utterance
stringlengths 594
850k
| label
listlengths 11
11
|
|---|---|
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 93/31/EEC of 14 June 1993 on stands for two-wheel motor vehicles
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100a thereof;
Having regard to Council Directive 92/61/EEC of 30 June 1992 relating to the type-approval of two- or three-wheel motor vehicles (1),
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (2),
In cooperation with the European Parliament (3),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (4),
Whereas the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured; whereas the measures required for that purpose need to be adopted;
Whereas, with regard to their stands, in each Member State two-wheel motor vehicles must display certain technical characteristics laid down by mandatory provisions which differ from one Member State to another; whereas, as a result of their differences, such provisions constitute a barrier to trade within the Community;
Whereas these obstacles to the operation of the internal market may be removed if the same requirements are adopted by all Member States in place of their national rules;.
Whereas it is necessary to draw up harmonized requirements relating to stands for two-wheel motor vehicles in order to enable the type-approval and component type-approval procedures laid down in Directive 92/61/EEC to be applied for each type of such vehicle;
Whereas, given the scale and impact of the action proposed in the sector in question, the Community measures covered by this Directive are necessary, indeed essential, to achieve the aim in view, which is to establish Community vehicle type-approval; whereas that aim cannot be adequately achieved by the Member States individually,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
This Directive and its Annex apply to stands for all types of two-wheel vehicle as defined in Article 1 of Directive 92/61/EEC.
Article 2
The procedure for the granting of component type-approval in respect of the stand for a type of two-wheel motor vehicle and the conditions governing the free movement of such vehicles shall be as laid down in Chapters II and III of Directive 92/61/EEC.
Article 3
Any amendments necessary to adapt the requirements of the Annexes to technical progress shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13 of Directive 70/156/EEC (5).
Article 4
1. Member States shall adopt and publish the provisions necessary to comply with this Directive not later than 14 December 1994. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
When the Member States adopt these provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by the Member States.
From the date mentioned in the first subparagraph Member States may not, for reasons connected with stands, prohibit the initial entry into service of vehicles which conform to this Directive.
They shall apply the provisions referred to in the first subparagraph as from 14 June 1995.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the texts of the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 5
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 14 June 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 3189/94 of 19 December 1994 laying down for 1995 certain measures for the conservation and management of fishery resources applicable to vessels flying the flag of certain non-member countries in the 200-nautical-mile zone off the coast of the French department of Guiana
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture (1), and in particular Article 8 (4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas, in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92, the Council determines for each fishery or group of fisheries on a case-by-case basis, the total allowable catch and/or the total allowable fishing effort in order to ensure a rational and responsible exploitation on a durable basis;
Whereas, since 1977, the Community has operated a system of conservation and management of fishery resources applicable to vessels flying the flag of certain non-member countries in the 200-nautical-mile-zone off the coast of the French department of Guiana most recently laid down by Council Regulation (EC) No 3681/93 (2); whereas the latter Regulation expires on 31 December 1994;
Whereas the continuity of the system should be assured, in particular by maintaining the restriction on some fish stocks in the zone in order to conserve the stock and ensure adequate profitability for the fishermen concerned;
Whereas the processing industry based in the French department of Guiana depends on landings from vessels of non-member countries operating in the fishing zone off that department;
Whereas therefore, it is necessary to ensure that those vessels which are under contract to land their catches in the French department of Guiana can continue to fish;
Whereas shrimp fishing licences calculated on the basis of scientific advice have been issued to non-member countries whose vessels fish in the zone of the said department; whereas therefore a number of those licences are subject to changes on the basis of that scientific advice;
Whereas the fishing activities covered by this Regulation are subject to the control measures provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (3),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Vessels flying the flag of one of the countries listed in Annex I shall be authorized, during the period 1 January to 31 December 1995 to fish for the species listed in the said Annex in the part of the 200-nautical-mile fishing zone off the coast of the French department of Guiana that lies more than 12 nautical miles from the base lines, in accordance with the conditions laid down in this Regulation.
Article 2
1. Fishing in the fishery zone referred to in Article 1 shall be subject to the possession on board of a licence, issued by the Commission on behalf of the Community, and to the observance of the conditions set out in that licence and the control measures and other provisions regulating fishing activities in that zone.
2. Applications for licences shall be submitted by the authorities of the non-member countries concerned to the Commission's services at least 15 working days before the desired date of commencement of validity. Licences will be issued to the authorities of the third countries concerned.
3. The registration letters and numbers of a vessel in possession of a licence must be clearly marked on both sides of the prow and on both sides of the superstructure at the most visible point. The letters and numbers must be painted in a colour that contrasts with the colour of the hull or superstructure and must not be obliterated, altered, covered or masked in any other way.
Article 3
1. Licences may be issued for shrimp fishing to vessels which fly the flag of one of the countries listed in point 1 of Annex I. The catch quantities authorized under such licences, the maximum number of licences and the maximum number of days at sea during which such licences are valid shall be as specified for each country in point 1 of Annex I.
2. The licences referred to in paragraph 1 shall be issued on the basis of a fishing plan submitted by the authorities of the country concerned, approved by the Commission and not exceeding the limits for the country concerned specified in point 1 of Annex I.
3. The period of validity of each of the licences referred to in paragraph 1 shall be limited to the fishing period provided for in the fishing plan on the basis of which the licence was issued.
4. All licences referred to in paragraph 1 issued to vessels of a non-member country shall cease to be valid as soon as it is established that the quota laid down in point 1 of Annex I for that country has been used up.
Article 4
1. Licences may be issued for the fishing of species other than shrimps to vessels flying the flag of one of the countries listed in point 2 of Annex I. The maximum number of such licences for each country shall be as specified in point 2 of Annex I.
2. Snapper fishing licences shall be granted subject to an undertaking by the owner of the vessel concerned to land 75 % of the catches in the French department of Guiana.
3. Shark fishing licences shall be granted subject to an undertaking by the owner of the vessel concerned to land 50 % of the catches in the French department of Guiana.
Article 5
1. The following information shall accompany applications for licences submitted to the Commission:
(a) name of the vessel;
(b) registration number;
(c) external identification letters and numbers;
(d) port of registration;
(e) name and address of the owner or charterer;
(f) gross tonnage and overall length;
(g) engine power;
(h) call sign and radio frequency;
(i) intended method of fishing;
(j) species intended to be fished;
(k) period for which a licence is requested.
2. Each licence shall be valid for one vessel only. Where several vessels are taking part in the same fishing operation, each vessel must be in possession of a licence.
Article 6
1. To obtain a fishing licence for snapper or shark, as referred to in Article 4, proof must be produced, in respect of each of the vessels concerned, that a valid contract exists between the shipowner applying for the licence and a processing undertaking situated in the French department of Guiana and that it includes an obligation to land at least 75 % of all snapper catches, or 50 % of all shark catches from the vessel concerned in that department so that they may be processed in that undertaking's plant.
2. The contract referred to in paragraph 1 must be endorsed by the French authorities, which shall ensure that it is consistent both with the actual capacity of the contracting processing undertaking and with the objectives for the development of the Guianese economy. A copy of the duly endorsed contract shall be appended to the licence application.
3. Where the endorsement referred to in paragraph 2 is refused, the French authorities shall give notification of this refusal and state their reasons for it to the party concerned and the Commission.
Article 7
Licences may be cancelled with a view to issuing new licences. Such cancellation shall take effect on the date of issuance of the new licence by the Commission.
Article 8
1. Fishing for shrimps of the species Penaeus subtilis and Penaeus brasiliensis shall be forbidden in waters of a depth less than 30 metres. During these fishing activities carried out by vessels using trawls, by-catches shall be permitted.
2. Tuna fishing shall be authorized only for vessels using long lines.
3. Snapper fishing shall be authorized only for vessels using long lines or traps.
4. Shark fishing shall be authorized only for vessels using long lines or mesh nets having a minimum mesh of 100 mm and shall be forbidden in waters of a depth less than 30 metres.
Article 9
A log-book, a model of which appears in Annex II, shall be completed after each fishing operation. A copy of this log-book shall be sent to the Commission within 30 days of the last day of each fishing trip via the French authorities.
Article 10
1. The master of each vessel in possession of a licence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 (1), as concerns tuna fishing, shall observe the special conditions set out in Annex III, and in particular forward the information specified in the Annex. These conditions shall form an integral part of the licence.
2. The master of each vessel in possession of a licence as referred to in Article 4 (2) and (3) shall, on landing the catch after each trip, submit to the French authorities a declaration, for whose accuracy the master alone is responsible, stating the quantities of shrimp caught and kept on board since the last declaration. This declaration shall be made using the form of which a model appears in Annex IV.
Article 11
1. The French authorities shall take all appropriate measures to verify the accuracy of the declarations referred to in Article 10 (2), by checking them in particular against the log-book referred to in Article 9. The declaration shall be signed by the competent official after it has been verified.
2. The French authorities shall ensure that all landings of shrimps in the French department of Guiana by vessels in possession of a licence as referred to in Article 4 (2) and (3) shall be the subject of a declaration as referred to in Article 10 (2).
3. Before the end of each month, the French authorities shall send to the Commission all the declarations referred to in paragraph 2 relating to the preceding month.
Article 12
The granting of licences to vessels from third countries shall be subject to the undertaking by the owner of the vessel concerned to permit an observer to come on board at the Commission's request.
Article 13
1. The French authorities shall take appropriate measures to ensure that the obligations set out in this Regulation are complied with, including the regular inspection of vessels.
2. Where an infringement is formally ascertained, the French authorities shall, without delay, and in any event not later than 30 days from the date on which the infringement was ascertained, inform the Commission of the name of the vessel concerned and of any action they may have taken.
Article 14
1. Licences for vessels which have not complied with the obligations provided for in this Regulation, including the obligation to land all or part of the catches laid down in a contract as referred to in Article 6 shall be withdrawn.
No licence shall be issued to such vessels for a period of four to 12 months from the date on which the infringement was committed.
2. Where a vessel fishes without a valid licence in the zone referred to in Article 1, and where that vessel belongs to a shipowner or is managed by a natural or legal person who has or exercises the management of one or more other vessels to which licences have been issued, one of those licences may be withdrawn.
3. The granting of a licence may be refused during the period referred to in paragraph 1 to one or more vessels belonging to a shipowner who owns a vessel whose licence has been withdrawn under this Article or which has fished without a licence in the zone referred to in Article 1.
Article 15
If, for a period of one month, the Commission receives no communication as referred to in Article 12 (1) concerning a vessel in possession of a licence referred to in Articles 3 and 4, the licence of such vessel shall be withdrawn.
Article 16
The period of validity of licences valid on 31 December 1992 pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 3681/93 may be extended, at the request of the authorities of the country concerned, until 31 January 1995. Licences thus extended shall be counted against the number of corresponding licences laid down in Annex I for the duration of the extension, without that total being exceeded.
Article 17
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1995.
It shall apply until 31 December 1995.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 December 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2077/88
of 13 July 1988
re-establishing the levying of customs duties on nails, tacks and drawing pins, falling within combined nomenclature code 7317, originating in China, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3635/87 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3635/87 of 17 November 1987 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1988 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 16 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 1 and 14 of Regulation (EEC) No 3635/87, suspension of customs duties shall be accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I, within the framework of the preferential tariff ceiling fixed in column 9 of Annex I;
Whereas, as provided for in Article 14 of that Regulation as soon as the individual ceilings in question are reached at Community level, the levying of customs duties on imports of the products in question originating in each of the countries and territories concerned may at any time be re-established;
Whereas, in the case of nails, tacks and drawing pins, falling within combined nomenclature code 7317, originating in China, the individual ceiling was fixed at 1 500 000 ECU; whereas, on 6 July 1988, imports of these products into the Community originating in China reached the ceiling in question after being charged thereagainst; whereas it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties in respect of the products in question against China,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 17 July 1988, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3635/87, shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in China:
1.2.3 // // // // Order No // CN code // Description // // // // 10.0880 // 7317 // Nails, tacks, drawing pins, corrugated nails, staples (other than those of code 8305) and similar articles of iron or steel, whether or not with heads of other material, but excluding such articles with heads of copper // // //
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 July 1988.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 4 May 1999
on the state aid which Portugal is planning to grant to Companhia de Têxteis Sintéticos, SA (Cotesi)
(notified under document number C(1999) 1268)
(Only the Portuguese version is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(1999/598/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,
Having regard to the Code on aid to the synthetic fibres industry(1),
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to those provisions(2) and having regard to those comments,
Whereas:
I. PROCEDURE
(1) By letter dated 19 March 1998, the Portuguese authorities notified the Commission of a proposal to grant aid in favour of Companhia de Têxteis Sintéticos, SA (hereinafter "Cotesi"), a manufacturer of rope and nets located in Grijó (Carvalhos). The proposed aid falls within the scope of the control measures under the Code on aid to the synthetic fibres industry.
(2) Following a preliminary analysis, the Commission registered the case under number N 196/98 and requested additional information by letters dated 17 April and 1 July 1998. The Portuguese authorities replied to the first letter by letter dated 2 June and to the second by letter dated 12 August 1998.
(3) By letter dated 29 October 1998, the Commission informed the Portuguese Government of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the above aid. The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities(3). The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments.
(4) The Commission received comments from interested parties in December 1998 and January 1999. It forwarded them to the Portuguese authorities, who were given the opportunity to react; their comments were received by letter dated 11 March 1999, registered by DG IV on 15 March.
II. THE PROPOSED AID
(5) The eligible costs for the project total EUR 10006095 and the proposed financial support amounts to EUR 2883864 (including Community co-financing). Of the latter amount, EUR 318446 is an outright grant while EUR 2565418 is in the form of a subsidy repayable at zero interest over a period of five years, with a grace period of 18 months. The Commission calculates that the total amount of aid (including the grant equivalent of the repayable subsidy) is some EUR 899696, with an aid intensity of around 9 % (gross).
(6) The proposed aid will be granted under the specific programme for modernising the Portuguese textile and clothing industry (IMIT), as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 852/95(4), which stipulated that the programme would be jointly financed by the Member State and the Community and executed in conformity with the Structural Funds regulations.
III. THE PROJECT
(7) The Portuguese authorities stated that the project related to the modernisation of the company's production process, with a view to replacing the tooling, improving the storage areas, altering the layout and strengthening the supply chain. The objective pursued is not to increase the production capacity but rather to achieve higher efficiency and reduce costs. The project would result in the dismantling of a number of extrusion machines and the acquisition of a new extrusion line.
(8) The Portuguese authorities stated that Cotesi employs 1524 persons, that its turnover in the year preceding the launch of the project was some ECU 46 million and that it had total assets of around ECU 47 million.
(9) They also stated that the company's extrusion capacity for polypropylene (PP) yarn would diminish as a result of the project, while the production capacity for fibres not covered by the Code on aid to the synthetic fibres industry, such as polyethylene (PE), would increase. More specifically, Cotesi would increase the production capacity for high-density polyethylene and would start manufacturing polysteel, a fibre made of 70 % PP and 30 % PE.
(10) According to the information transmitted by the Portuguese authorities by letter of 2 June 1998, the production capacity for PP fell by 2,89 %, from 20556 tonnes per year (prior to the beginning of the project) to 19962 tonnes per year (after the completion of the project). The Portuguese authorities also pointed out in their letter dated 12 August 1998 that this capacity reduction took place in the context of a general tendency for the company to cut capacity since 1992. Cotesi had already reduced installed capacity by 2,1 % between 1992 and 1995 and is forecasting a further 2 % capacity cut in the years 1999-2001.
IV. GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEDURE
(11) The Commission was obliged to open the Article 88(2) procedure since it was not satisfied that, as required by the Code on aid to the synthetic fibres industry, the aid resulted in a significant reduction in the relevant capacity.
V. COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
(12) The Commission received comments from the International Rayon and Synthetic Fibres Committee (IRSFC). These comments did not concern the extent to which the aid might or might not lead to a distortion of competition in the polypropylene fibres sector, but rather the criteria by which the Commission assesses the "significance" of a capacity reduction. As explained below, the additional information transmitted by the Portuguese authorities renders it unnecessary for the Commission to take a definitive view in this case as to whether a 2,89 % capacity reduction may be considered significant.
(13) The Commission also received comments from Ficcorfil (Syndicat des producteurs français de ficelles, cordages et filets) and from three French companies that manufacture net and rope. These interested parties oppose the granting of the aid, arguing:
- that there is a fierce competition in the products concerned in what is a shrinking market,
- that the acquisition of a new extrusion line would make it possible to manufacture products such as fishing nets or synthetic cords for agricultural use, for which there is excess capacity in Europe; one of the consequences of excess capacity is pressure on prices and manufacturers' margins,
- that the cheaper labour costs in Portugal as compared with France already constitute a competitive advantage which should not be further increased through subsidies,
- that the scrapping of capacity is difficult to establish in practice,
- and, in some cases, that they have never received subsidies whereas investments by Portuguese producers have been subsidised to a large extent.
VI. COMMENTS FROM THE PORTUGUESE AUTHORITIES
(14) By letter dated 26 January 1999, the Portuguese authorities submitted their comments. The main points were as follows:
- the information transmitted to the Commission prior to the opening of the procedure and concerning the installed extrusion capacities for the fibres covered by the Code was inaccurate. More specifically, the 90 % (PP)/10 % (PE) capacity ratio, which was correct in the three years preceding the project, should not have been taken as the basis for evaluating the change in capacity during the project period,
- during that period, Cotesi increased the capacity to produce high-density polyethylene (HDPE), to the detriment of PP. HDPE can be used in agriculture, with better resistance to UV rays and pesticides than PP. It is also more environmentally friendly and has a longer life than PP. The investment also resulted in the installation of a machine to extrude polysteel, a hybrid fibre made of 70 % PP and 30 % PE. On account of its strength and high resistance to abrasion, polysteel is increasingly used for fishing and for mooring large ships,
- the Portuguese legislation on working time (Law 21/96 of 23 July, which came into force on 1 December 1996) was the cause of an estimated 8 % reduction in viable capacity since, as a consequence of that legislation, the working week was reduced from 44 hours per week in 1995 (pre-project) to 40 in 1999 (post-project). The number of working days in a year also fell from 270 in 1995 to 248 in 1999,
- from 1993 to 1998, 13 extrusion lines for PP were scrapped, while only three new lines were installed (one for PP, one for PE and one for polysteel),
- the tables attached to the letter, which include details of the capacity of all of Cotesi's extrusion machines from 1993 to 1999, show that the 90 % (PP)/10 % (PE) ratio which existed in 1995 (pre-project) had become 79,5 % (PP)/20,5 % (PE) in 1999 (post-project),
- the actual installed capacity for the extrusion of PP (including the 70 % PP capacity of the new machine producing polysteel) diminished from 20936 tonnes in 1995 to 16800 tonnes in 1999, a 19,7 % reduction.
(15) By letter dated 11 March 1999, the Portuguese authorities responded to the comments from third parties. They stressed that the latter had been based on inaccurate information with regard to the capacity reduction. In addition, the production of fishing nets would not increase as a result of the project; these were in any case not covered by the Code. Nor did the project envisage investment in the production of agricultural fibres. The Portuguese authorities stressed that physical proof existed of the reduction in capacity. They agreed that increases in production could exacerbate the oversupply situation in the sector and thus gave special attention to projects which would result in a reduction in capacity. However, it was important to ensure that Portuguese companies invested in modern equipment. While Portugal had certain advantages, e.g. relatively cheap labour, it also had disadvantages such as a lack of raw materials and not enough producers of equipment, which had to be imported from other EU countries that thus benefited from investments by Portuguese companies. The Portuguese authorities concluded that the proposed aid satisfied the conditions laid down in the Code.
VII. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID PLAN
(16) Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty lays down the principle that, except where otherwise provided, aid which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods is, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, incompatible with the common market. Similarly, Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement states that, except where otherwise provided, such aid is incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement.
(17) The plan to grant aid to Cotesi undoubtedly constitutes aid within the meaning of the Articles mentioned above as it would allow the company to carry out the investment in question without having to bear the full cost. There is significant intra-EEA trade in the products concerned by the investment and placed on the market by the company (CN codes 56074990, 63053281, 56081191 and 60024331); the trade involved amounted to about 30000 tonnes in 1997. Accordingly, it can be said that the proposed aid would be likely to distort competition and affect trade within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty and Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
(18) The exception provided in Article 87(3)(a) of the EC Treaty and Article 61(3)(a) of the EEA Agreement relates to aid to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment. By enabling the company to carry out the investment in question, the proposed aid would promote the economic development of Carvalhos, an Objective 1 area. However, the effects of the aid on the synthetic fibres sector are subject to control, even for the most underdeveloped areas of the Community.
(19) Since 1977 the conditions under which aid may be granted to synthetic fibres producers by way of support for such activities have been prescribed in a code whose terms and scope have been revised from time to time, most recently in 1996(5).
(20) The current Code requires the notification of any proposal to grant aid, in whatever form, irrespective of whether the Commission has authorised the scheme concerned, (except where the aid would satisfy the de minimis criterion) to synthetic fibres producers by way of support for any of the following activities:
- extrusion/texturisation of all generic types of fibre and yarn based on polyester, polyamide, acrylic or polypropylene, irrespective of their end-uses, or
- polymerisation (including polycondensation), where it is integrated with extrusion in terms of the machinery used, or
- any ancillary process linked to the contemporaneous installation of extrusion/texturisation capacity by the prospective beneficiary or by another company in the group to which it belongs and which, in the specific business activity concerned, is normally integrated with such capacity in terms of the machinery used.
(21) In the present case, the proposed aid would be granted to a large extent in support of the production of synthetic fibres which fall within the scope of the Code, namely the installation of new capacity for the extrusion of polypropylene filament yarn. The extrusion of polyethylene, on the other hand, falls outside the scope of the Code.
(22) The Commission regrets that the Portuguese authorities did not notify the project sooner, bearing in mind that the company applied for the aid in 1996, the year in which the project started. Nevertheless, it notes that the proposed aid conforms with the IMIT specific programme, which the Commission authorised on 5 October 1995 and which is carried out within the framework of the PEDIP II programme, which the Commission authorised as being compatible with the common market by virtue of Article 87(3)(a) of the EC Treaty(6).
(23) The Code sets out in detail the criteria to be applied when the Commission scrutinises proposals coming within the scope of control. It states among other things that, in assessing the compatibility of the proposed aid, the fundamental consideration is the effect of that aid on the markets for the relevant products, namely the fibre/yarn whose production would be supported by the aid. In all cases and irrespective of the state of the market for the relevant product and the effect of the aid on that market, it provides for the limitation of the intensity of aid. Investment aid will be authorised for companies which are not SMEs, at up to 50 % of the applicable aid ceiling, only on condition that either the aid would result in a significant reduction in the relevant capacity or the market was characterized by a structural shortage of supply and the aid would not result in a significant increase in the relevant capacity.
(24) Given that the market does not appear to be characterised by a structural shortage of supply, the Commission must be satisfied that the aided project results in a significant reduction in the relevant capacity, which is the extrusion capacity for polypropylene filament yarn.
(25) Taking into account the new information provided by the Portuguese authorities in the course of the procedure with regard to the capacity reduction resulting from the project, which superseded the information provided during the Commission's preliminary investigation and on which the comments of third parties were based, the Commission can accept that the actual 19,7 % capacity reduction is significant within the meaning of the Code on aid to the synthetic fibres industry. Moreover, the planned aid intensity of approximately 9 % (gross) is well below 50 % of the ceiling of 75 % (gross) allowed under the PEDIP II programme,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The state aid which the Portuguese Republic plans to grant to Companhia de Têxteis Sintéticos, SA (Cotesi) in the form of an outright grant of EUR 318446 and a subsidy of EUR 2565418 repayable at zero interest over a period of five years with a grace period of 18 months is compatible with the common market.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic.
Done at Brussels, 4 May 1999.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 18 August 2008
concerning the financial contribution by the Community, for the year 2008, towards a study covering the area of animal transport
(2008/694/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), and in particular Article 17 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Decision 90/424/EEC lays down the procedures governing the Community's financial contribution towards specific veterinary measures.
(2)
In particular, the Community may avail itself of studies necessary for the development of Community veterinary legislation in the field of animal welfare.
(3)
Studies, impact assessments and evaluations covering the areas of animal health, animal welfare and food safety will also support the actions identified in the Community Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2006-2010 (2).
(4)
This Action Plan identified several areas of action in particular the upgrading of existing minimum standards for animal protection and welfare and introducing standardised animal welfare indicators. Concerning animal transport, advice from scientific experts indicates that new appropriate rules on travelling times and loading densities are needed.
(5)
In order to perform an Impact Assessment, and in particular in order to evaluate the animal welfare and health, public health, economic, social, environmental or administrative impacts that an amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 of 22 December 2004 on the protection of animals during transport and related operations and amending Directives 64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1255/97 (3) as regards travelling times and space allowances is likely to provoke, a study is needed.
(6)
It is therefore appropriate for the Community to fund for the year 2008 a study which is to evaluate the different policy options linked to identified scenarios as regards travelling times and space allowances for the transported animals and to assess their respective animal welfare and health, public health, economic, social, environmental and administrative impacts. The maximum amount to be allocated to this action should be specified.
(7)
The action will be performed by a service contract in accordance with procurement procedures for negotiated procedures as laid down in Article 91(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4) and Articles 126 and 129(1) of Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5).
(8)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
A Community financial contribution for the performance of a study on travelling times and space allowances during animal transport up to a maximum of EUR 58 000 is hereby approved.
Article 2
The granting of the contribution referred to in Article 1 shall be governed by public procurement rules and shall be carried out through a negotiated procedure according to Article 91(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002.
The financial contribution provided for in Article 1 shall be financed through the budget line 17 04 02 01 of the budget of the European Communities for 2008.
Done at Brussels, 18 August 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
1,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2271/2001
of 22 November 2001
fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to certain cereal and rice-products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2001(4), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 13(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 provide that the difference between quotations of prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1 of each of those Regulations and the prices within the Community may be covered by an export refund.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 of 13 July 2000 laying down common implementing rules for granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1563/2001(6), specifies the products for which a rate of refund should be fixed, to be applied where these products are exported in the form of goods listed in Annex B to Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 or in Annex B to Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 as appropriate.
(3) In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000, the rate of the refund per 100 kilograms for each of the basic products in question must be fixed for each month.
(4) The commitments entered into with regard to refunds which may be granted for the export of agricultural products contained in goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty may be jeopardised by the fixing in advance of high refund rates. Whereas it is therefore necessary to take precautionary measures in such situations without, however, preventing the conclusion of long-term contracts. Whereas the fixing of a specific refund rate for the advance fixing of refunds is a measure which enables these various objectives to be met.
(5) Now that a settlement has been reached between the European Community and the United States of America on Community exports of pasta products to the United States and has been approved by Council Decision 87/482/EEC(7), it is necessary to differentiate the refund on goods falling within CN codes 1902 11 00 and 1902 19 according to their destination.
(6) Pursuant to Article 4(3) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 provides that a reduced rate of export refund has to be fixed, taking account of the amount of the production refund applicable, pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1722/93(8), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1786/2001(9), for the basic product in question, used during the assumed period of manufacture of the goods.
(7) Spirituous beverages are considered less sensitive to the price of the cereals used in their manufacture. However, Protocol 19 of the Act of Accession of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark stipulates that the necessary measures must be decided to facilitate the use of Community cereals in the manufacture of spirituous beverages obtained from cereals. Accordingly, it is necessary to adapt the refund rate applying to cereals exported in the form of spirituous beverages.
(8) It is necessary to ensure continuity of strict management taking account of expenditure forecasts and funds available in the budget.
(9) The Management Committee for Cereals has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products appearing in Annex A to Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 and listed either in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 or in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95, exported in the form of goods listed in Annex B to Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 or in Annex B to amended Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 respectively, are hereby fixed as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 November 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 November 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 1 October 2007
appointing an Austrian member to the Committee of the Regions
(2007/650/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Austrian Government,
Whereas:
(1)
On 24 January 2006 the Council adopted Decision 2006/116/EC appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2006 to 25 January 2010 (1).
(2)
A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate of Mr Sepp RIEDER,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Ms Renate BRAUNER, Vizebürgermeisterin der Stadt Wien und stellvertretende Landeshauptfrau, is hereby appointed a member of the Committee of the Regions, in place of Mr Sepp RIEDER, for the remainder of the term of office, which runs until 25 January 2010.
Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its adoption.
Done at Luxembourg, 1 October 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2355/2000
of 24 October 2000
prohibiting fishing for saithe by vessels flying the flag of France
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2846/98(2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2742/1999 of 17 December 1999 fixing for 2000 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where limitations in catch are required and amending Regulation (EC) No 66/98(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1902/2000(4), lays down quotas for saithe for 2000.
(2) In order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated.
(3) According to the information received by the Commission, catches of saithe in the waters of ICES divisions Vb (EC zone), VI, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France have exhausted the quota allocated for 2000,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Catches of saithe in the waters of ICES divisions Vb (EC zone), VI, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated to France for 2000.
Fishing for saithe in the waters of ICES divisions Vb (EC zone), VI, XII and XIV by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France is hereby prohibited, as are the retention on board, transhipment and landing of this stock caught by the above vessels after the date of application of this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 October 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 7 October 1992 imposing a fine pursuant to Article 15 (1) of Council Regulation No 17 on CSM NV (Case IV/33.791 - CSM - ex IV/33.638 - Sugar) (Only the Dutch text is authentic) (92/500/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Articles 14 and 15 thereof,
Having given the undertaking in question the opportunity to make known its views of the objections raised by the Commission, pursuant to Article 19 (1) of Regulation No 17 and Commission Regulation No 99/63/EEC of 25 July 1963 on the hearings provided for in Article 19 (1) and (2) of Council Regulation No 17 (2),
After consulting the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions,
Whereas:
I. THE FACTS
(1) By decision of 6 December 1990, adopted pursuant to Article 14 (3) of Regulation No 17, the Commission ordered CSM NV (hereinafter referred to as CSM) to submit to an investigation. The decision was notified to CSM on 12 December 1990. In the body of the decision it was explained that the verification was ordered because the Commission had been informed of allegations that NV Centrale Suiker Maastschappij had participated in arrangements or concerted practices with certain other Community producers concerning the marketing of sugar.
The Commission officials charged with the investigation began carrying it out immediately after the decision had been notified. This included examination of the 12 documents specified in Annex I (3). The Commission officials intended to take copies of those documents which related to the exchange of information between CSM and Suiker Unie concerning the purchasing of sugar beet, as well as the passing on of information eminating from Tiense Suikerraffinaderij NV which involved its purchase prices for sugar beet. However, CSM prevented them from doing so. It stated that it was not prepared to give copies of the documents in question because it could not reasonably be argued that the documents could prove any fact covered by the subject matter of the investigation, as specified in the written authorization presented by the abovementioned Commission officials.
The Commission officials took minutes of the above. These were signed by CSM. Extracts from the documents allowing only their identification were annexed to the minutes.
The investigation was continued on the following day, 13 December 1990. In the course of that day, CSM stated that it was now prepared to allow copies to be taken of four of the abovementioned 12 documents. It stated that it had been mistaken about the content of the four documents. The Commission officials took copies of them and confirmed this in writing (Annex II to this Decision) (3).
On 19 May 1991 the Commission decided to initiate a proceeding against CSM pursuant to Regulation No 17. On 13 June 1991 a decision was adopted pursuant to Article 16 (1) of Regulation No 17 imposing a periodic penalty payment on CSM and a statement of objections sent in the context of the abovementioned proceeding.
On 14 June 1991, as a result of the Commission Decision imposing a periodic penalty payment, CSM declared its readiness, although protesting that it had no choice, to allow the Commission to make copies of the documents referred to in Annex I to the Decision and not included in Annex II.
These copies were made at the offices of CSM on 2 July 1991.
On 12 July 1991 the Commission received a reply under the abovementioned proceeding. CSM declined a hearing.
(2) By letter of 21 December 1990 CSM asked the Commission to return the copy of a business document concerning sugar-beet prices which the Commission officials had taken during the investigation. The grounds advanced for the request were the same as those given in the statement recorded in the abovementioned minutes.
The Commission provisionally refused this request since the inquiries in the proceeding which led to the investigation at the premises of CSM have not yet been completed. It could not, consequently, be established with certainty that the document was not relevant to the investigation. In any case, the document is not, according to the Commission, one that is obviously not related to the subject matter of the investigation as specified in the decision of 6 December 1990.
II. LEGAL ASSESSMENT
1. Article 14 of Regulation No 17
Pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation No 17, the Commission may, in carrying out the duties assigned to it by Article 89 and by provisions adopted pursuant to Article 87 of the Treaty, undertake all necessary investigations into undertakings. To this end, the officials authorized by the Commission are empowered, inter alia, to examine the books and other business records of the undertaking and to take copies of or extracts from these books and business records.
Pursuant to Article 14 (3) of the same Regulation, undertakings are required to submit to investigations ordered by decision of the Commission.
The decision of 6 December 1990 requires CSM to allow the Commission officials charged with the investigation to examine the business records specified by them and to take copies of such business records. CSM failed to comply with this requirement in respect of all of the documents listed in Annex I.
The fact that, in the case of the documents in Annex II, on the second day of the investigations, and in the case of the other documents, after receiving the Commission Decision imposing periodic penalty payments, CSM nevertheless allowed the Commission to take the necessary copies where it had previously refused to let it do so, has no bearing on this infringement. The obligation incumbent on an undertaking to submit to an investigation ordered by a decision adopted pursuant to Article 14 (3) of Regulation No 17 is not satisfied even if the undertaking's refusal to let officials charged with the investigation by the Commission to exercise their powers is only temporary. Any other interpretation would jeopardize the effectiveness of the investigation.
CSM's view that the documents in question cannot prove any facts covered by the subject matter of the investigation, as specified in the Commission's decision of 6 December 1990, is unacceptable. It cannot be deduced either from Article 14 of Regulation No 17 of from the abovementioned Commission decision that the undertaking's obligation to cooperate in the investigation is limited to supplying such documents as it considers relevant. It has consistently been held in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities that it is for the Commission to determine which business records must be presented for examination and from which any copies of extracts are to be taken (Cases 155/79, AM& S v. Commission (1) and 46/87, Hoechst v. Commission (2); confirmed, with regard to requests for information under Article 11 of Regulation No 17, by Case 374/87, Orkem v. Commission (3)).
CSM however considers that an undertaking's obligation to cooperate in an investigation is limited by the subject matter and purpose of the investigation as defined in the Commission decision. CSM concludes that it is up to the undertakings themselves to judge the extent to which they are required to cooperate. Both of these positions are supported, in CSM's view, by the abovementioned Hoechst judgment.
The Commission does not call into question that in the first instance it is up to the company itself to assess its rights in the framework of a verification in the case of dispute. However, at issue is the question how an undertaking should assert its rights. The answer is that the undertaking cannot take matters into its own hands but must apply to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, which alone is competent to supervise the Commission's conduct.
Of course, the Commission officials charged with the investigation have only such powers as are specified in Article 14 of Regulation No 17 and in the investigation decision. They are under an obligation not to examine business records, or to stop examining such records, if they are obviously or in the Commission officials' opinion not related to the subject matter of the investigation.
However, such documents are not, in the Commission's opinion, involved in this instance. Nor does CSM's minuted statement justifying its refusal to have copies taken, provide any evidence that the relevant documents are obviously not related to the subject matter of the investigation as specified in the decision of 6 December 1990. The exchange of information concerning the purchasing of sugar beet, which is itself a major component in the cost price of the final product, could, by virtue of Commission Decision 82/895/EEC (4) in Case UGAL/BNIC, constitute an infringement of the competition rules of the EEC Treaty in relation to the marketing of sugar.
However, only the Court of First Instance of the European Communities is entitled to review the lawfulness of an investigation decision and of the associated actions by the Commission officials charged with the investigation. If those officials take copies of or extracts from business records which, in the opinion of the undertaking concerned, are not related to the subject matter of the investigation, the undertaking can ask the Commission to return the copies or extracts taken. The undertaking is also able to apply to have the investigation decision declared void. At all events, the Commission is not allowed to make use of evidence which it acquired on the basis of an unlawful investigation decision or outside the scope of any such decision (orders of the President of the Court of Justice of 26 March and 28 October 1987 in Cases 46/87R (5) and 85/87R (6)).
2. Article 15 of Regulation No 17
Pursuant to Article 15 (1) (c) of Regulation No 17, the Commission may by decision impose on an undertaking a fine of from 100 to 5 000 units of account where, intentionally or negligently, the undertaking refuses to submit to an investigation ordered by decision issued in implementation of Article 14 (3).
CSM has not submitted, within the meaning of that provision, to the investigation ordered by the Commission by decision of 6 December 1990, since it prevented the Commission officials charged with the investigation (as explained above) from taking copies of the documents referred to in Annex I.
Consequently, the Commission considers that there are grounds for imposing a fine on CSM. In setting the amount of this fine, account is taken of the fact that, on the second day of the investigation, CSM at its own initiative allowed the Commission officials to take copies of the four documents referred to in Annex II. It is therefore assumed that in respect of these documents the infringement of Article 14 of Regulation No 17 occured through negligence. Moreover, it cannot be disputed that CSM otherwise cooperated in the investigation. On the other hand, CSM intentionally prevented copies of the other documents from being taken, and allowed such copies to be taken only when threatened with the imposition of periodic penalty payments. Even if CSM had been mistaken about the content and extent of its obligations, in respect of these further documents there can be no question of negligence since CSM acted in full knowledge of all relevant facts,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
CSM NV failed to submit fully to the investigation ordered by the Commision in its decision of 6 December 1990 adopted pursuant to Article 14 (3) of Regulation No 17 by temporarily preventing the taking of copies of the documents specified in Annex I.
Article 2
A fine of ECU 3 000 is hereby imposed on CSM NV.
Article 3
The fine imposed by Article 2 shall be paid, within three months of notification of this Decision, to the following bank account:
No 310-0933000-43,
Banque Bruxelles Lambert,
Agence européenne,
Rond-Point Schuman 5,
B-1040 Brussels.
After the expiry of that period, interest shall be automatically payable at the rate charged by the European Monetary Cooperation Fund for transactions in ecus on the first working day of the month in which this Decision was adopted, plus 3,5 % percentage points, i.e. 14,25 %.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to:
CSM NV,
Nienoord 13,
Nl-1112 XE Diemen. Done at Brussels, 7 October 1992.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1773/2005
of 27 October 2005
fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005 of 2 September 2005 on a special intervention measure for oats in Finland and Sweden for the 2005/2006 marketing year (3),
Whereas:
(1)
An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005.
(2)
On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed.
(3)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For tenders notified from 21 to 27 October 2005, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005, the maximum refund on exportation of oats shall be 24,98 EUR/t.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 28 October 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 October 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 98/90
of 15 January 1990
amending Regulation 282/67/EEC on detailed rules for intervention for oil seeds as regards the discontinuation of the price increase to cover the cost of entry into storage
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organization of the market in oils and fats (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2902/89 (2), and in particular Article 26 (3) thereof,
Whereas the second paragraph of Article 7 of Commission Regulation No 282/67/EEC (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1383/89 (4); provides that the price to be paid to the seller is to be increased by the cost of entry into storage where the seller places the goods in storage after acceptance of the offer by the intervention agency; whereas, moreover, the EAGGF pays the intervention agency a falt-rate amount for each product entering public storage to cover the actual costs of placing the product in storage pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1883/78 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 787/89 (6); hereas any duplicated payment by the EAGGF of the some technical costs should be avoided in the future;
Whereas the measure provided for in this Regulation is in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The second paragraph of Article 7 of Regulation No 282/7/EEC is hereby deleted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 January 1990.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
****
( 1 ) OJ NO L 281 , 1 . 11 . 1975 , P . 1 .
( 2 ) OJ NO L 184 , 17 . 7 . 1980 , P . 1 .
( 3 ) OJ NO L 213 , 11 . 8 . 1975 , P . 5 .
( 4 ) OJ NO L 41 , 16 . 2 . 1979 , P . 34 .
( 5 ) OJ NO L 25 , 31 . 1 . 1975 , P . 10 .
( 6 ) OJ NO L 254 , 27 . 9 . 1980 , P . 23 .
( 7 ) OJ NO L 246 , 30 . 9 . 1969 , P . 11 .
( 8 ) OJ NO L 309 , 29 . 11 . 1975 , P . 64 .
COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 3102/80
OF 28 NOVEMBER 1980
AMENDING FOR THE 18TH TIME REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2042/75 AND FOR THE SECOND TIME REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1913/69 AS REGARDS IMPORT AND EXPORT LICENCES FOR CEREALS AND RICE
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES ,
HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ,
HAVING REGARD TO COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2727/75 OF 29 OCTOBER 1975 ON THE COMMON ORGANIZATION OF THE MARKET IN CEREALS ( 1 ), AS LAST AMENDED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1870/80 ( 2 ), AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 12 ( 2 ) THEREOF ,
WHEREAS , PURSUANT TO COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2042/75 ( 3 ), AS LAST AMENDED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 296/79 ( 4 ), THE EXPORT REFUND IS FIXED IN ADVANCE ON APPLICATION ; WHEREAS , IN THAT CASE , EXPORT BEYOND THE COMMUNITY IS SUBJECT TO PRESENTATION OF AN EXPORT CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 193/75 ( 5 ), AS LAST AMENDED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2471/80 ( 6 );
WHEREAS EXPERIENCE IN RESPECT OF ADVANCE FIXING OF THE REFUND FOR CEREAL-BASED COMPOUND FEEDINGSTUFFS SUGGESTS THAT THE ISSUE OF EXPORT CERTIFICATES WITH ADVANCE FIXING OF THE SAID REFUND FOR WHICH APPLICATION IS MADE IN RESPECT OF THE SAID PRODUCTS SHOULD BE MADE ONLY AFTER A THREE-DAY PERIOD OF REFLECTION ; WHEREAS THIS PERIOD SHOULD MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO ASSESS THE MARKET SITUATION AND , IF NECESSARY , TO SUSPEND , IN CASE OF DIFFICULTIES , THE ADVANCE FIXING CONDITIONS SET OUT IN ARTICLE 16 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2727/75 , IN PARTICULAR FOR APPLICATIONS ALREADY BEING PROCESSED ; WHEREAS , THEREFORE , REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2042/75 SHOULD BE AMENDED ;
WHEREAS , IN ORDER TO ALLOW THIS MEASURE TO BE APPLIED IN PRACTICE , THE MEMBER STATES SHOULD PROVIDE DAILY INFORMATION ON APPLICATIONS FOR EXPORT CERTIFICATES FOR COMPOUND FEEDINGSTUFFS ; WHEREAS , FOR THIS PURPOSE , ARTICLE 4 OF COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1913/69 ( 7 ), AS AMENDED BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 3116/75 ( 8 ), SHOULD BE AMENDED ;
WHEREAS THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE FOR CEREALS HAS NOT DELIVERED AN OPINION WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SET BY ITS CHAIRMAN ,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION :
ARTICLE 1
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS HEREBY INSERTED IN REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2042/75 :
' ARTICLE 9D
1 . EXPORT CERTIFICATES FOR PRODUCTS WITHIN SUB-HEADING 23.07 B OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF , WITH ADVANCE FIXING OF THE REFUND , SHALL BE ISSUED ON THE THIRD WORKING DAY FOLLOWING THE DAY THE APPLICATION WAS LODGED , PROVIDED THAT NO MEASURE TO SUSPEND ADVANCE FIXING OF THE REFUND IS TAKEN DURING THAT PERIOD .
2 . THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY OF EXPORT CERTIFICATES ISSUED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 1 SHALL BE CALCULATED AS FROM THE ACTUAL DAY OF ISSUE . '
ARTICLE 2
ARTICLE 4 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1913/69 IS HEREBY REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING :
' ARTICLE 4
1 . MEMBER STATES SHALL COMMUNICATE TO THE COMMISSION , NOT LATER THAN WEDNESDAY EACH WEEK , THE FOLLOWING PARTICULARS IN RESPECT OF THE PRECEDING WEEK :
( A ) THE TOTAL QUANTITIES OF CEREAL-BASED FEEDINGSTUFFS FOR WHICH IMPORT LICENCES HAVE BEEN ISSUED ;
( B ) THE QUANTITIES EXPORTED UNDER INWARD PROCESSING ARRANGEMENTS .
2 . MEMBER STATES SHALL COMMUNICATE TO THE COMMISSION , DAILY BEFORE 3 P.M . ( BRUSSELS TIME ), THE TOTAL QUANTITIES OF CEREAL-BASED FEEDINGSTUFFS FOR WHICH APPLICATIONS FOR EXPORT CERTIFICATES HAVE BEEN LODGED . THIS COMMUNICATION MUST ITEMIZE APPLICATIONS WITH OR WITHOUT ADVANCE FIXING OF THE EXPORT REFUND OR OF THE EXPORT LEVY SEPARATELY .
3 . THE PARTICULARS REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPHS 1 AND 2 SHALL BE BROKEN DOWN ACCORDING TO THE PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO A SPECIFIC LEVY OR REFUND . '
ARTICLE 3
THIS REGULATION SHALL ENTER INTO FORCE ON 15 DECEMBER 1980 .
THIS REGULATION SHALL BE BINDING IN ITS ENTIRETY AND DIRECTLY APPLICABLE IN ALL MEMBER STATES .
DONE AT BRUSSELS , 28 NOVEMBER 1980 .
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 18 February 1985
determining the world market price for peas and field beans
(85/142/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 of 19 July 1982 adopting general rules concerning special measures for peas, field beans and sweet lupins (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1734/84 (2), and in particular Article 2 (1) thereof,
Whereas, under Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82, the world market price for peas and field beans, as referred to in Article 3 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1032/84 (4), is to be determined on the basis of offers made on the world market, disregarding those which cannot be considered representative of actual market trends; whereas in cases where no offer can be used for determining the world market price, this price is determined from prices recorded on the markets of the principal exporting countries; whereas, in cases where no offer or price can be used for determining the world market price, this price is fixed at a level equal to the guide price for the products in question;
Whereas, under Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2049/82 (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 574/83 (6), and under Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 and Council Regulation (EEC) No 1033/84 (7), the average world market price should be established per 100 kilograms of products in bulk, delivered at Rotterdam, of sound quality; whereas, for the purpose of establishing this price, only the most favourable offers should be used relating to deliveries closest in distance, excluding those relating to products being transported by ship;
Whereas for offers and prices which do not comply with the conditions laid down above, the necessary adjustments should be made, and in particular those referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 2049/82;
Whereas the world market price may be amended during the intervening period if the factors taken into consideration at the time of its fixing undergo a significant change;
Whereas the world market price has considerably decreased during recent weeks;
Whereas the Management Committee for Dried Fodder has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The world market price referred to in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 shall be 27,70 ECU per 100 kilograms.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 February 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2159/87
of 22 July 1987
amending Regulation (EEC) No 574/86 laying down detailed rules for the application of the supplementary trade mechanism
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 569/86 of 25 February 1986 laying down general rules of application of the supplementary trade mechanism (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2297/86 (2) and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3792/85 of 20 December 1986 laying down arrangements applying to trade in agricultural products between Spain and Portugal (3), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in cereals (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1900/87 (5) and in particular Articles 12 (2), 15 (5), 16 (6) and 24 thereof, and the corresponding provisions in the other regulations on the common organization of the markets in agricultural products,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 574/86 (6), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3866/86 (7), lays down detailed rules for the application of the supplementary trade mechanism (STM);
Whereas a relaxation in the procedure for completing STM licences is desirable for a specific situation;
Whereas an STM licence may be revoked when a single reducing coefficient is fixed; whereas this facility has given rise to differing interpretations; whereas a more precise system should be laid down;
Whereas the method of communication of data by the Member States to the Commission needs to be improved;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinions of all the relevant Management Committees,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 574/86 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In Article 3 (1) the following subparagraph is added:
'However, where a single reducing coefficient has been set, the Member States may provide for the STM licences and STM import licences to be completed by hand in ink and in block capitals.'
2. Article 6 is replaced by the following:
'Article 6
1. There shall be at least two copies of the STM licences; the first marked "copy of the holder", numbered "1", shall be issued at the applicant's choice either to himself or to the holder, and the second, marked ''copy for the issuing agency", numbered ''2", shall be retained by the issuing agency.
2. For products not subject to a guide quantity, the STM licence shall be issued on the fifth working day following the day the application is submitted, unless special measures have been taken during this period.
The Member States shall notify the Commission every Monday and Thursday of the quantity for which licence applications, submitted up to the day day of notification, have been made, broken down by product concerned.
When the Commission fixes a single coefficient for reducing the quantities in respect of which applications for STM licences have been made, this coefficient shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. The party concerned may then withdraw his application for the STM licence within ten working days following the publication of the coefficient. The security relating to it shall be released immediately. If the party concerned does not withdraw his application, then the STM licenc licence shall be issued directly after the expiry of the ten working days referred to above. The licence may be issued before the expiry of the ten working day period at the request of the party concerned.
When an STM licence is issued for a quantity reduced by applying the single reducing coefficient, the part of the security corresponding to the difference between the quantity applied for and the quantity for which the STM licence is issued, shall be released.
3. For products subject to a guide quantity, STM licence applications may be made only during the first 10 days of each month. However, if the 10th day is a public holiday, a Saturday or a Sunday, the STM licence applications may be lodged on the next working day.
On the second working day following that of the end of the period allowed for making application, Member States shall notify the Commission of the quantity applied for, broken down by product concerned.
4. With regard to products subject to a guide quantity, when the Commission has accepted the applications as notified by telex, STM licences shall be issued on the 21st day of each month, or, if this day is a public holiday, a Saturday or a Sunday, the first working day thereafter. Where the quantities for which applications for STM licences have been made exceed the quantity available, the Commission shall set a single coefficient for reducing the quantities applied for. This coefficient shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
When an STM licence is, as a result of applying the single reducing coefficient, valid for a quantity less than that applied for, then the party concerned may withdraw his application for the STM licence within ten working days following the date of publication of the coefficient in the Official Journal of the European Communities. The security relating to it shall be released immediately. If the party concerned does not withdraw his application, the STM licence shall be issued directly after expiry of the ten working days referred to above. The licence may be issued before expiry of the ten working day period at the request of the party concerned.
When a STM licence is issued for a quantity reduced by applying the single reducing coefficient, the part of the security corresponding to the difference between the quantity applied for and the quantity for which the StM licence is issued, shall be released.
Where the guide quantity deriving from the Act of Accession is split up during the calendar year or the marketing year applicable to the relevant product, for the purposes of the application of the first subparagraph, each part of the guide quantity shall be treated as the quantity available.
3. In Article 14 (2) the expression 'the quantities by refusal' is replaced by 'the quantities covered by refusal in the previous month'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 August 1987.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 July 1987.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1082/2004
of 9 June 2004
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 June 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 9 June 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 407/2006
of 9 March 2006
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 March 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 9 March 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL DECISION
of 22 March 1984
amending Decision 80/817/EEC on the equivalence of field inspections carried out in third countries on seed-producing crops
(84/184/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 66/400/EEC of 14 June 1966 on the marketing of beet seed (1), as last amended by Directive 78/692/EEC (2), and in particular Article 16 (1) (a) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 66/401/EEC of 14 June 1966 on the marketing of fodder plant seed (3), as last amended by Directive 83/116/EEC (4), and in particular Article 16 (1) (a) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 66/402/EEC of 14 June 1966 on the marketing of cereal seed (5), as last amended by Directive 81/561/EEC (6), and in particular Article 16 (1) (a) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 69/208/EEC of 30 June 1969 on the marketing of seed oil and fibre plants (7), as last amended by Directive 83/116/EEC, and in particular Article 15 (1) (a) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas, in Decision 80/817/EEC (8), as amended by Decision 82/601/EEC (9), the Council declared that field inspections carried out in 23 third countries on seed-producing crops of certain species satisfy the conditions laid down in the said Directives;
Whereas this declaration of equivalence is valid only until 30 June 1983; whereas work concerning its renewal, in particular a study of the current situation in each beneficiary country and experiments on the subject, is under way;
Whereas, pending the outcome of this work, the validity of that declaration of equivalence should be extended for an adequate period,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In Article 3 of Decision 80/817/EEC '30 June 1983' is hereby replaced by '31 December 1984'.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 March 1984.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1144/2009
of 26 November 2009
amending Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 establishing the Community list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Community
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 of the European Parliament and the Council of 14 December 2005 on the establishment of a Community list of air carriers subject to an operating ban within the Community and on informing air transport passengers of the identity of the operating air carrier, and repealing Article 9 of Directive 2004/36/EC (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 of 22 March 2006 established the Community list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Community referred to in Chapter II of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 (2).
(2)
In accordance with Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005, some Member States communicated to the Commission information that is relevant in the context of updating the Community list. Relevant information was also communicated by third countries. On this basis, the Community list should be updated.
(3)
The Commission informed all air carriers concerned either directly or, when this was not practicable, through the authorities responsible for their regulatory oversight, indicating the essential facts and considerations which would form the basis for a decision to impose on them an operating ban within the Community or to modify the conditions of an operating ban imposed on an air carrier which is included in the Community list.
(4)
Opportunity was given by the Commission to the air carriers concerned to consult the documents provided by Member States, to submit written comments and to make an oral presentation to the Commission within 10 working days and to the Air Safety Committee established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 of 16 December 1991 on the harmonization of technical requirements and administrative procedures in the field of civil aviation (3).
(5)
The authorities with responsibility for regulatory oversight over the air carriers concerned have been consulted by the Commission as well as, in specific cases, by some Member States.
(6)
The Air Safety Committee has heard presentations by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the Commission about the technical assistance projects carried out in countries affected by Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005. It has been informed about the requests for further technical assistance and cooperation to improve the administrative and technical capability of civil aviation authorities with a view to resolving any non compliance with applicable international standards.
(7)
The Air Safety Committee has also been informed about enforcement actions taken by EASA and Member States to ensure the continuing airworthiness and maintenance of aircraft registered in the European Community and operated by air carriers certified by civil aviation authorities of third countries.
(8)
Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(9)
Following information resulting from SAFA ramp checks carried out on aircraft of certain Community air carriers, as well as area specific inspections and audits carried out by their national aviation authorities, some Member States have taken certain enforcement measures. They informed the Commission and the Air Safety Committee about these measures: the competent authorities of Lithuania revoked the Air Operator Certificate (AOC) of the air carrier FLYLAL Lithuanian Airlines and the competent authorities of Spain launched the procedure to suspend the AOC of the air carrier Euro Continental on 30 October 2009.
(10)
There is verified evidence of serious safety deficiencies on the part of Albanian Airlines MAK certified in Albania. These deficiencies have been identified by France, Germany, Italy as well as other ECAC States during ramp inspections performed under the SAFA programme (4). These deficiencies concern mainly aircraft of type MD82.
