utterance
stringlengths 594
850k
| label
listlengths 11
11
|
|---|---|
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 870/2008
of 4 September 2008
amending the representative prices and additional duties for the import of certain products in the sugar sector fixed by Regulation (EC) No 1109/2007 for the 2007/08 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 951/2006 of 30 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards trade with third countries in the sugar sector (2), and in particular of the Article 36,
Whereas:
(1)
The representative prices and additional duties applicable to imports of white sugar, raw sugar and certain syrups for the 2007/08 marketing year are fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1109/2007 (3). These prices and duties have been last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 842/2008 (4).
(2)
The data currently available to the Commission indicate that the said amounts should be changed in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 951/2006,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The representative prices and additional duties on imports of the products referred to in Article 36 of Regulation (EC) No 951/2006, as fixed by Regulation (EC) No 1109/2007 for the 2007/08 marketing year are hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 5 September 2008.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 September 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 306/92 of 7 February 1992 ending the charges against the tariff ceilings opened in the framework of generalized tariff preferences, by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 in respect of certain textile products originating in Thailand, Argentina and China
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), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3587/87 (2), and in particular the third paragraph of Article 12 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Articles 1 and 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 suspension of customs duties in the context of preferential tariff ceilings is granted within the limits of the individual ceilings set out in column 8 of Annex I to that Regulation in respect of each of the categories of product under consideration; whereas as provided for in the third paragraph of Article 12 of the said Regulation, the Commission may, after 31 December 1992, take measures to stop quantities being charged against any particular preferential tariff limit if these limits were exceeded particularly as a result of regularizations of imports actually made during the preferential tariff period;
Whereas, in respect of the products of category 37 (order No 40.0370) originating in Thailand, of category 65 (order No 40.0650) originating in Argentina and of category 84 and 90 (order No 40.0840 and 40.0900) originating in China, the relevant ceilings were fixed at 386, 166, 3 and 15 tonnes, respectively; whereas on 1 January 1992, the sum of the quantities charged during the 1991 preferential period has exceeded the ceilings in question;
Whereas it appears desirable to take measures to stop quantities being charged against the said ceilings in respect of Thailand for category 37, in respect of Argentina for category 65, and in respect of China for category 84 and 90,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The quantities charged against the tariff ceilings opened by Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 relating to the products and origins indicated in the table below, shall cease to be allowed from 11 February 1992.
Order No Category (Unit) CN code Description Origin (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 40.0370 37 (tonnes) 5516 11 00
5516 12 00
5516 13 00
5516 14 00
5516 21 00
5516 22 00
5516 23 10
5516 23 90
5516 24 00
5516 31 00
5516 32 00
5516 33 00
5516 34 00
5516 41 00
5516 42 00 Woven fabrics of artificial staple fibres Thailand 40.0370 (cont'd) 5516 43 00
5516 44 00
5516 91 00
5516 92 00
5516 93 00
5516 94 00
5803 90 50
ex 5905 00 70 40.0650 65 (tonnes) 5606 00 10
ex 6001 10 00
6001 21 00
6001 22 00
6001 29 10
6001 91 10
6001 91 30
6001 91 50
6001 91 90
6001 92 10
6001 92 30
6001 92 50
6001 92 90
6001 99 10 Knitted or crocheted fabric other than of categories 38 A and 63, of wool, of cotton or of man-made fibres Argentina ex 6002 10 10
6002 20 10
6002 20 39
6002 20 50
6002 20 70
ex 6002 30 10
6002 41 00
6002 42 10
6002 42 30
6002 42 50
6002 42 90
6002 43 31
6002 43 33
6002 43 35
6002 43 39
6002 43 50
6002 43 91
6002 43 93
6002 43 95
6002 43 99
6002 91 00
6002 92 10
6002 92 30
6002 92 50
6002 92 90
6002 93 31
6002 93 33
6002 93 35
6002 93 39
6002 93 91
6002 93 99 40.0840 84 (tonnes) 6214 20 00
6214 30 00
6214 40 00
6214 90 10 Shawls, scarves, mufflers, mantillas, veils and the like other than knitted crocheted, of wool, of cotton or man-made fibres China 40.0900 90 (tonnes) 5607 41 00
5607 49 11
5607 49 19
5607 49 90
5607 50 11
5607 50 19
5607 50 30
5607 50 90 Twine, cordage, ropes and cables, of synthetic fibres, plaited or not China
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, 7 February 1992.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2052/98 of 24 September 1998 further amending Regulations (EC) No 1890/97 and (EC) No 1891/97 imposing definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties on imports of farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
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), and in particular Articles 8(9) and 9 thereof,
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 (2), and in particular Articles 13(9) and 15 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES
(1) In the framework of the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations initiated by two separate notices published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3), the Commission accepted, by Decision 97/634/EC (4), undertakings offered by the Kingdom of Norway and by 190 Norwegian exporters.
(2) The text of the undertakings specifically provides that failure to comply with the reporting obligations and, in particular, failure to submit the quarterly report within the prescribed time-limit except in case of force majeure, would be construed as a breach of the undertaking.
(3) For the fourth quarter of 1997, 12 Norwegian exporters failed to comply with their obligation to present a report within the prescribed time limit or did not submit any report at all. These exporters did not provide any evidence of force majeure to justify such late reporting or non-reporting. On this basis, the Commission had reasons to believe that these companies had breached the terms of their undertakings.
(4) Consequently, the Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 1126/98 (5), hereinafter referred to as the 'provisional duty Regulation`, imposed provisional anti-dumping and countervailing duties on imports of farmed Atlantic salmon falling within CN codes ex 0302 12 00, ex 0304 10 13, ex 0303 22 00 and ex 0304 20 13 originating in Norway and exported by the 12 companies listed in the Annex to that Regulation. By the same Regulation, the Commission deleted the companies concerned from the Annex to Decision 97/634/EC listing the companies, from which undertakings were accepted.
B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE
(5) All 12 Norwegian companies subject to the provisional duties received disclosure in writing concerning the essential facts and considerations, on the basis of which these provisional duties were imposed.
(6) Within the time limit set in the provisional duty Regulation, some of the Norwegian companies concerned submitted comments in writing.
(7) Subsequent to the written submissions received, the Commission sought and examined all information it deemed necessary for the purpose of a definitive determination on the apparent violations.
(8) None of the companies, which failed to respect their reporting obligations, submitted any valid evidence of force majeure as would have been necessary under the terms of the undertaking in order to lawfully justify such failure.
In the absence of specific provisions in this regard in Regulation (EC) No 384/96, hereinafter referred to as the 'basic anti-dumping Regulation`, and in Regulation (EC) No 2026/97, hereinafter referred to as the 'basic anti-subsidies Regulation`, and in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice, the justification invoked by each company as circumstances constituting force majeure can only be recognised as such where the failure was the inevitable result of an extraneous cause which could not reasonably have been foreseen or pre-empted and made it objectively impossible for the company concerned to comply with its obligations.
In this regard, all circumstances invoked by the parties concerned, e.g. the illness of staff members for a few days, or the intense activity of other fish productions, cannot be considered as circumstances constituting force majeure.
(9) Two out of the twelve exporters listed in Annex I, i.e. Gigante Fiskekroken A/S and Melands Røkeri Eftf. A/S (6), have notified the Commission that they have changed their names and requested that the newly named companies be allowed to enter new undertakings as newcomers. However, the Commission is of the view that a simple change of name of a company is not sufficient to bring a party within the scope of Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1890/97 of 26 September 1997 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway (7) or Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1891/97 of 26 September 1997 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway (8).
C. DEFINITIVE MEASURES
(10) The interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations, on the basis of which it was intended to confirm the withdrawal of the Commission's acceptance of their undertaking and to recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties and the definitive collection of the amounts secured by way of provisional duties. They were also granted a period, within which to make representations subsequent to this disclosure.
(11) In view of the comments submitted, it is concluded that definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties should be imposed on imports of farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway and exported by the companies listed in Annex I.
(12) The investigations, which led to the undertakings, were concluded by a final determination as to dumping and injury by Regulation (EC) No 1890/97, and by a final determination as to subsidisation and injury by Regulation (EC) No 1891/97.
Therefore, in accordance with Article 8(9) of the basic anti-dumping Regulation and Article 13(9) of the basic anti-subsidies Regulation, the rate of the definitive duties for the twelve Norwegian companies should be fixed at the level of the duties established in those two Regulations.
D. DEFINITIVE COLLECTION OF PROVISIONAL DUTIES
(13) A breach of undertaking has been established in relation to the twelve exporters having violated their undertakings. Therefore, it is considered necessary that the amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping and countervailing duties be definitively collected at the level of the definitive duties.
(14) The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1890/97 and the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1891/97, exempting the parties listed therein from the relevant duty, should be amended to remove the exemption from the 12 companies listed in Annex I to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1890/97 shall be replaced by Annex II hereto.
2. The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1891/97 shall be replaced by Annex II hereto.
Article 2
The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1126/98 in relation to farmed (other than wild) Atlantic salmon falling within CN codes ex 0302 12 00 (Taric code: 0302 12 00*19), ex 0304 10 13 (Taric code: 0304 10 13*19), ex 0303 22 00 (Taric code: 0303 22 00*19) and ex 0304 20 13 (Taric code: 0304 20 13*19) originating in Norway and exported by the companies listed in the Annex I to this Regulation shall be definitively collected.
Article 3
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, 24 September 1998.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 17 June 1991 amending Decision 87/257/EEC as regards the list of establishments in the United States of America approved for the purpose of importing fresh meat into the Community (91/344/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/462/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon importation of bovine, ovine and caprine animals and swine, fresh meat or meat products from third countries (1), as last amended by Directive 91/69/EEC (2), and in particular Articles 4 (1) and 18 (1) thereof,
Whereas a list of establishments in the United States of America, approved for the purpose of importing fresh meat into the Community, was drawn up initially by Commission Decision 87/257/EEC (3), as last amended by Commission Decision of 13 December 1990, and that this list may be amended at any time in the light of the results of Community inspections carried out in the United States of America;
Whereas the latest inspection pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 72/462/EEC and Article 2 (1) of Commission Decision 86/474/EEC of 11 September 1986 on the implementation of the on-the-spot inspections to be carried out in respect of the importation of bovine animals and swine and fresh meat from non-member countries (4) has revealed that the situation in some establishments has been altered since the previous inspection;
Whereas fresh meat from these establishments will be able to be imported into the Community from the moment that the American authorities have given assurances on the measures taken to establish satisfactory conditions and after a Community inspection;
Whereas the list of establishments should therefore be amended;
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 Annex to Decision 87/257/EEC is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
The import of fresh bovine and porcine meat from the slaughterhouses and cutting premises listed in the Annex to this Decision will start on a date to be fixed in the future when a review of this Decision is undertaken; such a review will only be carried out after the Commission has received the necessary assurances and verified that the necessary improvements, currently in hand in these establishments, have been completed.
This Article does not apply to establishment No 7 A (Berliner & Marx, Edgar, WI).
Article 3
The present Decision shall be reviewed before 31 December 1991 at the latest.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 17 June 1991.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 2 February 2007
on emergency measures suspending imports from the Republic of Guinea of fishery products intended for human consumption
(notified under document number C(2007) 278)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2007/82/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (1), and in particular Article 53(1)(b) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
A recent inspection by Commission services in the Republic of Guinea has revealed serious hygiene shortcomings throughout the production chain of fishery products. These shortcomings include inadequate cold chain, use of non-potable water and poor sanitary conditions of vessels and establishments. Such deficiencies are likely to lead to the presence of harmful contamination in fishery products intended for human consumption, thus presenting a serious risk to consumer health.
(2)
The inspection visit has also revealed a lack of proper sanitary controls by the competent authorities in the Republic of Guinea, which exacerbates the situation.
(3)
It is therefore necessary to suspend imports of fishery products, as defined in Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) from the Republic of Guinea with immediate effect. Considering the seriousness of the shortcomings identified during the inspection, the suspension should also apply to fishery products that have been dispatched to the Community before this Decision takes effect but which have not yet been introduced into the Community.
(4)
This Decision is to be reviewed in the light of guarantees offered by the Republic of Guinea and on the basis of a positive outcome of a new inspection by the Commission services.
(5)
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
Scope
This Decision shall apply to all fishery products originating from the Republic of Guinea and intended for human consumption.
Article 2
Prohibition
Member States shall prohibit the import on their territory of the products referred to in Article 1.
That prohibition shall apply to all consignments of products received at border inspection posts in the Community whether or not the consignments were produced, stored or certified in the country of origin before this Decision takes effect.
Article 3
Charging of expenditure
All expenditure incurred in the application of this Decision shall be charged to the consignee or his agent.
Article 4
Compliance
Member States shall immediately inform the Commission of the measures they take to comply with this Decision.
Article 5
Addressees
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 February 2007.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 16 May 1984
concerning the proposal by the Italian Government to award aid to an engine and tractor manufacturer
(Only the Italian text is authentic)
(84/364/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 93 (2) thereof,
Having given notice to the parties to submit their comments as required by the above provision, and having regard to those comments,
Whereas:
I
By letter dated 6 September 1983 the Italian Government notified the Commission of its intention of awarding aid under Law No 675/77 to an engine and tractor manufacturer.
The firm in question planned to install a flexible manufacturing system which would be used initially to produce a new range of engines. The project costs involved building work and the purchase of numerically controlled machine tools and other equipment.
The new flexible production line, together with existing plant, would lead to a net increase in the firm's engine production capacity. The flexibility the investment would give the firm in adoptimg to market requirements would enable it to lower its overall profitability threshold and so improve its competitive position on the market. The new engine, which embodied numerous user improvements, had been developed amid considerable R & D competition between different firms and would give an advantage to the firm putting the new product on the market.
The project was estimated to cost a total of Lit 46 344 million and it was proposed to grant an 8,4 % interest subsidy on a five-year loan covering half that amount.
On a preliminary scrutiny the Commission considered that the award did not fulfil the eligibility conditions for aid under Law No 675/77, which the Commission had approved on 18 January 1983.
It therefore opened the procedure provided for in Article 93 (2) of the EEC Treaty and by letter dated 23 December 1983 gave the Italian Government notice to submit its comments.
II
The Italian Government replied to the Commission's letter opening the Article 93 (2) procedure by letter dated 9 February 1984. It argued that the project accorded with the objectives of the programme adopted by the Interministerial Industry Policy Committee (CIPI). The flexibility the investment would give to the production process held distinct advantages for the company's overall profitability and working conditions and the new product embodied a series of improvements for the user. The project also represented a major piece of investment for the company.
The governments of two Member States replied to the Commission's invitation to comment and took the view that the aid would affect inter-State trade and, in a scarcely growing market in which trade was important, was liable to distort competition to the detriment of their own producers.
One trade association and four individual firms from the industry also made submissions. They argued that the aid would be an unacceptable distortion of competition, since price was a major selling point in that market and the relief of part of the firm's investment costs would mean that it did not pass on all the normal costs in its final selling price.
The Italian Government acknowledged in its submission that the market in question was competitive and in a state of stagnation. The company's engine output had fallen by some 40 % between 1980 and 1983. In 1982 it had sold 75 % of the tractors it produced in the Community and 33 % in Member States other than Italy. It also manufactured industrial engines mainly for the Community market. Both in engines and tractors the firm was in direct competition with other Community firms and there was intra-Community trade in the products.
III
The new investment will consolidate the firm's general competitive position on the engine market and also in the tractor market since some of the engines it produces are fitted in its tractors.
The investment is one which is conducive to the firm's own development and in line with market trends and it would be in the firm's interest to carry it out in any case in order at least to maintain its competitive position in response to changing demand patterns.
The aid proposed by the Italian Government is therefore liable to affect trade between Member States and to distort or threaten to distort competition within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the EEC Treaty by favouring the firm in question or production of its type of goods.
Article 92 (1) of the EEC Treaty lays down the principle that aid having the features there described is incompatible with the common market. The exceptions from this principle defined in Article 92 (3) specify objectives in the Community interest transcending the interests of the aid recipient. These exceptions must be construed narrowly when any regional or industry aid scheme or any individual award under a general aid scheme is scrutinized. In particular, they may be applied only when the Commission is satisfied that the free play of market forces alone, without the aid, would not induce the prospective aid recipient to adopt a course of action contributing to attainment of one of the said objectives.
To apply the exceptions to cases not contributing to such an objective would be to give unfair advantages to certain Member States and allow trading conditions between Member States to be affected and competition to be distorted without any justification on grounds of Community interest.
In applying these principles in scrutiny of individual awards under general aid schemes, the Commission must satisfy itself that the aid is justified by the contribution the recipient is making to attainment of one of the objectives set out in Article 92 (3), and is necessary to that end. Where this cannot be demonstrated, and particularly where the investment would be undertaken in any case, it is clear that the aid does not contribute to attainment of the objectives specified in the exceptions but merely serves to bolster the financial position of the recipient firm.
The recipient in the present case cannot be said to be making such a contribution in return for the aid.
The Italian Government has been unable to give, or the Commission to discover, any justification for a finding that the aid in question falls within one of the categories of exceptions in Article 92 (3).
With regard to the exceptions provided for by Article 92 (3) (a) and (c) for aids which promote or facilitate the development of certain areas, the Treviglio area is not one where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment within the meaning of Article 92 (3) (a), nor has the Italian Government designated the area as in particular need of regional development so that it could qualify for the exception in Article 92 (3) (c).
As far as the exceptions in Article 92 (3) (b) are concerned, the investment is one which a firm would be led to undertake in any case by market forces and does not have the features of a 'project of common European interest' or of a project likely to 'remedy a serious disturbance in the economy' of a Member State, whose promotion justifies application of the exception to the principle laid down in Article 92 (3) (b), from the incompatibility of the aid laid down by Article 92 (1).
Finally, as for the exception in Article 92 (3) (c) for 'aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities', an examination of the situation of the industry in question shows it to be suffering from excess capacity caused by weak demand, whereas the proposed aid is to help replace part of an old production line with a flexible manufacturing system which, together with the part of the present plant which is to be retained, should lead to a net expansion of the firm's production capacity, even though this is not the primary purpose of the project.
The investment will also improve the firm's overall profitability by better adapting its production to market requirements. It therefore ought to be treated as a normal business expense, and the granting of aid for the project would place the firm at an advantage since its competitors will be forced by the market to undertake equivalent investment without aid. The fact that the project may be a large one for the firm does not alter this assessment of its nature and its potential effects on the market and on the firm's competitors. The considerable R & D effort that has gone into the new engine, in the face of competition from other firms, cannot of itself justify aid for investment in the production of the engine.
The proposed aid is therefore devoid of any compensating benefit for the Community as a whole and is liable to affect trade between Member States to the detriment of the common interest, since the recipient belongs to an industry which is fiercely competitive even within the Community. There can therefore be absolutely no justification for applying to it the exception in Article 92 (3) (c) to the principle that aids are incompatible with the common market.
The aid proposed by the Italian Government in this case does not therefore fulfil the conditions necessary for the application of one of the exceptions provided for in Article 92 (3) of the EEC Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The aid which the Italian Government proposes to grant to an angine and tractor manufacturer at Treviglio and which it notified to the Commission by letter dated 6 September 1983 is incompatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 92 of the EEC Treaty and must consequently not be granted.
Article 2
The Italian Government shall inform the Commission, within two months of the date of notification of this Decision, of the measures it has taken to comply therewith.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic.
Done at Brussels, 16 May 1984.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 1999/79/EC
of 27 July 1999
amending the third Commission Directive 72/199/EEC of 27 April 1972 establishing Community methods of analysis for the official control of feedingstuffs
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 70/373/EEC of 20 July 1970 on the introduction of Community methods of sampling and analysis for the official control of feedingstuffs(1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden(2), and in particular Article 2 thereof,
(1) Whereas Directive 70/373/EEC stipulates that official controls of feedingstuffs for the purpose of checking compliance with the requirements arising under the laws, regulations and administrative provisions governing their quality and composition must be carried out using Community methods of sampling and analysis;
(2) Whereas the third Commission Directive 72/199/EEC of 27 April 1972 establishing Community methods of analysis for the official control of feedingstuffs(3), as last amended by Commission Directive 98/54/EC(4), sets out methods of analysis for, inter alia, the determination of starch by polarimetric method;
(3) Whereas Commission Directive 86/174/EEC of 9 April 1986 fixing the method of calculation for the energy value of compound poultryfeed(5), stipulates that for the calculation of the energy value of compound poultry feed, in application of Article 10 Council Directive 79/373/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the marketing of compound feedingstuffs(6), as last amended by Commission Directive 1999/61/EC(7), the starch content must be determined by the polarimetric method as set out in Commission Directive 72/199/EEC;
(4) Whereas Council Directive 96/25/EC of 29 April 1996 on the circulation of feed materials, amending Directives 70/524/EEC, 74/63/EEC, 82/471/EEC and 93/74/EEC and repealing Directive 77/101/EEC(8) as last amended by Directive 1999/61/EC requires the quantities of some analytical constituents, including starch, to be compulsorily declared on some feed materials;
(5) Whereas in the light of the advances of scientific and technological knowledge, the polarimetric method is no longer appropriate to determine the starch content for other purposes than those of the above mentioned Commission and Council Directives; whereas therefore it is appropriate to limit the purpose and scope of the polarimetric method for the determination of starch;
(6) Whereas some feed materials give rise to interferences, whereby the polarimetric method for the determination of starch could yield false results; whereas it is therefore appropriate to mention these feed materials explicitly;
(7) Whereas the measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annex I to Commission Directive 72/199/EEC is hereby amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive.
Article 2
Member States shall bring into force, not later than 31 December 1999, the laws, regulations or administrative provisions necessary to comply with the provisions of this Directive. They shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
They shall apply the measures from 1 January 2000.
When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. Member States shall adopt the procedure for such reference.
Article 3
This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Article 4
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 July 1999.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 53/2000
of 10 January 2000
fixing the definitive aid for oranges for the 1998/1999 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 of 28 October 1996 introducing a Community aid scheme for producers of certain citrus fruits(1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 858/1999(2), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 establishes a processing threshold of 1189000 tonnes for oranges. Article 5(2) of that Regulation provides that, for each marketing year, any overrun of the processing threshold is to be assessed on the basis of the average quantity processed with benefit of the aid during the last three marketing years, including the current marketing year. Article 5(3) of that Regulation provides that where an overrun has been established, the aid fixed for the current marketing year in the Annex to that Regulation is to be reduced by 1 % per 11890 tonnes of the overrun;
(2) in accordance with Article 22(1)(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1169/97 of 26 June 1997 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 introducing a Community aid scheme for producers of certain citrus fruits(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1082/1999(4), the Member States have notified the Commission of the quantities of oranges delivered for processing in respect of the 1998/1999 marketing year under Regulation (EC) No 2202/96. On the basis of those figures and of the quantities processed with aid in the 1996/97 and 1997/98 marketing years, an overrun of the processing threshold of 381106 tonnes has been established. The aid for oranges laid down in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 for the 1998/1999 marketing year should accordingly be reduced by 32 %;
(3) the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for fruit and vegetables,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 1998/1999 marketing year, the aid for oranges laid down in the tables in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2202/96 is reduced by 32 %.
When the aid is paid, account shall be taken of advances paid in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1169/97.
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, 10 January 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 28 March 1989
authorizing the Kingdom of Belgium, the French Republic and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to permit temporarily the marketing of flax seed not complying with the requirements of Council Directive 69/208/EEC
(89/245/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Directive 69/208/EEC of 30 June 1969 on the marketing of seed of oil and fibre plants (1), as last amended by Directive 88/380/EEC (2), and in particular Article 16 thereof,
Having regard to the requests made by Belgium, France and the Netherlands,
Whereas in Belgium, France and the Netherlands the production of flax seed complying with the requirements of Directive 69/208/EEC has been insufficient in 1988 and is not adequate to supply the needs of these countries;
Whereas it has not been possible to cover these needs sufficiently with seed from Member States, or from third countries, meeting all the requirements laid down in the said Directive;
Whereas Belgium, France and the Netherlands should therefore be authorized to permit, for a period expiring on 31 May 1989, the marketing of seed of the abovementioned species subject to less stringent requirements;
Whereas it also appears desirable to authorize other Member States which are able to supply Belgium, France and the Netherlands with such seed not complying with the requirements of the said Directive to permit the marketing of such seed, provided that it is intended for those Member States;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Seeds and Propagating Material for Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Kingdom of Belgium, the French Republic and the Kingdom of the Netherlands are authorized to permit, for a period expiring on 31 may 1989, the marketing in their territories of a maximum of 500 tonnes of flax seed (Linum usitatissimum L.) of the categories 'certified seed of the first generation', 'certified seed of the second generation' and 'certified seed of the third generation' which does not satisfy the requirements laid down in Annex II to Directive 69/208/EEC with regard to the minimum germination capacity. This maximum applies to all three Member States taken together. The following requirements are satisfied:
(a) the germination capacity is at least 87 % of pure seed;
(b) the official label shall bear the following endorsements:
- 'Minimum germination capacity 87 %',
- 'Intended exclusively for Belgium, France or the Netherlands'.
Article 2
The other Member States are authorized to permit, subject to the conditions laid down in Article 1, the marketing in their territories of a maximum of 500 tonnes of flax seed, provided that such seed is intended exclusively for Belgium, France or the Netherlands. The official label shall bear the endorsement referred to in Article 1 (b).
Article 3
The Member States shall notify the Commission and the other Member States before 31 July 1989 of the quantities of seed certified and marketed in their territories pursuant to this Decision.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 March 1989.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 421/86
of 25 February 1986
amending Regulation (EEC) No 771/74 and Regulation (EEC) No 2188/84 by prescribing a Community method for the quantitative determination of tetrahydrocannabinol in hemp
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1308/70 of 29 June 1970 on the common organization of the market in flax and hemp (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1430/82 (2), and in particular Article 4 (5) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2059/84 of 16 July 1984 laying down general rules relating to the import restrictions on hemp and hemp seed and amending Regulation (EEC) No 619/71 in respect of hemp (3), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas Article 3 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 619/71 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2059/84, provides for the aid to be granted only for hemp grown from certified seed of varieties, the average tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of which has been found not to exceed certain acceptable limits; whereas Article 6a of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 771/74 of 29 March 1974 laying down detailed rules for granting aid for flax and hemp (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2188/84 (6), provides in particular that the THC level shall be recorded, and samples taken for that purpose, temporarily and under certain conditions, in accordance with a method to be selected by Member States; whereas, in view of experience gained, Regulation (EEC) No 771/74 should be amended accordingly by prescribing a single method for the Community;
Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2059/84 also lays down that raw hemp from third countries may be imported only if evidence is produced that its THC content does not exceed certain limits; whereas Article 2 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2188/84 provides that until such time as a Community method of analysis has been adopted for recording the weight of THC in relation to the weight of the representative sample taken for this purpose on import by the Member States, the latter shall apply a method of their choice; whereas, taking into account experience gained, the Community method should be prescribed and that Regulation amended accordingly;
Whereas the determination of D9 THC has proved to be the most suitable method of measuring the THC content of hemp since that substance is composed very largely of that particular natural isomer and it should therefore be considered as representative of its total THC content; whereas this method should therefore be adopted;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for flax and hemp,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 771/74 is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 6a is replaced by the following:
'Article 6a
The tetrahydrocannabinol level shall be ascertained, and samples taken for that purpose, using the single method valid for the entire Community set out in Annex C'.
2. The following Annex C is inserted:
'ANNEX C
COMMUNITY METHOD FOR THE QUANTITATIVE DETERMINATION OF D9 THC (TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL) IN CERTAIN VARIETIES OF HEMP
1. Purpose and scope
This method permits quantitative determination of D9 tetrahydrocannabinol (D9 THC) in certain varieties of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) for the purpose of checking that the conditions laid down in Article 3 paragraph 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 619/71 are fulfilled.
2. Principle
Quantitative determination of D9 THC by gas chromatography (GC) after extraction with a suitable solvent.
3 Apparatus.
- gas chromatography equipment with a flame ionization detector,
- glass column 2,50 m long and 3,2 mm in diameter (1,8") packed with a suitable support impregnated with a stationary phase phenyl-methyl-silicon (e.g. OV 17 at 3 %).
4. Sampling and reduction of sample
Sampling
In a standing crop of a given variety of hemp, take not less than 500 plants, preferably at different points buts not from the edges of the crop. Samples should be taken during the day after flowering has finished.
The pooled samples should be representative of the lot.
The plant material is then left to dry at ambient air temperature.
Reduction
Reduce the sample, obtained as described, to 500 stalks; the reduced sample should be representative of the original sample. Divide the reduced sample into two portions.
Send one portion to the laboratory which is to determine the D 9 THC content. Keep the other portion for counter-analysis if necessary.
5. Reagents
- petroleum ether (40/65 °), or a solvent of comparable polarity,
- tetrahydrocannabinol (D9 THC), pure for chromatographic purposes,
- solution of 0,1 % (w/v) androstene-3-17-dione in ethanol, pure for chromatographic purposes,.
6. Preparation of test sample
For the purposes of D9 THC determination, retain the upper third of the plants in the portion of sample received. Stems and seeds must be removed from the plant material retained.
Dry the material in an oven, without exceeding 40 °C, to obtain a constant weight.
7. Extraction
Reduce the material obtained as described in point 6 to a semi-fine powder (sieve of 1 000 meshes per cm2).
Take 2,0 g of well-mixed powder and extract with 30-40 ml petroleum ether (40-65 °C). Leave for 24 hours, then shake in a mechanical shaker for one hour, and then filter. The extraction process is carried out twice under the same conditions. Evaporate the petroleum ether solutions to dryness. Dissolve the residue in 10,0 ml of petroleum ether. The prepared extract is used for quantitative analysis by gas chromatography. 8. Quantitative analysis by gas chromatography
(a) Preparation of assay solutions
The extraction residue dissolved in 10,0 ml of petroleum ether is subjected to quantitative analysis to determine the D9 THC content. This is performed with the aid of an internal standard and calculation of the peak areas.
