therefore be returned. This should also apply to persons who arrived on the territory of Italy or Greece between 24 March and 25 September 2015 in order for them to be eligible for relocation. When voluntary return is not practicable and other measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC are not adequate to prevent secondary movements, detention measures in line with Chapter IV of that Directive should be applied urgently and effectively. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure should be excluded from relocation.
(38) Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States which could hamper the efficient application of this Decision. In particular, Member States should take the necessary preventive measures in the field of access to social benefits and legal remedies, in accordance with Union law. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of irregular onward movement within the Member States and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, they are entitled to the rights attached to international protection only in that Member State.
(39) Additionally, in line with the objectives set out in Directive 2013/33/EU, the harmonisation of reception conditions amongst Member States should help to limit secondary movements of applicants for international protection influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception. With a view to reaching the same objective, Member States should consider imposing reporting obligations, and providing applicants for international protection with material reception conditions that include housing, food and clothing only in kind, as well as, where appropriate, ensuring that applicants are directly transferred to the Member State of relocation. Likewise, during the period of the examination of applications for international protection, as provided for in the asylum and Schengenacquis, except for serious humanitarian reasons, Member States should neither provide applicants with national travel documents, nor give them other incentives, such as financial ones, which could facilitate their irregular movements to other Member States. In case of irregular movements to other Member States, applicants for or beneficiaries of international protection should be required to go back to the Member State of relocation, and that Member State should take those persons back without delay.
(40) In order to avoid secondary movements of beneficiaries of international protection, Member States should also inform the beneficiaries about the conditions under which they may legally enter and stay in another Member State, and should be able to impose reporting obligations. Pursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC, Member States should require a beneficiary of international protection who is staying irregularly on their territories to go back immediately to the Member State of relocation. In case the person refuses to return voluntarily, return to the Member State of relocation should be enforced.
(41) Furthermore, if provided for in national law, in the case of enforced return to the Member State of relocation, the Member State which enforced the return may decide to issue a national entry ban that would prevent the beneficiary, for a certain period of time, from re-entering the territory of that specific Member State.
(42) As the purpose of this Decision is to address an emergency situation and to support Italy and Greece in reinforcing their asylum systems, it should allow them to make, with the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland on the relocation of persons falling within the scope of this Decision. Such arrangements should also reflect the core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants as well as those relating to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
(43) The specific support provided to Italy and to Greece through the relocation scheme should be complemented by additional measures, from the arrival of third-country nationals on the territory of Italy or of Greece until the completion of all applicable procedures, coordinated by EASO and other relevant Agencies, such as Frontex coordinating the return of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC.
(44) Since the objectives of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(45) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(46) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(47) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(48) In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council should fix the number of applicants to be relocated to that Member State. The Council should also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
(49) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(50) In view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force on the date following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Subject matter
Article 1
1. This Decision establishes provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece, in view of supporting them in better coping with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries in those Member States.
2. The Commission shall keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States.
The Commission will submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to take into account the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States.
Definitions
Article 2
For the purposes of this Decision, the following definitions apply:
(a)
‘application for international protection’ means an application for international protection as defined in point (h) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(12);
(b)
‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken;
(c)
‘international protection’ means refugee status and subsidiary protection status as defined in points (e) and (g), respectively, of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU;
(d)
‘family members’ means family members as defined in point (g) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013;
(e)
‘relocation’ means the transfer of an applicant from the territory of the Member State which the criteria laid down in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 indicate as responsible for examining his or her application for international protection to the territory of the Member State of relocation;
(f)
‘Member State of relocation’ means the Member State which becomes responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of an applicant following his or her relocation in the territory of that Member State.
Scope
Article 3
1. Relocation pursuant to this Decision shall take place only in respect of an applicant who has lodged his or her application for international protection in Italy or in Greece and for whom those States would have otherwise been responsible pursuant to the criteria for determining the Member State responsible set out in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
2. Relocation pursuant to this Decision shall be applied only in respect of an applicant belonging to a nationality for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection among decisions taken at first instance on applications for international protection as referred to in Chapter III of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(13)is, according to the latest available updated quarterly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75 % or higher. In the case of stateless persons, the country of former habitual residence shall be taken into account. Quarterly updates shall be taken into account only in respect of applicants who have not already been identified as applicants who could be relocated in accordance with Article 5(3) of this Decision.
Relocation of 120 000 applicants to Member States
Article 4
1.
120 000 applicants shall be relocated to the other Member States as follows:
(a)
15 600 applicants shall be relocated from Italy to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex I;
(b)
50 400 applicants shall be relocated from Greece to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex II;
(c)
54 000 applicants shall be relocated to the territory of the other Member States, proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II, either in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article or through an amendment of this Decision, as referred to in Article 1(2) and in paragraph 3 of this Article.
2. As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants, referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, shall be relocated from Italy and Greece, in proportion resulting from points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, to the territory of other Member States and proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II. The Commission shall submit a proposal to the Council on the figures to be allocated accordingly per Member State.
3. If by 26 September 2016, the Commission considers that an adaptation of the relocation mechanism is justified by the evolution of the situation on the ground or that a Member State is confronted with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries due to a sharp shift of migration flows and taking into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State, it may submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
Likewise, a Member State may, giving duly justified reasons, notify the Council and the Commission that it is confronted with a similar emergency situation. The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
4. In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, fix the number of applicants to be relocated to the Member State concerned. In the same implementing decision, the Council shall also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
5. A Member State may, in exceptional circumstances, by 26 December 2015, notify the Council and the Commission that it is temporarily unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with paragraph 1, giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit proposals to the Council regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned in accordance with paragraph 1. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocating the applicants in the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the date referred to in Article 13(2).
6. The Council shall, within 1 month, decide on the proposals referred to in paragraph 5.
7. For the purpose of application of paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 of this Article, and of Article 11(2), the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, adopt an implementing decision.
Relocation procedure
Article 5
1. For the purpose of the administrative cooperation required to implement this Decision, each Member State shall appoint a national contact point, whose address it shall communicate to the other Member States and to EASO. Member States shall, in liaison with EASO and other relevant agencies, take all the appropriate measures to establish direct cooperation and an exchange of information between the competent authorities, including about the grounds referred to in paragraph 7.
2. Member States shall, at regular intervals, and at least every 3 months, indicate the number of applicants who can be relocated swiftly to their territory and any other relevant information.
3. Based on this information, Italy and Greece shall, with the assistance of EASO and, where applicable, of Member States’ liaison officers referred to in paragraph 8, identify the individual applicants who could be relocated to the other Member States and, as soon as possible, submit all relevant information to the contact points of those Member States. Priority shall be given for that purpose to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
4. Following approval of the Member State of relocation, Italy and Greece shall, as soon as possible, take a decision to relocate each of the identified applicants to a specific Member State of relocation, in consultation with EASO, and shall notify the applicant in accordance with Article 6(4). The Member State of relocation may decide not to approve the relocation of an applicant only if there are reasonable grounds as referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article.
5. Applicants whose fingerprints are required to be taken pursuant to the obligations set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 may be proposed for relocation only if their fingerprints have been taken and transmitted to the Central System of Eurodac, pursuant to that Regulation.
6. The transfer of the applicant to the territory of the Member State of relocation shall take place as soon as possible following the date of the notification to the person concerned of the transfer decision referred to in Article 6(4) of this Decision. Italy and Greece shall transmit to the Member State of relocation the date and time of the transfer as well as any other relevant information.
7. Member States retain the right to refuse to relocate an applicant only where there are reasonable grounds for regarding him or her as a danger to their national security or public order or where there are serious reasons for applying the exclusion provisions set out in Articles 12 and 17 of Directive 2011/95/EU.
8. For the implementation of all aspects of the relocation procedure described in this Article, Member States may, after exchanging all relevant information, decide to appoint liaison officers to Italy and to Greece.
9. In line with the Unionacquis, Member States shall fully implement their obligations. Accordingly, identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure shall be guaranteed by Italy and by Greece. To ensure that the process remains efficient and manageable, reception facilities and measures shall be duly organised so as to temporarily accommodate people, in line with the Unionacquis, until a decision is quickly taken on their situation. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure shall be excluded from relocation.
10. The relocation procedure provided for in this Article shall be completed as swiftly as possible and not later than 2 months from the time of the indication given by the Member State of relocation as referred to in paragraph 2, unless the approval by the Member State of relocation referred to in paragraph 4 takes place less than 2 weeks before the expiry of that 2-month period. In such case, the time limit for completing the relocation procedure may be extended for a period not exceeding a further 2 weeks. In addition, the time limit may also be extended, for a further 4-week period, as appropriate, where Italy or Greece show objective practical obstacles that prevent the transfer from taking place.