(11)
Albanian Airlines MAK responded adequately and in a timely fashion to the enquiry by the civil aviation authority of France, Germany and Italy regarding the corrective actions undertaken to address these safety deficiencies.
(12)
The competent authorities of Albania (DGCA) however confirmed that the deficiencies identified in SAFA inspections actually pointed to systemic deficiencies in the operations and the quality system of Albanian Airlines MAK. The DGCA carried out an in-depth investigation of the air carrier’s compliance with the applicable safety standards, following which they decided to impose restrictions on the operation and structural changes to the air carrier. In particular the DGCA informed the Air Safety Committee that the fleet was reduced from 3 to 2 aircraft and that the aircraft of type MD-82 with registration ZA-ASA was withdrawn from the AOC of Albanian Airlines and deregistered on 1 October 2009. In addition, the DGCA limited on 23 October the operations of the air carrier to the level and destinations existing at that date and requested the air carrier to change, with immediate effect, its management and reinforce the quality management and safety management systems.
(13)
The DGCA made presentations to the Air Safety Committee on 11 November which confirmed that these corrective actions have been implemented and are deemed to effectively address the safety deficiencies identified.
(14)
The competent authorities of Albania have shown that they acted to ensure the safety oversight of Albanian Airlines MAK.
(15)
The competent authorities of Albania are invited to expedite the implementation of the action plan referred to in recital (32) of Regulation (EC) No 787/2007 (5), and reminded of their commitment referred to in recital (33) of the same Regulation, not to issue any further AOC until the restructuring programme has been satisfactorily implemented. In view of this, Albania is invited to accelerate the capacity building of the DGCA in order to ensure the continuing oversight of air carriers certified in Albania is carried out in a sustainable manner and in compliance with the applicable safety standards.
(16)
The European Aviation Safety Agency will carry out a standardisation inspection of Albania in early 2010 to monitor the implementation of the applicable safety requirements by the competent authorities and by the undertakings under their oversight.
(17)
In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 619/2009 (6) and following the presentation of the Corrective Action Plan in June 2009, the competent authorities of Egypt have submitted four monthly reports covering July, August, September and October 2009 to show the status of implementation of the plan as verified by these authorities. Further to these reports which have focused on ramp checks of aircraft of Egypt Air, the competent authorities of Egypt were requested to provide the audit reports for maintenance, continuing airworthiness and flight operations that they carried out on the air carrier. The competent authorities of Egypt transmitted on 10 November the report of the base inspection of Egypt Air in October 2009 which led to the renewal of the AOC of the air carrier. The audit reports for continued airworthiness, flight and ground operations were not transmitted. The documents provided show that, while significant progress has been made by the air carrier, further improvements in the areas of maintenance and engineering and operations are anticipated.
(18)
The competent authorities of Egypt have also undertaken to provide information regarding the satisfactory closure of findings previously raised during ramp checks of aircraft of Egypt Air in 2008 and 2009. To that end, they addressed relevant correspondence to certain Member States where aircraft of Egypt Air had been subject to ramp checks in the period 1 January 2008 to 30 September 2009. The process of closure of these finding is ongoing and shall be verified on a regular basis.
(19)
The Air Safety Committee acknowledges the efforts made by the carrier towards completing the actions necessary to redress its safety situation, as well as the strong disposition towards cooperation shown both by the carrier and the competent authorities of Egypt. However, given the scope and range of the corrective action plan and the need to provide for sustainable solutions to the previously identified safety deficiencies, the competent authorities of Egypt are requested to continue sending monthly reports on verification of the implementation of that plan and closure of the findings identified during the SAFA inspections along with any other reports of audits that they carry out on Egypt Air.
(20)
Upon completion of the corrective action plan, the competent authorities of Egypt should carry out a final audit and communicate the results to the Commission along with any recommendations. The Commission reserves the right to proceed to the verification of the implementation of corrective measures by the air carrier by means of a visit to be carried out by the European Aviation Safety Agency with the assistance of Member States. In the meantime, the Member States shall continue to ensure that the number of inspections of Egypt Air will be intensified in order to provide the basis for a reassessment of this case during the next Air Safety Committee.
(21)
Pursuant to Regulations (EC) No 715/2008 and 1131/2008 (7), Member States continued to verify the effective compliance of Yemenia with the relevant safety standards through regular ramp checks of its aircraft landing on Community airports. In 2009, France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom reported such inspections. The Commission received documentation demonstrating that the air carrier reacted appropriately and in a timely manner to resolve the findings arising from these inspections.
(22)
Following the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 619/2009 the Commission received additional information from the competent authorities of the Republic of Yemen as well as from the carrier Yemenia Yemen Airways on the implementation of the corrective actions plan in the areas of maintenance and operations.
(23)
The competent authorities of the Republic of Yemen informed the Commission of the verification they carried out on the maintenance facilities of Yemenia after the suspension of its maintenance organisation approval EASA.145.0177 with a view to assess the compliance of Yemenia with the Yemenite standard YCAR-145. The competent authorities of the Republic of Yemen transmitted a revised corrective action plan from Yemenia dated 15 September 2009 following the audit by the Civil Aviation and Meteorology Authority (CAMA) of the maintenance organisation of Yemenia according to the national requirements (YCAR-145) together with a follow-up audit by CAMA dated 20 September 2009. Both documents showed that all findings have been closed. In addition, individual supporting documentation for the closure of findings were provided by CAMA during the meeting of the Air Safety Committee on 10 November 2009.
(24)
Furthermore, the Air Safety Committee was informed of the positive assessment, at this stage, by EASA and the competent authorities of France of the implementation of corrective actions by Yemenia to regain its European maintenance approval.
(25)
The efforts deployed by Yemenia to correct the identified safety deficiencies in the various audits are acknowledged. The completion by Yemenia of the corrective action plan in the field of maintenance as reported in the assessments carried out in this area by CAMA is noted. An on-site visit in Yemen will be organised by EASA and Member States as soon as practicable to verify the safety situation of Yemenia with a view to evaluating its actual compliance with international safety standards and to evaluate the capacity of CAMA to ensure the oversight of the safety of civil aviation in Yemen.
(26)
Member States will verify systematically the effective compliance of Yemenia with the relevant safety standards through the prioritisation of ramp inspections to be carried out on aircraft of this carrier pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 351/2008. The Air Safety Committee will review this case in its next session.
(27)
The Democratic Republic of Congo informed the Commission of the withdrawal of operating licences for the following air carriers: Virunga Air Charter, Air Navette, Air Beni, Air Boyoma, Butembo Airlines, Sun Air services, Rwakabika Bushi Express, Aigle Aviation, Kivu Air, Comair, Free Airlines, Great Lake Business Company, Air Infini, Bel Glob Airlines, Safari Logistics, Tembo Air Services, Katanga Airways, Cargo Bull, Africa One, Malila Airlift, Transport Aérien Congolais (TRACO), El Sam Airlift, Thom's Airways, Piva Airlines, Espace Aviation Service. These air carriers have ceased their activities since 30 July 2009.
(28)
Furthermore, the competent authorities of the Democratic Republic of Congo informed of the withdrawal of operating licenses for air carriers of which the Commission had not been previously informed they had an operating license: Air Fox, Trans Kasai Air, Wetrafa, Adala Airways, Executive Aviation, Flight Express, Katana Airways, Showa Air Cargo, Gloria Airways, Soft Trans Air, Lomami Aviation, Pegassus Aviation, African Trading and Transport, Brooks Trading. These air carriers have ceased their activities since 30 July 2009.
(29)
In view of the above, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that the aforementioned air carriers licensed in the Democratic Republic of Congo should be removed from Annex A.
(30)
There is verified evidence of a lack of ability of the authorities responsible for the oversight of air carriers licensed in Djibouti to address safety deficiencies, as demonstrated by the results of the audit of Djibouti carried out by ICAO in the framework of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) in March 2008. This audit reported a large number of significant deficiencies with regard to the capability of the civil aviation authorities of Djibouti to discharge their air safety oversight responsibilities. At the time of the completion of the ICAO audit, more than 96% of ICAO standards were not implemented.
(31)
There is evidence of insufficient ability of the competent authorities of Djibouti to remedy effectively the non-compliance findings made by ICAO, as demonstrated by the fact that ICAO considers in its final report dated February 2009 that a very significant part of the corrective actions proposed or implemented by these authorities do not actually address the deficiencies observed. In the area of aircraft operations in particular, more than two-third of the actions proposed by Djibouti were not considered as fully acceptable by ICAO.
(32)
In addition, ICAO released a significant safety concern to all States Party to the Chicago Convention to notify them that Djibouti has not established a reliable system for the oversight of the air carriers to which the competent authorities of Djibouti have issued an Air Operator Certificate (AOC) nor an acceptable action plan to remedy this situation.
(33)
The Commission, having regard to the above, has entered into consultation with the competent authorities of Djibouti, expressing serious concerns about the safety of the operations of air carriers licensed in this state and asking for clarifications regarding the actions undertaken by the competent authorities of Djibouti to respond to ICAO findings and observations on the acceptability of the remedial actions.
(34)
The competent authorities of Djibouti (DACM) informed the Commission that the implementation of the action plan aimed at addressing the findings made by ICAO is delayed, with only a limited number of findings being considered as closed. The DACM did not provide details about the actions undertaken nor evidence of the satisfactory closure of the related findings. The DACM did not respond to the observations made by ICAO concerning the relevance of 34 actions considered by ICAO as insufficient to address the findings.
(35)
The DACM confirmed that two fatal accidents occurred in 2002 and 2007, affecting aircraft of type Let 410 and the aircraft of type Antonov 26. However, they did not provide information about the aircraft accident investigations nor their actions to address the causes of these accidents.
(36)
The DACM informed the Commission that they cancelled the AOC of Djibouti Airlines on 30 July 2009 and that the airline had at that date stopped its activities. They also informed that they cancelled the AOC of Daallo Airlines on 15 September. However, Daallo Airlines still retains an operating license and uses aircraft of type DC9 registered in Comores, aircraft of type Antonov 24 registered in Armenia, and aircraft of type Ilyushin 18 registered in Kazakhstan. The identity of the actual operators of these aircraft was not provided. The competent authorities of Djibouti have not demonstrated that they are in a position to effectively discharge their responsibilities regarding safety oversight of air carriers certified in Djibouti.
(37)
In view of this, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that all air carriers certified in Djibouti should be included in Annex A.
(38)
ICAO conducted an USOAP audit in the Republic of Congo in November 2008. The following finding gave rise to a significant safety concern: ‘The ANAC (National Civil Aviation Agency) has issued a certain number of air operator certificates (AOC) without having first established and put in place a process for the certification and continuous oversight of air operators. Consequently, these AOCs have been issued without the ANAC having ensured the operators’ compliance with the Standards of Annex 6 to the Chicago Convention or the provisions of ICAO Doc 8335. In addition, there are operators functioning with a provisional operating licence and without an AOC’. This significant safety concern is still in force.
(39)
During this ICAO audit, 63 findings were raised showing a lack of effective implementation of international safety standards. The Republic of Congo consequently submitted a corrective action plan. However, more than one third of the proposed corrective actions were not accepted by ICAO.
(40)
On 26 August 2009, a cargo aircraft operated by the air carrier Aero Fret Business certified in the Republic of Congo suffered an accident near the airport of Brazzaville, killing all six occupants. As State of Occurrence, the Republic of Congo is responsible for the safety investigation which must be carried out under the provisions of Annex 13 to the Chicago Convention in order to identify the causes and avoid the re-occurrence of such an accident. However, the ICAO audit also identified 11 deficiencies in the field of accident investigation in the Republic of Congo, of which 6 proposed corrective actions were not considered satisfactory.
(41)
The competent authorities of the Republic of Congo informed the Commission during two meetings held in Brussels that they intended to proceed to the recertification of three operators with the assistance of ICAO experts. Also, these authorities transmitted its decisions dated 15 October 2009 by which the operators Aero-Service, Equaflight Services, Société Nouvelle Air Congo and Trans Air Congo were granted Air Operators Certificates for a one year period. At the same date, the competent authority of the Republic of Congo informed the companies Aero Fret Business, Canadian Airways, Congo Airways (WAC), Emeraude, Equajet, Heli-Union Congo, Mani Air Fret, Mistral Aviation and Protocole Aviation that their AOCs were withdrawn pending examination of the necessary documentation required to obtain a new AOC. In addition, the Air Operators Certificates of the following companies were withdrawn: Air Cargo International, BIP Congo, Brazza Airways, Clesh Aviation, Finalair, Heavy Lift Congo, Ligne Aérienne Colombe, Locair Craft, Maouene, Natalco Airlines and United Express Service. However, these authorities did not demonstrate that the certification process followed for the issuance of any AOC complies with the relevant ICAO standards nor that the oversight of the air carriers to which they have issued AOCs is carried out in compliance with these standards.
(42)
The competent authorities of the Republic of Congo have made written submissions to the Air Safety Committee regarding measures taken to resolve the significant safety concern raised by ICAO as well as other non compliances stated in the ICAO USOAP audit report. The Commission takes note of all measures undertaken to date by the competent authorities of the Republic of Congo and urges them to intensify their efforts to implement sustainable corrective actions. The Commission will monitor closely in cooperation with ICAO any developments in the civil aviation in the Republic of Congo and is willing to engage in technical assistance with a view to enhance the administrative and technical capability of authority with oversight responsibility in this country.
(43)
However, the competent authorities of the Republic of Congo have not demonstrated a sufficient ability to implement the relevant safety standards. In view of the above, and pending the sustainable resolution of the non compliances with international standards, including the significant safety concern, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that all air carriers certified in the Republic of Congo should be subject to an operating ban and included in Annex A.
(44)
There is verified evidence of serious safety deficiencies on the part of Executive Jet Services certified in Sao Tome and Principe. These deficiencies have been identified by Belgium and France during ramp inspections performed under the SAFA programme (8). Executive Jet Services did not respond adequately and have not demonstrated that these deficiencies have been successfully rectified in a sustainable manner.
(45)
There is verified evidence of serious safety deficiencies on the part of STP Airways certified in Sao Tome and Principe. These deficiencies have been identified by France and the United Kingdom during ramp inspections performed under the SAFA programme (9). STP Airways however responded adequately and in a timely fashion to the enquiry by the civil aviation authority of France regarding the safety aspect of its operations.
(46)
There is evidence that some air carriers currently subject to an operating ban within the European Community have been relocating part of their activity in São Tomé and Príncipe.
(47)
In particular, there is verified evidence showing that the air carrier Hewa Bora Airways, certified in the Democratic Republic of Congo and currently subject to an operating ban within the Community, continues to use, under a lease-back agreement, the aircraft of type Boeing 767 with serial number 23178, deregistered from the Democratic Republic of Congo and registered in São Tomé and Príncipe under registration mark S9-TOP (10).
(48)
Further, the air carrier Africa’s Connection uses the aircraft of type Dornier 228 with serial number 8068 registered in São Tomé and Príncipe under registration mark S9-RAS, an aircraft previously registered in Gabon and operated by SCD Aviation certified in Gabon, currently subject to an operating ban within the Community.
(49)
In addition, there is verified evidence that the air carrier British Gulf International certified in Sao Tome is the same carrier British Gulf International which was previously certified in Kyrgyzstan and subject to an operating ban in October 2006 (11). British Gulf International also continues to use aircraft of type Antonov 12 and serial number 401901. One aircraft of this type operated by the air carrier had an accident in Al Habniaya (Iraq) on 13 November 2008, which resulted in the total loss of the aircraft and six fatalities.
(50)
The Commission, having regard to the above mentioned situation, has entered into consultation with the competent authorities of Sao Tome and Principe, expressing serious concerns about the safety of the operations of Executive Jet Services, STP Airways, as well as about the relocation to the register of Sao Tome of aircraft used by air carriers currently subject to an operating ban within the Community and asking for clarification regarding the actions undertaken by the competent authorities to respond to these concerns.
(51)
The competent authorities of Sao Tome (INAC) informed the Commission that, in the process of re-certification of Executive Jet Services, they decided on 26 October 2009 to provisionally suspend the operations of aircraft of type Boeing 767 with serial number 23178 and registration mark S9-TOP operated by this carrier.
(52)
The air carrier Executive Jet Services airways requested to make presentations to the Air Safety Committee and reported on the actions undertaken in order to address the deficiencies detected in the SAFA programme.
(53)
INAC informed the Commission that, in the process of re-certification of STP Airways, they decided to suspend on 26 October the operations of two aircraft of type Boeing 767 with serial number 25411 (registration mark unknown) and 26208 (registration mark S9-DBY), which were subsequently deregistered. INAC reported that although STP Airways holds a valid AOC, there are currently no aircraft on this certificate.
(54)
The air carrier STP Airways requested to make presentations to the Air Safety Committee and reported on the actions undertaken in order to address the deficiencies detected in the SAFA programme. It confirmed that no aircraft are operated anymore and that it intends to request the suspension of its AOC.
(55)
INAC informed that they have issued 13 AOCs, 3 of which were presented as suspended or revoked. However, INAC failed to provide evidence of suspension or revocation of the air carriers Sky Wind, Styron Trading and Jet Line.
(56)
The documentation submitted by INAC shows that more than half of the air carriers holding valid AOCs issued by these authorities have their principal place of business outside Sao Tome and Principe. In particular, British Gulf International Company Ltd, Global Aviation Operation, Goliaf Air, Transafrik International Ltd, Transcargo and Transliz Aviation do not have their principal place of business in Sao Tome, as evidenced by their response to an enquiry by the Commission as well as the addresses mentioned on their respective AOCs.
(57)
INAC did not demonstrate that it discharges its obligations regarding the safety oversight of the air carriers certified in Sao Tome and Principe in conformity with international safety requirements, given that a substantial part of these carriers are not operating in Sao Tome on a regular basis and that INAC stated that it relies partly on the oversight of the competent authorities of the States in which the operations are actually conducted. However, INAC failed to produce adequate agreements with these authorities.
(58)
In addition, an analysis of the AOC issued by the competent authorities of Sao Tome and Principe revealed substantial inconsistencies with regard to the approval of continuing airworthiness of the fleets operated, the approval for transport of dangerous goods and the authorisation for low visibility operations, which could not be clarified in the course of the consultations.
(59)
There is evidence of a high rate of accidents affecting air carriers certified in Sao Tome and Principe. INAC confirmed that four fatal accidents affected aircraft of type Antonov 12, Ilyushin 76 and DHC 6 operated by air carriers registered in Sao Tome and Principe. In response to this situation, INAC indicated that it decided on 21 February 2009 to suspend all operations of aircraft of type Antonov 12 registered in Sao Tome and Principe. However, INAC confirmed that aircraft of this type are still operated by the air carriers British Gulf International, Transliz Aviation and Goliaf Air certified in Sao Tome and Principe.
(60)
There is evidence of lack of willingness of the competent authorities of Sao Tome and Principe to show compliance with international safety standards, as demonstrated by the fact that Sao Tome and Principe has continuously postponed its audit by ICAO in the framework of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP). The ICAO audit scheduled in May 2007 and April 2008 could not be carried out to these dates.
(61)
In view of this, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that the air carriers certified in Sao Tome and Principe do not meet the relevant safety standards and should therefore be included in Annex A.
(62)
The competent authorities of Ukraine informed the Commission on 22 September of their decision No 574 of 17 August 2009 that operations under AOC Nr. 145 of 20 November 2008 held by Ukraine Cargo Airways were terminated with effect from the day of the decision. During their presentation on 11 November 2009 before the Air Safety Committee the competent authorities of Ukraine confirmed that ‘the company Ukraine Cargo Airways is not included among the registered airlines of Ukraine’.
(63)
Therefore, on the basis of the common criteria, Ukraine Cargo Airways should be removed from Annex A.
(64)
The competent authorities of Ukraine informed the Commission on 31 July 2009 of their decision No357 dated 25 May 2009 to revoke with immediate effect the AOC of the Ukrainian air carrier Volare.
(65)
Therefore, on the basis of the common criteria, the air carrier Volare should be removed from Annex A.
(66)
Following the adoption of Regulation No 619/2009, a team of EC experts, led by the European Aviation Safety Agency, visited the Ukrainian air carrier Motor Sich (MSI) on 27 October 2009 to verify the status of implementation of corrective actions and the effective closure of safety deficiencies previously detected with a view to resolving in a sustainable manner these deficiencies.
(67)
The report of the visit of the team stated that MSI demonstrated that they have performed root-cause analysis of findings identified during SAFA inspections. It appeared that the root cause analysis as well as the corrective action plans derived thereof are appropriately addressing the findings. During the visit, MSI declared that SAFA findings previously raised on their fleet of aircraft have all been addressed and rectified, including Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning Systems (EGPWS), flight deck seat harnesses, cargo restraint nets. It was furthermore declared that take-off performance calculation charts for all aircraft types and all runways in use have been established. The team led by the European Aviation Safety Agency is satisfied following physical inspection and/or document review, that: a) Flight deck seat harness retrofit on aircraft of types AN-12, AN-72 and YAK-40; b) Flight deck retrofit with quick donning masks on AN-12 (installation was ongoing on aircraft UR-11316 at the time of visit and reviewed by the team); c) Installation of EGPWS on the aircraft of types AN-12 and AN-140; d) Take-off performance charts for all runways currently being used for aircraft of types AN-12 and YAK-40. During their presentation before the Air Safety Committee the competent authorities of Ukraine confirmed that the carrier has the capability to apply the quality management system and undertook to inform the Commission of the results of the verification to be conducted on this matter.
(68)
With regard to flight operations, during the visit the team sampled in particular Minimum Equipment Lists (MEL), Operations Manuals, flight time limitations scheme, operations control and flight dispatch documents and procedures, sampling of returned and completed flight folders. No discrepancies to ICAO Standards were observed. Also, during the visit MSI demonstrated to the team that it performs analysis of recorded flight data for all flights performed on all aircraft operated.
(69)
The air carrier requested to be heard by the Air Safety Committee and made presentations on 11 November 2009 where it submitted written information to support the corrective actions implemented to resolve the previously detected safety deficiencies.
(70)
Following the presentations made on 11 November 2009 by the competent authorities of Ukraine and the air carrier, the Air Safety Committee requested that the State Aviation Administration provides the following documentation in order to be able to determine whether the removal of Motor Sich at this stage is warranted: a) the verification audit of the air carrier's quality management system; b) confirmation that all aircraft of Motor Sich conducting international flights are equipped in conformity with ICAO standards, in particular: i) flight deck seat harness on aircraft of types AN-12, AN-72 and YAK-40; ii) flight deck quick donning masks on AN-12; iii) EGPWS on the aircraft of types AN-12 and AN-140; c) Confirmation that take-off performance data for all runways currently being used for aircraft of types AN-12 and YAK-40 by Motor Sich is available in the carrier's operations manual; d) evidence of satisfactory resolution of the 38 findings raised during 2009 by the State Aviation Administration of Ukraine during its oversight activities on the carrier. The competent authorities of Ukraine submitted this information on 16 November.
(71)
Following receipt of the requested information from the competent authorities of Ukraine, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that Motor Sich should be removed from Annex A.
(72)
Following the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 619/2009, a team of EC experts visited the Ukrainian air carrier UMAir on 28 October 2009 to verify the status of implementation of corrective actions and the effective closure of safety deficiencies previously detected with a view to resolving in a sustainable manner these deficiencies.
(73)
During the visit, the team was presented with an updated corrective action plan which indicated that their quality manager had completed a review of the corrective actions they had implemented. However, verification of the status of findings raised by a team of EC experts during a visit to this air carrier on 28 May 2009, showed that whilst significant efforts had been undertaken since that visit to appropriately address findings raised, certain findings affecting flight safety (flight data monitoring on DC-9 aircraft) and continuing airworthiness, maintenance and engineering (engine condition monitoring programme has yet to be used for DC-9 and MD-80 aircraft) could not yet be considered as closed. Also, with regard to flight operations, a new finding was raised due to a discrepancy observed in the approved Minimum Equipment List (MEL) of the aircraft of type DC-9.
(74)
During the meeting of the Air Safety Committee on 11 November 2009, UMAir stated that they had requested that their AOC be restricted to exclude flights into the Community with DC-9 aircraft. The competent authorities of Ukraine issued a new AOC excluding flights into the EU with this type of aircraft on 11 November 2009.
(75)
The improvements achieved by UMAir in the period since the visit of EC experts in May 2009 as well as of the limitations imposed on the AOC of the air carrier are noted. Given the significant efforts undertaken by the air carrier to ensure safety of operations in compliance with international standards, it should be allowed to resume its operations into the Community with a part of its fleet.
(76)
Therefore, on the basis of the common criteria, UMAir should be transferred from Annex A to Annex B and should thus be allowed to resume operations into the Community with the aircraft of type MD-83, registration mark UR-CFF.
(77)
As provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2009, the Commission has continued to monitor closely the implementation of the various measures presented by the competent authorities of Ukraine at the Air Safety Committee on 1 July 2009. To that end a visit of EC experts was carried out to the State Aviation Administration of Ukraine from 26 to 29 October. The objective of this visit was to verify the status of implementation of corrective actions proposed to close the findings raised in the report of the visit of EC experts carried out between 25 and 29 May 2009 as well as of those presented in the corrective action plan presented by the State Aviation Administration of Ukraine on 23 June to enhance the safety oversight of air carriers under its regulatory control.
(78)
The report of the visit indicates that 14 of 33 findings raised during the visit carried out in May 2009 can be considered as closed on the basis of evidence provided by the competent authorities of Ukraine during the visit. 19 findings remain open.
(79)
The improvements achieved by the competent authorities in the period since the visit carried out in May 2009 and in particular of the increase in oversight activities on Ukrainian air carriers as well as the removal of a significant number of aircraft from the Ukrainian register (more than 800 aircraft out of 1 600 aircraft in 2008) are noted. The authorities are invited to further intensify their efforts with a view to strengthen their safety oversight.
(80)
On the basis of documentation submitted by the carrier the Commission noted that Ariana Afghan Airlines had undergone a change in management, had recruited external experts to assist the carrier in redrafting its policies, procedures and manuals, and had acquired two Airbus A310 aircraft and were being supported in their operation by Turkish Technic. It also noted the carrier's intention to be subject to an audit by the International Air Transport Association.
(81)
The Afghan Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation (MoTCA) has written outlining the progress made by both the MoTCA and Ariana towards meeting International Standards. They confirmed Ariana Afghan Airlines had undergone significant changes in aircraft equipment, management and documentation, but confirmed they had yet to conduct an audit of the operator, although one was planned to be completed by the end of 2009. Thus MoTCA are not yet in a position to confirm that Ariana Afghan Airlines are compliant with ICAO Standards and have an effective system in place for the management of safety. Although MoTCA stated that various oversight activities (e.g. flight and base inspections) had taken place this year, they did not provide any evidence of the results of these inspections.
(82)
The Commission notes the progress being made by Ariana Afghan Airlines towards compliance with international safety standards. However, pending the provision of additional evidence that the air carrier has addressed the root causes of previously identified safety deficiencies, it is assessed, on the basis of the common criteria, that the air carrier should remain in Annex A.
(83)
TAAG Angolan Airlines was allowed since July 2009 to operate in Portugal only with the aircraft of type Boeing 777-200 with registration marks D2-TED, D2-TEE, D2-TEF under the conditions presented in the recital (58) and (59) of Regulation (EC) No 619/2009 (12).
(84)
The Commission requested the competent authorities of Angola (INAVIC) to provide information about the oversight of the air carrier TAAG Angolan Airlines, in particular in respect of the increased oversight of the flights to Portugal and on their results.
(85)
INAVIC informed the Commission that it has strengthened the continuing oversight of TAAG Angolan Airlines, in particular via ramp inspections, and that the results of these ramp checks do not reveal safety or repetitive deficiencies.
(86)
TAAG Angolan Airlines requested to be heard by the Commission and the Air Safety Committee and made presentations on 10 November 2009, with a view to provide information on the progress of its action plan and on the safety performance of its operations to Lisbon. It was noted that more than 100 flights with aircraft of type Boeing 777 have been conducted to Lisbon without safety concern and that TAAG was certified on 23 October 2009 by INAVIC to conducting ETOPS 120 min operations for the Boeing 777. The air carrier also requested to have its B737-700 fleet benefit from the same provisions as the B777 fleet.
(87)
The competent authorities of Portugal confirmed that the results of the ramp inspections of TAAG Angolan Airlines it had carried out since the operations to Lisbon have resumed do not reveal safety or repetitive deficiencies.
(88)
Consequently, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that TAAG should be maintained in Annex B under the condition that the carrier carries out no more than ten flights per week with the aircraft of type Boeing B-777 with registration marks D2-TED, D2-TEE and D2-TEF or with aircraft of type Boeing B-737-700 with registration marks D2-TBF, D2-TBG, D2-TBH and D2-TBJ from Luanda to Lisbon. These flights are to be operated only after the Angolan authorities have carried out ramp checks of the aircraft before each flight departing Angola and the Portuguese authorities have conducted ramp checks of aircraft in Portugal. This is a temporary measure and the Commission will review the situation on the basis of all available information and in particular of an evaluation from the competent authorities of Portugal.
(89)
INAVIC reported significant progress in the resolution of the findings remaining after the last EU safety assessment visit made from 8 to 11 June 2009. In particular, it has further updated the specific operating regulations in line with ICAO requirements, continued to recruit qualified personnel, notably flight operations inspectors qualified on aircraft of type Boeing 737-700, leading to an overall increase in the surveillance activities by 30%.
(90)
INAVIC reported progress in the recertification of Angolan air carriers, a process that is expected to be completed by end 2010, however apart from TAAG Angolan Airlines no air carrier has been recertified yet.
(91)
The Commission encourages INAVIC to continue the recertification of the Angolan air carriers with determination and due consideration to potential safety concerns identified in this framework. Pending the recertification of Aerojet, Air26, Air Gemini, Air Gicango, Air Jet, Air Nave, Alada, Angola Air Services, Diexim, Gira Globo, Heliang, Helimalongo, Mavewa, Pha, Rui & Conceicao, Sal, Servisair and Sonair in full compliance with the new Angolan Aviation Safety Regulations, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that these 18 air carriers should remain in Annex A.
(92)
Berkut State Aircompany informed the Commission that it removed one aircraft of type IL-76 and one aircraft of type AN-12 from its fleet and that it decided in August 2009 to restrict its operations to state flights only.
(93)
The competent authorities of Kazakhstan confirmed this situation and provided evidence that they issued an ‘Operations Certificate’ to Berkut State Aircompany on 30 October 2009 which excludes commercial flights.
(94)
In view of this, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that Berkut State Aircompany should be removed from Annex A.
(95)
The carrier Prime Aviation certified in Kazakhstan requested to be heard by the Commission and the Air Safety Committee and made presentations on 11 November 2009. It stated that its commercial fleet is limited to one aircraft of type Challenger 604 with registration mark P4-CHV registered outside Kazakhstan (in Aruba).
(96)
The competent authority of Aruba is responsible for the oversight of the aircraft of type Challenger 604 with registration mark P4-CHV in accordance with the provisions of Annexes 1 and 8 to the Chicago Convention and Annex 6 for the continuing airworthiness aspects. They carried out an audit of the carrier Prime Aviation in March 2009 which revealed numerous deficiencies. The documentation submitted by the air carrier to the Air Safety Committee does not contain evidence that all corrective actions have been satisfactorily completed. In relation to ICAO Annex 6 requirements, this audit did not provide the evidence that oversight of operations is effectively carried out. In particular, evidence was not shown that the MEL is adequately approved and the conditions to defer defects remain to be clarified.
(97)
In view of this, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that this carrier should remain in Annex A.
(98)
The competent authorities of Kazakhstan requested to be heard by the Commission and the Air Safety Committee and made presentations on 11 November 2009 with a view to report on the improvements of their safety oversight.
(99)
They informed the Air Safety Committee of the actions taken to remove the two significant safety concerns, which were submitted to ICAO on 30 October 2009. These actions are being progressively implemented, with a view to complete the actions pertaining to aircraft involved in commercial air transport by October 2010.
(100)
Also, the competent authorities of Kazakhstan informed that they initiated a series of enforcement measures, leading to the suspension or the revocation of several Air Operator Certificates. In particular, they suspended the AOCs of the carriers Pankh Center Kazakhstan, Air Flamingo, Arkhabay, Air Company Atyrau Aue Joly and Turgay Avia. They also suspended the certificates of airworthiness of 66 aircraft of type Antonov 2 and removed from the registry of Kazakhstan 13 aircraft, including 10 of type Ilyushin 76, one of type Illyushin 62, one of type Antonov 28 and one of type Antonov 2.
(101)
The competent authorities of Kazakhstan also informed and provided evidence that the AOC of the following ten air carriers certified in Kazakhstan was revoked: Irbis, Aerotur, MAK Air, Excellent Glide, Tulpar Avia Service, Takhmid Air, Starline KZ, Olimp Air, EOL Air (revoked on 1 April 2009), and Sayat Air (revoked on 19 August 2009). Consequently, on the basis of the common criteria, these air carriers should be removed from Annex A.
(102)
On the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that all air carriers licensed in Kazakhstan, except Air Astana, should remain in Annex A.
(103)
It is noted that Kazakhstan has undertaken an ambitious reform of its aviation sector, in particular with a view to enhance safety. The on-going revision of the aviation legislation as well as the establishment of the Flight Assessment Centre are welcomed, these will provide for a better regulation of civil aviation in Kazakhstan and should pave the way for significant improvements towards compliance with international safety standards. In that respect, the competent authorities of Kazakhstan are invited to cooperate fully with ICAO to ensure that action plans proposed are acceptable to ICAO and are timely implemented.
(104)
The competent authorities of Kyrgyzstan made presentations on 11 November 2009 and reported on their progress in the implementation of their action plan established to remedy the identified safety concerns. In particular, they indicated that the aviation safety legislation was revised, that an independent civil aviation safety agency is being established and that the conditions to be certified as an air carrier have become more stringent. They also stated that a significant part of the AOC was consequently revoked and that the majority of the aircraft had actually been removed from the registry.
(105)
The competent authorities of Kyrgyzstan informed that they have issued a new AOC to the air carrier Asian Air. On the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that Asian Air should be included in Annex A.
(106)
It is acknowledged that Kyrgyzstan undertook an ambitious reform of its aviation sector, in particular with a view to enhance safety. The importance of the audit carried out by ICAO in April 2009 as part of the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) is underlined. The competent authorities of Kyrgyzstan are invited to cooperate fully with ICAO to ensure that the action plans proposed are acceptable to this organisation and timely implemented.
(107)
It was decided that the European Aviation Safety Agency shall carry out an inspection of Kyrgyzstan in order to monitor the implementation of the applicable safety requirements by the competent authorities and by the undertakings under its oversight. The inspection will be carried out once the action plan has been agreed with ICAO and implemented.
(108)
On the basis of verified evidence (13) of major safety deficiencies affecting flight operations detected on the part of the air carrier YAK Service certified by the competent authorities of the Russian Federation, the Commission launched a formal investigation of that air carrier on 15 July 2009. The competent authorities of the Russian Federation informed the Commission on 4 August 2009 that following inspections carried out by these authorities which confirmed these findings, the operations of the air carrier with aircraft of type YAK-42 and YAK-40 had been restricted as per decision of these authorities of 24 July 2009.
(109)
The competent authorities of the Russian Federation informed the Commission on 6 October 2009 that following the implementation of corrective measures by the air carrier they lifted the operating restrictions on its aircraft. The air carrier assisted by its authority was heard by the Commission and a Member State on 30 October.
(110)
The competent authorities of the Russian Federation made presentations to the Air Safety Committee on 11 November, where they explained the various oversight activities and enforcement action they had undertaken to ensure that the air carrier would resolve the previously detected safety deficiencies in a sustainable manner. They furthermore stated that aircraft operated by YAK Services will be regularly ramp checked to ensure compliance with international standards. On the basis of this information the Commission and the members of the Air Safety Committee consider that the safety deficiencies previously identified on the part of YAK Service have been addressed under the responsibility of the competent authorities of the Russian Federation.
(111)
Based on the information presented by these authorities, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that, at this stage, no further action is necessary. Member States will verify systematically the effective compliance of YAK Service with the relevant safety standards through the prioritisation of ramp inspections to be carried out on aircraft of this carrier pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 351/2008.
(112)
By correspondence of 9 November 2009 the competent authorities of the Russian Federation informed the Commission of the decision of 6 November 2009 by their certification committee to lift restrictions imposed previously on the operations of the air carriers Aeroflot Nord.
(113)
The competent authorities of the Russian Federation informed the Commission on 9 November 2009 that they modified their decision of 25 April 2008, whereby they excluded from operations into the Community aircraft on the AOC of 13 Russian air carriers. These aircraft were not equipped to perform international flights as per ICAO standards (not equipped with TAWS/E-GPWS) and their certificate of airworthiness had expired and had not been renewed.
(114)
According to the new decision, the following aircraft are excluded from operations into, within and out of the Community:
a)
Aircompany Yakutia: Tupolev TU-154: RA-85007; Antonov AN-140: RA-41250; AN-24RV: RA-46496, RA-46665, RA-47304, RA-47352, RA-47353, RA-47360; AN-26: RA-26660.
b)
Atlant Soyuz: Tupolev TU-154M: RA-85672 and RA-85682.
c)
Gazpromavia: Tupolev TU-154M: RA-85625 and RA-85774; Yakovlev Yak-40: RA-87511, RA-88186 and RA-88300; Yak-40K: RA-21505 and RA-98109; Yak-42D: RA-42437; all (22) helicopters Kamov Ka-26 (unknown registration); all (49) helicopters Mi-8 (unknown registration); all (11) helicopters Mi-171 (unknown registration); all (8) helicopters Mi-2 (unknown registration); all (1) helicopter EC-120B: RA-04116.
d)
Kavminvodyavia: Tupolev TU-154B: RA-85494 and RA-85457.
e)
Krasnoyarsky Airlines: The aircraft of type TU-154M RA-85683 previously on the AOC of Krasnoyarsky Airlines, which was revoked earlier this year is currently operated by another air carrier certified in the Russian Federation.
f)
Kuban Airlines: Yakovlev Yak-42: RA-42331, RA-42336, RA-42350, RA-42538, and RA-42541.
g)
Orenburg Airlines: Tupolev TU-154B: RA-85602; all TU-134 (unknown registration); all Antonov An-24 (unknown registration); all An-2 (unknown registration); all helicopters Mi-2 (unknown registration); all helicopters Mi-8 (unknown registration).
h)
Siberia Airlines: Tupolev TU-154M: RA-85613, RA-85619, RA-85622 and RA-85690.
i)
Tatarstan Airlines: Yakovlev Yak-42D: RA-42374, RA-42433; all Tupolev TU-134A including: RA-65065, RA-65102, RA-65691, RA-65970 and RA-65973; all Antonov AN-24RV including: RA-46625 and RA-47818; the aircraft of type AN24RV with registration marks RA-46625 and RA-47818 are currently operated by another Russian carrier.
j)
Ural Airlines: Tupolev TU-154B: RA-85319, RA-85337, RA-85357, RA-85375, RA-85374, RA-85432 and RA-85508.
k)
UTAir: Tupolev TU-154M: RA-85813, RA-85733, RA-85755, RA-85806, RA-85820; all (25) TU-134: RA-65024, RA-65033, RA-65127, RA-65148, RA-65560, RA-65572, RA-65575, RA-65607, RA-65608, RA-65609, RA-65611, RA-65613, RA-65616, RA-65620, RA-65622, RA-65728, RA-65755, RA-65777, RA-65780, RA-65793, RA-65901, RA-65902, and RA-65977; the aircraft RA-65143 and RA-65916 are operated by another Russian carrier; all (1) TU-134B: RA-65726 is operated by another Russian carrier; all (10) Yakovlev Yak-40: RA-87292, RA-87348, RA-87907, RA-87941, RA-87997, RA-88209, RA 88210, RA-88227, RA-88244 and RA-88280; all helicopters Mil-26: (unknown registration); all helicopters Mil-10: (unknown registration); all helicopters Mil-8 (unknown registration); all helicopters AS-355 (unknown registration); all helicopters BO-105 (unknown registration); the aircraft of type AN-24B (RA-46267 and RA-47289 and the aircraft of type AN-24RV (RA-46509, RA-46519 and RA-47800) are operated by another Russian carrier.
l)
Rossija (STC Russia): Tupolev TU-134: , RA-65904, RA-65905, RA-65911, RA-65921 and RA-65979; TU-214: RA-64504, RA-64505; Ilyushin IL-18: RA-75454 and RA-75464; Yakovlev Yak-40: RA-87203, RA-87968, RA-87971, and RA-88200; the aircraft RA-65555 is operated by another Russian carrier.
(115)
No evidence of the full implementation of appropriate remedial actions by the other air carriers included in the Community list updated on 13 July 2009 and by the authorities with responsibility for regulatory oversight of these air carriers has been communicated to the Commission so far in spite of specific requests submitted by the latter. Therefore, on the basis of the common criteria, it is assessed that these air carriers should continue to be subject to an operating ban (Annex A) or operating restrictions (Annex B), as the case may be.
(116)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Air Safety Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 is amended as follows:
1.
Annex A is replaced by the text set out in Annex A to this Regulation.
2.
Annex B is replaced by the text set out in Annex B to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 November 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 834/2004
of 28 April 2004
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein(1), and in particular Article 19(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 lists animal and plant species in respect of which trade is restricted or controlled. Those lists incorporate the lists set out in the annexes to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, hereinafter "the CITES Convention".
(2) Annex A of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 includes the species listed in Appendix I to the Convention for which the Member States have not entered a reservation and consequently Varanus nebulosus should be included on that Annex.
(3) Amendments to Appendix III to the Convention made in accordance with the provisions of Article XVI of the Convention should be reflected in Annex C of Council Regulation (EC) No. 338/97 and in the "Notes on interpretation of Annexes A, B, C and D". In particular, it is necessary to list Argentina, Australia, Indonesia, Mexico, New Zealand and Peru as range States of species included in Appendix III to the Convention.
(4) The annotation relating to some coral species needs to be adapted in order to incorporate some of the terms of CITES Resolution Conf. 11.10 concerning definitions of coral sand and coral fragments, in accordance with the definition of "specimens" given by Article 2(t) of Regulation (EC) No 338/97; the annotation regarding Aloe spp. needs to make an explicit reference to the species listed in Annex A; and the annotation to Guaiacum spp. needs to be changed in order to designate the parts and derivatives decided upon at the 12th Conference.
(5) The Scientific Review Group has established, on the basis of the criteria set out in Article 3(4)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 338/97, that certain species must be withdrawn from the list of animals whose importation into the Community should, on account of the volume involved, be monitored, whilst certain other species must be added to that list.
(6) Regulation (EC) No 338/97 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(7) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora established pursuant to Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 338/97,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EC) 338/97 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twenty-first day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 April 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 688/2004
of 14 April 2004
adapting Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001 on account of the accession to the European Union of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and in particular Article 2(3) thereof,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and in particular Article 57(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In view of the accession to the Community on 1 May 2004 of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, linguistic amendments need to be made to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001 of 26 November 2001 laying down detailed rules for the export of products supplied as food aid(1).
(2) Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001 should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2298/2001 is replaced by the following:
"3. In the document used to apply for the refund as referred to in Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 and, in addition to the requirements of Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000, in box 20 of the application for licences and the export licence itself, one of the following entries shall be included:
- Ayuda alimentaria comunitaria - Acción n°.../.. o Ayuda alimentaria nacional
- Potravinová pomoc Spolecenství - akce c. .../... nebo vnitrostátní potravinová pomoc
- Fællesskabets fødevarehjælp - Aktion nr. .../... eller National fødevarehjælp
- Gemeinschaftliche Nahrungsmittelhilfe - Maßnahme Nr..../... oder Nationale Nahrungsmittelhilfe
- Ühenduse toiduabi - programm nr.../..või siseriiklik toiduabi
- Κοινοτική επισιτιστική βοήθεια - Δράση αριθ.../.. ή Εθνική επισιτιστική βοήθεια
- Community food aid - Action No.../..or National food aid
- Aide alimentaire communautaire - Action n° .../... ou Aide alimentaire nationale
- Aiuto alimentare comunitario - Azione n. .../... o Aiuto alimentare nazionale
- Kopienas partikas atbalsts - Pasakums Nr.../.. vai valsts partikas atbalsts
- Bendrijos pagalba maisto produktais - Priemone Nr.../.. arba Nacionaline pagalba maisto produktais
- Közösségi élelmiszersegély - ... számú intézkedés/.. vagy Nemzeti élelmiszersegély
- Gajnuna alimentari komuni - Azzjoni nru .../.. jew Gajnuna alimentari nazzjonali
- Communautaire voedselhulp - Actie nr...../... of Nationale voedselhulp
- Wspólnotowa pomoc zywnosciowa -Dziaanie nr.../..lub Krajowa pomoc zywnosciowa.
- Ajuda alimentar comunitária - Acção n.o.../.. ou Ajuda alimentar nacional
- Potravinová pomoc spolocenstva - Akcia c. .../... alebo Národná potravinová pomoc
- Pomoc Skupnosti v hrani - Akcija st. .../... ali drzavna pomoc v hrani
- Yhteisön elintarvikeapu - Toimi No.../.. tai Kansallinen elintarvikeapu
- Livsmedelsbistånd från gemenskapen - Aktion nr .../... eller Nationellt livsmedelsbistånd.
The action number to be indicated is that specified in the tender notice. In addition, the country of destination shall be indicated in box 7 of both the licence application and the licence."
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force subject to and on the date of the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 April 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 21 December 1998
concerning the approval, on behalf of the Community, of amendments to Appendices II and III to the Berne Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats adopted at the 17th meeting of the Convention's Standing Committee
(98/746/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 130s(1), the first sentence of Article 228(2), and the first subparagraph of Article 228(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Whereas the European Community is a Contracting Party to the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats by virtue of Decision 82/72/EEC (3);
Whereas, thanks to decisive support from the Community, four species were added to Appendix II to the Convention and 22 to Appendix III to the Convention at the 17th meeting of the Berne Convention Standing Committee held in Strasbourg from 1 to 5 December 1997; whereas the Commission took part in that meeting on behalf of the Community;
Whereas two of those species are covered by Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (4) and three of them are covered by Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (5);
Whereas, in accordance with Article 17 of the Convention, any amendments to the Appendices to the Convention are to enter into force for all Contracting Parties, with the exception of any which notify objections pursuant to paragraph 3 of that Article, three months after their adoption by the Standing Committee;
Whereas the Community must approve the said amendments to Appendices II and III to the Convention adopted at the 17th meeting of the Standing Committee, in accordance with Article 17 of the Convention,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The inclusion of the species Acipenser sturio, Puffinus yelkouan, Phalacrocorax aristotelis (in the Mediterranean) and Valencia leutourneuxi in Appendix II to the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, and of the species Hippospongia communis, Spongia agaricina, Spongia officinalis, Spongia zimocca, Antipathes sp. plur., Corallium rubrun, Paracentrotus lividus, Homarus gammarus, Maja squinado, Palinurus elephas, Scyllarides latus, Scyllarides pigmaeus, Scyllarus arctus, Epinephelus marginatus, Isurus oxyrinchus, Lamna nasus, Mobula mobular, Prionace glauca, Raja alba, Scioena umbra, Squatina squatina, and Umbrina cirrosa (all 22 species in the Mediterranean) in Appendix III to that Convention is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community.
Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Done at Brussels, 21 December 1998.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3533/84
of 13 December 1984
extending the period of validity of retrospective control of imports of footwear into the Community
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 288/82 of 5 February 1982 on common rules for imports (1), and in particular Article 10 (3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulations (EEC) No 1765/82 and (EEC) No 1766/82 of 30 June 1982 establishing common rules for imports from State-trading countries and from the People's Republic of China (2), and in particular Articles 10 (3) and 10 (4) thereof, respectively,
Consultations having been held within the committees set up under Article 5 of the said Regulations,
Whereas, by Decision 78/560/EEC (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2854/79 (4), the Commission established retrospective control of imports of footwear into the Community; whereas, by Regulation (EEC) No 3579/83 (5), the period of validity of that Decision was extended to 31 December 1984;
Whereas the reasons which originally led the Commission to take such action, that is to say the considerable pressure exercised by imports into the Community of footwear and the resultant threat of injury to the Community producers of like or directly competing products, continue to apply;
Whereas it is therefore necessary to prolong this retrospective control,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The period of validity of Decision 78/560/EEC is hereby extended to 31 December 1985.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1985.
It shall apply until 31 December 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 1984.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 155/87
of 21 January 1987
amending Regulation (EEC) No 765/86 laying down detailed rules for the sale of butter from intervention stocks for export to certain destinations
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in milk and milk products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1335/86 (2), and in particular Article 6 (7) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 765/86 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3535/86 (4), set out arrangements for the sale of butter from intervention storage for export to certain destinations;
Whereas it is necessary to amend Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 765/86 in order to make it clear that, in accordance with the provisions of the Decision adopted on 31 May 1985 under the International Dairy Arrangement by the Committee on the Protocol relating to Milk Fat, only the sales contract with the country of destination need be concluded by 31 December 1986 at the latest; whereas consequently the monetary compensatory amounts applicable must be those valid on 31 December 1986;
Whereas it should be specified that no refunds are applicable on butter exported, unaltered or after processing, under the arrangements introduced by Regulation (EEC) No 765/86;
Whereas Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 765/86 provides for the lodging of a tendering security of 25 ECU per tonne, which guarantees not only that the tender will not be withdrawn and that the butter will be removed, but also that the price will be paid; whereas, however, since payment of the price is guaranteed by the export of destination security mentioned in Article 7 (2) of the Regulation, provision should be made for release of the tendering security pro rata with the removal of butter within the time limit laid down;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 765/86 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In Article 1 (1) the date 31 December 1986 is deleted.
2. Article 1 (3) is replaced by the following:
'3. The sales contract with the country of destination must have been concluded by 31 December 1986 at the latest. Any sales contract concluded no later that 31 December 1986 shall be communicated to the Commission by 31 January 1987 at the latest.'
3. In Article 3 (2) 'second Tuesday' is replaced by 'fourth Tuesday'.
4. The following is added to Article 5 (3):
'(d) Proof is furnished that the tender is lodged in connection with a sales contract concluded by 31 December 1986 at the latest. The contract must be lodged with one of the intervention agencies concerned. These agencies shall take the necessary measures for informing each other of the contract(s) lodged.'
5. The first sentence of Article 6 (1) is replaced by the following:
'Under this Regulation the maintenance of the tender after expiry of the deadline for submission of tenders and removal of the butter shall constitute principal requirements fulfilment of which shall be ensured by the lodging of a security of 25 ECU per tonne.'
6. Article 9 (2) is replaced by the following:
'2. The application for the export licence and the licence itself shall carry in Section 12 the words 'For export under Regulation (EEC) No 765/86'.
7. Article 9 (3) is replaced by the following:
'3. Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2729/81 (1) notwithstanding, the export licence shall remain valid throughout the duration of the operations to be carried out under this Regulation.'
8. Article 9 (4) is replaced by the following:
'4. When butter sold under this Regulation is exported, unaltered or after processing, no refund shall be applicable. The monetary compensatory amounts applicable to the products covered by this Regulation shall be those fixed pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1677/85 (2) valid on 31 December 1986. They shall remain applicable throughout the duration of the operations to be carried out under this Regulation.'
9. Article 10 is replaced by the following:
'Article 10
1. Successful tenderers shall remove the butter assigned to them
- within 15 months in the case of sales of up to 150 000 tonnes,
- within 18 months in the case of sales of more than 150 000 tonnes
as from the date of the sales contract with the country of destination.
If the butter is not removed within the time specified above, the guarantee specified in Article 6 (1) shall be forfeit and the sale shall be annulled.
The guarantee specified in Article 6 (1) shall be immediately released pro rata with the removal of butter within the specified time limit.
2. Within three months of the day of removal of any quantity of butter the successful tenderer shall pay the intervention agency the tendered price.
Except in cases of force majeure, if the successful tenderer has failed to make the payment within the specified time limit the security specified in Article 7 (2) shall be forfeit and the sale annulled in respect of the remaining quantities.'
10. In Article 14 the words 'fixing the refund in advance' are deleted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply with effect from 1 January 1987.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 January 1987.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 31 May 2006
concerning the designation of the Community reference laboratory for foot-and-mouth disease
(notified under document number C(2006) 2069)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2006/393/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 2003/85/EC of 29 September 2003 on Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease repealing Directive 85/511/EEC and Decisions 89/531/EEC and 91/665/EEC and amending Directive 92/46/EEC (1), and in particular Article 69(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Directive 2003/85/EC provides for the designation of the Community reference laboratory for foot-and-mouth disease. The Commission, in close collaboration with the Member States, has carried out a tender for the selection of that Community reference laboratory, taking into account the criteria of technical and scientific competence and staff expertise.
(2)
Account was also taken of additional requirements for the designation of official laboratories laid down in Article 12(2) of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (2).
(3)
Following completion of the selection procedure, the successful laboratory, the Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright Laboratory sponsored by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), should be designated as the Community reference laboratory for foot-and-mouth disease for a period of five years.
(4)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
1. The Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright Laboratory, of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) in the United Kingdom, is designated as the Community reference laboratory for foot-and-mouth disease for a period of five years following the date of publication of this Decision in the Official Journal of the European Union.
2. The rules setting out the functions and duties of the Community reference laboratory referred to in paragraph 1 are laid down in Annex XVI to Directive 2003/85/EC.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 31 May 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1286/2008
of 16 December 2008
amending Regulation (EC) No 193/2007, imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate, originating in India and amending Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate, originating in, inter alia, India
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of 6 October 1997 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (the basic Regulation), and in particular Articles 15 and 19 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
I. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION AND EXISTING MEASURES
(1)
On 30 November 2000, by Regulation (EC) No 2603/2000 (2), the Council imposed definitive countervailing duties on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate (PET) originating in, inter alia, India (the country concerned) (the original investigation).
(2)
Following an expiry review, the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 (3), imposed a definitive countervailing duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate, originating in India (the anti-subsidy Regulation) for a further period of five years. The product concerned falls within the CN code 3907 60 20. The rate of the fixed duty ranges between 0 and 106,5 EUR/tonne for individually named exporters with a residual duty rate of 41,3 EUR/tonne imposed on imports from other exporters.
(3)
Furthermore, by Regulation (EC) 192/2007 (4), the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on the same product originating in India (the anti-dumping Regulation). Under this Regulation the rate of the fixed duty ranges between 88,9 and 200,9 EUR/tonne for individually named exporters with a residual duty rate of 181,7 EUR/tonne imposed on imports from other exporters.
