REPORT on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the Specific Programme to be carried out by means of direct actions by the Joint Research Centre implementing the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2011) of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities

13.10.2006 - (COM(2005)0444 – C6‑0385/2005 – 2005/0189(CNS)) - *

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
Rapporteur: Daniel Caspary

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the Specific Programme to be carried out by means of direct actions by the Joint Research Centre implementing the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2011) of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities

(COM(2005)0444 – C6‑0385/2005 – 2005/0189(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2005)0444)[1],

–   having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 7 thereof, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6‑0385/2005),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6‑0357/2006),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Considers that the indicative financial reference amount indicated in the legislative proposal must be compatible with the ceiling of heading 1a of the new multiannual financial framework and points out that the annual amount will be decided within the annual budgetary procedure in accordance with the provisions of point 38 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006;

3.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 119, second paragraph, of the Euratom Treaty;

4.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

5.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

6.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 1 Recital 8 a (new)
	(8a) The JRC takes part in European networks on nuclear reactor safety, which are designed to harmonise as far as possible the various national safety standards. As part of this framework programme, it would be appropriate for the JRC, given its expertise, to step up this participation so that Community safety standards can be defined for the planning, construction and operation of reactors and nuclear fuel processing plants in the European Union. This would contribute towards the establishment of a codex of nuclear security within the EU in which the different national standards could be harmonised in the interests of a high level of nuclear security in the Union.
Justification
Establishing minimum standards for the operation and equipment of nuclear reactors is in the shared interests of the European Union. These minimum standards should be drawn up through mutual, transparent and consensus-based dialogue and in accordance with the latest developments in science and research. The JRC would be given an important moderating role in this area. Establishing these minimum standards serves the safety interests of all citizens and, given the cross-border nature of the subject, will also benefit those Member States that choose to exercise their sovereignty by not operating or building nuclear reactors.
Amendment 2 Recital 9
(9) Research activities carried out within this specific programme should respect fundamental ethical principles, including those which are reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.	(9) Research activities carried out within this specific programme should respect fundamental ethical principles, including those which are reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In addition, public acceptance of these activities should be encouraged.
Justification
The research work carried out by the JRC in this area serves a common European safety interest, which does not stop at national borders. Public acceptance of this research is important from a democratic point of view and should therefore be encouraged.
Amendment 3 Recital 10
(10) The JRC should continue to generate additional resources through competitive activities; these include participation to the indirect actions of the Framework Programme, third party work and to a lesser extent the exploitation of intellectual property.	(10) The JRC should continue to generate additional ressources through competitive activities; in addition to third-party work, these include participation in the indirect actions of the Framework Programme, where efforts should be made to significantly build on a number of the activities undertaken to date, and to a lesser extent the exploitation of intellectual property.
Justification
It must continue to be possible in future for the JRC to take part in public procurement procedures in the area of indirect measures, regarding which there needs to be a redoubling of the efforts made to date. Also, additional fund-raising from other sources and the exploitation of intellectual property should continue to be authorised. This provides an automatic quality control and, in addition, contributes towards a continued high level of excellence and efficiency within the JRC.
Amendment 4 Recital 10 a (new)
	(10a) The JRC should seek to maintain its own level of scientific excellence so that it can better fulfil its mission and, with this in view, should step up activities devoted strictly to research, without prejudice to those directly intended to meet the requirements of Community policies.
Justification
As stressed on several occasions by the evaluation committee, the JRC must strike a balance between the service activities it provides for its users and the research activities which are vital for maintaining its scientific level; see also Amendment 6.
Amendment 5 Recital 10 b (new)
	(10b) The JRC will ensure that in its work the position and role of both genders are treated equally in science and research, which should ensure respect for equality of opportunity, irrespective of gender.
Justification
Clearly, the JRC does not discriminate in its work on the basis of gender. Respect for equality of opportunity must be guaranteed, irrespective of gender.
Amendment 6 Article 3, paragraph 1 a (new)
	The Commission shall take all necessary steps to verify that the actions financed are carried out effectively and in compliance with the provisions of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002.
Amendment 7 Article 3, paragraph 1 b (new)
	The overall administrative expenditure of the Specific Programme, including internal and management expenditure for the Joint Research Centre, should be proportional to the actions established under the programme and is subject to the decision of the budgetary and legislative authorities.
Justification
The appropriations allocated to the Executive Agency should comply with the provisions of the Code of conduct on the setting up of an Executive agency and Council Regulation N°58/2003 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programs. This will ensure appropriate financing of the actions of the programme.
Amendment 8 Article 3, paragraph 1 c (new)
	Budget appropriations shall be used in accordance with the principle of sound financial management, namely in accordance with the principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness, as well as the the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 9 Article 5 a (new)
	Article 5a
	The Commission shall provide prior information to the budgetary authority whenever it intends to depart from the breakdown of expenditure stated in the remarks in and annex to the annual budget.