Where the relocation procedure is not completed within these time limits and unless Italy and Greece agree with the Member State of relocation to a reasonable extension of the time limit, Italy and Greece shall remain responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
11. Following the relocation of the applicant, the Member State of relocation shall take and transmit to the Central System of Eurodac the fingerprints of the applicant in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 and update the data sets in accordance with Article 10 of, and, where applicable, Article 18 of that Regulation.
Rights and obligations of applicants for international protection covered by this Decision
Article 6
1. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration for Member States when implementing this Decision.
2. Member States shall ensure that family members who fall within the scope of this Decision are relocated to the territory of the same Member State.
3. Prior to the decision to relocate an applicant, Italy and Greece shall inform the applicant in a language which the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand of the relocation procedure as set out in this Decision.
4. When the decision to relocate an applicant has been taken and before the actual relocation, Italy and Greece shall notify the person concerned of the decision to relocate him in writing. That decision shall specify the Member State of relocation.
5. An applicant or beneficiary of international protection who enters the territory of a Member State other than the Member State of relocation without fulfilling the conditions for stay in that other Member State shall be required to return immediately. The Member State of relocation shall take back the person without delay.
Operational support to Italy and to Greece
Article 7
1. In order to support Italy and Greece better to cope with the exceptional pressure on their asylum and migration systems caused by the current increased migratory pressure at their external borders, Member States shall increase their operational support in cooperation with Italy and Greece in the area of international protection through relevant activities coordinated by EASO, Frontex and other relevant Agencies, in particular by providing, as appropriate, national experts for the following support activities:
(a)
the screening of the third-country nationals arriving in Italy and Greece, including their clear identification, fingerprinting and registration, and, where applicable, the registration of their application for international protection and, upon request by Italy or Greece, their initial processing;
(b)
the provision to applicants or potential applicants that could be subject to relocation pursuant to this Decision of information and specific assistance that they may need;
(c)
the preparation and organisation of return operations for third-country nationals who either did not apply for international protection or whose right to remain on the territory has ceased.
2. In addition to the support provided under paragraph 1, and for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of all steps of the relocation procedure, specific support shall be provided as appropriate to Italy and to Greece through relevant activities coordinated by EASO, Frontex and other relevant Agencies.
Complementary measures to be taken by Italy and Greece
Article 8
1. Italy and Greece, shall, bearing in mind the obligations set out in Article 8(1) of Decision (EU) 2015/1523, and by 26 October 2015, notify to the Council and the Commission an updated roadmap taking into account the need to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision.
2. Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State in accordance with Article 1(2) and Article 4(3), that Member State shall, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which shall include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in these areas as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision. That Member State shall fully implement that roadmap.
3. If Italy or Greece does not comply with the obligations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may decide, having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, to suspend the application of this Decision with regard to that Member State for a period of up to 3 months. The Commission may decide once to extend such suspension for a further period of up to 3 months. Such suspension shall not affect the transfers of applicants that are pending following approval of the Member State of relocation pursuant to Article 5(4).
Further emergency situations
Article 9
In the event of an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries in a Member State, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, pursuant to Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the participation of that Member State in the relocation as provided for in this Decision, as well as possible compensatory measures for Italy and for Greece.
Financial support
Article 10
1. For each person relocated pursuant to this Decision:
(a)
the Member State of relocation shall receive a lump sum of EUR 6 000;
(b)
Italy or Greece shall receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500.
2. This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014. By way of exception from the pre-financing arrangements set out in that Regulation, Member States shall, in 2016, be paid a pre-financing amount of 50 % of their total allocation pursuant to this Decision.
Cooperation with associated States
Article 11
1. With the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements may be made between, Italy and, respectively Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, and between Greece and, respectively, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, on the relocation of applicants from the territory of Italy and of Greece to the territory of those latter States. The core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants, shall be duly taken into account in those arrangements.
2. In case such bilateral arrangements are made, Italy or Greece shall notify to the Council and the Commission the number of applicants who are to be relocated to the associated States. The Council shall accordingly adapt, on a proposal from the Commission, the allocations of Member States by reducing them in proportion.
Reporting
Article 12
On the basis of the information provided by the Member States and by the relevant agencies, the Commission shall report to the Council every 6 months on the implementation of this Decision.
On the basis of the information provided by Italy and by Greece, the Commission shall also report to the Council every 6 months on the implementation of the roadmaps referred to in Article 8.
Entry into force
Article 13
1. This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.
2. It shall apply until 26 September 2017.
3. It shall apply to persons arriving on the territory of Italy and Greece from 25 September 2015 until 26 September 2017, as well as to applicants having arrived on the territory of those Member States from 24 March 2015 onwards.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 78(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),
(1) According to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned.
(2) According to Article 80 TFEU, the policies of the Union in the area of border checks, asylum and immigration and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, and Union acts adopted in this area are to contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.
(3) The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in that region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate action to be taken in response to the crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism.
(4) At its meeting of 23 April 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, to reinforce internal solidarity and responsibility and committed itself in particular to increasing emergency assistance to frontline Member States and to considering options for organising emergency relocation between Member States on a voluntary basis, as well as to deploying European Asylum Support Office (EASO) teams in frontline Member States for the joint processing of applications for international protection, including registration and fingerprinting.
(5) In its resolution of 28 April 2015, the European Parliament reiterated the need for the Union to base its response to the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and to step up its efforts in this area towards those Member States which receive the highest number of refugees and applicants for international protection in either absolute or relative terms.
(6) Besides measures in the area of asylum, Member States at the frontline should increase their efforts to set up measures to cope with mixed migration flows at the external borders of the European Union. Such measures should safeguard the rights of those in need of international protection and prevent irregular migration.
(7) At its meeting of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/resettlement, return/readmission/reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. The European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over 2 years, from Italy and from Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection, in which all Member States would participate.
(8) The specific situations of the Member States result in particular from migratory flows in other geographical regions, such as the Western Balkans migratory route.
(9) Several Member States were confronted with a significant increase in the total number of migrants, including applicants for international protection, arriving on their territories in 2014 and some continue to be so confronted in 2015. Emergency financial assistance by the Commission and operational support by EASO were provided to several Member States to help them cope with this increase.
(10) Among the Member States witnessing situations of considerable pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems.
(11) On 20 July 2015, reflecting the specific situations of Member States, a Resolution of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on relocating from Greece and Italy 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection was adopted by consensus. Over a period of 2 years, 24 000 persons will be relocated from Italy and 16 000 persons will be relocated from Greece. On 14 September 2015, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2015/1523(2), which provided for a temporary and exceptional relocation mechanism from Italy and Greece to other Member States of persons in clear need of international protection.
(12) During recent months, the migratory pressure at the southern external land and sea borders has again sharply increased, and the shift of migration flows has continued from the central to the eastern Mediterranean and towards the Western Balkans route, as a result of the increasing number of migrants arriving in and from Greece. In view of the situation, further provisional measures to relieve the asylum pressure from Italy and Greece should be warranted.
(13) According to data of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (Frontex), the central and eastern Mediterranean routes were the main areas for irregular border crossing into the Union in the first 8 months of 2015. Since the beginning of 2015, approximately 116 000 migrants arrived in Italy in an irregular manner, (including approximately 10 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 34 691 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August, 42 356, an increase of 20 %. A strong increase was also witnessed by Greece in 2015, with more than 211 000 irregular migrants reaching the country (including approximately 28 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 53 624 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August 137 000, an increase of 250 %). A significant proportion of the total number of irregular migrants detected in those two regions included migrants of nationalities which, based on the Eurostat data, meet a high Union-level recognition rate.
(14) According to Eurostat and EASO figures, 39 183 persons applied for international protection in Italy between January and July 2015, compared to 30 755 in the same period of 2014 (an increase of 27 %). A similar increase in the number of applications was witnessed by Greece with 7 475 applicants (an increase of 30 %).
(15) Many actions have been taken so far to support Italy and Greece in the framework of the migration and asylum policy, including by providing them with substantial emergency assistance and EASO operational support. Italy and Greece were the second and third largest beneficiaries of funding disbursed during the period 2007-2013 under the General Programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’ (SOLID), and, in addition, received substantial emergency funding. Italy and Greece will likely continue to be the main beneficiaries of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in 2014-2020.
(16) Due to the ongoing instability and conflicts in the immediate neighbourhood of Italy and Greece, and the repercussions in migratory flows on other Member States, it is very likely that a significant and increased pressure will continue to be put on their migration and asylum systems, with a significant proportion of the migrants who may be in need of international protection. This demonstrates the critical need to show solidarity towards Italy and Greece and to complement the actions taken so far to support them with provisional measures in the area of asylum and migration.
(17) On 22 September 2015, the Council noted the willingness and readiness of Member States to take part, in accordance with the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, which govern the Union policy on asylum and migration, in the relocation of 120 000 persons in clear need of international protection. The Council therefore decided to adopt this Decision.