(4)
In line with the principle that no product shall be subject to both anti-dumping and countervailing duties for the purpose of dealing with one and the same situation arising from dumping or from export subsidisation, the level of anti-dumping duties in the anti-dumping Regulation takes into account the amount of countervailing duty imposed by the anti-subsidy Regulation, in accordance with Article 14(1) of the basic Regulation.
II. INITIATION OF A PARTIAL INTERIM REVIEW
(5)
Following the imposition of the definitive countervailing duty the Government of India (GOI) submitted that the circumstances with regard to two subsidy schemes (the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme and the Income Tax Exemption under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act) have changed and that these changes are of a lasting nature. Consequently, it was argued that the level of subsidisation was likely to have decreased and thus measures that had been established partly on these schemes should be revised.
(6)
The Commission examined the evidence submitted by the GOI and considered it sufficient to justify the initiation of a review in accordance with the provisions of Article 19 of the basic Regulation, limited to the level subsidisation imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate, originating in India. After consultation of the Advisory Committee, the Commission initiated, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union (5) (‘the Notice of Initiation’), an ex officio partial interim review of Regulation (EC) No 193/2007.
(7)
The purpose of the partial interim review investigation is to assess the need for the continuation, removal or amendment of the existing measures in respect of those companies which benefited from one or both the changed subsidy schemes, where sufficient evidence was provided in line with the relevant provisions of the Notice of Initiation. The partial interim review investigation would also assess the need, depending on the review findings, to revise the measures applicable to other companies that cooperated in the investigation that set the level of the existing measures and/or the residual measure applicable for all other companies.
III. INVESTIGATION PERIOD
(8)
The investigation covered the period from 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007 (the review investigation period or RIP).
IV. PARTIES CONCERNED BY THE INVESTIGATION
(9)
The Commission officially informed the GOI and those Indian exporting producers who cooperated in the previous investigation, were mentioned under Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 as benefiting from any of the two allegedly changed subsidy schemes and that were listed in the Annex to the Notice of Initiation, as well as the Community producers, of the initiation of the partial interim review investigation. Interested parties had the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing. The written and oral comments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, taken into account.
(10)
In view of the number of parties involved in this review, the use of sampling techniques for the investigation of subsidisation was envisaged in accordance with Article 27 of the basic Regulation.
(11)
Two exporting producers made themselves known and provided the information requested for sampling. Therefore, the use of sampling techniques was not considered necessary. One of the two exporting producers that had submitted a sampling form did however later notify the Commission that it did not intend to complete a full questionnaire and provide the data necessary for the purpose of the investigation.
(12)
The Commission therefore sent and obtained a reply to the questionnaire from only one producer which was eligible for this review, namely Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd (the company). A questionnaire was also addressed to the GOI. Replies were received from both the company and the GOI.
(13)
The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed necessary for the determination of subsidisation. Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following interested parties:
1.
Government of India
Ministry of Commerce, New Delhi.
2.
Exporting producers in India
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd, New Delhi.
V. DISCLOSURE AND COMMENTS ON PROCEDURE
(14)
The GOI and the other interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations upon which it was intended to propose to amend the duty rate applicable to the sole cooperating Indian producer and to the non-cooperating exporting producer also mentioned in the Annex to the Notice of Initiation as well as the intention to maintain existing measures for all other companies which did not cooperate with this partial interim review. They were also given a reasonable time to comment. All submissions and comments were taken duly into consideration as set out below.
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED
(15)
The product covered by this review is the same product as the one concerned by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007, i.e. PET with a viscosity number of 78 ml/g or higher, according to ISO Standard 1628-5, originating in the country concerned. It is currently classifiable within CN code 3907 60 20.
C. SUBSIDIES
I. INTRODUCTION
(16)
On the basis of the information submitted by the GOI and the sole cooperating exporting producer and the replies to the Commission’s questionnaire, the following schemes, which allegedly involve the granting of subsidies, were investigated:
(a)
Advance Authorisation Scheme (formerly known as Advance Licence Scheme) (AAS);
(b)
Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPS);
(c)
Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS);
(d)
Income Tax Exemption Scheme (ITES);
(e)
Focus Market Scheme (FMS);
(f)
Target Plus Scheme (TPS).
(17)
The schemes (a) (b) (c) (e) and (f) specified above are based on the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act 1992 (No 22 of 1992) which entered into force on 7 August 1992 (Foreign Trade Act). The Foreign Trade Act authorises the GOI to issue notifications regarding the export and import policy. These are summarised in ‘Export and Import Policy’ documents, which are issued by the Ministry of Commerce every five years and updated regularly. One Export and Import Policy document is relevant to the RIP of this case, i.e. the five-year plan relating to the period 1 September 2004 to 31 March 2009 (EXIM-policy 04-09). In addition, the GOI also sets out the procedures governing the EXIM-policy 04-09 in a ‘Handbook of Procedures - 1 September 2004 to 31 March 2009, Volume I’ (HOP I 04-09). The Handbook of Procedure is also updated on a regular basis.
(18)
The Income Tax Schemes specified above under (d) are based on the Income Tax Act of 1961, which is amended yearly by the Finance Act.
(19)
In accordance with Article 11(10) of the basic Regulation, the Commission invited the GOI for additional consultations with respect to both changed and unchanged schemes with the aim of clarifying the factual situation as regards the alleged schemes and arriving at a mutually agreed solution. Following these consultations, and in the absence of a mutually agreed solution in relation to these schemes, the Commission included all these schemes in the investigation of subsidisation.
(20)
One interested party, representing Community industry alleged that a number of other schemes and subsidies continued to be available to Indian exporters. However, no definite evidence has emerged from the information showing that these schemes were used by the cooperating exporting producer. Therefore these matters have not been pursued further for the purpose of this specific proceeding.
II. SPECIFIC SCHEMES
1. Advance Authorisation Scheme (AAS)
(a) Legal basis
(21)
The detailed description of the scheme is contained in paragraphs 4.1.1 to 4.1.14 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 and chapters 4.1 to 4.30 of the HOP I 04-09. This scheme was called Advance Licence Scheme during the previous review investigation that led to the imposition by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 of the definitive countervailing duty currently in force.
(b) Eligibility
(22)
The AAS consists of six sub-schemes, as described in more detail in recital 23. Those sub-schemes differ, inter alia, in the scope of eligibility. Manufacturer-exporters and merchant-exporters ‘tied to’ supporting manufacturers are eligible for the AAS physical exports and for the AAS for annual requirement. Manufacturer-exporters supplying the ultimate exporter are eligible for AAS for intermediate supplies. Main contractors which supply to the ‘deemed export’ categories mentioned in paragraph 8.2 of the EXIM-policy 04-09, such as suppliers of an export oriented unit (EOU), are eligible for AAS deemed export. Eventually, intermediate suppliers to manufacturer-exporters are eligible for ‘deemed export’ benefits under the sub-schemes Advance Release Order (ARO) and back-to-back inland letter of credit.
(c) Practical implementation
(23)
Advance authorisations can be issued for:
(i)
physical exports: this is the main sub-scheme. It allows for duty-free import of input materials for the production of a specific resultant export product. ‘Physical’ in this context means that the export product has to leave Indian territory. An import allowance and export obligation, including the type of export product are specified in the licence;
(ii)
annual requirement: such an authorisation is not linked to a specific export product, but to a wider product group (e.g. chemical and allied products). The licence holder can - up to a certain value threshold set by its past export performance - import duty free any input to be used in manufacturing any of the items falling under such a product group. It can choose to export any resultant product falling under the product group using such duty-exempt material;
(iii)
intermediate supplies: this sub-scheme covers cases where two manufacturers intend to produce a single export product and divide the production process. The manufacturer-exporter who produces the intermediate product can import duty-free input materials and can obtain for this purpose an AAS for intermediate supplies. The ultimate exporter finalises the production and is obliged to export the finished product;
(iv)
deemed exports: this sub-scheme allows a main contractor to import free of duty inputs which are required in manufacturing goods to be sold as ‘deemed exports’ to the categories of customers mentioned in paragraph 8.2(b) to (f), (g), (i) and (j) of the EXIM-policy 04-09. According to the GOI, deemed exports refer to those transactions in which the goods supplied do not leave the country. A number of categories of supply is regarded as deemed exports provided the goods are manufactured in India, e.g. supply of goods to an EOU or to a company situated in a special economic zone (SEZ);
(v)
ARO: the AAS holder intending to source the inputs from indigenous sources, in lieu of direct import, has the option to source them against AROs. In such cases the Advance Authorisations are validated as AROs and are endorsed to the indigenous supplier upon delivery of the items specified therein. The endorsement of the ARO entitles the indigenous supplier to the benefits of deemed exports as set out in paragraph 8.3 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 (i.e. AAS for intermediate supplies/deemed export, deemed export drawback and refund of terminal excise duty). The ARO mechanism refunds taxes and duties to the supplier instead of refunding the same to the ultimate exporter in the form of drawback/refund of duties. The refund of taxes/duties is available both for indigenous inputs as well as imported inputs;
(vi)
back-to-back inland letter of credit: this sub-scheme again covers indigenous supplies to an Advance Authorisation holder. The holder of an Advance Authorisation can approach a bank for opening an inland letter of credit in favour of an indigenous supplier. The authorisation will be invalidated by the bank for direct import only in respect of the value and volume of items being sourced indigenously instead of importation. The indigenous supplier will be entitled to deemed export benefits as set out in paragraph 8.3 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 (i.e. AAS for intermediate supplies/deemed export, deemed export drawback and refund of terminal excise duty).
(24)
It was established that during the RIP, the cooperating exporter only obtained concessions under two sub-schemes linked to the product concerned, i.e. (i) AAS physical exports and (iv) AAS for deemed exports. It is therefore not necessary to establish the countervailability of the remaining unused sub-schemes.
(25)
Following the imposition by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 of the definitive countervailing duty currently in force, the GOI has modified the verification system applicable to AAS. In concrete terms, for verification purposes by the Indian authorities, an Advance Authorisation holder is legally obliged to maintain ‘a true and proper account of consumption and utilisation of duty-free imported/domestically procured goods’ in a specified format (Chapters 4.26, 4.30 and Appendix 23 HOP I 04-09), i.e. an actual consumption register. This register has to be verified by an external chartered accountant/cost and works accountant who issues a certificate stating that the prescribed registers and relevant records have been examined and the information furnished under Appendix 23 is true and correct in all respects. Nevertheless, the aforesaid provisions apply only to Advance Authorisations issued on or after 13 May 2005. For all Advance Authorisations or Advance Licences issued before that date, holders are requested to follow the previously applicable verification provisions, i.e. to keep a true and proper account of licence-wise consumption and utilisation of imported goods in the specified format of Appendix 18 (Chapter 4.30 and Appendix 18 HOP I 02-07).
(26)
With regard to the sub-schemes used during the RIP by the sole cooperating exporting producer, i.e. physical exports and deemed exports, both the import allowance and the export obligation are fixed in volume and value by the GOI and are documented on the Authorisation. In addition, at the time of import and of export, the corresponding transactions are to be documented by Government officials on the Authorisation. The volume of imports allowed under this scheme is determined by the GOI on the basis of standard input-output norms (SIONs). SIONs exist for most products, including the product concerned and are published in the HOP II 04-09.
(27)
In this respect it should be noted that the SIONs are regularly revised. Since the one cooperating exporter used licences issued at different times, this also meant that different SIONs were applied by this company under the RIP.
(28)
Imported input materials are not transferable and have to be used to produce the resulting export product. The export obligation must be fulfilled within a prescribed time frame after issuance of the licence (24 months with two possible extensions of six months each).
(29)
The review investigation established that while the cooperating exporting producer could establish the total consumption of raw materials there was no actual consumption register for the product concerned. Consumption was only presumed to be in line with the SIONs. It was therefore not possible to establish whether SION requirements, stipulated under specific authorisations/licences, with respect to duty-free input materials exceed the material needed to produce the reference quantity of the resulting export product.
(30)
Moreover, the review investigation established that raw materials were imported under three different authorisations/licences and different SION norms and then were mixed and physically incorporated in the production process of the same exported good. The fact that there are three different SIONs with different consumption norms for each of the raw materials further underlines the problem in establishing the actual consumption of the cooperating exporter. In this respect, it is clear that an actual consumption register is a basic requirement in order to allow for verification as to whether the duty-free input materials exceed the material needed to produce the reference quantity of the resulting export product.
(31)
The review investigation also established that the verification requirements stipulated by the Indian authorities were either not honoured or not yet tested in practice. For Advance Licences issued before 13 May 2005 the necessary actual consumption and stock registers (i.e. Appendix 18) were not sent to the relevant authorities and hence not controlled by GOI. For Advance Authorisations issued after 13 May 2005 the necessary actual consumption and stock registers are required but GOI had not yet verified the compliance of these registers with EXIM policy requirements. In particular, the registers were verified by external chartered accountants as required by the relevant Indian legislation mentioned under recital 25 but there were no records kept either by the company or by the chartered accountant on how this certification process took place. There was no audit plan or any other supporting material of the audit performed, no recorded information on the methodology used and the specific requirements needed for such scrupulous work that requires detailed technical knowledge on production processes, EXIM policy requirements and accounting procedures. Account taken of this situation, it is considered that the investigated exporter was not able to demonstrate that the relevant EXIM provisions were met.
(d) Disclosure comments
(32)
The cooperating exporter challenged the findings above, in particular with respect to the conclusions as concerns the chartered accountant as detailed in recital 31. To this end it was claimed that there is no national or international legal provision that requires an audited company to maintain a record of how an audit was carried out. On the contrary, Indian law stipulates that the working papers are the property of the auditor. Under such circumstances and considering that no prior request to meet the chartered accountant had been made before the verification visit, the fact that the audited company was not in the possession of such supporting documents at the time of the visit should not be held against it. Furthermore, it was also claimed that the basic Regulation in any event would not authorise the Commission services to verify documents held outside the investigated company such as would be the case with an independent accountant. It was also argued that the actual consumption of the sole cooperating producer had been higher than the SION norms for every input and that there was no excess remission of duties.
(33)
In this respect it is recalled that the verification process performed by the chartered accountant and the issuing of the relevant certificate form part of the verification system introduced by the GOI in its EXIM policy. To this end the EXIM policy has introduced the chartered accountant as an actor in the implementation of the system and the Commission had to examine whether the aforesaid verification system was effectively applied. The fact that the company could not show that either itself nor the assigned chartered account hold any record on the checks performed in order to issue the EXIM policy stipulated certificate demonstrates that the company was not in a position to prove that the relevant EXIM policy provisions were met. As to the company’s claim that that there in any event was no excess remission of duties it is recalled that the actual situation found on the spot (i.e. mixture of inputs and produced products, use of different SION norms, lack of the by EXIM policy stipulated actual consumption registers) and pending the fulfilment of the necessary final verification steps by the GOI, showed that any calculation with respect to actual consumption and consequent excess remission of duties per authorisation/licence and SION norm was not feasible.
(e) Conclusion
(34)
The exemption from import duties is a subsidy within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a)(ii) and Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, i.e. a financial contribution of the GOI which conferred a benefit upon the investigated exporter.
(35)
In addition, AAS physical exports and AAS for deemed exports are clearly contingent in law upon export performance, and therefore deemed to be specific and countervailable under Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation. Without an export commitment a company cannot obtain benefits under these schemes.
(36)
None of the two sub-schemes used in the present case can be considered as permissible duty drawback systems or substitution drawback systems within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a)(ii) of the basic Regulation. They do not conform to the rules laid down in Annex I item (i), Annex II (definition and rules for drawback) and Annex III (definition and rules for substitution drawback) to the basic Regulation. The GOI did not effectively apply its verification system or procedure to confirm whether and in what amounts inputs were consumed in the production of the exported product (Annex II(II)(4) to the basic Regulation and, in the case of substitution drawback schemes, Annex III(II)(2) to the basic Regulation). The SIONs themselves cannot be considered a verification system of actual consumption, since duty-free input materials imported under authorisations/licences with different SION yields are mixed in the same production process for an exporting good. This type of process does not enable the GOI to verify with sufficient precision what amounts of inputs were consumed in the export production and under which SION benchmark they should be compared. Furthermore, an effective control done by the GOI based on a correctly kept actual consumption register either did not take place or has not yet been completed. In addition, the GOI did not carry out a further examination based on actual inputs involved, although this would normally need to be carried out in the absence of an effectively applied verification system (Annex II(II)(5) and Annex III(II)(3) to the basic Regulation). Moreover, it is recalled that the company in question did not have a consumption register that allowed for a verification of real consumption of raw material per product type. Therefore, even if an efficient control system had been put in place it would not have been possible for the GOI to ascertain what amounts inputs were consumed in the production of the exported product. Finally, the involvement of chartered accountants in the verification process has not led to the improvement of the verification system as no detailed rules exist on how chartered accountants should perform the entrusted tasks and the information presented during the investigation could not warrant the fulfilment of the aforesaid rules laid down under the basic Regulation.
(37)
These two sub-schemes are therefore countervailable.
(f) Calculation of the subsidy amount
(38)
In the absence of permitted duty drawback systems or substitution drawback systems, the countervailable benefit is the remission of total import duties normally due upon importation of inputs. In this respect, it is noted that the basic Regulation does not only provide for the countervailing of an ‘excess’ remission of duties. According to Article 2(1)(a)(ii) and Annex I(i) to the basic Regulation only an excess remission of duties can be countervailed, provided the conditions of Annexes II and III to the basic Regulation are met. However, these conditions were not fulfilled in the present case. Thus, if an absence of an adequate monitoring process is established, the above exception for drawback schemes is not applicable and the normal rule of the countervailing of the amount of (revenue forgone) unpaid duties, rather than any purported excess remission, applies. As set out in Annexes II(II) and III(II) to the basic Regulation the burden is not upon the investigating authority to calculate such excess remission. To the contrary, according to Article 2(1)(a)(ii) of the basic Regulation it only has to establish sufficient evidence to refute the appropriateness of an alleged verification system.
(39)
The subsidy amount for the exporter which used the AAS was calculated on the basis of import duties forgone (basic customs duty and special additional customs duty) on the material imported under the two sub-schemes used for the product concerned during the RIP (nominator). In accordance with Article 7(1)(a) of the basic Regulation, fees necessarily incurred to obtain the subsidy were deducted from the subsidy amount where justified claims were made. In accordance with Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation, this subsidy amount has been allocated over the export turnover generated by the product concerned during the RIP as appropriate denominator, because the subsidy is contingent upon export performance and was not granted by reference to the quantities manufactured, produced, exported or transported.
(40)
The subsidy rate established in respect of this scheme during the RIP for the sole cooperating producer amounts to 12,8 %.
2. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPS)
(a) Legal basis
(41)
The detailed description of the DEPS is contained in paragraph 4.3 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 and in Chapter 4 of the HOP I 04-09.
(42)
It was found that the cooperating exporting producer obtained no countervailable benefits under the DEPS. It was therefore not found necessary to further analyse this scheme in the scope of this investigation.
3. Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS)
(a) Legal basis
(43)
The detailed description of the EPCGS is contained in Chapter 5 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 and in Chapter 5 of the HOP I 04-09.
(b) Eligibility
(44)
Manufacturer-exporters, merchant-exporters ‘tied to’ supporting manufacturers and service providers are eligible for this scheme.
(c) Practical implementation
(45)
Under the condition of an export obligation, a company is allowed to import capital goods (new and - since April 2003 - second-hand capital goods up to 10 years old) at a reduced rate of duty. To this end, the GOI issues, upon application and payment of a fee, an EPCGS licence. Since April 2000, the scheme provides for a reduced import duty rate of 5 % applicable to all capital goods imported under the scheme. Until 31 March 2000, an effective duty rate of 11 % (including a 10 % surcharge) and, in case of high value imports, a zero duty rate was applicable. In order to meet the export obligation, the imported capital goods must be used to produce a certain amount of export goods during a certain period.
(46)
The EPCGS licence holder can also source the capital goods indigenously. In such case, the indigenous manufacturer of capital goods may avail of the benefit for duty-free import of components required to manufacture such capital goods. Alternatively, the indigenous manufacturer can claim the benefit of deemed export in respect of supply of capital goods to an EPCGS licence holder.
(d) Disclosure comments
(47)
No comments with respect to EPCGS were submitted upon disclosure.
(e) Conclusion on EPCG Scheme
(48)
The EPCGS provides subsidies within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a)(ii) and Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. The duty reduction constitutes a financial contribution by the GOI, since this concession decreases the GOI’s duty revenue, which would be otherwise due. In addition, the duty reduction confers a benefit upon the exporter, because the duties saved upon importation improve its liquidity.
(49)
Furthermore, the EPCGS is contingent in law upon export performance, since such licences cannot be obtained without a commitment to export. Therefore, it is deemed to be specific and countervailable under Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation.
(50)
Finally, this scheme can not be considered a permissible duty drawback system or substitution drawback system within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a)(ii) of the basic Regulation. Capital goods are not covered by the scope of such permissible systems, as set out in Annex I(i) to the basic Regulation, because they are not consumed in the production of the exported products.
(f) Calculation of the subsidy amount
(51)
The one cooperating exporter had not purchased any capital goods in the IP. The company continued however to benefit from duty exemptions for capital goods purchased before the IP at the amount established in the original investigation. As established in the original investigation the subsidy amount obtained during the RIP was calculated, in accordance with Article 7(3) of the basic Regulation, on the basis of the unpaid customs duty on imported capital goods spread across a period which reflects the actual depreciation period of such capital goods of the exporting producer. In accordance with the established practice, the amount so calculated which is attributable to the RIP has been adjusted by adding interest during this period in order to reflect the full value of the benefit over time. Fees necessarily incurred to obtain the subsidy were deducted in accordance with Article 7(1)(a) of the basic Regulation from this sum to arrive at the subsidy amount as numerator. In accordance with Article 7(2) and 7(3) of the basic Regulation this subsidy amount has been allocated over the export turnover during the review investigation period as appropriate denominator, because the subsidy is contingent upon export performance and it was not granted by reference to the quantities manufactured, produced, exported or transported. The subsidy rate established with respect to the benefit obtained by the company during the RIP was 0,3 %.
4. Income Tax Exemption Scheme (ITES)
(a) Legal basis
(52)
Under this scheme exporters could avail the benefit of a partial income tax exemption on profits derived from export sales. The legal basis for this exemption was set by Section 80HHC of the ITA.
(53)
This provision was abolished for the assessment year 2005-2006 (i.e. for the financial year from 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005) onwards and thus 80HHC of the ITA does not confer any benefits after 31 March 2004. The sole cooperating exporting producer did not avail of any benefits under this scheme during the RIP. Consequently, since the scheme has been withdrawn, it shall therefore not be countervailed, in accordance with Article 15(1) of the basic Regulation.
5. Focus Market Scheme (FMS)
(a) Legal basis
(54)
The detailed description of the FMS is contained in Chapter 3.9 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 and in Chapter 3.20 of the HOP I 04-09. While the company reported this scheme, the investigation revealed that no benefit was received in the RIP. Since it was found that the cooperating exporting producer did not obtain any countervailable benefits under this scheme, it was not found necessary to further analyse it in the scope of this investigation.
6. Target Plus Scheme (TPS)
(a) Legal basis
(55)
The detailed description of the TPS is contained in Chapter 3.7 of the EXIM-policy 04-09 and in Chapter 3.2 of the HOP I 04-09.
(b) Eligibility
(56)
Any manufacturing exporter is eligible to apply for this scheme
(c) Practical implementation
(57)
This scheme aims at giving a premium to companies that increase their export turnover growth. To this end the scheme allows eligible companies to avail of duty credit ranging between 5 % and 15 % of an amount based on the difference between the FOB values of exports made in two consecutive financial years.
(58)
Companies wishing to benefit from the scheme have to file an application to the Ministry of Commerce and industry. Once authorised, a licence indicating the amount of the duty credit is issued by the relevant authorities.
(59)
This scheme was discontinued in March 2006 and replaced over time by two new schemes, the Focus Market Scheme and the Focus Product Scheme. The right to apply for TPS licence did however continue until March 2007 and companies availing of the scheme may make use of the relevant duty credit entitlements until March 2009.
(d) Disclosure comments
(60)
The cooperating producer considered that there was no benefit accrued to the company in the RIP of this scheme and considering that the scheme was withdrawn in 2006 it should not be countervailed. However, as detailed above, the investigation revealed that a benefit was conferred on the company in the RIP and furthermore, while the scheme indeed has been abandoned, companies may continue to benefit from it until 2009.
(e) Conclusion on Target Plus Scheme
(61)
The TPS provides subsidies within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a) (ii) and Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. A TPS duty credit is a financial contribution by the GOI, since the credit will eventually be used to offset import duties, thus decreasing the GOI’s duty revenue which would be otherwise due. In addition, the TPS duty credit confers a benefit upon the exporter, because it improves its liquidity.
(62)
Furthermore, the TPS is contingent in law upon export performance, and therefore deemed to be specific and countervailable under Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation.
(63)
This scheme cannot be considered a permissible duty drawback system or substitution drawback system within the meaning of Article 2(1)(a)(ii) of the basic Regulation. It does not conform to the strict rules laid down in Annex I item (i), Annex II (definition and rules for drawback) and Annex III (definition and rules for substitution drawback) to the basic Regulation. An exporter is under no obligation to actually consume the goods imported free of duty in the production process and the amount of credit is not calculated in relation to actual inputs used. There is no system or procedure in place to confirm which inputs are consumed in the production process of the exported product or whether an excess payment of import duties occurred within the meaning of item (i) of Annex I and Annexes II and III to the basic Regulation. An exporter is eligible for the TPS benefits regardless of whether it imports any inputs at all. In order to obtain the benefit, it is sufficient for an exporter to simply increase its export turnover without demonstrating that any input material was imported. Thus, even exporters which procure all of their inputs locally and do not import any goods which can be used as inputs are still entitled to benefit from the TPS.
(f) Calculation of the subsidy amount
(64)
The amount of countervailable subsidies was calculated in terms of the benefit conferred on the recipient, which is found to exist during the RIP as booked by the cooperating exporting producer on an accrual basis as income at the stage of export transaction. In accordance with Article 7(2) and 7(3) of the basic Regulation this subsidy amount (nominator) has been allocated over the export turnover during the RIP as appropriate denominator, because the subsidy is contingent upon export performance and it was not granted by reference to the quantities manufactured, produced, exported or transported.
(65)
The subsidy rate established with regard to this scheme during the RIP for the sole cooperating exporting producer amounts to 0,7 %.
III. AMOUNT OF COUNTERVAILABLE SUBSIDIES
(66)
It is recalled that of the subsidy margin, established in the original investigation was found to be 5,8 % for the sole exporting producer cooperating with the present partial interim review.
(67)
During the present partial interim review the amount of countervailing subsidies, expressed ad valorem, was fount to be 13,8 %, as listed hereunder:
Scheme
Company
ALS
DEPS
EPCGS
ITIRAD
FMS
TPS
Total
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd
12,8
0
0,3
0
0
0,7
13,8
(68)
Account taken of the above it is concluded that the level of subsidisation with regard to the sole cooperating exporting producer has increased.
D. COUNTERVAILING MEASURES AND ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
I. COUNTERVAILING MEASURES
(69)
In line with the provisions of Article 19 of the basic Regulation and the grounds of this partial interim review stated under point 3 of the Notice of Initiation, it is established that the margin of subsidisation with regard to the sole cooperating producer has increased from 5,8 % to 13,8 % and, therefore, the rate of countervailing duty, imposed to this exporting producer by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 has to be amended accordingly.
(70)
The second company that was concerned with the present partial interim review Reliance Industries Ltd, had the highest subsidy margin in the original investigation but did not cooperate in this review. Since this company did not cooperate an assessment had to be based on best facts available in accordance with Article 28 of the basic Regulation. In this respect and in view of the findings as concern the one cooperating exporter, it is also likely that this non-cooperating exporting producer will continue to avail of benefits under the investigated subsidisation schemes at least the same rate as that established for the cooperator. It must thus be concluded that the level of subsidisation with regard to the one non-cooperating exporting producer concerned by the review has also increased to 13,8 % and, therefore, the rate of countervailing duty, imposed on this exporting producer by Regulation (EC) No 193/2007, has to be amended accordingly.
(71)
With regard to companies that cooperated in the original investigation but that were not identified as concerned by the investigation in the Annex to the Notice of Initiation, there was no indication that the countervailing and dumping duty rates applicable to such companies need to be recalculated. Consequently, the individual rates of the duty applicable to all other parties except Pearl Engineering and Reliance Industries mentioned under Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 remain unchanged.
(72)
Conversely, as concerns the companies that cooperated neither in this review nor in the original investigation, these must be considered to continue to avail of benefits under the investigated subsidisation schemes at least the same rate as that established for the sole cooperator. In order to avoid granting a bonus for non-cooperation it is considered appropriate to establish level of subsidisation applicable to ‘all other companies’ as the highest rate set for any company cooperating in the original investigation i.e. 13,8 %.
(73)
The amended countervailing duty rates should be established at the level of the new rates of subsidisation found during the present review, as the injury margins calculated in the original anti-subsidy investigation remain higher.
(74)
The individual company countervailing duty rates specified in this Regulation reflect the situation found during the partial interim review. Thus, they are solely applicable to imports of the product concerned produced by these companies. Imports of the product concerned manufactured by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this Regulation, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.
(75)
In order to avoid that fluctuations in the PET prices caused by variations in the crude oil prices result in higher duties being collected it is recalled that the measures in place have been set in the form of a specific duty per tonne. The amount set results from the application of the countervailing duty rate to the CIF export prices that were used for the calculation of the injury elimination level in the original investigation. The same method has been used for the purpose of establishing the amended specific duty levels in the context of this review.
(76)
The margins and duty rates applicable should therefore be calculated as indicated in the table below.
Countervailing duty rate
Proposed countervailing duty rate
(EUR/tonne)
Reliance Industries Ltd
13,8 %
69,4
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd
13,8 %
74,6
Senpet Ltd
4,43 %
22,0
Futura Polyesters Ltd
0 %
0,0
South Asian Petrochem Ltd
13,9 %
106,5
All other companies
13,8 %
69,4
(77)
Any claim requesting the application of these individual countervailing duty rates (e.g. following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new production or sales entities) should be addressed to the Commission (6) forthwith with all relevant information, in particular any modification in the company’s activities linked to production, domestic and export sales associated with, for instance, that name change or that change in the production and sales entities. If appropriate, and after consultation of the Advisory Committee, the Regulation will be amended accordingly by updating the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates.
II. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
(78)
The amendment of the countervailing duty rate will have an impact on the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on producers in India, by Regulation (EC) No 192/2007.
(79)
In the original anti-dumping investigation, the anti-dumping duty was adjusted in order to avoid any double-counting of the effects of benefits from export subsidies. In this regard, Article 14(1) of the Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (7) and Article 24(1) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation provide that no product shall be subject to both anti-dumping and countervailing measures for the purpose of dealing with one and the same situation arising from dumping or export subsidisation. It was found in the original anti-subsidy investigation as well as in the present partial interim review that certain of the subsidy schemes investigated, which were found to be countervailable, constituted export subsidies within the meaning of Article 3(4)(a) of the basic anti-subsidy Regulation. As such, these subsidies affected the export price of the Indian exporting producers, thus leading to an increased margin of dumping. In other words, the definitive dumping margins established in the original anti-dumping investigation were partly due to the existence of export subsidies.
(80)
Consequently, the definitive anti-dumping duty rates for the exporting producers concerned must now be adjusted to take account of the revised level of benefit received from export subsidies in the RIP in the present partial interim review to reflect the actual dumping margin remaining after the imposition of the adjusted definitive countervailing duty offsetting the effect of the export subsidies.
(81)
In other words, the new subsidy levels will have to be taken into account for the purpose of adjusting the dumping margins, previously established.
(82)
The margins and duty rates applicable to the companies concerned should therefore be calculated as indicated in the table below.
Countervailing duty rate
(resulting from export subsidies)
Injury elimination level
Anti-dumping duty rate
Proposed anti-dumping duty
(EUR/tonne)
Reliance Industries Ltd
13,8 %
44,3 %
30,5 %
153,6
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd
13,8 %
33,6 %
16,2 %
87,5
Senpet Ltd
4,43 %
44,3 %
39,9 %
200,9
Futura Polyesters Ltd
0 %
44,3 %
14,7 %
161,2
South Asian Petrochem Ltd
13,9 %
44,3 %
11,6 %
88,9
All other companies
13,8 %
44,3 %
30,5 %
153,6
(83)
In order to ensure proper enforcement of the countervailing and anti-dumping duties, the residual duty level should not only apply to non-cooperating exporters but also apply to those companies which did not have any exports during the RIP. However, the latter companies are invited, if they fulfil the requirements of Article 20 of the basic Regulation, to present a request for a review pursuant to that Article in order to have their situation examined individually,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 193/2007 shall be replaced by the following:
‘2. Except as provided for in Article 2, the rate of the countervailing duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty for products manufactured by the companies listed below shall be as follows:
Country
Company
Countervailing duty
(EUR/tonne)
TARIC additional code
India
Reliance Industries Ltd
69,4
A181
India
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd
74,6
A182
India
Senpet Ltd
22,0
A183
India
Futura Polyesters Ltd
0,0
A184
India
South Asian Petrochem Ltd
106,5
A585
India
All other companies
69,4
A999’
Article 2
Paragraph 2 of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 shall be replaced by the following:
‘2. Except as provided for in Article 2, the rate of the anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty for products manufactured by the companies listed below shall be as follows:
Country
Company
Anti-dumping duty
(EUR/tonne)
TARIC additional code
India
Reliance Industries Ltd
153,6
A181
India
Pearl Engineering Polymers Ltd
87,5
A182
India
Senpet Ltd
200,9
A183
India
Futura Polyesters Ltd
161,2
A184
India
South Asian Petrochem Ltd
88,9
A585
India
All other companies
153,6
A999
Indonesia
P.T. Mitsubishi Chemical Indonesia
187,7
A191
Indonesia
P.T. Indorama Synthetics Tbk
92,1
A192
Indonesia
P.T. Polypet Karyapersada
178,9
A193
Indonesia
All other companies
187,7
A999
Malaysia
Hualon Corp. (M) Sdn. Bhd.
36,0
A186
Malaysia
MpI Polyester Industries Sdn. Bhd.
160,1
A185
Malaysia
All other companies
160,1
A999
Republic of Korea
SK Chemicals Group:
A196
SK Chemicals Co. Ltd
0
A196
Huvis Corp.
0
Republic of Korea
KP Chemical Group:
A195
Honam Petrochemicals Corp.
0
A195
KP Chemical Corp.
0
Republic of Korea
All other companies
148,3
A999
Taiwan
Far Eastern Textile Ltd
36,3
A808
Taiwan
Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corp.
67,0
A809
Taiwan
All other companies
143,4
A999
Thailand
Thai Shingkong Industry Corp. Ltd
83,2
A190
Thailand
Indo Pet (Thailand) Ltd
83,2
A468
Thailand
All other companies
83,2
A999’
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 2008.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 19 December 2007
concerning the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities
(2008/99/EC, Euratom)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community and in particular the second paragraph of Article 101 thereof,
Having regard to Council Decision 2007/513/Euratom of 10 July 2007 approving the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to the amended Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities (1),
Whereas:
(1)
Article 2(e) of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom Treaty) states that the European Atomic Energy Community (the Community) shall make certain, by appropriate supervision, that nuclear materials are not diverted to purpose other than those for which they are intended.
(2)
The Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) was adopted in 1979 and entered into force in 1987. 128 States and the Community are parties to the CPPNM (2). All the Member States are Parties to the CPPNM.
(3)
The Court of Justice of the European Communities (Court of Justice) (3) decided that the participation of the Member States in the CPPNM is compatible with the provisions of the Euratom Treaty only subject to the conditions that, insofar as its own powers and jurisdiction are concerned, the Community as such is a party to the CPPNM on the same lines as the Member States and that certain commitments of the CPPNM can only be implemented, where the Community is concerned, by means of close association between the Community and the Member States, both in negotiation and conclusion process and in fulfilment of the commitments assumed,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Accession to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities is hereby approved on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community.
The text of the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities (Annex 1) and the declaration by the European Atomic Energy Community according to Articles 18(4) and 17(3) of that Convention are attached to this Decision (Annex 2).
Article 2
The instrument of accession shall be deposited with the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, depositary of the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities, as soon as possible after the adoption of this Decision in the form of a letter signed by the Head of Delegation of the European Commission to the International Organisations in Vienna.
Article 3
The Member of the European Commission responsible for External Relations shall confirm in a note, as attached to this Decision (Annex 3), the appointment of the Head of Delegation of the European Commission to the International Organisations in Vienna to deposit the declaration attached to the Decision with the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, depositary of the Convention (Full powers), as soon as possible after the adoption of this Decision.
Done at Brussels, 19 December 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1999/2006
of 20 December 2006
imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain saddles originating in the People's Republic of China
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
1. Initiation
(1)
On 22 February 2006, the Commission received a complaint concerning certain saddles originating in the People's Republic of China (PRC) lodged pursuant to Article 5 of the basic Regulation by the European Saddle Manufacturers Association (the complainant) on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this case 99 %, of the total Community production of certain saddles.
(2)
This complaint contained evidence of dumping and of material injury resulting there from, which was considered sufficient to justify the opening of a proceeding.
(3)
On 7 April 2006, the proceeding was initiated by the publication of a notice of initiation in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).
2. Parties concerned by the proceeding
(4)
The Commission officially advised the exporting producers in the PRC, importers, traders, users, suppliers and associations known to be concerned, representatives of the PRC and the complainant Community producers and other Community producers known to be concerned of the initiation of the proceeding. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set in the notice of initiation.
(5)
In order to allow exporting producers to submit a claim for market economy treatment (MET) or individual treatment (IT), if they so wished, the Commission sent claim forms to the Chinese exporting producers known to be concerned. Three exporting producers groups and one individual exporting producer requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, or IT should the investigation establish that they do not meet the conditions for MET. It should be noted that three of these exporting producers consisted of two or more related companies involved in the production and/or sales of saddles.
(6)
In view of the apparent high number of exporting producers in the PRC, importers and producers in the Community, in the notice of initiation, the Commission indicated that sampling may be applied in this investigation for the determination of dumping and injury in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.
(7)
In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select a sample, all exporting producers in the PRC, Community importers and Community producers were asked to make themselves known to the Commission and to provide, as specified in the notice of initiation, basic information on their activities related to the product concerned during the investigation period (1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005).
(8)
As far as the exporting producers are concerned, given that only three groups of companies and one individual company cooperated in the investigation, it was decided that sampling was not required.
(9)
With regard to Community producers, in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, a sample was selected based on the largest representative volume of production of saddles in the Community, which can reasonably be investigated within the time available. On the basis of the information received from Community producers, the Commission selected five companies located in two different Member States. In terms of production volume the five sampled companies represented 86 % of the total Community production. In accordance with Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, the parties concerned were consulted and raised no objection. In addition, the remaining Community producers were requested to provide certain general data for the injury analysis. Furthermore, and in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, a sample of importers was selected based on the largest representative volume of imports of the product concerned into the Community which can reasonably be investigated within the time available. On the basis of the information received from various importers and considering the different quality of the information submitted, two importers located in one Member State were selected for the sample. The two importers selected for the sample represent 21 % of imports of the product concerned in the Community. In view of the small number of responses received by users, it was decided that sampling of users was not necessary.
(10)
Questionnaires were sent to all parties known to be concerned and to all other companies that made themselves known within the deadlines set out in the notice of initiation. Replies were received from four exporting producers in the PRC and one producer in the analogue country, Brazil. Full questionnaire replies were also received from the five Community producers selected in the sample. Although four importers replied to the sampling form, only two cooperated by submitting a full questionnaire reply. Moreover, four users of saddles returned a full questionnaire reply. In addition, one questionnaire reply was also received from a raw material supplier.
(11)
The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for a provisional determination of dumping, resulting injury and Community interest and carried out verifications at the premises of the following companies:
(a)
Community producers
-
Selle Royal S.p.A., Pozzoleone, Italy
-
Selle Italia s.r.l., Rossano Veneto, Italy
-
Bassano Selle s.r.l., Riese Pio X, Italy
-
Selle SMP S.A.S., Casalserugo, Italy
-
pph ABI sp.j., Nasielsk, Poland.
(b)
Exporting producers in the PRC
-
Cionlli Group
-
Cionlli Bicycle (Taicang) Co., Ltd.
-
Shunde Hongli Bicycle Parts Co., Ltd., Shunde
-
Safe Strong Bicycle Parts Shenzhen Co., Ltd., Shenzhen
-
Cionlli Bicycle (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., Tianjin.
-
Giching Group
-
Giching Bicycle Parts (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shenzhen
-
Velo Cycle (Kunshan) Co., Ltd., Kunshan.
-
Justek Group
-
Jiangyin Justek Vehicle Co., Ltd., Jiangyin
-
Jiangyin Justek Communication Equipment Co., Ltd., Jiangyin
-
Tianjin Justek Vehicle Co., Ltd., Tianjin
-
Viscount Vehicle (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shenzhen.
(c)
Related companies in the PRC and Taiwan
-
Cionlli Bicycle (Tianjin) Co., Ltd, Tianjin
-
Cionlli Industrial Co., Ltd.
(d)
Unrelated importer in the Community
-
Buechel GmbH, Fulda, Germany.
(12)
In view of the need to establish a normal value for exporting producers to which MET might not be granted, a verification to establish normal value on the basis of data from an analogue country, Brazil in this case, took place at the premises of the following company:
(e)
Producer in Brazil
-
Royal Ciclo Indústria de Componentes Ltda, Rio do Sul.
3. Investigation period
(13)
The investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 January to 31 December 2005 (investigation period or IP). The examination of the trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2002 to the end of the investigation period (‘period considered’).
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
1. Product concerned
(14)
The product concerned is certain saddles and essential parts thereof (i.e. bases, cushions and covers), of bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorised, of cycles fitted with an auxiliary motor with or without sidecars, of fitness machines and of home trainers, (‘the product concerned’, or ‘saddles’) originating in the People's Republic of China. The product is normally declared within CN codes 8714 95 00, ex 8714 99 90 and ex 9506 91 10.
(15)
A saddle is typically made up of three parts: a base or support on which the saddle is built, is generally produced through a plastic injection moulding process; the cushion which is applied to the base to make the saddle comfortable which can made from different types of synthetic foam or other materials; the cover, made from synthetic material or natural leather which covers the cushion and the edges of the base giving the saddle its feeling and aesthetical properties. As well as the above three components a saddle normally incorporates an attaching mechanism made from metal such as a fork, or clamp and may also include a spring or elastomer shock-absorbing mechanism.
(16)
The product concerned is used in bicycles and similar vehicles, as well as stationary appliances such as fitness machines. The investigation has shown that, despite differences in shapes, materials and production process, the different types of the product concerned all share the same basic physical and technical characteristics and are basically used for the same purposes. They are therefore considered to constitute a single product for the purpose of this proceeding.
2. Like product
(17)
The investigation showed that the basic physical and technical characteristics of the saddles produced and sold by the Community industry in the Community, saddles produced and sold on the domestic Chinese market and saddles imported into the Community from the PRC, as well as those produced and sold in Brazil are the same and that these products have the same use.
(18)
It was therefore provisionally concluded that these products are alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
C. DUMPING
1. Market economy treatment (MET)
(19)
Pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation, in anti-dumping investigations concerning imports originating in the PRC, normal value shall be determined in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said Article for those producers which were found to meet the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation.
(20)
Briefly, and for ease of reference only, the MET criteria are set out in summarised form below:
1.
Business decisions and costs are made in response to market signals and without significant State interference; and costs of major inputs substantially reflect market values.
2.
Firms have one clear set of basic accounting records which are independently audited in line with international accounting standards and are applied for all purposes.
3.
There are no significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system.
4.
Bankruptcy and property laws guarantee legal certainty and stability.
5.
Exchange rate conversions are carried out at market rates.
(21)
Two groups of exporting producers and one individual exporting producer requested MET pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation and replied to the MET claim form for exporting producers within the given deadline. The Commission sought and verified at the premises of these companies all necessary information submitted in the MET applications as deemed necessary. The investigation revealed that the MET could only be granted to two group of exporting producers, whereas the claim had to be rejected for one group of companies and the individual company.
(22)
With regard to the individual exporting producer, the investigation showed that the company did not meet the requirements of the above-mentioned criteria 1 and 3. Namely, the company could not demonstrate that its business decisions were taken in response to market signals, without significant State interference, in particular as sales quantities in the domestic and export markets are restricted by the Articles of Association of the company which cannot be changed without State approval. Moreover, the company could not demonstrate that there are no distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system, in particular by providing written evidence concerning the acquisition of the land use rights.
(23)
In addition, one group of exporting producers failed to declare their relationship with a major domestic customer both in the reply to the market economy claim form and the response to the anti-dumping questionnaire. The relationship was only uncovered by cross-checks made at the premises of those exporting producers. It is the Commission's consistent policy to make an MET/IT determination for groups of related companies as a whole. Therefore granting MET/IT to this exporter would have required the related company to fully cooperate in the investigation, in order to establish its precise activities regarding the product concerned, the fulfilment of the MET criteria and the influence of the relationship upon the transactions between the two companies. This was not the case, since the related company did not cooperate in the investigation. Therefore, the Commission was not in a position to make a MET/IT determination for this group of companies. It should be noted that this issue affected a very substantial part of the exporters' domestic sales. Moreover, this deliberate omission cast doubts on the reliability of other information and documents submitted to the Commission. In view of this omission and its significance both in terms of the MET analysis and of any dumping determinations that would be based on the individual data submitted by this group of exporters, it was determined that they had provided false and misleading information within the meaning of Article 18 of the basic Regulation. The company was informed forthwith of the basis on which it was intended to disregard the information provided and was given the opportunity to provide further explanations, in accordance with Article 18(4) of the basic Regulation. However, the explanations given by the company were unsatisfactory and could neither convince the Commission that it did not submit misleading information nor resolve the doubts about the integrity of the remaining data submitted by the company. As such, this group of exporting producers was considered as not cooperating in the investigation and its request for MET and IT was rejected.
(24)
The interested parties were given an opportunity to comment on the above findings.
(25)
On this basis, MET was granted to two groups of exporting producers:
-
Cionlli Bicycle (Taicang) Co. Ltd., and related companies
-
Giching Bicycle parts (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd., and related companies.
2. Individual treatment (IT)
(26)
Pursuant to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, a country-wide duty, if any, is established for countries falling under that Article, except in those cases where companies are able to demonstrate that they meet all criteria set out in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation.
(27)
The exporting producer to which MET could not be granted also claimed IT in the event it was not granted MET. However, the company's claim for individual treatment (IT) was also rejected as the company failed to meet the criteria set out in Article 9(5)(b), namely that export prices and quantities were freely determined.
3. Normal value
(a) Determination of normal value for the exporting producers granted MET
(28)
As far as the determination of normal value is concerned, the Commission first established, for each of the exporting producers concerned, whether its total domestic sales of saddles were representative in comparison with its total export sales to the Community. In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, domestic sales were considered representative when the total domestic sales volume of the exporting producer was at least 5 % of its total export sales volume to the Community.
(29)
The two groups of companies granted MET included five companies producing saddles for export, three of which had also domestic sales. One further company had domestic sales but no exports.
(30)
For those exporting producers whose overall domestic sales were found to be representative, the Commission subsequently identified the types of saddles sold domestically which were identical or directly comparable to the types sold for export to the Community.
(31)
For each of those types, it was established whether domestic sales were sufficiently representative for the purposes of Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. Domestic sales of a particular type were considered sufficiently representative when the total domestic sales volume of that type during the IP represented 5 % or more of the total sales volume of the comparable type exported to the Community.
(32)
The Commission subsequently examined for each company whether the domestic sales of each type of the product concerned, sold domestically in representative quantities, could be regarded as having been made in the ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic Regulation, by establishing the proportion of profitable sales to independent customers on the domestic market of the type in question.
(33)
In cases where the sales volume of a type of saddle, sold at a net sales price equal to or above its cost of production, represented more than 80 % of the total sales volume of that type, and where the weighted average price of that type was equal to or above its cost of production, normal value, by product type, was based on the actual domestic price. This price was calculated as a weighted average of the prices of all domestic sales of that type made during the IP, irrespective of whether these sales were profitable or not.
(34)
Where the volume of profitable sales of a type of saddle represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that type, or where the weighted average price of that type was below its cost of production, normal value, by product type, was based on the actual domestic price, which was calculated as a weighted average of profitable sales of that type only, provided that these sales represented 10 % or more of the total sales volume of that type.
(35)
Finally, where the volume of profitable sales of any type of saddle represented less than 10 % of the total sales volume of that type, it was considered that this particular type was sold in insufficient quantities for the domestic price to provide an appropriate basis for the establishment of the normal value.
(36)
Wherever domestic prices of a particular type sold by an exporting producer could not be used, constructed normal value was used.
(37)
In accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation, normal value was constructed by adding to each exporter's manufacturing costs of the exported types, adjusted where necessary, a reasonable amount for selling, general and administrative costs (SG&A) and for profits. In all cases SG&A and profits were established pursuant to the methods set out in Article 2(6) of the basic Regulation. To this end, the Commission examined whether the SG&A costs incurred and the profit realised by each of the exporting producers concerned on the domestic market constituted reliable data.
(38)
Actual domestic SG&A costs were considered reliable when the total domestic sales volume of the company concerned could be regarded as representative as compared to the volume of export sales to the Community. The domestic profit margin was determined on the basis of domestic sales of those types that were sold in the ordinary course of trade. For this purpose, the methodology set out above was applied.
(39)
For the three companies with representative domestic sales it was found that the majority of types of the product concerned, which were exported, were sold on the domestic market in the ordinary course of trade. For those types where this was not the case, normal value was constructed using the methodology set out above, using the SG&A and profit information for each company concerned.
(40)
For the two companies without representative domestic sales, the amounts for SG&A and profit were determined on the basis of the average SG&A and profit of the four companies with domestic sales.
(b) Determination of normal value for the exporting producers not granted MET
(i) Analogue country
(41)
According to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, normal value for the exporting producers not granted MET, has to be established on the basis of the prices or constructed value in an analogue country.
(42)
In the notice of initiation, the Commission indicated its intention to use Brazil as an appropriate analogue country for the purpose of establishing normal value and interested parties were invited to comment on this.
(43)
No exporting producers in the PRC not granted MET objected to this proposal.
(44)
However, an importer and an exporting producer granted MET have argued that Brazil is not the most appropriate analogue country, and that Taiwan or Mexico should be selected for that purpose instead.
(45)
Regarding Taiwan, it is considered that although a bicycle parts industry had developed there, most of the production has been transferred to the PRC. Accordingly, saddle manufacturers headquartered in Taiwan would be largely the same companies or related companies to the ones which are exporting from the PRC to the Community at allegedly dumped prices. Moreover, the normal division of labour within those groups means that only a few specialised models, with higher profit margins, are still produced in Taiwan, while the production of the vast majority of middle-range to lower-end models have been transferred to the PRC for cost reasons. It is not likely, therefore, that prices or costs of saddle models manufactured in Taiwan would be the best surrogate to base a normal value for the saddles manufactured in the PRC.
(46)
Regarding Mexico, this country is considered to be an open and competitive market, representing about one eighth of the size of the Brazilian market. The Commission contacted the two known producers in Mexico, but no cooperation was offered.
(47)
Regarding Brazil, the investigation revealed that it is a competitive market for the product concerned with at least three domestic producers, of different sizes, and with imports from third countries amounting to about 15 % of the domestic consumption of eight to nine million saddles per year. One exporting producer alleged that the level of competition on the Brazilian market was dubious due to the low number of producers. However, the investigation showed that there was no evidence of a dominant position of one of the Brazilian producers or that prices are established in a non-competitive manner. There was also no reason to believe that the access to raw materials, costs and other conditions of production in Taiwan or Mexico would be more similar to those in the PRC than they are in Brazil. The Brazilian market was therefore deemed adequate for the purpose of establishing normal value.
(48)
The three known exporting producers in Brazil were contacted, and one company agreed to cooperate. A questionnaire was therefore sent to this producer and the data submitted in its reply was verified on the spot. This cooperating producer is related to one of the Community producers, but there is no reason to believe that this would affect the reliability of the data, which was moreover verified at the company's premises.
(49)
In view of the foregoing, it is provisionally concluded that Brazil is the most appropriate and reasonable analogue country in accordance with Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation.
(ii) Normal value
(50)
Pursuant to Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, normal value for the exporting producers not granted MET was established on the basis of verified information received from the producer in the analogue country, i.e. on the basis of prices paid or payable on the Brazilian market for comparable product types, in accordance with the methodology set out above.
(51)
Normal value was established on the basis of all prices paid or payable on the Brazilian market for comparable product types, as the transactions were all found to be made in the ordinary course of trade.
4. Export prices
(52)
All exporting producers made export sales to the Community either directly to independent customers in the Community or through related or unrelated trading companies located in Hong Kong, the British Virgin Islands and Taiwan.
(53)
Where the product concerned was directly exported to independent customers in the Community, the export prices were based on the prices actually paid or payable for the product concerned, in accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation.
(54)
Where sales were made via a related trader located outside the Community, the export price was established on the basis of the first resale prices to independent customers in the Community.
5. Comparison
(55)
The normal value and export prices were compared on an ex-works basis. For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between the normal value and the export price, due allowance in the form of adjustments was made for differences affecting prices and price comparability in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation. Appropriate adjustments concerning transport, insurance, handling and ancillary costs, packing, credit, and bank charges were granted in all cases where they were found to be reasonable, accurate and supported by verified evidence.
(56)
For the sales channelled through related companies in Taiwan, an adjustment was applied in accordance with Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation, where these companies have been shown to perform functions similar to that of an agent working on a commission basis. Given that the allocation of SG&A expenditure provided by the related company could not be considered reliable, this adjustment was based on the SG&A and profit data obtained from an unrelated trader.
6. Dumping margins
(a) For the cooperating exporting producers granted MET
(57)
For the companies granted MET, the weighted average normal value of each type of the product concerned exported to the Community was compared with the weighted average export price of the corresponding type of the product concerned, as provided for in Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation.
(58)
It has been the consistent practice of the Commission to consider related exporting producers or exporting producers belonging to the same group as one single entity for the determination of a dumping margin and thus to establish one single dumping margin for them. This in particular because individual dumping margins might encourage circumvention of anti-dumping measures, thus rendering them ineffective, by enabling related exporting producers to channel their exports to the Community through the company with the lowest individual dumping margin.