Evaporate to dryness 1,0 ml of the petroleum ether solution. Dissolve the residue in 2,0 ml of a solution of 0,1 % androstene-3-17-dione in ethanol (internal standard with a retention time distinctly higher than that of other cannabinoids, and in particular twice that of D9 THC).
calibration ranges
0,10, 0,25, 0,50, 1,0 and 1,5 mg of D9 THC in 1 ml of a solution of 0,1 % androstene-3-17-dione in ethanol.
(b) Experimental conditions
1.2 // Oven temperature // 240 °C. // Injector temperature // 280 °C. // Detector temperature // 270 °C. // Nitrogen flowrate: // 25 ml/min, // Hydrogen flowrate: // 25 ml/min, // Air flowrate: // 300 ml/min, // Volume injected: // 1 ml of the final ethanol solution.
The relative retention time of D9 THC is calculated in relation to the andostene.
9. Expression of the results
The result is expressed in g of D9 THC per 100 g of the laboratory sample dried to constant weight.
The result is subject to a tolerance of 0,03 g per 100 g.'
Article 2
Regulation (EEC) No 2188/84 is hereby amended as follows:
1. The last subparagraph of Article 2 (2) is replaced by the following:
'The weight of THC in relation to the weight of the sample shall be recorded using the single method valid for the entire Community set out in the Annex to this Regulation'.
2. The following Annex is inserted:
'ANNEX
COMMUNITY METHOD FOR THE QUANTITATIVE DETERMINATION OF D9 THC (TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL) IN HEMP
1. Purpose and scope
This method permits quantitative determination of D9 tetrahydrocannabinol (D9 THC) in raw hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) for the purpose of checking that the conditions laid down in Article 2 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2059/84 are fulfilled.
2. Principle
Quantitative determination of D9 THC by gas chromatography (GC) after extraction with a suitable solvent. 3. Apparatus
- gas chromatography equipment with a flame ionization detector
- glass column 2,50 m long and 3,2 mm in diameter (1,8") packed with a suitable support impregnated with 3 % stationary phase phenyl-methyl-silicon (e.g. OV 17 at 3 %).
4. Sampling and reduction of sample
Sampling
In a standing crop of a given variety of hemp, take not less than five spot samples each weighing not less than 1 000 g from different parts of the lot for inspection. The pooled samples should be representative of the lot.
Reduction
Reduce the sample, obtained as described, to 1 000 g; the reduced sample should be representative of the original sample. Moist material is dried in air. Divide the reduced sample into two portions.
Send one portion to the laboratory which is to determine the D 9 THC content. Keep the other portion for counter-analysis if necessary.
5. Reagents
- petroleum ether (40/65 °), or a solvent of comparable polarity,
- tetrahydrocannabinol (D9 THC), pure for chromatographic purposes,
- solution of 0,1 % (w/v) androstene-3-17-dione in ethanol, pure for chromatographic purposes.
6. Preparation of test sample
For the purposes of D9 THC determination, retain the upper third of the plants in the portion of sample received. If the third cannot be isolated, retain the entire plants. Stems and seeds must be removed from the plant material retained.
Dry the material in an oven, without exceeding 40 °C, to obtain a constant weight.
7. Extraction
Reduce the material obtained as described in point 6 to a semi-fine powder (sieve of 1 000 meshes per cm2).
Take 2,0 g of well-mixed powder and extract with 30-40 ml of petroleum ether (40-65 °C). Leave for 24 hours, then shake in a mechanical shaker for one hour, and then filter. The extraction process is carried out twice under the same conditions. Evaporate the petroleum ether solution to dryness. Dissolve the residue in 10,0 ml of petroleum ether. The prepared extract is used for quantitative analysis by gas chromatography.
8. Quantitative analysis by gas chromatography
(a) Preparation of assay solutions
The extraction residue dissolved in 10,0 ml of petroleum ether is subjected to quantitative analysis to determine the D9 THC content. This is performed with the aid of an internal standard and calculation of the peak areas. Evaporate to dryness 1,0 ml of the petroleum ether solution. Dissolve the residue in 2,0 ml of a solution of 0,1 % androstene-3-17-dione in ethanol (internal standard with a retention time distinctly higher than that of other cannabinoids, and in particular twice that of D9 THC).
Calibration ranges
0,10, 0,25, 0,50, 1,0 and 1,5 mg of D9 THC in 1 ml of a solution of 0,1 % androstene-3, 17-dione in ethanol.
(b) Experimental conditions
1.2 // Oven temperature // 240 °C // Injector temperature // 280 °C // Detector temperature // 270 °C. // Nitrogen flowrate: // 25 ml/min // Hydrogen flowrate: // 25 ml/min // Air flowrate: // 300 ml/min // Volume injected: // 1 ml of the final ethanol solution.
The relative retention time of D9 THC is calculated in relation to the andostene.
9. Expression of the results
The result is expressed in g of D9 THC per 100 g of the laboratory sample dried to constant weight.
The result is subject to a tolerance of 0,03 g per 100 g.'
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 July 1986.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 February 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 53/97 of 14 January 1997 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of polyester textured filament yarn originating in Malaysia
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), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
(1) In April 1995, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of polyester textured filament yarn originating in Malaysia, pursuant to Article 5 (9) of Council Regulation (EC) No 3283/94 (4), subsequently replaced by Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Basic Regulation`).
(2) The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged in December 1994 by the International Committee of Rayon and Synthetic Fibres (Cirfs), acting on behalf of Community producers representing allegedly a major proportion of the Community production of polyester textured filament yarn.
The complaint contained evidence of dumping and of material injury resulting therefrom; this evidence was considered sufficient to justify the opening of a proceeding.
(3) The Commission officially advised the producers, exporters and importers known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting country and the complainant, and gave the parties concerned the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing.
(4) The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned.
It received detailed information from the complaining Community producers.
Exporter's questionnaires were sent to 15 alleged producers in Malaysia according to the information supplied by Cirfs; however, only one producer/exporter in Malaysia cooperated in this proceeding.
25 importers known to the Commission were given the opportunity to submit information or to make their views known. Neither these nor other importers cooperated in this proceeding.
(5) The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed necessary for the purposes of a preliminary determination and carried out investigations at the premises of the following companies:
(a) Community producers
Rhône Poulenc (France)
Hoechst AG (Germany)
Montefibre Spa Enichem (Italy)
Akzo Fibres and Polymers Division Enka BV (Netherlands)
Nurel SA (Spain)
Exsa (United Kingdom)
Unifi (Ireland).
(b) Producer/exporter in the exporting country
Hualon Corporation (M) Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur
This cooperating company exported during the investigation period some 90 % of the total Malaysian exports of polyester textured filament yarn to the Community.
(6) The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1 January 1994 to 31 March 1995 (hereinafter referred to as ' the investigation period`).
B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE PRODUCT
1. Description of the product concerned
(7) The product covered by the complaint is polyester textured filament yarn (hereinafter referred to as 'PTY`), which falls under CN codes 5402 33 10 and 5402 33 90. It is directly derived from partially oriented polyester yarn (hereinafter referred to as 'POY`), and is used in both the weaving and the knitting sectors to make polyester or polyester/cotton fabrics.
There are different types of PTY, depending on the weight ('denier`), the number of filaments and the lustre. There are also different qualities, depending on the efficiency of the production process. However, no significant differences exist in the basic physical characteristics and uses of the different types and qualities of PTY. In these circumstances, all types of PTY are considered as one product for the purposes of this proceeding.
2. Like product
(8) The investigation showed that PTY sold on the domestic market of Malaysia has similar basic physical characteristics and uses to the PTY exported from that country to the Community. Similarly, the PTY manufactured by the Community industry and sold on the Community market has similar basic physical characteristics and uses when compared to that exported to the Community from Malaysia.
(9) Consequently, PTY sold on the respective domestic market of the exporting country, PTY exported from this country to the Community and PTY produced by the Community industry and sold in the Community market are considered 'like product`, within the meaning of Article 1 (4) of the Basic Regulation.
C. DUMPING
1. Normal value
(10) It was first examined whether the volume of sales of the product concerned by the sole cooperating Malaysian producer on the domestic market reached in total at least 5 % of the volume of the exports of the like product to the Community, a percentage which has consistently been considered to constitute sales in sufficient quantities to permit a proper comparison in accordance with Article 2 (2) of the Basic Regulation. The producer achieved a level in excess of this 5 % threshold.
(11) For each of the types sold on the domestic market and found to be identical or directly comparable to types sold for export to the Community, the Commission then established whether domestic sales per type were made in sufficient quantities.
(12) Domestic sales of each type were considered to have been made in sufficient quantities within the meaning of Article 2 (2) of the Basic Regulation where the volume of each type of PTY sold in Malaysia during the investigation period represented 5 % or more of the quantity of the comparable type of PTY sold for export to the Community.
(13) The Commission subsequently examined whether the domestic sales of each type of PTY could be considered to have been made in the ordinary course of trade, by looking at the proportion of profitable sales of each type in question.
(14) The methodology applied to assess the ordinary course of trade for domestic sales was as follows:
In cases where the volume of the type of PTY sold at a net sales price equal to or above the unit costs, as defined in Article 2 of the Basic Regulation, represented 80 % or more of the total sales volume of that type, the normal value was established as a weighted average of all domestic sales transactions of the type concerned during the investigation period, whether profitable or not.
In cases where the volume of the type of PTY sold at a net sales price equal to or above the unit costs represented less than 80 % of the total sales volume of that type, the normal value was established as a weighted average of profitable domestic sales transactions of the type concerned only, where these transactions were made in sufficient quantities.
As a result of the methodology set out above, normal value for all 20 types of PTY exported to the Community during the investigation period could be based on the domestic selling prices of comparable types of PTY.
2. Export prices
(15) Export prices were established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for the product concerned when sold for export from the exporting country to the Community, in accordance with Article 2 (8) of the Basic Regulation.
3. Comparison
(16) Normal value by product type was compared with the export price for the corresponding type, at an ex-works level and at the same level of trade. Normal value, established on a weighted average basis, was compared to a weighted average of prices of all export transactions to the Community, in accordance with Article 2 (11) of the Basic Regulation.
(17) For the purpose of a fair comparison, normal value and export price were adjusted in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 (10) of the Basic Regulation to take account of differences affecting price comparability.
(18) In the case of normal value, adjustments were made to take account of inland transport costs, insurance, handling and loading expenses and payment terms so as to bring the normal value to an ex-factory level.
(19) Adjustments for transport costs (inland and ocean), handling and ancillary expenses as well as payment terms and, where appropriate, commissions and insurance were made to export prices to arrive at an ex-factory level.
(20) Adjustments granted were limited to those claimed for which satisfactory evidence was submitted that the differences concerned affected prices and price comparability.
4. Dumping margin
(21) The comparison made as described under recital (16) above revealed the existence of dumping, the margin of dumping being equal to the amount by which the normal value exceeds the export price to the Community.
A weighted average dumping margin, expressed as a percentage of the free-at-Community-frontier price, customs duty unpaid, was established. For Hualon Corporation (M) Sdn. Bhd., the sole cooperating producer in Malaysia, this margin amounts to 16,4 %.
(22) In the case of producers in Malaysia which neither replied to the Commission's questionnaire nor otherwise made themselves known, and which thus failed to cooperate in the investigation, the Commission considered that the dumping margin should be determined on the basis of the facts available in accordance with Article 18 (1) of the Basic Regulation. In this connection, it was considered that the most reasonable facts were those established during the investigation, and that in order to avoid giving a premium for non-cooperation, the dumping margin attributable to those producers should be based on the highest dumping margin found for a type of PTY most representative, in terms of volume and quality, of the types of PTY exported by the sole cooperating Malaysian producer. The dumping margin thereby established for this type, representing some 20 % of the export volume by Hualon Corporation (M) Sdn. Bhd. to the Community, amounts to 32,5 %, and should be attributed to the producers in Malaysia which failed to cooperate in the investigation.
D. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY
(23) Not all the producers of PTY in the Community cooperated in the investigation, though no producer expressed opposition to the complaint. Accordingly, in order to establish the total PTY production in the Community, data obtained from the responses to the questionnaires, from Eurostat figures and from Cirfs concerning the output of the non-cooperating producers were used. On this basis, the total PTY annual output in the Community during the investigation period was estimated at about 193 000 tonnes, of which 97 000 tonnes were produced by the Community producers supporting the complaint which were not related to exporters of the allegedly dumped product and which cooperated during the proceeding.
(24) As in the review proceeding of anti-dumping measures concerning imports of PTY from Turkey and Taiwan (5) as well as in the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of PTY from India, Indonesia and Thailand (6), the Commission considered whether one company, Exsa, producing PTY in the Community, which is a subsidiary of an exporting company located in Turkey, should, in this proceeding too, be excluded from the definition of the Community industry, pursuant to Article 4 (1) (a) of the Basic Regulation.
(25) In this connection, it should be recalled that Exsa purchased the essential element for the PTY production, POY, from its parent company which was found to be exporting POY to the Community market at dumped prices. Exsa processed the POY into PTY which was mainly sold on the Community market. In addition, the Turkish parent company exported PTA at dumped prices to the Community (7). For these reasons, Exsa was excluded from the definition of the Community PTY industry in both those proceedings.
(26) In the present proceeding, Exsa is not related to any of the Malaysian exporters concerned. However, in view of the fact that Exsa has produced PTY from POY obtained from its parent company which was found to be dumping, the Commission took the view that to include the data relating to PTY produced by this company would distort the assessment of the situation of the Community industry and would thus make it unreliable. Accordingly, Exsa was also excluded in this proceeding from the definition of the Community industry.
(27) On this basis, the share of the total Community production held by the complainant producers during the investigation period was about 50 %. Therefore, the complainants represent a major proportion of the total Community production of the product concerned within the meaning of Article 4 (1) of the Basic Regulation. For the remainder of this document, the term 'Community industry` refers only to the complaining companies of the Community industry.
E. INJURY
(28) The injury assessment made by the Commission was based on the relevant economic indicators covering the period January 1991 to March 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'period under consideration`). This assessment was based on information available for the fifteen Member States.
1. Community consumption of PTY
(29) The Commission determined that the total apparent Community consumption of PTY has, with the exception of 1993, increased during the period under consideration. Thus, it went from around 236 000 tonnes in 1991, to around 243 000 tonnes in 1992 and fell back to around 227 000 tonnes in 1993, to increase again to around 262 000 tonnes in 1994. Total Community consumption during the investigation period (15 months) amounts to around 330 000 tonnes. Overall, consumption of PTY in the Community increased by some 11 % from 1991 to 1994, and this trend seems to have continued in 1995.
2. Exporters' behaviour in the Community market
(a) Volume and market share of the dumped imports
(30) At the beginning of the period under consideration, no exports of PTY originating in Malaysia were registered in the Community market (1991). Malaysian exports increased from 0 tonnes in 1991 to around 1 100 tonnes in 1992 (0,4 % market share), to around 2 400 tonnes in 1993 (1,0 % market share), and to around 7 900 during 1994 (3,0 % market share). During the investigation period (see recital (6)), Malaysian exports amounted to around 9 000 tonnes representing, again, a 3,0 % market share (see recital (29)).
(b) Prices of the dumped imports
(31) In order to assess the pricing of the imports concerned, PTY types manufactured and sold by the Community producers and those exported from Malaysia to the Community have been divided into comparable product groups, depending on the denier and filament number of the types. The Commission then compared the weighted average Community industry's selling price of each group with the weighted average price of the comparable group of PTY exported, at the same level of trade. On this basis, undercutting margins, obtained per individual group, were then weighted in order to reach one overall margin.
The Community industry's selling prices were established on an ex-works basis and the comparable export prices at a free-at-Community-frontier stage, duty paid.
(32) This comparison showed undercutting margins constantly during the investigation period, ranging from 5 % to 43 %, with an overall weighted average margin of 18,2 %.
3. Situation of the Community industry
(a) Production, production capacity and capacity utilization(33) The Community industry's production of PTY dropped from around 104 000 tonnes in 1991 to around 92 000 tonnes in 1993, and then recovered to around 95 000 tonnes in 1994. During the investigation period (15 months), the production of the Community industry reached around 121 000 tonnes (representing around 97 000 tonnes on an annual basis).
It should be noted that the actual level of production, although increasing since 1994, was during the investigation period still nearly 7 % lower than the output level in 1991, notwithstanding an increase of 11 % in Community consumption of PTY over the same period.
(34) The PTY production capacity of the Community industry developed from 114 000 tonnes in 1991, to 118 000 tonnes in 1992, to 122 000 tonnes in 1993, and fell back to 107 000 tonnes in 1994. During the investigation period (15 months) the capacity of the Community industry amounted to 135 925 tonnes (representing 108 740 tonnes on an annual basis).
The increase in PTY production capacity from 1991 to 1993 is mainly the result of the development of an Irish company, Unifi, related to a US company. It is noted that this production facility merely replaced imports of POY from the USA.
(35) Capacity utilization of the Community industry steadily declined from 91 % in 1991 to 76 % in 1993 and then recovered to 89 % during the investigation period, mainly as a result of the reduction in production capacity which took place in 1994.
(b) Sales volume and market share
(36) The quantity of PTY sold in the Community by the Community industry moved as follows: 87 000 tonnes in 1991, 91 000 tonnes in 1992, 87 000 tonnes in 1993, 89 000 tonnes in 1994, and reached around 114 000 tonnes during the investigation period (15 months), representing 87 000 tonnes on an annual basis, in the context of growing demand.
(37) The Community industry's market share developed as follows: 37,2 % in 1991, 37,7 % in 1992, 38,7 % in 1993, 34,0 % in 1994, and 34,5 % for the investigation period. This decline in the market share is the result of the relative stability of sales volume by the Community industry in an expanding market, and has to be seen in the light of the expansion of a producer in the period 1992 to 1993 (see recital (34)). Had the sales of this producer not been taken into account, the market share of the remaining producers making up the Community industry would have decreased even more substantially.
(c) Price movements
(38) Prices for PTY, charged by the Community industry on the Community market, decreased steadily from 1991 onwards. On average this decrease amounted to 16 % during the investigation period when compared to the prices of the Community industry in 1991, and despite a price increase in raw materials which occurred at the end of the investigation period (see also recitals (58) and (59)).
(d) Profitability
(39) It was found that, overall and from 1992 onwards, the Community PTY industry has recorded deteriorating financial results. The profitable situation in 1991 (+ 11,2 %) sharply shrank to an unsatisfactory profit margin of 2,1 % in 1992, and turned into losses as from 1993 (- 9,4 %). Since then, all Community producers have continued to suffer heavy losses, or decreasing profitability, notwithstanding a certain reduction on the overall losses incurred.
(e) Employment and investment
(40) Although the production of PTY is not labour intensive, there has been a steady curtailment in employment by the Community industry.
As a result of insufficient profitability, investments by the Community industry were reduced to a level which in many cases jeopardizes the efficiency of the production process.
4. Conclusion on injury
(41) On the basis of the unsatisfactory movement of the economic indicators as outlined above, which consists mainly in a decline in actual production, in production capacity and in market share, as well as a price decrease and considerable financial losses, it is provisionally concluded that the Community industry has suffered material injury.
F. CAUSATION OF INJURY
1. Causal link between dumped imports and injury
(42) Dumped imports of PTY originating in Malaysia have been made at low prices as compared to the prices of the Community industry (see recitals (30) (31) and (32)). This finding is particularly relevant as the PTY market is highly transparent, with the effect that pricing behaviour of particular market participants has an effect on the prices that other market participants can obtain; this conclusion is underlined by the fact that the dumped imports concerned have been sold through the same channels and to the same kinds of customers as sales from the Community industry. Furthermore, the investigation has established that these imports have gained a significant share of the Community market during the period under consideration. During the same period, the Community industry has suffered a loss in market share despite the increase recorded in Community consumption of PTY, as well as substantial financial losses.
2. Effect of other facts
(43) In order to ensure that injury suffered by the Community industry due to other factors is not attributed to the dumped imports, the Commission examined further these other factors. This examination was all the more warranted as the profitability of the Community industry had already started to deteriorate in 1992, whereas imports from Malaysia showed the most significant increase in 1994.
(a) Imports from other countries
- Taiwan and Turkey
(44) Anti-dumping measures were introduced in 1988 on imports of PTY originating in Turkey and Taiwan and they remain in force, duly amended as the result of a review investigation that shows that the expiry of the measures would lead to a recurrence of injury to the Community industry.
- India, Indonesia and Thailand
(45) Imports into the Community of PTY from India, Indonesia and Thailand are also subject to an anti-dumping proceeding. The findings made in the investigation showed that, while Indian imports were negligible, imports from Indonesia and Thailand have increased significantly at dumped prices which undercut Community producers' prices. It was therefore concluded that imports from Indonesia and Thailand contributed materially to the injurious situation of the Community industry and that anti-dumping measures needed to be imposed on those imports.
- USA, South Africa and Slovakia
(46) Imports from these countries were claimed to have influenced the situation of the Community industry and it was alleged that the complaint was discriminatory as a number of countries had not been included.
(47) In this respect, the investigation confirmed that imports of PTY from the USA during the period under consideration had increased reaching a peak level in 1992. Since then, though still significant (4,9 % absolute market share during the investigation period), they dropped consistently, both in volume (- 28 % between 1992 and the investigation period) and in market share (- 21 % between 1992 and the investigation period). Furthermore, as far as import prices are concerned, the information available to the Commission based on Eurostat figures does not specify the types of PTY imported from the USA. Consequently, no conclusion on prices can be drawn, although it should also be noted that the Commission did not have any indication whatsoever that imports of PTY from the USA might have been made at dumped prices.
As to imports of PTY from South Africa, they remained stable at a negligible level of ± 1 % market share. For these imports, a conclusion on prices cannot be drawn in view of the lack of information provided in Eurostat data on the individual types of PTY imported from South Africa, although the imports were made during the investigation period at prices which were, on average, 24 % higher than those of imports originating in Malaysia.
For these reasons, it is concluded that those imports could not have contributed to the deteriorating economic situation of the Community industry.
(48) As far as Slovakia is concerned, imports of PTY into the Community from this country achieved a Community market share in the investigation period of 3,3 %. However, it appeared that since 1993, owing to an investment of a Community producer in Slovakia, a major proportion of imports into the Community originating in that country was made at transfer prices between related parties. It can reasonably be assumed that such imports cannot have been made by the Community producer in question with the intention of adversely affecting its own profitability, and the investigation has shown that the company concerned belonging to the Community industry has seen a deterioration of its financial results. Consequently, it is concluded that the Slovakian imports cannot have had a meaningful impact on the situation of the Community industry.
(b) Other Community producer
(49) Since the Community producers supporting the complaint represent only about 50 % of the total Community production of PTY, it was considered necessary to examine the behaviour of the other Community producers of PTY in the Community and their possible impact on the situation of the complainants.
(50) The estimated production capacity of the other PTY producers in the Community appears to have remained stable over the last four years. The same applies to their actual production. As to the market share of these other Community producers, it showed during the investigation period a slight decrease as against that of the Community industry.
(51) Therefore, it does not appear that these producers' behaviour could have a negative impact on the situation of the Community industry other than that resulting from normal competition.
(c) Exports of the Community industry
(52) The Malaysian exporter argued that the critical situation alleged by the Community industry on the Community market can be explained by the fact that Community exports have increased since 1991.
(53) This argument is of doubtful logic. Independently of the fact that only non-complaining Community producers were able to increase their exports (export sales of the complaining industry decreased as from 1991), there are no rational grounds for concluding that a strong export performance is a reason for poor results on the domestic market. The claim by the Malaysian exporter, therefore, appears unfounded.
(d) Exchange rates and market conditions
(54) The Malaysian exporter claimed that favourable exchange rates of the US dollar against the ecu have fostered Malaysian exports to the Community.
(55) The fact that the exchange rate of the dollar against the ecu might have rendered the imported PTY invoiced in US dollars more attractive to the importers does not detract from the fact that the product was exported at dumped prices throughout the entire period. While the exchange rate fluctuations may have reinforced the injurious effect to the Malaysian imports, they cannot explain nor justify the considerable price undercutting exercised by these imports during the investigation period (see recital (32)).
(56) The Malaysian exporter also alleged that labour costs are much higher in the Community than in Malaysia, which leads to much higher prices of Community produced PTY than of Malaysian-produced PTY.
(57) It should be noted that labour in this type of industry constitutes a minor part of the production costs. The difference in price of the dumped imported yarn and the price of the yarn produced by the Community industry cannot be accounted for to any significant extent by differences in labour costs.
(58) The producer in Malaysia claimed that the imposition of anti-dumping measures would be unjustified in the present circumstances given the dramatic increase in their export prices since the end of 1994 which was more than sufficient to remove any alleged dumping or injury during the investigation period.
(59) This price increase is mainly the result of a cost increase due to higher-priced raw materials and therefore merely reflecting an overall world-wide general increase in prices. As previously stated, undercutting margins were also found throughout the investigation period (see recital (32)), and imports continued to be made at dumped prices.
(60) Furthermore, it should be recalled that it is the Commission's standard practice in anti-dumping proceedings to investigate facts and figures relating to a precise period of investigation. Events occurring after the investigation period, in this case after March 1995, cannot normally be taken into consideration for the purpose of dumping and injury calculations, as the need to verify these events would perpetuate an investigation almost indefinitely. It would also allow exporters to manipulate the results by short-lived price increase after the initiation of the anti-dumping proceeding. In any event, on the basis of the information obtained for the investigation period, the price increase, if maintained after the investigation period, would still be at injurious dumping levels.
(e) Recession
(61) The Malaysian producer argued that a recession was a major factor having caused injury to the Community producer.
(62) In this respect it has to be noted that the development of the apparent Community consumption described in recital (29) above does not reflect any recession in the PTY market.
3. Conclusions on causation of injury
(63) The surge of Malaysian imports, which were consistently sold during the investigation period at low, dumped prices, undercutting Community producers' prices, has had a particularly destabilizing impact on the Community industry, which experienced a decline in production, market share and prices, as well as substantial financial losses. Like the PTY imports from Taiwan, Turkey, Indonesia and Thailand, which are subject to anti-dumping proceedings, the dumped imports from Malaysia, taken in isolation, must, in these circumstances, be considered to have caused material injury to the Community industry.
G. COMMUNITY INTEREST
1. General considerations
(64) A determination as to whether the Community interest calls for intervention should be based on an appraisal of all the various interests taken as a whole, including those of producers, users and consumers in the Community. In such an examination, the need to eliminate the trade-distorting effects of injurious dumping and to restore effective competition shall be given special consideration while assessing the situation in the Community with and without the imposition of anti-dumping measures.
2. Interest of the Community industry and impact on competition
(65) The investigation has established that the Community industry is facing an injurious situation in the form of an overall decrease in production, market share and selling prices, which together have led to substantial financial losses. In addition, it has had to reduce the number of employees.
Restoring a situation in which the imports concerned will be made at undumped prices should prevent the further deterioration of the situation of the Community industry, which is in danger of becoming uncompetitive given the nature of the injury suffered and given the opportunities for the Community industry to increase its market position. Competitiveness in this sector is largely dependent on the capacity for regular modernization of the production equipment, an investment which may become problematic for the Community industry in view of its precarious financial situation (see also recitals (39) and (40)).
(66) When examining the effect on competition of possible anti-dumping measures in the present case, account has to be taken of the fact that the Community PTY industry held a market share of only around 35 % during the investigation period. In this connection, the following considerations appear relevant.
(67) The imposition of anti-dumping measures could affect the price levels of the Malaysian exporters in the Community and may subsequently have some influence on the relative competitiveness of their products. However, competition on the Community market cannot be expected to be reduced in any significant way as a consequence of such measures. On the contrary, the removal of the unfair advantages gained by the dumping practices is designed to place the Community industry, and possibly those producers in third countries selling to the Community at fair prices, in a position to compete in the Community market with the dumped imports on equal terms, and thus to help to maintain the availability of a wide choice of PTY sources.
(68) It has also to be recalled that the Community industry has been affected by dumped imports from other third countries, namely Taiwan, Turkey, Thailand and Indonesia, which are currently subject to anti-dumping measures or for which measures have been proposed. These countries would be treated in a discriminatory manner, and the effectiveness of the measures would be undermined, if no action is taken to eliminate the injurious effects of dumped imports from Malaysia.
3. Other specific interests involved
(69) The effects of imposing anti-dumping measures on dumped imports of PTY from Malaysia in relation to the specific interests of parties other than the Community industry, including the processing industry, have also to be considered.
(70) Though no arguments were submitted by users of PTY in the Community with regard to the impact of an increase in the price of PTY, the Commission has analysed this aspect and has come to the conclusion that the anti-dumping duties proposed can be considered a minor factor in the global cost structure of the textile industry: the cost of PTY imported from Malaysia accounts for only 14 % of the Community selling price of polyester dyed filament fabric. With a 16,4 % anti-dumping duty, the maximum impact would be 2,3 % on polyester dyed filament fabric.
4. Conclusion on Community interest
(71) Having examined the various interests involved, the Commission concludes that to leave the Community PTY industry suffering material injury, as especially demonstrated by declining production and market share, as well as by financial losses, without protection against the dumped imports concerned, would accelerate the deterioration of that industry and would therefore not be in the interest of the Community. It is furthermore considered necessary to assure a non-discriminatory treatment between dumped imports of PTY from Malaysia and from other third countries.
(72) In these circumstances, no compelling reasons for not imposing anti-dumping measures were found, and it is concluded that the Community interest calls for the imposition of anti-dumping measures.