(18) It should be recalled that Decision (EU) 2015/1523 sets out an obligation for Italy and Greece to provide structural solutions to address exceptional pressures on their asylum and migration systems, by establishing a solid and strategic framework for responding to the crisis situation and intensifying the ongoing reform process in these areas. The roadmaps which Italy and Greece have presented to that end should be updated to take this Decision into account.
(19) Bearing in mind that the European Council agreed on a set of interlinked measures, the Commission should be entrusted with the power to suspend, where appropriate and having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, the application of this Decision for a limited period where Italy or Greece does not respect its commitments in this regard.
(20) As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants should be proportionally relocated from Italy and Greece to other Member States. The Council and the Commission should keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States. The Commission should submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to address the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States. In doing so, it should take into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State.Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State, that Member State should, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending Decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which should include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in those areas, as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision with a view to allowing it better to cope, after the end of the application of this Decision, with a possible increased inflow of migrants on its territory.
(21) If any Member State should be confronted with a similar emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, on the basis of Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the obligations of that Member State provided for in this Decision.
(22) In accordance with Article 78(3) TFEU, the measures envisaged for the benefit of Italy and of Greece should be of a provisional nature. A period of 24 months is reasonable in view of ensuring that the measures provided for in this Decision have a real impact in respect of supporting Italy and Greece in dealing with the significant migration flows on their territories.
(23) The measures to relocate from Italy and from Greece, provided for in this Decision, entail a temporary derogation from the rule set out in Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3)according to which Italy and Greece would otherwise have been responsible for the examination of an application for international protection based on the criteria set out in Chapter III of that Regulation, as well as a temporary derogation from the procedural steps, including the time limits, laid down in Articles 21, 22 and 29 of that Regulation. The other provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, including the implementing rules set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003(4)and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014(5), remain applicable, including the rules contained therein on the obligation for the transferring Member States to meet the costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation and on the cooperation on transfers between Member States, as well as on transmission of information through the DubliNet electronic communication network. This Decision also entails a derogation from the consent of the applicant for international protection as referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6).
(24) Relocation measures do not absolve Member States from applying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 in full, including the provisions related to family reunification, the special protection of unaccompanied minors, and the discretionary clause on humanitarian grounds.
(25) A choice had to be made in respect of the criteria to be applied when deciding which and how many applicants are to be relocated from Italy and from Greece, without prejudice to decisions at national level on asylum applications. A clear and workable system is envisaged based on a threshold of the average rate at Union level of decisions granting international protection in the procedures at first instance, as defined by Eurostat, out of the total number at Union level of decisions on applications for international protection taken at first instance, based on the latest available statistics. On the one hand, this threshold would have to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that all applicants in clear need of international protection would be in a position to fully and swiftly enjoy their protection rights in the Member State of relocation. On the other hand, it would have to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, applicants who are likely to receive a negative decision on their application from being relocated to another Member State, and therefore from prolonging unduly their stay in the Union. A threshold of 75 %, based on the latest available updated Eurostat quarterly data for decisions at first instance, should be used in this Decision.
(26) The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure on Italy and on Greece, in particular by relocating a significant number of applicants in clear need of international protection who will have arrived in the territory of Italy or Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third-country nationals who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in 2015, and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 120 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 43 % of the total number of third-country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in July and August 2015. The relocation measure foreseen in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other, given the overall available figures on irregular border crossings in 2015. Given the figures at stake, 13 % of these applicants should be relocated from Italy, 42 % from Greece and 45 % should be relocated as provided for in this Decision.
(27) Within 3 months of the entry into force of this Decision, a Member State may, in exceptional circumstances and giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, notify the Council and the Commission that it is unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with this Decision. Such exceptional circumstances include, in particular, a situation characterised by a sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a magnitude as to place extreme pressure even on a well prepared asylum system otherwise functioning in line with the relevant Unionacquison asylum or a risk of sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a high probability that it warrants an immediate action. Following an assessment, the Commission should submit proposals to the Council for an implementing decision regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocation of the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the duration of this Decision.
(28) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the relocation in the case of proportional relocation of 54 000 applicants from Italy and Greece to the other Member States, in the case where the participation of one or more Member States in the relocation of applicants should be suspended, or in the case where, following relevant notifications to the Council, other Member State(s) or Associated States take part in the relocation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council.The conferral of those powers upon the Council is justified in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures, which touch on national powers regarding the admission of third country nationals on the territory of the Member States and the need to be able to adapt swiftly to rapidly evolving situations.
(29) The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) set up by Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides support to burden-sharing operations agreed between Member States, and is open to new policy developments in that field. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides for the possibility for Member States to implement actions related to the transfer of applicants for international protection as part of their national programmes, while Article 18 of that Regulation provides for the possibility of a lump sum payment of EUR 6 000 for the transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from another Member State.
(30) With a view to implementing the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and taking into account that this Decision constitutes a further policy development in this field, it is appropriate to ensure that the Member States that relocate, pursuant to this Decision, applicants from Italy and Greece who are in clear need of international protection, receive a lump sum for each relocated person which is identical to the lump sum provided for in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014, namely EUR 6 000, and is implemented by applying the same procedures. This entails a limited, temporary derogation from Article 18 of that Regulation because the lump sum should be paid in respect of relocated applicants rather than in respect of beneficiaries of international protection. Such a temporary extension of the scope of potential recipients of the lump sum appears indeed to be an integral part of the emergency scheme set up by this Decision. Moreover, with regard to the costs for the transfer of persons relocated pursuant to this Decision, it is appropriate to provide that Italy and Greece receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500 for each person relocated from their respective territories, taking into account the actual costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation. Member States should be entitled to receive additional pre-financing to be paid in 2016 following the revision of their national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund to implement actions under this Decision.
(31) It is necessary to ensure that a swift relocation procedure is put in place and to accompany the implementation of the provisional measures by close administrative cooperation between Member States and operational support provided by EASO.
(32) National security and public order should be taken into consideration throughout the relocation procedure, until the transfer of the applicant is implemented. In full respect of the fundamental rights of the applicant, including the relevant rules on data protection, where a Member State has reasonable grounds for regarding an applicant as a danger to its national security or public order, it should inform the other Member States thereof.
(33) When deciding which applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and from Greece, priority should be given to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(7). In this respect, any special needs of applicants, including health, should be of primary concern. The best interests of the child should always be a primary consideration.
(34) The integration of applicants in clear need of international protection into the host society is the cornerstone of a properly functioning Common European Asylum System. Therefore, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the specific qualifications and characteristics of the applicants concerned, such as their language skills and other individual indications based on demonstrated family, cultural or social ties which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and to the necessity of ensuring a fair distribution of those applicants among Member States. With due respect for the principle of non-discrimination, Member States of relocation may indicate their preferences for applicants based on the above information on the basis of which Italy and Greece, in consultation with EASO and, where applicable, liaison officers, may compile lists of possible applicants identified for relocation to that Member State.
(35) The legal and procedural safeguards set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 remain applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision. In addition, applicants should be informed of the relocation procedure set out in this Decision and be notified with the relocation decision which constitutes a transfer decision within the meaning of Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. Considering that an applicant does not have the right under Union law to choose the Member State responsible for his or her application, the applicant should have the right to an effective remedy against the relocation decision in line with Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, only in view of ensuring respect for his or her fundamental rights. In line with Article 27 of that Regulation, Member States may provide in their national law that the appeal against the transfer decision does not automatically suspend the transfer of the applicant but that the person concerned has the opportunity to request a suspension of the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal.
(36) Before and after being transferred to the Member States of relocation, applicants enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in Directive 2013/32/EU(8)and Directive 2013/33/EU(9)of the European Parliament and of the Council, including in relation to their special reception and procedural needs. In addition, Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10)remains applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision, and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(11)is applicable for the returning of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory. The above is subject to the limitations in the application of those Directives.
(37) In line with the Unionacquis, a robust mechanism of identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure should be ensured by Italy and Greece so as to quickly identify the persons in need of international protection who are eligible for relocation and to identify the migrants who do not qualify for international protection and should therefore be returned. This should also apply to persons who arrived on the territory of Italy or Greece between 24 March and 25 September 2015 in order for them to be eligible for relocation. When voluntary return is not practicable and other measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC are not adequate to prevent secondary movements, detention measures in line with Chapter IV of that Directive should be applied urgently and effectively. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure should be excluded from relocation.
(38) Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States which could hamper the efficient application of this Decision. In particular, Member States should take the necessary preventive measures in the field of access to social benefits and legal remedies, in accordance with Union law. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of irregular onward movement within the Member States and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, they are entitled to the rights attached to international protection only in that Member State.