Justification
This procedure was introduced as a result of an agreement between the Committee on Budgets and the Commission in October 1999. The draftswoman considers that the procedure should be maintained to improve the follow-up of the use of funds in the specific programmes of FP7.
Amendment 10 Article 7, paragraph 1 a (new)
	The evaluation shall include an assessment of the soundness of financial management and an evaluation of the efficiency and regularity of the budgetary and economic management of the programme.
Amendment 11 Annex, Section 2: ‘Approach’, Paragraph 4 a (new)
	The JRC will seek to maintain its own level of scientific excellence so that it can better fulfil its mission and, with this in view, will step up activities devoted strictly to research, without prejudice to those directly intended to meet the requirements of Community policies.
Justification
This adds the new Recital 10b to the text of the decision.
Amendment 12 Annex, Section 2: ‘Approach’, Paragraph 4 b (new)
	Another objective will be further development of collaboration through networking, leading to broad consensus on a range of these issues at European and world level. The possibility of the JRC taking part in networks of excellence and integrated projects will be particularly important in this connection. The application of Safeguards by the Euratom Safeguards Office (ESO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) requires R&D support and direct assistance. Special attention will be given to cooperation with future EU Member States.
Justification
This participation enables the JRC to involve a variety of partners, particularly from acceding countries, in its contribution to this very sensitive issue.
Amendment 13 Annex, Section 3.1.1: ‘Spent fuel characterisation, storage and disposal’, Paragraph -1 (new)
	Given the growing number of nuclear power stations throughout the world, the issues of waste disposal and environmental impact are becoming increasingly important. The Union, too, has to make up ground in this area and needs quickly to find lasting solutions to long‑unanswered questions on this matter.
Justification
Waste disposal and impact on the environment are issues that are independent of the position on the use of peaceful nuclear power and which, given the high number of nuclear power plants throughout the world, are in urgent need of a solution, to which the JRC must contribute.
Amendment 14 Annex, Section 3.1.7: ‘Knowledge Management, Training and Education’
It is important for the new generations of nuclear scientists and engineers, to maintain and deepen the knowledge of nuclear research through the experiments, results, interpretations and skills acquired in the past. This applies especially to domains where three decades experience in analysis of reactor performance and safety was concentrated in complex analytical tools such as models and computer codes. The JRC will contribute in making this knowledge readily available, properly organised and well documented and in supporting higher education activities in Europe. Furthermore, the JRC will contribute to the development of better communication on nuclear issues, in particular in relations with public acceptability and more globally of strategies for overall energy awareness.	It is important for the new generations of nuclear scientists and engineers, to maintain and deepen the knowledge of nuclear research through the experiments, results, interpretations and skills acquired in the past. This applies especially to domains where three decades experience in analysis of reactor performance and safety was concentrated in complex analytical tools such as models and computer codes. In view of the threat of a loss of knowledge and a lack of new scientists and engineers in the area of nuclear technology, the JRC could establish itself as a European centre for the diffusion of information and for training and education. The JRC will implement a programme aimed at retaining knowledge, ensuring that this knowledge is readily available, properly organised and well documented; in addition, it will implement a programme encouraging the development of new scientists and engineers, designed to establish how to attract young people to research in the field of nuclear energy and to train them in this area; it will also support higher education activities in Europe. Furthermore, the JRC will contribute to the development of better communication on nuclear issues, in particular in relations with public acceptability and more globally of strategies for overall energy awareness.
Justification
Support for new scientists and researchers urgently needs to be stepped up because the existing number of nuclear power plants alone poses questions for the future that require urgent efforts in terms of research. The European Union cannot afford to allow future generations of researchers to be denied the transfer of knowledge.
Amendment 15 Annex, Section 3.2.3: ‘Safe Operation of Advanced Nuclear Energy Systems’, Paragraph 2
It is essential for the JRC to be part, directly and in co-ordinating European contributions in this world-wide initiative in which the principal research organisations are involved. This includes primarily safety and safeguard aspects of innovative nuclear fuel cycles, in particular characterisation, test and analysis of new fuels. The development of safety and quality goals, safety requirements and advanced evaluation methodology for reactors will be addressed. This information will be systematically disseminated to interested Member States authorities and Commission services, in particular through regular co-ordination meetings.	It is essential for the JRC to be part, directly and in coordinating European contributions in this world-wide initiative in which the principal research organisations are involved. This is an area in which the JRC will play a decisive role in future in terms of coordinating and integrating European contributions. This includes primarily safety and safeguard aspects of innovative nuclear fuel cycles, in particular characterisation, test and analysis of new fuels. The development of safety and quality goals, safety requirements and advanced evaluation methodology for reactors will be addressed. This information will be systematically disseminated to interested Member States authorities and Commission services, in particular through regular coordination meetings.
Justification
The JRC should contribute towards ensuring that contributions from the Member States to Generation IV research activities are better coordinated and integrated in future.
Amendment 16 Annex, Section 3.3.1: ‘Nuclear Safeguards’, Paragraph 1 a (new)
..	As a result of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, or at least of the efforts of certain countries in this direction, the international context has recently changed for the worse. The dimension of non-proliferation, alongside other security issues, is growing in importance. Against this background, it is vital for the safety of EU citizens that the necessary capacities continue to be available within the JRC.
Justification
Non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is, sadly, becoming an increasingly topical issue. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance for the EU that the necessary technical capacities to evaluate and deal with this threat are maintained and constantly updated by the JRC.