(59)
In accordance with this practice, the related exporting producers belonging to the same groups were regarded as one single entity and attributed one single dumping margin which was calculated on the basis of the weighted average of the dumping margins of the cooperating producers in the respective groups.
(60)
On this basis, the provisional weighted average dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid, are:
Company
Provisional dumping margin
Cionlli Bicycle (Taicang) Co. Ltd., Shunde Hongli Bicycle Parts Co. Ltd. and Safe Strong Bicycle Parts Shenzhen Co. Ltd.
7,5 %
Giching Bicycle parts (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. and Velo Cycle Kunshan Co. Ltd.
0 %
(b) For all other exporting producers
(61)
In order to calculate the country-wide dumping margin applicable to all other exporters in the PRC, the Commission first established the level of cooperation. A comparison was made between the total export quantities indicated in the questionnaire replies of the three cooperating exporting producers and total dumped imports from the PRC, calculated as explained in recital 71. The percentage found was 23 %. On this basis, the level of cooperation was deemed to be low.
(62)
It was therefore considered appropriate to determine the country-wide dumping margin as the weighted average of:
-
the dumping margin found for the cooperating exporter to which neither MET nor IT was granted, and
-
the highest dumping margins for representative product types of the same exporter, since there were no indications that the non-cooperating exporting producers dumped at a lower level.
(63)
On this basis the country-wide level of dumping was provisionally established at 30,9 % of the cif Community frontier price, duty unpaid.
D. INJURY
1. Community production
(64)
Within the Community the product concerned is known to be manufactured by nine producers on behalf of which the complaint was lodged. They are located in Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom and Portugal and represent 99 % of the Community production during the IP.
(65)
Furthermore, there was at initiation stage only one known Community producer which was not complainant. Taking into account the production volume of the nine complaining producers and the non-complaining producer in the Community, the total production of the like product amounted to 16 165 936 pieces in the IP.
2. Community industry
(66)
The following Community producers supported the complaint:
-
Selle Royal S.p.A., Pozzoleone, Italy with its related company:
-
Brooks England Ltd., West Midlands, United Kingdom
-
Selle Italia s.r.l., Rossano Veneto, Italy with its related company:
-
Bassano Selle s.r.l., Riese Pio X, Italy
-
Selle SMP S.A.S., Casalserugo, Italy
-
pph ABI sp.j., Nasielsk, Poland
-
Iberoselle Fabrica de Selins Lda., Agueda, Portugal
-
Selle Montegrappa s.n.c., Ramon di Loria, Italy
-
Selle San Marco S.p.A., Rossano, Italy.
(67)
As these nine complainant cooperating Community producers (both the sampled and non-sampled) represent 99 % of the Community production of the like product, they constitute the Community industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation. The sampled Community producers in the investigation, (hereafter referred to as ‘sampled producers’) accounted for 86 % of the total Community production of saddles during the IP. The remaining Community producers were requested to provide certain general data for the injury analysis.
3. Community consumption
(68)
The Community consumption was established on the basis of the sales volumes on the Community market by the five sampled Community producers, the four Community producers which were not included in the sample, the non-complaining producer in the Community and imports from the PRC and from other third countries under the relevant CN codes according to Eurostat. As mentioned in recital 14 the product concerned is presently declared within CN codes 8714 95 00, ex 8714 99 90 and ex 9506 91 10. The Eurostat data concerning the latter two CN codes (ex 8714 99 90 and ex 9506 91 10) comprise also other parts of bicycles and exercising apparatus. As it was not possible to retrieve from these two broader categories the data for saddles only, it was decided to establish the import statistics only on the basis of one CN code, namely CN codes 8714 95 00. As a consequence, the import volumes considered for the establishment of the Community consumption may be slightly understated.
(69)
On the basis of these data, it was found that over the period considered, consumption increased by 17 % from 20 701 027 pieces in 2002 to 24 179 012 pieces in 2005.
Table 1
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Community consumption (pieces)
20 701 027
21 688 470
23 357 359
24 179 012
Index
100
105
113
117
4. Imports of saddles from the PRC
(a) Margin of dumping and volume of imports and market share
(70)
As indicated earlier, the present investigation has shown that average dumping margins established for the PRC are above the de minimis threshold as defined in Article 9(3) of the basic Regulation, and that the volume of imports from the PRC is not negligible in the sense of Article 5(7) of the basic Regulation.
(71)
Import volumes were established on the basis of Eurostat data. As mentioned above in recital 68, the import data given below may be slightly understated. Furthermore, Eurostat provides statistics concerning import volumes of bicycle saddles in quantities of 100 kg and not in pieces. It was therefore considered as appropriate to use 500 grams per piece as the average weight of imported saddles from China as this weight was reported by one exporting producer and one unrelated importer.
(72)
Imports from the PRC more than quadrupled over the period considered. In fact, they increased from 1 416 814 pieces in 2002 to 6 276 749 pieces in the IP. Correspondingly, the market share increased from 7 % in 2002 to 26 % during the IP. This has to be seen against the background of a consumption which augmented by only 17 %, i.e. relatively less than the increase of imports from the PRC.
(73)
One unrelated importer alleged that import statistics were overestimated because an average weight of 400 grams per piece of saddles was used in the complaint. The company claimed that the average weight of saddles imported from the PRC would be between 600 and 800 grams. However, the same company confirmed during the verification visit which took place at its premises that the average weight of imported saddles from the PRC was 500 grams, i.e. exactly the weight used by the Commission for the conversion of Eurostat data given in 100 kg into pieces. This importer also argued that the import statistics from the PRC were inflated because they included also imports of saddles cover coats which are used for the protection of saddles. As mentioned above in recital 71, the import statistics were based on only one CN code, (CN 8714 95 00) which is not the one under which seat covers are normally declared and therefore the claim of the importer is unfounded.
Table 2
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Imports (pieces)
1 416 814
2 048 240
4 351 842
6 276 749
Index
100
145
307
443
Market share
7 %
9 %
19 %
26 %
(b) Prices
(74)
The weighted average price of imports of saddles originating in the PRC decreased steadily each year throughout the period considered and overall by 21 %, i.e. from EUR 1,4 per piece to EUR 1,1 per piece between 2002 and the IP.
Table 3
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Weighted average cif Community frontier price (EUR/piece)
1,4
1,3
1,1
1,1
Index
100
91
75
79
(c) Undercutting
(75)
For the determination of price undercutting, the Commission analysed data referring to the IP. The relevant sales prices of the Community industry were those to independent customers, adjusted where necessary to an ex-works level, i.e. excluding freight costs in the Community and after deduction of discounts and rebates. Prices for the different types of saddles, defined according to base, cushion, cover, fork and weight, were compared with the sales prices of similar types charged by the exporters, net of discounts, and adjusted, where necessary, to cif Community frontier with an appropriate adjustment for the customs duties (1,2 %) and post-importation costs, as incurred by an importer in the Community.
(76)
For the calculation of weighted average undercutting margins, export prices of cooperating exporting producers were taken into consideration. During the IP, the weighted average undercutting margin of cooperating producers amounted to 67,3 %. Moreover, taking into account all imports of saddles, i.e. those of cooperating and non-cooperating exporting producers in the PRC, the calculation of the average undercutting margin based on Eurostat data showed a similar average undercutting margin of 70,1 % for the IP.
5. Situation of the Community industry
(77)
In accordance with Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the Community industry included an evaluation of all economic factors having a bearing on the state of the Community industry during the period considered.
(78)
This analysis was carried out for the sampled companies. However, in order to provide a complete picture of the situation of the Community industry, for those indicators for which reliable information was available for the Community industry as a whole, this information has also been provided below. On this basis, the industry's performances as measured by factors such as prices, wages, investments, profits, return on investment, cash flow and ability to raise capital have been established on the basis of information provided by the sampled companies. The injury factors such as market share, sales volume and production have been established for the full Community industry.
(a) Production
(79)
The production volume of the whole Community industry showed a clear negative trend over the period considered. Whereas in 2002 the production volume amounted to 19 546 740 pieces of saddles, during the IP, the Community industry produced only 16 165 936 pieces, which is almost 3,5 million pieces or 17 % less than in 2002. As saddles are in general only produced upon orders received from customers, the negative development of the production volume can be directly linked to the declined demand for saddles produced by the Community industry.
Table 4
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Production (pieces)
19 546 740
19 022 491
17 698 103
16 165 936
Index
100
97
91
83
(b) Capacity of production and capacity utilisation rates
(80)
The production capacity was established on the basis of the nominal capacity of the production units owned by the Community industry, taking into account interruptions in production as well as the fact that in some few cases part of the capacity had been used for other products manufactured, e.g. handle bars for wheel chairs, with the same production lines.
(81)
The saddles production capacity increased by 5 % over the period considered from 29 492 120 pieces in 2002 to 30 921 920 pieces in the IP. The slight increase in production capacity results from investments made in 2004 and in the IP for the production of some new product types which are used for racing bicycles. The capacity utilisation rate mirrors the decline in production and demand. It steadily decreased during the period considered reaching only a 45 % utilisation in the IP.
Table 5
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Capacity of production (pieces)
29 492 120
29 215 880
29 354 000
30 921 920
Index
100
99
100
105
Capacity utilisation
60 %
59 %
53 %
45 %
(c) Stocks
(82)
As far as end of year stocks are concerned, the vast majority of production is made in response to orders. Therefore, whilst a decrease in stocks of 35 % was observed over the period considered, it is considered that in this case stocks were not a relevant indicator of injury.
Table 6
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Stocks (pieces)
1 365 040
1 192 612
1 000 376
884 829
Index
100
87
73
65
(d) Investments
(83)
Between 2002 and 2003, investments for the production of the like product diminished from EUR 3 808 057 to EUR 1 664 147. In 2004 the Community producers stepped up their investments and spent almost double the amount, i.e. EUR 3 381 996 compared to the previous year. During the IP investments amounted to 3 638 962 which is 4 % lower than the level reached at the beginning of the period considered in 2002. During the investigation it was found that investments in buildings, plants and machinery were mainly made to maintain the production capacity and, only in 2004 and the IP, to a lesser extent, to develop new product types. In view of the low capacity utilisation mentioned before, investments were in any case not made with the purpose to increase the overall production volume.
(84)
The investigation revealed that the Community industry is considered as the world leader concerning product design, and innovation of saddles. Between 2000 and the IP, the Community producers designed and marketed over one thousand new types of saddles. R&D accounts for approximately 8 % to 10 % of turnover of the Community industry. In order to keep this position, the Community industry needs to maintain a certain level of investment, even if capacity utilisation is low.
Table 7
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Investments (EUR)
3 808 057
1 664 147
3 381 996
3 638 962
Index
100
44
89
96
(e) Sales volume and market share
(85)
There are two main sales channels for saddles: the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) market and the ‘after market’. In the first case, saddles are sold to be put on a new bicycle and, in the second case saddles are sold in order to replace a used bicycle saddle. It was found that OEM sales account for approximately 60 % and after market sales for approximately 40 % of the total market. Like tyres, saddles are those components of a bicycle which are replaced most frequently.
(86)
Sales volumes of the whole Community industry declined by 20 % over the period considered from 15 109 569 pieces to 12 139 162 pieces in the IP, i.e. the Community industry sold almost three million saddles less in the IP than during 2002. After a small decrease of 1 % in 2003 compared to 2002, the loss in sales volumes was more pronounced in 2004 and the IP.
(87)
In terms of value, over the whole period considered sales of saddles by the Community industry increased only by 1 %. Sales value on the Community market increased by 5 % from EUR 54 460 180 in 2002 to EUR 56 978 530 in 2003 and then further to EUR 58 052 609 in 2004. However, during the IP, the Community industry's sales value decreased by almost EUR three million as compared to the previous year. The fact that sales in value did not develop along the same trend as sales in volume is explained by an increase in average prices which will be explained below.
(88)
Corresponding to the decline in sales volumes, the Community market share also went down significantly from 81 % in 2002 to 58 % in the IP. In other words, the Community industry lost 23 percentage points of its market share over the whole period considered to increasing imports from the PRC.
Table 8
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Sales value (EUR)
54 460 180
56 978 530
58 052 609
55 228 738
Index
100
105
107
101
Sales in the EC (pieces)
15 109 569
15 024 427
13 803 151
12 139 162
Index
100
99
91
80
Market share
81 %
77 %
67 %
58 %
(f) Prices
(89)
The Community industry's average unit selling price increased by 25 % over the period considered. This price increase can be explained, on the one hand, as a result of the increased cost of raw material, which impacted the whole industry and, on the other hand, by a shift from low tech to high tech product types which incorporate more expensive raw materials and whose production is also more labour intensive.
(90)
The main raw materials used for the production of saddles include plastic shells, coverings, polyurethane, rails and clamps. The prices of these raw materials are indirectly related to the development of the oil price and metal prices. The raw material is a major cost driving component in the production cost of saddles accounting for approximately half of the total production cost and has a direct impact on the sales price evolution.
(91)
It was found that average prices of raw materials remained stable between 2002 and 2003, but increased from 2003 and also during the IP, which was reflected in the higher sales prices of the Community industry
(92)
One unrelated importer alleged that the rise of prices of the Community industry was a result of a change in consumer demand. The company argued that the demand for low price bicycles and accordingly low price saddles has declined whereas the demand for more expensive high quality saddles has increased. This statement is contradicted by the fact that low priced imports from the PRC increased in relative terms considerably more that the overall consumption of saddles in the Community as stated in recital 72.
Table 9
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Weighted average price (EUR/piece)
3,6
3,8
4,2
4,5
Index
100
106
117
125
(g) Profitability and cash flow
(93)
During the period considered the weighted average profitability on net turnover of the Community industry decreased sharply from 3,8 % in 2002 to only 0,4 % in the IP. Whereas profitability increased to 5,0 % in 2003, it dropped to 3,1 % in 2004 and reached finally 0,4 % during the IP. The low profit margin is a consequence of the fact that the Community industry was unable to sufficiently pass on the price increase in raw materials to its customers.
Table 10
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Pre-tax profit margin
3,8 %
5,0 %
3,1 %
0,4 %
The Community industry generated a cash flow of EUR 3 990 473 during the IP which was approximately EUR 1,1 million or 22 % lower than in the year 2002. The still substantial amount of liquidity of the Community industry is explained by the fact that it is a capital intensive industry which requires high depreciation amounts. In general, it could be seen that the liquidity of the Community industry developed in a similar trend as profitability.
Table 11
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Cash flow (EUR)
5 084 871
6 655 555
6 574 821
3 990 473
Index
100
131
129
78
(h) Return on net assets
(94)
The return on net assets was calculated by expressing the pre-tax net profit of the like product as a percentage of the net book value of fixed assets allocated to the like product. This indicator followed a similar trend as profitability, decreasing from 12 % in 2002 to only 1 % in the IP.
Table 12
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Return on net assets
12 %
16 %
10 %
1 %
(i) Ability to raise capital
(95)
There was no claim from the Community industry nor indication that it encountered problems to raise capital for its activities and it was therefore concluded that the Community industry, as a whole, was in a position to raise capital for its activities throughout the period considered.
(j) Employment and wages
(96)
Employment in the Community industry remained stable over the whole period considered. After a small increase in 2003 and 2004, the Community industry employed 418 people on a full time basis during the IP, i.e. almost the same number as in 2002. However, it is noted that all Community producers outsource substantial parts of their production to other small and medium sized enterprises located in the Community and, in a few cases, almost the entire production process to other small and medium sized enterprises. Therefore, the total amount of people employed on a full time basis in the production of saddles is much higher than the number of employees directly employed by the Community industry. It is estimated that the total number of employees working in the production of the like product is at least three times higher, i.e. approximately 1 200 people during the IP. Average annual wages developed along the same trend as labour cost, i.e. they increased by 5 % over the period considered from EUR 7 784 339 in 2002 to EUR 8 190 911 in the IP, which is below the inflation rate in the Community during the same period.
Table 13
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Employees
421
434
456
418
Index
100
103
108
99
Labour cost (EUR/year)
11 427 812
12 136 974
12 319 136
12 121 976
Index
100
106
108
106
Wages (EUR/year)
7 784 339
8 136 410
8 428 090
8 190 911
Index
100
105
108
105
(k) Productivity
(97)
Productivity measured in output (production) per employee per year amounted to 42 225 pieces in 2002 and declined steadily over the years to 33 317 pieces in the IP. This decrease is caused by the decreasing production volume.
Table 14
2002
2003
2004
2005 (IP)
Productivity (pieces/employee)
42 225
39 752
34 388
33 317
Index
100
94
81
79
(l) Growth
(98)
While Community consumption increased by 17 % between 2002 and the IP, the sales volume of the Community industry remained stable during the same period. Thus, sales by the Community industry increased far less than the demand during the period considered. On the other hand, the market share of imports from the PRC went up by 19 percentage points.
(m) Magnitude of the dumping margin and recovery from past dumping
(99)
As concerns the impact on the Community industry of the magnitude of the actual margin of dumping, given the volume and the prices of the imports from the PRC, this impact cannot be considered negligible.
(100)
The Community industry was not found to be recovering from the effects of past dumping or subsidisation.
6. Conclusion on injury
(101)
The analysis of the injury indicators revealed that the situation of the Community industry deteriorated significantly over the period considered. The majority of injury indicators (net sales in volume, production volume, capacity utilisation, profitability, return on investments, investments, cash flow and employment) follow a negative trend over the period considered.
(102)
Still, some injury indicators show a stable development (net sales in value and ability to raise capital) or, they even show a positive trend (average sales prices, production capacity and closing stocks). However, the increase in sales prices and net sales value during IP cannot be attributed to an improvement of the situation of the Community industry as such, but were a consequence of the increased prices of raw materials and also a shift of the Community industry to the production of higher value product types. As far as closing stocks are concerned, as mentioned in recital 82, in view of the particularity of this industry, closing stocks cannot be considered as relevant for the determination of the injury.
(103)
Given the vastly negative development of the profit-related indicators, the viability of the industry can be considered to be at stake if this situation is not remedied. Indeed, as the Community industry consists of small and medium sized enterprises and operates in a capital intensive business, it is highly unlikely that the Community industry could financially survive a longer period at this level.
(104)
In the light of the foregoing, it is concluded that the Community industry has suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation.
E. CAUSATION
1. Introduction
(105)
In accordance with Article 3(6) and 3(7) of the basic Regulation, the Commission has examined whether the dumped imports of the product concerned originating in the PRC have caused injury to the Community industry to a degree that enables it to be classified as material. Known factors other than the dumped imports, which could at the same time have injured the Community industry, were also examined to ensure that possible injury caused by these other factors was not attributed to the dumped imports.
2. Effect of the dumped imports
(106)
Imports from the PRC more than quadrupled over the period considered, i.e. they increased by 343 % in terms of volume, and by 19 percentage points in terms of market share. At the same time, average prices of all exporting producers in the PRC undercut the average Community industry prices by 70,1 % in the IP. The substantial increase in the volume of imports from the PRC and their gain in market share during the period considered, at prices which were only a fraction of those of the Community industry, coincided with the evident deterioration of the overall financial situation of the Community industry during the same period.
(107)
Whereas unit prices of imports from PRC steadily declined over the period considered by 21 % from EUR 1,4 in 2002 to EUR 1,1 in the IP, the Community industry's prices increased over the same period by 26 % from EUR 3,6 in 2002 to EUR 4,5 during the IP. This price development into opposite directions can only partly be explained by a different product mix of saddles produced in the Community and the PRC. Moreover, the Community producers have submitted evidence that the access to and the prices of most raw materials are similar in the Community and the PRC. They have also shown that the raw material cost of saddles in the Community increased over the period considered. Indeed, some exporting producers in the PRC sell their products to the Community below cost of the raw material and this clearly shows that this is not a situation where prices are low because of a comparative advantage of the producers in the PRC, but because of the existence of dumping practices.
(108)
The effect of this unfair pricing behaviour of the dumped imports from the PRC was that the Community industry's prices were suppressed and could not even cover the increase of cost of raw materials. This was further confirmed by the significant reduction in profitability by the Community industry.
(109)
Based on the above considerations, it is evident that the low-priced imports from the PRC which significantly undercut the prices of the Community industry have had a determining role in the deterioration of the situation of the Community industry, which is reflected in particular in the decrease of production and sales volumes, market share, and in the sharp decrease of profitability.
3. Effect of other factors
(a) Non-dumped imports originating in the PRC
(110)
For one exporting producer the dumping margin established was below the de minimis threshold. Therefore, imports of this company were not considered in the injury analysis above. Of all imports from the PRC, the imports of this exporting producer amounted to a range of 28 % up to 33 % in the years 2002 and 2003, to a range between 18 % and 23 % in 2004 and reached a range between 12 % and 17 % in the IP. Average prices of this company still undercut those of the Community industry significantly throughout the period considered. However, the average undercutting margins of this company were much smaller than those of the companies for which dumping was found. In view of the fact that imports from this company were not significant, and, even more important, sharply decreased over the period considered, it is concluded that the non-dumped imports of this exporting producer did not break the causal link, i.e. that dumped imports from the PRC caused material injury to the Community industry.
(b) Imports originating in third countries other than the country concerned
(111)
According to Eurostat and to the information collected during the investigation, the main third countries from which saddles are imported are Taiwan, India and Vietnam.
(112)
Imports from Taiwan amounted 1 145 000 pieces in 2002 and increased over the period considered by 25 % to 1 429 200 pieces in the IP. The market share of saddles imported from Taiwan amounted to 6 % in 2002, i.e. the same level as in the IP. Taiwanese imports were made at prices at similar levels of those of the Community industry. As the market share of Taiwanese imports did not increase, but remained stable at 6 % over the period considered and prices were at the same level as Community industry's prices, imports from Taiwan are not considered as having had a negative effect on the situation of the Community industry.
(113)
Imports from India amounted to 204 200 pieces in 2002 and augmented by 30 % to 264 600 in the IP. Average prices of imports from India stayed during the whole period considered well below the level of imports from the PRC. They amounted to EUR 0,63 in 2002, then increased to EUR 0,91 EUR in 2003 after which they declined sharply to EUR 0,47 and reached EUR 0,6 in the IP. However, these imports only represent a market share of 1 % throughout the whole period considered. Therefore, it is concluded that despite the low price level of imports from India, these imports did not have a significant effect on the situation of the Community industry.
(114)
As to imports from Vietnam, Eurostat statistics show a very low level of 4 400 imported saddles in 2002 which augmented to 136 600 pieces in the IP. Prices of imports from Vietnam remained in the same range as prices from the PRC. However, similar as in the case of India, the market share of Vietnamese imports was below 1 % in 2002 and 2003 and merely reached 1 % in 2004 and the IP. Thus, it is concluded that these imports have not had a significant impact on the state of the Community industry.
(115)
It can thus provisionally be concluded that imports other than from the PRC did not contribute to the material injury suffered by the Community industry.
(c) Infringement of intellectual property rights
(116)
As mentioned earlier in recital 84, around 8 % to 10 % of the Community industry's turnover is devoted to investments in R&D. These investments include posture studies, tests and the design of new models of saddles. Some Community producers alleged that certain exporting producers from the PRC simply copy the patented European products and are hence able to generate a cost advantage compared to the producers in the Community which is reflected in the low price of saddles imported from the PRC. On the other hand, one unrelated importer submitted that counterfeits were not only originating from the PRC, but that they were also a cause of litigation among the producers in the Community. It is acknowledged that counterfeiting is an important issue in this industry and may indeed have aggravated the situation for the Community industry. In any event, the losses incurred by infringement of intellectual property rights caused by the Community industry itself are not such as to break the strong causal link between the surge of dumped imports and the material injury suffered by the Community industry. It should also be noted that to the extent that dumped imports from the PRC benefited from infringements of intellectual property rights, this could not be considered as another factor as this infringement would still relate to the dumped imports.
4. Conclusion on causation
(117)
The coincidence in time between, on the one hand, the increase in dumped imports from the PRC, the increase in market shares and the undercutting found and, on the other hand, the evident deterioration in the situation of the Community industry, leads to the conclusion that the dumped imports caused the material injury suffered by the Community industry within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation. Other factors were analysed but found not to be a determining reason for the injury suffered.
(118)
Based on the above analysis, which has properly distinguished and separated the effects of all known factors having an effect on the situation of the Community industry from the injurious effect of the dumped imports, it is provisionally concluded that the imports of saddles from the PRC have caused material injury to the Community industry within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation.
F. COMMUNITY INTEREST
(119)
In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, it was examined whether, despite the conclusion on injurious dumping, compelling reasons exist for concluding that it is not in the Community interest to adopt measures in this particular case. The likely impact of possible measures on all parties involved in the proceeding and also the consequences of not taking measures have to be considered in this respect.
1. Community industry
(120)
The injurious situation of the Community industry resulted from its difficulty to compete with the low-priced, dumped imports.
(121)
The imposition of measures should enable the Community industry to increase the volume of its sales and to regain market share and thereby generating better economies of scale, thus achieving the necessary profit level to justify continued investments in its production facilities and in research, to remain competitive.
(122)
One importer claimed that one Community producer had a dominant market position, however, without substantiating this allegation. Given the fact that saddles were produced throughout the period considered by at least 10 different competing producers in the Community, and that nothing was found in the course of the investigation to support this allegation, this claim is rejected.
(123)
Should measures not be imposed, the deterioration of the situation of the Community industry would continue. It would not be able to invest in new technologies and to compete effectively with imports from third countries. In addition, if measures are not imposed, the Community industry would continue to be deprived from the big volumes of the market of medium range saddles, therefore be unable to distribute its fixed costs. Indeed, some companies would have to cease the production of the like product and lay off their employees, as was already the case of one Community producer in 2005. It is therefore concluded that the imposition of anti-dumping measures is in the interest of the Community industry.
2. Interest of unrelated importers
(124)
As far as importers are concerned, only two unrelated importers replied to the questionnaire and a verification visit was subsequently carried out to one of them. The volumes of the product concerned imported by these two importers represented 21 % of the total imports in the Community from China and 7 % of the Community consumption.
(125)
In view of the fact that the majority of all saddles imports into the Community are channelled through importers which are not related to exporting producers, imports of these unrelated importers were considered as representative for all other unrelated importers.
(126)
For both importers, imports of the product concerned from the PRC represented 100 % of their total imports of saddles. In the case of one importer, the corresponding sales value of saddles represented 8 % of the importer's total turnover during the IP. The sales of imported saddles from the PRC were profitable during the IP. However, the profitability of the sales of saddles was 0,7 percentage points below the overall profitability of this company which was in a range of approximately 2 % to 6 % in the IP. In the case of the other importer, the sales value of imported saddles in the IP represented only 1,2 % of the company's total turnover and the profitability of the sales of saddles was estimated to be in line with the overall profitability of this company. It can be assumed from the information submitted by other importers that the situation of these two described importers is representative for most importers of saddles from the PRC.
(127)
As both companies imported saddles only from the PRC, it can be concluded that the imposition of measures may indeed have a negative effect on the financial situation of these companies. However, taking into consideration that the sales of saddles only account for a minor share of the companies' total turnover and profit, it is not expected that measures would have a significant financial impact on the overall situation of these two importers. In addition, these companies could also import saddles either from the group of companies for which zero dumping was found, or from other third countries, e.g. Taiwan.
3. Interest of users
(128)
Four users and distributors of the product concerned replied to the questionnaire sent by the Commission. These are companies which use saddles produced in the Community and also imported saddles for the assembly of bicycles. These four companies used a total amount of 1 255 655 saddles during the IP of which more than half (55 %) were saddles originating in the PRC. The number of imported saddles from the PRC and used by the four companies represented 5,7 % of the sales volume of the Community industry and 2,9 % of the total consumption of saddles in the Community during the IP. As far as the assemblers of bicycles are concerned, it was found that saddles constitute only a minor cost component of the total cost of a finished bicycle. On average, saddles account, depending on the model, for 1 % to 4 % of the total cost of a bicycle.
(129)
Two of the four users declared that the imposition of an anti-dumping duty would most likely not have a big effect on their business because an increase in the price of saddles would possibly be passed on to their final customer. Furthermore, they argued that the price difference between saddles produced and sold by the Community industry and imports from China was such, that even after the imposition of anti-dumping duties, saddles originating in the PRC would still remain competitive.
(130)
The other two users did not provide a non-confidential version of their submission. Therefore, in line with Article 19(3), such information was provisionally disregarded.
(131)
One exporting producer claimed that the imposition of measures on imports of saddles was not in the Community interest as it would put the existence of a viable European bicycle manufacturing industry further at risk. The company argued that manufacturers in the Community would stop their assembling business and instead start importing finished bicycles from the PRC despite the existence of an anti-dumping duty on bicycles. In this respect, it should be noted that exporters have no standing with regard to the determination of the Community interest. Nevertheless, the substance of the argument was examined. Given that two of the four users of bicycle saddles declared that the imposition of measures would not have any substantial impact on their businesses because of the low cost of a saddle in the overall cost of production of a bike the argument should in any event be rejected.
(132)
In view of the fact that the four companies purchased an important part of saddles (45 % during the IP) in the Community and given the relatively low importance of a saddle in the total cost of a fully assembled bicycle, it is concluded that the impact on costs resulting from the imposition of anti-dumping measures on saddles would not result in a significant impact in the overall costs of users. In any event, should such impact occur it is highly likely that users of imported saddles will be able to pass on the additional cost.
4. Interest of raw material suppliers and consumers
(133)
One raw material supplier replied to the questionnaire. This company is selling the metallic parts of saddles to producers in the Community, namely frames and springs which are made out of iron, steel, titanium, vanadium, manganese or carbon-steel. The company is in favour of the imposition of anti-dumping duties, as it expects production volumes of the Community industry to increase and consequently a higher demand for its raw materials.
(134)
On the basis of the above findings, and in the absence of any other element or reaction from consumer organisations it is concluded that the impact of the proposed measures on the consumers is not likely to be significant.
5. Conclusion on Community interest
(135)
Following the above, it is concluded that there are no compelling reasons on the grounds of Community interest, why provisional anti-dumping duties should not be imposed.
G. PROVISIONAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
1. Injury elimination level
(136)
In view of the conclusions reached with regard to dumping, resulting injury, causation and Community interest, provisional measures should be imposed in order to prevent further injury being caused to the Community industry by the dumped imports.
(137)
The measures should be imposed at a level sufficient to eliminate the injury caused by these imports without exceeding the dumping margin found. When calculating the amount of duty necessary to remove the effects of the injurious dumping, it was considered that any measures should allow the Community industry to cover its costs of production and to obtain overall a profit before tax that could be reasonably achieved by an industry of this type in the sector under normal conditions of competition, i.e. in the absence of dumped imports, on the sales of the like product in the Community. The pre-tax profit margin used for this calculation was 5 % of turnover, based on the profitability established in previous investigations for producers of bicycle parts which include the Community producers as defined in recital 67.
(138)
The necessary price increase was then determined on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average import price, as established for the price undercutting calculations (see recital 75 above), with the non-injurious price of products sold by the Community industry on the Community market. The non-injurious price has been obtained by adjusting the sales price of the Community industry by the actual loss/profit made during the IP and by adding the above mentioned profit margin. Any difference resulting from this comparison was then expressed as a percentage of the total cif import value.
(139)
In order to calculate the country-wide injury elimination level for all other exporters in the PRC, it should be recalled that the level of cooperation was low. Therefore, the injury margin was calculated as a weighted average of the margin calculated for the cooperating exporter and the highest margins established for representative types exported by the same exporter.
(140)
The injury margins were significantly higher than the dumping margins found.
2. Provisional measures
(141)
In light of the foregoing, it is considered that a provisional anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the dumping margin found, but should not, in accordance with Article 7(2) of the basic Regulation, be higher than the injury margin calculated above.
(142)
The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation were established on the basis of the findings of the present investigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during that investigation with respect to these companies. These duty rates (as opposed to the countrywide duty applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively applicable to imports of products originating in the country concerned and produced by the companies and thus by the specific legal entities mentioned. Imported products produced by any other company not specifically mentioned in the operative part of this document with its name and address, including entities related to those specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.
(143)
Any claim requesting the application of these individual company anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new production or sales entities) should be addressed to the Commission (3) forthwith with all relevant information, in particular any modification in the company's activities linked to production, domestic and export sales associated with, for example, that name change or that change in the production and sales entities. The Commission, if appropriate, will, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, amend the Regulation accordingly by updating the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates. In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-dumping duty, the countrywide dumping margin should also apply to those producers which did not have any exports to the Community during the IP.
(144)
On the basis of the above, the provisional duty rates are:
Cionlli Bicycle (Taicang) Co. Ltd., Shunde Hongli Bicycle Parts Co. Ltd. and Safe Strong Bicycle Parts Shenzhen Co. Ltd.
7,5 %
Giching Bicycle parts (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. and Velo Cycle Kunshan Co. Ltd.
0 %
All other companies
30,9 %
3. Special monitoring
(145)
In order to minimise the risks of circumvention due to the high difference in the duty rates, it is considered that special measures are needed in this case to ensure the proper application of the anti-dumping duties. Only the imports of the product concerned manufactured by the respective exporting producer can benefit from the specific dumping margin calculated for the producer concerned. These special measures include the following:
(146)
The presentation to the customs authorities of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice which must conform to the requirements set out in the Annex to this Regulation. Imports not accompanied by such an invoice must be made subject to the residual anti-dumping duty applicable to all other companies.
(147)
It is recalled that should the exports by the companies benefiting from lower individual duty rates increase significantly in volume after the imposition of the anti-dumping measures, such an increase in volume could be considered as constituting in itself a change in the pattern of trade due to the imposition of measures within the meaning of Article 13(1) of the basic Regulation. In such circumstances, and provided the conditions are met, an anti-circumvention investigation may be initiated. This investigation may, inter alia, examine the need for the removal of individual duty rates and the consequent imposition of a country-wide duty.
H. FINAL PROVISION
(148)
In the interest of sound administration, a period should be fixed within which the interested parties which made themselves known within the time limit specified in the notice of initiation may make their views known in writing and request a hearing. Furthermore, it should be stated that the findings concerning the imposition of anti-dumping duties made for the purposes of this Regulation are provisional and may have to be reconsidered for the purpose of any definitive duty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of saddles and essential parts thereof i.e., bases, cushions and covers, of bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorised, of cycles fitted with an auxiliary motor with or without sidecars, of fitness machines and of home trainers, falling within CN codes 8714 95 00, ex 8714 99 90 and ex 9506 91 10 (TARIC codes 8714999081 and 9506911010) and originating in the People's Republic of China.
2. The rate of the provisional anti-dumping duty applicable to the net free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, of the products manufactured by the companies below shall be:
Company
Anti-Dumping Duty
TARIC Additional Code
Cionlli Bicycle (Taicang) Co. Ltd., Shunde Hongli Bicycle Parts Co. Ltd. and Safe Strong Bicycle Parts Shenzhen Co. Ltd.
7,5 %
A787
Giching Bicycle parts (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. and Velo Cycle Kunshan Co. Ltd.
0 %
A788
All other companies
30,9 %
A999
3. The application of the individual duty rates specified for the companies mentioned in paragraph 2 shall be conditional upon presentation to the customs authorities of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the requirements set out in the Annex. If no such invoice is presented, the duty rate applicable to all other companies shall apply.
4. The release for free circulation in the Community of the product referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provision of a security, equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty.
5. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 2
Without prejudice to Article 20 of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96, interested parties may request disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which this Regulation was adopted, make their views known in writing and apply to be heard orally by the Commission within one month of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Pursuant to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the parties concerned may comment on the application of this Regulation within one month of the date of its entry into force.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 1 of this Regulation shall apply for a period of six months.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
REGULATION (EC) No 1108/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 21 October 2009
amending Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 in the field of aerodromes, air traffic management and air navigation services and repealing Directive 2006/23/EC
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 80(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions (2),
Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty (3),
Whereas:
(1)
In its communication of 15 November 2005 to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Extending the tasks of the European Aviation Safety Agency - an agenda for 2010’, the Commission announced its intention to progressively extend the tasks of the European Aviation Safety Agency (the Agency), with a view towards a ‘total system approach’, to aerodrome/airport safety and interoperability, air navigation services (ANS) and air traffic management (ATM).
(2)
The continuous growth of aviation in Europe leads to many challenges, in particular regarding the key safety factors of aerodromes and ATM/ANS. Therefore, necessary risk mitigation measures need to be established to ensure safety through a harmonised, holistic regulatory approach across the Member States.
(3)
The achievements of the single European sky initiative need to be complemented by the harmonised safety element to be applied to aerodromes and ATM/ANS. To this end, the appropriate safety regulatory framework should also be developed with regard to the deployment of new technologies in this field.
(4)
The Community should lay down, in line with the Standards and Recommended Practices set by the Convention on International Civil Aviation, signed in Chicago on 7 December 1944 (the Chicago Convention), essential requirements applicable to aeronautical products, parts and appliances, aerodromes and the provision of ATM/ANS; essential requirements applicable to persons and organisations involved in the operation of aerodromes and in the provision of ATM/ANS; and essential requirements applicable to persons and products involved in the training and medical assessment of air traffic controllers. The Commission should be empowered to develop the necessary related implementing rules.
(5)
Taking into account that services consisting in the origination and processing of data and formatting and delivering data for the purpose of air navigation are different from ANS services as defined in Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 laying down the framework for the creation of the single European sky (the framework Regulation) (4), the Commission should develop specific requirements adapted to such services.
(6)
It would not be appropriate to subject all aerodromes to common rules. In particular, aerodromes which are not open to public use and aerodromes mainly used for recreational flying or serving commercial air transport other than in accordance with instrument flight procedures and with paved runways of less than 800 metres, should remain under the regulatory control of the Member States, without any obligation under this Regulation on other Member States to recognise such national arrangements. However, proportionate measures should be taken by Member States to increase generally the level of safety of recreational aviation and of all commercial air transport. The Commission will re-examine in due time, extending the scope of application to aerodromes currently excluded in a modular manner, and taking full account of the impact this might have on such aerodromes.
(7)
Taking into account the large variety of aerodromes and their highly individual infrastructures and environments, common aerodrome safety rules should provide for the necessary flexibility for customised compliance, through an adequate balance between implementing rules, certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance. These rules should be proportionate to the size, traffic, category and complexity of the aerodrome and nature and volume of operations thereon, thereby avoiding unnecessary bureaucratic and economic burdens in particular for smaller aerodromes which only involve very limited passenger traffic.
(8)
Aerodrome infrastructure and operations should be certified by means of a single certificate. However, Member States may certify aerodrome infrastructure and operations separately. In that case, certificates should be delivered by the same authority. Operators of multiple aerodromes, having established appropriate central functions, may request a single certificate, covering operations and management at all aerodromes under their responsibility.
(9)
Aeronautical products, parts and appliances, aerodromes and their equipment, operators involved in commercial air transport and in the operation of aerodromes, ATM/ANS systems and providers, as well as pilots and air traffic controllers, and persons, products and organisations involved in their training and medical assessment, should be certified or licensed once they have been found to comply with essential requirements to be laid down by the Community in line with Standards and Recommended Practices set by the Chicago Convention. The Commission should be empowered to develop the necessary implementing rules for establishing the conditions for the issue of the certificate or the conditions for its replacement by a declaration of capability, taking into account the risks associated with the different types of operations or services.
(10)
Implementing rules relating to the certification of the design, manufacture and maintenance of ATM/ANS systems and constituents as well as to organisations engaged in the design, manufacture and maintenance should only be laid down when related to safety-critical issues identified following a detailed impact assessment study.
(11)
The Commission intends to begin work, in due time, on an examination of the feasibility and the necessity of introducing accredited bodies for the certification of ATM/ANS systems and an evaluation of all possible options and impacts. The Commission could, if appropriate, make a proposal for further revision of this Regulation based on a full impact assessment.
(12)
Under the Community institutional system, implementation of Community law is primarily the responsibility of the Member States. Certification tasks required by this Regulation and its implementing rules are therefore to be executed at national level. In certain clearly defined cases, however, the Agency should also be empowered to conduct certification tasks as specified in this Regulation. The Agency should, for the same reason, be allowed to take the necessary measures related to the fields covered by this Regulation when this is the best means to ensure uniformity and facilitate the functioning of the internal market.
(13)
The implementing rules to be developed by the Agency in the domain of ATM/ANS should be prepared in accordance with the results of the consultation process of the Agency on a basis that should be adapted to new stakeholders, and build on the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the provision of air navigation services in the single European sky (the service provision Regulation) (5), Regulation (EC) No 551/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the organisation and use of the airspace in the single European sky (the airspace Regulation) (6), Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the interoperability of the European Air Traffic Management network (the interoperability Regulation) (7), and in particular the transposed Eurocontrol Safety Regulatory Requirements. Such implementing rules should be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the regulatory procedure set out in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004. Transitional mechanisms should be designed in order to provide for the continuity of approvals already granted under the rules of those Regulations.
(14)
Regulations (EC) No 549/2004, (EC) No 550/2004, (EC) No 551/2004 and (EC) No 552/2004 include provisions on several regulatory functions of ATM, such as, but not limited to interoperability and the management of air traffic flows and of the airspace. All these areas involve safety aspects, which need to be properly addressed. Therefore, when regulating on these subjects, Member States and the Commission should ensure proper coverage of such safety aspects by means of appropriate coordination with the Agency.
(15)
It is a general objective that the transfer of functions and tasks from the Member States, including those resulting from their cooperation through the Safety Regulation Commission of Eurocontrol, to the Agency should be done efficiently, without any reduction in the current high levels of safety, and without any negative impact on certification schedules. Appropriate measures should be adopted to provide for the necessary transition. The Agency should have sufficient resources for its new tasks, and the timing of the allocation of these resources should be based on a defined need and schedule for the adoption and the respective applicability of the related implementing rules.
(16)
Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (8) establishes an appropriate and comprehensive framework for the definition and implementation of common technical requirements and administrative procedures in the field of civil aviation. Directive 2006/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on a Community air traffic controller licence (9) should therefore be repealed, without prejudice to the certification or licensing of products, persons and organisations already carried out in accordance with that Directive.
(17)
With regard to the regulation of professions which are not covered by this Regulation, the competence of Member States should be retained to establish or maintain at their own discretion, inter alia, certification or licensing requirements of the personnel.
(18)
The implementing rules to be developed by the Agency in the domain of ATM/ANS should be developed in the context of a comprehensive review of the safety requirements in the single European sky legislation, namely, Regulations (EC) No 549/2004, (EC) No 550/2004, (EC) No 551/2004 and (EC) No 552/2004. In order to avoid duplication of safety requirements applicable to ATM/ANS services on the one hand, and to avoid a legal void without applicable safety requirements on the other hand, the date of entry into force of the amendments to the single European sky legislation should be in line with those of the new safety measures made under this Regulation.
(19)
The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (10).
(20)
In particular the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing rules for air traffic controller licensing and associated approvals, aerodromes and aerodrome operations, air traffic management and air navigation services, and associated certificates, oversight and enforcement, as well as to adopt a regulation on the fees and charges of the Agency. Since those measures are of general scope and are designed to amend non-essential elements of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, inter alia, by supplementing it with new non-essential elements, they must be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.
(21)
Without prejudice to the competences of the Member States, the Commission, if necessary, could make recommendations to the Council to establish a framework of coordination between the Community and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) on safety audits, with the aim of avoiding duplication and in the interests of the efficient use of resources.
(22)
When drafting safety rules, the Agency should ensure the involvement of all interested parties. Rule-making opinions should be based on a full scale consultation of all stakeholders, including the smaller industry operators, as well as on a proper assessment of their potential impact in the applicable fields. As provided for in Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, the advisory body of interested parties should be consulted by the Agency prior to making decisions,
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 is hereby amended as follows:
1.
Article 1 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 1
Scope
1. This Regulation shall apply to:
(a)
the design, production, maintenance and operation of aeronautical products, parts and appliances, as well as personnel and organisations involved in the design, production and maintenance of such products, parts and appliances;
(b)
personnel and organisations involved in the operation of aircraft;
(c)
the design, maintenance and operation of aerodromes, as well as personnel and organisations involved therein and, without prejudice to Community and national legislation on environment and land-use planning, the safeguarding of surroundings of aerodromes;
(d)
the design, production and maintenance of aerodrome equipment, as well as personnel and organisations involved therein;
(e)
the design, production and maintenance of systems and constituents for air traffic management and air navigation services (ATM/ANS), as well as personnel and organisations involved therein;
(f)
ATM/ANS, as well as personnel and organisations involved therein.
2. This Regulation shall not apply to:
(a)
products, parts, appliances, personnel and organisations referred to in paragraph 1(a) and (b) while carrying out military, customs, police, search and rescue, firefighting, coastguard or similar activities or services. The Member States shall undertake to ensure that such activities or services have due regard as far as practicable to the objectives of this Regulation;
(b)
aerodromes or part thereof, as well as equipment, personnel and organisations, referred to in paragraph 1(c) and (d), that are controlled and operated by the military;
(c)
ATM/ANS, including systems and constituents, personnel and organisations, referred to in paragraph 1(e) and (f), that are provided or made available by the military. The Member States shall undertake to ensure that aircraft referred to in point (a) of this paragraph are separated, where appropriate, from other aircraft.
3. Member States shall, as far as practicable, ensure that any military facilities open to public use referred to in paragraph 2(b) or services provided by military personnel to the public referred to in paragraph 2(c), offer a level of safety that is at least as effective as that required by the essential requirements as defined in Annexes Va and Vb.’;
2.
Article 3 is amended as follows:
(a)
point (d) is replaced by the following:
‘(d)
“parts and appliances” shall mean any instrument, equipment, mechanism, part, apparatus, appurtenance, software or accessory, including communications equipment, that is used or intended to be used in operating or controlling an aircraft in flight; it shall include parts of an airframe, engine or propeller, or equipment used to manoeuvre the aircraft from the ground;’;
(b)
the following point is inserted:
‘(da)
“ATM/ANS constituents” shall mean any constituent as defined in Article 2(19) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 laying down the framework for the creation of the single European sky (the framework Regulation) (*1);
(*1) OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 1.’;"
(c)
point (h) is replaced by the following:
‘(h)
“operator” shall mean any legal or natural person, operating or proposing to operate one or more aircraft or one or more aerodromes;’;
(d)
the following points are added:
‘(m)
“aerodrome” shall mean a defined area (including any buildings, installations and equipment) on land or water or on a fixed, fixed offshore or floating structure intended to be used either wholly or in part for the arrival, departure and surface movement of aircraft;
(n)
“aerodrome equipment” shall mean any equipment, apparatus, appurtenance, software or accessory, that is used or intended to be used to contribute to the operation of aircraft at an aerodrome;
(o)
“apron” shall mean a defined area intended to accommodate aircraft for purposes of loading or unloading passengers, mail or cargo, fuelling, parking or maintenance;
(p)
“apron management service” shall mean a service provided to manage the activities and the movement of aircraft and vehicles on an apron;
(q)
“ATM/ANS” shall mean the air traffic management functions as defined in Article 2(10) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, air navigation services defined in Article 2(4) of that Regulation, and services consisting in the origination and processing of data and formatting and delivering data to general air traffic for the purpose of safety-critical air navigation;
(r)
“ATM/ANS system” shall mean any combination of safety-related equipment and systems as defined in Article 2(39) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004;
(s)
“flight information service” shall mean a service provided for the purpose of giving advice and information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights.’;
3.
in Article 4, the following paragraphs are inserted:
‘3a. Aerodromes, including equipment, located in the territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty, open to public use and which serve commercial air transport and where operations using instrument approach or departure procedures are provided, and:
(a)
have a paved runway of 800 metres or above; or
(b)
exclusively serve helicopters;
shall comply with this Regulation. Personnel and organisations involved in the operation of these aerodromes shall comply with this Regulation.
3b. By way of derogation from paragraph 3a, Member States may decide to exempt from the provisions of this Regulation an aerodrome which:
-
handles no more than 10 000 passengers per year, and
-
handles no more than 850 movements related to cargo operations per year.
If such exemption by a Member State does not comply with the general safety objectives of this Regulation or any other rule of Community law, the Commission shall take a decision in accordance with the safeguard procedure referred to in Article 65(7) not to permit the exemption in question. In such a case, the Member State concerned shall revoke the exemption.
3c. ATM/ANS provided in the airspace of the territory to which the Treaty applies, as well as in any other airspace where Member States apply Regulation (EC) No 551/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the organisation and use of the airspace in the single European sky (the airspace Regulation) (*2) in accordance with Article 1(3) of that Regulation, shall comply with this Regulation. Systems and constituents, personnel and organisations involved in the provision of these ATM/ANS shall comply with this Regulation.
(*2) OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 20.’;"
4.
in Article 5, paragraph 2, points (b) and (c) are replaced by the following:
‘(b)
the measures referred to in paragraph 5 may lay down a requirement for certification in respect of parts and appliances. The certificates for parts and appliances shall be issued when the applicant has shown that the parts and appliances comply with the detailed airworthiness specifications established to ensure compliance with the essential requirements referred to in paragraph 1;
(c)
no aircraft shall be operated, unless it has a valid certificate of airworthiness. The certificate shall be issued when the applicant has shown that the aircraft conforms to the type design approved in its type-certificate and that relevant documentation, inspections and tests demonstrate that the aircraft is in condition for safe operation. This certificate of airworthiness shall remain valid as long as it is not suspended, revoked or terminated and as long as the aircraft is maintained in accordance with the essential requirements related to continuing airworthiness set out in point 1.d of Annex I and the measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 5;’;
5.
in Article 7, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:
‘4. A certificate shall be required in respect of each flight simulation training device used for the training of pilots. The certificate shall be issued when the applicant has shown that the device complies with the rules established to ensure compliance with the relevant essential requirements as set out in Annex III.’;
6.
Article 8 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. The operation of aircraft referred to in Article 4(1)(b) and (c) shall comply with the essential requirements set out in Annex IV and, if applicable, Annex Vb.’;
(b)
paragraph 5 is amended as follows:
(i)
point (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
conditions to operate an aircraft in compliance with the essential requirements set out in Annex IV and, if applicable, Annex Vb;’;
(ii)
point (g) is replaced by the following:
‘(g)
how operations of aircraft referred to in point (a)(ii) and points (d) and (h) of Annex II, when used for commercial air transportation, comply with the relevant essential requirements set out in Annex IV and, if applicable, Annex Vb.’;
(c)
in paragraph 6, the following indent is added:
‘-
take into account the safety aspects related to ATM/ANS,’;
7.
the following Articles are inserted:
‘Article 8a
Aerodromes
1. Aerodromes and aerodrome equipment as well as the operation of aerodromes shall comply with the essential requirements set out in Annex Va and, if applicable, Annex Vb.
2. The compliance of aerodromes, aerodrome equipment and operation of aerodromes with the essential requirements shall be established in accordance with the following:
(a)
a certificate shall be required in respect of each aerodrome. The certificate and certification of changes to that certificate shall be issued when the applicant has shown that the aerodrome complies with the aerodrome certification basis set out in point (b), and that the aerodrome has no feature or characteristic making it unsafe for operation. The certificate shall cover the aerodrome, its operation and its safety-related equipment;
(b)
the certification basis for an aerodrome shall consist of the following:
(i)
the applicable certification specifications related to the type of aerodromes;
(ii)
the provisions for which an equivalent level of safety has been accepted; and
(iii)
the special detailed technical specifications necessary when the design features of a particular aerodrome or the experience in operation render any of the specifications referred to in point (i) inadequate or inappropriate to ensure conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex Va;
(c)
the measures referred to in paragraph 5 may lay down a requirement of certification in respect of safety-critical aerodrome equipment. The certificate for such equipment shall be issued when the applicant has shown that the equipment complies with the detailed specifications established to ensure compliance with the essential requirements referred to in paragraph 1;
(d)
organisations responsible for the operation of aerodromes shall demonstrate their capability and means to discharge the responsibilities associated with their privileges. These capabilities and means shall be recognised through the issuance of the certificate referred to in point (a). They may also be recognised through the issuance of a separate certificate if the Member State where the aerodrome is located so decides. The privileges granted to the certified organisation and the scope of the certificate, including a list of aerodromes to be operated, shall be specified in the certificate;
(e)
by way of derogation from point (d), Member States may decide that providers of apron management services shall be allowed to declare their capability and means of discharging the responsibilities associated with the services provided.
3. Member States shall ensure that provisions are in place to safeguard aerodromes against activities and developments in their surroundings which may cause unacceptable risks to aircraft using the aerodrome.
4. Aerodrome operators shall monitor activities and developments which may cause unacceptable safety risks to aviation in the aerodrome surroundings and take, within their competence, mitigating measures as appropriate.
5. The measures designed to amend non-essential elements of the requirements referred to in this Article, by supplementing it, shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 65(4).
Those measures shall specify in particular:
(a)
the conditions for establishing and notifying to an applicant the certification basis applicable to an aerodrome;
(b)
the conditions for establishing and notifying to an applicant the detailed specifications applicable to aerodrome equipment;
(c)
the conditions for issuing, maintaining, amending, suspending or revoking certificates for aerodromes and certificates for aerodrome equipment, including operating limitations related to the specific design of the aerodrome;
(d)
the conditions for operating an aerodrome in compliance with the essential requirements set out in Annex Va and, if applicable, Annex Vb;
(e)
the conditions for issuing, maintaining, amending, suspending or revoking the certificates referred to in paragraph 2(d);
(f)
the responsibilities of the holders of certificates;
(g)
the conditions for the acceptance and for the conversion of aerodrome certificates issued by Member States, including measures which are already authorised by the Member State concerned on the basis of notified deviations from Annex 14 of the Chicago Convention before the entry into force of this Regulation;
(h)
the conditions for the decision not to permit exemptions referred to in Article 4(3b), including criteria for cargo aerodromes, the notification of exempted aerodromes and for the review of granted exemptions;
(i)
the conditions under which operations shall be prohibited, limited or subject to certain conditions in the interest of safety;
(j)
the conditions and procedures for the declaration by and for the oversight of service providers referred to in paragraph 2(e).
6. The measures referred to in paragraph 5 shall:
(a)
reflect the state of the art and the best practices in the field of aerodromes and take into account the applicable ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices;
(b)
be proportionate to the size, traffic, category and complexity of the aerodrome and nature and volume of operations thereon;
(c)
take into account worldwide aerodrome operation experience, and scientific and technical progress;
(d)
allow for immediate reaction to established causes of accidents and serious incidents;
(e)
provide for the necessary flexibility for customised compliance.
Article 8b
ATM/ANS
1. Provision of ATM/ANS shall comply with the essential requirements set out in Annex Vb and, as far as practicable, Annex Va.
2. ATM/ANS providers shall be required to hold a certificate. The certificate shall be issued when the provider has demonstrated its capability and means of discharging the responsibilities associated with the provider’s privileges. The privileges granted and the scope of the services provided shall be specified in the certificate.