(39) Additionally, in line with the objectives set out in Directive 2013/33/EU, the harmonisation of reception conditions amongst Member States should help to limit secondary movements of applicants for international protection influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception. With a view to reaching the same objective, Member States should consider imposing reporting obligations, and providing applicants for international protection with material reception conditions that include housing, food and clothing only in kind, as well as, where appropriate, ensuring that applicants are directly transferred to the Member State of relocation. Likewise, during the period of the examination of applications for international protection, as provided for in the asylum and Schengenacquis, except for serious humanitarian reasons, Member States should neither provide applicants with national travel documents, nor give them other incentives, such as financial ones, which could facilitate their irregular movements to other Member States. In case of irregular movements to other Member States, applicants for or beneficiaries of international protection should be required to go back to the Member State of relocation, and that Member State should take those persons back without delay.
(40) In order to avoid secondary movements of beneficiaries of international protection, Member States should also inform the beneficiaries about the conditions under which they may legally enter and stay in another Member State, and should be able to impose reporting obligations. Pursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC, Member States should require a beneficiary of international protection who is staying irregularly on their territories to go back immediately to the Member State of relocation. In case the person refuses to return voluntarily, return to the Member State of relocation should be enforced.
(41) Furthermore, if provided for in national law, in the case of enforced return to the Member State of relocation, the Member State which enforced the return may decide to issue a national entry ban that would prevent the beneficiary, for a certain period of time, from re-entering the territory of that specific Member State.
(42) As the purpose of this Decision is to address an emergency situation and to support Italy and Greece in reinforcing their asylum systems, it should allow them to make, with the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland on the relocation of persons falling within the scope of this Decision. Such arrangements should also reflect the core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants as well as those relating to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
(43) The specific support provided to Italy and to Greece through the relocation scheme should be complemented by additional measures, from the arrival of third-country nationals on the territory of Italy or of Greece until the completion of all applicable procedures, coordinated by EASO and other relevant Agencies, such as Frontex coordinating the return of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC.
(44) Since the objectives of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(45) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(46) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(47) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(48) In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council should fix the number of applicants to be relocated to that Member State. The Council should also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
(49) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(50) In view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force on the date following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 78(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),
(1) According to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned.
(2) According to Article 80 TFEU, the policies of the Union in the area of border checks, asylum and immigration and their implementation are to be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, and Union acts adopted in this area are to contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.
(3) The recent crisis situation in the Mediterranean prompted the Union institutions to immediately acknowledge the exceptional migratory flows in that region and call for concrete measures of solidarity towards the frontline Member States. In particular, at a joint meeting of Foreign and Interior Ministers on 20 April 2015, the Commission presented a ten-point plan of immediate action to be taken in response to the crisis, including a commitment to consider options for an emergency relocation mechanism.
(4) At its meeting of 23 April 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, to reinforce internal solidarity and responsibility and committed itself in particular to increasing emergency assistance to frontline Member States and to considering options for organising emergency relocation between Member States on a voluntary basis, as well as to deploying European Asylum Support Office (EASO) teams in frontline Member States for the joint processing of applications for international protection, including registration and fingerprinting.
(5) In its resolution of 28 April 2015, the European Parliament reiterated the need for the Union to base its response to the latest tragedies in the Mediterranean on solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and to step up its efforts in this area towards those Member States which receive the highest number of refugees and applicants for international protection in either absolute or relative terms.
(6) Besides measures in the area of asylum, Member States at the frontline should increase their efforts to set up measures to cope with mixed migration flows at the external borders of the European Union. Such measures should safeguard the rights of those in need of international protection and prevent irregular migration.
(7) At its meeting of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council decided, inter alia, that three key dimensions should be advanced in parallel: relocation/resettlement, return/readmission/reintegration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit. The European Council agreed in particular, in the light of the current emergency situation and the commitment to reinforce solidarity and responsibility, on the temporary and exceptional relocation over 2 years, from Italy and from Greece to other Member States of 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection, in which all Member States would participate.
(8) The specific situations of the Member States result in particular from migratory flows in other geographical regions, such as the Western Balkans migratory route.
(9) Several Member States were confronted with a significant increase in the total number of migrants, including applicants for international protection, arriving on their territories in 2014 and some continue to be so confronted in 2015. Emergency financial assistance by the Commission and operational support by EASO were provided to several Member States to help them cope with this increase.
(10) Among the Member States witnessing situations of considerable pressure and in light of the recent tragic events in the Mediterranean, Italy and Greece in particular have experienced unprecedented flows of migrants, including applicants for international protection who are in clear need of international protection, arriving on their territories, generating significant pressure on their migration and asylum systems.
(11) On 20 July 2015, reflecting the specific situations of Member States, a Resolution of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on relocating from Greece and Italy 40 000 persons in clear need of international protection was adopted by consensus. Over a period of 2 years, 24 000 persons will be relocated from Italy and 16 000 persons will be relocated from Greece. On 14 September 2015, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2015/1523(2), which provided for a temporary and exceptional relocation mechanism from Italy and Greece to other Member States of persons in clear need of international protection.
(12) During recent months, the migratory pressure at the southern external land and sea borders has again sharply increased, and the shift of migration flows has continued from the central to the eastern Mediterranean and towards the Western Balkans route, as a result of the increasing number of migrants arriving in and from Greece. In view of the situation, further provisional measures to relieve the asylum pressure from Italy and Greece should be warranted.
(13) According to data of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (Frontex), the central and eastern Mediterranean routes were the main areas for irregular border crossing into the Union in the first 8 months of 2015. Since the beginning of 2015, approximately 116 000 migrants arrived in Italy in an irregular manner, (including approximately 10 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 34 691 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August, 42 356, an increase of 20 %. A strong increase was also witnessed by Greece in 2015, with more than 211 000 irregular migrants reaching the country (including approximately 28 000 irregular migrants who have been registered by local authorities, but have yet to be confirmed in Frontex data). During May and June 2015, 53 624 irregular border crossings were detected by Frontex and during July and August 137 000, an increase of 250 %). A significant proportion of the total number of irregular migrants detected in those two regions included migrants of nationalities which, based on the Eurostat data, meet a high Union-level recognition rate.
(14) According to Eurostat and EASO figures, 39 183 persons applied for international protection in Italy between January and July 2015, compared to 30 755 in the same period of 2014 (an increase of 27 %). A similar increase in the number of applications was witnessed by Greece with 7 475 applicants (an increase of 30 %).
(15) Many actions have been taken so far to support Italy and Greece in the framework of the migration and asylum policy, including by providing them with substantial emergency assistance and EASO operational support. Italy and Greece were the second and third largest beneficiaries of funding disbursed during the period 2007-2013 under the General Programme ‘Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows’ (SOLID), and, in addition, received substantial emergency funding. Italy and Greece will likely continue to be the main beneficiaries of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in 2014-2020.
(16) Due to the ongoing instability and conflicts in the immediate neighbourhood of Italy and Greece, and the repercussions in migratory flows on other Member States, it is very likely that a significant and increased pressure will continue to be put on their migration and asylum systems, with a significant proportion of the migrants who may be in need of international protection. This demonstrates the critical need to show solidarity towards Italy and Greece and to complement the actions taken so far to support them with provisional measures in the area of asylum and migration.
(17) On 22 September 2015, the Council noted the willingness and readiness of Member States to take part, in accordance with the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the Member States, which govern the Union policy on asylum and migration, in the relocation of 120 000 persons in clear need of international protection. The Council therefore decided to adopt this Decision.
(18) It should be recalled that Decision (EU) 2015/1523 sets out an obligation for Italy and Greece to provide structural solutions to address exceptional pressures on their asylum and migration systems, by establishing a solid and strategic framework for responding to the crisis situation and intensifying the ongoing reform process in these areas. The roadmaps which Italy and Greece have presented to that end should be updated to take this Decision into account.
(19) Bearing in mind that the European Council agreed on a set of interlinked measures, the Commission should be entrusted with the power to suspend, where appropriate and having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, the application of this Decision for a limited period where Italy or Greece does not respect its commitments in this regard.
(20) As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants should be proportionally relocated from Italy and Greece to other Member States. The Council and the Commission should keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States. The Commission should submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to address the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States. In doing so, it should take into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State.Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State, that Member State should, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending Decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which should include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in those areas, as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision with a view to allowing it better to cope, after the end of the application of this Decision, with a possible increased inflow of migrants on its territory.
(21) If any Member State should be confronted with a similar emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, on the basis of Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the obligations of that Member State provided for in this Decision.
(22) In accordance with Article 78(3) TFEU, the measures envisaged for the benefit of Italy and of Greece should be of a provisional nature. A period of 24 months is reasonable in view of ensuring that the measures provided for in this Decision have a real impact in respect of supporting Italy and Greece in dealing with the significant migration flows on their territories.