• [1]  Not yet published in OJ.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Nuclear safety: Given the increasing number of nuclear power plants throughout the world, nuclear safety has become a topic with relevance for the future and one that is likely only to grow in importance on account of considerations concerning climate protection. Regardless of the fact that certain Member States exercise their sovereignty by choosing not to have nuclear power plants operating on their territory, we cannot ignore the fact that other Member States choose, equally justifiably, to take a different path, and nuclear energy used for peaceful means is for a number of reasons unquestionably a factor in a balanced energy mix in the medium term. In this connection, we need to do more to tackle the issues of waste disposal and environmental impact, because even in the European Union there is room for improvement. The JRC will be given a decisive moderating role in this area.

Research into ‘Generation IV’ reactors is currently being conducted throughout the world. Regardless of whether or not we will use reactors of this kind in certain Member States in the future, the European Union must aim to take the lead in research efforts and follow developments closely. If we in the European Union want to take decisions when the safety and use of these reactors are being discussed in future, we will be able to do so only if the European Union keeps the necessary capacities available. The JRC will have to make efforts to ensure that contributions by Member States with regard to existing Generation IV research activities are better integrated and coordinated in future.

Nuclear security: The JRC has for years worked successfully in the area of nuclear security and has regularly made its expertise available to the Euratom Safeguards Office. Here, too, we in the EU must continue to maintain the necessary capacities. In particular, the issue of non‑proliferation of nuclear weapons is becoming increasingly topical against the background of recent international developments. The monitoring and security of nuclear fuels will play an important role in future for security policy reasons. The European Union cannot stand aside but must take part in the international scientific debate and monitor further political developments from a scientific point of view. In addition, EU enlargement and the questions that arise from it for new and old Member States provides the JRC with further areas for action in which it can use its expertise to make an important contribution.

Maintenance, transfer and diffusion of knowledge: In the field of nuclear energy, the European Union has in the past always been able to refer to the broad expertise of the European research landscape. In particular, the JRC has gained an international reputation in this area and has always produced outstanding results. This expertise must be kept for the benefit of future generations of scientists. In view of the threat of a loss of knowledge and a lack of new scientists and engineers in the area of nuclear technology, the JRC could establish itself as a European centre for the diffusion of information and for training and education. It is also important that the JRC continues to intensify systematically its relations with universities and research institutes in the Member States and to advance the European scientific area in this field.

Scientific excellence and participation in indirect actions: As an organisation with a primary responsibility to its stakeholders, but at the same time concerned with scientific excellence and independence, the JRC must always seek to strike a balance between the requirements of these working methods. The JRC must continue to be allowed to take part in public procurement procedures in the area of indirect measures. A redoubling of the efforts made to date would be desirable in this area. Also, additional fund-raising from other sources and the exploitation of intellectual property should continue to be authorised. This provides an automatic quality control and, in addition, contributes towards a high level of excellence and efficiency within the JRC.

Executive agency: The rapporteur maintains the view that implementation of the measures entrusted to the JRC does not require external coordination through a further executive agency. Administrating its work lies in the field of responsibilities of the JRC and will remain established there in the form of a flexible and efficient organisational structure. Possible conflicts of interest can be avoided by the building of ‘Chinese walls’, as is the case in investment banking, for example. The rapporteur therefore explicitly welcomes the fact that the Commission is considering establishing an executive agency only for the implementation of the specific programme for indirect measures. In the area of direct measures, what is needed to ensure efficiency and transparency is not an additional agency but a more streamlined organisation.