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Member States may decide that providers of flight information services shall be allowed to declare their capability and means of discharging the responsibilities associated with the services provided.
4. The measures referred to in paragraph 6 may lay down a requirement for certification in respect of organisations engaged in the design, manufacture and maintenance of safety-critical ATM/ANS systems and constituents. The certificate for those organisations shall be issued when they have demonstrated their capability and means of discharging the responsibilities associated with their privileges. The privileges granted shall be specified in the certificate.
5. The measures referred to in paragraph 6 may lay down a requirement for certification, or alternatively, validation by the ATM/ANS provider, in respect of safety-critical ATM/ANS systems and constituents. The certificate for those systems and constituents shall be issued, or validation shall be given, when the applicant has shown that the systems and constituents comply with the detailed specifications established to ensure compliance with the essential requirements referred to in paragraph 1.
6. The measures necessary for the implementation of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure referred to in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004.
Those measures shall specify in particular:
(a)
the conditions for the provision of ATM/ANS in compliance with the essential requirements set out in Annex Vb and, if applicable, in Annex Va;
(b)
the conditions for establishing and notifying to an applicant the detailed specifications applicable to ATM/ANS systems and constituents;
(c)
the conditions for issuing, maintaining, amending, suspending or revoking the certificates referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4;
(d)
the responsibilities of the holders of certificates;
(e)
the conditions and procedures for the declaration by, and for the oversight of service providers referred to in paragraph 3;
(f)
the conditions under which operations shall be prohibited, limited or subject to certain conditions in the interest of safety.
7. The measures referred to in paragraph 6 shall:
(a)
reflect the state of the art and the best practices in the field of ATM/ANS;
(b)
be proportionate to the type and complexity of the services provided;
(c)
take into account worldwide ATM/ANS experience, and scientific and technical progress;
(d)
be developed using as far as practicable the relevant provisions of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 and of Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the provision of air navigation services in the single European sky (the service provision Regulation) (*3), Regulation (EC) No 551/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the interoperability of the European Air Traffic Management network (the interoperability Regulation) (*4) and provide for transitional mechanisms to ensure the continuity of certificates already granted under those Regulations; initially they shall include the safety provisions of those Regulations and, where appropriate, in case of future amendments, take into account latest scientific and technical progress;
(e)
allow for immediate reaction to established causes of accidents and serious incidents.
Article 8c
Air traffic controllers
1. Air traffic controllers as well as persons and organisations involved in the training, testing, checking or medical assessment of air traffic controllers, shall comply with the relevant essential requirements set out in Annex Vb.
2. Air traffic controllers shall be required to hold a licence and a medical certificate appropriate to the service provided.
3. The licence referred to in paragraph 2 shall only be issued when the applicant for the licence demonstrates that he or she complies with the rules established to ensure compliance with the essential requirements regarding theoretical knowledge, practical skill, language proficiency and experience as set out in Annex Vb.
4. The medical certificate referred to in paragraph 2 shall only be issued when the air traffic controller complies with the rules established to ensure compliance with the essential requirements on medical fitness as set out in Annex Vb. The medical certificate may be issued by aero medical examiners or by aero medical centres.
5. The privileges granted to the air traffic controller and the scope of the licence and the medical certificate shall be specified in such licence and certificate.
6. The capability of air traffic controller training organisations, aero medical examiners and aero medical centres to discharge the responsibilities associated with their privileges in relation to the issuance of licences and medical certificates shall be recognised by the issuance of a certificate.
7. A certificate shall be issued to training organisations, aero medical examiners and aero medical centres for air traffic controllers that have demonstrated that they comply with the rules established to ensure compliance with the relevant essential requirements as set out in Annex Vb. The privileges granted by the certificate shall be specified therein.
8. Persons responsible for providing practical training or for assessing air traffic controllers’ skill shall hold a certificate. The certificate shall be issued when the person concerned has demonstrated that he or she complies with the rules established to ensure compliance with the relevant essential requirements as set out in Annex Vb. The privileges granted by the certificate shall be specified therein.
9. Synthetic training devices shall comply with the relevant essential requirements set out in Annex Vb.
10. The measures designed to amend non-essential elements of this Article by supplementing it, shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 65(4).
Those measures shall specify in particular:
(a)
the different ratings and endorsements for air traffic controllers’ licences;
(b)
the conditions for issuing, maintaining, amending, limiting, suspending or revoking licences, ratings and endorsements for licences, medical certificates, approvals and certificates, and the conditions under which such certificates and approvals need not be requested, while providing for transitional mechanisms to ensure the continuity of approvals and certificates already granted;
(c)
the privileges and responsibilities of the holders of licences, ratings and endorsements for licences, medical certificates, approvals and certificates;
(d)
the conditions for the acceptance and for the conversion of air traffic controllers’ licences as well as the conditions for the acceptance and for the conversion of national medical certificates into commonly recognised medical certificates.
11. The measures referred to in paragraph 10 shall reflect the state of the art, including best practices and scientific and technical progress, in the field of air traffic controller training. They shall initially be developed on the basis of the provisions of Directive 2006/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on a Community air traffic controller licence (*5).
(*3) OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 10."
(*4) OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 26."
(*5) OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p. 22.’;"
8.
Article 9 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. Aircraft referred to in Article 4(1)(d), as well as their crew and their operations, shall comply with applicable ICAO standards. To the extent that there are no such standards, these aircraft and their operations shall comply with the requirements set out in Annexes I, III, IV and, if applicable, Annex Vb, provided these requirements are not in conflict with the rights of third countries under international conventions.’;
(b)
in paragraph 5, the following point is added:
‘(e)
safety aspects related to ATM/ANS are taken into account.’;
9.
in Article 10, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. The Member States, the Commission and the Agency shall cooperate with a view to ensuring compliance with this Regulation and its implementing rules.’;
10.
Article 11 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraphs 4 and 5 are replaced by the following:
‘4. Pending the entry into effect of the measures referred to in Articles 5(5), 7(6) and 9(4) and the expiry of any transition periods provided for by those measures, and without prejudice to Article 69(4), certificates which cannot be issued in accordance with this Regulation may be issued on the basis of the applicable national regulations.
5. Pending the entry into effect of the measures referred to in Article 8(5) and the expiry of any transition periods provided for by those measures, and without prejudice to Article 69(4), certificates which cannot be issued in accordance with this Regulation may be issued on the basis of the applicable national regulations.’;
(b)
the following paragraphs are inserted:
‘5a. Pending the entry into effect of the measures referred to in Articles 8a(5) and 8c(10) and the expiry of any transition periods provided for by those measures, and without prejudice to Article 69(4), certificates which cannot be issued in accordance with this Regulation may be issued on the basis of the applicable national regulations.
5b. Pending the entry into effect of the measures referred to in Article 8b(6) and the expiry of any transition periods provided for by those measures, and without prejudice to Article 69(4), certificates which cannot be issued in accordance with this Regulation may be issued on the basis of the applicable national regulations or, where applicable, on the basis of the relevant requirements of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2096/2005 of 20 December 2005 laying down common requirements for the provision of air navigation services (*6).
(*6) OJ L 335, 21.12.2005, p. 13.’;"
11.
in Article 13, the following paragraph is added:
‘Qualified entities shall not issue certificates.’;
12.
in Article 18, points (c) and (d) are replaced by the following:
‘(c)
issue certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance, as well as any guidance material for the application of this Regulation and its implementing rules;
(d)
take the appropriate decisions for the application of Articles 20, 21, 22, 22a, 22b, 23, 54 and 55 including the granting of exemptions to holders of certificates it has issued, from the substantive requirements laid down in this Regulation and its implementing rules in the event of unforeseen urgent operational circumstances or operational needs of a limited duration, provided that the level of safety is not affected, that they are granted for a period not exceeding two months, that they are notified to the Commission and that they are not renewed;’;
13.
in Article 19(2), point (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance; and’;
14.
the following Articles are inserted:
‘Article 22a
ATM/ANS
With regard to ATM/ANS referred to in Article 4(3c) the Agency shall:
(a)
conduct, itself or through national aviation authorities or qualified entities, inspections, and audits of the organisations it certifies;
(b)
issue and renew certificates of organisations located outside the territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty, responsible for providing services in the airspace of the territory to which the Treaty applies;
(c)
issue and renew certificates of organisations providing pan-European services;
(d)
amend, suspend or revoke the relevant certificate, when the conditions according to which it was issued are no longer fulfilled or if the holder of the certificate fails to fulfil the obligations imposed on it by this Regulation or by its implementing rules.
Article 22b
Air traffic controller certification
With regard to the persons and organisations referred to in Article 8c(1), the Agency shall:
(a)
conduct, itself or through national aviation authorities or qualified entities, investigations and audits of the organisations it certifies and, where relevant, their personnel;
(b)
issue and renew the certificates of air traffic controller training organisations located outside the territory of the Member States and, where relevant, their personnel;
(c)
amend, suspend or revoke the relevant certificate when the conditions according to which it was issued by it are no longer fulfilled, or if the legal or natural person holding the certificate fails to fulfil the obligations imposed on it by this Regulation or its implementing rules.’;
15.
in Article 33(2)(c), the date ‘30 September’ is replaced by ‘30 November’;
16.
in Article 44, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. An appeal may be brought against decisions of the Agency taken pursuant to Articles 20, 21, 22, 22a, 22b, 23, 55 or 64.’;
17.
in Article 50, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
‘2. Actions for the annulment of decisions of the Agency taken pursuant to Articles 20, 21, 22, 22a, 22b, 23, 55 or 64 may be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities only after all appeal procedures within the Agency have been exhausted.’;
18.
Article 52 is amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘As soon as possible after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Management Board shall establish transparent procedures for issuing opinions, certification specifications, acceptable means of compliance and guidance material referred to in Article 18(a) and(c).’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
‘2. When the Agency, pursuant to Article 19, develops opinions, certification specifications, acceptable means of compliance and guidance material to be applied by Member States, it shall establish a procedure for consulting the Member States. To this effect, it may create a working group in which each Member State is entitled to designate an expert.’;
19.
in Article 55, paragraph 1, the first sentence is replaced by the following:
‘The Agency may itself conduct or assign to national aviation authorities or qualified entities all necessary investigations of undertakings in accordance with Articles 7, 20 21, 22, 22a, 22b 23 and 24(2).’;
20.
the following Article is inserted:
‘Article 65a
Amendments
In accordance with the provisions of the Treaty, the Commission shall propose to amend Regulations (EC) No 549/2004, (EC) No 550/2004, (EC) No 551/2004 and (EC) No 552/2004 in order to take into account the requirements of this Regulation.’;
21.
the title of Annex V is replaced by the following:
‘Criteria for qualified entities referred to in Article 13 (“qualified entity” or “entity”)’;
22.
Annexes Va and Vb as set out in the Annex to this Regulation are inserted.
Article 2
Directive 2006/23/EC is hereby repealed.
The provisions of Directive 2006/23/EC shall continue to apply, on a transitional basis, until the date of application of the measures referred to in Article 8c(10) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 as amended by this Regulation.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
The Commission shall adopt the measures referred to in Article 8a(5) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 as amended by this Regulation before 31 December 2013. Article 8a shall apply as from the dates specified in those measures.
The Commission shall adopt the measures referred to in Article 8b(6) and Article 8c(10) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 as amended by this Regulation before 31 December 2012. Articles 8b and 8c shall apply as from the dates specified in those measures.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Strasbourg, 21 October 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
1,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 88/97 of 20 January 1997 on the authorization of the exemption of imports of certain bicycle parts originating in the People's Republic of China from the extension by Council Regulation (EC) No 71/97 of the anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2331/96 (2),
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 71/97 of 14 January 1997 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 on bicycles originating in the People's Republic of China to imports of certain bicycle parts from the People's Republic of China, and levying the extended duty on such imports registered under Regulation (EC) No 703/96 (3), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
(1) By Regulation (EC) No 71/97 (hereinafter 'the Reference Regulation`), the Council extended the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 (4) on imports of bicycles originating in the People's Republic of China to imports of certain bicycle parts from that country.
(2) The Reference Regulation sets out certain principles and guidelines governing the exemption of certain imports of bicycle parts from the extended duty.
(3) This Regulation should provide clear guidance to interested parties as to how the exemption system will be operated. It should, in particular, make clear provision as to how certain imports of essential bicycle parts may be exempted from the extended duty, and how authorization for such exemptions may be obtained.
(4) In this regard, the exemption system should envisage three cases in which imports of essential bicycle parts may conditionally or definitively be exempted from the payment of the extended duty.
First, direct imports of essential bicycle parts should be exempted from the extended duty where they are declared for free circulation by, or on behalf of, an assembler which has been exempted by the Commission.
Secondly, imports of essential bicycle parts should also be exempted from the extended duty where they are admitted under end-use control and where they are finally delivered to an exempted assembler, or are declared for free circulation or delivered to a party in limited quantities. It is appropriate in this respect to apply the existing mechanism of end-use control provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (5) and in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 12/97 (7) mutatis mutandis. Where less than 300 units per month of any type of essential bicycle parts are declared for free circulation by, or delivered to, a party, such imports of essential bicycles parts will be of limited economic significance, and will be unlikely to undermine the effect of the duty imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93. They should, therefore, be presumed not to constitute circumvention.
Thirdly, imports of essential bicycle parts should conditionally be exempted from the extended duty by suspension of the payment of the extended duty, where they are declared for free circulation by, or on behalf of, an assembler which is under examination by the Commission.
(5) The Commission is charged with examining whether a party's assembly operations fall within the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (hereinafter the 'basic Regulation`), and will exempt the party if justified. Only parties carrying out assembly operations may submit a request for exemption by the Commission.
Any Commission decision to exempt a party carrying out assembly operations constitutes an authorization within the meaning of Article 13 (4) of the basic Regulation.
In this respect it is appropriate that, where imports of essential bicycle parts have been exempted from the extended duty by reference to an exempted assembler or to the de minimis clause, the exemption conditions should provide for the Commission to ensure that the parts are actually used in the exempted party's assembly operations and that the de minimis threshold is not abused.
(6) The competent authorities of the Member States must check that those parts are either declared for free circulation by an exempted assembler or, through the operation of the end-use system, that they are finally delivered to an exempted assembler or fall under the de minimis clause.
(7) As regards assemblers' requests for exemption by the Commission, clear provisions should be laid down regarding the admissibility of requests, the conduct of examinations, the taking of decisions, review and revocation of exemptions.
In the interest of sound administration, requests should provide prima facie evidence of the absence of circumvention, and should be duly substantiated if they are to be considered admissible by the Commission. In order to ensure an expeditious decision on the admissibility of duly substantiated requests, a period should be prescribed within which such decisions should normally be taken.
A period should be prescribed within which the Commission should normally decide on the merits of a request.
As regards review, the Commission may re-examine exempted assemblers to verify that the conditions of exemption are still fulfilled, in particular by random checks.
(8) Other parties which cannot be exempted by the Commission because they do not carry out assembly operations may nonetheless also benefit from the exemption system where they declare the goods under end-use control and deliver essential bicycle parts to exempted parties or to other holders of an end-use authorization, or under the de minimis clause.
It is, however, necessary for the customers of those parties, if they are assemblers but are not yet exempted and if they use parts in quantities above the de minimis threshold, to obtain an exemption from the Commission.
(9) In the case of parties which have submitted duly substantiated requests which are pending, the examination should be initiated immediately.
It is necessary to ensure that retroactive exemption is possible for parties with pending requests. Therefore, the payment of the extended duty should be suspended not only in respect of imports declared for free circulation after entry into force of the Reference Regulation but also in respect of imports subject to the duty arising under Article 2 (3) of the Reference Regulation.
(10) Parties carrying out assembly operations which have already been found not to circumvent the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 should be exempted by this Regulation.
It is necessary to ensure that these parties are exempted retroactively.
(11) Annexed to this Regulation is a list of parties in respect of which an examination is initiated and a list of parties which are exempted from the extended duty. Changes to the lists and consolidated updated lists will be published, from time to time and as necessary, in the C Series of the Official Journal of the European Communities.
(12) Finally, the general rules applying to anti-dumping investigations, regarding in particular the conduct of investigations, verification visits, non-cooperation, confidentiality, and the procedural rights of the parties concerned, should apply to the procedures laid down in this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Definitions
For the purpose of this Regulation:
- 'bicycle parts` means bicycle parts and accessories falling within CN codes 8714 91 10 to 8714 99 90,
- 'extended duty` means the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93, as extended by Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 71/97 (hereinafter 'the Reference Regulation`),
- 'essential bicycle parts` means the bicycle parts defined in Article 1 of the Reference Regulation,
- 'assembly operation` means an operation in which essential bicycle parts are brought in for the assembly or completion of bicycles,
- 'request` means any step taken by a party carrying out assembly operations with a view to obtaining authorization for exemption from the Commission pursuant to Article 3,
- 'party under examination` means a party carrying out assembly operations in respect of which an examination has been initiated pursuant to Article 4 (5) or Article 11 (1), and
- 'exempted party` means any party whose assembly operations have been found to fall outside the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 and which has been exempted pursuant to Article 7 or 12 of this Regulation.
Article 2
Exemption of imports from the extended duty
1. Imports of essential bicycle parts shall be exempt from the extended duty where:
- they are declared for free circulation by, or on behalf of, an exempted party, or
- they are declared for free circulation under the provisions on end-use control in Article 14.
2. Imports of essential bicycle parts shall be provisionally exempted from the payment of the extended duty where they are declared for free circulation by, or on behalf of, a party under examination.
Article 3
Request for exemption
1. Requests shall be made in writing in one of the official languages of the Community and must be signed by a person authorized to represent the applicant. The request must be sent to the following address:
European Commission,
Directorate-General for External Economic Relations,
Unit I/C-3,
CORT 100 4/59,
Rue de la Loi/Weststraat 200,
B-1049 Brussels;
Fax No: (32-2) 295 65 05.
2. Upon receipt of a request, the Commission shall immediately inform the applicant and the Member States.
Article 4
Admissibility of requests
1. A request shall be admissible where:
(a) it contains evidence that the applicant is using essential bicycle parts for the production or assembly of bicycles in quantities above the threshold set out in Article 14 (c) or that he has entered into a irrevocable contractual obligation to do so;
(b) it provides prima facie evidence that the applicant's assembly operations fall outside the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96; and
(c) the applicant has not, within the 12 months preceding the request, been refused authorization of exemption pursuant to Article 7 (3) or (4), or had an exemption revoked pursuant to Article 10.
2. A reasonable period may be prescribed for the submission of any additional information required for the determination of the admissibility of a request. Where such evidence is not forthcoming within the period specified, the request shall be considered inadmissible.
3. The admissibility of a request which is duly substantiated pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 shall normally be determined within 45 days of its receipt. The applicant shall first be given an opportunity to comment on the Commission's conclusions as to the admissibility of the request.
4. Where a request is held inadmissible, it shall, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, be rejected by a Decision.
5. Where a request is held admissible, an examination shall be initiated immediately and the applicant and the Member States shall be notified.
Article 5
Suspension of payment of the duties
1. As from the date of receipt of a request complying with the conditions set out in Article 3 (1) and pending a decision on its merits pursuant to Articles 6 and 7, payment of the customs debt in respect of the extended duty pursuant to Article 2 (1) of the Reference Regulation shall be suspended in respect of any imports of essential bicycle parts declared for free circulation by the party under examination.
2. The competent authorities of the Member States may make the suspension of payment of the extended duty subject to the provision of a security to guarantee payment of the extended duty in the event that the request is subsequently held inadmissible pursuant to Article 4 (4) or rejected pursuant to Article 7 (3) or (4).
Article 6
Examination of the request
1. In conducting its examination, the Commission may, where appropriate, request additional information from the applicant and/or carry out on-the-spot verifications. The examination will normally cover a period of not less than six months prior to the receipt of the request.
2. Any party under examination shall ensure that, at any time, essential bicycle parts which it declares for free circulation are either used in its assembly operations, destroyed, or re-exported. It shall keep records of the essential bicycle parts delivered to it - and of the use made of them. These records shall be retained for at least three years. The records and any necessary additional evidence and information shall be communicated to the Commission upon request.
3. The examination of the merits of a request shall normally be concluded within twelve months after notification pursuant to Article 4 (5).
4. Before a decision is adopted pursuant to Article 7, the applicant shall be informed of the Commission's conclusions on the merits of the request and shall be given an opportunity to comment thereon.
Article 7
Decision
1. Where the facts as finally ascertained show that the applicant's assembly operations do not fall within the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the applicant's exemption from the extended duty shall be authorized, after consultation of the Advisory Committee.
2. The decision shall have retroactive effect as from the date of receipt of the request. The applicant's customs debt pursuant to Article 2 (1) of the Reference Regulation shall be considered void from that date.
3. Where the criteria for exemption are not fulfilled, the request shall, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, be rejected and the suspension of the payment of the extended duty referred to in Article 5 shall be lifted.
4. Any breach of obligations under Article 6 (2) or any false declaration relating to a decision may constitute a reason for rejecting the request.
Article 8
Obligations of exempted parties
1. An exempted party shall ensure that, at all times:
(a) its assembly operations remain outside the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96;
(b) where it receives deliveries of essential bicycle parts which have been exempted from the extended duty pursuant to Article 2, those parts are either used in its assembly operations, destroyed, re-exported, or resold to another exempted party.
2. An exempted party shall keep records of the essential bicycle parts of which it receives deliveries and of the use made of them. It shall retain those records and appropriate supporting evidence for at least three years. Those records shall be made available to the Commission on request.
Article 9
Review
1. The Commission may on its own initiative review the situation of an exempted party to verify that its assembly operations remain outside the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 384/96.
2. A review shall consist of an examination covering a period which may be shorter than six months.
Article 10
Revocation of an exemption
An exemption shall be revoked, after the exempted party has been given an opportunity to comment, and after consultation of the Advisory Committee:
- where a review has shown that the exempted party's assembly operations fall within the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96,
- in the event of breach of the party's obligations pursuant to Article 8 (2), or
- in the event of lack of cooperation after the adoption of the exemption decision.
Article 11
Pending requests
1. The requests of the parties listed in Annex I are admissible and examinations pursuant to Article 6 are hereby initiated.
2. The date of receipt within the meaning of Article 5 (1) of the requests referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be deemed to be the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
3. Pending a decision on the merits of the requests of the parties listed in Annex I, the payment of the customs debt incurred for the extended duty pursuant to Article 2 of the Reference Regulation shall be suspended with effect from the date of the entry into force of that Regulation.
4. Decisions pursuant to Article 7 (2) in respect of the parties listed in Annex I shall have retroactive effect as from 20 April 1996. The applicant's customs debts in respect of the extended duty shall therefore be considered void from that date.
Article 12
Parties exempted by this Regulation
The parties listed in Annex II are hereby exempted from the extended duty with effect form 20 April 1996.
Article 13
Procedural provisions
The relevant provisions of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 concerning:
- the conduct of investigations (Article 6 (2), (3), (4) and (5)),
- verification visits (Article 16),
- non-cooperation (Article 18), and
- confidentiality (Article 19),
shall apply to examinations pursuant to this Regulation.
Article 14
Exemption subject to end-use control
Where imports of essential bicycle parts are declared for free circulation by a person other than an exempted party, as from the date of entry into force of the Reference Regulation, they shall be exempted from the application of the extended duty if declared in accordance with the Taric structure in Annex III and subject to the conditions laid down in Article 82 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 and Articles 291 to 304 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, which shall be applicable mutatis mutandis, where:
(a) the essential bicycle parts are delivered to a party exempted pursuant to Articles 7 or 12; or
(b) the essential bicycle parts are delivered to another holder of an authorization within the meaning of Article 291 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93; or
(c) on a monthly basis, less than 300 units per type of essential bicycle parts are either declared for free circulation by a party or are delivered to it. The number of parts declared by or delivered to any party shall be calculated by reference to the number of parts declared by or delivered to all parties which are associated with or have compensatory arrangements with that party.
Article 15
Special provision for parties receiving de minimis deliveries
1. The Commission or the competent authorities of the Member States may decide, on their own initiative, to examine parties which declare essential bicycle parts for free circulation or receive deliveries pursuant to Article 14 (c).
2. Where the parties referred to in paragraph 1 are found to have declared for free circulation or received deliveries of quantities of essential bicycle parts above the threshold set out in Article 14 (c), or where they fail to co-operate with the examination, they shall no longer be presumed to fall outside the scope of Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96. After the party concerned has been given an opportunity to comment, those findings shall be notified to the competent authorities of the Member States.
3. Where the parties referred to in paragraph 1 abused Article 14 (c) in order to circumvent the extended duty, the extended duty not levied on any essential bicycle parts declared for free circulation by those parties or delivered to them after the entry into force of this Regulation may be reclaimed.
Article 16
Exchange of information
1. The particulars of parties in respect of which an examination has been initiated pursuant to Article 4 or in respect of which a decision has been taken pursuant to Articles 7 or 10 shall be communicated to the competent authorities of the Member States.
2. A notice will be published, from time to time as appropriate, containing updated lists of parties under examination and exempted parties, which will also be communicated forthwith to any interested party upon demand.
3. The competent authorities of the Member States shall communicate to the Commission within one month after the end of each quarter summary information with regard to exempted parties in accordance with the format set out in Annex IV.
Article 17
Provisions on customs duties
Unless otherwise specified, the provisions concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 18
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 January 1997.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 29 November 1999
authorising the Italian Republic to apply or to continue to apply reductions in, or exemptions from, excise duties on certain mineral oils used for specific purposes, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 8(4) of Directive 92/81/EEC
(1999/806/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils(1) and in particular Article 8(4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) Under Article 8(4) of Directive 92/81/EEC, the Council, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, may authorise any Member State to introduce exemptions from, or reductions in, excise duties on grounds of specific policy considerations;
(2) The Italian authorities have notified the Commission that they wish to apply, to certain particularly disadvantaged geographical areas, reduced excise duty rates for heating gas oil and LPG used for heating and distributed through networks of such areas;
(3) The other Member States have been informed thereof;
(4) The Commission and all the Member States accept that the application of reduced rates on excise duties on heating gas oil and LPG used for heating and distributed through the networks of the said areas is justified on environmental and social policy grounds and that it will not give rise to distortions of competition or hinder the operation of the internal market;
(5) The Commission regularly reviews excise duty reductions and exemptions to check that they are compatible with the operation of the internal market or with Community policy on protection of the environment;
(6) Italy has requested authorisation to apply reduced rates on excise duties on heating gas oil and LPG used for heating and distributed through networks of the areas concerned from 1 January 1999; the Council is to review its application on the basis of a report from the Commission before 31 December 1999, when the authorisation granted by this Decision expires,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In accordance with Article 8(4) of Directive 92/81/EEC and with the obligations laid down in Directive 92/82/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the approximation of the rates of excise duties on mineral oil(2), and in particular the minimum rates laid down in Articles 5 and 7 thereof, Italy is hereby authorised to apply until 31 December 1999 and in certain particularly disadvantaged geographical areas reduced rates of excise duty on heating gas oil and LPG used for heating and distributed through the networks of such areas.
Article 2
This Decision shall apply from 1 January 1999.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic.
Done at Brussels, 29 November 1999.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1849/2002
of 16 October 2002
fixing the export refunds on olive oil
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1513/2001(2), and in particular Article 3(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 3 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that, where prices within the Community are higher than world market prices, the difference between these prices may be covered by a refund when olive oil is exported to third countries.
(2) The detailed rules for fixing and granting export refunds on olive oil are contained in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 616/72(3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2962/77(4).
(3) Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund must be the same for the whole Community.
(4) In accordance with Article 3(4) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, the refund for olive oil must be fixed in the light of the existing situation and outlook in relation to olive oil prices and availability on the Community market and olive oil prices on the world market. However, where the world market situation is such that the most favourable olive oil prices cannot be determined, account may be taken of the price of the main competing vegetable oils on the world market and the difference recorded between that price and the price of olive oil during a representative period. The amount of the refund may not exceed the difference between the price of olive oil in the Community and that on the world market, adjusted, where appropriate, to take account of export costs for the products on the world market.
(5) In accordance with Article 3(3) third indent, point (b) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, it may be decided that the refund shall be fixed by tender. The tendering procedure should cover the amount of the refund and may be limited to certain countries of destination, quantities, qualities and presentations.
(6) The second indent of Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund on olive oil may be varied according to destination where the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets make this necessary.
(7) The refund must be fixed at least once every month. It may, if necessary, be altered in the intervening period.
(8) It follows from applying these detailed rules to the present situation on the market in olive oil and in particular to olive oil prices within the Community and on the markets of third countries that the refund should be as set out in the Annex hereto.
(9) The Management Committee for Oils and Fats has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(2)(c) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 October 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 October 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 July 2005
granting derogations to certain Member States with respect to the statistics to be compiled for the reference years 2003, 2004 and 2005 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 753/2004
(notified under document number C(2005) 2773)
(Only Dutch, English, Estonian, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese and Swedish texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2005/686/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Commission Regulation (EC) No 753/2004 of 22 April 2004 implementing Decision No 1608/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards statistics on science and technology (1), and in particular section 1 and section 2 of the Annex thereto,
Whereas,
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 753/2004 contains the reference framework of common standards, definitions and classifications for compiling Community statistics on science and technology in order to obtain high quality statistical results from Member states in accordance with these standards, definitions and classifications.
(2)
Section 1, point 3 of the Annex to the Regulation (EC) No 753/2004 provides that, in so far as national statistical systems require major adaptations, the Commission may grant derogations to Member States with respect to the statistics on research and development compiled for the first reference year 2003. In very exceptional cases, this derogation period may be extended for the regional breakdowns of certain variables.
(3)
Section 2, point 3 of the Annex to the Regulation (EC) No 753/2004 provides that, in so far as national statistical systems require major adaptations, the Commission may grant derogations to Member States with respect to the statistics on government budget appropriations or outlays on research and development (GBAORD) compiled for the first reference year 2004.
(4)
Such derogations have been requested by the respective authorities of Belgium, Estonia, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
(5)
According to the information received by the Commission (Eurostat), the requests from the Member States concerned are due to the fact that they need to make important changes to their statistical system.
(6)
The requested derogations should therefore be granted,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Derogations are granted to Belgium, Estonia, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom as laid down in the annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Estonia, the Hellenic Republic, the French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Done at Brussels, 22 July 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1626/2003
of 17 September 2003
on the issue of import licences for rice originating in the least developed countries
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001 of 10 December 2001 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences for the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2004(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 814/2003(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1401/2002 of 31 July 2002 laying down detailed rules for the opening and administration of the tariff quotas for rice, originating in the least developed countries, for the marketing years 2002/2003 to 2008/2009(3), and in particular Article 5(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1401/2002 opened a tariff quota for a quantity of 3329 tonnes of husked rice equivalent for the 2003/2004 marketing year.
(2) The quantities in respect of which applications have been submitted exceed the quantities available. It is therefore necessary to set a reduction percentage applicable to the quantities applied for,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For applications for import licences for rice originating in the least developed countries referred to in Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 2501/2001, submitted during the first five working days of September 2003 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1401/2002 and notified to the Commission, licences shall be issued for the quantities given in the applications submitted multiplied by a reduction percentage of 93,8878 %.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 September 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 September 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3089/92 of 27 October 1992 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on products of categories No 19, 27 and 72 (order Nos 40.0190, 40.0270 and 40.0720), originating in India, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 of 20 December 1990 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1991 in respect of textile products originating in developing countries (1), extended for 1992 by Regulation (EEC) No 3587/91 (2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 provides that preferential tariff treatment shall be accorded for 1992 for each category of products subjected in Annexes I and II thereto to individual ceilings, within the limits of the quantities specified in column 8 of Annex I and column 7 of Annex II, in respect of certain or each of the countries or territories of origin referred to in column 5 of the same Annexes;
Whereas Article 11 of the abovementioned Regulation provides that the levying of customs duties may be re-established at any time in respect of imports of the products in question once the relevant individual ceilings have been reached at Community level;
Whereas, in respect of products of categories No 19, 27 and 72 (order Nos 40.0190, 40.0270 and 40.0720), originating in India, the relevant ceiling amounts to 1 746 000, 260 000 and 189 000 pieces, respectively;
Whereas on 6 May 1992 imports of the products in question into the Community, originating in India, a country covered by preferential tariff arrangements, reached and were charged against that ceiling;
Whereas it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties for the products in question with regard to India,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 31 October 1992 the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90, shall be re-established in respect of the following products, imported into the Community and originating in India:
Order No Category (unit) CN code Description 40.0190 19
(1 000 pieces) 6213 20 00
6213 90 00 Handkerchiefs other than knitted or crocheted 40.0270 27
(1 000 pieces) 6104 51 00
6104 52 00
6104 53 00
6104 59 00
6204 51 00
6204 52 00
6204 53 00
6204 59 10 Women's or girls' skirts, including divided skirts 40.0720 72
(1 000 pieces) 6112 31 10
6112 31 90
6112 39 10
6112 39 90
6112 41 10
6112 41 90
6112 49 10
6112 49 90
6211 11 00
6211 12 00 Swimwear, of wool, of cotton or of man-made fibres
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 October 1992.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1827/2004
of 19 October 2004
fixing the olive yields and oil yields for the 2003/2004 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats (1), and in particular Article 5(11) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2261/84 of 17 July 1984 laying down general rules on the granting of aid for the production of olive oil and of aid to olive oil producer organisations (2), and in particular the first indent of the second paragraph of Article 19 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 2261/84 provides that the olive yields and oil yields referred to in Article 5(7) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC are to be fixed by homogeneous production zone on the basis of the figures supplied by producer Member States. These production zones were designated in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2138/97 (3). These yields should now be laid down taking into account the figures received.
(2)
Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 of 30 October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for olive oil for the 1998/99 to 2004/2005 marketing years (4) lays down a method for estimating yields in homogenous zones that takes account of the overall statistical results obtained on the basis of samples at the level of larger regional areas.
(3)
The statistical results for France, in view of its modest production levels, are obtained on the basis of a single regional area and a small sample that does not permit an accurate national figure to be obtained. Adjustment of the yields of the homogenous zones on the basis of the statistical results as provided for in Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 produced clearly inconsistent values for the 2003/2004 marketing year. The yields of the homogenous zones in France should therefore be fixed without making the adjustment concerned.
(4)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 2003/2004 marketing year, the olive yields and oil yields shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 November 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 October 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 2 May 2005
concerning the measures necessary as regards an obstacle to trade constituted by trade practices maintained by Brazil affecting trade in retreaded tyres
(notified under document number C(2005) 1302)
(2005/388/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 (1) laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and in particular Articles 12(1) and 13(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
On 5 November 2003, the Commission received a complaint pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 (the Trade Barriers Regulation). The complaint was lodged by the Bureau international permanent des associations de vendeurs et rechapeurs de pneumatiques (Bipaver).
(2)
The complaint concerned certain alleged Brazilian trade practices that prevented the importation into Brazil of retreaded tyres (2). In particular, the complaint alleged that these practices were inconsistent with Articles III and XI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994). On that basis, the complainant asked the Commission to take the necessary action.
(3)
The complaint contained sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of a Community examination procedure pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Trade Barriers Regulation. Consequently, the Commission initiated the procedure after consulting with the Member States in the framework of the Advisory Committee, on 7 January 2004 (3).
(4)
Following the initiation of the examination procedure, the Commission carried out an investigation. The investigation concerned an alleged import ban and financial penalties relating to imported retreaded tyres.
(5)
The investigation considered the relevant Brazilian legislation relating to the import ban and the imposition of financial penalties, and equally took into account the views expressed by the various Brazilian Government Ministries, as well as Brazilian trade associations.
(6)
The investigation concluded that the Brazilian measures under investigation are inconsistent with several provisions of GATT 1994, specifically Articles I:1, III:4, XI:1 and XIII:1, and are not justified under Article XX of GATT 1994, the Enabling Clause or other applicable instruments of international law. Since the WTO Agreement prohibits the challenged practices, there is evidence of an obstacle to trade in the sense of Article 2(1) of the Trade Barriers Regulation.
(7)
The investigation showed that Brazil was an important market for European manufactures of retreaded tyres prior to the introduction of the ban on 25 September 2000. In the period 1995 to 2000 exports of retreaded tyres to Brazil for passenger cars rose at an average of 58 % and for the first time in the six-year period dropped by 32 % in 2001, i.e. after the imposition of the ban.
(8)
Whilst exports continued after the ban’s imposition, either on account of import licenses that were still in circulation, or as result of legal challenge by some importers through the Brazilian courts, it is evident that the market was gradually being closed off to European exporters. Whilst many of the Community exporters were eventually able to find new markets, they were still unable to compensate for what had been a large proportion of their export revenue. Not all were successful in finding new markets, or in creating new lines of retreaded tyre for specialist vehicles (4×4, sports, etc.) and therefore the ban, combined with other factors (late payment by the Brazilian importer, exchange-rate fluctuations) drove some Community producers into receivership.
(9)
The evidence clearly shows that Community industry has suffered and continues to suffer adverse effects within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the Trade Barriers Regulation.
(10)
Export data and the replies to the questionnaires sent by the Commission to European producers and exporters of retreaded tyres support Community industry’s claim that Brazil had been an important export market prior to the imposition of the ban and that they had anticipated annual sales reaching 3 million units by the end of 2002. The evidence also corroborates their claim that they have been suffering for the past three years as a result of the Brazilian import ban. In some instances, companies which were unable to find new export markets went into liquidation.
(11)
On the basis of the above, it can be concluded that it is in the Community’s interest in the sense of Article 12(1) of the Trade Barriers Regulation to take action, within the WTO framework, to seek a rapid removal of the Brazilian import ban on retreaded tyres, which represents a breach of fundamental WTO rules and an obstacle to trade in the sense of Article 2(1) of the Trade Barriers Regulation.
(12)
It is of utmost importance for the Community to ensure that WTO partners fully comply with their obligations, just as the Community is required to do. It is therefore fundamental for the good functioning of the multilateral trading system that this incompatibility with WTO rules should be addressed in that forum.
(13)
Attempts to resolve this dispute through numerous meetings with the Brazilian authorities since the imposition of the ban, and throughout the course of this investigation, have failed to identify a willingness on the part of the Brazilian authorities to reach a mutually agreed solution. In the absence of any likelihood that the Brazilian position will change, the initiation of a procedure within the framework of the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes is therefore deemed necessary.
(14)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the TBR Committee,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Brazilian Government’s imposition of an import ban on retreaded tyres and the related financial penalties appear to be inconsistent with Brazil’s obligations under the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organisation and, in particular, provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, and constitutes an obstacle to trade within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94.
Article 2
The Community will initiate dispute settlement proceedings against Brazil under the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes and other relevant WTO provisions with a view to securing removal of the obstacle to trade.
Done at Brussels, 2 May 2005.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Decision of the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the European Ombudsman
of 25 July 2002
establishing a European Communities Personnel Selection Office
(2002/620/EC)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, THE COURT OF JUSTICE, THE COURT OF AUDITORS, THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS AND THE EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN,
Having regard to the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and to the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Communities, as laid down by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC, ECSC, Euratom) No 490/2002(2), and in particular the third paragraph of Article 2 of the said Staff Regulations,
Having regard to the opinion of the Staff Regulations Committee,
Whereas:
(1) In the interests of making efficient and economic use of resources, a common interinstitutional body should be entrusted with the means of selecting officials and other servants to serve the European Communities.
(2) The interinstitutional body so established should have the task of drawing up reserve lists from among candidates in open competitions in line with the needs indicated by each institution and in compliance with the Staff Regulations, the decisions to appoint successful candidates being taken by each appointing authority.
(3) On the same terms, the interinstitutional body should also be able to assist the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies established by or in accordance with the Treaties with their internal competitions and the selection of other servants,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Establishment
A European Communities Personnel Selection Office (hereinafter referred to as "the Office") is hereby established.
Article 2
Powers
1. The Office shall exercise the powers of selection conferred under the first paragraph of Article 30 of the Staff Regulations and under Annex III thereto on the appointing authorities of the institutions signing this Decision. In exceptional cases only and with the agreement of the Office, the institutions may hold their own open competitions to meet specific needs for highly specialised staff.
2. Where the powers referred to in paragraph 1 are conferred on the appointing authority of a body, office or agency established by or in accordance with the Treaties, the Office may exercise such powers at the request of the latter.
3. The decisions to appoint successful candidates shall be taken by the appointing authorities of the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the European Ombudsman and by any body, office or agency established by or in accordance with the Treaties which has delegated its powers to, or called on the services of, the Office.
Article 3
Duties
1. In response to requests made to it by the appointing authorities referred to in Article 2, the Office shall draw up reserve lists from among candidates in open competitions as referred to in the first paragraph of Article 30 of the Staff Regulations and in accordance with Annex III thereto.
2. The Office may assist the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies established by or in accordance with the Treaties with internal competitions and the selection of other servants.
Article 4
Requests, complaints and appeals
In accordance with Article 91a of the Staff Regulations, requests and complaints relating to the exercise of the powers conferred under Article 2(1) and (2) of this Decision shall be lodged with the Office. Any appeal in these areas shall be made against the Commission.
Article 5
Implementation
The Secretaries-General of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the Registrar of the Court of Justice, the Secretaries-General of the Court of Auditors, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions and the representative of the European Ombudsman shall by mutual agreement take the measures necessary to implement this Decision.
Article 6
Effective date
This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
For the European Parliament
The President
Patrick Cox
For the Council
The President
Jaume Matas i Palou
For the Commission
The President
Romano Prodi
For the Court of Justice
The President
Gil Carlos Rodríguez Iglesias
For the Court of Auditors
The President
Juan Manuel Fabra Vallés
For the Economic and Social Committee
The President
G. Frerichs
For the Committee of the Regions
The President
Sir Albert Bore
The European Ombudsman
Jacob Söderman
(1) OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 77, 20.3.2002, p. 1.
Declaration by the Bureau of the European Parliament
The Bureau of the European Parliament
1. has authorised its President to sign the decision of the institutions establishing the European Communities Personnel Selection Office (the "Office"), and its Secretary-General to sign the two subsidiary decisions concerning its operations;
2. affirms that the institutional autonomy of the European Parliament is not affected by the creation of the Office, in so far as it will remain exclusively competent for the recruitment of permanent officials, in accordance with its institutional interests, from the reserve lists drawn up by the Office;
3. recalls that the selection and recruitment of other categories of staff, in particular the staff of the political groups, remains the exclusive competence of the European Parliament, except in so far as it may seek the technical assistance of the Office in this respect;
4. recalls likewise that the organisation of internal competitions, permitting the passage of officials from one category to another, remains the exclusive responsibility of the European Parliament; reiterates its intention periodically to organise internal competitions for the different staff categories;
5. confirms its commitment to a multilingual and multicultural administration which is balanced from a linguistic and geographical point of view; gives notice that the capacity of the Office to provide reserve lists such as to allow a recruitment policy ensuring such balance is one of the main criteria on which its performance will be judged;
6. further gives notice that, in the event of the Office not being able to provide reserve lists sufficient to guarantee linguistic and geographical balance, the European Parliament reserves its right autonomously to organise specific selection competitions to redress the situation in accordance with Article 2 of the Decision establishing the Office;
7. recalls its decision of 8 April to instruct Parliament's representatives on the Management Board of the Office not to approve the use of age limits in the organisation of open selection competitions.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 13/2002
of 4 January 2002
amending Regulation (EC) No 713/2001 on the purchase of beef under Regulation (EC) No 690/2001
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2345/2001(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2001 of 3 April 2001 on special market support measures in the beef sector(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2595/2001(4), and in particular Article 2(2),
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 690/2001 provides in its Article 2(2) in particular for the opening or the suspension of tendering for purchase of beef depending on the average market prices for the reference class during the two most recent weeks with price quotations preceding the tender.
(2) The application of Article 2 referred to above results in the opening of purchase by tender in a number of Member States. Commission Regulation (EC) No 713/2001(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2288/2001(6), on the purchase of beef under Regulation (EC) No 690/2001 should be amended accordingly.
(3) Since this Regulation should be applied immediately it is necessary to provide for its entry into force on the day of its publication,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 713/2001 is replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 5 January 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 January 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) N° 646/86
of 28 February 1986
fixing the export refunds on wine and repealing Commission Regulation (EEC)
N° 204/84
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) N° 337/79 of
5 February 1979 on the common organization of the market in wine (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) N° 3805/85 (2), and in particular Article 20 (4) thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 20 of Regulation (EEC) N° 337/79, to the extent necessary to enable the products listed in Article 1 (2) of that Regulation to be exported in an economically significant quantity on the basis of the prices for those products on the world market, the difference between those prices and the prices in the Community may be covered by an export refund; whereas, however, refunds may be granted only for the products specified in Article 1 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 345/79 of 5 February 1979 laying down general rules for granting export refunds on wine and criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (3), as amended by Regulation (EEC) N° 2009/81 (4);
Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) N° 345/79, refunds are to be fixed having regard to the existing situation and future trends with regard to: (i) prices and availabilities of the products concerned on the Community market and (ii) world market prices for these products; whereas account must also be taken of the costs referred to in that Article, of the economic aspects of the proposed exports, of the objectives defined in the said Article and of the need to avoid disturbances on the Community market; whereas, however, when fixing the amount of the refunds applicable to liqueur wines, account should be taken of the difference between Community prices and world market prices in respect only of wine and musts used in the manufacture of liqueur wines, since no such difference is recorded in respect of the other products used in the manufacture of the wines in question;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) N° 345/79, Community market prices must be determined on
(1) OJ N° L 54, 5. 3. 1979, p. 1.
(2) OJ N° L 367, 31. 12. 1985, p. 39.
(3) OJ N° L 54, 5. 3. 1979, p. 69.
(4) OJ N° L 195, 18. 7. 1981, p. 6.
the basis of the most advantageous export prices; whereas the prices referred to in Article 3 (2) must be taken into account when the prices in international trade are being determined;
Whereas the international trade situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund according to the use or destination of a specific product;
Whereas there is at present scope for economically significant exports of concentrated grape musts, table wines other than of type R III and rosé table wines from the Portugieser variety;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) N° 3389/81 of 27 November 1981 (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) N° 3473/82 (6), lays down the detailed rules for the application of export refunds on wine;
Whereas Article 10 of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 480/86 (7) provides that export refunds applicable to trade between Spain and third countries are to be reduced by the regulatory amounts referred to in Articles 2 and 5 of the Regulation; whereas, however, in order to avoid the risk of disturbances to trade or in cases where the market situation so requires, provision may be made for all or part of the regulatory amounts to be disregarded;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) N° 648/86 (8) fixes the regulatory amounts referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) 480/86;
Whereas, applying the abovementioned rules to the present market situation, in particular to the prices of wines in the Community and on the world market, the refunds should be fixed as shown in the Annex hereto, and Commission Regulation (EEC) N° 204/84 of 26 January 1984 fixing the export refunds on wine (9) should be repealed;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,
(5) OJ N° L 341, 28. 11. 1981, p. 24.
(6) OJ N° L 365, 24. 12. 1982, p. 30.
(7) OJ N° L 54, 1. 3. 1986, p. 2.
(8) See page 54 of this Official Journal.
(9) OJ N° L 22, 27. 1. 1984, p. 23.
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds for the products listed in Article 1 (2) of Regulation (EEC) N° 345/79 shall be as shown in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
Regulation (EEC) N° 204/84 is hereby repealed.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 March 1986.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 February 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 13 December 2007
amending Decision 2006/415/EC concerning certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of the subtype H5N1 in poultry in Poland
(notified under document number C(2007) 6597)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2007/838/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), and in particular Article 9(3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (2), and in particular Article 10(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Decision 2006/415/EC of 14 June 2006 concerning certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of the subtype H5N1 in poultry in the Community and repealing Decision 2006/135/EC (3) lays down certain protection measures to be applied in order to prevent the spread of that disease, including the establishment of areas A and B following a suspected or confirmed outbreak of the disease.
(2)
Following outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza of H5N1 subtype in Poland Decision 2006/415/EC was last amended by Commission Decision 2007/816/EC of 10 December 2007 amending Decision 2006/415/EC concerning certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of the subtype H5N1 in poultry in Poland.
(3)
Due to further outbreaks of the disease in Poland the delineation of the areas under restriction and the duration of the measures should be modified to take account of the epidemiological situation.
(4)
Decision 2006/415/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Decision should be reviewed at the next meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Annex to Decision 2006/415/EC is amended in accordance with the text in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 2007.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 16 September 2009
on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management
(2009/764/EC)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular point 28 thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2), and in particular Article 12(3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1)
The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) was established to provide additional support to redundant workers who suffer from the consequences of major structural changes in world trade patterns and to assist them with their reintegration into the labour market.
(2)
The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 allows the mobilisation of the Fund within the annual ceiling of EUR 500 million.
(3)
Spain submitted an application to mobilise the EGF, in respect of redundancies in the textiles sector, on 29 December 2008. This application complies with the requirements for determining the financial contributions as laid down in Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, therefore the Commission proposes to deploy an amount of EUR 3 306 750.
(4)
Portugal submitted an application to mobilise the EGF, in respect of redundancies in the textiles sector, on 23 January 2009. This application complies with the requirements for determining the financial contributions as laid down in Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, therefore the Commission proposes to deploy an amount of EUR 832 800.
(5)
The EGF should, therefore, be mobilised in order to provide a financial contribution for the applications submitted by Spain and Portugal,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2009, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 4 139 550 in commitment and payment appropriations.
Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Strasbourg, 16 September 2009.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 24 January 1997 amending Decision 95/343/EC providing for the specimens of the health certificate for the importation from third countries of heat-treated milk, milk-based products and raw milk for human consumption intended to be accepted at a collection centre, standardization centre, treatment establishment or processing establishment (Text with EEA relevance) (97/115/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/46/EEC of 16 June 1992 laying down the health rules for the production and placing on the market of raw milk, heat-treated milk and milk-based products (1), as last amended by Directive 96/23/EC (2),
Whereas Commission Decision 95/343/EC (3), last amended by Decision 96/106/EC (4), provides for the specimens of the health certificate for the importation from third countries of heat-treated milk, milk-based products and raw milk for human consumption intended to be accepted at a collection centre, standardization centre, treatment establishment or processing establishment;
Whereas the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 13 (1) of Directive 92/46/EEC provides that animals on production holdings must undergo regular veterinary inspections to ensure that the requirements of Annex A, Chapter I, are being complied with;
Whereas Decision 95/343/EC must be amended accordingly;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Annexes A, B, C and D to Decision 95/343/EC are hereby replaced by Annexes A, B, C and D hereto.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 January 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 23 December 2003
amending Decision 2003/467/EC as regards the declaration that certain provinces of Italy are free of bovine brucellosis and enzootic bovine leukosis
(notified under document number C(2003) 5063)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2004/63/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 64/432/EEC of 26 June 1964 on health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine(1), and in particular Annex A(II)(7) and Annex D(I)(E) thereto,
Whereas:
(1) The lists of regions of Member States declared free of bovine brucellosis and enzootic bovine leukosis are set out in Commission Decision 2003/467/EC of 25 June 2003 establishing the official tuberculosis, brucellosis and enzootic-bovine-leukosis free status of certain Member States and regions of Member States as regards bovine herds(2).
(2) Italy submitted to the Commission documentation demonstrating compliance with the appropriate conditions provided for in Directive 64/432/EEC as regards the provinces of Cremona, Lodi and Pavia in the Region of Lombardia in order that those provinces may be declared officially free of brucellosis as regards bovine herds.
(3) Italy also submitted to the Commission documentation demonstrating compliance with the appropriate conditions provided for in Directive 64/432/EEC as regards the provinces of Milano, Lodi and Cremona in the Region of Lombardia and the provinces of Arezzo, Firenze, Grossetto, Livorno, Lucca, Pisa, Pistoia, Prato, and Siena in the Region of Toscana, in order that those provinces may be declared officially free of enzootic bovine leukosis as regards bovine herds.
(4) Following evaluation of the documentation submitted by Italy, the provinces of Cremona, Lodi and Pavia in the Region of Lombardia should be declared officially free of bovine brucellosis and the provinces of Milano, Lodi and Cremona in the Region of Lombardia and the provinces of Arezzo, Firenze, Grossetto, Livorno, Lucca, Pisa, Pistoia, Prato, and Siena in the Region of Toscana should be declared officially free of enzootic bovine leukosis.
(5) Decision 2003/467/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
(6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Annexes II and III to Decision 2003/467/EC are amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 2003.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1143/92 of 5 May 1992 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2213/76 on the sale of skimmed-milk powder from public storage
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organizations of the market in milk products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 816/92 (2), and in particular Article 7 (5) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2213/76 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3153/91 (4), limited the quantity of skimmed-milk powder put up for sale by the Member States' intervention agencies to that taken into storage before 1 August 1990;
Whereas, having regard to the market situation, that date should be replaced by 1 September 1990;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
In Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 2213/76, '1 August 1990' is hereby replaced by '1 September 1990'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 May 1992.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2234/2001
of 16 November 2001
fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled round grain, medium grain and long grain A rice to be exported to certain third countries in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2009/2001
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2001(2), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) An invitation to tender for the export refund on rice was issued pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2009/2001(3).
(2) Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 584/75(4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/95(5), allows the Commission to fix, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a maximum export refund. In fixing this maximum, the criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 must be taken into account. A contract is awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less than the maximum export refund.
(3) The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the rice in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The maximum export refund on wholly milled grain, medium grain and long grain A rice to be exported to certain third countries pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2009/2001 is hereby fixed on the basis of the tenders submitted from 9 to 15 November 2001 at 200,00 EUR/t.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 November 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 November 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2005/16/EC
of 2 March 2005
amending Annexes I to V to Council Directive 2000/29/EC on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
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 (c) and (d) of the second paragraph of Article 14 thereof,
After consulting the Member States concerned,
Whereas:
(1)
Directive 2000/29/EC provides for certain measures against the introduction into the Member States from other Member States or third countries of organisms which are harmful to plants or plant products. It also provides for certain zones to be designed as protection zones.
(2)
Due to a clerical error in the 2003 Act of Accession, the list of counties in Sweden recognised as a protected zone in respect of Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say was incorrect and needs to be rectified.
(3)
From information supplied by Denmark, that Member State should no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Beet necrotic yellow vein virus as it appears that that harmful organism is now established in Denmark.
(4)
From information supplied by the United Kingdom, it appears that Dendroctonus micans Kugelan is now established in some parts of the United Kingdom. Accordingly, the protected zone in respect of Dendroctonus micans Kugelan should be restricted to Northern Ireland. In addition, the protected zone in respect of that organism should also be restricted to the Isle of Man and Jersey.
(5)
From information supplied by Estonia, it appears that Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. is not present in that Member State. Estonia may therefore be recognised as a protected zone for that organism.