(23) The measures to relocate from Italy and from Greece, provided for in this Decision, entail a temporary derogation from the rule set out in Article 13(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3)according to which Italy and Greece would otherwise have been responsible for the examination of an application for international protection based on the criteria set out in Chapter III of that Regulation, as well as a temporary derogation from the procedural steps, including the time limits, laid down in Articles 21, 22 and 29 of that Regulation. The other provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, including the implementing rules set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003(4)and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 118/2014(5), remain applicable, including the rules contained therein on the obligation for the transferring Member States to meet the costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation and on the cooperation on transfers between Member States, as well as on transmission of information through the DubliNet electronic communication network. This Decision also entails a derogation from the consent of the applicant for international protection as referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(6).
(24) Relocation measures do not absolve Member States from applying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 in full, including the provisions related to family reunification, the special protection of unaccompanied minors, and the discretionary clause on humanitarian grounds.
(25) A choice had to be made in respect of the criteria to be applied when deciding which and how many applicants are to be relocated from Italy and from Greece, without prejudice to decisions at national level on asylum applications. A clear and workable system is envisaged based on a threshold of the average rate at Union level of decisions granting international protection in the procedures at first instance, as defined by Eurostat, out of the total number at Union level of decisions on applications for international protection taken at first instance, based on the latest available statistics. On the one hand, this threshold would have to ensure, to the maximum extent possible, that all applicants in clear need of international protection would be in a position to fully and swiftly enjoy their protection rights in the Member State of relocation. On the other hand, it would have to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, applicants who are likely to receive a negative decision on their application from being relocated to another Member State, and therefore from prolonging unduly their stay in the Union. A threshold of 75 %, based on the latest available updated Eurostat quarterly data for decisions at first instance, should be used in this Decision.
(26) The provisional measures are intended to relieve the significant asylum pressure on Italy and on Greece, in particular by relocating a significant number of applicants in clear need of international protection who will have arrived in the territory of Italy or Greece following the date on which this Decision becomes applicable. Based on the overall number of third-country nationals who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in 2015, and the number of those who are in clear need of international protection, a total of 120 000 applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and Greece. This number corresponds to approximately 43 % of the total number of third-country nationals in clear need of international protection who have entered Italy and Greece irregularly in July and August 2015. The relocation measure foreseen in this Decision constitutes fair burden sharing between Italy and Greece on the one hand and the other Member States on the other, given the overall available figures on irregular border crossings in 2015. Given the figures at stake, 13 % of these applicants should be relocated from Italy, 42 % from Greece and 45 % should be relocated as provided for in this Decision.
(27) Within 3 months of the entry into force of this Decision, a Member State may, in exceptional circumstances and giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, notify the Council and the Commission that it is unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with this Decision. Such exceptional circumstances include, in particular, a situation characterised by a sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a magnitude as to place extreme pressure even on a well prepared asylum system otherwise functioning in line with the relevant Unionacquison asylum or a risk of sudden and massive inflow of nationals of third countries of such a high probability that it warrants an immediate action. Following an assessment, the Commission should submit proposals to the Council for an implementing decision regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocation of the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the duration of this Decision.
(28) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the relocation in the case of proportional relocation of 54 000 applicants from Italy and Greece to the other Member States, in the case where the participation of one or more Member States in the relocation of applicants should be suspended, or in the case where, following relevant notifications to the Council, other Member State(s) or Associated States take part in the relocation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Council.The conferral of those powers upon the Council is justified in view of the politically sensitive nature of such measures, which touch on national powers regarding the admission of third country nationals on the territory of the Member States and the need to be able to adapt swiftly to rapidly evolving situations.
(29) The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) set up by Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides support to burden-sharing operations agreed between Member States, and is open to new policy developments in that field. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 provides for the possibility for Member States to implement actions related to the transfer of applicants for international protection as part of their national programmes, while Article 18 of that Regulation provides for the possibility of a lump sum payment of EUR 6 000 for the transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from another Member State.
(30) With a view to implementing the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, and taking into account that this Decision constitutes a further policy development in this field, it is appropriate to ensure that the Member States that relocate, pursuant to this Decision, applicants from Italy and Greece who are in clear need of international protection, receive a lump sum for each relocated person which is identical to the lump sum provided for in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014, namely EUR 6 000, and is implemented by applying the same procedures. This entails a limited, temporary derogation from Article 18 of that Regulation because the lump sum should be paid in respect of relocated applicants rather than in respect of beneficiaries of international protection. Such a temporary extension of the scope of potential recipients of the lump sum appears indeed to be an integral part of the emergency scheme set up by this Decision. Moreover, with regard to the costs for the transfer of persons relocated pursuant to this Decision, it is appropriate to provide that Italy and Greece receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500 for each person relocated from their respective territories, taking into account the actual costs necessary to transfer an applicant to the Member State of relocation. Member States should be entitled to receive additional pre-financing to be paid in 2016 following the revision of their national programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund to implement actions under this Decision.
(31) It is necessary to ensure that a swift relocation procedure is put in place and to accompany the implementation of the provisional measures by close administrative cooperation between Member States and operational support provided by EASO.
(32) National security and public order should be taken into consideration throughout the relocation procedure, until the transfer of the applicant is implemented. In full respect of the fundamental rights of the applicant, including the relevant rules on data protection, where a Member State has reasonable grounds for regarding an applicant as a danger to its national security or public order, it should inform the other Member States thereof.
(33) When deciding which applicants in clear need of international protection should be relocated from Italy and from Greece, priority should be given to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(7). In this respect, any special needs of applicants, including health, should be of primary concern. The best interests of the child should always be a primary consideration.
(34) The integration of applicants in clear need of international protection into the host society is the cornerstone of a properly functioning Common European Asylum System. Therefore, in order to decide which specific Member State should be the Member State of relocation, specific account should be given to the specific qualifications and characteristics of the applicants concerned, such as their language skills and other individual indications based on demonstrated family, cultural or social ties which could facilitate their integration into the Member State of relocation. In the case of particularly vulnerable applicants, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Member State of relocation to provide adequate support to those applicants and to the necessity of ensuring a fair distribution of those applicants among Member States. With due respect for the principle of non-discrimination, Member States of relocation may indicate their preferences for applicants based on the above information on the basis of which Italy and Greece, in consultation with EASO and, where applicable, liaison officers, may compile lists of possible applicants identified for relocation to that Member State.
(35) The legal and procedural safeguards set out in Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 remain applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision. In addition, applicants should be informed of the relocation procedure set out in this Decision and be notified with the relocation decision which constitutes a transfer decision within the meaning of Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013. Considering that an applicant does not have the right under Union law to choose the Member State responsible for his or her application, the applicant should have the right to an effective remedy against the relocation decision in line with Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, only in view of ensuring respect for his or her fundamental rights. In line with Article 27 of that Regulation, Member States may provide in their national law that the appeal against the transfer decision does not automatically suspend the transfer of the applicant but that the person concerned has the opportunity to request a suspension of the implementation of the transfer decision pending the outcome of his or her appeal.
(36) Before and after being transferred to the Member States of relocation, applicants enjoy the rights and guarantees provided for in Directive 2013/32/EU(8)and Directive 2013/33/EU(9)of the European Parliament and of the Council, including in relation to their special reception and procedural needs. In addition, Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(10)remains applicable in respect of applicants covered by this Decision, and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(11)is applicable for the returning of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory. The above is subject to the limitations in the application of those Directives.
(37) In line with the Unionacquis, a robust mechanism of identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure should be ensured by Italy and Greece so as to quickly identify the persons in need of international protection who are eligible for relocation and to identify the migrants who do not qualify for international protection and should therefore be returned. This should also apply to persons who arrived on the territory of Italy or Greece between 24 March and 25 September 2015 in order for them to be eligible for relocation. When voluntary return is not practicable and other measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC are not adequate to prevent secondary movements, detention measures in line with Chapter IV of that Directive should be applied urgently and effectively. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure should be excluded from relocation.
(38) Measures should be taken in order to avoid secondary movements of relocated persons from the Member State of relocation to other Member States which could hamper the efficient application of this Decision. In particular, Member States should take the necessary preventive measures in the field of access to social benefits and legal remedies, in accordance with Union law. In addition, applicants should be informed of the consequences of irregular onward movement within the Member States and of the fact that, if the Member State of relocation grants them international protection, they are entitled to the rights attached to international protection only in that Member State.
(39) Additionally, in line with the objectives set out in Directive 2013/33/EU, the harmonisation of reception conditions amongst Member States should help to limit secondary movements of applicants for international protection influenced by the variety of conditions for their reception. With a view to reaching the same objective, Member States should consider imposing reporting obligations, and providing applicants for international protection with material reception conditions that include housing, food and clothing only in kind, as well as, where appropriate, ensuring that applicants are directly transferred to the Member State of relocation. Likewise, during the period of the examination of applications for international protection, as provided for in the asylum and Schengenacquis, except for serious humanitarian reasons, Member States should neither provide applicants with national travel documents, nor give them other incentives, such as financial ones, which could facilitate their irregular movements to other Member States. In case of irregular movements to other Member States, applicants for or beneficiaries of international protection should be required to go back to the Member State of relocation, and that Member State should take those persons back without delay.