H. DUTY
(73) Based on the provisional findings made during the investigation, it is considered that anti-dumping measures should be established in such a way as to allow the Community industry to obtain the reasonable profit it has been deprived of through the injurious effects of the dumped imports. To this end, a provisional anti-dumping duty in the form of an ad valorem duty should be imposed.
(74) For the purpose of establishing the level of the provisional duty, account was taken of the level of dumping found and the amount of duty necessary to eliminate the injury sustained by the Community industry.
(75) When calculating the amount of duty adequate to remedy the injury suffered by the Community industry, the Commission had to consider that injury has manifested itself mainly in the form of a loss of market share and worsening financial results due to depressed prices resulting from price undercutting. The removal of such injury requires that the measures taken allow the Community industry to realize sales on the basis of prices at a non-injurious level.
(76) In this respect, the Commission had calculated, at an ex-factory level, the price level considered adequate to remove the injury on the basis of the weighted average cost of production of the Community industry, plus a profit of 6 % considered reasonable for guaranteeing the industry productive investment on a long-term basis. This injury elimination level has then be compared to import prices on a free-at-Community-frontier basis, duty paid.
(77) Since the injury margin thus established exceeds, for the sole Malaysian cooperating exporter, the dumping margin found, the duties should be based on the dumping margin pursuant to Article 7 (2) of the Basic Regulation.
(78) In establishing the level of provisional duty to be imposed in respect of producers in the exporting country concerned which neither replied to the Commission's questionnaire nor otherwise made themselves known, the Commission considered it appropriate, for the reasons outlined in recital (22), to establish the level of provisional anti-dumping duty at the dumping margin provisionally used in that recital for imports originating in Malaysia.
I. RIGHTS OF INTERESTED PARTIES
(79) In the interests of sound administration, a period should be fixed within which the parties concerned may make their views known in writing and request a hearing. Furthermore, it should be stated that all findings made for the purpose of this Regulation are provisional and may have to be reconsidered for the purpose of any definitive duty which the Commission may propose,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of polyester textured filament yarn falling within CN codes 5402 33 10 and 5402 33 90, and originating in Malaysia.
2. The rate of duty applicable to the net free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, shall be as follows:
TABLE
3. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
4. The release for free circulation in the Community of the products referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provision of a security, equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty.
Article 2
Without prejudice to Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the parties concerned may make known their views in writing and apply to be heard orally by the Commission within one month of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Article 3
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, 14 January 1997.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1151/2004
of 23 June 2004
on the issue of import licences for garlic imported under the autonomous tariff quota opened by Regulation (EC) No 1077/2004
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1077/2004 of 7 June 2004 opening and providing for the administration of an autonomous tariff quota for garlic (1), and in particular Article 6(3) thereof,
Whereas:
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Applications for import licences made by traditional importers pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1077/2004 and submitted to the Commission by the Member States on 17 and 18 June 2004 shall be issued for 3,143 % of the quantity applied for.
2. Applications for import licences made by new importers pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1077/2004 and submitted to the Commission by the Member States on 17 and 18 June 2004 shall be issued for 1,061 % of the quantity applied for.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 24 June 2004.
It shall apply until 31 December 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 June 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 2 February 2005
as regards transitional provisions concerning the introduction and the storage period for consignments of certain products of animal origin in customs warehouses in the Community
(notified under document number C(2005) 192)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2005/93/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to 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 (1), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Directive 2002/99/EC provides that Member States are to take measures to ensure that as from 1 January 2005, products of animal origin intended for human consumption, are introduced from third countries only if they comply with the rules laid down in that Directive.
(2)
Council Directive 97/78/EC of 18 December 1997 laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (2), lays down requirements for veterinary checks on consignments of certain products of animal origin coming from a third country and provides, inter alia, for the storage in customs warehouses of products which do not comply with Community animal health import conditions.
(3)
Directive 2002/99/EC also provides for the establishment of animal health rules and certificates for products in transit immediately or after storage. Accordingly, such rules and certificates for consignments of meat, including game and poultry, and meat products, meat preparations and milk and milk products for human consumption either destined for a third country or to supply cross border means of sea transport whether by transit immediately or after storage are laid down in Council Decision 79/542/EEC (3) and Commission Decisions 94/984/EC (4), 97/221/EC (5), 2000/572/EC (6), 2000/585/EC (7), 2000/609/EC (8), 2003/779/EC (9), and 2004/438/EC (10) (the relevant Community acts).
(4)
Therefore, consignments of products of animal origin introduced into the Community for storage in customs warehouses before 1 January 2005 and which do not comply with the relevant Community acts should be dealt with in a harmonised and transparent way in order to avoid unnecessary problems for the businesses involved whilst ensuring that there is a final fixed end date for such products to be retained in the Community.
(5)
For that reason, a transitional period of 12 months should be laid down for businesses to dispose of those products introduced into customs warehouses before 1 January 2005.
(6)
It is appropriate to ensure that from 1 January 2006, any such products still stored in customs warehouses in the Community that do not comply with the relevant Community acts should be destroyed under the control of the competent authority. All costs of such procedure should be chargeable to the owner of the consignment.
(7)
For animal health reasons, it is necessary for this Decision to apply from 1 January 2005.
(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 ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Until 31 December 2005, consignments of products falling within the scope of Decisions 79/542/EEC, 94/984/EC, 97/221/EC, 2000/572/EC, 2000/585/EC, 2000/609/EC, 2003/779/EC and 2004/438/EC and which were introduced before 1 January 2005 into customs warehouses, approved in accordance with Article 12(4)(b) of Directive 97/78/EC, shall be allowed to leave the warehouses where they are stored to be delivered either in whole or in part to their destination as provided for in Article 12(8) or Article 13(2)(a) of Directive 97/78/EC, without being accompanied by the appropriate animal health certificate as provided for in the relevant Community acts.
Article 2
From 1 January 2006, any such consignments, as referred to in Article 1, remaining in storage shall be destroyed under the control of the competent authority.
All costs of such destruction shall be chargeable to the owner of the consignment.
Article 3
This Decision shall apply from the date of notification.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 February 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 131/2005
of 27 January 2005
fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to certain milk 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 (EC) No 1255/1999 of 15 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 31(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products listed in Article 1(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g) of that Regulation and 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 criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (2), 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 II to Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999.
(3)
In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000, the rate of the refund per 100 kg for each of the basic products in question must be fixed for each month.
(4)
However in the case of certain milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, there is a danger that, if high refund rates are fixed in advance, the commitments entered into in relation to those refunds may be jeopardised. In order to avert that danger, it is therefore necessary to take appropriate precautionary measures, but without precluding the conclusion of long-term contracts. The fixing of specific refund rates for the advance fixing of refunds in respect of those products should enable those two objectives to be met.
(5)
Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 provides that, when the rate of the refund is being fixed, account should be taken, where necessary, of production refunds, aids or other measures having equivalent effect applicable in all Member States in accordance with the Regulation on the common organisation of the market in the product in question to the basic products listed in Annex A to Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 or to assimilated products.
(6)
Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides for the payment of aid for Community-produced skimmed milk processed into casein if such milk and the casein manufactured from it fulfil certain conditions.
(7)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2571/97 of 15 December 1997 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the granting of aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice-cream and other foodstuffs (3), lays down that butter and cream at reduced prices should be made available to industries which manufacture certain goods.
(8)
In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1676/2004 of 24 September 2004 adopting autonomous and transitional measures concerning the importation of certain processed agricultural products originating in Bulgaria and the exportation of certain processed agricultural products to Bulgaria (4) with effect from 1 October 2004, processed agricultural products not listed in Annex I to the Treaty which are exported to Bulgaria are not eligible for export refunds.
(9)
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
The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products listed in Annex A to Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 and in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999, and exported in the form of goods listed in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 shall be fixed as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
By way of derogation from Article 1 and with effect from 1 October 2004, the rates set out in the Annex are not applicable to goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty when exported to Bulgaria.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 28 January 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 January 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 95/2002
of 18 January 2002
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2670/81 laying down detailed implementing rules in respect of sugar production in excess of the quota
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), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Regulations (EC) No 1453/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural products for the Azores and Madeira and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (Poseima)(2) and (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) lay down new arrangements to remedy the remoteness, insularity and outermost location of these regions.
(2) The detailed rules for implementing the specific supply arrangements for the outermost regions introduced by Council Regulations (EC) No 1452/2001(4), (EC) No 1453/2001 and (EC) No 1454/2001 laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 20/2002(5), provide, among others, for the continuation of specific provisions relating to traditional trade flows with the rest of the Community, in particular as regards deliveries of C white sugar and C raw sugar within the meaning of Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001. To ensure a standardised period of application of this Regulation and Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001, it should be specified that the specific provisions set out in Article 1(1a) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2670/81 of 14 September 1981 laying down detailed implementing rules in respect of sugar production in excess of the quota(6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1148/98(7), apply during the period laid down in Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001.
(3) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The text of Article 1(1a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2670/81 is hereby replaced by the following: "1a. During the period referred to in Article 10(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001(8), notwithstanding paragraph 1(a), (b) and (d), where C sugar is imported into the Canary Islands or into Madeira in the form of white sugar falling within CN code 1701 or into the Azores in the form of raw sugar falling within CN code 1701 12 10 under the scheme of exemption from import duties provided for in Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001(9) or Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1454/2001(10), it shall be regarded as being exported to a third country within the meaning of Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 and originating in that third country for the purposes of the application of the said scheme."
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 January 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 January 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 92/28/EEC of 31 March 1992 on the advertising of medicinal products for human use
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 the proposal from the Commission(1) ,
In cooperation with the European Parliament(2) ,
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(3) ,
Whereas Directive 84/450/EEC(4) harmonized the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising; whereas this Directive is without prejudice to the application of measures adopted pursuant to that Directive;
Whereas all Member States have adopted further specific measures concerning the advertising of medicinal products; whereas there are disparities between these measures; whereas these disparities are likely to have an impact on the establishment and functioning of the internal market, since advertising disseminated in one Member State is likely to have effects in other Member States;
Whereas Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities(5) prohibits the television advertising of medicinal products which are available only on medical prescription in the Member State within whose jurisdiction the television broadcaster is located; whereas this principle should be made of general application by extending it to other media;
Whereas advertising to the general public, even of non-prescription medicinal products, could affect public health, were it to be excessive and ill-considered; whereas advertising of medicinal products to the general public, where it is permitted, ought therefore to satisfy certain essential criteria which ought to be defined;
Whereas, furthermore, distribution of samples free of charge to the general public for promotional ends must be prohibited;
Whereas the advertising of medicinal products to persons qualified to prescribe or supply them contributes to the information available to such persons; whereas, nevertheless, this advertising should be subject to strict conditions and effective monitoring, referring in particular to the work carried out within the framework of the Council of Europe;
Whereas medical sales representatives have an important role in the promotion of medicinal products; whereas, therefore, certain obligations should be imposed upon them, in particular the obligation to supply the person visited with a summary of product characteristics;
Whereas persons qualified to prescribe medicinal products must be able to carry out these functions objectively without being influenced by direct or indirect financial inducements;
Whereas it should be possible within certain restrictive conditions to provide samples of medicinal products free of charge to persons qualified to prescribe or supply them so that they can familiarize themselves with new products and acquire experience in dealing with them;
Whereas persons qualified to prescribe or supply medicinal products must have access to a neutral, objective source of information about products available on the market; whereas it is nevertheless for the Member States to take all measures necessary to this end, in the light of their own particular situation;
Whereas advertising of medicinal products should be subject to effective, adequate monitoring; whereas reference in this regard should be made to the monitoring mechanisms set up by Directive 84/450/EEC;
Whereas each undertaking which manufactures or imports medicinal products should set up a mechanism to ensure that all information supplied about a medicinal product conforms with the approved conditions of use,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
CHAPTER I Scope, definitions and general principles
Article 1
1. This Directive concerns the advertising in the Community of medicinal products for human use covered by Chapters II to V of Council Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products(6) .
2. For the purposes of this Directive:
- the definitions of the name of the medicinal product and of the common name shall be those laid down in Article 1 of Directive 92/27/EEC(7) ;
- the summary of product characteristics shall be the summary approved by the competent authority which granted the marketing authorization in accordance with Article 4b of Directive 65/65/EEC.
3. For the purposes of this Directive, advertising of medicinal products shall include any form of door-to-door information, canvassing activity or inducement designed to promote the prescription, supply, sale or consumption of medicinal products; it shall include in particular:
- the advertising of medicinal products to the general public,
- advertising of medicinal products to persons qualified to prescribe or supply them,
- visits by medical sales representatives to persons qualified to prescribe medicinal products,
- the supply of samples,
- the provision of inducements to prescribe or supply medicinal products by the gift, offer or promise of any benefit or bonus, whether in money or in kind, except when their intrinsic value is minimal,
- sponsorship of promotional meetings attended by persons qualified to prescribe or supply medicinal products,
- sponsorship of scientific congresses attended by persons qualified to prescribe or supply medicinal products and in particular payment of their travelling and accommodation expenses in connection therewith.
4. The following are not covered by this Directive:
- the labelling of medicinal products and the accompanying package leaflets, which are subject to the provisions of Directive 92/27/EEC;
- correspondence, possibly accompanied by material of a non-promotional nature, needed to answer a specific question about a particular medicinal product;
- factual, informative announcements and reference material relating, for example, to pack changes, adverse-reaction warnings as part of general drug precautions, trade catalogues and price lists, provided they include no product claims;
- statements relating to human health or diseases, provided there is no reference, even indirect, to medicinal products.
Article 2
1. Member States shall prohibit any advertising of a medicinal product in respect of which a marketing authorization has not been granted in accordance with Community law.
2. All parts of the advertising of a medicinal product must comply with the particulars listed in the summary of product characteristics.
3. The advertising of a medicinal product:
- shall encourage the rational use of the medicinal product, by presenting it objectively and without exaggerating its properties,
- shall not be misleading.
CHAPTER II Advertising to the general public
Article 3
1. Member States shall prohibit the advertising to the general public of medicinal products which:
- are available on medical prescription only, in accordance with Directive 92/26/EEC(8) ,
- contain psychotropic or narcotic substances, within the meaning of the international conventions,
- may not be advertised to the general public in accordance with paragraph 2.
2. Medicinal products may be advertised to the general public which, by virtue of their composition and purpose, are intended and designed for use without the invervention of a medical practitioner for diagnostic purposes or for the prescription or monitoring of treatment, with the advice of the pharmacist, if necessary.
Member States shall prohibit the mentioning in advertising to the general public of therapeutic indications such as:
- tuberculosis,
- sexually transmitted diseases,
- other serious infectious diseases,
- cancer and other tumoral diseases,
- chronic insomnia,
- diabetes and other metabolic illnesses.
3. Member States shall also be able to ban on their territory advertising to the general public of medicinal products the cost of which may be reimbursed.
4. The prohibition referred to in paragraph 1 shall not apply to vaccination campaigns carried out by the industry and approved by the competent authorities of the Member States.
5. The prohibition referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply without prejudice to Articles 2, 3 and 14 of Directive 89/552/EEC.
6. Member States shall prohibit the direct distribution of medicinal products to the public by the industry for promotional purposes; they may, however, authorize such distribution in special cases for other purposes.
Article 4
1. Without prejudice to Article 3, all advertising to the general public of a medicinal product shall:
(a) be set out in such a way that it is clear that the message is an advertisement and that the product is clearly identified as a medicinal product;
(b) include the following minimum information:
- the name of the medicinal product, as well as the common name if the medicinal product contains only one active ingredient,
- the information necessary for correct use of the medicinal product,
- an express, legible invitation to read carefully the instructions on the package leaflet or on the outer packaging, according to the case.
2. Member States may decide that the advertising of a medicinal product to the general public may, notwithstanding paragraph 1, include only the name of the medicinal product if it is intended solely as a reminder.
Article 5
The advertising of a medicinal product to the general public shall not contain any material which:
(a) gives the impression that a medical consultation or surgical operation is unnecessary, in particular by offering a diagnosis or by suggesting treatment by mail;
(b) suggests that the effects of taking the medicine are guaranteed, are unaccompanied by side effects or are better than, or equivalent to, those of another treatment or medicinal product;
(c) suggests that the health of the subject can be enhanced by taking the medicine;
(d) suggests that the health of the subject could be affected by not taking the medicine; this prohibition shall not apply to the vaccination campaigns referred to in Article 3 (4);
(e) is directed exclusively or principally at children;
(f) refers to a recommendation by scientists, health professionals or persons who are neither of the foregoing but who, because of their celebrity, could encourage the consumption of medicinal products;
(g) suggests that the medicinal product is a foodstuff, cosmetic or other consumer product;
(h) suggests that the safety or efficacy of the medicinal product is due to the fact that it is natural;
(i) could, by a description or detailed representation of a case history, lead to erroneous self diagnosis;
(j) refers, in improper, alarming or misleading terms, to claims of recovery;
(k) uses, in improper, alarming or misleading terms, pictorial representations of changes in the human body caused by disease or injury, or of the action of a medicinal product on the human body or parts thereof;
(l) mentions that the medicinal product has been granted a marketing authorization.
CHAPTER III Advertising to health professionals
Article 6
1. Any advertising of a medicinal product to persons qualified to prescribe or supply such products shall include:
- essential information compatible with the summary of product characteristics;
- the supply classification of the medicinal product.
Member States may also require such advertising to include the selling price or indicative price of the various presentations and the conditions for reimbursement by social security bodies.
2. Member States may decide that the advertising of a medicinal product to persons qualified to prescribe or supply such products may, notwithstanding paragraph 1, include only the name of the medicinal product, if it is intended solely as a reminder.
Article 7
1. Any documentation relating to a medicinal product which is transmitted as part of the promotion of that product to persons qualified to prescribe or supply it shall include as a minimum the particulars listed in Article 6 (1) and shall state the date on which it was drawn up or last revised.
2. All the information contained in the documentation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be accurate, up-to-date, verifiable and sufficiently complete to enable the recipient to form his or her own opinion of the therapeutic value of the medicinal product concerned.
3. Quotations as well as tables and other illustrative matter taken from medical journals or other scientific works for use in the documentation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be faithfully reproduced and the precise sources indicated.
Article 8
1. Medical sales representatives shall be given adequate training by the firm which employs them and shall have sufficient scientific knowledge to be able to provide information which is precise and as complete as possible about the medicinal products which they promote.
2. During each visit, medical sales representatives shall give the persons visited, or have available for them, summaries of the product characteristics of each medicinal product they present together, if the legislation of the Member State so permits, with details of the price and conditions for reimbursement referred to in Article 6 (1).
3. Medical sales representatives shall transmit to the scientific service referred to in Article 13 (1) any information about the use of the medicinal products they advertise, with particular reference to any adverse reactions reported to them by the persons they visit.
Article 9
1. Where medicinal products are being promoted to persons qualified to prescribe or supply them, no gifts, pecuniary advantages or benefits in kind may be supplied, offered or promised to such persons unless they are inexpensive and relevant to the practice of medicine or pharmacy.
2. Hospitality at sales promotion must always be reasonable in level and secondary to the main purpose of the meeting and must not be extended to other than health professionals.
3. Persons qualified to prescribe or supply medicinal products shall not solicit or accept any inducement prohibited under paragraph 1 or contrary to paragraph 2.
4. Existing measures or trade practices in Member States relating to prices, margins and discounts shall not be affected by this Article.
Article 10
The provisions of Article 9 (1) shall not prevent hospitality being offered, directly or indirectly, at events for purely professional and scientific purposes; such hospitality must always be reasonable in level and remain subordinate to the main scientific objective of the meeting; it must not be extended to persons other than health professionals.
Article 11
1. Free samples shall be provided on an exceptional basis only to persons qualified to prescribe them and on the following conditions:
(a) a limited number of samples for each medicinal product each year on prescription;
(b) any supply of samples must be in response to a written request, signed and dated, from the recipient;
(c) those supplying samples must maintain an adequate system of control and accountability;
(d) each sample shall be identical with the smallest presentation on the market;
(e) each sample shall be marked free medical sample - not for resale or bear another legend of analogous meaning;
(f) each sample shall be accompanied by a copy of the summary of product characteristics;
(g) no samples of medicinal products containing psychotropic or narcotic substances within the meaning of international conventions may be supplied.
2. Member States may also place further restrictions on the distribution of samples of certain medicinal products.
CHAPTER IV Monitoring of advertising
Article 12
1. Member States shall ensure that there are adequate and effective methods to monitor the advertising of medicinal products. Such methods, which may be based on a system of prior vetting, shall in any event include legal provisions under which persons or organizations regarded under national law as having a legitimate interest in prohibiting any advertisement inconsistent with this Directive may take legal action against such advertisement, or bring such advertisement before an administrative authority competent either to decide on complaints or to initiate appropriate legal proceedings.
2. Under the legal provisions referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall confer upon the courts or administrative authorities powers enabling them, in cases where they deem such measures to be necessary taking into account all the interests involved and in particular the public interest:
- to order the cessation of, or to institute appropriate legal proceedings for an order for the cessation of, misleading advertising,
or
- if misleading advertising has not yet been published but publication is imminent, to order the prohibition of, or to institute appropriate legal proceedings for an order for the prohibition of, such publication,
even without proof of actual loss or damage or of intention or negligence on the part of the advertiser.
Member States shall also make provision for the measures referred to in the first subparagraph to be taken under an accelerated procedure:
- either with interim effect, or
- with definitive effect,
on the understanding that it is for each Member State to decide which of the two options to select.
Furthermore, Member States may confer upon the courts or administrative authorities powers enabling them, with a view to eliminating the continuing effects of misleading advertising the cessation of which has been ordered by a final decision:
- to require publication of that decision in full or in part and in such form as they deem adequate,
- to require in addition the publication of a corrective statement.
3. Under the legal provisions referred to in paragraph 1, Member States shall ensure that any decision taken in accordance with paragraph 2 shall state in detail the reasons on which it is based and shall be communicated in writing to the person concerned, mentioning the redress available at law and the time limit allowed for access to such redress.
4. This Article shall not exclude the voluntary control of advertising of medicinal products by self-regulatory bodies and recourse to such bodies, if proceedings before such bodies are possible in addition to the judicial or administrative proceedings referred to in paragraph 1.
Article 13
1. The marketing authorization holder shall establish within his undertaking a scientific service in charge of information about the medicinal products which he places on the market.
2. The person responsible for placing the product on the market shall:
- keep available for, or communicate to, the authorities or bodies responsible for monitoring advertising of medicinal products a sample of all advertisements emanating from his undertaking together with a statement indicating the persons to whom it is addressed, the method of dissemination and the date of first dissemination,
- ensure that advertising of medicinal products by his undertaking conforms to the requirements of this Directive,
- verify that medical sales representatives employed by his undertaking have been adequately trained and fulfill the obligations imposed upon them by Article 8 (2) and (3),
- supply the authorities or bodies responsible for monitoring advertising of medicinal products with the information and assistance they require to carry out their responsibilities,
- ensure that the decisions taken by the authorities or bodies responsible for monitoring advertising of medicinal products are immediately and fully complied with.
Article 14
Member States shall take the appropriate measures to ensure that all the provisions of this Directive are applied in full and shall determine in particular what penalties shall be imposed should the provisions adopted in the execution of this Directive be infringed.
Article 15
1. Member States shall take the measures necessary in order to comply with this Directive with effect from 1 January 1993. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
2. When Member States adopt the said measures, such measures shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such a reference shall be laid down by the Member States.
Article 16
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 31 March 1992.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1180/77 of 17 May 1977 on imports into the Community of certain agricultural products originating in Turkey
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Articles 43 and 113 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas, in Decision No 1/77, the EEC-Turkey Association Council, pursuant to Article 35 (3) of the Additional Protocol, as amended by Article 10 of the Interim Agreement signed on 30 June 1973, established the arrangements to be applied to imports into the Community of certain agricultural products originating in Turkey;
Whereas the implementation of that Decision involves the adaptation of Community Regulations;
Whereas the provisions regarding imports into the Community of certain agricultural products originating in Turkey have been amended on a number of occasions following Association Council Decisions ; whereas the texts in question, since they are to be found in various Official Journals, are difficult to use and therefore lack the necessary clarity which any Regulation must have ; whereas it is therefore necessary to consolidate them;
Whereas, moreover, in order to bring together in a single Regulation all the provisions regarding imports into the Community of agricultural products originating in Turkey, it is desirable to incorporate in this Regulation the provisions laid down by Council Acts in implementation of the provisions of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey;
Whereas Article 4 of Annex 6 to the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey provides for a tariff reduction for imports into the Community of fresh lemons originating in Turkey ; whereas, during the period of application of the reference prices this reduction is subject to the observance of a given price on the internal market of the Community ; whereas the implementation of these arrangements requires the adoption of detailed rules for their application;
Whereas the proposed arrangements must be included in the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables ; whereas it is therefore necessary to take account of the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 795/76 (3), and of those adopted pursuant to that Regulation;
Whereas Article 12 of Annex 6 to the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey stipulates that the levy on imports of durum wheat and canary seed produced in Turkey and transported direct from that country into the Community shall be the levy calculated in accordance with Article 13 of 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 3138/76 (5), less 0 75 unit of account per tonne;
Whereas Article 13 of the abovementioned Annex stipulates that, on condition that Turkey applies a special charge on exports of rye into the Community, the levy on imports into the Community of that product, calculated in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75, shall be reduced by an amount equal to that of the charge paid up to a maximum of eight units of account per tonne;
Whereas it is necessary to stipulate, in accordance with the Additional Protocol, that the special charge referred to above shall be reflected in the price of rye imported into (1)OJ No C 118, 16.5.1977, p. 68. (2)OJ No L 118, 20.5.1972, p. 1. (3)OJ No L 93, 8.4.1976, p. 6. (4)OJ No L 281, 1.11.1975, p. 1. (5)OJ No L 354, 24.12.1976, p. 1.
the Community ; whereas, in order to ensure that the arrangements in question are properly implemented, it is necessary to adopt the necessary measures so that, on importing rye, the importer supplies proof that the special export charge has been paid by the exporter,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The customs duties applicable to imports into the Community of products listed in Annex I and originating in Turkey shall be reduced to the extent indicated for each of them.
2. Until 31 December 1977 and by way of derogation from paragraph 1, Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom shall be authorized to apply duties not lower than those listed in Annex II to imports of fresh oranges falling within subheading 08.02 ex A of the Common Customs Tariff and of fresh mandarins (including tangerines and satsumas), clementines, wilkings and other similar citrus hybrids falling within subheading 08.02 ex B of the Common Customs Tariff.
Article 2
The fixed component of the duty charged on importation into the Community of the products listed in Annex III originating in Turkey shall be reduced to the extent indicated for each of them.
Article 3
For the products listed below originating in Turkey the customs duties on imports into the Community shall be reduced to the extent indicated for each of them, provided that the reference prices fixed or to be fixed pursuant to Article 19 of Regulation (EEC) No 100/76 (1) are observed. PIC FILE= "T
Article 4
1. For fresh lemons of subheading 08.02 ex C of the Common Customs Tariff, the tariff reduction provided for in Article 4 (3) of Annex 6 to the Additional Protocol shall be applicable where the quotations recorded on the representative Community markets at the importer/wholesaler stage, or converted to this stage, remain, for the product in question, at least as high as the price defined in paragraph 4.
The quotations referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken into consideration after customs clearance and deduction of import charges other than customs duties, the charges being those stipulated for the calculation of the entry price referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72. (1)OJ No L 20, 28.1.1976, p. 1.
The product in question shall, where appropriate, be converted to Quality Class I pursuant to the third indent of the second subparagraph of Article 24 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72.
2. With respect to the deduction of the import charges other than customs duties which are referred to in the third indent of paragraph 3 of Article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72, in so far as the prices disclosed to the Commission by Member States include the incidence of such charges, the sum to be deducted shall be calculated by the Commission so as to avoid difficulties which may result from the incidence of such charges on entry prices being dependent on the origin of the products concerned. In such cases an average amount corresponding to the arithmetic mean between the lowest and highest incidence of such taxes shall be taken into account in this calculation.
3. The representative markets for the purposes of paragraph 1 are the Community markets used for recording quotations on the basis of which the entry prices referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 are calculated.
4. The price referred to in paragraph 1 shall be equal to the reference price in force during the period in question, plus the incidence on this price of the customs duties applicable to imports coming from non-member countries and a standard amount of 1 720 units of account per 100 kilograms.
5. Where the quotations referred to in paragraph 1, after customs clearance and deduction of import charges other than customs duties, remain, on the representative markets of the Community with the lowest quotations, lower than the price defined in paragraph 4 on three consecutive market days, the customs duties in force in respect of non-member countries on the date of import shall be applied to the product concerned.
These arrangements shall apply until the said quotations remain, on the representative markets of the Community with the lowest quotations, at least as high as the price defined in paragraph 4 on three consecutive market days.
6. The Commission, on the basis of the quotations recorded on the representative markets of the Community disclosed by the Member States, shall follow regularly the movement of prices and shall ascertain the levels referred to in paragraph 5.
The measures required shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 with regard to the application of countervailing duties on fruit and vegetables.
7. Articles 23 to 28 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall continue to apply.
Article 5
1. The following products, originating in Turkey, shall be allowed into the Community at a 2 75 % ad valorem customs duty within the limit of an annual tariff quota of 25 000 tonnes. PIC FILE= "T
2. Should paragraph 1 not apply to a full calendar year the quota shall be opened on a pro rata basis.
Article 6
The levies applied to Community imports of durum wheat and canary seed, produced in Turkey and transported direct from there to the Community, which fall within subheadings 10.01 B and 10.07 ex D of the Common Customs Tariff respectively, shall be those calculated in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75, each minus 0 750 unit of account per tonne.
Article 7
1. The levy on imports of rye falling within heading No 10.02 of the Common Customs Tariff which is produced in Turkey and transported direct from there to the Community, shall be that calculated in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 minus an amount equal to the special export charge levied by Turkey on exports to the Community of the said product but not exceeding eight units of account per tonne.