OPINION of the Committee on Budgets (23.6.2006)

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

on the proposal for a Council decision concerning the specific programme to be carried out by means of direct actions by the Joint Research Centre implementing the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2011) of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities
(COM(2005)0444 – C6‑0385/2005 – 2005/0189(CNS))Draftswoman: Marilisa Xenogiannakopoulou

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

1. Main elements of the proposal

The present specific programme proposal covers the same period as the Framework Programme, 2007-2011, which in turn is based on Article 7 of the Euratom Treaty. In accordance with this Article, second paragraph, research programmes are drawn up for a period of not more than five years. Hence, the present proposal is not for the same duration as the EC specific programmes.

The Commission proposes that, unless extenuating circumstances arise, the Specific Euratom Programmes will be renewed for the period 2012-2013, in accordance with the foreseen legislative procedure.

The “legislative financial statement” attached to this Decision sets out the budgetary implications and the human and administrative resources, and also provides indicative figures for the period 2012‑2013.

The Commission intends to set up an executive agency which will be entrusted with certain tasks required to implement the specific programme.

This specific programme covers the following two thematic priorities:

· Fusion energy research: to develop the knowledge base for, and to realise ITER as the major step towards, the creation of prototype reactors for power stations that are safe, sustainable, environmentally responsible and economically viable. This thematic priority includes the following areas of activity:

– The realisation of ITER

– R&D in preparation of ITER operation

– Technology activities in preparation of DEMO

– R&D activities for the longer term

– Human resources, education and training

– Infrastructures

– Responding to emerging and unforeseen policy needs.

· Nuclear fission and radiation protection: to promote the safe use and exploitation of nuclear fission and other uses of radiation in industry and medicine. This thematic priority includes the following areas of activity:

– Management of radioactive waste

– Reactor systems

– Radiation protection

– Support for and access to research infrastructures

– Human resources and training including mobility.

There are, in addition, important novelties in this Specific Programme which require specific consideration for the implementation:

– A strengthened approach to the coordinating of national research programmes in the field of nuclear fission and radiation protection.

– The joint implementation of ITER in an international framework, the establishment of a Euratom Joint Undertaking for ITER, and a further strengthening of the co-ordination of the integrated European fusion energy research activities.

– A more targeted approach to international cooperation within each theme is foreseen with specific cooperation actions to be identified in the work programmes in line with the strategic approach for international cooperation.

– A component to allow a flexible response to emerging needs and unforeseen policy needs will be supported under each of the themes and the implementation will build on the experience of the Scientific Support for Policy and New and Emerging Science and Technology schemes introduced in the 6^th Framework Programme, as well as the Future and Emerging Technology scheme in the ICT area.

During the lifetime of this specific programme, and the foreseen extension to 2013, opportunities for the creation of effective joint undertakings may arise, for example in the field of radioactive waste management[1]. The Commission services will submit proposals for the creation of such undertakings to Council at the appropriate time.

The JRC will implement its mission in taking into account the internal evolution within Commission services, as well as the European and worldwide context in the nuclear field.

To this end, the strengthening of JRC relations with Member States research organisations will be systematically sought.

In connection with the Lisbon agenda and upon request of most of JRC stakeholders, the JRC will make a significant effort on training and knowledge management. The JRC will pursue its R&D activities in areas linked to waste management and environmental impact.

In nuclear safety, the most important changes are an answer to the Community policy developments, new needs expressed by Commission services and to the Community involvement in international initiatives. The JRC has been involved in nuclear safety for 30 years

2. Recommendations by the draftswoman

For reasons of coherence, the draftswoman proposes the same set of amendments to all 7 specific research programmes.

A standard amendment refers to the multiannual financial framework and the need to respect the ceiling of heading 1 a.

The following proposed amendments include the idea of sound financial management and efficient implementation of the actions financed under the specific programme.