(40) In order to avoid secondary movements of beneficiaries of international protection, Member States should also inform the beneficiaries about the conditions under which they may legally enter and stay in another Member State, and should be able to impose reporting obligations. Pursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC, Member States should require a beneficiary of international protection who is staying irregularly on their territories to go back immediately to the Member State of relocation. In case the person refuses to return voluntarily, return to the Member State of relocation should be enforced.
(41) Furthermore, if provided for in national law, in the case of enforced return to the Member State of relocation, the Member State which enforced the return may decide to issue a national entry ban that would prevent the beneficiary, for a certain period of time, from re-entering the territory of that specific Member State.
(42) As the purpose of this Decision is to address an emergency situation and to support Italy and Greece in reinforcing their asylum systems, it should allow them to make, with the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements with Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland on the relocation of persons falling within the scope of this Decision. Such arrangements should also reflect the core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants as well as those relating to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
(43) The specific support provided to Italy and to Greece through the relocation scheme should be complemented by additional measures, from the arrival of third-country nationals on the territory of Italy or of Greece until the completion of all applicable procedures, coordinated by EASO and other relevant Agencies, such as Frontex coordinating the return of third-country nationals not having the right to remain on the territory, in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC.
(44) Since the objectives of this Decision cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and effects of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(45) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(46) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, the United Kingdom is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(47) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(48) In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council should fix the number of applicants to be relocated to that Member State. The Council should also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
(49) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
(50) In view of the urgency of the situation, this Decision should enter into force on the date following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Subject matter
1. This Decision establishes provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece, in view of supporting them in better coping with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries in those Member States.
2. The Commission shall keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States.
The Commission will submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to take into account the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States.
2. The Commission shall keep under constant review the situation regarding massive inflows of third country nationals into Member States.
The Commission will submit, as appropriate, proposals to amend this Decision in order to take into account the evolution of the situation on the ground and its impact upon the relocation mechanism, as well as the evolving pressure on Member States, in particular frontline Member States.
Definitions
For the purposes of this Decision, the following definitions apply:
(a)
‘application for international protection’ means an application for international protection as defined in point (h) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(12);
(b)
‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken;
(c)
‘international protection’ means refugee status and subsidiary protection status as defined in points (e) and (g), respectively, of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU;
(d)
‘family members’ means family members as defined in point (g) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013;
(e)
‘relocation’ means the transfer of an applicant from the territory of the Member State which the criteria laid down in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 indicate as responsible for examining his or her application for international protection to the territory of the Member State of relocation;
(f)
‘Member State of relocation’ means the Member State which becomes responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of an applicant following his or her relocation in the territory of that Member State.
(a)
‘application for international protection’ means an application for international protection as defined in point (h) of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(12);
(b)
‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken;
(c)
‘international protection’ means refugee status and subsidiary protection status as defined in points (e) and (g), respectively, of Article 2 of Directive 2011/95/EU;
(d)
‘family members’ means family members as defined in point (g) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013;
(e)
‘relocation’ means the transfer of an applicant from the territory of the Member State which the criteria laid down in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 indicate as responsible for examining his or her application for international protection to the territory of the Member State of relocation;
(f)
‘Member State of relocation’ means the Member State which becomes responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of an applicant following his or her relocation in the territory of that Member State.
Scope
1. Relocation pursuant to this Decision shall take place only in respect of an applicant who has lodged his or her application for international protection in Italy or in Greece and for whom those States would have otherwise been responsible pursuant to the criteria for determining the Member State responsible set out in Chapter III of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
2. Relocation pursuant to this Decision shall be applied only in respect of an applicant belonging to a nationality for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection among decisions taken at first instance on applications for international protection as referred to in Chapter III of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(13)is, according to the latest available updated quarterly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75 % or higher. In the case of stateless persons, the country of former habitual residence shall be taken into account. Quarterly updates shall be taken into account only in respect of applicants who have not already been identified as applicants who could be relocated in accordance with Article 5(3) of this Decision.
2. Relocation pursuant to this Decision shall be applied only in respect of an applicant belonging to a nationality for which the proportion of decisions granting international protection among decisions taken at first instance on applications for international protection as referred to in Chapter III of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(13)is, according to the latest available updated quarterly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75 % or higher. In the case of stateless persons, the country of former habitual residence shall be taken into account. Quarterly updates shall be taken into account only in respect of applicants who have not already been identified as applicants who could be relocated in accordance with Article 5(3) of this Decision.
Relocation of 120 000 applicants to Member States
1.
120 000 applicants shall be relocated to the other Member States as follows:
(a)
15 600 applicants shall be relocated from Italy to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex I;
(b)
50 400 applicants shall be relocated from Greece to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex II;
(c)
54 000 applicants shall be relocated to the territory of the other Member States, proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II, either in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article or through an amendment of this Decision, as referred to in Article 1(2) and in paragraph 3 of this Article.
2. As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants, referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, shall be relocated from Italy and Greece, in proportion resulting from points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, to the territory of other Member States and proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II. The Commission shall submit a proposal to the Council on the figures to be allocated accordingly per Member State.
3. If by 26 September 2016, the Commission considers that an adaptation of the relocation mechanism is justified by the evolution of the situation on the ground or that a Member State is confronted with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries due to a sharp shift of migration flows and taking into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State, it may submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
Likewise, a Member State may, giving duly justified reasons, notify the Council and the Commission that it is confronted with a similar emergency situation. The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
4. In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, fix the number of applicants to be relocated to the Member State concerned. In the same implementing decision, the Council shall also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
5. A Member State may, in exceptional circumstances, by 26 December 2015, notify the Council and the Commission that it is temporarily unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with paragraph 1, giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit proposals to the Council regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned in accordance with paragraph 1. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocating the applicants in the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the date referred to in Article 13(2).
6. The Council shall, within 1 month, decide on the proposals referred to in paragraph 5.
7. For the purpose of application of paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 of this Article, and of Article 11(2), the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, adopt an implementing decision.
120 000 applicants shall be relocated to the other Member States as follows:
(a)
15 600 applicants shall be relocated from Italy to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex I;
(b)
50 400 applicants shall be relocated from Greece to the territory of the other Member States in accordance with the table set out in Annex II;
(c)
54 000 applicants shall be relocated to the territory of the other Member States, proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II, either in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article or through an amendment of this Decision, as referred to in Article 1(2) and in paragraph 3 of this Article.
2. As of 26 September 2016, 54 000 applicants, referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, shall be relocated from Italy and Greece, in proportion resulting from points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, to the territory of other Member States and proportionally to the figures laid down in Annexes I and II. The Commission shall submit a proposal to the Council on the figures to be allocated accordingly per Member State.
3. If by 26 September 2016, the Commission considers that an adaptation of the relocation mechanism is justified by the evolution of the situation on the ground or that a Member State is confronted with an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries due to a sharp shift of migration flows and taking into account the views of the likely beneficiary Member State, it may submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
Likewise, a Member State may, giving duly justified reasons, notify the Council and the Commission that it is confronted with a similar emergency situation. The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit, as appropriate, proposals to the Council, as referred to in Article 1(2).
4. In case where, following a notification made pursuant to Article 4 of Protocol No 21 by a Member State covered by that Protocol, the Commission confirms in accordance with Article 331(1) TFEU the participation of that Member State in this Decision, the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, fix the number of applicants to be relocated to the Member State concerned. In the same implementing decision, the Council shall also accordingly adapt the allocations of other Member States by reducing them in proportion.
5. A Member State may, in exceptional circumstances, by 26 December 2015, notify the Council and the Commission that it is temporarily unable to take part in the relocation process of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to it in accordance with paragraph 1, giving duly justified reasons compatible with the fundamental values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
The Commission shall assess the reasons given and submit proposals to the Council regarding a temporary suspension of the relocation of up to 30 % of applicants allocated to the Member State concerned in accordance with paragraph 1. Where justified, the Commission may propose to extend the time limit for relocating the applicants in the remaining allocation by up to 12 months beyond the date referred to in Article 13(2).
6. The Council shall, within 1 month, decide on the proposals referred to in paragraph 5.
7. For the purpose of application of paragraphs 2, 4 and 6 of this Article, and of Article 11(2), the Council shall, on a proposal from the Commission, adopt an implementing decision.
Relocation procedure
1. For the purpose of the administrative cooperation required to implement this Decision, each Member State shall appoint a national contact point, whose address it shall communicate to the other Member States and to EASO. Member States shall, in liaison with EASO and other relevant agencies, take all the appropriate measures to establish direct cooperation and an exchange of information between the competent authorities, including about the grounds referred to in paragraph 7.
2. Member States shall, at regular intervals, and at least every 3 months, indicate the number of applicants who can be relocated swiftly to their territory and any other relevant information.