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall apply to all imports in respect of which the importer supplies proof of payment by the exporter of the special export charge, up to an amount exceeding neither the levy fixed in accordance with Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 on imports of rye into the Community nor eight units of account per tonne.
Article 8
The fixed component charged on importation into the Community of products listed below originating in Turkey shall be reduced by 50 %.
PIC FILE= "T
Article 9
1. Where Turkey applies the special charge on exports of olive oil, other than refined olive oil falling within subheading 15.07 A II of the Common Customs Tariff, obtained entirely in Turkey and transported direct from that country to the Community, the levy on imports into the Community of that oil shall, according to the case, be the levy referred to in Article 13 of 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 1707/73 (2), or that resulting from application of the tendering procedure provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 2843/76 (3), less: (a) 0 750 unit of account per 100 kilograms;
(b) an amount equal to the special export charge imposed by Turkey on such oil within a limit of nine units of account per 100 kilograms, that amount being increased, until 31 October 1977, by nine units of account per 100 kilograms.
2. The arrangements set out in paragraph 1 shall be applied to all imports of olive oil for which the importer supplies proof upon importation that the special export charge referred to in the said paragraph has been reflected in the import price.
3. Where Turkey does not apply the special export charge, the levy imposed on imports into the Community of the oil as defined in paragraph 1, shall, according to the case, be the levy referred to in Article 13 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC or that resulting from application of the tendering procedure provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 2843/76, less 0 750 unit of account per 100 kilograms.
Article 10
1. Without prejudice to the collection of the variable component, the fixed component of the levy shall be reduced by 80 % on imports into the Community of olive oil having undergone a refining process, falling within subheading 15.07 A I of the Common Customs Tariff, wholly obtained in Turkey and transported direct from that country to the Community.
2. The levy referred to in paragraph 1 shall be fixed by the Commission.
Article 11
1. For prepared and preserved sardines falling within subheading 16.04 D of the Common Customs Tariff and originating in Turkey the customs duty on imports into the Community shall be reduced by 40 % subject to observance of the minimum prices fixed in accordance with the following paragraphs.
2. Until 30 June 1978 the minimum prices referred to in paragraph 1 shall be those specified in Annex IV. The prices for the period beginning 1 July 1978 shall not be lower than those specified in the said Annex, as updated by exchange of letters between the Contracting Parties in order to take account of the trend of costs for the products in question.
3. From 1 July 1979 the minimum prices referred to in paragraph 1 shall be agreed by annual exchanges of letters between the Contracting Parties.
4. The reduction of the customs duty referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply only from the date and for the periods determined by exchanges of letters laying down the technical rules for applying this Article.
Article 12
1. For the products listed below originating in Turkey the customs duty on imports into the Community shall be reduced as follows, subject to the terms agreed by exchange of letters being observed. PIC FILE= "T
2. The tariff reduction referred to in paragraph 1 applies only from the date and for the periods determined by (1)OJ No 172, 30.9.1966, p. 3025/66. (2)OJ No L 175, 29.6.1973, p. 5. (3)OJ No L 327, 26.11.1976, p. 4. exchanges of letters to be concluded each year between the Contracting Parties in order to fix the terms and detailed rules.
Article 13
For the products listed below originating in Turkey the customs duty on imports into the Community shall be reduced by 30 % within the limit of an annual Community tariff quota of 90 tonnes. PIC FILE= "T
Article 14
Where necessary, detailed rules for the application of this Regulation shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 26 of Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 or, according to the case, in the corresponding Articles in other Regulations on the common organization of agricultural markets.
Article 15
1. The following are repealed: - Council Regulation (EEC) No 1233/71 of 7 June 1971 on imports of citrus fruit originating in Turkey (1);
- Council Regulation (EEC) No 1235/71 of 7 June 1971 on imports of olive oil from Turkey (2);
- Council Regulation (EEC) No 2754/75 of 29 October 1975 on imports of certain cereals from Turkey (3);
- Council Regulation (EEC) 2755/75 of 29 October 1975 on the importation into the Community of certain agricultural products originating in Turkey (4);
- Council Regulation (EEC) No 113/76 of 19 January 1976 on imports into the Community of fishery products originating in Turkey (5).
2. References to the Regulations repealed under paragraph 1 shall be understood as applying to this Regulation.
Citations and references relating to the Articles of the said Regulations are to be read in accordance with the table of equivalence given in Annex V.
Article 16
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 1977.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 May 1977.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1938/2001
of 2 October 2001
on the opening of a standing invitation to tender for the resale on the Community internal market of some 7850 tonnes of rice held by the Spanish intervention agency for use in animal feed
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 1667/2000(2), and in particular Article 8(b) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 75/91 of 11 January 1991 laying down the procedures and conditions for the disposal of paddy rice held by intervention agencies(3) provides among other things that rice held by intervention agencies is to be sold by tendering procedure at prices that allow market disturbances to be avoided.
(2) Spain has intervention stocks of paddy rice from harvests prior to 1998 whose quality is in danger of deteriorating as a result of prolonged storage.
(3) Disposing of this rice on traditional markets inside the Community would inevitably trigger off, in the present production situation and when concessions for rice imports are being granted under international agreements, the placing of an equivalent quantity in intervention, which must be avoided.
(4) This rice could be disposed of in the animal feed sector, on special conditions.
(5) The undertakings given by tenderers are regarded as primary requirements within the meaning of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 of 22 July 1985 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of securities for agricultural products(4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1932/1999(5).
(6) In order to ensure that the rice is used for the purpose specified, provision should be made for special monitoring and for the successful tenderer to provide a security, the conditions for the release of which should be laid down.
(7) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3002/92(6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 770/96(7), lays down common detailed rules for verifying the use of products from intervention. Procedures should also be laid down to ensure the traceability of the products used for animal feed.
(8) 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 Spanish intervention agency shall offer for sale by standing invitation to tender on the Community internal market some 7850 tonnes of rice as referred to in Annex I from the 1997 harvest, for use in preparations of a kind used in animal feeding (products falling within CN code 2309 ).
Article 2
1. The sale provided for in Article 1 shall take place in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 75/91.
However, notwithstanding Article 5 of that Regulation:
(a) tenders shall be drawn up on the basis of the actual quality of the lot to which they apply;
(b) the minimum sale price shall be set at a level that does not disturb the market for cereals within the Community.
2. Tenderers shall give an undertaking:
(a) to use in animal feed, within three months of the date of the award of the contract, rice for which they are declared the successful tenderer, save in cases of force majeure;
(b) to carry out immediately, under the supervision of the competent authorities at a place determined by agreement with them, the treatments described in Annex II, designed to ensure verification of the use made of the rice and the traceability of the products;
(c) to bear the costs of the processing referred to in Annex II;
(d) to keep stock records so that checks may be made that they have respected their undertakings.
Article 3
1. The Spanish intervention agency shall publish, at least eight days before the final day of the first period for the submission of tenders, a notice of invitation to tender.
The notice, and any changes to it, shall be forwarded to the Commission before publication.
2. The notice of invitation to tender shall contain:
(a) the additional clauses and conditions of sale compatible with this Regulation;
(b) the places of storage and the name and address of the storer;
(c) particulars of the competent authorities responsible for monitoring the operation;
(d) the main physical and technological characteristics of the various lots established upon buying in by the intervention agency or during checks carried out subsequently.
3. The Spanish intervention agency shall take all additional steps necessary to enable the parties concerned to assess the quality of the rice put up for sale before submitting their tenders.
Article 4
1. Tenders shall be valid only if they are accompanied by:
(a) evidence that the tenderer has lodged a security of EUR 15 per tonne;
(b) a written undertaking by the tenderer that the rice for which he is the successful tenderer will be processed into compound feed at his premises within three months of the date of the award of the contract;
(c) evidence that the tenderer is an animal feed manufacturer;
(d) a written undertaking by the tenderer to lodge a security for an amount equivalent to the difference between the intervention price for paddy rice applicable on the tender date plus EUR 15 and the price tendered per tonne of rice not later than two working days after the date of receipt of the notice of award of contract.
2. Once submitted, a tender may not be altered or withdrawn.
Article 5
1. The closing date for the submission of tenders for the first partial invitation to tender shall be 17 October 2001 at 12.00 (Brussels time).
2. The closing dates for the submission of tenders for subsequent partial invitations to tender shall be each Wednesday at 12.00 (Brussels time), with the exception of Wednesday, 31 October 2001.
3. The closing date for the submission of tenders for the last partial invitation to tender shall be 19 December 2001 at 12.00 (Brussels time).
Tenders must be lodged with the Spanish intervention agency: Fondo Español de Garantía Agraria FEGA C/Beneficencia 8 E - 28004 Madrid ( Telex 23427 FEGA E; Fax: (34) 915 21 98 32, (34) 915 22 43 87 ).
Article 6
Not later than 10.00 (Brussels time) on the Thursday following the expiry of the deadline for the submission of tenders, the Spanish intervention agency shall notify the Commission of the tenders received. The information shall be forwarded using the form given in Annex III and the fax and telex numbers shown in Annex IV.
Details of inadmissible tenders shall be notified separately. The reasons for their rejection shall also be given.
Article 7
The Commission shall set the minimum sale price or decide not to accept the tenders. The decision shall be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 3072/95.
Article 8
The intervention agency shall immediately notify all tenderers of the outcome of their participation in the tendering procedure.
Within three working days of the notification referred to in the first paragraph, it shall send notices of award of contract to successful tenderers by registered letter or written telecommunication.
Article 9
Successful tenderers shall pay for the rice before it is removed, and at the latest within one month of the date of dispatch of the notice referred to in the second paragraph of Article 8. The risks and costs of storing rice that is not removed within the payment period shall be borne by the successful tenderers.
Following the expiry of the payment period, rice for which a contract is awarded and which is not removed shall be regarded for all purposes as having been removed from storage.
Where a successful tenderer fails to pay for the rice within the period referred to in the first paragraph, the contract shall be terminated by the intervention agency, where appropriate in respect of the quantity not paid for.
Article 10
1. The security referred to in Article 4(1)(a) shall be released in respect of quantities for which:
(a) no award is made;
(b) payment of the sale price is made within the period set and the security referred to in Article 4(1)(d) has been lodged.
2. The security referred to in Article 4(1)(d) shall be released in proportion to the quantities used only if the intervention agency has carried out all the checks necessary to ensure that the product is used in accordance with the provisions laid down in this Regulation.
However, if proof of the treatments referred to in Annex II is provided and not less than 95 % of the fine broken grains and/or fragments obtained are used in feed, the security shall be released in full.
3. Proof that the rice has been used in feed as referred to in this Regulation shall be provided in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 3002/92.
Article 11
The obligation set out in Article 2(2) shall be regarded as a primary requirement within the meaning of Article 20 of Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85.
Article 12
In addition to the particulars provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 3002/92, box 104 of control copy T5 shall bear one or more of the following entries:
- Destinados a la transformación [Reglamento (CE) n° 1938/2001]
- Til forarbejdning (forordning (EF) nr. 1938/2001)
- Zur Verarbeitung bestimmt (Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1938/2001)
- Προορίζονται για μεταποίηση [Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 1938/2001]
- For processing (Regulation (EC) No 1938/2001)
- Destinées à la transformation [règlement (CE) n° 1938/2001]
- Destinate alla trasformazione [regolamento (CE) n. 1938/2001]
- Bestemd om te worden verwerkt (Verordening (EG) nr. 1938/2001)
- Para transformação [Regulamento (CE) n.o 1938/2001]
- Tarkoitettu jalostukseen (Asetus (EY) N:o 1938/2001)
- För bearbetning (förordning (EG) nr 1938/2001).
Article 13
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, 2 October 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1753/1999
of 6 August 1999
fixing the minimum selling prices for beef put up for sale under the invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1585/1999
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1633/98(2), and in particular Article 7(3) thereof,
(1) Whereas tenders have been invited for certain quantities of beef fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1585/1999(3);
(2) Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2173/79(4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2417/95(5), the minimum selling prices for meat put up for sale by tender should be fixed, taking into account tenders submitted;
(3) 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
The minimum selling prices for beef for the invitation to tender held in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1585/1999 for which the time limit for the submission of tenders was 26 July 1999 are as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 7 August 1999.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 6 August 1999.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1769/2002
of 3 October 2002
fixing the corrective amount applicable to the refund on cereals
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 organization of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), and in particular Article 13(8) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 13(8) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 provides that the export refund applicable to cereals on the day on which application for an export licence is made must be applied on request to exports to be effected during the period of validity of the export licence. In this case, a corrective amount may be applied to the refund.
(2) 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 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 1163/2002(4), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1324/2002(5), allows for the fixing of a corrective amount for the products listed in Article 1(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92. That corrective amount must be calculated taking account of the factors referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
(3) The world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the corrective amount according to destination.
(4) The corrective amount must be fixed at the same time as the refund and according to the same procedure; it may be altered in the period between fixings.
(5) It follows from applying the provisions set out above that the corrective amount must be as set out in the Annex hereto.
(6) 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 corrective amount referred to in Article 1(1)(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 which is applicable to export refunds fixed in advance except for malt shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 October 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 October 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1562/2001
of 31 July 2001
fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to certain milk 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 (EC) No 1255/1999 of 15 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1670/2000(2), and in particular Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 31(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products listed in Article 1 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (g) of that Regulation and prices within the Community may be covered by an export refund. Whereas 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 criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2390/2000(4), 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 the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999.
(2) 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.
(3) Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 provides that, when the rate of the refund is being fixed, account should be taken, where necessary, of production refunds, aids or other measures having equivalent effect applicable in all Member States in accordance with the Regulation on the common organisation of the market in the product in question to the basic products listed in Annex A to that Regulation or to assimilated products.
(4) Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 provides for the payment of aid for Community-produced skimmed milk processed into casein if such milk and the casein manufactured from it fulfil certain conditions.
(5) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2571/97 of 15 December 1997 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the granting of aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice-cream and other foodstuffs(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 635/2000(6), lays down that butter and cream at reduced prices should be made available to industries which manufacture certain goods.
(6) It is necessary to ensure continuity of strict management taking account of expenditure forecasts and funds available in the budget.
(7) 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
1. The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products appearing in Annex A to Regulation (EC) No 1520/2000 and listed in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999, exported in the form of goods listed in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999, are hereby fixed as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.
2. No rates of refund are fixed for any of the products referred to in the preceding paragraph which are not listed in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 August 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 31 July 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1522/2001
of 25 July 2001
determining the extent to which the applications for import licences submitted in July 2001 for certain dairy products under certain tariff quotas opened by Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 can be accepted
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1670/2000(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 of 29 June 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements and opening tariff quotas for milk and milk products(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 594/2001(4), and in particular Article 14(4) thereof,
Whereas:
Applications lodged for the products referred to in Annexes II and III to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 concern quantities greater than those available; therefore, the allocation factors should be fixed for the quantities applied for,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. Import licences applied for for products falling within the order numbers in Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 listed in Annex I to this Regulation lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 for the period 1 July to 31 December 2001, shall be awarded in accordance with the allocation factors indicated.
2. Import licences applied for for products falling within the order numbers in Annex III B to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 listed in Annex II to this Regulation lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 for the period 1 July to 31 December 2001, shall be awarded in accordance with the allocation factors indicated.
3. Import licences applied for for products falling within the order numbers in Annex III C to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 listed in Annex III to this Regulation lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1374/98 for the period 1 July to 31 December 2001, shall be awarded in accordance with the allocation factors indicated.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 July 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 July 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 17 September 1984 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to welded unalloyed steel gas cylinders (84/527/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 the Member States the construction and the inspection of gas cylinders are subject to mandatory provisions varying from one Member State to another and consequently hinder trade in such cylinders ; whereas it is therefore necessary to approximate these provisions;
Whereas Council Directive 76/767/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to common provisions for pressure vessels and methods of inspecting them (4), lays down in particular the procedures of EEC pattern approval and verification for these vessels ; whereas according to this Directive it is advisable to lay down the technical requirements to be complied with by EEC-type welded unalloyed steel gas cylinders with a capacity of 0,5 to 150 litres in order to be put into circulation, commercialized and used without restraint after having undergone inspection and bearing accordingly a mark and a symbol,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
This Directive shall apply to welded unalloyed steel gas cylinders formed from several pieces, of an actual thickness of 5 mm or less, capable of being refilled several times, with a capacity ranging from 0,5 to 150 litres inclusive and designed to contain and transport compressed, liquefied or dissolved gases except liquefied gases at very low temperatures and acetylene. The design pressure (Ph) of these cylinders shall not exceed 60 bars. These gas cylinders are hereinafter referred to as "cylinders".
Article 2
For the purposes of this Directive, "EEC-type cylinder" shall mean any cylinder designed and manufactured in such a way that it satisfies the requirements of this Directive and of Directive 76/767/EEC.
Article 3
No Member State may, on grounds relating to the construction or inspection of a cylinder within the meaning of Directive 76/767/EEC and this Directive refuse, prohibit or restrict the placing on the market and putting into service of an EEC-type cylinder.
Article 4
All EEC-type cylinders shall be subject to EEC pattern approval.
All EEC-type cylinders shall be subject to EEC verification with the exception of cylinders with a capacity of not more than 1 litre.
Article 5
Any amendments necessary to adapt sections 1, 2.1.1, 2.3 except for 2.3.3, 2.4 except for 2.4.1 and 2.4.2.1, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 5 except for 5.2.2 and 5.3, and 6 of Annex I and Annexes II and III to this Directive to technical progress shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 20 of Directive 76/767/EEC. (1) OJ No C 104, 13.9.1974, p. 59. (2) OJ No C 5, 8.1.1975, p. 52. (3) OJ No C 62, 15.3.1975, p. 31. (4) OJ No L 262, 27.9.1976, p. 153.
Article 6
The procedure laid down in Article 17 of Directive 76/767/EEC may apply to sections 2.2, 2.3.2 and 3.4.1.1 of Annex I to this Directive.
Article 7
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions needed in order to comply with this Directive within 18 months of its notification (1) 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 8
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 September 1984.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 25 October 2004
amending the Decision authorising the Director of Europol to enter into negotiations on agreements with third States and non-EU-related bodies
(2004/773/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Convention on the establishment of a European Police Office (Europol Convention) (1), and in particular Article 42(2), Article 10(4) and Article 18 thereof,
Having regard to the Council Act of 3 November 1998 laying down rules governing Europol's external relations with third States and non-EU-related bodies (2), and in particular Article 2 of that Act,
Having regard to the Council Act of 3 November 1998 laying down rules governing the receipt of information by Europol from third parties (3), and in particular Article 2 of that Act,
Having regard to the Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by Europol to third States and third bodies (4), and in particular Articles 2 and 3 of that Act,
Whereas:
(1)
Operational requirements and the need to combat in an effective way organised forms of criminality through Europol, require that Moldova and Ukraine be added to the list of third States with which the Director of Europol is authorised to start negotiations.
(2)
Council Decision of 27 March 2000 (5) should therefore be amended,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Council Decision of 27 March 2000 is hereby amended as follows:
In Article 2(1), under the heading ‘Third States’, the following States shall be inserted in the alphabetical list:
-
‘Moldova’ and
-
‘Ukraine’.
Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following its adoption.
Done at Luxembourg, 25 October 2004.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2742/98 of 16 December 1998 amending the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 of 17 December 1987 establishing an agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2580/98 (2), and in particular Article 3, last subparagraph, thereof,
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 provides for the publication of the full version of the refund nomenclature to be used from 1 January each year as it follows from the regulatory provisions on export arrangements for agricultural products (3);
Whereas account must be taken of amendments to the Combined Nomenclature introduced by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2261/98 of 26 October 1998 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (4) applicable from 1 January 1998,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 is replaced by the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1999.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1998.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1415/2004
of 19 July 2004
fixing the maximum annual fishing effort for certain fishing areas and fisheries
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 of 4 November 2003 on the management of the fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas and resources (1), and in particular Article 11(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 establishes the conditions and procedures for the introduction of a system for the management of fishing effort in certain Community fishing areas and resources.
(2)
The Member States have submitted to the Commission the information required in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 and in particular the annual average fishing effort over the period 1998 to 2002 exerted by vessels equal to or more than 15 m in length overall in the areas defined in that Regulation and the annual average fishing effort over the period 1998 to 2002 exerted by vessels equal to or more than 10 m in length overall in the biologically sensitive area defined in that Regulation.
(3)
In the assessment of fishing effort referred to in Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, the installed power has been understood as the power of a vessel, as defined in Regulation (EEC) No 2930/86 of 22 September 1986 defining characteristics for fishing vessels (2).
(4)
The Commission forwarded to the Member States the information required pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 and, after consultation with them, assessed the data provided in relation to fishing effort limitations adopted under previous or current Community measures which involve or have involved the management of fishing effort.
(5)
The maximum annual fishing effort, to be fixed for the vessels flying the flag of a Member State, by group of species, area and fishery, should be equal to the global fishing effort exerted over the five-year period 1998 to 2002 by those vessels, divided by five,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Subject matter
This Regulation sets the maximum annual fishing effort for each Member State and for each area and fishery defined in Articles 3 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.
Article 2
Maximum levels
1. The maximum levels of annual fishing effort by group of species, area and fishery, and by Member State, for the areas referred to in Article 3(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, are set out in Annex I to this Regulation.
2. The maximum levels of annual fishing effort by group of species, area and fishery, and by Member State, for the area referred to in Article 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, are set out in Annex II to this Regulation.
Article 3
Transiting through an area
1. Each Member State shall ensure that the utilisation of fishing effort allocations by area, as defined in Articles 3 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003, will not result in more time spent fishing by comparison to fishing effort levels exerted during the reference period.
2. Fishing effort established as a result of a vessel transiting through an area where no fishing operation had taken place during the reference period shall not be used for the purpose of carrying out fishing operations in that area. Each Member State shall record such fishing effort separately.
Article 4
Methodology
Each Member State shall ensure that the method used to record fishing effort is the same as the one used in assessing the levels of fishing effort according to Articles 3 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.
Article 5
Compliance with other fishing effort limitation schemes
The maximum levels of annual fishing effort fixed in Annexes I and II shall be without prejudice to fishing effort limitations fixed under recovery plans or any other management measure under Community law provided that the measure with the lower amount of fishing effort is complied with.
Article 6
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th 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, 19 July 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL AND COMMISSION DECISION
of 14 May 2008
on the conclusion of the Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union
(2008/438/EC, Euratom)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 310 in conjunction with the second sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2) and the second subparagraph of Article 300(3) thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second paragraph of Article 101 thereof,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania, and in particular Article 6(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the assent of the European Parliament (1),
Having regard to the Council’s approval pursuant to Article 101 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,
Whereas:
(1)
The Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union, has been signed on behalf of the European Community and the Member States on 18 February 2008 in accordance with Council Decision 2008/273/EC (2).
(2)
Pending its entry into force the Protocol has been applied on a provisional basis as from the date of accession.
(3)
The Protocol should be concluded,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Protocol to the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community, the European Atomic Energy Community and the Member States.
The text of the Protocol is annexed to this Decision (3).
Article 2
The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, deposit the instruments of approval provided for in Article 11 of the Protocol. The President of the Commission shall simultaneously deposit the instrument of approval on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community.
Done at Brussels, 14 May 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 11 February 1985
concerning an application for refund of anti-dumping duties collected on certain imports of glass textile fibres (rovings) originating in Czechoslovakia
(Only the German text is authentic)
(85/166/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84 of 23 July 1984 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), and in particular Article 16 thereof,
Whereas:
A. Procedure
(1) On 18 June 1983 the Commission, by Regulation (EEC) No 1631/83 (2), imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of glass textile fibres (rovings) originating in Czechoslovakia. The amount of the duty was equal to the amount by which the free-at-Community-frontier net price, before duty, was less than 0,97 ECU per kilogram. On 16 December 1983, by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3540/83 (3), a definitive anti-dumping duty was imposed. The amount of the duty is equal to the amount by which the free-at-Community-frontier net price before duty is less than 1,07 ECU per kilogram. The amounts secured by way of provisional duty from 18 June 1983 pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 1631/83 were definitively collected up to the amount of the provisional duty.
(2) On 18 November 1983 MBG GmbH and Co., Frankfurt/Main, on 25 October 1983 Fibron Wolfgang Mellert GmbH, Bretten/Baden, and on 5 March 1984 Menzolit-Werke, Albert Schmidt GmbH and Co. KG, Menzingen, importers of rovings from Czechoslovakia, applied to the German authorities for a refund of the amounts of DM 85 473,71, DM 92 220,75 and DM 66 010,36 respectively, in connection with their imports of rovings from Czechoslovakia. These sums were provisional anti-dumping duties which were collected. The German authorities forwarded the applications to the Commission.
(3) Following the submission by the applicants of further supporting evidence the claims were examined by the Commission. The applicants were informed of the preliminary results of this examination and given an opportunity to comment on them. The comments made were taken into consideration prior to this Decision.
(4) The Commission informed the Member States and gave its opinion on the matter. All Member States agreed with this opinion.
B. Arguments of the applicants
(5) The applicants have based their claims on the allegation that because the Commission used more up-to-date rates of exchange when discussing a possible undertaking, before the imposition of the provisional duty, the official rate of exchange should not have been used when calculating the amount of the duty to be paid in national currency. The difference between the two rates is requested as a refund by the applicants.
C. Admissibility
(6) The applications are admissible since they were introduced in conformity with the relevant provisions of the Community's anti-dumping legislation, in particular those concerning time limits.
D. Merits of the claim
(7) The applications would be justified if the importers had shown that the amounts of duty collected exceeded the actual dumping margin. In the case in question, the dumping margin amounts to 56,03 %. However, as a lower amount was considered sufficient to eliminate the injury, the provisional duty was fixed at a lower level, i.e. the amount by which the free-at-Community-frontier net price, before duty, was less than 0,97 ECU per kilogram. This, based on the exchange rates valid during the investigation period, corresponded to a duty of approximately 13 %.
(8) Concerning the collection of this variable duty, Article 1 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1631/83 clearly stated that 'the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply for the application of the duty'. Consequently, the duty set in ECU had to be expressed in national currencies in conformity with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2779/78 (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 289/84 (2).
(9) The Commission is well aware of the fact that the rate of exchange altered while the provisional duty was in operation. This matter was considered when the decision was made about the definitive collection of the amounts secured by way of provisional duty. It was found that, although there was an alteration in the exchange rate for the German mark between the date when securities were deposited and the date when these securities were definitively collected, the amount of that provisional duty did not exceed the definitively established margin.
(10) The applicants argue that the abovementioned alterations in the exchange rates should not lead to any supplementary collection of duties. They also allege that these alterations led to the collection of duties, the amount of which exceeded the actual dumping margin.
(11) The Commission has examined these allegations and has come to the conclusion that the mere fact that the effective rate of a duty in national currency has increased as a result of a change in exchange rates does not give a right to a refund pro tanto. As to the relation between duties collected and the dumping margin, it has, after re-examination of the matter, been found that the amounts collected, whatever exchange rate is applied - either the one valid at the time when securities were deposited, or the one valid during discussions for a possible undertaking or finally the one valid at the time of collection of the provisional duties - did not exceed the actual dumping margin.
(12) The applications have, thus, to be rejected,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The refund claim submitted by MBG GmbH and Co., Frankfurt/Main, Fibron Wolfgang Mellert GmbH, Bretten/Baden and Menzolit-Werke, Albert Schmidt GmbH and Co. KG, Menzingen, is hereby rejected.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany and to MBG GmbH and Co., Frankfurt/Main, Fibron Wolfang Mellert GmbH, Bretten/Baden and Menzolit-Werke, Albert Schmidt GmbH and Co. KG, Menzingen.
Done at Brussels, 11 February 1985.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 11 August 2003
approving on behalf of the European Community amendments to the Annexes to the Agreement between the European Community and New Zealand on sanitary measures applicable to trade in live animals and animal products
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/616/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 97/132/EC of 17 December 1996 on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and New Zealand on sanitary measures applicable to trade in live animals and animal products(1), as amended by Decision 1999/837/EC(2), and in particular Article 3, third paragraph thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Decision 2002/957/EC of 28 November 2002 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters concerning the amendment to the Annexes to the Agreement between the European Community and New Zealand on sanitary measures applicable to trade in live animals and animal products(3), provided for the possibility of recognising the equivalence of the New Zealand certification systems for fresh meat and meat-based products and for other animal products.
(2) The Joint Management Committee for the Agreement (the Committee), at its meeting on 27 and 28 February 2003, issued a recommendation concerning the determination of equivalence of certification systems for the following animal products: animal casings, hides and skins, pet food, bones and bone products, processed animal protein, blood and blood products, lard and rendered fats, raw materials for feedingstuffs, pharmaceutical or technical use and products obtained from poultrymeat. As a result of this recommendation it is appropriate to amend Annex V to the Agreement.
(3) The Committee at that same meeting issued further recommendations concerning amendments of certain Annexes to the Agreement to take account of changes in the administrative structure of the responsible authorities and the contact point of New Zealand, and of changes relating to New Zealand legislation. The Committee also recommended amendment of Annex V with respect to BSE-related measures in accordance with the current legislation of both Parties.
(4) Those amendments should be approved on behalf of the Community.
(5) The measure provided for in this Decision is in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Pursuant to the recommendations made by the Joint Management Committee established under Article 16 of the Agreement between the European Community and New Zealand on sanitary measures applicable to trade in live animals and animal products the amendments to Annexes II, V and X to the said Agreement are hereby approved on behalf of the European Community. The text of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters, including the amendments to the Annexes to the Agreement, is attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The Director-General for Health and Consumer Protection is hereby empowered to sign the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters in order to bind the Community.
Article 3
This Decision shall apply from the first day of the month following the month in which New Zealand notifies the Commission in writing that its internal procedures for the approval of the amendments referred to in Article 1 have been completed.