In order to improve the financial monitoring of Community-financed research activities, the draftswoman considers that the Commission should inform the budgetary authority on the implementation of the specific programmes on a regular basis and provide prior information whenever it intends to depart from the breakdown of expenditure stated in the general budget.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:

Draft legislative resolution

Amendment 1 Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a.      Considers that the indicative financial reference amount indicated in the legislative proposal must be compatible with the ceiling of heading 1a of the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) and points out that the annual amount will be decided within the annual budgetary procedure in accordance with the provisions of point 38 of the IIA of 17 May 2006;

Justification

Standard amendment

Proposal for a decision

Text proposed by the Commission[2]	Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 2 Article 3, paragraph 1 a (new)
	The Commission shall take all necessary steps to verify that the actions financed are carried out effectively and in compliance with the provisions of the Financial Regulation.
Amendment 3 Article 3, paragraph 1 b (new)
	The overall administrative expenditure of the programme including internal and management expenditure for the Executive Agency should be proportional to the tasks provided for in the programme concerned and is subject to the decision of the budgetary and legislative authorities.
Justification
The appropriations allocated to the Executive Agency should comply with the provisions of the Code of conduct on the setting up of an Executive agency and Council Regulation N°58/2003 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programs. This will ensure appropriate financing of the actions of the programme.
Amendment 4 Article 3, paragraph 1 c (new)
	Budget appropriations shall be used in accordance with the principle of sound financial management, namely in accordance with the principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness, as well as the the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 5 Article 5 a (new)
	Article 5a
	The Commission shall provide prior information to the budgetary authority whenever it intends to depart from the breakdown of expenditure stated in the remarks and annex of the annual budget.
Justification
This procedure was introduced as a result of an agreement between the Committee on Budgets and the Commission in October 1999. The draftswoman considers that the procedure should be maintained to improve the follow-up of the use of funds in the specific programmes of FP7.
Amendment 6 Article 7, paragraph 1 a (new)
	The evaluation report shall contain an assessment of the soundness of financial management. It shall contain an evaluation of the efficiency and regularity of the budgetary and economic management of the programme.

PROCEDURE

Title	Proposal for a Council decision concerning the specific programme to be carried out by means of direct actions by the Joint Research Centre implementing the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2011) of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities
References	COM(2005)0444 – C6-0385/2005 – 2005/0189(CNS)
Committee responsible	ITRE
Opinion by   Date announced in plenary	BUDG 17.11.2005
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary
Drafts(wo)man   Date appointed	Marilisa Xenogiannakopoulou 20.9.2004
Previous drafts(wo)man
Discussed in committee	22.6.2006
Date adopted	22.6.2006
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	14 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Herbert Bösch, Simon Busuttil, Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop, Markus Ferber, Ingeborg Gräßle, Nathalie Griesbeck, Anne E. Jensen, Wiesław Stefan Kuc, Janusz Lewandowski, Vladimír Maňka, Antonis Samaras, Esko Seppänen, Nina Škottová, Helga Trüpel, Yannick Vaugrenard, Ralf Walter
Substitute(s) present for the final vote
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote
Comments (available in one language only)	...

• [1]  See the Explanatory Memorandum to the Commission’s revised proposal for the “Nuclear Package”, COM(2004)0526, 8.9.2004.
• [2]  OJ C 49, 28.2.2006, p. 37.

PROCEDURE

Title	Proposal for a Council decision concerning the Specific Programme to be carried out by means of direct actions by the Joint Research Centre implementing the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2011) of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities
References	COM(2005)0444 – C6-0385/2005 – 2005/0189(CNS)
Date of consulting Parliament	14.11.2005
Committee responsible   Date announced in plenary	ITRE 17.11.2005
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)   Date announced in plenary	BUDG 17.11.2005		EMPL 17.11.2005	ENVI 17.11.2005
Not delivering opinion(s)   Date of decision	EMPL 5.10.2005		ENVI 29.11.2005
Enhanced cooperation   Date announced in plenary
Rapporteur(s)   Date appointed	Daniel Caspary 5.10.2005
Previous rapporteur(s)
Simplified procedure – date of decision  Date of decision
Legal basis disputed   Date of JURI opinion
Financial endowment amended   Date of BUDG opinion
Parliament to consult European Economic and Social Committee – date decided in plenary
Parliament to consult Committee of the Regions – date decided in plenary
Discussed in committee	31.1.2006		21.2.2006	3.5.2006	30.5.2006
Date adopted	10.10.2006
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	28 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Šarūnas Birutis, Joan Calabuig Rull, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Giles Chichester, Adam Gierek, Fiona Hall, David Hammerstein Mintz, Rebecca Harms, Ján Hudacký, Romana Jordan Cizelj, Werner Langen, Anne Laperrouze, Pia Elda Locatelli, Nils Lundgren, Eugenijus Maldeikis, Eluned Morgan, Miloslav Ransdorf, Herbert Reul, Mechtild Rothe, Paul Rübig, Britta Thomsen, Patrizia Toia, Catherine Trautmann, Claude Turmes, Nikolaos Vakalis, Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca, Dominique Vlasto
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Vittorio Prodi, Esko Seppänen
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Rosa Miguélez Ramos
Date tabled	13.10.2006
Comments (available in one language only)	...