(6)
From information supplied by Italy and from additional information collected by the Food and Veterinary Office during a mission in Italy in May 2004, it appears that Citrus tristeza virus is now established in that Member State. Italy should therefore no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Citrus tristeza virus.
(7)
From the Swiss legislation on plant protection, it appears that the Canton of Ticino is no longer recognised as a protected zone for Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. in Switzerland. The rules on imports to the Community should be adjusted to remove special treatment given to plants originating in Ticino.
(8)
Due to a clerical error in the preparation of Commission Directive 2004/31/EC (2), the special requirements for the introduction and movement of Vitis plants in Cyprus as laid down in point 21.1 of Part B of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC were erroneously deleted. Accordingly, that Annex should be amended.
(9)
In order to enhance the phytosanitary protection of the Community seeds of Medicago sativa L. and the Community certified seeds of Helianthus annuus L., Lycopersicon lycopersicum (L.) Karsten ex Farw. and Phaseolus L., those seeds need to be accompanied by a plant passport when moving, other than locally, within the Community.
(10)
The relevant Annexes to Directive 2000/29/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
(11)
The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annexes I, II, III, IV and V to Directive 2000/29/EC are amended in accordance with the text in the Annex to this Directive.
Article 2
1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by 14 May 2005 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.
They shall apply those provisions from 15 May 2005.
When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such a reference is to be made.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 3
This Directive shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 4
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 March 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2140/2004
of 15 December 2004
laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 as regards applications for fisheries licences in waters in the exclusive economic zone of Greenland
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 of 28 June 2004 on the conclusion of the Protocol modifying the fourth Protocol laying down the conditions relating to fishing provided for in the Agreement on fisheries between the European Economic Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland, on the other (1), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 provides that owners of Community vessels who receive a licence for a Community vessel authorised to fish in waters in the exclusive economic zone of Greenland are to pay a licence fee in accordance with Article 11(5) of the fourth Protocol.
(2)
Article 11(5) of the fourth Protocol provides that the implementing technical modalities for the attribution of fisheries licences are to be agreed by an administrative arrangement between the Parties.
(3)
The local Government of Greenland and the Community have held negotiations to determine the licence application and issuing formalities and, following those negotiations, an administrative arrangement was initialled on 30 September 2004.
(4)
The measures provided for in that administrative arrangement should be applied accordingly.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The fisheries licence application and issuing formalities referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1245/2004 shall be as set out in the administrative agreement in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 January 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 December 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1162/2005
of 19 July 2005
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 July 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 July 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1034/2005
of 1 July 2005
opening and providing for the administration of an autonomous tariff quota for garlic from 1 July 2005
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, and in particular the first paragraph of Article 41 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 (1) establishes the method for managing tariff quotas and introduces a system of certificates of origin for garlic imported from third countries.
(2)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 228/2004 of 3 February 2004 laying down transitional measures applicable to Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (2) adopts measures allowing importers from those countries (hereinafter the new Member States) to benefit from Regulation (EC) No 565/2002. The aim of those measures is to make a distinction between traditional importers and new importers in the new Member States, and to adapt the concept of the reference quantity so that those importers can benefit from the system.
(3)
To ensure uninterrupted supplies to the enlarged Community market while taking account of the economic supply conditions in the new Member States prior to their accession to the European Union, an autonomous and temporary import tariff quota should be opened for fresh or chilled garlic falling within CN code 0703 20 00. That new quota is in addition to the ones opened by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1077/2004 (3), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1743/2004 (4) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 218/2005 (5).
(4)
The new quota should be transitional and may not prejudge the outcome of the negotiations under way in the context of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as a result of the accession of the new Member States.
(5)
The Management Committee for fresh Fruit and Vegetables has not delivered an opinion within the time-limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. An autonomous tariff quota of 4 400 tonnes, bearing order number 09.4018 (hereinafter the autonomous quota), shall be opened from 1 July 2005 for Community imports of fresh or chilled garlic falling within CN code 0703 20 00.
2. The ad valorem duty applicable to products imported under the autonomous quota shall be 9,6 %.
Article 2
Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 228/2004 shall apply to the management of the autonomous quota, subject to the provisions of this Regulation.
However, Articles 1, 5(5) and 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 shall not apply to the management of the autonomous quota.
Article 3
Import licences issued under the autonomous quota (hereinafter licences), shall be valid until 30 September 2005.
Box 24 of the licences shall show one of the entries listed in Annex I.
Article 4
1. Importers may submit licence applications to the competent authorities of the Member States in the five working days following the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Box 20 of the licences shall show one of the entries listed in Annex II.
2. Licence applications submitted by a single importer may not relate to a quantity exceeding 10 % of the autonomous quota.
Article 5
The autonomous quota shall be allocated as follows:
-
70 % to traditional importers,
-
30 % to new importers.
If the quantity allocated to one of the categories of importers is not used in full, the balance may be allocated to the other category.
Article 6
1. The Member States shall notify the Commission, on the seventh working day following that of the entry into force of this Regulation, of the quantities for which licence applications have been made.
2. Licences shall be issued on the 12th working day following that of the entry into force of this Regulation, unless the Commission has taken special measures under paragraph 3.
3. If the Commission finds, on the basis of the information notified under paragraph 1, that licence applications exceed the quantities available for a category of importers under Article 5, it shall adopt, by means of a regulation, a single reduction percentage for the applications in question.
Article 7
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 1 July 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 96/2003
of 20 January 2003
on the supply of white sugar as food aid
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1292/96 of 27 June 1996 on food-aid policy and food-aid management and special operations in support of food security(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1726/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), and in particular Article 24(1)(b) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The abovementioned Regulation lays down the list of countries and organisations eligible for Community aid and specifies the general criteria on the transport of food aid beyond the fob stage.
(2) Following the taking of a number of decisions on the allocation of food aid, the Commission has allocated white sugar to certain beneficiaries.
(3) It is necessary to make these supplies in accordance with the rules laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2519/97 of 16 December 1997 laying down general rules for the mobilisation of products to be supplied pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 1292/96 as Community food aid(3). It is necessary to specify the time limits and conditions of supply to determine the resultant costs,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
White sugar shall be mobilised in the Community, as Community food aid for supply to the recipient listed in the Annex, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2519/97 and under the conditions set out in the Annex.
The tenderer is deemed to have noted and accepted all the general and specific conditions applicable. Any other condition or reservation included in his tender is deemed unwritten.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 January 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 10 March 2003
concerning the non-inclusion of parathion-methyl in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing this active substance
(notified under document number C(2003) 724)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/166/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(1), as last amended by Commission Directive 2003/5/EC(2), and in particular the fourth subparagraph of Article 8(2) thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92 of 11 December 1992 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2266/2000(4), and in particular Article 7(3A)(b) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC provided for the Commission to carry out a programme of work for the examination of the active substances used in plant protection products which were already on the market on 25 July 1993. Detailed rules for the carrying out of this programme were established in Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 933/94 of 27 April 1994 laying down the active substances of plant protection products and designating the rapporteur Member States for the implementation of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2230/95(6), designated the active substances which should be assessed in the framework of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92, designated a Member State to act as rapporteur in respect of the assessment of each substance and identified the producers of each active substance who submitted a notification in due time.
(3) Parathion-methyl is one of the 89 active substances designated in Regulation (EC) No 933/94.
(4) In accordance with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92, Italy, being the designated rapporteur Member State, submitted on 5 April 2001 to the Commission the report of its assessment of the information submitted by the notifiers in accordance with Article 6(1) of that Regulation.
(5) On receipt of the report of the rapporteur Member State, the Commission undertook consultations with experts of the Member States as well as with the main notifier as provided for in Article 7(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92.
(6) The assessment report prepared by Italy has been reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health. This review was finalised on 18 October 2002 in the format of the Commission review report for parathion-methyl, in accordance with Article 7(6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92.
(7) Assessments made on the basis of the information submitted have not demonstrated that it may be expected that, under the proposed conditions of use, plant protection products containing parathion-methyl satisfy in general the requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 91/414/EEC.
(8) Parathion-methyl should therefore not be included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(9) Measures should be taken to ensure that existing authorisations for plant protection products containing parathion-methyl are withdrawn within a prescribed period and are not renewed and that no new authorisations for such products are granted.
(10) Any period of grace for disposal, storage, placing on the market and use of existing stocks of plant protection products containing parathion-methyl allowed by Member States, in accordance with Article 4(6) of Directive 91/414/EEC should be limited to a period no longer than 12 months to allow existing stocks to be used in no more than one further growing season.
(11) This Decision does not prejudice any action the Commission may undertake at a later stage for this active substance within the framework of Council Directive 79/117/EEC of 21 December 1978 prohibiting the placing on the market and use of plant protection products containing certain active substances(7), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.
(12) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Parathion-methyl is not included as active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC.
Article 2
Member States shall ensure that:
(a) authorisations for plant protection products containing parathion-methyl are withdrawn within a period of six months from the date of adoption of the present Decision,
(b) from the date of adoption of the present Decision no authorisations for plant protection products containing parathion-methyl are granted or renewed under the derogation provided for in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC.
Article 3
Any period of grace granted by Member States in accordance with the provisions of Article 4(6) of Directive 91/414/EEC, shall be as short as possible and not longer than 18 months from the date of adoption of the present Decision.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 March 2003.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2197/2002
of 11 December 2002
fixing the export refunds on olive oil
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1513/2001(2), and in particular Article 3(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 3 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that, where prices within the Community are higher than world market prices, the difference between these prices may be covered by a refund when olive oil is exported to third countries.
(2) The detailed rules for fixing and granting export refunds on olive oil are contained in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 616/72(3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2962/77(4).
(3) Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund must be the same for the whole Community.
(4) In accordance with Article 3(4) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, the refund for olive oil must be fixed in the light of the existing situation and outlook in relation to olive oil prices and availability on the Community market and olive oil prices on the world market. However, where the world market situation is such that the most favourable olive oil prices cannot be determined, account may be taken of the price of the main competing vegetable oils on the world market and the difference recorded between that price and the price of olive oil during a representative period. The amount of the refund may not exceed the difference between the price of olive oil in the Community and that on the world market, adjusted, where appropriate, to take account of export costs for the products on the world market.
(5) In accordance with Article 3(3) third indent, point (b) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, it may be decided that the refund shall be fixed by tender. The tendering procedure should cover the amount of the refund and may be limited to certain countries of destination, quantities, qualities and presentations.
(6) The second indent of Article 3(3) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides that the refund on olive oil may be varied according to destination where the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets make this necessary.
(7) The refund must be fixed at least once every month. It may, if necessary, be altered in the intervening period.
(8) It follows from applying these detailed rules to the present situation on the market in olive oil and in particular to olive oil prices within the Community and on the markets of third countries that the refund should be as set out in the Annex hereto.
(9) The Management Committee for Oils and Fats has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(2)(c) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 12 December 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 December 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 95/88
of 14 January 1988
derogating for the first quarter of 1988 from Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 in respect of the issue of import licences under certain special arrangements in the beef and veal sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 467/87 (2),
Whereas while awaiting the Council Decision on certain contingents in the beef sector it is necessary to reintroduce the issue of licences;
Whereas consequently it is necessary to derogate from Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (3) with regard to the periods for lodging applications and for the granting of licences within the framework of these special systems;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the first quarter of 1988 notwithstanding Article 15 of Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 and in respect of the arrangements referred to in Article 12 of the said Regulation:
(a) applications may only be lodged from 18 until 22 January 1988;
(b) the information provided for in Article 15 (4) (e) of the said Regulation shall be provided on 27 January 1988;
(c) the licences provided for in Article 15 (5) (d) of the said Regulation shall be issued on 1 February 1988.
Article 2
In Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3893/87 (4)
- paragraph 1, 'Articles 9 to 12' is replaced by 'Articles 9 to 11',
- paragraph 2, 'points a), b) and e)' is replaced by 'points a) and b)'.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 January 1988.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 886/85
of 2 April 1985
amending Regulation (EEC) No 410/76 fixing the maximum permissible weight losses in connection with the supervision of the first processing and market preparation of tobacco
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 727/70 of 21 April 1970 on the common organization of the market in raw tobacco (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1461/82 (2), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 3 (3) and Article 7 (4) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1726/70 of 25 August 1970 on the procedure for granting the premium for leaf tobacco (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 884/85 (4), provides for a system of supervision of the first processing and market preparation of tobacco; whereas the purpose of such supervision is to ensure that the quantities of tobacco placed under supervision and those released therefrom tally, having regard to the maximum permissible weight losses for each variety in connection with the first processing and market preparation of tobacco;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 410/76 of 23 February 1976 fixing the maximum permissible weight losses in connection with the supervision of the first processing and market preparation of tobacco (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2165/83 (6), allows an additional weight loss of four percentage points for tobacco which has been threshed in order to take account of the additional losses caused by this process; whereas, having regard to current commercial practice and the low value of the by-products of threshing, i.e. stems and veins, where tobacco is threshed, only strips which are at least 0,5 centimetre in diameter should be counted for the purposes of checking that the quantities tally with the quantities of leaf tobacco placed under supervision;
Whereas it emerges from the technical data available that the leafweb generally represents 72 % of the weight of the baled tobacco leaf; whereas the rest consists of 21 % stems, 3 % veins and 4 % additional weight losses allowed for threshing;
Whereas for checking that the quantities released from supervision in the form of strips with a diameter of at least 0,5 centimetre tally with the quantities of tobacco placed under supervision, the net weight obtained from application of the maximum weight losses should be divided by 1,389, the coefficient representing the components of the baled tobacco other than leafweb; whereas the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 410/76 should be amended accordingly;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Raw Tobacco,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Footnote (1), in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 410/76 is hereby replaced by the following:
'(1) For tobacco from the 1985 and subsequent harvests the net weight resulting from application of these rates is divided by 1,389 for the purposes of checking the weight of the tobacco placed under supervision and the weight of the strips resulting from threshing which have a diameter of at least 0,5 centimetre.'
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 April 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision of 29 April 2004 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Republic of Kazakhstan establishing a double-checking system without quantitative limits in respect of the export of certain steel products from the Republic of Kazakhstan to the European Community (2004/577/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 in conjunction with the first sentence of Article 300(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) The Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Kazakhstan, of the other part(1), entered into force on 1 July 1999 .
(2) The European Community and the Republic of Kazakhstan agreed to establish a double-checking system in respect of certain steel products for the period from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2001 . This Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters was approved on behalf of the European Community by means of Decision 1999/865/EC(2). Regulation (EC) No 2743/1999(3) established the corresponding implementing legislation for the Community.
(3) The Commission has finalised negotiations for an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Republic of Kazakhstan establishing a double-checking system without quantitative limits in respect of the export of certain steel products from the Republic of Kazakhstan to the European Community,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. The Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and the Republic of Kazakhstan establishing a double-checking system without quantitative limits in respect of the export of certain steel products from the Republic of Kazakhstan to the European Community is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community.
2. The text of the Agreement(4) is annexed to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters referred to in Article 1 in order to bind the Community.
Done at Luxembourg, 29 April 2004 .
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3624/89
of 1 December 1989
amending Regulation (EEC) No 3105/87 as regards the admissibility of applications for and the term of validity of licences issued under the special arrangements for imports of maize and grain sorghum into Spain
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1799/87 of 25 June 1987 on special arrangements for imports of maize and sorghum into Spain from 1987 to 1990 (1), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3105/87 of 16 October 1987 laying down detailed rules for the application of the special arrangements for imports of maize and sorghum into Spain from 1987 to 1990 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3106/88 (3), defines in particular the conditions of admissibility for and the term of validity of licences; whereas, in order to ensure implementation in accordance with the international undertakings entered into by the Community, the conditions of admissibility of applications for and the term of validity of the said licences should be amended;
Whereas the Management Committee for Cereals has not issued an opinion within the time limit laid down by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following two paragraphs are hereby added to Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 3105/87:
'5. Applications shall only be admissible if:
- they do not exceed the maximum quantity available for each closing date for the submission of applications,
- they are accompanied by evidence that the applicant engages in commercial activity in import-export in cereals into and from Spain. Such evidence shall, in accordance with this Article, consist in the presentation to the competent agency of a copy of a certificate of payment of the value added tax and a copy of a customs clearance certificate in Spain in respect of an import or export licence in the applicant's name for an operation effected during the last three years.
6. By way of derogation from Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88 (*), rights accruing from the licences referred to in this Regulation shall not be transmissible.
(*) OJ No L 331, 2. 12. 1988, p. 1.'
Article 2
Article 5 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3105/87 is hereby replaced by the following:
'1. Import licences issued under this Regulation shall be valid from their date of issue within the meaning in Article 21 (1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88, until 31 May 1990 for maize and until 31 March 1990 for grain sorghum.'
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 December 1989.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 1 December 1989.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 28 December 1987
on improving the efficiency of agricultural structures in Italy (Valle d'Aosta) pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 797/85
(Only the Italian text is authentic)
(88/111/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 797/85 of 12 March 1985 on improving the efficiency of agricultural structures (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1760/87 (2), and in particular Article 25 thereof,
Whereas, on 31 July 1987, the Italian Government forwarded to the Commission pursuant to Article 24 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 797/87, Valle d'Aosta regional Law No 49 of 18 August 1986 adopting measures for the application of Regulation (EEC) No 797/85;
Whereas, under Article 25 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 797/85, the Commission must decide whether, having regard to the conformity which the provisions which have been forwarded have with Regulation (EEC) No 797/85, and having regard to the latter's objectives and to the need for a proper connection between the various measures, the conditions for a financial contribution by the Community are met;
Whereas the Italian Government has, via the abovementioned regional law, forwarded in full only the provisions relating to the compensatory allowance and collective investment in mountain and less-favoured areas of the Valle d'Aosta;
Whereas this Decision covers only the provisions which relate to the compensatory allowance and collective investment in mountain and less-favoured areas and which are laid down in Articles 7 and 9 of regional Law No 49 of 18 August 1986 of the Valle d'Aosta;
Whereas the provisions referred to above are in keeping with the conditions and the objectives of Title III of Regulation (EEC) No 797/87;
Whereas the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Committee has been consulted on the financial aspects;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Agricultural Structures,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Articles 7 and 9 of Valle d'Aosta regional Law No 49 of 18 August 1986 adopting measures for the application of Regulation (EEC) No 797/85 on improving the efficiency of agricultural structures are hereby deemed to satisfy the conditions for a financial contribution by the Community towards the common measures referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic.
Done at Brussels, 28 December 1987.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 26 May 1994 amending Decision 88/479/EEC authorizing methods for grading pig carcases in Spain (Only the Spanish text is authentic) (94/337/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3220/84 of 13 November 1984 determining the Community scale for grading pig carcases (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3513/93 (2), and in particular Article 5 (2) thereof,
Whereas, by Decision 88/479/EEC (3), the Commission authorized methods for grading pig carcases in Spain;
Whereas the Spanish Government has asked the Commission to authorize the use of a new formula for calculating the lean meat content of carcases in conjunction with one of the existing grading methods and has supplied the information required pursuant to Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2967/85 (4); whereas an examination of the request has shown that the conditions necessary for authorizing the new formula have been met;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Pigmeat,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Part 2 (3) of the Annex to Decision 88/479/EEC is hereby replaced by the following:
'3. The lean meat content of the carcase shall be calculated according to the following formula:
^y = 61,56 + (- 0,878 x1) + (0,157 x2)
where:
^y = the estimated percentage of lean meat in the carcase,
x1 = the thickness of backfat (including rind) in millimetres, measured at six centimetres off the midline of the carcase, between the third and fourth last ribs,
x2 = the thickness of muscle in millimetres, measured at the same time and in the same place as x1.
The formula shall be valid for carcases weighing between 50 and 110 kilograms.`
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.
Done at Brussels, 26 May 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 504/2002
of 21 March 2002
fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1558/2001
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 602/2001(4), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to all third countries except for the United States of America and Canada was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1558/2001(5).
(2) Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders notified, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95. In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.
(3) The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For tenders notified from 15 to 21 March 2002, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1558/2001, the maximum refund on exportation of barley shall be EUR 0,00/t.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 March 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 March 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 12 January 1996 on financial aid from the Community for the operation of the Community Reference Laboratory for the epidemiology of zoonoses (Bundesinstitut für gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz und Veterinärmedizin - formerly the Institut für Veterinärmedizin - Berlin, Germany) (Only the German text is authentic) (96/101/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), as last amended by Decision 94/370/EC (2), and in particular Article 28 (2) thereof,
Whereas Chapter I of Annex IV to Council Directive 92/117/EEC of 17 December 1992 concerning measures for protection against specified zoonoses and zoonotic agents in animals and products of animal origin in order to prevent outbreaks of food-borne infections and intoxications (3), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, designates the Bundesinstitut für gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz und Veterinärmedizin (formerly the Institut für Veterinärmedizin), Berlin, Germany as the Community Reference Laboratory for the epidemiology of zoonoses;
Whereas all the functions and duties which the laboratory has to perform are specified in Chapter II of Annex IV to Directive 92/117/EEC; whereas Community assistance must be conditional on the accomplishment of those functions and duties by the laboratory;
Whereas Community financial aid should be granted to the Community Reference Laboratory to assist it in carrying out the said functions and duties;
Whereas, for budgetary reasons, Community assistance should be granted for a period of one year;
Whereas, for supervisory purposes, Article 8 and 9 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2048/88 (5), should apply;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Community hereby grants financial assistance to Germany for the functions and duties to be carried out by the Community Reference Laboratory for the epidemiology of zoonoses referred to in Chapter II of Annex IV to Directive 92/117/EEC.
Article 2
The Bundesinstitut für gesundheitlichen Verbraucherschutz und Veterinärmedizin (formerly the Institut für Veterinärmedizin), Berlin, Germany shall perform the functions and duties referred to in Article 1.
Article 3
The Community's financial assistance shall amount to a maximum of ECU 100 000 for the period from 1 January to 31 December 1996.
Article 4
The Community's financial assistance shall be paid as follows:
- 70 % by way of an advance at Germany's request,
- the balance following presentation of supporting documents by the Germany. Those documents must be presented before 1 March 1997.
Article 5
Articles 8 and 9 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Article 6
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Done at Brussels, 12 January 1996.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 19 January 2005
relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement against Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB, and Akzo Nobel AB, jointly and severally, Clariant AG and Clariant GmbH jointly and severally, Elf Aquitaine SA and Arkema SA, jointly and severally, and Hoechst AG
(Case No C.37.773 - MCAA)
(notified under document number C(2004) 4876)
(Only the English, French and German texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2006/897/EC)
On 19 January 2005, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003
(1)
, the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, while having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business interests. A non-confidential version of the full text of the decision can be found in the authentic languages of the case and in the Commission's working languages at DG COMP's website at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition.
I. SUMMARY OF THE INFRINGEMENT
(1)
The Decision is addressed to Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB, and Akzo Nobel AB (hereinafter ‘Akzo’), jointly and severally, Clariant AG and Clariant GmbH (hereinafter ‘Clariant’) jointly and severally, Elf Aquitaine SA (hereinafter ‘Elf Aquitaine’) and Arkema SA (hereinafter ‘Arkema’, formerly known as Atofina SA), jointly and severally, and Hoechst AG (hereinafter ‘Hoechst’).
(2)
Reference in this summary will be made mostly to Atofina SA (or ‘Atofina’) and not to Arkema, even though it is the addressee of this Decision, as Atofina was the name in use during the administrative procedure.
(3)
The addressees participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 81 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (hereinafter ‘the EC Treaty’ or ‘the Treaty’) and, from 1 January 1994, Article 53(1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (hereinafter ‘EEA Agreement’), covering the whole of the EEA territory.
(4)
The Commission initiated an investigation into the EEA-wide MCAA industry after it received a leniency application in December 1999 from Clariant. The investigation revealed that the cartel lasted from at least 1 January 1984 to 7 May 1999.
(5)
Monochloroacetic acid (or ‘MCAA’) is a reactive organic acid which is a chemical intermediate used in the manufacture of detergents, adhesives, textile auxiliaries and thickeners used in food, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics.
(6)
The geographic market was considered to be the EEA. The value of this market was approximately EUR 121 million in 1998, the last full year of the infringement. During the period of investigation, almost every part of the common market and the EEA was under the influence of the cartel.
(7)
In terms of the organisation of the cartel, contacts between the major producers of MCAA can be traced back to the late 1970s and early 1980s and at this stage were largely bilateral and related to the exchange of customer and pricing information.
(8)
By the early to mid 1980s multilateral meetings began to be organised and arrangements became more solidified with the aim of maintaining their respective market shares. The participants at this stage were Hoechst, Akzo and Atochem SA (subsequently Atofina SA, now known as Arkema). Clariant joined only in 1997 after it purchased Hoechst's MCAA business.
(9)
At this time the participants would meet 2-4 times a year on a multilateral basis with meetings organised on a rotating basis in the respective countries of the undertakings involved. Bilateral contacts were maintained and the participants also met during special meetings and social occasions.
(10)
The cartel became more formalised in 1993 with the aim of having more transparent statistics, stamping out cheating, having greater control over sales personnel and implementing a compensation system. A formal system of exchange of quarterly sales and price data was also implemented between the participants.
(11)
In addition, in an attempt to justify the exchanged market figures a statistical organisation, […] (hereinafter ‘[…]’), was retained. […] provided aggregated market statistics and the participants met a […] representative twice a year, usually in Zurich, to discuss these and other matters of industry concern.
(12)
However, these legitimate meetings served as a cover for the real purpose of the gatherings which was for the parties to get together to discuss the implementation of the cartel arrangements. These illegal meetings usually took place the evening prior to the […] meeting at a separate location. 13 […] meetings were planned between 1994-1999 although the final meeting appears to have been cancelled.
(13)
Even though the organisation of the cartel may have shifted in the course of its duration, essential features remained the same. This involved volume and customer allocation in order to maintain market shares. Market shares were additionally safeguarded by a compensation mechanism between the parties in the event of over- or under-selling. There was significant exchange of sales and price information and also evidence of concerted price increases.
II: FINES
(14)
The infringement consisted of allocating customers and volume quotas, agreeing concerted price increases, arranging a compensation mechanism to ensure the implementation of quotas, exchanging sales volumes and prices, and, participating in regular meetings, both multilateral and bilateral, as well as other contacts to ensure the proper functioning of the cartel. These types of conduct are by their very nature very serious violations of Articles 81 EC and 53(1) EEA.
(15)
The cartel agreement was implemented by producers, which for the relevant period covered the vast majority of the Common market and the EEA, after 1 January 1994. It must therefore have had an impact on the MCAA market in the Common market and the EEA.
(16)
Given the nature of the behaviour under scrutiny, the Commission considered that the addressees of this Decision committed a very serious infringement of Article 81 EC and 53(1) EEA.
(17)
The undertakings were divided into different categories according to their relative importance in the market to account for the specific weight and therefore the real impact of each undertaking on the market.
(18)
As the basis for comparing the relative importance of an undertaking in the market concerned, the Commission considered it appropriate to take the EEA-wide product turnover. The comparison was made on the basis of the EEA-wide product turnover in the last full year of the infringement: 1998 for all the undertakings except for Hoechst for whom 1996 was the reference year, as it exited the MCAA market in mid-1997.
(19)
Akzo, Clariant, and Atofina were the major producers of MCAA in the EEA in 1998, with respective approximate market shares of 44 %, 34 % and 17 %. Hoechst had a market share of 28 % in 1996 before it exited the MCAA market in mid-1997. The undertakings were therefore split into three categories. First category: Akzo; second category: Hoechst and Clariant; third category: Atofina.
(20)
Within the category of very serious infringements, the scale of likely fines also makes it possible to set the fines at a level which ensures that they have sufficient deterrent effect, taking into account the size of each undertaking. In this respect, the Commission noted that in 2003 the turnover of Atofina/Elf Aquitaine was EUR 84,5 billion, and that of Akzo was EUR 13 billion. Accordingly, the Commission considered it appropriate to multiply the fine for Atofina/Elf Aquitaine with a factor of 2,5 and that of Akzo with a factor of 1,5.
(21)
Akzo and Atofina have committed an infringement of a long duration. They participated in the cartel from January 1984 to May 1999, equating to 15 years and four months, which justified an increase of 150 % of the basic amount of the fine for both undertakings.
(22)
Hoechst has also committed an infringement over a long time, by being involved in the illegal arrangements from January 1984 to the end of June 1997, or a period of 13 years and 6 months, which justified an increase of 135 % of the basic amount of the fine.
(23)
Clariant's participation is restricted to the period from July 1997, date at which it acquired the MCAA business from Hoechst, to May 1999. It was accordingly involved in the cartel for a period of 1 year and 10 months, which justified an increase of 15 % of the basic amount of the fine.
(24)
At the time the infringement took place, two of the addressees of this Decision had already been subject to previous Commission Decisions in cartel cases. Hoechst was an addressee in the PVC II (94/599/EC; 27 July 1994) and Dyestuffs (69/243/EEC; 24 July 1969) Commission Decisions. Atofina was also an addressee of the PVC II Decision. These aggravating circumstances justified an increase of 50 % in the basic amount of the fine imposed on Hoechst and Atofina.
(25)
Akzo made voluntary statements which allowed the Commission to conclude that Eka Nobel AB, Eka Nobel Skoghall AB and Nobel Industrier AB (now respectively Eka Chemicals AB, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB and Akzo Nobel AB) were independently involved in the cartel from 15 June 1993 until they became part of the Akzo group on 25 February 1994. As a result of Akzo's disclosures it faces a higher fine than it would without its cooperation. The Commission therefore considered it appropriate, having regard to the principles of fairness and the particular circumstances of the case, to reduce to zero the fine on the above companies for their independent infringement.
(26)
Three of the addressees (Akzo, Atofina and Clariant) of the present Decision co-operated with the Commission at different stages of the investigation into the infringement for the purpose of receiving the favourable treatment set out in the Commission's 1996 Leniency Notice (2).
(27)
The Leniency Notice was applied as follows in the Decision:
1. Non-imposition of a fine or a very substantial reduction of its amount (‘Section B’: reduction from of 75 % to 100 %)
(28)
Clariant was the first undertaking to submit decisive evidence on the existence of a secret cartel affecting the MCAA industry in the EEA. This information was provided in a statement and evidence submitted by Clariant on 6 December 1999, and, it enabled the Commission to carry out an investigation at the premises of Akzo and Atofina. Clariant also fulfilled the other conditions of Section B: it ended its involvement in the cartel, cooperated fully throughout the investigation and did not act as an instigator of the cartel. The Decision took into account all of these elements when granting a 100 % reduction of the fine that would otherwise have been imposed on Clariant AG and Clariant GmbH had they not cooperated with the Commission.
2. Substantial reduction in a fine (‘Section C’: reduction from 50 % to 75 %)
(29)
Neither Akzo or Atofina met the conditions set out in Section C of the Leniency Notice.
3. Significant reduction of a fine (‘Section D’: reduction from 10 % to 50 %)
(30)
Both Akzo and Atofina co-operated with the Commission.
(31)
Atofina closely cooperated with the Commission and therefore qualified for a significant reduction in the amount of the fine as it was the second undertaking that provided the Commission with information and evidence that materially contributed to the establishment of the existence of the cartel. Additionally, Atofina did not contest the facts relied upon to establish the existence of the cartel. The information and evidence provided by Atofina was detailed and extensively relied upon by the Commission in this Decision. Atofina fulfilled the conditions set out in Section D and its cooperation is reflected in a 40 % reduction of the fine that would otherwise have been imposed.
(32)
Akzo qualified for a significant reduction of the amount of the fine as it was the third undertaking that provided the Commission with information and evidence that corroborated the existence of the MCAA cartel. Akzo did not contest the facts that the Commission relied upon. The Commission concluded that Akzo fulfilled the conditions set out in Section D. The information and evidence provided by Akzo was detailed, was relied upon by the Commission and this is reflected in the 25 % reduction of the fine that would otherwise have been imposed.
(33)
The following undertakings infringed Article 81 of the Treaty by allocating volume quotas, allocating customers, agreeing concerted price increases, agreeing on a compensation mechanism, exchanging information on sales volumes and prices, and, participating in regular meetings and other contacts to agree and implement the above restrictions. The following undertakings’ behaviour also constituted an infringement of Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement as from 1 January 1994.
(a)
Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV and Akzo Nobel NV, from 1 January 1984 to 7 May 1999;
(b)
Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB and Akzo Nobel AB, from 15 June 1993 to 7 May 1999;
(c)
Hoechst AG, from 1 January 1984 to 31 June 1997;
(d)
Elf Aquitaine and Arkema SA (formerly known as Atofina SA), from 1 January 1984 to 7 May 1999;
(e)
Clariant AG, Clariant GmbH, from 1 July 1997 to 7 May 1999.
(34)
For these infringements, the following fines are imposed:
(a)
Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB and Akzo Nobel AB:
EUR 84,38 million;
(b)
Hoechst AG:
EUR 74,03 million;
(c)
Elf Aquitaine SA and Arkema SA (formerly known as Atofina SA) jointly and severally:
EUR 45,00 million;
(d)
Arkema SA (formerly known as Atofina SA):
EUR 13,50 million;
(e)
Clariant AG and Clariant GmbH jointly and severally:
EUR 0 million.
Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB, Eka Chemicals AB and Akzo Nobel AB shall be jointly and severally liable for payment of the fine imposed in point (a) of the first paragraph, up to an amount of EUR 50,63 million. The other Akzo companies listed in that point shall be jointly and severally liable for the full amount of the fine.
(35)
The undertakings listed in point 1 above shall immediately bring their infringement to an end, insofar as they have not already done so. They shall refrain from repeating any act or conduct as the infringement found in this case, and from any act or conduct having the same or similar object or effect.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 523/2004
of 19 March 2004
determining the world market price for unginned cotton
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Protocol 4 on cotton, annexed to the Act of Accession of Greece, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1050/2001(1),
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 of 22 May 2001 on production aid for cotton(2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, a world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined periodically from the price for ginned cotton recorded on the world market and by reference to the historical relationship between the price recorded for ginned cotton and that calculated for unginned cotton. That historical relationship has been established in Article 2(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001 of 2 August 2001 laying down detailed rules for applying the cotton aid scheme(3). Where the world market price cannot be determined in this way, it is to be based on the most recent price determined.
(2) In accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, the world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined in respect of a product of specific characteristics and by reference to the most favourable offers and quotations on the world market among those considered representative of the real market trend. To that end, an average is to be calculated of offers and quotations recorded on one or more European exchanges for a product delivered cif to a port in the Community and coming from the various supplier countries considered the most representative in terms of international trade. However, there is provision for adjusting the criteria for determining the world market price for ginned cotton to reflect differences justified by the quality of the product delivered and the offers and quotations concerned. Those adjustments are specified in Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001.
(3) The application of the above criteria gives the world market price for unginned cotton determined hereinafter,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The world price for unginned cotton as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 is hereby determined as equalling EUR 31,962/100 kg.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 March 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 March 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 466/2004
of 12 March 2004
amending Regulation (EC) No 2125/2003 as regards the deadline for decisions by the competent national authorities on operational programmes and funds
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables(1), and in particular Article 48 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2125/2003 of 3 December 2003 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 1433/2003 with regard to decisions by the competent national authorities on operational programmes and funds(2) waives, for 2003, the deadline of 15 December laid down in Articles 13 and 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1433/2003 of 11 August 2003 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards operational funds, operational programmes and financial assistance(3), and permits Member States to take the decisions provided for in Articles 13 and 14 no later than 31 January 2004.
(2) On account of excessive administrative work, some Member States were unable to draw up all their programmes and take decisions relating to them by the new deadline of 31 January 2004. In order to avoid harming operators and to enable the national authorities to continue drawing up the programmes, this deadline should be postponed until 15 March 2004.
(3) Given the urgency of the situation, it is essential that this Regulation take effect immediately.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2125/2003, is replaced by the following:
"1. For 2003 only, by way of derogation from Article 13(2) and Article 14(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1433/2003, Member States may take decisions on operational programmes and funds or on requests for amendments to operational programmes no later than 15 March 2004."
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 March 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1608/82
of 14 June 1982
on the application of Decision No 1/82 of the EEC-Switzerland Joint Committee - Community transit - amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on the application of the rules on Community transit
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Article 16 of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on the application of the rules on Community transit (1) empowers the Joint Committee set up under that Agreement to adopt Decisions making certain amendments to the Agreement;
Whereas the Joint Committee has decided to amend the Agreement, in particular, in order to make certain technical adjustments to the simplified Community transit procedure for carriage in large containers so as to enable this procedure to be fully effective, in particular, for mixed consignments;
Whereas these amendments are the subject of Decision No 1/82 of the Joint Committee; whereas it is necessary to take the measures required to implement the abovementioned Decision,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Decision No 1/82 of the EEC-Switzerland Joint Committee - Community transit - amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation on the application of the rules on Community transit shall apply in the Community.
The text of the Decision is attached to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 14 June 1982.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1315/88
of 3 May 1988
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff and Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 28 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas Section II C of the preliminary provisions of the combined nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (4), provides for customs duty to be charged at the flat rate of 10 % ad valorem on goods sent in small consignments to private individuals or contained in travellers' personal luggage, provided that such importations are not of a commercial nature and that the total value of such goods does not exceed 115 ECU per consignment or per traveller;
Whereas, in accordance with Section II C (3) of the said preliminary provisions, the flat rate 10 % customs duty is charged in respect of goods contained in travellers' personal luggage only on the fraction of the value exceeding the amounts admitted free of import duties pursuant to Article 45 to 49 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3822/85 (6); whereas, however, as a result of the third indent of Article 29 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83, the flat of 10 % is charged on all goods in small consignments sent to private individuals where the total value of the said consignments exceeds the amount laid down for their duty-free admission, i.e. 45 ECU;
Whereas the disadvantage of these rules is that they preclude any relief for the consignees of small consignments whose total value exceeds, even by a small margin, the amount of 45 ECU; whereas examination of the situation has revealed that the introduction in this particular context of provisions similar to those applicable to goods contained in travellers' personal luggage should not cause serious administrative difficulties; whereas it is accordingly appropriate to amend both Section II C of the preliminary provisions of the combined nomenclature and Title VII of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 to permit relief on the import of small consignments sent to private individuals up to a value of 45 ECU and to charge the flat rate 10 % customs duty only on the fraction of the value exceeding that amount;
Whereas at this juncture the value beyond which the flat rate of 10 % customs duty may be charged on consignments sent to private individuals should be raised from 115 ECU to 200 ECU, as the Commission proposed on 16 November 1984 (7); whereas for reasons of legal clarity, all these amendments should be made by means of a complete redrafting of Section II C of the preliminary provisions of the combined nomenclature and Title VII of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83;
Whereas Article 1 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 provides that the island of Heligoland is to be considered a third country; whereas as a result of the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2151/84 of 23 July 1984 on the customs territory of the Community (8), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, that all territories excluded from the customs territory of the Community are in the same legal position as Heligoland; whereas it is therefore necessary to amend the said Article 1 (3);
Whereas Articles 137 and 138 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 lay down the conditions on which, until the establishment of Community provisions in the field in question, Member States may apply special relief granted on imports of instruments and apparatus used in medical research, establishing medical diagnoses or carrying out medical treatment;
Whereas the experience acquired from application of these provisions by one Member State has shown that the duty-free admission of the instruments and apparatus in question, provided that equivalent instruments and apparatus are not being manufactured in the Community cannot have untoward effects on the Community economy; whereas it would, however, make an effective contribution to the detection and treatment of serious diseases which may affect persons residing in the Community; whereas it is advisable to encourage any donations of such instruments or apparatus to medical institutions approved for these purposes by the competent authorities; whereas the optional and temporary provisions laid down by Articles 137 and 138 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 in respect of instruments and apparatus used in medical research, establishing medical diagnoses or carrying out medical treatment
should be converted into definitive provisions applicable throughout the Community and, to this end, the said Articles should be replaced by a Title XIVa dealing with this particular case of relief;
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 should also be supplemented to take account of the work carried out by the World Health Organization by introduction of relief from import duties in respect of the reference substances required for the quality control of medicinal products;
Whereas, on the basis of work carried out within the Committee on Duty Free Arrangements since the entry into force of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83, it has been established that a certain number of temporary provisions foreseen in Article 136 could, under certain conditions, be transformed into definite provisions or limited in time, or be deleted; whereas Articles 133 to 136 should accordingly be amended in order to remove as far as possible any uncertainty as regards their scope and any disparity in application of the Community system of reliefs from customs duty set up by Regulation (EEC) No 918/83;
Whereas it is advisable to take the opportunity arising from these various amendments to Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 to amend certain other provisions so that their application is more consistent with the objectives pursued, or to ensure compliance with provisions adopted within the framework of certain international organizations, notably the Council Decision-Recommendation of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) adopted on 27 November 1985 concerning policy in the field of international tourism,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Section II C of the preliminary provisions of the combined nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 is replaced by the following:
'C. Standard rate of duty
1. Customs duty shall be charged at the flat rate of 10 % ad valorem on goods:
- contained in consignments sent by one private individual to another,
- contained in travellers' personal luggage,
provided that such importations are not of a commercial nature.
This flat rate 10 % customs duty shall apply provided that the value of the goods subject to import duty does not exceed 200 ECU per consignment or per traveller.
Such flat-rate assessment shall not apply to goods falling within Chapter 24 which are contained in a consignment or in travellers' personal luggage in amounts exceeding those laid down in Article 31 or in Article 46 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 (1).
2. Importations shall be treated as not being of a commercial nature if:
(a) in the case of goods contained in consignments sent by one private individual to another, such consignments:
- are of an occasional nature,
- contain goods exclusively for the personal use of the consignee or his family; which do not by their nature or quantity reflect any commercial interest,
- are sent to the consignee by the consignor free of payment of any kind;
(b) in the case of goods contained in travellers' personal luggage, they:
- are of an occasional nature, and
- consist exclusively of goods for the personal use of the travellers or their families, or of goods intended as presents; the nature and quantity of such goods must not be such as might indicate that they are being imported for commercial reasons.
3. The flat rate of customs duty shall not apply to goods imported under the conditions set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 if the person entitled has, before the said flat rate is applied to them, requested that they be subject to the customs duties appropriate to them. All the goods making up the consignment shall then be subject to the import duties which are appropriate to them, without prejudice to the duty-free admission provided for pursuant to Articles 29 to 31 and 45 to 49 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, import duties shall mean both customs duties and charges having equivalent effect and agricultural levies and other import charges provided for under the common agricultural policy or under specific arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products.
4. Member States may round off the amount in national currencies resulting from the conversion of the sum of 200 ECU.
5. Member States may maintain unchanged the equivalent in national currency of the sum of 200 ECU if, at the time of the annual adjustment provided for in the first paragraph of Article 2 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2779/78, as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 289/84 (2), the conversion of this amount, before the rounding off provided for in paragraph 4, results in a change of less than 5 % in the equivalent in national currency, or in a reduction thereof.
(1) OJ No L 105, 23. 4. 1983, p. 1.
(2) OJ No L 33, 4. 2. 1984, p. 2.'
Article 2
Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 1 (3) is replaced by the following:
'3. Save as otherwise provided in this Regulation for the purpose of applying Chapter I, the concept of third countries also includes those parts of Member States' territories excluded from the customs territory of the Community by virtue of Regulation (EEC) No 2151/84 (1).
(1) OJ No L 197, 27. 7. 1984, p. 1.'
2. Article 11 (2) is replaced by the following:
'2. Subject to the same conditions, presents customarily given on the occasion of a marriage, which are received by a person fulfilling the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 from persons having their normal place of residence in a third country shall also be admitted free of import duties. The value of each present admitted duty-free may not, however, exceed 1 000 ECU.'
3. Title VII shall be replaced by the following:
'TITLE VII
Consignments sent by one private individual to another
Article 29
1. Subject to Articles 30 and 31, goods contained in consignments sent from a third country by a private individual to another private individual living in the customs territory of the Community shall be admitted free of import duties, provided that such importations are not of a commercial nature.
The relief provided for under this paragraph shall not apply to goods in consignments sent from the island of Heligoland.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, imported consignments are ''not of a commercial nature" if they:
- are of an occasional nature,
- contain goods exclusively for the personal use of the consignee or his family, which do not by their nature or quantity reflect any commercial intent,
- are sent to the consignee by the consignor free of payment of any kind.
Article 30
The relief referred to in Article 29 (1) shall apply to a value of 45 ECU per consignment, including the value of goods referred to in Article 31.
Where the total value per consignment of two or more items exceeds the amount referred to in the first subparagraph, relief up to that amount shall be granted for such of the items as would, if imported separately, have been granted relief, it being understood that the value of an individual item cannot be split up.
Article 31
The relief referred to in Article 29 (1) shall be limited, per consignment, to the quantities given against each of the goods listed below:
(a) tobacco products:
50 cigarettes, or
25 cigarillos (cigars of a maximum weight of three grams each), or
10 cigars, or
50 grams of smoking tobacco, or
a proportional assortment of these different products;
(b) alcohols and alcoholic beverages:
- distilled beverages and spirits of an alcoholic strength by volume exceeding 22 % volume; non-denatured ethyl alcohol of 80 % volume and over: one litre, or
- distilled beverages and spirits, and aperitifs with a wine or alcoholic base, tafia, saké or similar beverages, of an alcoholic strength by volume not exceeding 22 % volume; sparkling wines, liqueur wines: one litre, or a proportional assortment of these different products and
- still wines: two litres;
(c) perfumes: 50 grams, or
toilet waters: 0,25 litre.'
4. Article 46 (1) is replaced by the following:
'1. The relief referred to in Article 45 (1) shall, in respect of the goods listed below, apply subject to the following quantitative limits per traveller:
(a) tobacco products:
200 cigarettes, or
100 cigarillos (cigars of a maximum weight of three grams each), or
50 cigars, or
250 grams of smoking tobacco, or
a proportional assortment of these different products; (b) alcohols and alcoholic beverages:
- distilled beverages and spirits of an alcoholic strength by volume exceeding 22 % volume; non-denatured ethyl alcohol of 80 % volume and over: one litre, or
- distilled beverages and spirits, and aperitifs with a wine or alcoholic base, tafia, saké or similar beverages, of an alcoholic strength by volume not exceeding 22 % volume; sparkling wines, liqueur wines: two litres, or a proportional assortment of these different products and
- still wines: two litres;
(c) perfumes: 50 grams and
toilet waters: 0,25 litre;
(d) medicinal products:
the quantity required to meet travellers' personal needs.'
5. The following shall be added to the first indent of Article 49 (2):
'Member States may grant exemptions therefrom.'
6. Article 60 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 60
1. Relief from import duties shall be granted in respect of:
(a) animals specially prepared for laboratory use;
(b) biological or chemical substances included in a list drawn up in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 143 (2) and (3), which are imported exclusively for non-commercial purposes.
2. The relief referred to in paragraph 1 shall be limited to animals and biological or chemical substances which are intended for:
- either public establishments principally engaged in education or scientific research and those departments of public establishments which are principally engaged in education or scientific research, or
- private establishments principally engaged in education or scientific research and authorized by the competent authorities of the Member States to receive such articles duty-free.
3. The list referred to in subparagraph 1 (b) may include only biological or chemical substances for which there is no equivalent production in the customs territory of the Community and which, on account of their specificity or degree of purity, are mainly or exclusively suited to scientific research.'
7. The following Titles shall be inserted:
'TITLE XIVa
Instruments and apparatus intended for medical research, establishing medical diagnoses or carrying out medical treatment
Article 63a
1. Instruments and apparatus intended for medical research, establishing medical diagnoses or carrying out medical treatment which are donated either by a charitable or philanthropic organization or by a private individual to health authorities, hospital departments or medical research institutions approved by the competent authorities of the Member States to receive such articles duty-free, or which are purchased by such health autorities, hospitals or medical research institutions entirely with funds provided by a charitable or philanthropic organization or with voluntary contributions, shall be admitted free of import duties, always provided that it is established that:
(a) equivalent instruments and apparatus are not being currently manufactured in the customs territory of the Community;
(b) the donation of the instruments or apparatus in question does not conceal any commercial intent on the part of the donor; and
(c) the donor is in no way connected with the manufacturer of the instruments or apparatus which are the subject of the duty relief application.
2. The relief shall also apply, on the same conditions, to:
(a) spare parts, components or accessories specifically for instruments or apparatus, provided that these spare parts, components for accessories are imported at the same time as such instruments and apparatus, or if imported subsequently that they can be identified as being intended for instruments or apparatus previously admitted duty-free;
(b) tools to be used for the maintenance, checking, calibration or repair of instruments or apparatus, provided that these tools are imported at the same time as such instruments and apparatus or, if imported subsequently, that they can be identified as being intended for instruments or apparatus previously admitted duty-free.
Article 63b
For the purposes of applying Article 63a, and in particular with regard to the instruments or apparatus and recipient bodies referred to therein, the fourth indent of Article 54 and Articles 55, 57 and 58 shall apply mutatis mutandis. TITLE XIVb
Reference substances for the quality control of medicinal products
Article 63c
Consignments which contain samples of reference substances approved by the World Health Organization for the quality control of materials used in the manufacture of medicinal products and which are addressed to consignees authorized by the competent authorities of the Member States to receive such consignments free of duty shall be admitted free of import duties.'
8. The following point is added to Article 86:
'(d) Awards, trophies and souvenirs of a symbolic nature and of limited value intended for distribution free of charge to persons normally resident in third countries at business conferences or similar international events; their nature, unitary value or other features, must not be such as might indicate that they are being imported for commercial reasons.'
9. The following point is added to Article 109:
'(q) Tax and similar stamps proving payment of charges in third countries.'
10. The title of Title XXVII is replaced by the following:
'Fuel and lubricants present in land motor vehicles and special containers.'
11. Articles 112 and 113 are replaced by the following:
'Article 112
1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 113 to 115:
(a) fuel contained in the standard tanks of:
- private and commercial motor vehicles and motor cycles,
- special containers,
entering the customs territory of the Community;
(b) fuel contained in portable tanks carried by private motor vehicles and motor cycles, with a maximum of 10 litres per vehicle and without prejudice to national provisions on the holding and transport of fuel;
shall be admitted free of import duties.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1:
(a) ''commercial motor vehicle" means any motorized road vehicle (including tractors with or without trailers) which by its type of construction and its equipment is designed for and capable of transporting, whether for payment or not:
- more than nine persons including the driver,
- goods,
- and any road vehicle for a special purpose other than transport as such;
(b) ''private motor vehicle" means any motor vehicle not covered by the definition set out in (a);
(c) ''standard tanks" means:
- the tanks permanently fixed by the manufacturer to all motor vehicles of the same type as the vehicle in question and whose permanent fitting enables fuel to be used directly, both for the purpose of propulsion and, where appropriate, for the operation, during transport, of refrigeration systems and other systems.
Gas tanks fitted to motor vehicles designed for the direct use of gas as a fuel and tanks fitted to the other systems with which the vehicle may be equipped shall also be considered to be standard tanks,
- tanks permanently fixed by the manufacturer to all containers of the same type as the container in question and whose permanent fitting enables fuel to be used directly for the operation, during transport, of the refrigeration systems and other systems with which special containers are equipped;
(d) ''special container" means any container fitted with specially designed apparatus for refrigeration systems, oxygenation systems, thermal insulation systems, or other systems.
Article 113
As regards the fuel contained in the standard tanks of commercial motor vehicles and special containers, Member States may limit application of the relief to 200 litres per vehicle, per special container and per journey.'
12. The second paragraph of Article 132 is replaced by the following:
'Member States may also maintain unamended the exchange value in national currency of the amount determined in ECU if, at the time of the annual adjustment provided for in the first subparagraph of Article 2 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2779/78 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 289/84 (2), the conversion of this amount, before the rounding off provided for in the previous paragraph leads to an alteration of less than 5 % in the exchange value expressed in national currency, or to a reduction thereof.
(1) OJ No L 333, 30. 11. 1978, p. 5.
(2) OJ No L 33, 4. 2. 1984, p. 2.' 13. The following subparagraph is added to Article 133 (1):
'(g) relief in the context of agreements entered into on the basis of reciprocity with third countries that are Contracting Parties to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago 1944) for the purpose of implementing Recommended Practices 4.42 and 4.44 in Annex 9 to the Convention (eighth edition, July 1980).'
14. Article 134 (1) is replaced by the following:
'1. Member States shall notify the Commission of the customs provisions contained in international conventions and agreements of the type referred to in Article 133 (1) (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) and Article 133 (3) concluded after the entry into force of this Regulation.'
15. Articles 135 and 136 are replaced by the following:
'Article 135
This Regulation shall not preclude retention:
(a) by Greece of the special status accorded to Mount Athos as guaranteed by Article 105 of the Greek Constitution;
(b) by Spain and France, until the entry into force of arrangements governing trade relations between the Community and Andorra, of the relief resulting from the Convention of 13 July 1867 and 22 and 23 November 1867 respectively between those countries and Andorra;
(c) by the Member States and up to a limit of 210 ECU of the relief, if any, in excess of that referred to in Article 47 which they granted on 1 January 1983 to merchant-navy seamen involved in international travel.
Article 136
1. Until the establishment of Community provisions in the field in question, Member States may grant special relief to armed forces not serving under their flags which are stationed on their territories in pursuance of international agreements.
2. Until the establisment of Community provisions in the field in question, this Regulation shall not preclude the retention by Member States of relief granted to workers returning to their country after having resided for at least six months outside the customs territory of the Community on account of their occupation.'
16. Articles 137 and 138 are deleted.
17. In Articles 1, 4, 22, 45, 52 to 56, 65, 72, 73, 86, 87, 117 and 120 of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83, 'Community' is replaced by 'customs territory of the Community'.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1989.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 May 1988.
|
[
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2748/1999
of 17 December 1999
fixing the Community producer price for the fishery products listed in Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 for the 2000 fishing year
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 of 17 December 1992 on the common organization of the market in fishery and aquaculture products(1), and in particular Article 17(4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) Article 17(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 provides that a Community producer price should be fixed for each of the products listed in Annex III to that Regulation;
(2) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3510/82(2) sets down the conversion factors applicable to different species of tuna; it is not therefore necessary to fix the Community producer price for all species of tuna listed in Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 but only for yellow-fin tuna (Thunnus albacares);
(3) On the basis of the criteria laid down in the first and second indents of Article 9(2) and in Article 17(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92, the price for the 2000 fishing year should be decreased;
(4) The fishing year begins on 1 January 2000 for the products covered by this Regulation; given the urgency of the matter, it is imperative to grant an exception to the six-week period mentioned in point 1(3) of the Protocol on the role of national parliaments in the European Union annexed to the Treaty of Amsterdam,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Community producer price for the fishing year 1 January to 31 December 2000 for yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) is hereby fixed as follows:
TABLE
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 2000.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 December 1999.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2065/2004
of 30 November 2004
prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Germany
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (1) and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 2287/2003 of 19 December 2003 fixing for 2004 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and for Community vessels, in waters where limitations in catch are required (2) lays down quotas for cod for 2004.