Done at Brussels, 11 August 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
REGULATION (EC) No 1366/2006 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 6 September 2006
amending Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 as regards the base year for the allocation of quotas of hydrochlorofluorocarbons with respect to the Member States that acceded to the European Union on 1 May 2004
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 175(1) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),
After consulting the Committee of the Regions,
Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty (2),
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer (3) takes 1999 as the base year for allocating quotas of hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). The HCFC market in the 10 new Member States has changed considerably since 1999, with the arrival of new companies and changes in market shares. Taking 1999 as the base year for allocating quotas of HCFCs in these new Member States would result in a large number of companies not receiving an import quota. This could be considered as being arbitrary and might also result in a breach of the principles of non-discrimination and legitimate expectations.
(2)
As a general rule, quotas should be based on the most recent and representative figures available in order to ensure that a number of importing companies in the new Member States are not excluded. It is therefore appropriate to choose the years for which the most recent data are available. In order to best reflect the commercial situation on the HCFC market in the 10 new Member States, average market shares in 2002 and 2003 should therefore be used as the basis for the companies from those Member States.
(3)
Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following point shall be added to Article 4(3)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000:
‘(i)
by way of derogation from point (h), each producer and importer in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia shall ensure that the calculated level of hydrochlorofluorocarbons which it places on the market or uses for its own account shall not exceed, as a percentage of the calculated levels set out in points (b), (d), (e) and (f), the average of its percentage market share in 2002 and 2003.’
.
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 1 January 2007.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Strasbourg, 6 September 2006.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 151/96 of 29 January 1996 on certain exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat in Belgium
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2759/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in pigmeat (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3290/94 (2), and in particular Article 20 thereof,
Whereas, because of the outbreak of classical swine fever in certain production regions of Belgium, health measures have been adopted by the Belgian authorities pursuant to Council Directive 80/217/EEC of 22 January 1980 introducing Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (3), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden; whereas exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat were adopted for Belgium by Commission Regulation (EC) No 3337/93 (4), as repealed by Regulation (EC) No 2303/94 (5);
Whereas the exceptional support measures applied from 22 November 1993 until 27 September 1994 included the purchase of live pigs by the Belgian authorities from the protection zone and their processing into products intended for uses other than human consumption;
Whereas in December 1993 the Belgian veterinary authorities purchased live pigs from the protection zone in the Wingene region, where there is a large pig population; whereas the pigs in question were covered by the restrictions on the free movement of pigs resulting from application of the measures to prevent the spread of classical swine fever; whereas their buying-in helped to prevent a serious disturbance on the pigmeat market in Belgium; whereas these pigs were processed in the same way as those covered by Regulation (EC) No 3337/93;
Whereas the presence of classical swine fever in the production areas of Flanders and the measures to combat the disease heavily engaged the administration's resources for a long time; whereas it was not therefore possible to determine rapidly the exact nature of the purchases in the Wingene region and to decide whether they constituted veterinary measures or exceptional market support measures; whereas, this delay made it impossible to include the purchases among the support measures introduced by Regulation (EC) No 3337/93 as that Regulation had been repealed in the meantime;
Whereas the purchases have had the same beneficial effect on the market as those carried out under Regulation (EC) No 3337/93; whereas it is accordingly justified to consider them exceptional market support measures similar to those adopted by Regulation (EC) No 3337/93 and to apply the financing arrangements provided for by that Regulation;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Pigmeat,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. The purchase of 58 047 live pigs in December 1993 by the Belgian veterinary authorities in the Wingene region is hereby deemed an exceptional market support measure.
2. The purchase of 40 633 live pigs shall be borne by the Community budget.
3. The purchase of 17 414 live pigs shall be borne by the national budget.
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, 29 January 1996.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1533/93 of 22 June 1993 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
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organization of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Articles 13 and 16 thereof,
Whereas the export refunds, corrective amounts and export levies on products covered by the common organization of the market in cereals must be fixed as a special measure in the event of a disturbance on the market, in accordance with certain criteria enabling the difference between the quotations and prices for such products in the Community and those on the world market to be covered;
Whereas, given the disparity in the prices at which cereals are offered by the different exporting countries on the world market, account should be taken in particular of the different internal forwarding costs and the refund should be fixed bearing in mind the difference between the representative prices in the Community and the most favourable quotations and prices applying on the world market;
Whereas, in order to make it possible to export flour, groats, meal and malt, the factors to be taken into account when fixing the refund are, on the one hand, the prices of the basic cereals, the quantities needed to manufacture the products concerned and the value of the by-products and, on the other hand, the opportunities and conditions for the sale of the products on the world market;
Whereas Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 provides for the possibility of advance fixing of the refund on exports of the products listed in Article 1 (c) of that Regulation; whereas, in view of the existence of a forward market in international trade in such products, provision should be made for the advance fixing of the refund on exports to be effected at a later date;
Whereas, since there is no threshold price for the products falling within CN code 1107, provision should be made to adjust the refund on those products using the threshold price for the basic cereal, multiplied by a processing factor;
Whereas the corrective amounts provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 vary according to the destination of the products to be exported;
Whereas, with a view to the efficient administration of Community funds and to take account of the export possibilities for those products, provision should be made for the export refunds and levies on the products listed in Article 1 (a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 to be fixed by invitation to tender covering a given quantity;
Whereas, in order to ensure equal treatment for all interested parties within the Community, invitations to tender must be organized in accordance with uniform principles; whereas, to that end, decisions opening invitations to tender should be published together with a notice of invitation to tender in the Official Journal of the European Communities;
Whereas tenders must contain the data needed to assess them and must be accompanied by certain formal undertakings;
Whereas a maximum export refund or a minimum export levy should be fixed; whereas that procedure ensures that all the quantities concerned are allocated;
Whereas situations may arise on the market in which the economic aspects of the exports contemplated result in no further action being taken in respect of tenders received rather than in the fixing of an export refund or levy;
Whereas a tendering security will ensure that the quantities exported are so exported pursuant to the licence issued under the invitation to tender; whereas that obligation can only be met if tenders submitted are maintained; whereas the security must accordingly be forfeited where tenders are withdrawn;
Whereas detailed rules must be laid down to ensure that tenderers are notified of the outcome of the invitation to tender and that the necessary licences are issued for the export of the quantities allocated;
Whereas, for the purposes of fixing export refunds on the products listed in Article 1 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and in order to avoid the need to introduce checks to detect slight variations in quantities of the basic materials used without any noticeable effect on the quality of the product, a standard method of assessment should be adopted; whereas the analysis of the ash content of products manufactured has proved the most effective technical means of assessing the quantity of basic cereals used; whereas that analysis should be carried out following the same procedure throughout the Community;
Whereas granting export refunds on cereals imported from third countries and re-exported to third countries does not appear justified; whereas refunds should accordingly be granted on Community products only;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1525/92 (3), requires that, where refunds vary according to destination, payment of the refund be made conditional in particular on presentation of proof that the product has been imported in its unaltered state into the third country or into one of the third countries for which the refund applies; whereas, as regards cereals, the only refund lower than that applicable to exports to third countries as a whole is that on exports to Switzerland, Austria and Liechtenstein; whereas, in order to avoid obstructing most Community exports by requiring proof of arrival at destination, other means must be found to ensure that products on which a refund applying to all third countries has been paid are not exported to the abovementioned countries; whereas, to that end, the need to present proof of arrival should be waived in all cases where export is effected by sea; whereas certificates drawn up by the competent authorities of the Member States stating that the products have left the customs territory of the Community on board of a vessel of a certain minimum size suitable for sea transport are considered to provide a sufficient guarantee;
Whereas Article 16 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 provides that appropriate measures may be taken when the quotations or prices on the world market for one or more of the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation reach the level of Community prices, and when that situation is likely to continue and to deteriorate, thereby disturbing or threatening to disturb the Community market; whereas to that end sufficient supplies of cereals must be ensured; whereas for that purpose export levies may in particular be improved and the issuing of export licences totally or partly suspended;
Whereas, in order to permit operators to enter into commitments with a view to forward export deliveries, provision should be made for the possibility of advance fixing of export levies; whereas, in cases of advance fixing, provision should be made to adjust the export levy on the basis of the difference between the threshold price in force on the day the licence application is submitted and of that applying during the month of export;
Whereas this Regulation incorporates, whilst adjusting them to current market conditions, the provisions of Commission Regulation No 162/67/EEC (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 468/92 (5), Regulation (EEC) No 3130/73 (6), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2788/86 (7), Regulation (EEC) No 279/75 (8), as last amended by the aforesaid Regulation (EEC) No 2788/86, and Regulation (EEC) No 1281/75 (9); whereas those Regulations should therefore be repealed;
Whereas, since a situation as envisaged in Article 16 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 may arise at relatively short notice, the Commission must be able to suspend the issuing of export licences at any time;
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
This Regulation lays down the detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds as provided for in Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and for the measures as provided for in Article 16 thereof, to be taken in the event of disturbance.
Article 2
Export refunds, export levies as provided for in Article 15 of this Regulation, and corrective amounts as provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 relating to the products listed in Article 1 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of that Regulation shall be fixed in the light of the following factors in particular:
(a) the prices charged on the representative Community markets and their trends,
and
the quotations recorded on the markets of third countries;
(b) the marketing costs and the most favourable costs of transport from the representative Community markets to the port or other place of export and the costs of forwarding on the world market;
(c) in the case of processed products, the quantity of cereals required for the manufacture thereof;
(d) the prospects for and conditions governing the sale of the relevant products on the world market;
(e) the advantage of avoiding disturbance on the Community market;
(f) the economic aspect of the exports contemplated.
Article 3
Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 shall apply to the products listed in Article 1 (1) (c) of that Regulation as well.
However, without prejudice to the fourth subparagraph of Article 13 (4) of that Regulation, the refund on products falling within CN code 1107 shall be adjusted using the threshold prices for the basic products multiplied by the coefficient 1,3 in the case of products falling within CN codes 1107 10 19 and 1107 10 99 and 1,52 in the case of products falling within CN code 1107 20 00.
Article 4
Corrective amounts may vary according to the destination.
Article 5
1. The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1 (1) (a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and the export levies provided for in Article 15 of this Regulation may be fixed by invitation to tender.
The terms of invitations to tender must guarantee equality of access to all persons established in the Community.
Such invitations to tender shall relate to the export refund or levy.
2. Decisions to issue invitations to tender shall be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92.
3. Decisions to issue invitations to tender shall be accompanied by the publication of notices of invitation to tender drawn up by the Commission setting out in particular the dates on which tenders may be submitted and the relevant departments of the Member States to which they are to be sent.
4. Decisions to issue invitations to tender and notices of invitation to tender shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
At least five days must elapse between the publication of the notice of invitation to tender and the first date for the submission of tenders.
Article 6
1. Interested parties shall submit tenders in writing or any means of written telecommunication to the competent department of the Member State.
2. Tenders shall indicate:
(a) the reference of the invitation to tender;
(b) the name and address of the tenderer;
(c) the type and quantity of product to be exported;
(d) the export refund per tonne or, where applicable, the export levy per tonne, expressed in ecus.
3. Tenders shall only be valid if:
(a) proof is provided before the expiry of the time limit laid down for the submission of tenders that the tenderer has lodged the tendering security;
(b) they are accompanied by a written undertaking to submit, in respect of quantities awarded and within two days of recipient of notification of award pursuant to Article 8 (3) of this Regulation, an application for advance fixing of an export refund or, where applicable, an application for advance fixing of an export levy equal to the amount tendered;
(c) they do not include any conditions other than those provided for in the notice of invitation to tender.
4. Tenders submitted may not be withdrawn.
Article 7
Tenders shall be opened by the competent departments of the Member States. They shall not be opened in public. Persons authorized to be present at the opening of tenders shall be under an obligation of secrecy.
The Commission shall be notified forthwith of the tenders without the tenderers being mentioned by name.
Article 8
1. On the basis of tenders notified, the Commission shall, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix a maximum export refund or, where applicable, a minimum export levy or to take no further action in respect of the invitation to tender.
2. Where a maximum export refund is fixed, the contract shall be awarded to the tenderer or tenderers whose bids are equal to or lower than the maximum refund.
Where a minimum export levy is fixed, the contract shall be awarded to the tenderer or tenderers whose bids are equal to or higher than the minimum levy.
3. The competent departments of the Member States concerned shall notify all tenderers in writing of the outcome of their tenders as soon as the Commission has taken a decision.
Article 9
1. Export licences shall be issued to successful tenderers after their applications for export licences have been received by the competent departments of the Member States and in respect of the quantities awarded to them.
2. In the relevant section of the licence applications, and of the licences themselves, shall be state the destinations specified in the regulation issuing the invitation to tender. Licences shall entail the obligation to export to the stated destination.
Article 10
Tendering securities shall be released:
(a) where tenders are not accepted;
(b) when the successful tenderer provided proof that the security provided for in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 891/89 (10) has been submitted.
Where the undertaking provided for in Article 6 (3) (b) hereof is not fulfilled, the tendering security shall be forfeited except in cases of force majeure.
Article 11
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 shall be fixed at least once a month.
Article 12
1. The export refund on wheat flour, meslin flour and rye flour, wheat groats, meal and malt shall be fixed taking account of the quantity of the basic cereal necessary to manufacture 1 000 kg of the product in question. The quantities of basic cereals shall be as set out in Annex I hereto.
2. The ash content of the flour shall be determined using the method of analysis defined in Annex II hereto.
Article 13
Refunds on the products listed in Article 1 (1) (a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 shall be paid once proof has been provided that the products are of Community origin.
Article 14
Notwithstanding Article 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87, proof of completion of customs formalities for release for consumption shall not be required for payment of refunds fixed by invitation to tender, on condition that the operator provides proof that the cereals have left the customs territory of the Community on board a vessel of at least 2 500 tonnes GRT suitable for sea transport.
Such proof shall be provided by the following endorsement certified by the competent authority on the control copy referred to in Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87, on the single administrative document or on the national document proving that the goods have left the Community customs territory:
« Exportación de cereales por vía marítima; artículo 14 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1533/93 »;
»Eksport af korn ad soevejen - Artikel 14 i forordning (EOEF) nr. 1533/93«;
"Ausfuhr von Getreide auf dem Seeweg - Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1533/93 Artikel 14";
« Exagogi sitiron dia thalassis - Arthro 14 toy kanonismoy (EOK) arith. 1533/93 »;
'Export of cereals by sea - Article 14 of Regulation (EEC) No 1533/93';
« Exportation de céréales par voie maritime - Règlement (CEE) no 1533/93, article 14 »;
« Esportazione di cereali per via marittima - Regolamento (CEE) n. 1533/93, art. 14 »;
"Uitvoer van graan over zee - Verordening (EEG) nr. 1533/93, artikel 14";
« Exportaçao de cereais por via marítima - Art. 14, Regulamento (CEE) no 1533/93 ».
Article 15
Where the conditions laid down in Article 16 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 are met in respect of one or more products, the following measures may be taken:
(a) An export levy may be applied. A corrective amount may be fixed. Such levies and corrective amounts may vary according to destination;
(b) the issuing of export licences may be totally or partly suspended;
(c) the export licence applications pending may be rejected in whole or in part.
Article 16
The export levy to be collected shall be that applicable on the day on which customs formalities are completed.
However, export levies applicable on the day of submission of licence applications, adjusted on the basis of the threshold price in force in the month of export, shall apply, at the request of the party concerned lodged at the same time as the licence application, to exports to be effected during the term of validity of the licence.
Article 17
In emergencies the Commission may apply the measure referred to in Article 15 (b). It shall notify the Member States of its decision and shall publish it.
Article 18
Regulation No 162/67/EEC and Regulations (EEC) No 1281/75, (EEC) No 313/73 and (EEC) No 279/75 are hereby repealed.
Article 19
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 1993.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 June 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 537/2008
of 13 June 2008
establishing a prohibition of fishing for saithe in Norwegian waters of I and II by vessels flying the flag of Portugal
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 40/2008 of 16 January 2008 fixing for 2008 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 2008.
(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 2008.
(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 2008 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 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, 13 June 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) No 3416/90
of 27 November 1990
on the introduction of Community aid for the consumption of olive oil in Spain and Portugal
THE COUNCIL 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, and in particular Articles 89 ( 1 ) and 234 ( 2 ) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Articles 95 ( 1 ) and 293 ( 1 ) of the Act of Accession provide that Community aid for the consumption of olive oil hereinafter called "aid' is to be introduced in Spain and Portugal from 1 January 1991, according to a timetable to be determined, to the extent necessary to reach the common level at the end of the period of application of the transitional measures; whereas it is therefore necessary to fix the amount of the aid applicable in Spain and Portugal from 1 January 1991 and the timetable for bringing this amount into line with the common level of aid; whereas transitional measures may, however, prove necessary for a limited period, to avoid major upheavals on the olive oil market in the two Member States concerned and to take account of transitional measures adopted for sunflower seed;
Whereas, to avoid a fall in olive oil consumption in Spain and Portugal following the end of the standstill period, it is necessary to introduce the aid in these two Member States at a level allowing the price ratio between olive oil and competing oils to be adjusted gradually;
Whereas Article 4 of Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of the Council 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 ), provides that the representative market price may be adjusted under certain circumstances during the marketing year, thereby entailing an adjustment of aid; whereas, in this case, the aid levels applicable in Spain and Portugal must be adapted to take account of this price adjustment;
Whereas the alignment of the intervention price in Spain and Portugal on the common price is to be completed from the 1994/95 marketing year; whereas, therefore, the common level of aid must be applied in these two Member States from that date, so that the same price is paid by consumers throughout the Community,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION :
Article 1
Community aid for the consumption of olive oil shall be introduced in Spain and Portugal from 1 January 1991, save for transitional measures taken under Articles 90 and 257 of the Act of Accession .
The amount of the aid shall be ECU 43 per 100 kilograms in Spain and ECU 48 per 100 kilograms in Portugal . Subject to the transitional provisions referred to in the first paragraph, these amounts shall apply from 1 January to 31 October 1991 .
Article 2
1 . At the beginning of the 1991/92, 1992/93 and 1993/94 marketing years, the amount of the aid applicable in Spain and Portugal shall be aligned on the common aid level applicable for the marketing year in question in stages, by one-quarter, one-third and one-half of the difference between each of these amounts and the common aid level .
2 . The common aid level shall be fully applied in Spain and Portugal from the 1994/95 marketing year .
Article 3
Where the representative market price is adjusted during the marketing year, the amount of aid applicable in Spain and Portugal shall be adapted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 38 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, to take account of the adjustment to the said price .
Article 4
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, 27 November 1990 .
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1886/86
of 18 June 1986
fixing for the 1986/87 marketing year the amount of the levy in connection with the offsetting of storage costs for sugar
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30 June 1981 on the common organization of the markets in the sugar sector (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 934/86 (2), and in particular Article 8 (5) thereof,
Whereas Article 8 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 provides that the storage costs for sugar and syrups shall be reimbursed at a flat rate by the Member States;
Whereas Article 6 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1358/77 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3042/78 (4), provides that the amount of the levy for Community sugar shall be calculated by dividing the total estimated reimbursement by the estimated quantity of sugar which will be marketed during the sugar marketing year in question; whereas the total estimated reimbursement is to be increased or decreased, as the case may be, by the amounts carried forward from previous marketing years;
Whereas Article 8 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 provides that the monthly reimbursement amount shall be fixed by the Council simultaneously with the derived intervention prices; whereas the amount for 1986/87 as laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1453/86 (5), is 0,53 ECU per 100 kilograms of white sugar;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1358/77, the quantity in store to be taken into account for the reimbursement of any one month's storage costs is equal to the arithmetic mean of the quantities held in store in the beginning and at the end of the month in question; whereas, for the 1986/87 marketing year, the quantities of Community sugar in store each month may be estimated by reference to estimated stocks at the beginning of the marketing year, estimated monthly production and the quantities likely to be marketed for domestic consumption or exported during the same month; whereas total average monthly stocks during the 1986/87 marketing year can be estimated at approximately 96 million tonnes of sugar expressed as white sugar; whereas the total reimbursement for Community sugar can thus be estimated at approximately 509 million ECU for the 1986/87 marketing year; whereas the balance of previous sugar marketing years can be estimated at a surplus of 19 million ECU; whereas the detailed rules for the application of the system of offsetting storage costs for sugar provide that the levy is to be fixed per 100 kilograms of white sugar; whereas the quantity of Community sugar which will be marketed during the 1986/87 marketing year for home consumption or for export may be estimated at approximately 12,25 million tonnes of sugar expressed as white sugar; whereas the amount of the levy for Community sugar should therefore be 4,00 ECU per 100 kilograms of white sugar:
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 1986/87 marketing year, the amount of the levy referred to under the second subparagraph of Article 8 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 is hereby fixed at 4,00 ECU per 100 kilograms of white sugar.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 1986.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 June 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 780/2008
of 31 July 2008
establishing a prohibition of fishing for saithe in Norwegian waters of I and II by vessels flying the flag of Poland
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 40/2008 of 16 January 2008 fixing for 2008 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 2008.
(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 2008.
(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 2008 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 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, 31 July 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1574/2005
of 28 September 2005
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds (1), and in particular Article 20 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 provides for the amending of the list of participants in the Kimberley Process certification scheme in Annex II.
(2)
The Chair of the Kimberley Process certification scheme, through his Chair’s Notice of 19 September 2005, has decided to add Lebanon to the list of Participants as of 20 September 2005. Annex II should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 is hereby replaced by 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 Union.
It shall be applicable from 20 September 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 September 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1415/94 of 21 June 1994 on the issuing of import licences for certain processed mushroom products originating in China
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1707/90 of 22 June 1990 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EEC) No 1796/81 on imports of mushrooms from third countries (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3453/93 (2), and in particular Article 5 (8) thereof,
Whereas the quantities for which licences have been issued have reached the annual amount granted to China; whereas the issuing of licences qualifying for the exemption from the additional amount provided for in Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1796/81 of 30 June 1981 on measures applicable to imports of mushrooms of Agaricus spp. falling within CN codes 0711 90 40, 2003 10 20 and 2003 10 30 (3), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1122/92 (4), should accordingly be suspended,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For mushrooms of Agaricus spp. falling within CN codes 0711 90 40, 2003 10 20 and 2003 10 30 originating in China, the issuing of licences which may qualify for exemption from the additional amount provided for in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1796/81 is hereby suspended.
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, 21 June 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 683/86
of 4 March 1986
amending Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 laying down common detailed rules for verifying the use and/or destination of products from intervention
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), and in particular Article 8 (8) thereof,
Whereas the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 142/86 (3), are applicable to the products sold pursuant to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 682/86 of 4 March 1986 on the sale by storage agencies of unprocessed dried grapes for the manufacture of certain condiments (4);
Whereas the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 should therefore be amended accordingly;
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
The following is hereby added to point II 'Products subject to a use and/or destination other than that mentioned under I' of the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76:
'36. Commission Regulation (EEC) No 682/86 of 4 March 1986 on the sale by the storage agencies of unprocessed dried grapes for the manufacture of certain condiments:
- Section 104:
Til fremstilling af visse smagspraeparater - forordning (EOEF) nr. 682/86,
Zur Herstellung bestimmter Wuerzmittel - Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 682/86,
Gia tin paraskeví orisménon karykevmáton - Kanonismaós (EOK) arith. 682/86,
For the manufacture of certain condiments - Regulation (EEC) No 682/86,
Para la fabricación de determinados condimentos - Reglamento (CEE) no 682/86,
Destiné à la fabrication de certains condiments - règlement (CEE) no 682/86,
Destinato alla fabbricazione di taluni condimenti - regolamento (CEE) n. 682/86,
Voor de vervaardiging van bepaalde kruiderijen - Verordening (EEG) nr. 682/86,
Destinado à fabricação de determinados condimentos - Regulamento (CEE) no 682/86.
- Section 106:
Date of acceptance of the purchase application.
(36) OJ No L 62, 5. 3. 1986, p. 8.'
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, 4 March 1986.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1289/85
of 21 May 1985
on minimum quality requirements for Williams pears in syrup eligible for production aid
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 516/77 of 14 March 1977 on the common organization of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 746/85 (2), and in particular Article 3d (4) thereof,
Whereas Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 516/77 provides for a system of production aid for certain products; whereas Article 3d (1) (b) of the Regulation lays down that aid shall be paid only for products which meet minimum quality standards to be laid down;
Whereas the aim of such quality requirements is to avoid production of products for which no demand exists or products which would create distortion of the market; whereas the requirements must be based on traditional fair manufacturing procedures;
Whereas with a view to implementing the production aid system this Regulation must be applied in conjunction with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1599/84 of 5 June 1984 laying down detailed rules for the application of production aid for products processed from fruit and vegetables (3), in particular as regards examination of the processed products;
Whereas the quality requirements laid down in this Regulation are measures for implementing the production aid system; whereas quality requirements for the marketing of the products are not yet established by the Community; whereas national requirements to that end may continue to be applied by the Member States, provided they are compatible with the provisions of the Treaty on the free movement of goods;
Whereas the Management Committee for Products Processed from Fruit and Vegetables has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
This Regulation lays down the minimum quality requirements which Williams pears in syrup, as defined in Article 1 (2) (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1599/84, hereinafter referred to as pears in syrup, shall meet in order to benefit from the production aid provided for in Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 516/77.
Article 2
For the manufacture of pears in syrup only pears of the species Pyrus Communis L. variety Williams shall be used. The raw material shall be fresh, sound, clean and suitable for processing.
The raw material may before being used for the manufacture of pears in syrup have been chilled.
Article 3
1. Pears in syrup shall be manufactured in one of the styles defined in paragraph 2.
2. For the purposes of this Regulation the styles are defined as follows:
(a) 'whole fruit' means the whole fruit, with core and with or without stalk;
(b) 'halves' means the cored fruit cut into two approximately equal parts;
(c) 'quarters' means the cored fruit cut into four approximately equal parts;
(d) 'slices' means the cored fruit cut into more than four wedge-shaped parts;
(e) 'dice' means the cored fruit cut into cube-like parts.
3. Each container with pears in syrup shall contain only one style and the fruit or pieces thereof shall be practically uniform in size. No other type of fruit may be found in the container.
4. The colour of pears in syrup shall be characteristic for the variety Williams. A slightly pink discoloration shall not be considered a defect. Pears in
syrup containing special ingredients shall be considered to be of characteristic colour when there is no abnormal discoloration for the respective ingredient used.
5. Pears in syrup shall be free of foreign materials of non-vegetable origin, and from foreign flavours and odours. The fruit shall be fleshy and may be variable in tenderness but shall neither be excessively soft nor excessively firm.
6. Pears in syrup shall be practically free from:
(a) harmless foreign materials of vegetable orgin;
(b) peel;
(c) blemished units.
Whole fruits, halves and quarters shall also be practically free from mechanically damaged units.
Article 4
1. Fruit, or pieces thereof, is considered practically uniform in size when, in a container, the weight of the largest unit is not more than twice the weight of the smallest unit. However, until 30 June 1987 whole fruit and halves, packed in containers with a nominal water capacity of 2 650 ml or more shall be considered practically uniform in size when the weight of the largest unit is not more than 2,5 times the weight of the smallest unit.
If there are less than 20 units in a container, one unit may be disregarded. When determining the largest and the smallest units, broken units shall not be taken into consideration.
2. Pears in syrup shall be considered as complying with Article 3 (6) when the following tolerances are not exceeded:
1.2,3 // // // // Style // 1.2.3 // // Whole, halves and quarters // Other // // // // Blemished units // 15 % by number // 1,5 kilograms // Mechanically damaged units // 10 % by number // Not applicable // Peel // 100 cm2 aggregate area // 100 cm2 aggregate area // Harmless foreign material of vegetable origin: // // // - Core material // 10 units // 10 units // - Loose pear seeds // 80 pieces // 80 pieces // - Other material, including loose core material // 60 pieces // 60 pieces // // //
The tolerances fixed, other than those fixed by reference to per cent by number, are per 10 kilograms drained net weight.
Cores shall not be considered as a defect in whole styles with core.
3. For the purposes of paragraph 2:
(a) 'blemished units' means fruit with discoloration on the surface or spots which definitely contrast with the overall colour and which may penetrate into the flesh, in particular bruises, scab and dark discoloration;
(b) 'mechanically damaged units' means units which have been severed into definite parts, and all of such portions that equal the size of a full-size unit are considered one unit or units where the trimming has been excessive and includes serious gouges on the surface of the units which substantially detracts from the appearance;
(c) 'peel' means both peel adhering to pear flesh and peel found loose in the container;
(d) 'harmless foreign material of vegetable origin' means vegetable materials which are irrelevant to the fruit itself or which have been attached to the fresh fruit but should have been removed during processing, in particular core material, pear seeds, stalks and leaves and pieces thereof. Peel shall, however, be excluded;
(e) 'core material' means the seed cell or parts thereof attached to the fruit, with or without seeds. Pieces of core are considered as equivalent to one unit when, having been aggregated, the pieces total approximately one-half of a core; (f) 'loose pear seeds' means seeds which are not included in core material but which are loose in the container.
Article 5
1. The pears and the syrup in a container shall occupy not less than 90 % of the water capacity of the container.
2. The drained net weight of the fruit shall on average be at least equal to the following percentages of the water capacity, expressed in grams, of the container:
(%)
1.2,3 // // // Style // Containers with a nominal water capacity of // 1.2.3 // // 425 ml or more // less than 425 ml // // // // Whole // 50 // 46 // Halves // 54 // 46 // Quarters // 56 // 46 // Slices // 56 // 46 // Dice // 56 // 50 // // //
3. Where pears in syrup are packed in glass containers, the water capacity shall be reduced by 20 ml before the percentages referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 are calculated.
4. Each container shall be marked with a reference identifying the date and year of production and the processor. The marking, which may be in code form, shall be approved by the competent authorities in the Member State where production takes place and these authorities may adopt additional provisions as to the marking itself.