3. Based on this information, Italy and Greece shall, with the assistance of EASO and, where applicable, of Member States’ liaison officers referred to in paragraph 8, identify the individual applicants who could be relocated to the other Member States and, as soon as possible, submit all relevant information to the contact points of those Member States. Priority shall be given for that purpose to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
4. Following approval of the Member State of relocation, Italy and Greece shall, as soon as possible, take a decision to relocate each of the identified applicants to a specific Member State of relocation, in consultation with EASO, and shall notify the applicant in accordance with Article 6(4). The Member State of relocation may decide not to approve the relocation of an applicant only if there are reasonable grounds as referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article.
5. Applicants whose fingerprints are required to be taken pursuant to the obligations set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 may be proposed for relocation only if their fingerprints have been taken and transmitted to the Central System of Eurodac, pursuant to that Regulation.
6. The transfer of the applicant to the territory of the Member State of relocation shall take place as soon as possible following the date of the notification to the person concerned of the transfer decision referred to in Article 6(4) of this Decision. Italy and Greece shall transmit to the Member State of relocation the date and time of the transfer as well as any other relevant information.
7. Member States retain the right to refuse to relocate an applicant only where there are reasonable grounds for regarding him or her as a danger to their national security or public order or where there are serious reasons for applying the exclusion provisions set out in Articles 12 and 17 of Directive 2011/95/EU.
8. For the implementation of all aspects of the relocation procedure described in this Article, Member States may, after exchanging all relevant information, decide to appoint liaison officers to Italy and to Greece.
9. In line with the Unionacquis, Member States shall fully implement their obligations. Accordingly, identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure shall be guaranteed by Italy and by Greece. To ensure that the process remains efficient and manageable, reception facilities and measures shall be duly organised so as to temporarily accommodate people, in line with the Unionacquis, until a decision is quickly taken on their situation. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure shall be excluded from relocation.
10. The relocation procedure provided for in this Article shall be completed as swiftly as possible and not later than 2 months from the time of the indication given by the Member State of relocation as referred to in paragraph 2, unless the approval by the Member State of relocation referred to in paragraph 4 takes place less than 2 weeks before the expiry of that 2-month period. In such case, the time limit for completing the relocation procedure may be extended for a period not exceeding a further 2 weeks. In addition, the time limit may also be extended, for a further 4-week period, as appropriate, where Italy or Greece show objective practical obstacles that prevent the transfer from taking place.
Where the relocation procedure is not completed within these time limits and unless Italy and Greece agree with the Member State of relocation to a reasonable extension of the time limit, Italy and Greece shall remain responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
11. Following the relocation of the applicant, the Member State of relocation shall take and transmit to the Central System of Eurodac the fingerprints of the applicant in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 and update the data sets in accordance with Article 10 of, and, where applicable, Article 18 of that Regulation.
2. Member States shall, at regular intervals, and at least every 3 months, indicate the number of applicants who can be relocated swiftly to their territory and any other relevant information.
3. Based on this information, Italy and Greece shall, with the assistance of EASO and, where applicable, of Member States’ liaison officers referred to in paragraph 8, identify the individual applicants who could be relocated to the other Member States and, as soon as possible, submit all relevant information to the contact points of those Member States. Priority shall be given for that purpose to vulnerable applicants within the meaning of Articles 21 and 22 of Directive 2013/33/EU.
4. Following approval of the Member State of relocation, Italy and Greece shall, as soon as possible, take a decision to relocate each of the identified applicants to a specific Member State of relocation, in consultation with EASO, and shall notify the applicant in accordance with Article 6(4). The Member State of relocation may decide not to approve the relocation of an applicant only if there are reasonable grounds as referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article.
5. Applicants whose fingerprints are required to be taken pursuant to the obligations set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 may be proposed for relocation only if their fingerprints have been taken and transmitted to the Central System of Eurodac, pursuant to that Regulation.
6. The transfer of the applicant to the territory of the Member State of relocation shall take place as soon as possible following the date of the notification to the person concerned of the transfer decision referred to in Article 6(4) of this Decision. Italy and Greece shall transmit to the Member State of relocation the date and time of the transfer as well as any other relevant information.
7. Member States retain the right to refuse to relocate an applicant only where there are reasonable grounds for regarding him or her as a danger to their national security or public order or where there are serious reasons for applying the exclusion provisions set out in Articles 12 and 17 of Directive 2011/95/EU.
8. For the implementation of all aspects of the relocation procedure described in this Article, Member States may, after exchanging all relevant information, decide to appoint liaison officers to Italy and to Greece.
9. In line with the Unionacquis, Member States shall fully implement their obligations. Accordingly, identification, registration and fingerprinting for the relocation procedure shall be guaranteed by Italy and by Greece. To ensure that the process remains efficient and manageable, reception facilities and measures shall be duly organised so as to temporarily accommodate people, in line with the Unionacquis, until a decision is quickly taken on their situation. Applicants that elude the relocation procedure shall be excluded from relocation.
10. The relocation procedure provided for in this Article shall be completed as swiftly as possible and not later than 2 months from the time of the indication given by the Member State of relocation as referred to in paragraph 2, unless the approval by the Member State of relocation referred to in paragraph 4 takes place less than 2 weeks before the expiry of that 2-month period. In such case, the time limit for completing the relocation procedure may be extended for a period not exceeding a further 2 weeks. In addition, the time limit may also be extended, for a further 4-week period, as appropriate, where Italy or Greece show objective practical obstacles that prevent the transfer from taking place.
Where the relocation procedure is not completed within these time limits and unless Italy and Greece agree with the Member State of relocation to a reasonable extension of the time limit, Italy and Greece shall remain responsible for examining the application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.
11. Following the relocation of the applicant, the Member State of relocation shall take and transmit to the Central System of Eurodac the fingerprints of the applicant in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 and update the data sets in accordance with Article 10 of, and, where applicable, Article 18 of that Regulation.
Rights and obligations of applicants for international protection covered by this Decision
1. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration for Member States when implementing this Decision.
2. Member States shall ensure that family members who fall within the scope of this Decision are relocated to the territory of the same Member State.
3. Prior to the decision to relocate an applicant, Italy and Greece shall inform the applicant in a language which the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand of the relocation procedure as set out in this Decision.
4. When the decision to relocate an applicant has been taken and before the actual relocation, Italy and Greece shall notify the person concerned of the decision to relocate him in writing. That decision shall specify the Member State of relocation.
5. An applicant or beneficiary of international protection who enters the territory of a Member State other than the Member State of relocation without fulfilling the conditions for stay in that other Member State shall be required to return immediately. The Member State of relocation shall take back the person without delay.
2. Member States shall ensure that family members who fall within the scope of this Decision are relocated to the territory of the same Member State.
3. Prior to the decision to relocate an applicant, Italy and Greece shall inform the applicant in a language which the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand of the relocation procedure as set out in this Decision.
4. When the decision to relocate an applicant has been taken and before the actual relocation, Italy and Greece shall notify the person concerned of the decision to relocate him in writing. That decision shall specify the Member State of relocation.
5. An applicant or beneficiary of international protection who enters the territory of a Member State other than the Member State of relocation without fulfilling the conditions for stay in that other Member State shall be required to return immediately. The Member State of relocation shall take back the person without delay.
Operational support to Italy and to Greece
1. In order to support Italy and Greece better to cope with the exceptional pressure on their asylum and migration systems caused by the current increased migratory pressure at their external borders, Member States shall increase their operational support in cooperation with Italy and Greece in the area of international protection through relevant activities coordinated by EASO, Frontex and other relevant Agencies, in particular by providing, as appropriate, national experts for the following support activities:
(a)
the screening of the third-country nationals arriving in Italy and Greece, including their clear identification, fingerprinting and registration, and, where applicable, the registration of their application for international protection and, upon request by Italy or Greece, their initial processing;
(b)
the provision to applicants or potential applicants that could be subject to relocation pursuant to this Decision of information and specific assistance that they may need;
(c)
the preparation and organisation of return operations for third-country nationals who either did not apply for international protection or whose right to remain on the territory has ceased.
2. In addition to the support provided under paragraph 1, and for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of all steps of the relocation procedure, specific support shall be provided as appropriate to Italy and to Greece through relevant activities coordinated by EASO, Frontex and other relevant Agencies.
(a)
the screening of the third-country nationals arriving in Italy and Greece, including their clear identification, fingerprinting and registration, and, where applicable, the registration of their application for international protection and, upon request by Italy or Greece, their initial processing;
(b)
the provision to applicants or potential applicants that could be subject to relocation pursuant to this Decision of information and specific assistance that they may need;
(c)
the preparation and organisation of return operations for third-country nationals who either did not apply for international protection or whose right to remain on the territory has ceased.
2. In addition to the support provided under paragraph 1, and for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of all steps of the relocation procedure, specific support shall be provided as appropriate to Italy and to Greece through relevant activities coordinated by EASO, Frontex and other relevant Agencies.