(2)
In order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated.
(3)
According to the information received by the Commission, catches of cod in the waters of ICES divisions I and IIb by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany have exhausted the quota allocated for 2004. Germany has prohibited fishing for this stock from 22 October 2004. This date should be adopted in this Regulation also,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Catches of cod in the waters of ICES divisions I and IIb by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated to Germany for 2004.
Fishing for cod in the waters of ICES divisions I and IIb by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany is hereby prohibited, as are the retention on board, transhipment and landing of this stock caught by the above vessels after the date of application of this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 22 October 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 November 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 818/2009
of 7 September 2009
establishing a prohibition of fishing for ling in ICES zone IIIa; EC waters of IIIb, IIIc and IIId by vessels flying the flag of Denmark
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 26(4) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to common fisheries policy (2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 43/2009 of 16 January 2009 fixing for 2009 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in Community waters and for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required (3), lays down quotas for 2009.
(2)
According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2009.
(3)
It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing for that stock and its retention on board, transhipment and landing,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Quota exhaustion
The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2009 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.
Article 2
Prohibitions
Fishing for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. It shall be prohibited to retain on board, tranship or land such stock caught by those vessels after that date.
Article 3
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 September 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 168/85
of 23 January 1985
re-establishing the levying of customs duties applicable to vitamin C, falling within subheading 29.38 B IV and originating in China, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 of 18 December 1984 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1985 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Whereas pursuant to Articles 1 and 10 of that Regulation, suspension of customs duties shall be accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I, within the framework of the preferential tariff ceiling fixed in column 9 of Annex I;
Whereas, as provided for in Article 11 of that Regulation, as soon as the individual ceilings in question are reached at Community level, the levying of customs duties on imports of the products in question originating in each of the countries and territories concerned may at any time be re-established;
Whereas, in the case of vitamin C, falling within subheading 29.38 B IV, the individual ceiling was fixed at 578 800 ECU; whereas, on 21 January 1985, imports of these products into the Community originating in China reached the ceiling in question after being charged thereagainst; whereas, it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties in respect of the products in question against China,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 27 January 1985, the levying of customs duties, suspended in pursuance of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in China:
1.2 // // // CCT heading No // Description // // // 29.38 B IV (NIMEXE code 29.38-50) // Vitamin C // //
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 January 1985.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 28 March 1988 supplementing Decision 87/516/Euratom, EEC concerning the framework programme for Community activities in the field of research and technological development (1987 to 1991) (88/193/EEC, Euratom)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 130q (1) thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Having regard to the opinion of the Scientific and Technical Committee,
Whereas in Decision 87/516/Euratom, EEC (4) the Council adopted the framework programme for Community activities in the field of research and technological development (1987 to 1991);
Whereas pursuant to Article 1 (3) of that Decision the amount deemed necessary in respect of the specific programmes to be decided on between 1987 and 1991 was provisionally fixed at 4 979 million ECU; whereas the Council was subsequently to decide on the addition of the remaining amount of 417 million ECU to that amount;
Whereas, following the conclusions of the European Council meeting on 11, 12 and 13 February 1988, the amount in question should be added to the amount provisionally deemed necessary,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article An amount of 417 million ECU shall be added to the amount of 4 979 million ECU provisionally deemed necessary in the framework programme for Community activities in the field of research and technological development (1987 to 1991).
The total amount deemed necessary in respect of the specific programmes to be decided on between 1987 and 1991 thus amounts to 5 396 million ECU.
Done at Brussels, 28 March 1988.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 2370/89
of 28 July 1989
amending, with regard to capelin, Regulation (EEC) No 3950/88 allocating, for 1989, Community catch quotas in Greenland waters
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 170/83 of 25 January 1983 establishing a Community system for the conservation and management of fishery resources (1), as amended by the 1985 Act of Accession, and in particular Article 11 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the agreement on fisheries between the European Economic Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland, on the other (1), and the Protocol on the conditions relating to fishing between the European Economic Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland on the other (2), establish the fishing quotas allocated to the Community in Greenland waters;
Whereas catch quotas in Greenland waters for 1989 were allocated by Regulation (EEC) No 3950/88 (3), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1578/89 (4);
Whereas the Greenland Home Rule Authorities in a letter dated 19 May 1989 have offered the Community a supplementary quota for 1989 of capelin;
Whereas in accordance with the provisions of Article 8 (1) of the abovementioned Agreement, the Community has accepted Greenland's offer of a supplementary quota of 8 000 tonnes of capelin off East Greenland;
Whereas this acceptance implies an adjustment of the financial compensation in proportion to this supplementary quota, as provided for in Article 3 (2) of the abovementioned Protocol;
Whereas it is for the Community to lay down, in accordance with Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 170/83, the conditions subject to which this quota may be used by Community fishermen;
Whereas, to ensure efficient management of the catch possibilities available, they should be distributed between the Member States by means of quotas in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 170/83;
Whereas the fishing activities covered by this Regulation are subject to the relevant control measures provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2241/87 of 23 July 1987 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities (6), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3483/88 (7),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The data (columns 1 to 6) relating to capelin set out in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 3950/88 are hereby replaced by those set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 July 1989.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 807/2005
of 26 May 2005
fixing the export refunds on cereals and on wheat or rye flour, groats and meal
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 provides that the difference between quotations or prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation and prices for those products in the Community may be covered by an export refund.
(2)
The refunds must be fixed taking into account the factors referred to in Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules under Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2).
(3)
As far as wheat and rye flour, groats and meal are concerned, when the refund on these products is being calculated, account must be taken of the quantities of cereals required for their manufacture. These quantities were fixed in Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
(4)
The world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund for certain products according to destination.
(5)
The refund must be fixed once a month. It may be altered in the intervening period.
(6)
It follows from applying the detailed rules set out above to the present situation on the market in cereals, and in particular to quotations or prices for these products within the Community and on the world market, that the refunds should be as set out in the Annex hereto.
(7)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003, excluding malt, exported in the natural state, shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 May 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 May 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2166/2005
of 20 December 2005
establishing measures for the recovery of the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks in the Cantabrian Sea and Western Iberian peninsula and amending Regulation (EC) No 850/98 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 37 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1)
Recent scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has indicated that the Southern hake and Norway lobster stocks in ICES Divisions VIIIc and IXa have been subjected to levels of mortality by fishing which have eroded the quantities of mature individuals in the sea to the extent that these stocks may not be able to replenish themselves by reproduction, and as result are threatened with collapse.
(2)
Measures should be taken to establish multi-annual plans for the recovery of these stocks in conformity with Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (2).
(3)
The objective of the plans should be to rebuild these stocks to safe biological limits within 10 years.
(4)
The objective should be considered to be achieved when the stocks concerned are assessed by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) to be within safe biological limits in the light of the most recent advice from ICES.
(5)
In order to achieve that objective, the levels of the fishing mortality rates should be controlled so that the rates may be reduced from year to year.
(6)
Such control of the fishing mortality rates can be achieved by establishing an appropriate method for the establishment of the level of Total Allowable Catches (TACs) of the stocks concerned, and a system including closed areas and limitations on kilowatt-days whereby fishing efforts on those stocks are restricted to levels at which the TACs may not be exceeded.
(7)
Once recovery has been achieved, the Council should decide on a proposal from the Commission on follow-up measures in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002.
(8)
Control measures in addition to those laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (3) should be included in order to ensure compliance with the measures laid down in this Regulation.
(9)
The recovery of Norway lobster stocks requires certain areas of reproduction of the species to be protected from fishing. Therefore Regulation (EC) No 850/98 (4) should be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
CHAPTER I
SUBJECT MATTER AND OBJECTIVE
Article 1
Subject matter
This Regulation establishes a recovery plan for the following stocks (hereinafter referred to as the stocks concerned):
(a)
the Southern hake stock which inhabits Divisions VIIIc and IXa, as delineated by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES);
(b)
the Norway lobster stock which inhabits ICES Division VIIIc;
(c)
the Norway lobster stock which inhabits ICES Division IXa.
Article 2
Objective of the recovery plan
The recovery plan shall aim to rebuild the stocks concerned to within safe biological limits, in keeping with ICES information. This shall mean:
(a)
as regards the stock referred to in Article 1(a), reaching a spawning stock biomass of 35 000 tonnes during two consecutive years, according to the available scientific reports, or increasing the quantities of mature individuals within a period of 10 years so that values are reached equal to or higher than 35 000 tonnes. This figure shall be adjusted in the light of new scientific data from the STECF;
(b)
as regards the stocks referred to in Article 1(b) and (c), rebuilding the stocks to within safe biological limits within a period of 10 years.
Article 3
Evaluation of recovery measures
1. The Commission shall, on the basis of advice from ICES and STECF, evaluate the impact of the recovery measures on the stocks concerned and the fisheries on those stocks in the second year of application of this Regulation and in each of the following years.
2. Where the Commission finds, on the basis of the annual evaluation, that any of the stocks concerned have reached the objective set out in Article 2, the Council shall decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission to replace, for that stock, the recovery plan provided for in this Regulation by a management plan in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002.
3. Where the Commission finds, on the basis of the annual evaluation, that any of the stocks concerned do not show proper signs of recovery, the Council shall decide by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission on additional and/or alternative measures in order to ensure recovery of the stock concerned.
CHAPTER II
TOTAL ALLOWABLE CATCHES
Article 4
Setting of TACs
1. Each year, the Council shall decide by qualified majority on the basis of a proposal from the Commission on a TAC for the following year for the stocks concerned.
2. The TAC for the stock referred to in Article 1(a) shall be set in accordance with Article 5.
3. The TACs for the stocks referred to in Article 1(b) and (c) shall be set in accordance with Article 6.
Article 5
Procedure for setting the TAC for the Southern hake stock
1. Where the fishing mortality rate for the stock referred to in Article 1(a) has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be above 0,3 per year, the TAC shall not exceed a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a reduction of 10 % in the fishing mortality rate in the year of its application as compared with the fishing mortality rate estimated for the preceding year.
2. Where the fishing mortality rate for the stock referred to in Article 1(a) has been estimated by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES to be equal to or below 0,3 per year, the TAC shall be set at a level of catches which, according to a scientific evaluation carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of ICES, will result in a fishing mortality rate of 0,27 per year in the year of its application.
3. Where STECF, in the light of the most recent report of ICES, is able to calculate a level of catches corresponding to the mortality rates specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 for only a part of ICES Divisions VIIIc and IXa, the TAC shall be set at a level that is compatible with both:
(a)
the level of catch corresponding to the specified mortality rate in the area covered by the scientific advice, and
(b)
maintaining a constant ratio of catches between that area covered by the scientific advice and the totality of Divisions VIIIc and IXa. The ratio shall be calculated on the basis of catches in the three years preceding the year in which the decision is taken.
The method of calculation used shall be that provided in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 6
Procedure for setting the TACs for the Norway lobster stocks
Based on the latest scientific evaluation of the STECF, the TACs for the stocks referred to in Article 1(b) and (c) shall be set at a level that will result in the same relative change in its fishing mortality rate as the change in fishing mortality rate achieved for the stock referred to in Article 1(a) when applying Article 5.
Article 7
Constraints on variation in TACs
As from the first year of application of this Regulation, the following rules shall apply:
(a)
where application of Article 5 or Article 6 would result in a TAC which exceeds the TAC of the preceding year by more than 15 %, the Council shall adopt a TAC which shall not be more than 15 % greater than the TAC of that year;
(b)
where application of Article 5 or Article 6 would result in a TAC which is more than 15 % less than the TAC of the preceding year, the Council shall adopt a TAC which is not more than 15 % less than the TAC of that year.
CHAPTER III
FISHING EFFORT LIMITATION
Article 8
Effort limitation
1. The TACs referred to in Chapter II shall be complemented by a system of fishing effort limitation based on the geographical areas and groupings of fishing gear, and the associated conditions for the use of these fishing opportunities specified in Annex IVb to Council Regulation (EC) No 27/2005 of 22 December 2004 fixing for 2005 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required (5).
2. Each year, the Council shall decide by qualified majority on the basis of a proposal from the Commission on an adjustment to the maximum number of fishing days available for vessels subject to the system of fishing effort limitation referred to in paragraph 1. The adjustment shall be in the same proportion as the annual adjustment in fishing mortality that is estimated by ICES and STECF as being consistent with the application of the fishing mortality rates established according to the method described in Article 5.
3. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, each Member State concerned may implement a different method of effort management in that part of Area IXa lying east of longitude 7°23′48″ W as measured according to the WGS84 standard. Such a method shall establish a reference level of fishing effort equal to the fishing effort deployed in the year 2005. For 2006 and subsequent years, the fishing effort shall be adjusted by an amount that shall be decided by qualified majority by the Council on the basis of a proposal by the Commission. This adjustment shall be proposed after considering the most recent advice from STECF in the light of the most recent report from ICES. In the absence of a decision by the Council, Member States concerned shall ensure that the fishing effort does not exceed the reference level.
4. Each Member State taking up the derogation in paragraph 3 may be requested by the Commission to provide a report on the implementation of any different method of effort management. The Commission will communicate this report to all other Member States.
5. For the purposes of paragraph 3, fishing effort shall be measured as the sum, in any calendar year, of the products across all relevant vessels of their installed engine power measured in kW and their number of days fishing in the area.
CHAPTER IV
MONITORING, INSPECTION AND SURVEILLANCE
Article 9
Margin of tolerance
1. By way of derogation from Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2807/83 of 22 September 1983 laying down detailed rules for recording information on Member States’ catches of fish (6), the permitted margin of tolerance, in estimation of quantities of the stocks concerned, in kilograms retained on board of vessels shall be 8 % of the logbook figure. In the event that no conversion factor is laid down in Community legislation, the conversion factor adopted by the Member State whose flag the vessel is flying shall apply.
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply if the quantity of the stocks concerned on board is less than 50 kg.
Article 10
Weighing of landings
The competent authorities of a Member State shall ensure that any quantity of the stock referred to in Article 1(a) exceeding 300 kg and/or 150 kg of the stocks referred to in Article 1(b) and/or (c) caught in any of the areas referred to in Article 1 shall be weighed using auction room scales before sale.
Article 11
Prior notification
The master of a Community fishing vessel that has been present in the areas referred to in Article 1 and who wishes to tranship any quantity of the stocks concerned that is retained on board, or to land any quantity of the stocks concerned in a port or a landing location of a third country, shall provide the competent authorities of the flag Member State with the following information at least 24 hours prior to transhipping or to landing in a third country:
-
the name of the port or landing location,
-
the estimated time of arrival at that port or landing location,
-
the quantities in kilograms live weight of all species of which more than 50 kg is retained onboard.
This notification may also be made by a representative of the master of the fishing vessel.
Article 12
Separate stowage of Southern hake and Norway lobster
1. When quantities of the stock referred to in Article 1(a) greater than 50 kg are stowed on board a vessel, it shall be prohibited to retain on board a Community fishing vessel in a container any quantity of the stocks referred to in Article 1 mixed with any other species of marine organisms.
2. The masters of Community fishing vessels shall give Member States’ inspectors such assistance as will enable the quantities declared in the logbook and the catches of the stocks concerned that are retained on board to be cross-checked.
Article 13
Transport of Southern hake and Norway lobster
1. The competent authorities of a Member State may require that any quantity of the stock referred to in Article 1(a) exceeding 300 kg or the stocks referred to in Article 1(b) and/or (c) exceeding 150 kg caught in any of the geographical areas referred to in Article 1 and first landed in that Member State is weighed before being transported elsewhere from the port of first landing.
2. By way of derogation from Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, quantities of the stock referred to in Article 1(a) exceeding 300 kg which are transported to a place other than that of landing or import shall be accompanied by a copy of one of the declarations provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 pertaining to the quantities of these species transported. The exemption provided for in Article 13(4)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 shall not apply.
Article 14
Specific monitoring programme
By way of derogation from Article 34c(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93, the specific monitoring programme for the stocks concerned may last for more than two years from its date of entry into force.
CHAPTER V
AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION (EC) NO 850/98
Article 15
Restrictions on fishing for Norway lobster
The following Article shall be inserted in Regulation (EC) No 850/98:
‘Article 29b
Restrictions on fishing for Norway lobster
1. During the periods set out below fishing with:
(i)
bottom trawls or similar towed nets operating in contact with the bottom of the sea, and
(ii)
creels shall be prohibited in the geographical areas bounded by rhumb lines joining the following positions as measured according to the WGS84 standard:
(a)
from 1 June to 31 August:
latitude 42°23′ N, longitude 08°57′ W
latitude 42°00′ N, longitude 08°57′ W
latitude 42°00′ N, longitude 09°14′ W
latitude 42°04′ N, longitude 09°14′ W
latitude 42°09′ N, longitude 09°09′ W
latitude 42°12′ N, longitude 09°09′ W
latitude 42°23′ N, longitude 09°15′ W
latitude 42°23′ N, longitude 08°57′ W;
(b)
from 1 May to 31 August:
latitude 37°45′ N, longitude 09°00′ W
latitude 38°10′ N, longitude 09°00′ W
latitude 38°10′ N, longitude 09°15′ W
latitude 37°45′ N, longitude 09°20′ W.
2. By way of derogation from the prohibition laid down in paragraph 1, fishing with bottom trawls or similar towed nets operating in contact with the bottom of the sea in the geographical areas and during the period set out in paragraph 1(b) shall be authorised provided that the by-catch of Norway lobster does not exceed 2 % of the total weight of the catch.
3. By way of derogation from the prohibition laid down in paragraph 1, fishing with creels that do not catch Norway lobster shall be authorised in the geographical areas and during the period set out in paragraph 1(b).
4. In the geographical areas and outside the periods referred to in paragraph 1, the by-catch of Norway lobster may not exceed 5 % of the total weight of the catch.
5. In the geographical areas and outside the periods set out in paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that the fishing effort levels of vessels fishing with bottom trawls or similar towed nets operating in contact with the bottom of the sea do not exceed the levels of fishing effort carried out by the vessels of the Member State concerned during the same periods and in the same geographical areas in 2004.
6. Member States shall communicate to the Commission their measures to fulfil the obligation laid down in paragraph 5. If the Commission finds that the measures of a Member State do not fulfil that obligation, it may propose amendments to those measures. In the absence of agreement on measures between the Commission and the Member State concerned, the Commission may adopt measures in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 (7).
Article 16
Report on the recovery plan
The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council setting out the conclusions relating to the application of the recovery plan for the stocks concerned, including available socioeconomic data linked to the plan. This report shall be submitted by 17 January 2010.
CHAPTER VI
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 17
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 11 December 1997 concerning the conclusion of an Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia in the field of transport (97/863/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 75 in conjunction with the first sentence of Article 228 (2) and the first subparagraph of Article 228 (3) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Whereas the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia in the field of transport (3), signed on 5 April 1993, and in particular Article 12 (2) thereof, gives unrestricted access for Slovenian heavy goods vehicles for transit through the Community;
Whereas Protocol 9 on road, rail and combined transport in Austria to the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden to the European Union, and in particular Articles 11 and 14 thereof, establishes a special regime for Community heavy goods vehicles in transit through Austria;
Whereas it is necessary to ensure non-discriminatory treatment between Community and Slovenian heavy goods vehicles in transit through Austria as from 1 January 1995;
Whereas the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia in the field of transport should be approved,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Slovenia in the field of transport is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
The text of the Protocol is annexed to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Community, give the notification provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol.
Done at Brussels, 11 December 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 9 June 1989
relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/27.958 - National Sulphuric Acid Association)
(Only the English text is authentic)
(89/408/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, first Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Articles 6 and 8 thereof,
Having regard to the application submitted by the National Sulphuric Acid Association Ltd to the Commission pursuant to Article 8 (2) of Regulation No 17 requesting renewal of Commission Decision 80/917/EEC (2) for a period of 10 years,
Having regard to the publication (3) pursuant to Article 19 (3) of Regulation No 17 of a summary of the rules of the joint buying Pool and relevant changes which have occurred since Decision 80/917/EEC, in which the Commission granted an exemption pursuant to Article 85 (3) to the rules of the joint buying Pool of the National Sulphuric Acid Association Ltd, London, for a period ending on 31 December 1988, was adopted,
Having consulted the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions pursuant to Article 10 (3) of Regulation No 17,
Whereas:
I. THE FACTS
(1) The joint buying Pool (the Pool) of the National Sulphuric Acid Association Ltd, (the Association), is operated by a Management Committee which negotiates for and purchases the quantities of imported sulphur requirements of the members of the Association.
Each member has to purchase from the pool at least 25 % of the total imported sulphur acquired by him in any calendar year; for the remaining 75 % he is free to purchase from sources other than the Pool. There is no restriction at all on members to purchase sulphur from indigenous sources of supply.
Should any member purchase less than 25 % of his annual requirements from the Pool, he shall be deemed to have withdrawn from the Pool from the end of that year. However, he may apply to rejoin the Pool commencing 1 July or 1 January on giving 12 months notice of his intention to do so.
The imported sulphur (approximately 86 % in liquid form and 14 % in solid form) is resold by the Pool to the members on a no-profit no-loss basis.
(2) Since Decision 80/917/EEC (the Decision) the following changes have occurred:
(a) At present 12 companies (compared to 19 in 1980) are members of the Pool, representing together the total production of sulphuric acid in the United Kingdom, whereas in 1980 one
major producer of sulphuric acid, using about 11 % of all imported sulphur in the United Kingdom, was not a member of the Pool. This producer joined the Pool in 1981 but resigned from the Pool by end 1986, following the closure of his sulphuric acid plant.
(b) Although since 1980 members of the Pool were free to purchase up to 75 % of their requirements of imported sulphur outside the Pool, nearly all members of the Pool have continued to purchase all their requirements of imported sulphur for sulphuric acid manufacture through the Pool, with a few exceptions between 1980 and 1985 where Pool members purchased some quantities of imported sulphur for sulphuric acid manufacture outside the Pool. Several members of the Pool purchase sulphur from indigenous sources, representing approximately 15 % of the total of sulphur used by the industry concerned in the United Kingdom.
(c) Sulphur is imported into the United Kingdom from Poland, the United States, Canada, Mexico, France and the Federal Republic of Germany; the Community countries accounting together for approximately 35 % of total purchases by the Pool.
(d) In 1987 production of sulphuric acid in the United Kingdom was 2 200 000 tonnes, compared to 3 500 000 tonnes when the exemption was granted. The decline is mainly due to changes in acid requirements for the manufacture of some principal products, for economic and technical reasons.
(e) The proportion of sulphuric acid produced by Pool members sold to third parties represents again 30 % as cited in the exemption Decision, after having decreased in the meantime to 27 %.
(3) The object of the Pool is to provide price and other advantages, like more flexibility in distribution and greater security of supply, to its members by joint negotiations with and purchases from the limited number of major world suppliers, especially to those members who purchase small quantities of sulphur and who might otherwise have difficulties in being supplied at a reasonable price or, during periods when demand outstrips supply, even at all. By contrast to an individual member, especially one with small requirements, the Pool can request a supplier to make liquid sulphur available when the member's plant is within a favourable road haulage distance of a dockside terminal, or otherwise to deliver a full cargo of solid sulphur to the particular port which provides the optimum access for one or more members. In view of the high transport costs by road, especially for liquid sulphur, the choice of port may be of critical significance for the price paid for delivery at the plant.
The fact that the Pool can guarantee to the suppliers of liquid sulphur the purchase of minimum quantities is important in order to assure the profitability of the terminals which are installed and operated by the suppliers.
(4) The application for an extension of the exemption for a period of 10 years from 31 December 1988 onwards is motivated by the wish of the Association to be able to enter into supply contracts of a normal duration, which means in this industry contracts of up to five, or in some cases seven, years.
(5) Following the publication pursuant to Article 19 (3) of Regulation No 17 of the above facts, in which the Commission announced its intentions to renew the Decision, the French producer of sulphur and supplier to the Pool declared his agreement with the Commission's intention; no other observations were received from third parties.
II. LEGAL ASSESSMENT
A. Article 85 (1)
(6) For the same reasons as those stated in the Decision the rules of the Pool are still deemed to fall within the scope of Article 85 (1), notably because:
(a) Each member of the Pool, to the extent he is committed to purchase through the Pool (i.e. 25 % of his annual requirements), is prevented from competing with other Pool members to obtain more favourable terms from the suppliers than those obtained by the Management Committee.
(b) To the extent that Pool members are committed to purchase through the Pool, suppliers in the Community are excluded from selling directly to those members. To this extent suppliers in the Community are limited to dealing with a single purchaser in the UK.
(c) Since sulphur accounts for an important part of the production costs of sulphuric acid, there are not only effects on the supply and price of the latter but also of the numerous products in the manufacture of which sulphuric acid is required. These products are marketed throughout the Community by members of the Pool and other manufacturers. B. Article 85 (3)
(7) On the basis of the information at its disposal, the Commission has come to the conclusion that the advantages of the activities of the Pool (i.e. price and transport advantages, such as delivery of a full cargo for several members purchasing small quantities, and greater security of supply as indicated above under point 3) still constitute a sufficient basis for the application of Article 85 (3).
(8) Since 30 % of the total quantity of sulphuric acid produced by Pool members is sold to third parties competition between Pool members on the market for sulphuric acid is ensured. In addition the consumer i.e. the user of sulphuric acid and the many products in the manufacture of which sulphuric acid is required (for example fertilizers, paint, fibres, detergents, soap) will obtain these products at a price reflecting the advantageous price paid by Pool members for the raw material as there is not only competition for these products between Pool members but also between Pool members and other manufacturers in the Community.
(9) The fact that Pool members have not made use of their right to purchase up to 75 % of imported sulphur from sources other than the Pool, appears to have been determined only by the advantageous conditions which the Pool was able to negotiate in favour of its members. On the other hand, the limitation of the commitment to 25 % gives the necessary flexibility to Pool members to purchase from sources other than the Pool if they wish to do so.
C. Article 8 of Regulation No 17
(10) Article 2 of the Decision obliged the Association to inform the Commission of any amendments or additions to, or the discontinuation of, the rules of the Pool and of any alteration in the nature or scope of the Pool including any changes in or refusals of application for the membership of the Pool. Furthermore, the Association was obliged to submit to the Commission every year not later than 31 January a report on the sulphur tonnage each member of the Pool purchased in the previous year from the Pool and from sources other than the Pool.
The reporting requirements have been fulfilled throughout the period of exemption and should be imposed again for the extended duration of the exemption pursuant to Article 8 (2) of Regulation No 17.
(11) Pursuant to Article 8 (1) of Regulation No 17, a Commission Decision in application of Article 85 (3) of the Treaty must be issued for a specified period. In the present case an extension of the Decision for a period of 10 years appears appropriate in order to allow the Association to enter into supply contracts of a normal duration in the industry concerned,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The exemption granted in Decision 80/917/EEC is hereby extended until 31 December 1989.
Article 2
Exemption is granted subject to the same reporting requirements as specified in Article 2 of Decision 80/917/EEC.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to:
- The National Sulphuric Acid Association Ltd,
140 Park Lane,
London W1Y 4DT,
UK;
- Allright & Wilson Ltd,
210-222 Hagley Road West,
Oldbury,
Warley,
West Midlands B68 ONN,
UK;
- The Associated Octel Co Ltd,
Ellesmere Port,
South Wirral,
Cheshire L65 4HF,
UK;
- Courtaulds plc,
Barton Dock Road,
Stretford,
Manchester M32 OTD,
UK;
- Hays Chemical Distribution Ltd,
Rawdon House,
Green Lane,
Yeadon,
Leeds LS19 7XX,
UK;
- Imperial Chemical Industries plc,
ICI Chemicals & Polymers Ltd,
PO Box 14,
Runcorn,
Cheshire WA7 4QG,
UK;
- RTZ Chemicals-ISC Division,
St Andrew's Road,
Avonmouth,
Bristol BS11 9HP,
UK; - Laporte Industries Ltd,
PO Box 2,
Moorfield Road,
Widnes,
Cheshire WA8 OJU,
UK;
- Richardsons Fertilisers Ltd,
Herdman Channel Road,
Belfast BT3 9AP,
UK;
- Scottish Agricultural Industries plc,
Leith Fertiliser Works,
67 Edinburgh Dock,
Leith Docks,
Edinburgh EH6 7DS,
UK;
- Staveley Chemicals Ltd,
Staveley Works,
Chesterfield,
Derbyshire S43 2PB,
UK;
- Synthetic Chemicals Ltd,
Four Ashes Works,
Wolverhampton,
West Midlands WV10 7BP,
UK;
- Tioxide UK Ltd,
Billingham,
Cleveland TS23 1PS,
UK.
Done at Brussels, 9 June 1989.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2205/2002
of 12 December 2002
amending and correcting Regulation (EC) No 21/2002 establishing the supply balances and Community aid for the outermost regions under Council Regulations (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001 and (EC) No 1454/2001
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1452/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural products for the French overseas departments, amending Directive 72/462/EEC and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 525/77 and (EEC) No 3763/91 (Poseidom)(1), and in particular Article 3(6) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural products for the Azores and Madeira and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (Poseima)(2), and in particular Article 3(6) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1454/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural products for the Canary Islands and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 (Poseican)(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1922/2002(4), and in particular Article 3(6) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 21/2002(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2132/2002(6), establishes the forecast supply balances and Community aid for the outermost regions under Regulations (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001 and (EC) No 1454/2001.
(2) The forecast supply balance for breeding cattle (CN code ex 0102 10 ) in the French overseas departments provides for an annual quantity of 400 animals. Information provided by the French authorities shows that this will be insufficient to cover the needs of the overseas departments in 2002. The quantity should therefore be increased by 50 animals for 2002.
(3) Following detection of a material error, the tariff code for frozen carcasses and half-carcasses of meat of domestic swine referred to in Annex II, Part 10 to Regulation (EC) No 21/2002 should be corrected.
(4) The forecast supply balance for fresh and chilled meat of bovine animals (CN code 0201 ) in the Canary Islands provides for an annual quantity of 20000 tonnes. Information provided by the Spanish authorities shows that this will be insufficient to cover the needs of the Islands for direct consumption in 2002. The quantity should therefore be increased by 1000 tonnes for 2002. However, the information shows an under-utilisation of the quantity of frozen beef, initially fixed at 16500 tonnes for 2002. As a result, this quantity should be reduced by 1650 tonnes.
(5) The measures laid down in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committees for Beef and Veal and Pigmeat,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 21/2002 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In Annex I, Part 6 is replaced by Annex I to this Regulation.
2. In Annex II, Part 10 is replaced by Annex II to this Regulation.
3. In Annex III, Part 8 is replaced by Annex III to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Points 1 and 3 of Article 1 shall apply until 31 December 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 December 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2254/93 of 28 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3418/88 fixing the free-at-frontier reference prices applicable to imports of certain wine products with effect from 1 September 1988
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1566/93 (2), and in particular Article 54 (8) thereof,
Whereas the free-at-frontier reference prices applicable to imports of certain wine products were set by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3418/88 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3696/92 (4);
Whereas the reference prices for the 1993/94 wine year were set by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2025/93 (5); whereas the free-at-frontier reference prices should be adapted accordingly with effect from 1 September 1993;
Whereas a check has revealed errors in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 3418/88; whereas, therefore, the Regulation in question should be corrected,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 3418/88 is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 September 1993.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 July 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 10 October 2008
correcting Directive 2008/40/EC amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include amidosulfuron and nicosulfuron as active substances
(notified under document number C(2008) 5703)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2008/791/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1), and in particular the second indent of the second subparagraph of Article 6(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Directive 2008/40/EC (2) contains errors concerning some dates which must be corrected.
(2)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Directive 2008/40/EC is corrected as follows:
1.
Article 2 is corrected as follows:
(a)
in the first paragraph, the words ‘30 April 2009’ are replaced by the words ‘30 June 2009’;
(b)
in the second paragraph, the words ‘1 May 2009’ are replaced by the words ‘1 July 2009’.
2.
Article 3 is corrected as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1, the words ‘30 April 2009’ are replaced by the words ‘30 June 2009’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is corrected as follows:
(i)
in the first subparagraph, the words ‘31 October 2008’ are replaced by the words ‘31 December 2008’;
(ii)
the second subparagraph is corrected as follows:
-
in point (a), the words ‘31 October 2012’ are replaced by the words ‘31 December 2012’,
-
in point (b), the words ‘31 October 2012’ are replaced by the words ‘31 December 2012’.
3.
In Article 4, the words ‘1 November 2008’ are replaced by the words ‘1 January 2009’.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 October 2008.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Regulation (EC) No 335/2001
of 22 December 2000
concerning the export of certain ECSC steel products from Poland to the Community for the period 1 January to 31 December 2001 (extension of the double-checking system)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1) A Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Poland, of the other part(1), entered into force on 1 February 1994.
(2) The Parties decided by Decision No 1/2001 of the Association Council(2) to extend the double-checking system introduced by Decision No 2/1999 of the Association Council(3) for the period 1 January to 31 December 2001.
(3) It is consequently necessary to extend the Community implementing legislation introduced by Council Regulation (EC) No 1093/1999 of 30 March 1999 establishing a double-checking system for exports of certain ECSC steel products from the Republic of Poland to the European Community for the period 1 January to 31 December 2000(4),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 1093/1999 shall continue to apply for the period 1 January to 31 December 2001, in accordance with the provisions of Decision No 1/2001 of the Association Council between the European Communities and their Member States, of, the one part, and Poland, of the other part.
Article 2
Regulation (EC) No 1093/1999 shall in consequence be amended as follows:
In the title, preamble and Article 1(1) and (3) references to the period "1 January to 31 December 2000" shall be replaced by references to "1 January to 31 December 2001".
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply with effect from 1 January 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 December 2000.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 28 July 1993 establishing the list of products provided for in Article 8 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 339/93
(93/583/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 of 8 February 1993 on checks for conformity with the rules on product safety, and in particular Article 8 thereof (1),
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 lays down that the Commission will draw up a list of the products more particularly covered by the second indent of Article 2, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 9;
Whereas this list must be drawn up and updated on the basis of experience and/or the rules on product safety and wihtin the scope of Community rules;
Whereas it has emerged from the preparatory work relating to that Regulation and from the work on abolishing controls at internal frontiers that Member States pay particular attention to toys, medicinal products and foodstuffs in the context of checks for conformity with the rules on product safety;
Whereas toys constitute products aimed at a particularly vulnerable category of consumers who, given the normal behaviour of children, do not display the 'average caution' shown by adult consumers;
Whereas medicinal products and foodstuffs constitute the categories of products whose consumption influences the health of their users most directly;
Whereas it is necessary, therefore, to include toys, medicional products and foodstuffs in the list of products more particularly covered by the second indent of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 339/93;
Whereas the measures provided for by this Decision comply with the opinion of the committee referred to in Article 9 of the said Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The list of products more particularly covered by the second indent of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 shall comprise the following categories of products:
- toys,
- medicinal products for human use,
- veterinary medicinal products,
- foodstuffs,
dealt with by Community rules whose main provisions are referred to, for information purposes, in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
Member States shall inform the Commission of the provisions which they have adopted in order to implement this Decision within one month of its notification.
The Commission shall notify the other Member States of those provisions.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 July 1993.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1609/2001
of 6 August 2001
amending Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000 laying down certain detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine and establishing a Community code of oenological practices and processes, as regards the methods of analysis
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000(2), and in particular Article 46 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 885/2001(4), maintains in force Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2676/90 of 17 September 1990 determining Community methods for the analysis of wines(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 761/1999(6), with the exception of the usual methods which will no longer be described from 1 August 2001.
(2) Several of the usual methods of analysis are normally used by the control laboratories of the Member States and their precision and accuracy, established through collaborative analytical studies, appear to be the same as those of the reference methods of analysis in Regulation (EEC) No 2676/90. Furthermore, the International Vine and Wine Office has organised a validation study of some of these methods with a view to their recognition as reference methods. This review of the validity of the usual methods will require a further two years of study, during which time it is advisable that the methods remain as described in Regulation (EEC) No 2676/90.
(3) Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000 should therefore be amended so that the repeal of the usual methods described in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2676/90 is postponed for two years.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The date of 1 August 2001 in Article 44 of Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000 is replaced by 1 August 2003.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 August 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 August 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1779/2001
of 7 September 2001
concerning the issue of A licences for the import of garlic
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1047/2001 of 30 May 2001 introducing a system of import licences and certificates of origin and establishing the method for managing the tariff quotas for garlic imported from third countries(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1510/2001(2),
Whereas:
(1) Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1047/2001 provides that if quantities covered by applications for A licences exceed the quantities available, the Commission is to fix a simple reduction percentage and suspend the issue of such licences covered by subsequent applications.
(2) Quantities applied for on 3 and 4 September 2001 under Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1047/2001 for products originating in China exceed the quantities available. The extent to which A licences can be issued, and whether the issue of those licences should be suspended for any subsequent applications, should therefore be determined,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
A import licences covered by applications under Article 1(1), of Regulation (EC) No 1047/2001 for products originating in China on 3 and 4 September 2001 and forwarded to the Commission on 5 September 2001 shall be issued, with the entry referred to in Article 1(2) of that Regulation, at the rate of:
- 31,261 % of the quantity applied for, for traditional importers,
- 0,907 % of the quantity applied for, for new importers.
Article 2
Issue of the import licences covered by applications under Regulation (EC) No 1047/2001 for products originating in China is hereby suspended for applications lodged from 4 September 2001 to 3 December 2001.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 8 September 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 September 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1180/2005
of 20 July 2005
fixing for the 2004/2005 marketing year the specific agricultural conversion rate applicable to the minimum sugarbeet prices and the production levy and additional levy in the sugar sector for the currencies of those Member States which have not adopted the single currency
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1713/93 of 30 June 1993 establishing special detailed rules for applying the agricultural conversion rate in the sugar sector (2), and in particular Article 1(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Pursuant to Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1713/93, the minimum sugarbeet prices referred to in Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 and the production levy and additional levy referred to, respectively, in Articles 15 and 16 of that Regulation are to be converted into national currency using a specific agricultural conversion rate equal to the average, calculated pro rata temporis, of the agricultural conversion rates applicable during the marketing year in question.
(2)
Since 1 January 1999, pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 of 15 December 1998 establishing agrimonetary arrangements for the euro (3), the fixing of conversion rates should be restricted to the specific agricultural conversion rates between the euro and the national currencies of those Member States which have not adopted the single currency.
(3)
The specific agricultural conversion rate for the minimum sugarbeet prices and the production levy and the additional levy for the 2004/2005 marketing year should therefore be fixed in the various national currencies,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The specific agricultural conversion rate to be used for the conversion of the minimum sugarbeet prices as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001, and of the production levy and, where appropriate, the additional levy referred to in Articles 15 and 16 respectively of that Regulation, into each of the national currencies of the Member States which have not adopted the single currency shall be fixed, for the 2004/2005 marketing year, as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 21 July 2005.
It shall apply from 1 July 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 July 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3528/92 of 7 December 1992 amending Regulation No 470/67/EEC as regards the criteria to be used for the taking over of paddy rice by intervention agencies
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1418/76 of 21 June 1976 on the common organization of the market in rice (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 674/92 (2), and in particular Article 5 (5) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation No 470/67/EEC of 21 August 1967 on the taking over of paddy rice by intervention agencies, and fixing the corrective amounts, price increases and reductions applied by them (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2151/91 (4), sets lower limits for processing yields; whereas section B in Annex II thereto indicates basic yields after processing; whereas the updating of the value of the yields from milling certain varieties is called for as a result of an improvement in technical conditions;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annex II to Regulation No 470/67/EEC is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 7 December 1992.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3338/88
of 27 October 1988
anmending Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 laying down detailed rules for the application of intervention measures in the beef and veal sector
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2248/88 (2), and in particular Articles 6 (5) and 25 thereof;
Whereas Article 18 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 797/88 (4), lays down certain rules for communications between Member States and the Commission in respect of intervention operations; whereas in order to improve the management of the intervention stocks those rules should be appropriately amended in particular by providing for fixed deadlines;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 18 (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2226/78 is replaced by the following:
'2. Member States shall communicate by telex or telefax to the Commission before Thursday of each week the estimated quantities bought into intervention during the previous week.
3. Member States shall communicate to the Commission not later than the 21st of each month and in respect of the preceding month:
- the weekly and monthly quantities bought into intervention broken down by products and qualities according to the Community carcase classification laid by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1208/81 (*),
- the quantities of each boneless and bone-in product for which a selling contract has been concluded during the month concerned,
- the quantities of each boneless and bone-in product for which a withdrawal order or a similar document has been delivered during the month concerned,
- the uncommitted and the physical stocks at the end of the month concerned of each bone-in product indicating the age structure of the former.
4. Member States shall communicate to the Commission not later than the end of each month and in respect of the preceding month:
- the quantities of each boneless product produced from bone-in beef bought into intervention during the month concerned,
- the uncommitted and physical stocks at the end of the month concerned of each boneless product indicating the age structure of the former.
5. For the purpose of this Article:
- uncommitted stocks shall mean stocks not yet subject to a selling contract,
- physical stocks shall mean the total of uncommitted stocks and stocks having been subject to a selling contract but not yet taken over.
(*) OJ No L 123, 7. 5. 1981, p. 3.'
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 January 1989.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 October 1988.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1314/2002
of 19 July 2002
authorising transfers between the quantitative limits of textiles and clothing products originating in the Republic of India
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 of 12 October 1993 on common rules for imports of certain textile products from third countries(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 797/2002(2), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Republic of India on arrangements in the area of market access for textile products, initialled on 31 December 1994(3), provides that favourable consideration should be given to certain requests for so-called "exceptional flexibility" by India.
(2) The Republic of India made a request for transfers between categories on 17 May 2002.
(3) The transfers requested by the Republic of India fall within the limits of the flexibility provisions referred to in Article 7 and set out in Annex VIII to Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93.
(4) It is appropriate to grant the request.
(5) It is desirable for this Regulation to enter into force the day after its publication in order to allow operators to benefit from it as soon as possible.
(6) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Textile Committee provided for in Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Transfers between the quantitative limits for textile goods originating in the Republic of India are authorised for the quota year 2002 in accordance with the Annex.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 July 2002.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 25 March 1997 recognizing in principle the completeness of the dossier submitted for detailed examination in view of the possible inclusion of pseudomonas chlororaphis in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (Text with EEA relevance) (97/248/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1), as last amended by Commission Directive 96/68/EC (2), and in particular Article 6 (3) thereof,
Whereas Council Directive 91/414/EEC has provided for the development of a Community list of active substances accepted for incorporation in plant protection products;
Whereas on 15 December 1994, Svenska Lantmännen submitted a dossier to the Swedish authorities in view of obtaining the inclusion of the active substance pseudomonas chlororaphis in Annex I to the Directive;
Whereas the Swedish authorities indicated to the Commission the results of a first examination of the completeness of the dossier with regard to the data and information requirements provided for in Annex II and, for at least one plant protection product containing the active substance concerned, in Annex III of the said Directive; whereas subsequently, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6 (2), the dossier was submitted by the applicants to the Commission and other Member States;
Whereas the dossier was referred to the Standing Committee on Plant Health in the meeting of the working group 'legislation` thereof on 20 March 1996;
Whereas Article 6 (3) of the Directive requires it being confirmed at the level of the Community that the dossier is to be considered as satisfying in principle the data and information requirements provided for in Annex II and, for at least one plant protection product containing the active substance concerned, in Annex III of the Directive;
Whereas such confirmation is necessary in order to pursue the detailed examination of the dossier as well as in order to open to Member States the possibility of granting provisional authorization for plant protection products containing this active substance in due respect of the conditions laid down in Article 8 (1) of the Directive, and in particular the condition to make a detailed assessment of the active substances and the plant protection products with regard to the requirements of the Directive;
Whereas such decision does not prejudice that further data or information may be requested from the applicant where it would appear during the detailed examination that such information or data are required for a decision to be taken;
Whereas it is understood between the Member States and the Commission that Sweden will pursue the detailed examination for the dossier and report the conclusions of its examination accompanied by any recommendations on the inclusion or non-inclusion and any conditions related thereto to the Commission as soon as possible and at the latest within a period of one year; whereas on receipt of the report the detailed examination will be continued with the expertise from all Member States within the framework of the Standing Committee on Plant Health;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The dossier submitted by Svenska Lantmännen to the Commission and the Member States with a view to the inclusion of pseudomonas chlororaphis as active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC and which was referred to the Standing Committee on Plant Health on 20 March 1996, is considered as satisfying in principle the data and information requirements provided for in Annex II and, for a plant protection product containing the active substance concerned, in Annex III to the Directive.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 March 1997.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 18 February 2003
appointing a member of the Committee of the Regions
(2003/142/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Austrian Government,
Whereas:
(1) On 22 January 2002 the Council adopted Decision 2002/60/EC(1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions.
(2) The seat of a member of the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the resignation of Mr Wendeling WEINGARTNER, of which the Council was notified on 28 January 2003,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Mr Herwig VAN STAA is hereby appointed a member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Wendeling WEINGARTNER for the remainder of his term of office, which expires on 25 January 2006.
Done at Brussels, 18 February 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 782/2008
of 5 August 2008
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Laguiole (PDO))
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 9(1), and in application of Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Commission has examined France's application for the approval of amendments to the specification of the protected designation of origin ‘Laguiole’ registered on the basis of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2).
(2)
Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of that Regulation. As no statement of objection within the meaning of Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been sent to the Commission, the amendments should be approved,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby approved.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 August 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 16 March 1992
concerning the conclusion of the Framework Agreement for cooperation between the European Economic Community and the Eastern Republic of Uruguay
(92/205/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Articles 113 and 235 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Whereas, in order to attain its objectives regarding external economic relations, the Community should approve the Framework Agreement for cooperation with the Eastern Republic of Uruguay,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Framework Agreement for cooperation between the European Economic Community and the Eastern Republic of Uruguay is hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 25 of the Agreement (3).
Article 3
The Commission, assisted by representatives of the Member States, shall represent the Community in the Joint Committee set up by Article 21 of the Agreement.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities and shall enter into force on the day of publication.
Done at Brussels, 16 March 1992.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 298/2002
of 15 February 2002
concerning tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender for the export of husked long grain rice to the island of Réunion referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2011/2001
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1987/2001(2), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 of 6 September 1989 laying down detailed rules for exports of rice to Réunion(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1453/1999(4), and in particular Article 9(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2011/2001(5) opens an invitation to tender for the subsidy on rice exported to Réunion.
(2) Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, to make no award.
(3) On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89, a maximum subsidy should not be fixed.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
No action shall be taken on the tenders submitted from 11 to 14 February 2002 in response to the invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2011/2001 for the subsidy on exports to Réunion of husked long grain rice falling within CN code 1006 20 98.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 February 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 February 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 9 November 1987
establishing the delivery levels of ECSC steel products of Portuguese origin onto the rest of the Community market, excluding Spain
(Only the Portuguese text is authentic)
(87/543/ECSC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Protocol 20 thereof,
Having received the assent of the Council,
Whereas Protocol 20, which covers the restructuring of the Portuguese iron and steel industry, and the Joint Declaration on the Portuguese iron and steel industry provide that deliveries of ECSC steel products of Portuguese origin onto the Community market will be the subject of quantitative limits in 1987;
Whereas, at the date of accession, there was no agreement between the Commission and the Portuguese Government on the level of these aforementioned deliveries;
Whereas, pursuant to the second subparagraph of paragraph 5 (a) of Protocol 20, it falls upon the Commission, with the assent of the Council, to establish the level of these deliveries;
Whereas, by the terms of the first subparagraph of paragraph 3 (a) of the said Joint Declaration the level of the deliveries must be compatible with the forecasts used to calculate the evolution of the Community market;
Whereas no major changes are forecast for the Community market for 1987 in comparison with 1986 and, in particular, several important aspects of the internal anti-crisis measures will remain;
Whereas the deliveries of ECSC steel products of Portuguese origin onto the rest of the Community market, excluding Spain, were not permitted to exceed 90 000 tonnes in 1986;
Whereas, under the terms of Protocol 20 (paragraph 5 (a), third line), the level of such deliveries may be the subject of an increase prior to the end of the transitionary period;
Whereas, following the results of a study of the viability of steel undertakings, the Portuguese authorities have agreed to implement measures additional to the plan for the restructuring of the Portuguese steel industry,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Deliveries of ECSC steel products of Portuguese origin onto the rest of the Community market, excluding Spain, may not exceed 100 000 tonnes during 1987.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Portugal.
Done at Brussels, 9 November 1987.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 25 February 1992 on the conclusion by the European Economic Community of the Interim Agreement between the European Economic Community and the European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Hungary, of the other part, on trade and trade-related matters (92/230/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas, pending the entry into force of the European Agreement signed in Brussels on 16 December 1991, it is necessary to approve the Interim Agreement between the European Economic Community and the European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Hungary, of the other part, on trade and trade-related matters signed in Brussels on 16 December 1991,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Interim Agreement between the European Economic Community and the European Coal and Steel Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Hungary, of the other part, on trade and trade-related matters together with its Annexes, the Protocols, the exchanges of letters and the declarations are hereby approved on behalf of the European Economic Community.
These texts are attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 48 of the Interim Agreement on behalf of the European Economic Community.
Done at Brussels, 25 February 1992.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1206/2007
of 16 October 2007
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 October 2007.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 October 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 16 December 1986
introducing a Community financial measure for the eradication of African swine fever in Portugal
(86/649/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 43 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Whereas African swine fever has been present in Portugal for many years;
Whereas, in order to prevent the disease from spreading to its territory, the Community granted financial support for a period of five years by means of Council Decision 80/877/EEC of 15 September 1980 on financial aid from the Community for the eradication of African swine fever in Portugal (3);
Whereas the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal sets as a specific objective to be achieved by the Portuguese Republic that of continuing and intensifying the campaign against African swine fever;
Whereas as the efforts already made have served to stabilize the incidence of the disease; whereas the resources deployed must, however, be maintained and reinforced in order to eradicate African swine fever from the entire territory of Portugal and thus contribute to the establishment of the internal market;
Whereas the Portuguese authorities have appealed to the Community for a contribution towards the expenditure involved in the continuation and reinforcement of the eradication programme undertaken in 1981;
Whereas, in order to benefit from the results obtained, this request should be granted so that the systematic action already undertaken can be maintained and consolidated;
Whereas the reinforced eradication plan must include measures ensuring the effectiveness of the action undertaken; whereas a procedure closely associating the Member States and the Commission should be introduced by means of which such measures can be adopted and adapted as the situation develops;
Whereas the Member States should be kept regularly informed of the proress of the measures undertaken,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Portuguese Republic shall draw up a reinforced plan for the eradication of African swine fever and the restructuring of pig farms so as to protect the health of their livestock.
Article 2
The plan referred to in Article 1 must, apart from an indication of the organization that is to implement and coordinate it, provide for:
1. Measures to eliminate outbreaks of African swine fever, and more particularly:
(a) the immediate slaughter and destruction of all pigs on those holdings where a clinical case of African swine fever is diagnosed and on those holdings which, as a result of an epizootiological investigation, can be considered as contaminated. Slaughter and destruction shall be effected in such a way as to avoid any danger of spreading the virus;
(b) the cleansing and disinfection of, and elimination of insect and rodent pests from, holdings after the elimination of the pigs;
(c) immediate and adequate compensation for the owners of holdings whose pigs have been slaughtered in accordance with (a);
(d) a delay for health reasons before restocking of holdings, the duration of such delay being at least one month after slaughter and the completion of the operations provided for in paragraph (b) for holdings operating in enclosed premises and at least three months for other holdings;
(e) the gradual restocking of holdings by the prior introduction of 'sentinel' pigs, in which the absence of African swine fever antibodies has been checked prior to their entry into the holding and again one month later;
(f) continuous serological surveillance of holdings until they are fully restocked.
(1) OJ N° C 203, 12. 8. 1986, p. 8.
(2) OJ N° C 322, 15. 12. 1986.
(3) OJ N° L 250, 2. Measures for the surveillance of pig farms and the establishment of zones free from African swine fever, and in particular:
(a) seriological testing by rerpresentative samples from all pig farms in each region of production.
However, the following rules shall apply in the special cases described below:
- in the case of breeding farms, multiplication farms or mixed closed circuit farms, all breeding sows and sows intended for breeding must be subjected to serological investigation,
- in the case of mixed farms receiving pigs from external sources, if no clear separation exists between the breeding unit and the pig fattening unit, all the pigs on the holding must be subjected to serological investigation;
(b) systematic serological investigation on all farms where one or more animals have reacted positively to the serological test provided for in (a) and the continuation of this investigation until all positive animals have been detected and eliminated;
(c) an epizootiological investigation to identify the farms on which pigs reacting positively to serological tests originate and systematic serological investigation on such farms;
(d) elimination by slaughter and destruction of all animals reacting positively to serological tests following measures provided for in (a), (b) and (c);
(e) immediate and adequate compensation for owners of pigs slaughtered and destroyed in accordance with (d);
(f) health protection measures on farms where pigs react negatively to serological tests. More particularly such protection must entail:
- the application of health measures with regard to any person entering the farm,
- arrangements for the disinfection of any vehicle having to enter the farm,
- the installation of safety gates for the delivery of feedingstuffs and various supplies,
- the installation of safety gates for the removal of pigs;
(g) health measures in respect of all animals entering the farm for the purposes of breeding or fattening. More particularly these measures must entail:
- an obligation to acquire animals from a farm presenting the same assurances,
- serological investigation of all breeding pigs,
- monitoring of breeding pigs before their entry into the production cycle;
(h) establishment for the recognition of holdings free of African swine fever, of the following minimum criteria:
- absence of clinical disease on the holding for at least one year,
- absence of clinical disease within a radius of 2 kilometres around the holding for at least one year,
- execution of the serological operations provided for in (a), (b) and (c) for one year, when a positive animal has been detected;
(i) clearly distinguishable marking of all pigs on holdings recognized as free of African swine fever.
3. Measures to create regions free of African swine fever, entailing more particularly:
(a) the establishment of a system identifying all pigs on the national territory so that the region and holding of origin can be traced at any time;
(b) the registration of all holdings engaged in pig farming, specifying the type of production, their position whith regard to African swine fever and the size of their stock;
(c) the monitoring of stock of holdings by the introduction of a pig-farming register or file recording in particular entries of pigs to the holding and their origin, exit of pigs and their destination, mortality and the causes thereof;
(d) the monitoring of movements of pigs within a region or between regions irrespective of their origin and destination by regional bodies established for that purpose;
(e) an absolute ban on the entry of live pigs originating in a region which does not have the same health status;
(f) the promotion of regional groups of farmers to combat African swine fever so as to engender more effective cooperation with the technical and administrative departments and voluntary control over the application of the plan;
(g) serological testing by sampling of pigs at the time of their slaughter;
(h) laboratory testing of samples from slaughtered wild swine.