Article 6
The processor shall daily and at regular intervals during the processing period verify that the pears in syrup comply with the requirements for benefiting from aid. The result of the verification shall be recorded.
Article 7
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 May 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 22 February 2001
laying down the sampling plans and diagnostic methods for the detection and confirmation of certain fish diseases and repealing Decision 92/532/EEC
(notified under document number C(2001) 426)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2001/183/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products(1), as last amended by Directive 98/45/EC(2), and in particular Article 15 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The sampling plans and diagnostic methods for the detection and confirmation of certain fish diseases have been laid down in Commision Decision 92/532/EEC(3), as amended by Commission Decision 96/240/EC(4).
(2) Since the time of adoption of Decision 92/532/EEC, new practical and scientific developments have taken place and Directive 91/67/EEC has been amended. This requires the sampling plans and diagnostic methods to be updated.
(3) Such updating relates to the examination and identification of viruses causing viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious haematopoietic necrosis (IHN) and to changes in accordance with the last amendments of Directive 91/67/EEC.
(4) The Community reference laboratory for fish diseases, established by Council Directive 93/53/EEC(5), has been consulted.
(5) The sampling plans and diagnostic methods for the detection and confirmation of certain fish diseases introduced by Decision 92/532/EEC must be repealed for the sake of clarity.
(6) 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 sampling plans and diagnostic methods for the detection and confirmation of viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious haematopoietic necrosis (IHN) are laid down in the Annex.
Article 2
The present Decision shall repeal Decision 92/532/EEC.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 February 2001.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 17 November 2003
drawing up lists of third countries from which Member States are to authorise imports of certain products for human consumption subject to Council Directive 92/118/EEC
(notified under document number C(2003) 4181)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/812/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(1) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC(1), as last amended by Commission Decision 2003/721/EC(2), and in particular Article 10(2)(a) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Directive 92/118/EEC sets out Community rules concerning animal and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of products of animal origin.
(2) Commission Decision 94/278/EC of 18 March 1994 drawing up a list of third countries from which Member States authorise imports of certain products subject to Council Directive 92/118/EEC(3), as last amended by Decision 2003/235/EC(4), sets out lists of third countries from which Member States are to authorise imports of certain products subject to Directive 92/118/EC, including products not intended for human consumption.
(3) 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(5), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 808/2003(6), sets out Community rules on animal products not intended for human consumption. The date of application of the model health certificates provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 is 1 January 2004.
(4) Directive 2002/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2002 amending Council Directives 90/425/EEC and 92/118/EC as regards health requirements for animal by-products(7), has significantly amended Directive 92/118/EEC in order to limit its scope to products intended for human consumption.
(5) It is necessary to take into account that the Acceding States are scheduled to join as of 1 May 2004.
(6) In the interests of clarity and consistency of Community legislation, Decision 94/278/EC should be repealed and replaced by the provisions of this Decision.
(7) 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
Member States shall authorise imports of certain animal products intended for human consumption subject to Directive 92/118/EEC from third countries or parts of third countries or territories appearing on the lists set out in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
Decision 94/278/EC is repealed.
Article 3
This Decision shall apply from 1 January 2004.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 November 2003.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1631/2000
of 25 July 2000
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for tinned pineapple and fixing, for the 2000/2001 marketing year, the production aid for tinned pineapple and the minimum price to be paid to pineapple producers
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 525/77 of 14 March 1977 establishing a system of production aid for tinned pineapple(1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1699/85(2), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85 of 25 July 1985(3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2033/91(4), lays down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid established by Regulation (EC) No 525/77 and in particular the products eligible for aid.
(2) As well as tinned whole pineapple and pieces of pineapple, the Community pineappple sector produces tinned pineapple "crush" (small pieces or shreds of fruit), obtained by pressing the fruit and presented in the form of finely crushed pineapple. The products eligible for aid should therefore be defined more precisely and Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85 amended to this end.
(3) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1558/91(5), to which Article 1(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85 refers, has been repealed and replaced by Commisison Regulation (EC) No 504/97 of 19 March 1997 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 as regards the system of production aid for products processed from fruit and vegetables(6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1607/1999(7). The corresponding references in Regulation (EC) No 504/97 should therefore be specified in the above Article.
(4) The minimum price and the production aid for tinned pineapple should be fixed for the 2000/2001 marketing year on the basis of Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 525/77 distinguishing between the two types of products defined in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85.
(5) The Management Committee for Products Processed from Fruit and Vegetables has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) 2077/85 is replaced by the following:
"Article 1
1. For the purposes of the production aid system provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 525/77 'tinned pineapple' means pineapple, without peel and core, having undergone a heat treatment, packed in hermetically sealed containers with a covering liquid of sugar syrup and/or natural fruit juice, covered by CN codes ex 2008 20 51, ex 2008 20 59, ex 2008 20 71, ex 2008 20 79, ex 2008 20 91 and ex 2008 20 99, and
(a) presented whole or in pieces, in which the drained net weight of the fruit accounts for at least 58 % of the net weight of the container, or
(b) presented in finely crushed small pieces or shreds, in which the drained net weight of the fruit accounts for at least 73 % of the net weight of the container.
2. Article 1(2)(o) and (p) and Articles 3, 4 7(1), (2) and (4), 8, 9, 10, 11(1), 14, 15 and 16(2) to (7) of Regulation (EC) No 504/97 shall apply to this production aid system."
Article 2
For the 2000/2001 marketing year:
(a) the minimum price referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 525/77 to be paid to producers for pineapples shall be EUR 41,413 per 100 kg net from the producer,
(b) the production aid for tinned pineapple referred to in Article 5 of that Regulation shall be EUR 111,925 per 100 kg net for products referred to in Article 1(1)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2077/85, and EUR 240,067 per 100 kg net for products referred to in Article 1(1)(b) of that Regulation.
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 from 1 June 2000.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 July 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 11 February 2005
fixing for the year 2005 an indicative allocation between the Member States of the financing under the Community Tobacco Fund of the measures referred to in Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EC) No 2182/2002
(notified under document number C(2005) 331)
(2005/129/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco (1), and in particular Article 14a thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Articles 13 and 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2182/2002 of 6 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 with regard to the Community Tobacco Fund (2) provide for measures to promote a switch of tobacco production. Those measures are to be financed by the Community Tobacco Fund set up by Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92.
(2)
The total amount available to the Community Tobacco Fund for 2005 is EUR 28,8 million, 50 % of which should be used to finance specific measures to help tobacco growers to switch to other crops or to other economic activities that create employment, and to fund related studies.
(3)
It is therefore necessary to fix an indicative allocation of the available amount between the Member States concerned in accordance with Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2182/2002.
(4)
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Tobacco,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
For the year 2005, the indicative allocation between the Member States of the financing under the Community Tobacco Fund of the measures referred to in Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EC) No 2182/2002 shall be as set out in the Annex.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 February 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1356/2003
of 31 July 2003
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002(2), 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 1 August 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 31 July 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1987/2005
of 2 December 2005
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) originating in Russia and the People’s Republic of China
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
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 Articles 9 and 10(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PROCEDURE
1. Provisional Measures
(1)
By Regulation (EC) No 862/2005 (2), (provisional Regulation), the Commission imposed provisional anti-dumping duties on imports into the Community of granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) originating in Russia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
2. Subsequent Procedure
(2)
Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was decided to impose provisional anti-dumping duties on imports of PTFE from Russia and the PRC, several interested parties submitted comments in writing. In accordance with the provision of Article 20(1) of the basic Regulation, all interested parties which requested a hearing were granted an opportunity to be heard by the Commission.
(3)
The Commission continued to seek and verify all information deemed necessary for the definitive findings.
(4)
An additional verification visit was carried out at the premises of the following companies:
-
Heroflon (Italy), granular PTFE transformer,
-
Fluorseals (Italy), granular PTFE processor.
(5)
All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty and the definitive collection of amounts secured by way of provisional duty. They were also granted a period within which they could make representations subsequent to this disclosure.
(6)
The oral and written arguments submitted by the parties were considered, and, were deemed appropriate, taken into account for the definitive findings.
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
1. Product concerned
(7)
The provisional Regulation described the product concerned as granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), containing not more than 3 % of other monomer unit than tetrafluoroethylene, without fillers, in the form of powder or pellets, with the exclusion of micronised material. The product concerned can also be presented as raw polymer (reactor bead) in wet or dry form. Further to comments received by interested parties, it is clarified that ‘micronised material’ means a fluoropolymer micropowder as defined by norm ‘ASTM D5675-04’. The product concerned is currently classifiable within CN code ex 3904 61 00.
(8)
One users’/importers’ organisation (the European Fluoropolymer Fair Trade Association or EFFTA) and one exporters’ association objected to the provisional conclusions that all granular PTFE constitute a single product. It was argued that granular PTFE can be divided into three product groups based on quality differences (high/medium/low). It was claimed that each product group would be used in different applications not competing with one another in the same market.
(9)
Despite quality differences, all granular PTFE types were found to have the same basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics, which were neither contested by EFFTA nor by the exporters’ association. As far as granular PTFE applications are concerned, it was found that granular PTFE of a lower quality could be used after post-treatment in almost all applications, including some high-end applications (e.g. billets for skiving). In general, as also admitted by EFFTA, there was an overlapping in applications for various types and qualities of granular PTFE and no clear dividing line could thus be established.
(10)
It was therefore concluded that, notwithstanding the different possible product types due to different form, average particle size, thermo treatment or co-monomer content, and despite quality differences, all of them constituted one single product for the purpose of this proceeding because all types and qualities had the same physical characteristics and essentially the same basic end-uses. In recitals 13, 145 and 147 of the provisional Regulation it was erroneously mentioned that granular PTFE would also be contained in anoraks and in the inner shield of cables and that it is used in textile and biomedical applications as well as isolation agents. The definitive findings revealed that granular PTFE is not used in any of the aforementioned applications.
(11)
Taking into account the abovementioned considerations, the product definition and the provisional findings set out in recital 14 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2. Like product
(12)
A number of importers and users reiterated that the granular PTFE produced and sold in the Community market could not be likened to the products imported from the PRC and Russia. It was argued that the products imported from the countries subject of the present investigation, would be of a much lower quality than the product produced by the Community industry and would therefore be sold on different markets, thus not competing with each other. These parties did not, however, come forward with new information or evidence in this matter.
(13)
It should first be noted that, as outlined in recital 16 of the provisional Regulation, the investigation has shown that the Community industry also produced and sold scrap or ‘off-spec’ material during the investigation period (IP) to the same customers as the exporting producers concerned. On the other hand, the investigation revealed that at least the Russian exporting producers sold a quality of granular PTFE to the Community, which was, even without post-treatment, comparable to the high quality Community grades, albeit in very limited quantities. Furthermore, even low quality granular PTFE imported from the countries concerned could, after post-treatment, be used in a similar range of applications as the product produced and sold in the Community market by the Community industry.
(14)
Considering the above, it was concluded that the product concerned and the granular PTFE produced and sold in the Community by the Community industry share the same physical and technical characteristics and the same basic end-uses. They were therefore considered to be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
(15)
In the absence of any other comments in this regard, the provisional conclusions set out in recital 15 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
C. DUMPING
1. People’s Republic of China
1.1. Market economy treatment (MET)
(16)
Following the imposition of provisional measures, the three Chinese cooperating exporting producers claimed that they should have been granted MET and reiterated the arguments they had previously submitted. These comments were already addressed in recitals 33 to 39 of the provisional Regulation. Consequently, it was considered that the decision to reject MET to the three companies should be maintained.
1.2. Individual treatment (IT)
(17)
Two exporting producers argued that they should be granted IT. One exporter submitted that the Commission was not entitled to reject IT on the basis of possible State interference, since Article 9(5) requires that only export prices and quantities are freely determined. In this respect, it should be noted that a company can, by definition, not be considered to freely determine its export prices and quantities and conditions and terms of sale, if the latter can be influenced by the State. Therefore, the conditions of Article 9(5)(b) of the basic Regulation cannot be considered to be met by companies that are not able to demonstrate that they are not subject to possible State interference. The exporting producer concerned has not provided any evidence showing that the State could neither influence its decisions with regard to export prices and quantities, and conditions and terms of sale, nor that possible State interference was not such as to permit circumvention of the measures. This is mainly due to the fact that, as outlined in recital 33 of the provisional Regulation, the relationship of this company to the State-owned shareholder was unclear and the Articles of Association were considered unreliable. Therefore, the fact that such State interference would allegedly not have occurred in the past, would, even if it were demonstrated, not offer any guarantee that it will not take place in future, in particular should an individual duty rate be attributed to this company.
(18)
Another exporter argued that its shareholding structure, in particular the fact that it is partly State-owned, did not as such allow the conclusion that the State interfered in the setting of prices and other sales terms. First of all, the company did not substantiate its claim with any evidence. On the other hand, it was found that the State owned the majority of the company’s capital and furthermore, nominated the General Manager and the majority of the Board of Directors of this company. Therefore, it was concluded that Article 9(5)(c) is not fulfilled and IT should therefore be rejected.
(19)
In the absence of any other comments, the findings of the provisional Regulation, as set out in recital 45 of that Regulation, are hereby confirmed.
1.3. Analogue country
(20)
All three Chinese cooperating exporting producers disagreed with the choice of the United States of America (USA) and claimed that Russia should have been chosen as the analogue country instead. Two of them reiterated the comments made before the imposition of provisional measures, which have already been addressed in recitals 47 to 54 of the provisional Regulation. In the absence of any new information and evidence, the claims of these exporting producers had to be rejected.
(21)
Another Chinese exporting producer argued that, due to the lower economic development of the PRC, production factors, such as labour costs and overhead expenses, would be lower and therefore not comparable to the USA. Nevertheless, as mentioned in recital 54 of the provisional Regulation, the different level of overall economic development is, in itself, not a relevant factor when selecting an analogue country. This company also alleged that as a consequence of the lower economic development in China, public services such as water, power and gas supply would be less expensive than in the USA. In this regard, it must be noted that it is precisely the aim of Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation that an analogue country is selected to determine the normal value on the basis of prices and costs, unbiased by non-market economy conditions. Thus, a simple comparison of prices in the non-market economy country or in the country with an economy in transition with those in the analogue country is as such not meaningful. In any event, no information was submitted which would have substantiated the alleged differences and allowed a quantification, or which would have demonstrated that this exporting producer benefited from any natural comparative advantage. The argument was therefore rejected. Finally, this exporting producer also claimed that, due to a simpler production process, the equipment, as well as the related investments and depreciation rates would be significantly different. However, the exporter did not submit any information showing that its production process was indeed simpler than that used by the USA producers or which would allow the Commission services to quantify the effect of such alleged differences.
(22)
This exporter also argued that the USA and the Chinese granular PTFE have a different quality which would result in different applications and that the choice of the USA as analogue country was therefore not appropriate. In this regard it is noted that, as explained in recital 53 of the provisional Regulation, an adjustment was made for differences of quality, in particular contamination, the level of which the Chinese exporting producer did not contest. This argument was therefore also rejected.
(23)
In the absence of any other comments, the findings set out in recitals 47 to 54 of the provisional Regulation regarding the choice of the USA as an appropriate analogue country are hereby confirmed.
1.4. Determination of normal value for Chinese exporting producers not granted MET
(24)
One Chinese exporting producer argued that the adjustment for quality differences described in recital 53 of the provisional Regulation was insufficient and that normal value should have been adjusted to the same extent as the Community industry price when calculating undercutting and underselling margins, as explained in recital 98 of the same Regulation.
(25)
It should be noted that while the adjustment to the normal value is designed to capture differences between the like product sold on the market of the analogue country and the product concerned, the adjustment made in the injury analysis takes into consideration differences between the latter and the like product sold in the Community. Although the like product sold in the analogue country and the one sold in the Community market may be of a similar quality and may have similar characteristics, differences in the product concerned are not necessarily identical. Consequently, the adjustments were made on their own merits and on the basis of the information and evidence collected during the investigation. The exporting producer did not submit any evidence showing that the methodology used by the Commission in its provisional determinations was unreasonable and that indeed, differences between the product concerned and the like product produced and sold in the Community on the one hand and in the analogue country on the other hand would be identical, nor was there any other information or evidence available suggesting that the adjustments should be identical. Consequently, the claim had to be rejected and the findings in recital 53 of the provisional Regulation as regards the determination of normal value for exporting producers not granted MET are hereby confirmed.
1.5. Export price
(26)
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the methodology set out in recital 59 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
1.6. Comparison
(27)
One Chinese exporting producer argued that the adjustment for physical differences outlined in recital 62 of the provisional Regulation would not properly reflect the actual difference in production costs and the adjustment made should therefore be revised appropriately. It should be noted that the adjustment made for the determination of the provisional dumping margin was based on a reasonable estimate of the difference in market value in the USA, in accordance with Article 2(10)(a) of the basic Regulation. It was considered that this methodology was the most accurate in order to determine the effect of the difference in price and price comparability. The Chinese exporting producer did not quantify its claim, nor did it submit any information or evidence that the methodology set out by Article 2(10)(a) of the basic Regulation would not be adequate to take the physical difference into account. On this basis, the claim had to be rejected. In the absence of any other comments, the findings on comparison, as set out in recitals 60 to 64 of the provisional Regulation, are hereby confirmed.
2. Russia
2.1. Application of the provisions of Article 18 of the basic Regulation
(28)
As mentioned in recitals 69 to 82 of the provisional Regulation, the determination of dumping at provisional stage was based on the facts available for both exporting producers investigated in Russia.
(29)
Prior to the imposition of the provisional duties, the two Russian exporting producers were informed forthwith of the basis on which it was intended to apply facts available at the stage of the provisional determination and were given the opportunity to provide further explanations, in accordance with Article 18(4) of the basic Regulation.
(30)
The two Russian exporting producers claimed that they cooperated to the best of their abilities and that the full application of facts available was therefore disproportionate. They argued that in accordance with Article 18(3) of the basic Regulation, the companies’ own data, although not in all respects ideal, should have been used.
(31)
In this respect, and as outlined in recitals 70 to 74 of the provisional Regulation, it is recalled first of all that both companies submitted incomplete, incorrect and misleading information. Moreover, one company refused to submit information for the calculation of the dumping margin or did not provide such information in a timely manner thus, it was no longer verifiable. Finally, a trader in Russia related to one of the exporting producers did not cooperate.
(32)
Both companies already admitted the existence of deficiencies in their responses to the questionnaires, as well as during the on-the-spot verification, but alleged that these were not such as to cause undue difficulty in arriving at a reasonably accurate finding. It was claimed that the deficiencies would only have a minor impact on the findings and that the figures supplied by the companies would, overall, be sufficiently reliable to be used for the determination of dumping.
(33)
A re-examination was made of all information submitted by the two companies in their responses to the questionnaire and during the on-the-spot verification, as well as of all the information submitted by the companies following the disclosure of the provisional findings. However, none of the companies’ explanations submitted could alter the provisional conclusions. It is reiterated that the data provided by the companies in their questionnaire reply could not be reconciled with their audited accounts. This was considered a serious deficiency. Under these circumstances, a reliable individual dumping margin cannot be established and recourse has to be made to facts available.
(34)
In this regard and as already mentioned in recital 72 of the provisional Regulation, it is recalled that one company provided significantly misleading information concerning its company structure which ultimately did not allow the reconciliation of the figures reported. The reply of this company was also significantly incomplete and of low quality. For the other company, while each deficiency taken separately may not have a major impact on the dumping calculations, the accumulation of such deficiencies casts serious doubts on the overall reliability of the data. Therefore, and for the reasons set out in recital 71 of the provisional Regulation, available facts had to be used in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. No new evidence was provided which could alter these findings.
(35)
Due to the serious deficiencies outlined above and the impossibility of verifying the information submitted, it had to be concluded that data submitted were overall unreliable and inaccurate. Therefore, the questionnaire replies of both companies had to be rejected as a whole. Consequently, the findings of recitals 70 to 74 and the conclusion in recital 75 of the provisional Regulation, namely that the dumping margins for both exporting producers could not be established on the basis of their own data but had to be based on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, is hereby confirmed.
2.2. Normal value
(36)
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the methodology set out in recital 76 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
2.3. Export price
(37)
Both companies claimed that the calculation of the export price was wrongly based on prices, as recorded by Eurostat, for imports falling under the CN code ex 3904 61 00, since apart from the product concerned this code also includes other products not subject to the present proceeding.
(38)
In this regard, it should be noted that the large majority of imports under the abovementioned CN code falls under the product concerned. Nevertheless, in the provisional determinations, adjustments were made to the data recorded by Eurostat on the basis of information available (estimates of the Community industry). In the absence of any more reliable information available, this methodology was maintained for the determination of the definitive dumping margin.
(39)
One company claimed that in order to establish its export price, the information of two unrelated importers accounting for more than 80 % of its sales to the Community during the investigation period should be used. However, one of these importers did not fully cooperate during the investigation. In addition, the data provided by the fully cooperating unrelated importer could not be linked with those provided by the exporting producer concerned. Therefore, the data provided did not allow a determination of the export price on that basis and the claim had to be rejected.
(40)
In the absence of any other information, the methodology as outlined in recital 77 of the provisional Regulation was maintained and the export price was calculated on the basis of Eurostat data.
2.4. Comparison
(41)
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the findings of recitals 78 and 79 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3. Dumping margin
(42)
In the absence of any comments by the interested parties, the methodology for the calculation of the dumping margins as set out in recitals 24, 65 to 68 and 80 to 82 of the provisional Regulation are herewith confirmed. Considering the above, the definitive dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the cif import price at the Community border, are:
Exporting country
Dumping margin
PRC
99,7 %
Russia
36,6 %
D. INJURY
1. Community production, Community industry and Community consumption
(43)
In the absence of any comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 83 to 87 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2. Cumulative assessment of the effects of the imports concerned
(44)
The two Russian exporting producers reiterated that for the purpose of assessing injury, imports of granular PTFE originating in Russia should be decumulated for the reasons set out in recital 91 of the provisional Regulation. To support their claim, the exporting producers argued that the decrease in the Community industry’s profitability from 2002 onwards coincided with a decrease of imports originating in Russia, while in 2001, when imports from Russia were at their highest, the Community industry enjoyed high profit margins. In contrast, imports originating in the PRC increased in parallel to the Community industry’s decline in profit margin. The exporter concluded that on this basis material injury could not have been caused by imports originating in Russia and that cumulation was therefore not warranted.
(45)
It is noted that, as set out in recital 90 of the provisional Regulation, price trends from both Russia and the PRC, are similar. They have a decreasing trend throughout the entire IP and dropped each year by a significant percentage. Furthermore, both imports originating in Russia and those originating in the PRC undercut the Community industry’s prices substantially throughout the period from 1 January 2001 to the end of the IP (period considered). In addition, it is noted that import trends from Russia, although decreasing in 2002, remained stable afterwards and even increased slightly during the IP. Finally, the definitive findings confirmed that imports of granular PTFE from the PRC and Russia were competing with each other on the Community market. Therefore, and in view of the arguments set out in recitals 89 to 92 of the provisional Regulation, there are no reasons to conclude that Russian imports should be decumulated. The abovementioned argument was consequently rejected.
(46)
In the absence of any further comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 88 to 93 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3. Imports from the countries concerned
3.1. Volume, market share and prices of the imports concerned
(47)
In the absence of any comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 94 to 96 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.2. Price undercutting
(48)
One Chinese exporting producer expressed its concern with regard to the provisional determination of the post-importation costs when calculating the price of the Community industry. In particular, this exporter alleged that such cost would be higher than the one used in the provisional calculations, without however providing any supporting evidence in this regard. The determination of post-importation costs at provisional stage was based on actual data provided by the two cooperating importers. The reply of one of these importers was subject to verification. The information of the other importer, although not verified, was in line with the verified data of the first importer and was therefore considered sufficiently reliable. It is therefore considered that the data provided by the importers were more reliable than the estimates made by the Chinese exporting producers, which were furthermore not substantiated by any evidence. This claim had consequently to be rejected.
(49)
One Chinese exporting producer pointed to a clerical error when calculating the adjustment for import duties. Accordingly, the adjustment for import duties for all Chinese exporting producers was corrected in accordance with the applicable duty rate during the IP.
(50)
As announced in recital 98 of the provisional Regulation, it was examined whether the adjustment provisionally granted for quality differences between the like product sold by the Community industry and the product concerned imported from Russia and the PRC was appropriate.
(51)
In this regard, the Community industry submitted that post-treatment would only be necessary for a limited number of the imported product types, i.e. the reactor bead. The Community industry further argued that in order to produce pre-sintered material, their products would also need further processing, and therefore no adjustment to the import price would be necessary. Finally, information was submitted regarding sales of high quality product types produced by the Russian exporting producers, which did not need any post-treatment.
(52)
It was found that certain granular PTFE types produced by Russian exporting producers indeed reached higher quality standards and could thus be used without any further treatment. However, these product types were only sold in negligible quantities during the IP and mainly for testing purposes. Thus, on the basis of the information available from the cooperating users, imports of such higher quality granular PTFE from Russia constituted only 1,4 % of their total imports from that country.
(53)
It was further found that all other imported granular PTFE grades needed post-treatment, which consisted mainly in heating and further milling. This process has to be distinguished from the processing needed for the production of pre-sintered PTFE, which is a specific process after post-treatment. Thus, the adjustment granted at provisional stage correctly reflects the demonstrated quality differences between the like product manufactured by the Community industry and the product concerned and does not concern the additional processing costs of granular PTFE required for the production of pre-sintered grades. The Community industry’s arguments had therefore to be rejected.
(54)
On the other hand, one Russian exporting producer and one importer of granular PTFE from Russia claimed that even after post-treatment the granular PTFE exported by this exporting producer would still be of a lower quality than the granular PTFE produced and sold by the Community industry on the Community market. The exporting producer added that the post-treatment would only balance quality differences with regard to the particle size and the impurity of the product, excluding, however, other key quality parameters, such as tensile strength and elongation, which would have a considerable impact on the intrinsic quality of the Russian granular PTFE and consequently on the quality of the semi-finished product. In order to substantiate this claim, the abovementioned importer submitted information on testing results which allegedly showed quality differences between granular PTFE produced by Community producers and post-treated granular PTFE imported from Russia. On this basis, it was claimed that the adjustment should exceed the mere cost of post-treatment.
(55)
However, the investigation could not confirm these allegations. It was found that the information submitted by the importer concerning the testing results was not representative, but rather anecdotal, since it singled out only one production lot. Even within this lot, all tested granular PTFE fulfilled the required specifications in order to comply with the norm, despite variations in their technical specifications. Therefore, the evidence submitted was not considered conclusive. In any case, based on the information submitted by the abovementioned Russian exporting producer and the importer, the claimed quality difference could not be quantified. Therefore, it is confirmed that granular PTFE imported from this exporting producer after post-treatment was of a similar quality as the granular PTFE produced and sold by the Community industry on the Community market and could be used in a wide-range of similar applications.
(56)
Given the above, the adjustment provisionally made when calculating the undercutting margin was found to be appropriate. However, the adjustment was corrected on the basis of the verified information of two users, which allowed a precise calculation of these costs. Thus, the adjustment amounted to 36,7 % of the purchase price of the users/importers concerned.
(57)
Taken into consideration the abovementioned corrections and in the absence of any other comments, recitals 97 to 98 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(58)
On the basis of the above, the comparison on a per-model basis showed that the product concerned originating in the PRC and Russia was sold in the Community at prices which undercut those of the Community industry by 20,5 and 13,5 % respectively during the IP, when expressed as a percentage of the Community industry’s prices.
3.3. Situation of the Community industry and conclusion on injury
3.3.1. General remarks
(59)
Certain interested parties pointed to the positive trends of certain injury factors and claimed that it would not be sufficient that other injury indicators such as sales prices and profitability showed negative trends to conclude that material injury had been suffered by the Community industry.
(60)
It should first be noted that Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation provides that while the impact of dumped imports on the Community industry shall be examined on the basis of an evaluation of all relevant economic factors and indices, none of these factors on its own or together with others can necessarily give decisive guidance. It is therefore not required that all injury factors show a negative trend in order to conclude that the Community industry suffered material injury.
(61)
On this basis, in order to determine whether the Community industry suffered material injury, it is important that its overall financial situation be considered. Thus, in case of the positive development of certain injury indicators, these should not be considered in isolation but in a broader context, i.e. together with the development of other injury indicators in order to make meaningful conclusions. In the present case and as outlined in recital 117 of the provisional Regulation, the positive trend of certain injury indicators has to be seen in the context of the overall significant negative effects of the imports under consideration on the performance of the Community industry and the latter’s reaction to this. The overall negative picture of the Community industry’s situation is in particular translated in a decline of its sales prices and profitability.
(62)
It is therefore considered that the approach taken for the provisional determinations was reasonable and in line with the basic Regulation and is therefore maintained for the definitive findings.
3.3.2. Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation
(63)
Some interested parties argued that the Community industry was able to increase its production capacity, volume and capacity utilisation, while consumption in the Community was decreasing, which would not point to an injurious situation of the Community industry.
(64)
In fact, the decrease in consumption (by 12 %) was only felt in 2002, when the Community industry’s production volume decreased in line by 13 %, which is also translated into a decrease in the capacity utilisation during the same year. As a consequence and as outlined in recital 102 of the provisional Regulation, the Community industry had to lower its sales prices, thereby increasing its sales volume in order to be able to compete with the dumped imports. Nevertheless, even the sales volume of the Community industry decreased slightly during 2002.
(65)
Furthermore, the development of the production volume should also be seen in the more global context than solely in relation to the development of the Community consumption. Thus, as mentioned in recital 134 of the provisional Regulation, export sales of the Community industry were slightly increasing, which had also an impact on production figures. Furthermore, the increase in the production volume of granular PTFE is partly explained by the fact that some Community producers increased the internal use of granular PTFE for the production of, for example, compounds and micronised grades. Finally, the overall increase of production volume and production capacity during the period considered is also part of the Community industry’s attempt to react to the dumped imports by trying to increase sales volume, albeit at the expense of sales prices and profitability.