Complementary measures to be taken by Italy and Greece
1. Italy and Greece, shall, bearing in mind the obligations set out in Article 8(1) of Decision (EU) 2015/1523, and by 26 October 2015, notify to the Council and the Commission an updated roadmap taking into account the need to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision.
2. Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State in accordance with Article 1(2) and Article 4(3), that Member State shall, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which shall include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in these areas as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision. That Member State shall fully implement that roadmap.
3. If Italy or Greece does not comply with the obligations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may decide, having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, to suspend the application of this Decision with regard to that Member State for a period of up to 3 months. The Commission may decide once to extend such suspension for a further period of up to 3 months. Such suspension shall not affect the transfers of applicants that are pending following approval of the Member State of relocation pursuant to Article 5(4).
2. Should this Decision be amended for the benefit of another Member State in accordance with Article 1(2) and Article 4(3), that Member State shall, on the date of entry into force of the relevant Council amending decision, present a roadmap to the Council and the Commission which shall include adequate measures in the area of asylum, first reception and return, enhancing the capacity, quality and efficiency of its systems in these areas as well as measures to ensure appropriate implementation of this Decision. That Member State shall fully implement that roadmap.
3. If Italy or Greece does not comply with the obligations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may decide, having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to present its views, to suspend the application of this Decision with regard to that Member State for a period of up to 3 months. The Commission may decide once to extend such suspension for a further period of up to 3 months. Such suspension shall not affect the transfers of applicants that are pending following approval of the Member State of relocation pursuant to Article 5(4).
Further emergency situations
In the event of an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries in a Member State, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State concerned, pursuant to Article 78(3) TFEU. Such measures may include, where appropriate, a suspension of the participation of that Member State in the relocation as provided for in this Decision, as well as possible compensatory measures for Italy and for Greece.
Financial support
1. For each person relocated pursuant to this Decision:
(a)
the Member State of relocation shall receive a lump sum of EUR 6 000;
(b)
Italy or Greece shall receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500.
2. This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014. By way of exception from the pre-financing arrangements set out in that Regulation, Member States shall, in 2016, be paid a pre-financing amount of 50 % of their total allocation pursuant to this Decision.
(a)
the Member State of relocation shall receive a lump sum of EUR 6 000;
(b)
Italy or Greece shall receive a lump sum of at least EUR 500.
2. This financial support shall be implemented by applying the procedures laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 516/2014. By way of exception from the pre-financing arrangements set out in that Regulation, Member States shall, in 2016, be paid a pre-financing amount of 50 % of their total allocation pursuant to this Decision.
Cooperation with associated States
1. With the assistance of the Commission, bilateral arrangements may be made between, Italy and, respectively Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, and between Greece and, respectively, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, on the relocation of applicants from the territory of Italy and of Greece to the territory of those latter States. The core elements of this Decision, in particular those relating to the relocation procedure and the rights and obligations of applicants, shall be duly taken into account in those arrangements.
2. In case such bilateral arrangements are made, Italy or Greece shall notify to the Council and the Commission the number of applicants who are to be relocated to the associated States. The Council shall accordingly adapt, on a proposal from the Commission, the allocations of Member States by reducing them in proportion.
2. In case such bilateral arrangements are made, Italy or Greece shall notify to the Council and the Commission the number of applicants who are to be relocated to the associated States. The Council shall accordingly adapt, on a proposal from the Commission, the allocations of Member States by reducing them in proportion.
Reporting
On the basis of the information provided by the Member States and by the relevant agencies, the Commission shall report to the Council every 6 months on the implementation of this Decision.
On the basis of the information provided by Italy and by Greece, the Commission shall also report to the Council every 6 months on the implementation of the roadmaps referred to in Article 8.
On the basis of the information provided by Italy and by Greece, the Commission shall also report to the Council every 6 months on the implementation of the roadmaps referred to in Article 8.
Entry into force
1. This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in theOfficial Journal of the European Union.
2. It shall apply until 26 September 2017.
3. It shall apply to persons arriving on the territory of Italy and Greece from 25 September 2015 until 26 September 2017, as well as to applicants having arrived on the territory of those Member States from 24 March 2015 onwards.
2. It shall apply until 26 September 2017.
3. It shall apply to persons arriving on the territory of Italy and Greece from 25 September 2015 until 26 September 2017, as well as to applicants having arrived on the territory of those Member States from 24 March 2015 onwards.
Allocations from Italy
ANNEX I
| Allocation per Member State (15 600 applicants relocated)
Austria | 462
Belgium | 579
Bulgaria | 201
Croatia | 134
Cyprus | 35
Czech Republic | 376
Estonia | 47
Finland | 304
France | 3 064
Germany | 4 027
Hungary | 306
Latvia | 66
Lithuania | 98
Luxembourg | 56
Malta | 17
Netherlands | 922
Poland | 1 201
Portugal | 388
Romania | 585
Slovakia | 190
Slovenia | 80
Spain | 1 896
Sweden | 567
| Allocation per Member State (15 600 applicants relocated)
Austria | 462
Belgium | 579
Bulgaria | 201
Croatia | 134
Cyprus | 35
Czech Republic | 376
Estonia | 47
Finland | 304
France | 3 064
Germany | 4 027
Hungary | 306
Latvia | 66
Lithuania | 98
Luxembourg | 56
Malta | 17
Netherlands | 922
Poland | 1 201
Portugal | 388
Romania | 585
Slovakia | 190
Slovenia | 80
Spain | 1 896
Sweden | 567
Allocations from Greece
ANNEX II
| Allocation per Member State (50 400 applicants relocated)
Austria | 1 491
Belgium | 1 869
Bulgaria | 651
Croatia | 434
Cyprus | 112
Czech Republic | 1 215
Estonia | 152
Finland | 982
France | 9 898
Germany | 13 009
Hungary | 988
Latvia | 215
Lithuania | 318
Luxembourg | 181
Malta | 54
Netherlands | 2 978
Poland | 3 881
Portugal | 1 254
Romania | 1 890
Slovakia | 612
Slovenia | 257
Spain | 6 127
Sweden | 1 830
| Allocation per Member State (50 400 applicants relocated)
Austria | 1 491
Belgium | 1 869
Bulgaria | 651
Croatia | 434
Cyprus | 112
Czech Republic | 1 215
Estonia | 152
Finland | 982
France | 9 898
Germany | 13 009
Hungary | 988
Latvia | 215
Lithuania | 318
Luxembourg | 181
Malta | 54
Netherlands | 2 978
Poland | 3 881
Portugal | 1 254
Romania | 1 890
Slovakia | 612
Slovenia | 257
Spain | 6 127
Sweden | 1 830
Pending: 32015D1510
| 10.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 236/8 |
| (1) | On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| (2) | A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the passing away of Ms Urve ERIKSON, |
| (3) | An alternate member's seat would become vacant following the appointment of Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV as member of the Committee of the Regions, |
| — | Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV,Member of Rae Municipal Council. |
| — | Mr Juri GOTMANS,Mayor of Haanja Municipality. |
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Estonian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the passing away of Ms Urve ERIKSON,
(3) An alternate member’s seat would become vacant following the appointment of Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV as member of the Committee of the Regions,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Estonian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the passing away of Ms Urve ERIKSON,
(3) An alternate member’s seat would become vacant following the appointment of Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV as member of the Committee of the Regions,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The following is hereby appointed as member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV,Member of Rae Municipal Council.
Article 2
The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Juri GOTMANS,Mayor of Haanja Municipality.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Estonian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the passing away of Ms Urve ERIKSON,
(3) An alternate member’s seat would become vacant following the appointment of Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV as member of the Committee of the Regions,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Estonian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the passing away of Ms Urve ERIKSON,
(3) An alternate member’s seat would become vacant following the appointment of Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV as member of the Committee of the Regions,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The following is hereby appointed as member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV,Member of Rae Municipal Council.
—
Mr Mart VÕRKLAEV,Member of Rae Municipal Council.
The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Juri GOTMANS,Mayor of Haanja Municipality.
—
Mr Juri GOTMANS,Mayor of Haanja Municipality.
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
Pending: 32015D1509
| 10.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 236/7 |
| (1) | On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020. |
| (2) | An alternate member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Clodovaldo RUFFATO, |
| — | Mr Eros BREGA,Consigliere della Regione Umbria |
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Clodovaldo RUFFATO,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Clodovaldo RUFFATO,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Eros BREGA,Consigliere della Regione Umbria
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Clodovaldo RUFFATO,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,
(1) On 26 January, on 5 February and on 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116(1), (EU) 2015/190(2)and (EU) 2015/994(3)appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.
(2) An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Clodovaldo RUFFATO,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
The following is hereby appointed as alternate member to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:
—
Mr Eros BREGA,Consigliere della Regione Umbria
—
Mr Eros BREGA,Consigliere della Regione Umbria
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.