4. Measures to restructure pig farms in order to ensure greaterhealth protection and prevent the spread of the disease, entailing more particularly:
(a) adaptation of existing piggeries so as to ensure effective health protection through:
- protective installations for the entry of vehicles and persons and safety gates for deliveries of feedingstuffs and various supplies,
- safety gates for the delivery or removal of live pigs;
(b) encouragement for the replacement of traditional farms by closed circuit farms with clear and effective separation between the breeding unit and the fattening unit;
(c) for flattening farms, the establishment of systems for the supply of piglets requiring the direct transportation of animals from recognized multiplication farms to the fattening farm;
(d) in the case of farms continuing to use grazing land in certain regions where this practice cannot be abandoned:
- the establishment of closed and protected housing for breeding stock and their piglets,
- establishment of enclosed and protected runs for sows and fattening piglets until the latters' departure to the grazing land,
- prohibition on the return of fattening pigs from grazing land to the breeding unit,
- obligation to transport fattened pigs direct to the slaughterhouse,
- serological testing of all pigs fattened on grazing land both before they are turned out and at the time of slaughter,
- where the result of serological testing is positive, seisure and destruction of the carcases in question and a ban on the use of the grazing land of origin for the fattening of pigs,
- laboratory testing of samples from slaughtered wild swine.
5. National and regional protection measures, entailing more particularly:
(a) control and destruction of all waste from international means of transport;
(b) control of all scraps and swill form kitchens and industries using pigmeat;
(c) ban on the use for feeding to pigs of scraps and swill from kitchens and industries using pigmeat. However, the competent authorities may authorize the use of scraps for feeding in specially designated farms wherethere are only fattening pigs provided that these scraps are collected and heat-treated, so as to ensure destruction of the virus, in specialized establishments under official control; animals of the swine species must not be allowed in these specialized establishments;
(d) obligation to slaughter pigs, for consumption, in slaughterhouses under official veterinary control.
Article 3
After examination of the plan submitted by the Portuguese authorities and of any amendments to be made thereto, the Commission shall decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 9, whether or not to approve it.
The Committee of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund shall be consulted on the financial aspects and the Standing Committee on Structure on the structural aspects of the plan.
Article 4
The measure provided for in this Decision shall qualify for financial aid from the Community.
Article 5
1. Community financial assistance shall be granted for a period of five years from the date fixed by the Commission in its decision approving the plan referred to in Article 1.
2. The estimated assistance to be charged to the Community budget under the chapter covering expenditure relating to agriculture shall be 10 million ECU for the duration of the period provided for in paragraph 1.
Article 6
1. On condition that all the measures laid down are applied and are in compliance with the plan approved by the Commission pursuant to Article 3, the expenditure incurred by Portugal:
- under Article 2 (1) (a), (b), (c), (e) and (f), (2) (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e), (3) (d), (f), (g) and (h) and the last three indents of (4) (d), and
- under Article 2 (3) (b) and (4) (a), (b), (c) and the first two shall qualify for Community financial aid within the limits laid down in Article 5.
2. The Commission shall refund 50 % of the expenditure referred to in the first indent of paragraph 1 and 30 % of the expenditure referred to in the second indent of paragraph 1.
3. Detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be adopted, as required in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) N° 729/70 (1).
Article 7
1. Applications for payment shall relate to expenditure incurred by the Portuguese Republic during the calendar year and shall be submitted to the Commission before 1 July of the followig year.
2. Article 7 (1) of Regulation (EEC) N° 729/70 shall apply to the decisions adopted by the Commission relating to the Community financing of the measure provided for by this Decision.
3. Detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) N° 729/70.
Article 8
Regulation (EEC) N° 129/78 (2) and Articles 8 and 9 of Regulation (EEC) N° 729/70 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Article 9
1. Where the procedure laid down in this Article is to be followed, matters hall be referred without delay by the chairman, either on his own initiative or at the request of a Member State, to the Standing Veterinary Committee (hereinafter called the 'Committee') set up by Decision 68/361/EEC (3).
3. The representative of the Commission shall submit a draft of the measures to be adopted. The Committee shall deliver its opinion on such measures within the time limit set by the chairman according the urgency of the mattersunder consideration. Opinions shall be delivered by a qualified majority of 54 votes.
4. The Commission shall adopt the measures and shall apply them immediately where they are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee. Where they are not in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, or if no opinion is delivered, the Commission shall without delay propose to the Council the measures to be taken. The Council shall adopt the measures by a qualified majority.
If, within three month from the date on which the proposal was submitted to it, the Council has not adopted any measures, the Commission shall adopt the proposed measures and shall apply them immediately, save where the Council decides against the said measures by a simple majority.
Article 10
1. The Commission shall follow developments with regard to African swine fever in Portugal and the implementation of the eradication plan.
The Commission shall inform the Member States within the Committee of developments regularly, at least once a year, in the light of the information provided by the Portuguese authorities, who shall submit a progress report to the Commission together with the applications for payment, and any reports from experts who, acting on behalf of the Community and appointed by the Commission, have made on-the-spot visits.
2. Should the need arise to amend the eradication plan in the course of its execution, in particular with a view to ensuring coordination with other plans a new decision approving it shall be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 9.
Article 11
This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1986.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 3544/91 of 25 November 1991 temporarily suspending the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duty on certain industrial products (in the microelectronics and related sectors)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 28 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas production of the products referred to in this Regulation is at present inadequate or non-existent within the Community and producers are thus unable to meet the needs of user industries in the Community;
Whereas it is in the Community's interest in certain cases to suspend the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties only partially, particularly because of the existence of Community production, and in other cases to suspend them completely;
Whereas, taking account of the difficulties involved in accurately assessing the development of the economic situation in the sectors concerned in the near future, these suspension measures should be taken only temporarily, by fixing their period of validity by reference to the interests of Community production,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION
Article 1
The autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties for the products listed in the table appearing in the Annex shall be suspended at the level indicated in respect of each of them.
These suspensions shall apply from 1 January to 30 June 1992.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1992.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 November 1991.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3467/86
of 13 November 1986
fixing for the Irish pound a specific monetary coefficient applicable on imports of dried grapes
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 426/86 of 24 February 1986 on the common organization of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1838/86 (2), and in particular Article 9 (6) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1676/85 of 11 June 1985 on the value of the unit of account and the conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the common agricultural policy (3), and in particular Article 10 (2) thereof,
Whereas the monetary coefficients applicable on imports of dried grapes from 1 September until 2 November 1986 have been fixed in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2677/86 (4); whereas with effect from 22 September 1986 the agricultural conversion rate for the Irish pound has been changed; whereas as a consequence thereof the monetary coefficient for that currency should be amended;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Products Processed from Fruit and Vegetables,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As a derogation from Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 2677/86 the coefficient applicable for the Irish pound shall with effect from 22 September until 2 November 1986 be 1,073.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 November 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/2003
of 5 March 2003
amending Regulation (EC) No 805/1999 laying down certain measures for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 718/1999 on a Community-fleet capacity policy to promote inland waterway transport
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 718/1999 of 29 March 1999(1) on a Community-fleet policy to promote inland waterway transport, and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The Commission sets, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 718/1999 and after consulting the Member States and the organisations which represent inland waterway transport at Community level, the ratios of the "old-for-new" rule for dry cargo vessels, tanker vessels and pusher craft.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 805/1999 of 16 April 1999(2) laying down certain measures for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 718/1999 set the ratios for the "old-for-new" rule to apply from 29 April 1999.
(3) These ratios have to be reduced constantly in order to bring them, as quickly as possible and in regular stages, to zero no later than 29 April 2003 pursuant to Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 718/1999.
(4) The "old-for-new" ratios were reduced in 2000, 2001 and 2002 by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1532/2000(3), Commission Regulation (EC) No 997/2001(4) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 336/2002(5).
(5) The ratios of the "old-for-new" rule must now be set at zero for dry cargo vessels, tanker vessels and pusher craft, with effect from 29 April 2003, in accordance with the second sentence of Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 718/1999.
(6) It is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EC) No 805/1999 accordingly.
(7) The measures provided for in this Regulation have been the subject of consultation within the Group of Experts on Community Fleets Capacity and Promotion Policy set up by Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 805/1999,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 805/1999 is hereby amended as follows:
1. in Article 4(1), the ratio "0,30:1" is replaced by "0:1";
2. in Article 4(2), the ratio "0,45:1" is replaced by "0:1";
3. in Article 4(3), the ratio "0,125:1" is replaced by "0:1".
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 April 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 March 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
+++++
( 1 ) OJ NO C 82 , 14 . 4 . 1975 , P . 91 .
( 2 ) OJ NO C 76 , 7 . 4 . 1975 , P . 37 .
( 3 ) OJ NO C 263 , 17 . 11 . 1975 , P . 42 .
( 4 ) OJ NO L 42 , 23 . 2 . 1970 , P . 1 .
( 5 ) OJ NO L 375 , 31 . 12 . 1980 , P . 34 .
( 6 ) THIS DIRECTIVE WAS NOTIFIED TO THE MEMBER STATES ON 26 SEPTEMBER 1984 .
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1984 ON THE APPROXIMATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO COMMON PROVISIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT ( 84/532/EEC )
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 100 THEREOF ,
HAVING REGARD TO THE PROPOSAL FROM THE COMMISSION ( 1 ) ,
HAVING REGARD TO THE OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ( 2 ) ,
HAVING REGARD TO THE OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE ( 3 ) ,
WHEREAS , IN EACH MEMBER STATE , CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT MUST HAVE CERTAIN TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS WHICH ARE LAID DOWN IN MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS ; WHEREAS THESE REQUIREMENTS DIFFER FROM ONE MEMBER STATE TO ANOTHER ; WHEREAS THESE DIFFERENCES HINDER TRADE WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ;
WHEREAS SUCH OBSTACLES TO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON MARKET CAN BE REDUCED AND ELIMINATED IF THE SAME REQUIREMENTS ARE ADOPTED BY ALL THE MEMBER STATES EITHER IN ADDITION TO OR IN PLACE OF THEIR PRESENT LAWS ;
WHEREAS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DIRECTIVE ARE APPLICABLE TO CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT , AND ARE AIMED PRIMARILY AT ENSURING THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT FROM AIRBORNE NOISE AND SAFETY AT WORK EXCEPT WHERE THIS IS DIRECTLY ASSOCIATED WITH LIFTING EQUIPMENT ; WHEREAS , THEREFORE , LIFTING APPLIANCES ON WORKSITES WILL , IF NECESSARY , FORM THE SUBJECT OF SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS ;
WHEREAS , VERIFICATION THAT TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN OBSERVED IS NECESSARY IN ORDER THAT USERS AND OTHERS MAY BE PROPERLY PROTECTED ; WHEREAS THE EXISTING INSPECTION PROCEDURES DIFFER FROM ONE MEMBER STATE TO ANOTHER AND , IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE FREE MOVEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE COMMON MARKET AND AVOID MULTIPLE INSPECTIONS , WHICH CONSTITUE OBSTACLES TO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF SUCH PLANT AND EQUIPMENT , PROVISION SHOULD BE MADE FOR MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF INSPECTIONS BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES ;
WHEREAS , IN ORDER TO ASSIST THIS MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF INSPECTIONS , SUITABLE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED PRIOR TO THE MARKETING OF APPLIANCES SHOULD BE INTRODUCED , VIZ . EEC TYPE-APPROVAL , EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION , EEC VERIFICATION AND EEC SELF-CERTIFICATION ; WHEREAS THERE SHOULD BE HARMONIZATION OF THE CRITERIA TO BE APPLIED WHEN APPOINTING THE APPROVED BODIES FOR CARRYING OUT EEC TYPE-EXAMINATIONS ;
WHEREAS THE NATIONAL REGULATIONS RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT COVER NUMEROUS CATEGORIES OF PLANT AND EQUIPMENT WITH WIDELY VARYING USES ; WHEREAS IT IS THEREFORE DESIRABLE TO LAY DOWN IN THIS DIRECTIVE GENERAL PROVISIONS ON THE PROCEDURES FOR EEC TYPE-APPROVAL , EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION , EEC VERIFICATION AND EEC SELF-CERTIFICATION ; WHEREAS SEPARATE DIRECTIVES FOR EACH CATEGORY OF CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT LAY DOWN THE REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE TECHNICAL CONSTRUCTION , THE METHODS FOR INSPECTING SUCH PLANT AND EQUIPMENT AND , WHERE APPROPRIATE , THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH COMMUNITY TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS ARE TO BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE NATIONAL PROVISIONS WHICH ALREADY EXIST ;
WHEREAS THIS DIRECTIVE DOES NOT DIFFERENT THE PROVISIONS OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 70/156/EEC OF 6 FEBRUARY 1970 ON THE APPROXIMATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO THE TYPE-APPROVAL OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND THEIR TRAILERS ( 4 ) , AS LAST AMENDED BY DIRECTIVE 80/1267/EEC ( 5 ) ;
WHEREAS IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT CONSTRUCTION PLANT OR EQUIPMENT PLACED ON THE MARKET MAY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES BUT NEVERTHELESS REPRESENT A HAZARD TO HEALTH OR SAFETY ; WHEREAS IT IS THEREFORE NECESSARY TO LAY DOWN A PROCEDURE TO REDUCE THAT RISK ;
WHEREAS , IN ORDER TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF TECHNICAL PROGRESS , A PROMPT ADAPTATION OF THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN THE DIRECTIVES ON CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT IS NECESSARY ; WHEREAS , IN ORDER TO FACILITATE APPLICATION OF THE MEASURES NECESSARY FOR THIS PURPOSE , THERE SHOULD BE A PROCEDURE FOR SETTING UP CLOSE COOPERATION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION WITHIN A COMMITTEE FOR THE ADAPTATION TO TECHNICAL PROGRESS OF THE DIRECTIVES ON THE ELIMINATION OF TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO INTRA-COMMUNITY TRADE IN CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT ,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE :
CHAPTER I
DEFINITIONS
ARTICLE 1
1 . FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DIRECTIVE , " CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT " MEANS ALL MACHINERY , APPLIANCES , PLANT AND INSTALLATIONS OR COMPONENTS THEREOF WHICH ARE USED , ACCORDING TO THEIR TYPE , TO PERFORM WORK ON CIVIL ENGINEERING AND BUILDING SITES BUT WHICH ARE NOT PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR THE TRANSPORT OF GOODS OR PERSONS .
2 . THIS DIRECTIVE SHALL APPLY ONLY TO CIVIL ENGINEERING AND BUILDING EQUIPMENT AS DEFINED IN PARAGRAPH 1 , FOR WHICH DETAILED RULES ARE LAID DOWN IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 3 .
3 . AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY TRACTORS AND LIFTING APPLIANCES ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE SCOPE OF THIS DIRECTIVE .
ARTICLE 2
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DIRECTIVE :
" EEC TYPE-APPROVAL " MEANS THE PROCEDURE WHEREBY A MEMBER STATE ESTABLISHES , FOLLOWING TESTS , AND CERTIFIES THAT A TYPE OF EQUIPMENT REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1 CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS HARMONIZED UNDER THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES ;
" EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION " MEANS THE PROCEDURE WHEREBY A BODY APPROVED FOR THAT PURPOSE BY A MEMBER STATE ESTABLISHES , FOLLOWING TESTS , AND CERTIFIES THAT A TYPE OF EQUIPMENT CONFORMS TO THE HARMONIZED REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS DIRECTIVES ;
" EEC VERIFICATION " MEANS THE PROCEDURE WHEREBY A MEMBER STATE CAN AFFIRM , FOLLOWING TESTS , THAT EACH ITEM OF EQUIPMENT CONFORMS TO THE HARMONIZED REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS DIRECTIVE AND UNDER THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES ;
" EEC SELF-CERTIFICATION " MEANS THE PROCEDURE WHEREBY THE MANUFACTURER , OR THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY , CERTIFIES , ON HIS OWN RESPONSIBILITY , THAT AN ITEM OF EQUIPMENT CONFORMS TO THE HARMONIZED REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS DIRECTIVE AND THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
ARTICLE 3
1 . FOR ALL EQUIPMENT , GENERAL DIRECTIVES SHALL DEFINE THE HARMONIZED REQUIREMENTS , IN PARTICULAR THOSE CONCERNING SAFETY AT WORK AND THE METHOD OF MEASURING THE SOUND EMISSION LEVEL OF EQUIPMENT .
2 . SEPARATE DIRECTIVES SHALL SPECIFY THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND FUNCTIONING OF THE CATEGORIES OF EQUIPMENT TO WHICH THEY REFER AND SHALL FURTHER STATE WHICH OF THE PROCEDURES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 2 IS APPLICABLE .
CHAPTER II
EEC TYPE-APPROVAL
ARTICLE 4
1 . WHERE IT IS PROVIDED FOR IN A SEPARATE DIRECTIVE , EEC TYPE-APPROVAL SHALL BE A PREREQUISITE FOR THE MARKETING , PLANING INTO SERVICE AND USE OF AN ITEM OF EQUIPMENT .
2 . MEMBER STATES SHALL , AT THE REQUEST OF THE MANUFACTURER , OR OF HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY , GRANT EEC TYPE-APPROVAL FOR ANY TYPE OF EQUIPMENT WHICH CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DIRECTIVE AND OF THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVE .
3 . AN APPLICATION FOR EEC TYPE-APPROVAL FOR A GIVEN TYPE OF EQUIPMENT MAY BE SUBMITTED IN ONLY ONE MEMBER STATE .
4 . MEMBER STATES SHALL GRANT , REFUSE , SUSPEND OR WITHDRAW EEC TYPE-APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND OF ANNEX I .
5 . FOR THE TESTS WHICH FORM PART OF AN EEC TYPE-APPROVAL , A MEMBER STATE MAY OBTAIN THE ASSISTANCE OF ONE OR MORE LABORATORIES .
ARTICLE 5
1 . IF THE RESULTS OF THE TESTS PROVIDED FOR IN ANNEX I , SECTION 2 , ARE SATISFACTORY , THE MEMBER STATE WHICH CARRIED OUT THE TESTS SHALL MAKE OUT AN EEC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE , WHICH SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE APPLICANT .
THE EEC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE MAY BE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
2 . A MODEL EEC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE IS SHOWN IN ANNEX III .
3 . THE EEC TYPE-APPROVAL CERTIFICATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ANY CONDITIONS AND TO ANY LIMITATION ON THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY WHICH MAY BE LAID DOWN IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
ARTICLE 6
1 . THE MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS GRANTED EEC TYPE-APPROVAL SHALL TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES , IF NEED BE IN COOPERATION WITH OTHER MEMBER STATES , TO ENSURE THE CONFORMITY OF THE MANUFACTURED EQUIPMENT WITH THE APPROVED TYPE .
2 . DETAILS OF THE MEASURES PROVIDED FOR IN THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE LAID DOWN IN SEPARATE DIRECTIVES . THESE MEASURES MAY INCLUDE SUPERVISION BY MEANS OF SPOT CHECKS .
ARTICLE 7
1 . IF A MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS GRANTED EEC TYPE-APPROVAL FINDS THAT SOME SAMPLES OF AN ITEM OF EQUIPMENT FOR WHICH SUCH TYPE-APPROVAL HAS BEEN GRANTED FAIL TO CONFORM TO THE TYPE , IT SHALL SUSPEND OR WITHDRAW THE APPROVAL .
2 . THE EEC TYPE-APPROVAL MAY , HOWEVER , BE MAINTAINED WHERE THE DIFFERENCES RECORDED ARE MINIMAL OR HAVE NO FUNDAMENTAL EFFECT ON THE DESIGN OF THE EQUIPMENT AND IN NO WAY REPRESENT A HAZARD TO PERSONAL SAFETY OR THE ENVIRONMENT ; IN SUCH CASES , THE MEMBER STATE SHALL REQUEST THE MANUFACTURER TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE MANUFACTURING CHANGES AS SOON AS POSSIBLE . THE MEMBER STATES SHALL WITHDRAW TYPE-APPROVAL IF THE MANUFACTURER FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THIS REQUEST .
3 . THE MEMBER STATE WHICH GRANTED EEC TYPE-APPROVAL SHALL ALSO WITHDRAW IT IF IT FINDS THAT THE APPROVAL SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED .
4 . FURTHERMORE , IF THE SAID MEMBER STATE IS INFORMED BY ANOTHER MEMBER STATE OF THE EXISTENCE OF ONE OF THE CASES REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPHS 1 , 2 AND 3 , IT SHALL , AFTER CONSULTING THAT STATE , ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THOSE PARAGRAPHS .
5 . WHERE THE ADVISABILITY OR NECESSITY OF WITHDRAWING APPROVAL IS THE SUBJECT OF DISPUTE BETWEEN THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES OF THE MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS GRANTED EEC TYPE-APPROVAL AND THOSE OF ANOTHER MEMBER STATE , THE COMMISSION SHALL BE KEPT INFORMED . IT SHALL , WHERE NECESSARY , HOLD APPROPRIATE CONSULTATIONS IN ORDER TO ARRIVE AT A SOLUTION .
6 . ONLY THE MEMBER STATE WHICH GRANTED EEC TYPE-APPROVAL MAY DECIDE TO WITHDRAW IT ; IT SHALL FORTHWITH NOTIFY THE OTHER MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION OF ANY SUCH DECISION .
CHAPTER III
EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION
ARTICLE 8
1 . WHERE IT IS STIPULATED IN A SEPARATE DIRECTIVE , EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION SHALL BE A PREREQUISITE FOR THE MARKETING , PLACING INTO SERVICE AND USE OF AN ITEM OF EQUIPMENT .
2 . EEC TYPE-EXAMINATIONS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT BY BODIES APPROVED FOR THIS PURPOSE BY THE MEMBER STATES .
ARTICLE 9
1 . APPROVED BODIES APPOINTED BY MEMBER STATES TO CARRY OUT EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 10 SHALL COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM CRITERIA LAID DOWN IN ANNEX II .
THE FACT THAT A BODY COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM CRITERIA DOES NOT MEAN THAT A MEMBER STATE IS OBLIGED TO APPROVE THAT BODY .
2 . WHERE A MEMBER STATE HAS APPROVED A BODY OR BODIES TO CARRY OUT EEC TYPE-EXAMINATIONS , IT SHALL NOTIFY THE OTHER MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION OF THE BODY OR BODIES CONCERNED . IT SHALL ALSO NOTIFY THE OTHER MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS TO THESE PARTICULARS .
ARTICLE 10
1 . THE APPROVED BODIES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 9 SHALL , AT THE REQUEST OF THE MANUFACTURER , OR OF HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY , GRANT AN EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE FOR ANY TYPE OF EQUIPMENT WHICH CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DIRECTIVE AND OF THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVE AND IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE MANUFACTURER HAS UNDERTAKEN TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
2 . AN APPLICATION FOR EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION FOR A GIVEN TYPE OF EQUIPMENT MAY BE SUBMITTED TO ONLY ONE OF THE APPROVED BODIES .
3 . THE APPROVED BODIES SHALL GRANT , REFUSE , SUSPEND OR WITHDRAW EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND OF ANNEX I .
ARTICLE 11
1 . THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE SHALL CONFORM TO THE MODEL GIVEN IN ANNEX III .
2 . THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ANY CONDITIONS AND TO ANY LIMITATION ON THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY WHICH MAY BE LAID DOWN IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
ARTICLE 12
1 . THE APPROVED BODY WHICH GRANTED THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE SHALL TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES TO ENSURE THE CONFORMITY OF THE MANUFACTURED EQUIPMENT WITH THE TYPE EXAMINED .
2 . DETAILS OF THE MEASURES PROVIDED FOR IN THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE LAID DOWN IN SEPARATE DIRECTIVES . THESE MEASURES MAY INCLUDE SUPERVISION BY MEANS OF SPOT CHECKS .
ARTICLE 13
1 . IF AN APPROVED BODY FINDS THAT SAMPLES OF EQUIPMENT OF THE TYPE FOR WHICH IT HAS ISSUED AN EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE FAIL TO CONFORM TO THAT TYPE , IT SHALL REQUEST THE HOLDER OF THE CERTIFICATE TO RECTIFY PRODUCTION WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD , IF NECESSARY SUSPENDING THE CERTIFICATE IN THE MEANTIME . WHERE NECESSARY , THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVE ON THE EQUIPMENT CONCERNED SHALL DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF SAMPLES DEEMED SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE APPROVED BODY . IF THE MANUFACTURER FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THIS REQUEST WITHIN THE SPECIFIED PERIOD , THE APPROVED BODY SHALL SUSPEND OR WITHDRAW THE CERTIFICATE .
2 . THE APPROVED BODY SHALL WITHDRAW THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE WHICH IT HAS ISSUED IF IT FINDS THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED .
3 . IT SHALL SUSPEND OR WITHDRAW THE CERTIFICATE IF THE HOLDER FAILS TO FULFIL THE UNDERTAKINGS TO THE APPROVED BODY WHICH ARE REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 10 .
ARTICLE 14
1 . MEMBER STATES SHALL ENSURE THAT THE APPROVED BODIES CARRY OUT THE AFOREMENTIONED TASKS CORRECTLY .
TO THIS END THEY SHALL , BY APPROPRIATE MEASURES , OBLIGE THE APPROVED BODIES TO ALLOW THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES OF THE MEMBER STATE WHICH APPOINTED THEM TO MAKE CHECKS AT ANY TIME .
2 . MEMBER STATES SHALL TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THE APPLICANT OR THE PERSON TO WHOM THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED IS ABLE TO APPEAL AGAINST DECISIONS BY THE APPROVED BODY TO REFUSE , WITHDRAW OR SUSPEND THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE .
3 . IF A MEMBER STATE FINDS THAT A BODY WHICH IT HAS APPOINTED IS NOT CORRECTLY FULFILLING THE TASKS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLES 10 AND 13 , IT SHALL TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE STEPS WITH REGARD TO THAT BODY .
4 . THE MEMBER STATE SHALL IN ANY EVENT WITHDRAW APPROVAL FROM A BODY WHICH IT HAS APPOINTED IF IT FINDS THAT THAT BODY HAS CEASED TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM CRITERIA LAID DOWN IN ANNEX II OR THAT IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS SET BY THE MEMBER STATE .
5 . IF A MEMBER STATE DOES NOT WITHDRAW APPROVAL FROM A BODY WHICH NO LONGER SATISFIES THE MINIMUM CRITERIA , ANY OTHER MEMBER STATE MAY BRING THE SITUATION TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION . THE COMMISSION SHALL TAKE THE APPROPRIATE STEPS TO FIND A SOLUTION .
ARTICLE 15
1 . A MEMBER STATE WHICH WITHDRAWS APPROVAL FROM A BODY SHALL TAKE ALL NECESSARY STEPS TO ENSURE CONTINUITY IN THE FULFILMENT OF THE OBLIGATIONS AND DUTIES RESULTING FROM THE ISSUE OF EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATES BY THAT BODY BEFORE THE WITHDRAWAL OF APPROVAL .
2 . THE MEMBER STATE SHALL ANNUL ALL CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THAT BODY BEFORE WITHDRAWAL OF APPROVAL IF THEY WERE ISSUED IMPROPERLY .
ARTICLE 16
1 . IF ONE OF THE CASES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 13 IS FOUND TO EXIST IN A MEMBER STATE , THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES OF THAT MEMBER STATE SHALL BRING THIS FACT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH THE CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED .
2 . THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES OF THE LATTER MEMBER STATE SHALL OBLIGE THE APPROVED BODY CONCERNED TO TAKE THE STEPS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 13 .
3 . IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATE IN WHICH AN EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED AND ANOTHER MEMBER STATE , THE COMMISSION SHALL BE INFORMED AND SHALL TAKE APPROPRIATE STEPS .
CHAPTER IV
EEC VERIFICATION AND EEC SELF-CERTIFICATION
ARTICLE 17
1 . SEPARATE DIRECTIVES AS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 3 ( 2 ) WHICH STIPULATE EEC VERIFICATION OR EEC SELF-CERTIFICATION SHALL LAY DOWN THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED .
2 . IN THE CASE OF SELF-CERTIFICATION , THE MEMBER STATES SHALL TAKE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THE EQUIPMENT SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
CHAPTER V
COMMON PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 18
1 . THE MANUFACTURER , OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ESTABLISHED IN THE COMMUNITY , SHALL ISSUE AN EEC CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY , A MODEL OF WHICH IS GIVEN IN ANNEX IV , FOR EACH ITEM OF A GIVEN TYPE OF EQUIPMENT WHICH IS MANUFACTURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HARMONIZED REQUIREMENTS AND WHICH CONFORMS TO THE TYPE APPROVED OR EXAMINED .
2 . IF SO REQUIRED BY A SEPARATE DIRECTIVE , THE MANUFACTURER SHALL AFFIX TO THE EQUIPMENT THE MARK TOGETHER WITH THE INFORMATION SPECIFIED IN THAT SEPARATE DIRECTIVE .
3 . COSTS ARISING FROM APPLICATION OF THE PROCEDURES LAID DOWN IN A SEPARATE DIRECTIVE SHALL BE BORNE BY THE APPLICANT .
CHAPTER VI
HARMONIZED TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
ARTICLE 19
1 . NO MEMBER STATE MAY PROHIBIT , REFUSE OR RESTRICT THE MARKETING , PLACING INTO SERVICE AND USE , SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN PARAGRAPH 4 AND IN THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES , OF ANY EQUIPMENT ON GROUNDS RELATING TO ITS CONSTRUCTION OR FUNCTIONING WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES , OR THE CHECKING THEREOF , WHERE SUCH EQUIPMENT COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DIRECTIVE AND THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES .
2 . THE MEMBER STATES SHALL TAKE ALL APPROPRIATE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THEIR COMPETENT ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES ACCEPT THE CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 18 AND , WHERE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES SO REQUIRE , A CONFORMITY MARK AFFIXED TO THE EQUIPMENT AS A PRESUMPTION OF CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPH .
3 . A MEMBER STATE MAY REQUIRE THAT THIS CERTIFICATE BE DRAWN UP IN ITS OWN NATIONAL LANGUAGE OR LANGUAGES WHEN EQUIPMENT IS OFFERED FOR SALE TO THE CONSUMER IN ITS TERRITORY .
4 . IF THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO OTHER COMMUNITY PROVISIONS , THE CONDITIONS OF USE SHALL REMAIN SUBJECT TO THE LAWS , REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS OF THE COUNTRY OF DESTINATION ; WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO NOISE , THE USE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT MAY BE SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS WITHIN GEOGRAPHICALLY LIMITED ZONES .
NATIONAL LAWS , REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS GOVERNING CONDITIONS OF USE MAY NOT RESULT IN DISCRIMINATION OVER THE USE OF EQUIPMENT COVERED BY THIS DIRECTIVE WHICH IS MANUFACTURED IN OTHER STATES .
ARTICLE 20
1 . IF A MEMBER STATE HAS GOOD GROUNDS FOR BELIEVING THAT AN ITEM OF EQUIPMENT REPRESENTS A HAZARD TO SAFETY OR HEALTH , ALTHOUGH SATISFYING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS DIRECTIVE AND THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES , IT MAY TEMPORARILY PROHIBIT THE MARKETING AND USE OF THAT ITEM OF EQUIPMENT IN ITS TERRITORY OR MAKE THEM SUBJECT TO SPECIAL CONDITIONS . IT SHALL IMMEDIATELY INFORM THE OTHER MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION THEREOF , GIVING THE REASONS FOR ITS DECISION .
2 . THE COMMISSION SHALL CONSULT THE MEMBER STATES CONCERNED WITHIN SIX WEEKS , THEN GIVE ITS OPINION WITHOUT DELAY AND TAKE THE APPROPRIATE STEPS .
3 . IF THE COMMISSION CONSIDERS THAT TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE DIRECTIVE OR THE RELEVANT SEPARATE DIRECTIVES ARE NECESSARY , SUCH MODIFICATIONS SHALL BE ADOPTED , BY EITHER THE COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL , IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 24 ; IN THIS EVENT , THE MEMBER STATE WHICH HAS TAKEN THE SAFEGUARD MEASURES MAY RETAIN THEM UNTIL SUCH MODIFICATIONS COME INTO FORCE .
ARTICLE 21
1 . THE DESIGN OF A TYPE OF EQUIPMENT AND THE METHODS USED IN ITS MANUFACTURE MAY , IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES , DEPART FROM SOME OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES , WITHOUT THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT CEASING TO BE COVERED BY ARTICLE 19 , PROVIDED THAT THE ALTERATIONS MADE ARE SUCH AS TO ENSURE AT LEAST AN EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF PROTECTION AS FAR AS SAFETY OR HEALTH ARE CONCERNED .
2 . EACH OF THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES SHALL SPECIFY CLEARLY THE PROVISIONS FROM WHICH SUCH DEROGATION IS POSSIBLE OR THE PROVISIONS FROM WHICH THERE CAN BE NO DEROGATION .
3 . WHENEVER A REQUEST FOR DEROGATION IS ACCEPTED , THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURE SHALL BE OBSERVED :
( A ) THE MEMBER STATE - EITHER DIRECTLY IN THE CASE OF THE EEC TYPE-APPROVAL PROCEDURE OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH THE APPROVED BODY WHICH IT HAS APPOINTED IN THE CASE OF THE EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION PROCEDURE - SHALL FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION THE DOCUMENTS GIVING THE DESCRIPTION OF THE TYPE OF EQUIPMENT AND THE DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING ITS REQUEST FOR DEROGATION , INCLUDING THE RESULTS OF ANY TESTS CARRIED OUT . THE COMMISSION SHALL SEND A COPY TO THE OTHER MEMBER STATES WHICH SHALL THEN HAVE A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS FROM THAT DATE TO AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE MEMBER STATE CONCERNED OR TO ASK THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 23 . A COPY OF EACH DOCUMENT SHALL BE SENT TO THE COMMISSION ; ALL CORRESPONDENCE SHALL BE CONFIDENTIAL ;
( B ) IF NO MEMBER STATE HAS DISAGREED OR ASKED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BEFORE THE END OF THE PERIOD LAID DOWN UNDER ( A ) , THE COMMISSION MAY CONVENE THE COMMITTEE OR AUTHORIZE THE MEMBER STATE TO GRANT OR APPROVE THE DEROGATION REQUESTED AND SHALL INFORM THE OTHER MEMBER STATES THEREOF ;
( C ) IF A MEMBER STATE HAS NOT REPLIED BY THE END OF THE STATUTORY PERIOD , IT SHALL BE REGARDED AS HAVING AGREED ;
( D ) OTHERWISE , THE COMMISSION SHALL ACT ON THE DEROGATION REQUEST AFTER HAVING RECEIVED THE OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE PROVIDED FOR UNDER ARTICLE 23 ;
( E ) THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OR LANGUAGES OF THE COUNTRY OF DESTINATION OR , IN SPECIAL CASES , IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE ACCEPTABLE TO IT .
4 . IN THE CASE OF A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER HIMSELF , IT SHALL BE POSSIBLE TO DEROGATE FROM THE DIRECTIVE , PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 1 , ONLY IF AN APPROVED BODY HAS CONFIRMED TO THE MANUFACTURER THAT THE DEROGATION PROPOSED DOES NOT REDUCE SAFETY .
BEFORE GRANTING THE DEROGATION , THE APPROVED BODY SHALL INFORM THE OTHER APPROVED BODIES . SHOULD ONE OF THESE BODIES OBJECT WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS , THE MATTER SHALL BE PLACED BEFORE THE COMMISSION THROUGH A MEMBER STATE . THE COMMISSION SHALL TRY TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE . IF NECESSARY , IT SHALL CONVENE THE COMMITTEE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 23 AND SHALL TAKE A DECISION AFTER CONSULTING IT .
CHAPTER VII
ADAPTATION OF THE DIRECTIVES TO TECHNICAL PROGRESS
ARTICLE 22
THE AMENDMENTS NECESSARY TO KEEP :
- THE ANNEXES TO THIS DIRECTIVE AND
- THE PROVISIONS OF THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES , REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 3 , WHICH WILL BE SPECIFICALLY INDICATED IN EACH OF THOSE DIRECTIVES ,
IN LINE WITH TECHNICAL PROGRESS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 24 .
ARTICLE 23
1 . A COMMITTEE ON THE ADAPTATION TO TECHNICAL PROGRESS OF THE DIRECTIVES CONCERNING THE ELIMINATION OF TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE IN CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT , HEREINAFTER CALLED " THE COMMITTEE " IS HEREBY SET UP ; IT SHALL CONSIST OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEMBER STATES WITH A COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE AS CHAIRMAN .
2 . THE COMMITTEE SHALL ADOPT ITS OWN RULES OF PROCEDURE .
ARTICLE 24
1 . WHERE THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN THIS ARTICLE IS INVOKED , THE MATTER SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BY ITS CHAIRMAN EITHER ON HIS OWN INITIATIVE OR AT THE REQUEST OF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF A MEMBER STATE .
2 . THE COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE SHALL SUBMIT TO THE COMMITTEE A DRAFT OF THE MEASURES TO BE TAKEN . THE COMMITTEE SHALL DELIVER ITS OPINION ON THE DRAFT WITHIN A PERIOD TO BE FIXED BY THE CHAIRMAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE URGENCY OF THE QUESTION AT ISSUE . DECISIONS SHALL BE TAKEN BY A MAJORITY OF 45 VOTES , THE VOTES OF THE MEMBER STATES BEING WEIGHTED AS PROVIDED IN ARTICLE 148 ( 2 ) OF THE TREATY . THE CHAIRMAN SHALL NOT VOTE .
3 . ( A ) THE COMMISSION SHALL ADOPT THE PROPOSED MEASURES IF THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE .
( B ) IF THE PROPOSED MEASURES DO NOT CONFORM WITH THE OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE , OR IF NO OPINION IS DELIVERED , THE COMMISSION SHALL WITHOUT DELAY PROPOSE TO THE COUNCIL THE MEASURES TO BE ADOPTED . THE COUNCIL SHALL DECIDE BY A QUALIFIED MAJORITY .
( C ) IF WITHIN THREE MONTHS OF THE PROPOSAL BEING SUBMITTED TO IT , THE COUNCIL HAS NOT TAKEN ANY DECISION , THE PROPOSED MEASURES SHALL BE ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSION .
CHAPTER VIII
GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 25
ANY DECISION TAKEN BY A MEMBER STATE OR APPROVED BODY PURSUANT TO THIS DIRECTIVE AND THE SEPARATE DIRECTIVES TO REFUSE EEC TYPE-APPROVAL , EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION OR EEC VERIFICATION , TO SUSPEND OR TO WITHDRAW AN EEC TYPE-APPROVAL OR AN EEC TYPE-EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE OR TO PROHIBIT THE MARKETING , PLACING INTO SERVICE AND USE OF A TYPE OR ITEM OF EQUIPMENT SHALL STATE THE EXACT GROUNDS ON WHICH IT IS BASED . SUCH A DECISION SHALL BE NOTIFIED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO THE PARTY CONCERNED , WHO SHALL AT THE SAME TIME BE INFORMED OF THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO HIM UNDER THE LAWS IN FORCE IN THE MEMBER STATE IN QUESTION AND OF THE TIME LIMITS TO WHICH SUCH REMEDIES ARE SUBJECT .
ARTICLE 26
1 . MEMBER STATES SHALL BRING INTO FORCE THE LAWS , REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS NECESSARY TO COMPLY WITH THIS DIRECTIVE WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF ITS NOTIFICATION ( 6 ) AND SHALL FORTHWITH INFORM THE COMMISSION THEREOF .
2 . MEMBER STATES SHALL ENSURE THAT THE TEXTS OF THE PROVISIONS OF NATIONAL LAW WHICH THEY ADOPT IN THE FIELD COVERED BY THIS DIRECTIVE ARE COMMUNICATED TO THE COMMISSION .
ARTICLE 27
THIS DIRECTIVE IS ADDRESSED TO THE MEMBER STATES .
DONE AT BRUSSELS , 17 SEPTEMBER 1984 .
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 15 February 2006
concerning certain interim protection measures in relation to suspected cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza in wild birds in Hungary
(notified under document number C(2006) 526)
(Only the Hungarian text is authentic)
(2006/105/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), and in particular Article 9(3) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (2), and in particular Article 10(3) thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 of 26 May 2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals and amending Council Directive 92/65/EEC (3), and in particular Article 18 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Avian influenza is an infectious viral disease in poultry and birds, causing mortality and disturbances which can quickly take epizootic proportions liable to present a serious threat to animal and public health and to reduce sharply the profitability of poultry farming. There is a risk that the disease agent might be spread from wild birds to domestic birds, notably poultry, and from one Member State to other Member States and third countries through the international trade in live birds or their products.
(2)
Hungary has informed the Commission about the isolation of an H5 avian influenza virus collected from a clinical case in wild birds. Pending the determination of the neuraminidase (N) type and of the pathogenicity index, the clinical picture and the epidemiological circumstances allow the suspicion of highly pathogenic avian influenza caused by influenza A virus of subtype H5N1.
(3)
Hungary has without undue delay implemented certain measures foreseen in the framework of Council Directive 92/40/EEC of 19 May 1992 introducing Community measures for the control of avian influenza (4).
(4)
Given the disease risk, interim protection measures should be adopted in order to address the particular risks in different areas.
(5)
In the interests of consistency, it is appropriate to apply for the purposes of this Decision certain definitions provided for in Council Directive 2005/94/EC of 20 December 2005 on Community measures for the control of avian influenza and repealing Directive 92/40/EEC (5), Council Directive 90/539/EEC of 15 October 1990 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs (6), Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (7), Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals and amending Council Directive 92/65/EEC (8).
(6)
Protection and surveillance zones should be established around the place where the disease was detected in wild birds. Those zones should be limited to what is necessary to prevent virus introduction into commercial and non-commercial poultry flocks.
(7)
It is appropriate to control and restrict the movement of, in particular, live birds and hatching eggs while allowing the controlled dispatch from the zones of such birds and products of avian origin subject to certain conditions.
(8)
The measures laid down in Commission Decision 2005/734/EC of 19 October 2005 laying down biosecurity measures to reduce the risk of transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza caused by Influenza virus A subtype H5N1 from birds living in the wild to poultry and other captive birds and providing for an early detection system in areas at particular risk (9) should be implemented in protection and surveillance zones, independently of the defined risk status of the area where highly pathogenic avian influenza is suspected or confirmed in wild birds.
(9)
Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption (10) authorises the placing on the market of a range of animal by-products, such as gelatine for technical use, materials for pharmaceutical use and others, originating in areas of the Community under animal health restrictions, because those products are considered safe due to the specific conditions of production, processing and utilisation that effectively inactivate possible pathogens or prevent contact with susceptible animals. It is therefore appropriate to permit the transport from protection zones of unprocessed used litter or manure for the purposes of treatment in accordance with that Regulation and of animal by-products complying with the conditions set out therein.
(10)
Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC (11) provides for approved bodies, institutes and centres and a model certificate to accompany animals or their gametes between such approved premises in different Member States. A derogation from the transport restrictions should be envisaged for birds coming from and proceeding to bodies, institutes and centres approved in accordance with that Directive.
(11)
Transport of hatching eggs from the protection zones should be permitted under certain conditions. The dispatch of hatching eggs to other countries may be permitted subject in particular to compliance with the conditions referred to in Directive 2005/94/EC. In such cases the animal health certificates provided for in accordance with Directive 90/539/EEC should include a reference to this Decision.
(12)
The dispatch from protection zones of meat, minced meat, meat preparations and meat products should be permitted subject to certain conditions, in particular as regards compliance with certain requirements of Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 and of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (12).
(13)
Council Directive 2002/99/EC of 16 December 2002 laying down the animal health rules governing the production, processing, distribution and introduction of products of animal origin for human consumption (13) establishes a list of treatments rendering meat from restricted areas safe, and provides for the possibility to establish a specific health mark and the health mark required for meat not authorised for placing on the market for animal health reasons. It is appropriate to permit the dispatch from the protection zones of meat bearing the health mark provided for in that Directive and meat products subjected to treatment referred to therein.
(14)
Pending the meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and in collaboration with the Member State concerned the Commission should take interim protection measures relating to highly pathogenic avian influenza in wild birds.
(15)
The measures provided for in this Decision should be reviewed at the next meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Subject matter, scope and definitions
1. This Decision lays down certain interim protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza in wild birds in Hungary caused by influenza A virus of subtype H5 suspected to be of the neuraminidase type N1, in order to prevent the spread of avian influenza from wild birds to poultry or other captive birds as well as the contamination of products thereof.
2. Except as otherwise provided, the definitions of Directive 2005/94/EC shall apply. In addition, the following definitions shall apply:
(a)
‘hatching eggs’ means eggs as defined in Article 2(2) of Directive 90/539/EEC;
(b)
‘wild feathered game’ means game as defined in point 1.5, second indent, and point 1.7 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004;
(c)
‘other captive birds’ means birds as defined in point 6 of Article 2 of Directive 2005/94/EC, including:
(i)
pet animals of the bird species as referred to in Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 998/2003, and
(ii)
birds for zoos, circuses, amusement parks and experimental laboratories.
Article 2
Establishment of protection and surveillance zones
1. Hungary shall establish around the area where the presence of highly pathogenic avian influenza caused by influenza A virus of subtype H5 in wild birds is confirmed and the neuraminidase type N1 is either suspected or confirmed:
(a)
a protection zone with a radius of at least three kilometres, and
(b)
a surveillance zone with a radius of at least 10 kilometres, including the protection zone.
2. The establishment of the protection and surveillance zones referred to in paragraph 1 shall take account of geographical, administrative, ecological and epizootiological factors relating to avian influenza, and of monitoring facilities.
3. If the protection or surveillance zones cover the territories of other Member States, Hungary shall collaborate with the authorities of those Member States to establish the zones.
4. Hungary shall notify to the Commission and to the other Member States the details of any protection and surveillance zones established under this Article.
Article 3
Measures in the protection zone
1. Hungary shall ensure that at least the following measures are applied in the protection zone:
(a)
the identification of all holdings within the zone;
(b)
periodic and documented visits to all commercial holdings a clinical inspection of poultry including, if necessary, the collection of samples for laboratory examination;
(c)
the implementation of appropriate on-farm biosecurity measures, including disinfection at the entrances and exits of the holding, the housing of the poultry or the confinement of poultry to places where the direct and indirect contact with other poultry and captive birds can be prevented;
(d)
the implementation of the biosecurity measures laid down in Decision 2005/734/EC;
(e)
the control of the movement of products from poultry in accordance with Article 9;
(f)
active disease monitoring in the population of wild birds, in particular water fowl, if necessary with the co-operation of hunters and bird-watchers who have been specifically instructed on measures to protect themselves from infection with the virus and to prevent the spread of the virus to susceptible animals;
(g)
campaigns to increase disease awareness amongst owners, hunters and bird-watchers.
2. Hungary shall ensure that the following are prohibited in the protection zone:
(a)
the removal of poultry and other captive birds from the holding on which they are kept;
(b)
the assembly of poultry and other captive birds at fairs, markets, shows or other gatherings;
(c)
the transport through the zone of poultry and other captive birds, except transit on major roads or railways and transport to a slaughterhouse for direct slaughter;
(d)
the dispatch from the zone of hatching eggs;
(e)
the dispatch from the zone of fresh meat, minced meat, meat preparations and meat products from poultry and other captive birds and wild feathered game;
(f)
the transport or spread outside the zone of unprocessed used litter or manure from holdings within the zone, except the transport for treatment in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002;
(g)
the hunting of wild birds.
Article 4
Measures in the surveillance zone
1. Hungary shall ensure that at least the following measures are applied in the surveillance zone:
(a)
the identification of all holdings within the zone;
(b)
the implementation of appropriate on-farm biosecurity measures, including the use of appropriate means of disinfection at the entrances and exits of the holding;
(c)
the implementation of the biosecurity measures laid down in Decision 2005/734/EC;
(d)
the control of movement of poultry and other captive birds and hatching egg within the zone.
2. Hungary shall ensure that the following are prohibited in the surveillance zone:
(a)
movement of poultry and other captive birds out of the zone for the first 15 days following the establishment of the zone;
(b)
the assembly of poultry and other birds at fairs, markets, shows or other gatherings;
(c)
the hunting of wild birds.
Article 5
Duration of the measures
If the neuraminidase type is confirmed as being different from N1, the measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 shall be abolished.
If the presence of an influenza A virus of the subtype H5N1 in wild birds is confirmed, the measures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 shall apply for as long as is necessary having regard to the geographical, administrative, ecological and epizootiological factors relating to avian influenza and for at least 21 in the case of the protection zone and 30 days in the case of the surveillance zone after the date on which an H5 avian influenza virus collected from a clinical case in wild birds has been isolated.
Article 6
Derogations for live birds and day-old chicks
1. By way of derogation from Article 3(2)(a), Hungary may authorise the transport of ready-to-lay pullets and turkeys for fattening to holdings under official control situated either in the protection or in the surveillance zone.
2. By way of derogation from Article 3(2)(a) or Article 4(2)(a), Hungary may authorise the transport of:
(a)
poultry for immediate slaughter, including spent laying hens, to a slaughterhouse located in the protection zone or in the surveillance zone or, if that is not possible, to a slaughterhouse designated by the competent authority outside the zones;
(b)
day-old chicks from the protection zone to holdings under official control on the territory of Hungary on which there are no other poultry or captive birds, except pet birds referred to in Article 1(2)(c)(i), separated from poultry;
(c)
day-old chicks from the surveillance zone to holdings under official control on the territory of Hungary;
(d)
ready-to-lay pullets and turkeys for fattening from the surveillance zone to holdings under official control on the territory of Hungary;
(e)
pet birds referred to in Article 1(2)(c)(i), to premises on the territory of Hungary not keeping poultry, if the consignment consists of five or fewer caged birds, notwithstanding national rules referred to in Article 1, third paragraph, of Directive 92/65/EEC;
(f)
birds referred to in Article 1(2)(c)(ii) coming from bodies, institutes and centres and proceeding to bodies, institutes and centres approved in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 92/65/EEC.
Article 7
Derogations for hatching eggs
1. By way of derogation from Article 3(2)(d), Hungary may authorise:
(a)
the transport of hatching eggs from the protection zone to a designated hatchery within the territory of Hungary;
(b)
the dispatch of hatching eggs from the protection zone to hatcheries situated outside the territory of Hungary provided that:
(i)
the hatching eggs were collected from flocks which:
-
are not suspected of being infected with avian influenza, and
-
have tested negative in a serological survey for avian influenza capable of detecting 5 % prevalence of disease with at least a 95 % level of confidence, and
(ii)
the conditions laid down in Article 26(1)(b), (c) and (d) of Directive 2005/94/EC are fulfilled.
2. The animal health certificates in accordance with Model 1 of Annex IV to Council Directive 90/539/EEC accompanying consignments of hatching eggs referred to in paragraph 1(b) dispatched to other Member States shall include the words:
‘The animal health conditions of this consignment are in accordance with Commission Decision 2006/105/EC’
Article 8
Derogations for meat, minced meat, meat preparations and meat products
1. By way of derogation from Article 3(2)(e), Hungary may authorise the dispatch from the protection zone of:
(a)
fresh meat from poultry, including meat from ratites, originating in or outside that zone and produced in accordance with Annex II and Sections II and III of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 and controlled in accordance with Sections I, II, III, and Chapters V and VII of Section IV of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 854/2004;
(b)
minced meat, meat preparations and meat products containing meat referred to in point (a) and produced in accordance with Sections V and VI of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004;
(c)
fresh meat from wild feathered game originating in that zone, if such meat is marked with the health mark provided for in Annex II to Directive 2002/99/EC and is intended for transport to an establishment for treatment as required for avian influenza in accordance with Annex III to that Directive;
(d)
meat products produced from meat from wild feathered game which were subjected to a treatment as required for avian influenza in accordance with Annex III to Directive 2002/99/EC;
(e)
fresh meat from wild feathered game originating outside the protection zone and produced in establishments within the protection zone in accordance with Section IV of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 and controlled in accordance with Chapter VIII of Section IV of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 854/2004;
(f)
minced meat, meat preparations and meat products containing meat referred to in point (e) and produced in establishments situated in the protection zone in accordance with Sections V and VI of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004.
2. Hungary shall ensure that the products referred to in paragraph 1(e) and (f) are accompanied by a commercial document stating:
‘The animal health conditions of this consignment are in accordance with Commission Decision 2006/105/EC’
Article 9
Conditions for animal by-products
1. In accordance with Article 3(1)(e), Hungary may authorise the dispatch of:
(a)
animal by-products complying with the conditions set out in Chapters II (A), III (B), IV (A), VI (A and B), VII (A), VIII (A), IX (A) and X (A) of Annex VII, and Chapter II (B) and Chapter III (II) (A) of Annex VIII to Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002;
(b)
unprocessed feathers or parts of feathers in accordance with Chapter VIII (A)(1)(a) of Annex VIII to Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002, produced from poultry coming from outside the protection zone;
(c)
processed poultry feathers and parts of poultry feathers that have been treated with a steam current or by some other method that ensures that no pathogens remain;
(d)
products derived from poultry or other captive birds which, in accordance with Community legislation, are not subject to any animal health conditions or which are not subject to any ban or restriction for reasons of animal health, including the products referred to in Chapter VII (A)(1)(a) of Annex VIII to Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002.
2. Hungary shall ensure that the products referred to in paragraph 1(b) and (c) are accompanied by a commercial document in accordance with Chapter X of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 stating in point 6.1 of that document that those products have been treated with a steam current or by some other method ensuring that no pathogens remains.
However, that commercial document shall not be required for processed decorative feathers, processed feathers carried by travellers for their private use or consignments of processed feathers sent to private individuals for non-industrial purposes.
Article 10
Conditions for movements
1. Where movements of animals or products thereof covered by this Decision are authorised under Articles 6 to 9, all appropriate biosecurity measures shall be taken to avoid the spread of avian influenza.
2. Where the dispatch, movement or transport of products referred to in paragraph 1 are authorised under Articles 7, 8 and 9, they must be obtained, handled, treated, stored and transported separately from other products fulfilling all the animal health requirements for trade, placing on the market or export to third countries.
Article 11
Compliance
Hungary shall immediately take the necessary measures to comply with this Decision and publish those measures. It shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
Article 12
Addressee
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Hungary.
Done at Brussels, 15 February 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.