(66)
Therefore, the findings set out in recitals 101 and 102 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.3. Sales volume and market share
(67)
Likewise, some interested parties argued that the increase in sales volume and market share, in particular with a parallel decrease in demand, would clearly indicate that the Community industry did not suffer material injury. The Russian exporting producer also argued that such an increase in sales could not be explained by the Community industry’s strategy to lower its sales prices when faced with low-priced imports. In this context, the development of the Community industry’s sales volume was compared to that of the Russian imports which allegedly showed a downward trend despite decreasing import prices.
(68)
However, it was found that the analysis of Russian import data showed a slightly different picture. Thus, although imports and market share from Russia declined from 2001 to 2002 significantly, they dropped only marginally between 2002 and 2003 and even increased slightly during the IP. In contrast, selling prices of the Russian imports showed a constant downward trend during the entire period considered. In parallel, Chinese import prices declined to a higher extent and sales volume and market shares of these imports increased significantly during the same period. This indicates that Russian exporters faced with the low-priced Chinese imports on the Community market were, as the Community industry, obliged to lower their import prices even further to regain their market share in the Community. Moreover, as imports from Russia and the PRC have been cumulated, it is more appropriate to carry out this analysis not separately for each exporting country concerned, but together. In this respect, it is recalled that the market share of the imports remained continuously very high and their prices dropped dramatically and significantly undercut those of the Community industry. Therefore, the argument of the Russian exporting producer had to be rejected.
(69)
It is therefore reiterated that the development of the Community industry’s sales volume and market share has to be seen in correlation with the parallel decrease in sales value and unit prices due to the dumped imports and the consequent significant negative impact on the Community industry’s profitability. As mentioned in recital 61 of this Regulation, in order to reach a meaningful conclusion on the overall financial situation of the Community industry, the positive development of these indicators should not be considered in isolation but together with the development of the remaining injury indicators.
(70)
In the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings set out in recitals 103 and 104 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.4. Stocks
(71)
One Chinese and the two Russian exporting producers also argued that the stocks of the Community industry decreased significantly between 2003 and the IP, which would indicate that no material injury was suffered.
(72)
It is noted that stock movements during the period considered were not significant and did not show a clear trend. Indeed, while stocks decreased by 13 % between 2001 and 2002, they increased by 23 percentage points between 2002 and 2003 and then decreased again by 17 percentage points in the IP. Moreover, it should also be noted that the decrease in stocks between 2003 and the IP only amounted to 216 tons which corresponds to 4,3 % of the sales volume of the Community industry in 2003 and 3,9 % during the IP.
(73)
In any event, the Community industry produced granular PTFE mainly to order and products kept in stock are usually goods awaiting dispatch to customers. Therefore, the increase in stock in 2003 is rather due to a delay in delivery and cannot be seen as a meaningful injury indicator because it has no impact as such on the Community industry’s financial situation. Therefore, in this case the development of stock was not considered as a meaningful injury indicator.
(74)
Some interested parties also argued that the increase in stock in 2003, namely the year prior to the IP, caused injury to the Community industry because the Community industry would have been forced to sell this increased stock at lower prices during the IP. As already mentioned in recital 73, production was made to order and therefore, the increase in stock in 2003 is likely due to a delay in delivery, whereas customers and prices were already determined. In any case, the increase in stocks of 283 tons in 2003 cannot be considered as significant as it only represents 5,6 % of the sales volume of that year. It was therefore concluded that this increase in stock prior to the IP could not cause the material injury suffered by the Community industry.
(75)
This claim had therefore to be rejected and the findings of recital 105 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.5. Sales prices
(76)
The same exporting producers argued that the negative trend in the Community’s sales prices would not be a meaningful injury indicator since sales prices of granular PTFE have decreased globally as a consequence of market forces. One exporting producer also questioned the correctness of the calculations without, however, providing any further detail in how far the calculations would not be correct.
(77)
As far as the calculation of the Community industry’s sales prices is concerned, no error was detected in the provisional calculations which are therefore confirmed.
(78)
It is reiterated that sales prices in the Community dropped significantly during the period considered which had a considerable impact on the Community industry’s profitability. It is also confirmed that these were considered as key factors in the injury determination, due to their direct impact on the Community industry’s financial situation. It is therefore confirmed that prices are a very meaningful injury indicator in this investigation and the exporting producer’s claim in this respect had to be rejected.
(79)
More specifically as far as the argument of the alleged global price decrease is concerned, no factors were found which would point, for example, to cost reductions underlying such price decrease. It is therefore confirmed that prices are a very meaningful injury indicator in this investigation and the exporting producer’s claim in this respect had to be rejected in the context of the injury analysis. The remainder of this argument is more linked to the question of a causal link and will therefore be addressed below in recitals 106 and 107.
(80)
In the absence of any other comment in this particular regard, the findings of recital 106 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.6. Growth
(81)
It was argued that the provisional determinations failed to explain the growth of the Community industry, in particular in comparison to the shrinking Community consumption for the period considered. Since the growth of the Community industry was determined by the development of its market share, reference is made to recital 103 of the provisional Regulation and to recitals 67 and 69 of this Regulation.
3.3.7. Investments and ability to raise capital
(82)
One Chinese exporting producer objected to the provisional conclusions that the ability to raise capital was not a meaningful injury indicator.
(83)
As outlined in recital 109 of the provisional Regulation, it was found that, since the Community producers are part of larger groups and therefore financed via intra-group cash pooling systems, the ability to raise capital was not a meaningful injury indicator, as it would normally not be affected, even if some producers of such larger groups are in a particularly injurious situation. The Chinese exporting producer did not explain in how far it did not agree to these conclusions, nor did it support its statement with any other explanations. The claim therefore had to be rejected and the findings of recitals 108 and 109 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.8. Profitability, return on investments and cash flow
(84)
Some exporting producers also observed that there has been an increase in the Community industry’s profitability between 2003 and the IP, which would not have been considered in the provisional findings.
(85)
This claim has to be rejected, given that the development of the Community industry’s profitability over the entire period considered was analysed in the provisional Regulation. Thus, the increase in the profitability between 2003 and the IP could not reverse the conclusion of the overall significant decrease of profitability between 2001 and the IP, namely by 9,2 percentage points. The profitability during the IP was only slightly above break even, i.e. at 0,1 %, and would have been even lower should the Community industry have maintained its prices, in which case it would have suffered loss of market share and sales volume. It was therefore concluded that this injury factor showed a clear negative trend during the period considered.
(86)
In the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings of recitals 110 and 111 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.9. Employment and productivity
(87)
The Chinese as well as the two Russian exporting producers reiterated their arguments on the development of employment and productivity, suggesting that these factors would not point to material injury. In the absence of any new information in this regard, the provisional conclusions as set out in recital 112 of the provisional Regulation are maintained.
3.3.10. Increase in the Community industry’s exports
(88)
Finally, the abovementioned exporting producers argued that the Community industry’s increasing export performance during the period considered would show that it did not suffer material injury.
(89)
In this context, it should be clarified that recital 134 of the provisional Regulation erroneously indicated that the increase in exports was 3 % during the period considered. Correctly, exports of the Community industry increased by 54 %. However, as correctly indicated in the same recital of the provisional Regulation, these increased exports constituted only 12,7 % of the Community industry’s total sales volume during the IP. Thus, it is confirmed that in absolute terms, the increase was not significant (namely roughly 250 tons). Therefore, although increasing, export sales still represented only a small part of the Community industry’s total sales. On this basis, it was not considered as an indication that the Community industry was in good health.
3.3.11. Wages
(90)
In the absence of any comment in this particular regard, the findings in recital 113 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.12. Magnitude of the dumping margin
(91)
In the absence of any comment in this particular regard, the findings in recital 114 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.13. Recovery from past dumping
(92)
In the absence of any comment in this particular regard, the findings in recital 116 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
3.3.14. Conclusions on injury
(93)
As far as the arguments of certain interested parties which were based on information submitted in the complaint are concerned, it should be noted that provisional findings were based on verified data of the Community producers during the IP.
(94)
On this basis, despite the positive trend of some injury factors, it was concluded that the overall financial situation of the Community industry has significantly declined during the period considered and that it had suffered material injury during the IP.
(95)
Therefore, the findings set out in recitals 101 to 120 of the provisional Regulation concerning the situation of the Community industry and the conclusion on injury are hereby confirmed.
E. CAUSATION
1. Effects on dumped imports
(96)
In the absence of any comments in this particular respect, the findings in recitals 122 to 126 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2. Effects of other factors
2.1. Development of consumption and demand
(97)
Some interested parties reiterated that the decline in consumption and demand on the Community market were price driving factors and have to be seen as the main cause for the decline of prices and profitability of the Community industry, rather than the dumped imports. These parties did not, however, provide any new information or evidence but simply repeated their claims made prior to the imposition of provisional duties. It was also argued that a comparison between the decrease in consumption and the decrease of the Community market value as in recital 127 of the provisional Regulation is irrelevant since sales prices do not only depend on the development of consumption and demand but also on supply.
(98)
While it is not disputed that under normal competitive conditions prices are the result of supply and demand, it is recalled that in this case normal market conditions were distorted by uncompetitive behaviour, i.e. dumping practices. Thus, the investigation revealed significant dumping from all exporting producers during the IP and significant undercutting throughout the entire period considered, which caused high price pressure on the Community industry.
(99)
As already highlighted in recital 129 of the provisional Regulation, import prices of Russia and the PRC decreased to a significantly higher degree than the Community consumption during the same period. Furthermore, import prices from the countries under consideration continued to decrease significantly, while consumption remained relatively stable from 2002 onwards and even increased slightly. At the same time, sales prices of imports from other third countries decreased to a much lesser degree than the import prices from Russia and the PRC. The direct correlation between the decrease in consumption and the Community industry’s prices could therefore not be established and it was concluded that the development of consumption could not have such an impact that the injury resulting from the dumped imports could no longer be classified as material. Indeed, the dumped imports represent a significant market share (about 35 %) and have been made at very low prices. Compared with this, the effect of the decrease in consumption, which moreover only occurred until 2002, is only fairly small. Moreover, the Community industry did not lose any economies of scale as a result of reduced consumption.
(100)
This imbalance between the drop in prices and the decrease in consumption is also evidenced by the fact that the decrease in consumption was neither in line with the decrease of the Community market value of granular PTFE. Therefore, the comparison between market value and consumption was a valid, albeit not the only indicator with which to assess whether the price decline of the Community industry was due to the dumped imports.
(101)
In the absence of any other comment in this particular regard, the findings in recitals 127 to 129 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2.2. Imports originating in third countries other than Russia and the PRC
(102)
In the absence of any comments in this particular regard, the findings in recital 130 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2.3. Performance of non-complainant Community producers
(103)
It was argued that while the non-complaining Community producers suffered injury, such injury was mainly translated into a loss of market share, rather than into a loss in profitability as in the case of the Community industry. On this basis, it was alleged that one and the same factor, i.e. the dumped imports could not have had such adverse effects on the Community producers’ situation, be it complainants or non-complainants. Consequently, it was claimed that the material injury suffered by the Community producers must have been caused by other factors.
(104)
This argument had to be rejected. As mentioned in recital 103 of the provisional Regulation, producers, when faced with low-priced imports, have the choice to either maintain their sales prices at the expense of a negative development of their sales volume and market share, or to lower their sales prices in order to preserve, as far as possible, economies of scale and to defend their position in the market. It is therefore not unusual that different producers opt for different strategies and that the injury suffered by these producers is translated into the negative development of either their market share or their sales prices or a combination of both and a consequent loss of their profitability. Given the important dumping, the substantial import volume and market shares as well as the significant undercutting and the dramatic drop in prices of the dumped imports, it can be concluded, in the absence of any further causes that the dumping is at the origin of a negative situation such as the one experienced by the Community industry.
(105)
In the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings in recital 133 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2.4. Worldwide price development, economic recession and market shrinkage
(106)
It was claimed that on the basis of a decreasing trend of import prices as recorded by Eurostat and, in particular, import prices of the USA and Switzerland, granular PTFE prices had dropped in general in the entire Community market. This downward trend in prices would also be due to the fact that the granular PTFE market is a shrinking market, i.e. demand and consumption is decreasing. Therefore, the decline of the sales prices of the Community industry is rather due to this general downward trend than to the dumped imports from the countries concerned.
(107)
It should be noted that an analysis of import prices, as recorded by Eurostat, in general, and from Switzerland and the USA in particular, revealed that these were largely above the import price level of the PRC and Russia, as well as those of the Community industry. Likewise, the prices of the non-complainant Community producers were above the price level of the Community industry. Therefore, it was concluded that third countries and the non-complainant Community producers did not exert a competitive pressure on prices which could be regarded as a significant source of injury.
(108)
It is further noted that as mentioned above, although Community consumption was decreased significantly from 2001 to 2002, it remained fairly stable afterwards and even increased slightly. Moreover, this increasing trend was confirmed after the IP. Consequently, the granular PTFE market cannot be considered as a shrinking market.
(109)
On the basis of the above, it was concluded that the general economic downward trend during the period considered did not break the causal link between the dumped imports from the PRC and Russia and the material injury suffered by the Community industry.
2.5. Efficiency of the Community industry
(110)
Some cooperating exporters stated that the provisional conclusion in recital 135 of the provisional Regulation, i.e. that the Community industry’s cost of production was decreasing was not in line with the data submitted in the complaint, which suggested an increase in the Community industry’s unit cost during the period considered. They claimed that it should have been investigated whether or not this increase in costs caused the material injury suffered. In this respect, it should be noted that the conclusion of recital 135 in the provisional Regulation was based on data which were verified during the different on-the-spot investigations at the premises of the European producers. Therefore, these claims were rejected.
(111)
Another exporting producer claimed that the Community industry lowered its sales prices to unnecessary low levels, which would be evidenced by the fact that the Community industry increased sales volume and gained (instead of merely maintained) market share during the period considered. Furthermore, it was alleged that the loss in profitability was rather due to an increase of unit costs, as a consequence of low capacity utilisation rates and an increase in wages, than to the imports under consideration.
(112)
It should first be noted that, in contrast to this exporting producers’ allegation, the production cost of the Community decreased during the period considered, which was therefore not considered as a cause for the loss of the Community industry’s profitability. While it is true that the Community industry was able to keep its market position and even increase its market share, this was at the expense of its profitability. It is recalled that the imports under consideration significantly undercut the Community industry’s prices throughout the period considered, which could not be outweighed by the Community industry’s increase in market share.
(113)
On the basis of the above, it was concluded that, since the Community industry had efficient production processes and decreasing production costs, the material injury suffered by the Community industry was not self-inflicted. The findings of recital 135 of the provisional Regulation are thereby confirmed.
2.6. Captive sales
(114)
Two Russian exporting producers claimed that captive sales of granular PTFE of at least two Community producers had increased significantly during the period considered. It was argued that, given that these sales were usually unprofitable, the increase in captive sales should be considered as a possible cause for the injury suffered by the Community industry.
(115)
In this regard, the investigation revealed that captive sales constituted only around 5 % of the Community industry’s total production volume during the IP. Given these low quantities, it was concluded that, even if unprofitable, captive sales could not break the causal link between the dumped imports from the PRC and Russia and the material injury suffered by the Community industry.
2.7. No competition between granular PTFE imported from Russia and the PRC and the PTFE produced and sold by the Community industry
(116)
One exporting producer claimed that since the granular PTFE imported from the countries concerned would be of an overall lower quality and would not compete with the product sold by the Community industry in the Community market, any injury suffered by the Community industry cannot have been caused by the imports under consideration.
(117)
In this respect, it is recalled that in recitals 12 to 14 of this Regulation it was concluded that despite different possible product types, including quality differences, the granular PTFE produced by the Community industry and the product concerned imported from the countries concerned have the same physical characteristics and essentially the same basic end-uses. As set out in recitals 16, 90 and 92 of the provisional Regulation and in recital 10 of this Regulation, the investigation also confirmed that all imported product types are in competition with those produced and sold by the Community industry on the Community market. Therefore, the above claim had to be rejected.
2.8. Exports by the Community industry
(118)
As mentioned in recital 89 of this Regulation, the increase of export sales from the Community industry was in fact 54 %. However, the main conclusions in recital 134 of the provisional Regulation, i.e. that these increased exports constituted only a small part of the Community industry’s total sales (namely 12,7 % during the IP) are confirmed. Therefore, and in the absence of any other comments in this particular regard, the findings in recital 134 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2.9. Exchange rate fluctuations
(119)
Some interested parties argued that the depreciation of the United States dollar (USD) against the euro would have caused the injury suffered by the Community industry. It was claimed that: (i) the depreciation of the USD would have reduced the Community industry’s export sales to the United States; and (ii) increased the competitiveness of the Russian and Chinese imports.
(120)
As far as the export sales of the Community industry are concerned, these parties did not provide any underlying evidence but based their statement on mere assumptions. They did not, in particular, specify whether export sales of the Community industry would have allegedly been reduced in volume or in value or in both. In any case, as already concluded in recital 118 of this Regulation, the Community industry export sales increased by 54 % during the period considered. As indicated in recital 134 of the provisional Regulation, the profit margin realised by the Community industry on these export sales was higher than the one realised on sales in the Community market. Therefore, the export sales development of the Community industry could not be considered to have any negative impact on the situation of the Community industry.
(121)
As far as imports from Russia and the PRC are concerned, it must be noted that they were significantly dumped, i.e. reaching dumping margins of 36,6 % for Russia and almost 100 % for the PRC. On the other hand, imports from other countries into the Community representing roughly 25 % of the Community consumption were made at significantly higher prices than those from Russia and the PRC, despite the depreciation of the USD. Also, the undercutting of the imports under consideration was substantial throughout the whole period and exceeded by far the depreciation rate of the USD against the euro. This claim is therefore rejected.
2.10. Conclusion on causation
(122)
Based on the abovementioned considerations and other elements contained in recitals 121 to 138 of the provisional Regulation, it is concluded that dumped imports from Russia and the PRC have caused material injury to the Community industry within the meaning of Article 3(6) of the basic Regulation.
F. COMMUNITY INTEREST
1. Financial impact on users
(123)
Several users reiterated their main concern that the imposition of definitive measures would have a serious adverse impact on their financial situation since they would not be able to pass on the expected increase in costs resulting from the imposition of anti-dumping measures to their customers.
(124)
In this regard, subsequent to provisional disclosure, five users/processors not cooperating so far were contacted and invited to fill in a questionnaire. These users/processors who only requested a questionnaire after imposition of provisional measures were previously unknown to the Community institutions. It was found that a number of these users were importing the majority of the granular PTFE used in their production/processing process from the countries under consideration. These users represented a large part of the total imports from Russia and the PRC, as well as the total Community consumption. They alleged that anti-dumping measures would have a significant impact on their profitability. Under these circumstances and given the low number of users cooperating prior to the imposition of provisional measures, as well as the alleged impact of the imposition of anti-dumping measures, it was considered warranted to accept these replies, albeit submitted at a late stage of the investigation, in order to have findings as representative as possible.
(125)
Four users replied to the questionnaire (one only partially). One of these users was a transformer of granular PTFE, with part of its production directly competing with the Community producers on the granular PTFE market, while the other users were processors producing semi-finished and finished products, by using granular PTFE directly in their production process. The users already cooperating prior to the imposition of provisional measures and the ones coming forward after imposition of provisional duties were also invited to submit additional information regarding their cost of production, with a view to complementing the data used for the provisional findings and to allow a detailed, in-depth analysis of all aspects of the situation of different users, in particular to calculate the precise impact of the anti-dumping measures on their profitability. However, only four companies replied to this additional request. In summary, a total of seven users cooperated, representing 67,8 % of total imports from the countries concerned and 41,3 % of the total Community consumption.
(126)
The additional investigation revealed that the impact of definitive anti-dumping duties on users would vary significantly depending on the quantity of imported granular PTFE used in their production processes. In this regard, the calculations were made on the basis of the assumption that none of the users would be able to pass the price increase on to their customers. In this hypothetical worst case scenario, for two companies, sourcing between 70 and 80 % of granular PTFE from the countries under consideration, the impact of the measures on their profitability was estimated to be up to 7,5 %. For the remaining cooperating users, importing less than 30 % of their raw material from the countries under consideration, the impact, under the assumption that the price increase would not even be partly passed on to their customers, was estimated at a maximum of 2,7 %.
(127)
It should be noted, however, that the investigation also confirmed that price increases in the Community, as a consequence of the imposition of anti-dumping measures, will very likely be passed on to the final customer. In that respect, it was considered that the high price pressure in the Community was mainly due to the low-priced imports from the PRC and Russia. It is therefore expected that with the imposition of anti-dumping measures, price levels of granular PTFE in the Community will generally increase. The investigation also revealed that downstream products were partly resold via distributors benefiting from high margins, which indicates that those distributors have the potential to absorb price increases. Finally, it was found that there was very little competition in the market of semi-finished and finished products produced from granular PTFE from third countries during the IP, which also indicates that price increases would likely be passed on to the final customers. Indeed, the semi-finished and finished products market is dominated by Community processors, rather than imported products, which will all be equally subject to the anti-dumping duties. Therefore, it is expected that a price increase will equally affect all Community operators concerned and no price pressure is expected from imported products. For these reasons, it is concluded that users will in all likelihood be able to pass on a considerable part of the cost increase to their customers, so that the estimated impact of anti-dumping measures on their profitability should, in reality, be much more limited than in the worst case scenario.
(128)
Secondly, it should be noted that, even if the price increase could not be partly passed on, which is not a realistic hypothesis, the impact on the profitability of the above four cooperating users would not appear to be disproportionate. Two of the users would still be profitable, even in that of worst case scenario. One of the cooperating producers, for which the estimated impact of any anti-dumping measure would be slightly more than 1 %, already realised significant losses during the IP, which were not linked to the anti-dumping measures. Any price increase due to anti-dumping duties would therefore not have a considerable impact on its business performance. Finally, the last user had a significant gross margin, i.e. over 30 % and it is therefore expected that it can itself, at least partly absorb any price increase due to the imposition of anti-dumping duties.
(129)
As mentioned in recital 125 of this Regulation, the above findings reflect the situation of users representing almost 70 % of the total imports from the countries concerned and roughly 40 % of the Community consumption. The investigation covered also different types of users, i.e. representing different industrial sectors, using granular PTFE either directly or in semi-finished products, some importing high quantities from the countries concerned, others only limited quantities. It was therefore considered that the above findings could be regarded as largely representative. It should also be noted that, as mentioned in recital 147 of the provisional Regulation, the impact of the anti-dumping duties on certain users is negligible due to the fact that granular PTFE constitutes a rather low proportion of their overall costs.
(130)
Furthermore, it should be noted that all cooperating users have a significant business outside the Community. Indeed, 24,6 % of the users’ sales volume is exported outside the Community. This implies that the inward processing regime would allow these users to claim back or to avoid paying the anti-dumping duties levied on the imported granular PTFE. Consequently, this segment of the users’ business will not be affected by the measures.
(131)
Finally, when considering the possible effects of measures on users, it should also be noted that their current financial situation is partly due to the unfair competition resulting from the existence of dumped imports. This should be taken into account, when balancing the possible negative impact of measures on users against the positive effects on other interested parties, in particular the Community industry.
(132)
For all the abovementioned reasons, it is concluded that the likely effect of measures on users would not be disproportionate. It was therefore concluded that the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties would not be against the Community interest.
2. Imports of semi-finished and finished products
(133)
Certain users also claimed that they would be placed in a situation of competition distortion vis-à-vis producers in the countries concerned of semi-finished and finished products not subject to anti-dumping duties, in particular because such producers would shift their exports to the Community from granular PTFE to semi-finished and finished products. As a consequence, users in the Community would need to relocate part of their business outside the European Community in order to have access to cheaper raw material.
(134)
As regards the semi-finished and finished products, it was found that the threat of increasing imports of cheaper semi-finished and finished downstream products from the countries concerned is not imminent. On the basis of the information available, i.e. in particular the known quality difference between the imported granular PTFE from the countries concerned and the one produced by the Community industry, neither Russian nor Chinese producers are currently able to produce the complete product range produced by the users in the Community, due to a lack of the necessary technical know-how. A number of parties observed that the know-how of Russian and Chinese producers as well as the quality of their products is constantly increasing and that the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties would accelerate this process because it would create an incentive for shifting the production of semi-finished and finished products to these countries where the granular PTFE was available at cheaper prices. It is noted that according to some operators in the market, imports of semi-finished products from the countries concerned indeed appeared to have an increasing trend. There is, however, no evidence available suggesting that the quality of the products imported is comparable to that of the products manufactured and sold on the Community market and that there would therefore indeed be a higher competition and a risk of increasing imports of semi-finished and finished products.
(135)
Furthermore, the claim that the processing activities would actually consider to move outside the Community, or that exporters would shift into further processed products was not substantiated by sufficient evidence. The investigation also revealed that some users had only recently invested in their production process in the Community, which indicates that the relocation of those production facilities would be highly unlikely.
3. Employment
(136)
It was also argued that the processing industry employs by far more people than the granular PTFE producers in the Community and that those jobs would be in danger should anti-dumping measures be imposed.
(137)
The investigation revealed that the information submitted by the users’/importers’ organisation concerned with regard to employment was largely overestimated. In addition, only a proportion of those jobs would be directly threatened by the imposition of anti-dumping duties. It should also be noted that the production of granular PTFE is more capital-intensive, while the production of semi-finished or finished products is much more labour-intensive. Therefore, a direct comparison between the number of jobs of the granular PTFE industry and the downstream industry is not appropriate. Furthermore, it should be noted that some jobs at the non-complainant Community producers and suppliers would also be threatened. As indicated above, the non-complainant Community producers have already lost significant market share since the beginning of the period considered. Finally, a number of users and therefore jobs in the Community are also dependent fully or partly on the supply from the Community industry and from the non-complainant Community producers. Therefore, should the Community industry disappear these jobs would be equally in danger.
4. Shortage of supply
(138)
A number of parties also reiterated that the imposition of definitive duties would lead to a shortage of supply because it would prevent the exporting producers from the PRC and Russia from exporting their products to the Community, while the Community industry would not have sufficient capacity to supply the Community demand. It was also argued that even if the Community industry would have the theoretical capacity to increase its production of PTFE, this would economically not be interesting since the production of granular PTFE would generate less profit than the production of other fluoropolymers. It was claimed that other sources, such as Japan and the USA would not be a valid alternative because import prices from these countries remain high. It was further claimed that the shortage in the Community market would be aggravated by the expected increase in demand on the Community market. On the other hand, for certain low-end applications, the product produced in the Community would be over-specified and would be too expensive to be used in such applications. Finally, it was argued that reactor bead would not be sold at all in the Community, while pre-sintered grades are only produced in limited quantities in the Community, thus users would be dependent on imports from the countries under consideration.
(139)
It should be recalled that the Community industry’s capacity is 9 200 tons, at 80 % capacity utilisation. The sales volume during the IP was about 4 845 tons. This implies that the complaining producers would be able to sell an additional 4 355 tons of the like product, which is 85 % of the total imports of the countries concerned. The argument that the Community industry would not use this free capacity to produce granular PTFE, due to the low profit margins generated by the sales of this product, had to be rejected. It should be noted that this argument was not supported by any evidence. Moreover, the low profitability generated by the Community industry’s sales of granular PTFE was due to the dumped imports which were significantly undercutting the Community industry’s prices and therefore causing substantial price pressure. Therefore, with the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties prices on the Community market should recover which would also have a positive effect on the profitability.
(140)
As far as reactor bead is concerned, it was found that only very limited quantities were imported during the IP. Likewise, imports of pre-sintered grades were very limited during the IP, which implies that pre-sintered grades are made by the users themselves. It was found that at least two Community producers are able to produce pre-sintered grades. Finally, as mentioned above, the Community industry also sold ‘off-spec’ grades during the IP, which are comparable to the low quality grades from the PRC and Russia.
(141)
Other sources, such as Japan and USA are also available. The argument that import prices from these countries are higher than those from the countries under investigation and that granular PTFE from Japan and the USA would therefore not be a valid alternative cannot be accepted because the purpose of the anti-dumping duties is precisely to eliminate injurious dumping and restore fair conditions of competition.
(142)
It is further recalled that the purpose of any anti-dumping measure is by no means to stop access to the Community market for products from the countries concerned, but rather to restore a level playing field that had been distorted by unfair trade practices. Therefore, granular PTFE, including the product types for which a shortage was alleged, from the countries concerned can continue to enter the Community market, albeit at higher price levels.
(143)
Based on the abovementioned considerations and other elements contained in recitals 139 to 153 of the provisional Regulation, it is concluded that no compelling reasons exist for not imposing anti-dumping measures on import of the product concerned originating in Russia and the PRC.
G. DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
1. Injury elimination level
(144)
Based on the methodology set out in recitals 154 to 159 of the provisional Regulation, an injury elimination level was calculated for the purpose of establishing the level of measures to be definitively imposed.
(145)
One of the Russian exporting producers claimed that the adjustment for differences in the level of trade should have been based on the information provided by the fully cooperating unrelated importer which accounted for the major part of its imports. However, although the information of this importer was verified on-the-spot, due to the highly complex sales structure of the importer in question, involving a number of different companies from which no information was available, purchase prices and consequently the profit margin of this unrelated importer could not be reliably established and were therefore not used. Alternatively, this exporting producer claimed that in order to calculate the adjustment for the level of trade, the cif import price should be compared to the resale price of the importer in question in the Community. However, it was found that this methodology would not lead to more reliable results than the methodology used for the provisional determinations. In contrast, the information available, in particular the audited accounts of the importer, confirmed that the estimations made in the provisional determinations were reasonable.
(146)
Both Russian exporting producers also claimed that the comparison of their export price to the non-injurious price should have been made on a per-model basis. In particular, it was argued that the more expensive speciality types produced by the Community industry should have been excluded from the calculation of the injury elimination level. In this context, it is recalled that, as outlined in recitals 28 to 40 of this Regulation, findings for both Russian exporting producers had to be based on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. Since no reliable data on a per-model basis was available, the determination of the export price of these exporting producers was based on data recorded by Eurostat. Furthermore, as mentioned in recital 9 and 55 of this Regulation, imported PTFE after post-treatment was of a similar quality to the PTFE produced by the Community industry and could be used in almost all applications, including high-end applications. This claim had therefore to be rejected.
(147)
A number of parties contested the level of profit of 9,3 % used for the calculation of the provisional underselling margin, claiming that it was too high. In particular, it was argued that it should be taken into consideration that the granular PTFE market is shrinking and cost of production is increasing, therefore the Community industry would not have been able to achieve 9,3 % profit in the absence of dumped imports. It was proposed to use a profit margin of 5 % instead.
(148)
In this regard, it is recalled that the profit margin of 9,3 % was based on actual and verified data submitted by the Community producers, i.e. evidence which showed that 9,3 % was the profit effectively obtained before dumped imports started to penetrate into the Community market. It is also noted that, as mentioned in recital 112 of this Regulation cost of production decreased during the period considered. In the absence of any new information, the methodology used for establishing the injury margin as described in recitals 156 to 159 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2. Definitive duties
(149)
In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that a definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the dumping margin found, but should not be higher than the injury margin calculated in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation.
(150)
The proposed definitive duty rates, expressed as a percentage of the CIF Community border price, customs duty unpaid, are as follows:
Exporting country
Injury elimination margin
Dumping margin
Proposed anti-dumping duty
PRC
55,5 %
99,7 %
55,5 %
Russia
40,0 %
36,6 %
36,6 %
(151)
In order to ensure a proper enforcement of the anti-dumping duty, the residual duty level should not only apply to the non-cooperating exporter, but also to those companies which did not have any exports during the IP. However, the latter companies are invited, when they fulfil the requirements of Article 11(4) of the basic Regulation, second paragraph, to present a request for a review pursuant to that Article in order to have their situation examined individually.
3. Undertakings
(152)
One Chinese exporting producer which was granted neither MET nor IT has shown an interest in offering an undertaking. However, it is Commission practice not to accept undertaking offers from companies which were neither granted MET nor IT since no individual dumping margin can be established in those cases. Moreover, the investigation revealed that the accounts of the company concerned were not reliable so that the monitoring of the undertaking would have proved impractical.
(153)
The two Russian exporting producers also made proposals for offering an undertaking. However, as stated in recitals 28 to 35 of this Regulation, the findings with regard to both exporting producers had to be made on the basis of the facts available. It is recalled that the companies provided misleading information in respect of certain aspects of the investigation which affected the accuracy and reliability of their cooperation. Accordingly, the Commission was not satisfied that an undertaking from these companies could be effectively monitored and the offers were therefore rejected,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of so-called granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), containing not more than 3 % of other monomer unit than tetrafluoroethylene, without fillers, in the form of powder or pellets, with the exclusion of micronised material (namely fluoropolymer micropowder as defined by norm ASTM D5675-04) falling within CN code ex 3904 61 00 (TARIC code 3904610050) and originating in Russia and the PRC. The aforementioned product description also covers such products presented as raw polymer (reactor bead) in wet or dry form.
2. The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, of the products described in paragraph 1, shall be as follows:
Country
Rate of duty
PRC
55,5 %
Russia
36,6 %
3. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 2
The amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duties pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 862/2005 on imports of so called granular polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), containing not more than 3 % of other monomer unit than tetrafluoroethylene, without fillers, in the form of powder or pellets, with the exclusion of micronised material, and its raw polymer (reactor bead), the latter in wet or dry form, falling within CN code ex 3904 61 00 (TARIC code 3904610050) and originating in Russia and the PRC shall be collected at the rate of the duty definitively imposed. Amounts secured in excess of the definitive rate of anti-dumping duties shall be released. Where the definitive duties are higher than the provisional duties, only the amounts secured at the level of the provisional duties shall be definitively collected.
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, 2 December 2005.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 10 April 1996 on the clearance of the accounts presented by the Member States in respect of the expenditure for 1992 of the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund and in respect of certain expenditure for 1993 (Only the Spanish, Danish, German, Greek, English, French, Italian, Dutch and Portuguese texts are authentic) (96/311/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1287/95 (2), and in particular Article 5 (2) thereof,
After consulting the Fund Committee,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70, the Commission, on the basis of the annual accounts presented by the Member States, clears the accounts of the authorities and bodies referred to in Article 4 of that Regulation;
Whereas the Member States have transmitted to the Commission the documents required to clear the accounts for 1992; whereas Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 provides that the 1992 financial year began on 16 October 1991 and ended on 15 October 1992; whereas France and Italy have also transmitted the documents required to clear the accounts for 1993, which financial year began on 16 October 1992 and ended on 15 October 1993;
Whereas the Commission has carried out the verifications provided for in Article 9 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70;
Whereas Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1723/72 of 26 July 1972 on making up accounts of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 295/88 (4), provides that the decision to clear the accounts must include the determination of the amount of expenditure incurred in each Member State during the financial year in question recognized as chargeable to the Guarantee Section of the Fund; whereas Article 102 of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom, ECSC) No 2335/95 (6), provides that the outcome of the clearance decision, that is to say, any discrepancy which may occur between the total expenditure booked to the accounts for a financial year pursuant to Articles 100 and 101 and the total expenditure recognized by the Commission when clearing the accounts is to be booked, under a single article, as additional expenditure or a reduction in expenditure;
Whereas, pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70, only refunds on exports to third countries and intervention to stabilize agricultural markets, respectively granted and undertaken according to Community rules within the framework of the common organization of the agricultural markets, may be financed; whereas the inspections carried out show that a part of the expenditure declared by the Member States does not meet these conditions and therefore must be disallowed; whereas the amounts declared by each of the Member States concerned, those recognized as chargeable to the EAGGF Guarantee Section and the difference between the two amounts and the difference between the expenditure recognized as chargeable to the EAGGF Guarantee Section and that charged in respect of the year, are shown in the Annex to this Decision;
Whereas the expenditure declared by Italy concerning storage of olive oil, amounting to Lit 43 270 556 684, is not covered by the present Decision, since further examination is necessary; whereas this amount has therefore been deducted from the expenditure declared by the Member State in respect of the year under consideration and will be cleared subsequently;
Whereas Commission Decision 94/871/EC (7) does not cover the expenditure declared by Greece, Spain, France and Italy for private storage of wine amounting to Dr 132 358 648, Pta 636 164 384, FF 38 898 417 and Lit 8 203 376 912 respectively and the expenditure declared by Denmark and Ireland for public storage of beef amounting to Dkr 13 497 909 and £ Irl 9 613 206 respectively; whereas the Commission has examined this expenditure on the basis of the information presented by the Member States concerned; whereas it should therefore be cleared by means of this Decision;
Whereas, before a financial correction that is eligible for the conciliation procedure set up by Commission Decision 94/442/EC (8) is fixed by the Commission, it is necessary that the Member State be given an opportunity, if it so wishes, of availing itself of that procedure; whereas, should this occur, it is essential that the Commission study the report drawn up by the Conciliation Body; whereas the period set for the procedure will not have expired, in respect of all the eligible corrections, by the date of adoption of this Decision; whereas the clearance decision should not, however, be delayed further; whereas the corresponding amounts have therefore been deducted from the expenditure declared by the Member States concerned in respect of the year under consideration and will be declared subsequently;
Whereas Decision 94/871/EC referred, subject to revision, to financial corrections of Lit 6 417 202 385 for Italy in respect of production aid for olive oil and concerning the levies in the milk sector of Lit 488 800 000 000 for Italy, Pta 31 020 000 000 for Spain and Dr 1 592 000 000 for Greece; whereas the additional verifications carried out by the Commission revealed no information casting doubt on the justification for the financial corrections; whereas, therefore, these corrections should now become definitive;
Whereas, in the case of Germany, the inquiries regarding export refunds in the beef sector are now closed; whereas this Decision lays down the further action to be taken;
Whereas Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 provides that the financial consequences arising from irregularities or negligence are not to be borne by the Community if they are the result of irregularities or negligence are not to be borne by the Community if they are the result of irregularities or negligence attributable to administrative authorities or other bodies of the Member States; whereas some of those financial consequences which cannot be borne by the Community budget should be included within the scope of this Decision;
Whereas this Decision is without prejudice to any financial consequences which may be determined in any subsequent clearance of accounts in respect of State aid or infringements for which the procedures initiated under Articles 93 and 169 of the Treaty are now being implemented or were terminated after 30 June 1995;
Whereas this Decision is without prejudice to any financial consequences drawn by the Commission, during a subsequent accounts clearance procedure, from current investigations under way at the time of this Decision, from irregularities within the meaning of Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 or from judgments of the Court of Justice in cases now pending and relating to matters covered by this Decision;
Whereas Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 1723/72 does not prevent the Commission from clearing, before and outside the overall decision of the clearance of accounts, certain parts of the annual accounts concerning expenditure relating to specific measures; whereas in this particular case the gravity of the deficiencies found in Italy regarding the advance payment of export refunds for durum wheat, and in France regarding the payment of consumption aid for olive oil, make it necessary to include in this clearance decision a clearance of the accounts for the expenditure regarding the budget items for the 1993 financial year; whereas this Decision should not prejudice the clearance of the accounts for the 1993 financial year for the two Member States concerned regarding the expenditure not covered by this Decision;
Whereas the corrections decided under this clearance decision for the public storage of beef and veal in Ireland are of 10 % for the 1990 financial year and of 5 % for the 1991 financial year because Ireland has, since the beginning of 1991, shown its willingness to introduce significant improvements to its control system and began to put into place arrangements for remedying the deficiencies found,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Member States' accounts concerning expenditure financed by the EAGGF Guarantee Section in respect of 1992 are hereby cleared as shown in Annex I.
Article 2
The accounts of France and Italy concerning expenditure financed by the EAGGF Guarantee Section in respect of 1993 concerning export refunds for durum wheat and for durum wheat flour, groats and meal declared by Italy, and concerning consumption aid for olive oil declared by France, are hereby cleared as shown in Annex II.
Article 3
The amounts arising under points 3 of the Annexes are to be taken into account as part of the expenditure referred to in Article 4 (1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 296/96 (9) for May 1996.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States of the Community as constituted on 31 December 1994.
Done at Brussels, 10 April 1996.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 21 March 2003
on the publication of the reference of standard EN 1495:1997 "Lifting platforms - mast climbing work platforms" in accordance with Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
(notified under document number C(2003) 831)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/224/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery(1), as amended by Directive 98/79/EC(2) and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,
Having regard to the opinion of the standing committee set up pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations(3), as amended by Directive 98/48/EC(4),
Whereas:
(1) Article 2 of Directive 98/37/EC provides that machinery may be placed on the market and put into service only if it does not endanger the safety of persons, domestic animals or property, when properly installed and maintained and used for its intended purpose.
(2) Where a national standard transposing a harmonised standard, the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, covers one or more essential safety requirements, the machine built in accordance with this standard is presumed to meet the relevant essential requirements.
(3) Member States must publish the references of national standards transposing harmonised standards which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
(4) Pursuant to Article 6(1) of Directive 98/37/EC, the Netherlands has lodged a formal objection to the effect that standard EN 1495:1997 adopted by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) on 21 April 1997 and the references of which were published in the Official Journal of the European Communities(5) on 13 March 1998, does not entirely satisfy the essential health and safety requirements.
(5) The Commission acknowledges that the use of the machinery concerned could prove hazardous, since standard EN 1495:1997 fails to meet the essential health and safety requirements relating to the design and construction of machinery and safety components set out in Annex I to Directive 98/37/EC, specifically requirements 1.5.15 "Risk of slipping, tripping or falling", 1.7.4 "Instructions" and 6.3 "Risk of persons falling from the carrier". Regarding paragraph 5.3.2.4, the last subparagraph of 7.1.2.12, table 8 and figure 9 of standard EN 1495:1997 in particular, the Commission considers that the measures taken in designing and constructing the platform do not permit a high level of safety to be guaranteed for all foreseeable uses of the product.
(6) In the interest of safety and legal certainty the publication of the references to that standard should be accompanied by an appropriate warning and Member States should add an identical warning in their national standards transposing standard EN 1495:1997.
(7) The reference to standard EN 1495:1997 should be republished accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The references of standard EN 1495:1997 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex.
Article 2
Where, pursuant to Article 5(2) of Directive 98/37/EC, Member States publish the references of a national standard transposing harmonised standard EN 1495:1997, they shall add to that publication a warning identical to that provided for in the reference to standard EN 1495:1997 as set out in the Annex.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 March 2003.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 18 July 2001
amending Decision 93/195/EEC on animal health conditions and veterinary certification for the re-entry of registered horses for racing, competition and cultural events after temporary export
(notified under document number C(2001) 1953)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2001/610/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 on animal health conditions governing the movement and import from third countries of equidae(1), as last amended by Commission Decision 2001/298/EC(2), and in particular Article 19(ii) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Commission Decision 93/195/EEC(3), as last amended by Decision 2001/144/EC(4), the re-entry of registered horses for racing, competition and cultural events after temporary export is restricted to horses kept for less than 30 days in any of the non-member countries listed in the same group in Annex II to that Decision.
(2) In order to make it easier for race horses originating in the Community to take part in International Group/Grade meetings in non-member countries listed in different groups, notably Australia, Canada, the United States of America, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore or United Arab Emirates, that period should be extended to less than 90 days and the restriction to countries of the same group should be withdrawn for race horses participating in such meetings.
(3) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Decision 93/195/EEC is amended as follows:
1. An indent is added to Article 1 as follows: "- have taken part in International Group/Grade meetings in Australia, Canada, the United States of America, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore or the United Arab Emirates and meet the requirements laid down in a health certificate in accordance with the model set out in Annex VIII to this Decision."
2. The Annex to this Decision is added as Annex VIII.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 July 2001.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 446/2002
of 12 March 2002
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98(2), 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 13 March 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 March 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3117/88
of 10 October 1988
re-establishing the levying of customs duties on gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted, products of category 10 (order No 40.0100), originating in Sri Lanka, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3783/87 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3783/87 of 3 December 1987 concerning the administration of the generalized tariff preferences applicable for 1988 to textile products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 3783/87 provides that preferential tariff treatment shall be accorded, for each category of products subjected in Annexes I and II to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3782/87 (2) to individual ceilings, within the limits of the quantities specified in column 7 of Annex I or II thereto, in respect of certain or each of the countries or territories of origin referred to in column 5 of the same Annexes; whereas Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 3783/87 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 gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted, products of category 10 (order No 40.0100) the relevant ceiling amounts to 770 000 pairs;
Whereas on 4 October 1988 imports of the products in question into the Community, originating in Sri Lanka, 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 Sri Lanka,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 14 October 1988, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3782/87, shall be re-established in respect of the following products, imported into the Community and originating in Sri Lanka:
1.2.3.4 // // // // // Order No // Category // CN code // Description // // // // // // // // // 40.0100 // 10 (1 000 pairs) // 6111 10 10 6111 20 10 6111 30 10 ex 6111 90 00 6116 10 10 6116 10 90 6116 91 00 6116 92 00 6116 93 00 6116 99 00 // Gloves, mittens and mitts, knitted or crocheted // // // //
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, 10 October 1988.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3029/84
of 29 October 1984
on the disposal of reduced-price butter for direct consumption in Greece and Italy
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 1557/84 (2), and in particular Articles 6 (7), 12 (3) and 28 thereof,
Whereas the Commission has adopted, in connection with the Christmas and New Year holidays, Regulation (EEC) No 2956/84 (3) on the disposal, at a reduced price, of butter from public or private storage intended for direct consumption in the Community;
Whereas, in order to allow consumers in Greece and Italy, where there is little or no butter stored under public or private contract, to obtain reduced-price butter on similar terms, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2957/84 of 22 October 1984 on the granting of aid for the consumption of butter in Greece and Italy (4), provides for the granting of a subsidy for butter intended for direct consumption in those two countries; whereas detailed implementing rules should therefore be adopted in respect of Regulation (EEC) No 2957/84;
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
Greece and Italy shall, up to the quantities specified in the Annex hereto, grant a subsidy for butter which is not the subject of the intervention measures laid down in Article 6 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68.
Article 2
1. The packs of butter specified in Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2956/84 must bear on the upper surface, in letters at least 5 mm high, the following inscriptions:
- 'Eidikí pólisi EOK' í/kai 'Voýtyro Christoygénnon',
- 'Vendita speciale CEE' et/ou 'Burro di Natale'.
2. Packages containing butter put up in small packs as laid down in Article 6 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2956/84 shall bear, in letters at least 2 cm high, one of the following inscriptions:
- 'Voýtyro se meioméni timí (kanonismós (EOK) arith. 3029/84)',
- 'Burro a prezzo ridotto (regolamento (CEE) no 3029/84)'.
Article 3
1. The butter referred to in Article 1 shall qualify for a subsidy of 160 ECU per 100 kilograms.
The holders of the butter shall, before 1 February 1985, submit the aid applications to their intervention agency, specifying the origin of the butter, the quantity, the date of packing and the packing station where the butter is to be put up in small packets. The Member States concerned may, however, specify that aid applications be submitted within a shorter period.
2. The intervention agency concerned shall as soon as possible authorize or refuse, where appropriate in part, entitlement to the subsidy, which shall be granted after the butter concerned has been packaged and put up for sale for direct consumption.
Packaging in small packets shall, within not more than 45 days following the authorization referred to in the preceding subparagraph, take place in the Member State where the butter will be released for direct consumption, in an establishment approved for that purpose by the Member State in question and under conditions specified by it.
3. The provisions of Articles 4, 5 (1) and (2), 7, 8, 9 and 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 2956/84 shall apply to the allocation, to the parties concerned, of the quantity of butter specified in the Annex to this Regulation, its putting up in small packs, its marketing and the payment of the subsidy. The butter may, however, be blended prior to marketing.
4. The provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 shall apply to the butter referred to in Article 1 with effect from the date when such butter is put up in small packs.
Article 4
Greece and Italy shall inform the Commission on the Tuesday of each week of the quantities of butter from the market, specifying the quantities accepted and those rejected.
Article 5
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, 29 October 1984.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2456/97 of 10 December 1997 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2257/92 laying down detailed rules for implementing specific arrangements for supplying Madeira with certain vegetable oils
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2348/96 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2257/92 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1325/97 (4), establishes the forecast supply balance for certain vegetable oils for Madeira for the 1996/97 marketing year;
Whereas, pending a communication from the competent authorities updating the requirements for Madeira and in order to avoid a break in the application of the specific supply arrangements, the balance was drawn up for the period 1 July to 31 December 1997 by Regulation (EC) No 1325/97; whereas the balance for the whole of the 1997/98 marketing year has been drawn up following the presentation of data on the requirements for Madeira by the Portuguese authorities; whereas Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 2257/92 should therefore be amended accordingly;
Whereas the supply balances provided for in the specific supply arrangements are drawn up for the period 1 July to 30 June; whereas the definitive supply balance for the 1997/98 marketing year should therefore apply from the start of that year, i.e. 1 July 1997;
Whereas 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
Regulation (EEC) No 2257/92 is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 1 (1) is replaced by the following:
'1. The quantities of certain vegetable oils in the forecast supply balance for Madeira which qualify for exemption from customs duties on import from third countries or for aid for supply from the rest of the Community shall be as set out in the Annex.`;
2. the Annex hereto is added as an Annex.
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 July 1997.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 December 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) N° 2568/91
of 11 July 1991
on the characteristics of olive oil and olive-residue oil and on the relevant methods of analysis
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation N° 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) N° 3577/90 (2), and in particular Article 35a thereof,
Whereas the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC contains the descriptions and definitions of olive oil and olive-residue oil marketed within each Member State, in intra-Community trade and in trade with third countries;
Whereas, for the purpose of differentiating between the various types of oil, the physical and chemical characteristics of each of them and the organoleptic characteristics of virgin oil should be defined, in order to guarantee the purity and quality of the products concerned, without prejudice to other existing provisions;
Whereas the presence of the characteristics of the different types of oil should be determined uniformly throughout the Community; whereas, to that end, Community methods of chemical analysis and organoleptic evaluation should be established; whereas the use should be permitted, for a transitional period, of other methods of analysis applied in the Member States provided that where there is a difference in the results, those obtained using the common method will be decisive;
Whereas the definition of the physical and chemical characteristics of olive oil and of the methods of analysis entails the amendment of the additional notes to Chapter 15 of the combined nomenclature;
Whereas the method of evaluating the organoleptic characteristics of virgin oil includes the setting up of panels
of selected and trained tasters; whereas the period necessary for establishing such a structure should therefore be fixed; whereas in view of the difficulties that some Member States will encounter in setting up panels of tasters, the use of panels in other Member States should be authorized;
Whereas, in order to ensure that the system of levies applicable to imports of olive residues functions correctly, a single method for the determination of the oil content of these products should be laid down;
Whereas, in order not to harm trade, provision should be made for oil packaged prior to the entry into force of this Regulation to be disposed of during a limited period;
Whereas it is necessary to repeal Commission Regulation (EEC) N° 1058/77 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) N° 1858/88 (4);
Whereas 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
1. Oils, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in points 1, 2 and 3 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be virgin olive oil within the meaning of point 1 (a), (b) and (c) of the Annex to Regulation No 136/66/EEC.
2. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 4 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be lampante virgin olive oil within the meaning of point 1 (d) of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
3. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 5 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be refined olive oil within the meaning of point 2 of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
4. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 6 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be pure olive oil within the meaning of point 3 of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
5. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 7 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be olive-residue oil within the meaning of point 4 of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
6. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 8 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be refined olive-residue oil within the meaning of point 5 of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
7. Oil, the characteristics of which comply with those set out in point 9 of Annex I to this Regulation, shall be deemed to be olive-residue oil within the meaning of point 6 of the Annex to Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
Article 2
1. The characteristics of the oils laid down in Annex I shall be determined in accordance with the methods of analysis set out below:
- for the determination of the free fatty acids, expressed as the percentage of oleic acid, the method set out in Annex II,
- for the determination of the peroxide index, the method set out in Annex III,
- for the determination of aliphatic alcohols, the method set out in Annex IV,
- for the determination of the sterol content, the method set out in Annex V,
- for the determination of erythrodiol and uvaol, the method set out in Annex VI,
- for the determination of the saturated fatty acids in position 2 of the triglyceride, the method set out in Annex VII,
- for the determination of the trilinolein content, the method set out in Annex VIII,
- for spectrophotometric analysis, the method set out in Annex IX,
- for the determination of the fatty acid composition, the method set out in Annex X A and X B,
- for the determination of the volatile halogenated solvents, the method set out in Annex XI,
- for the evaluation of the organoleptic characteristics of virgin olive oil, the method set out in Annex XII,
- for proof that refining has taken place, the method set out in Annex XIII.
2. Evaluation of the organoleptic characteristics shall be carried out by an analyst and, as appropriate, with the assistance of a specialist, according to the procedure described in the tasting notes referred to in Annex XII. Where analysis shows different characteristics to those resulting from the description of the product, the sample must be examined by a panel of tasters in accordance with the provisions of Annex XII.
Any second analysis shall be carried out by the panel according to the said provisions.
In order to ascertain the organoleptic characteristics in connection with operations relating to the intervention system, the panel of tasters will carry out this evaluation in accordance with the provisions of Annex XII.
Article 3
Until 31 October 1992, the introduction of the analysis methods provided for in Article 2 shall not impede the use by the Member States of other tested and scientifically valid methods, provided that products recognized as complying with the rules in force governing Community methods shall be allowed to move freely. Before using other methods, the Member States concerned shall notify them to the Commission.
Where one of the other methods produces a result different from that produced by the common method, the result obtained by the latter method shall be determinant.
Article 4
1. For the purpose of assessing organoleptic characteristics, the Member States shall set up panels of trained and selected tasters in accordance with the rules laid down by the method set out in Annex XII.
2. Where a Member State encounters difficulties in setting up a panel in its territory, it may use the services of a panel operating in another Member State.
Article 5
The additional notes 2, 3 and 4 to Chapter 15 of the combined nomenclature are replaced by those contained in Annex XIV.
Article 6
1. The oil content of oil cake and other residues resulting from the extraction of olive oil (CN codes 2306 90 11 and 2306 90 19) shall be determined using the method set out in Annex XV.
2. The oil content referred to in paragraph 1 shall be expressed as a percentage of the weight of oil to the weight of dry matter.
Article 7
The Community provisions concerning the presence of undesirable substances, other than those referred to in Annex XI, shall apply.
Article 8
1. Member States shall notify the Commission of the measures taken to implement this Regulation.
2. Member States shall send the Commission, at the beginning of each half-year, a statement of the analytical data relating to the tests carried out during the previous half-year.
The results shall be considered by the Management Committee for Oils and Fats in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 39 of Regulation N° 136/66/EEC.
Article 9
Regulation (EEC) No 1058/77 is hereby repealed.
Article 10
1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
However, the method set out in Annex XII shall apply from
1 January 1992, except in so far as operations relating to the intervention system are concerned.
2. This Regulation shall not apply to olive oil and oliveresidue oil packaged before the entry into force of this Regulation and marketed up to 31 October 1992.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 July 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE
of 26 May 1986
amending, on account of the accession of Portugal, Directive 83/416/EEC concerning the authorization of scheduled inter-regional air services for the transport of passengers, mail and cargo between Member States
(86/216/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 84 (2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal provides that Directive 83/416/EEC (1) must be adjusted so as to add to it the classification of Portuguese airports open to scheduled international traffic;
Whereas air traffic in the Atlantic islands comprising the autonomous region of the Azores is currently insufficiently developed; whereas, for that reason, airports situated on these islands should be temporarily exempted from the application of Directive 83/416/EEC;
Whereas the infrastructure at Oporto airport is still being expanded to enable it to cope with the growth in scheduled services; whereas, consequently, the airport should be temporarily exempted from the application of Directive 83/416/EEC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Directive 83/416/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 15 (1) and (3) are replaced by the following:
'1. Airports in the Greek islands and in the Atlantic islands comprising the autonomous region of the Azores shall be exempted from the application of this Directive until 1 July 1993.'
'3. The Commission shall make a report on the air traffic system in the Greek islands and in the Atlantic islands comprising the autonomous region of the Azores by 31 December 1991, and a further report by 31 December 1996.'
2. The following Article is inserted:
'Article 15a
1. By way of derogation from the classification of airports set out in Annex A, Oporto airport shall be exempted from the application of this Directive until 1 January 1993.
2. The derogation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be rescinded as soon as the Portuguese Republic judges that the economic conditions of the airport have improved. To this end, the Portuguese Republic shall inform the Commission, which shall take the necessary decision.'
3. In Annex A to Directive 83/416/EEC the following is inserted after 'Netherlands':
1.2.3 // 'PORTUGAL // Lisboa // 1 // // Faro // 1 // // Funchal // 2 // // Porto // 2'.
Article 2
1. After consulting the Commission, Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with this Directive by 30 June 1986.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive.
Article 3
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 May 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 438/2005
of 17 March 2005
fixing the export refunds on white sugar and raw sugar exported in its unaltered state
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), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 27(5) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that the difference between quotations or prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1(1)(a) of that Regulation and prices for those products within the Community may be covered by an export refund.
(2)
Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that when refunds on white and raw sugar, undenatured and exported in its unaltered state, are being fixed account must be taken of the situation on the Community and world markets in sugar and in particular of the price and cost factors set out in Article 28 of that Regulation. The same Article provides that the economic aspect of the proposed exports should also be taken into account.
(3)
The refund on raw sugar must be fixed in respect of the standard quality. The latter is defined in Annex I, point II, to Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001. Furthermore, this refund should be fixed in accordance with Article 28(4) of that Regulation. Candy sugar is defined in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2135/95 of 7 September 1995 laying down detailed rules of application for the grant of export refunds in the sugar sector (2). The refund thus calculated for sugar containing added flavouring or colouring matter must apply to their sucrose content and, accordingly, be fixed per 1 % of the said content.
(4)
In special cases, the amount of the refund may be fixed by other legal instruments.
(5)
The refund must be fixed every two weeks. It may be altered in the intervening period.
(6)
The first subparagraph of Article 27(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that refunds on the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation may vary according to destination, where the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets make this necessary.
(7)
The significant and rapid increase in preferential imports of sugar from the western Balkan countries since the start of 2001 and in exports of sugar to those countries from the Community seems to be highly artificial.
(8)
To prevent any abuse through the re-import into the Community of sugar products in receipt of an export refund, no refund should be set for all the countries of the western Balkans for the products covered by this Regulation.
(9)
In view of the above and of the present situation on the market in sugar, and in particular of the quotations or prices for sugar within the Community and on the world market, refunds should be set at the appropriate amounts.
(10)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001, undenatured and exported in the natural state, are hereby fixed to the amounts shown in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 March 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 March 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1064/2008
of 29 October 2008
amending Regulation (EC) No 957/2008 derogating for the 2008/09 quota period from Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 opening and providing for the administration of certain Community tariff quotas in the sector of poultrymeat originating in Brazil, Thailand and other third countries
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Articles 144(1) and 148 in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,
Having regard to Council Decision 2007/360/EC of 29 May 2007 on the conclusion of Agreements in the form of Agreed Minutes between the European Community and the Federative Republic of Brazil, and between the European Community and the Kingdom of Thailand pursuant to Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) relating to the modification of concessions with respect to poultrymeat (2), and in particular Article 2 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 957/2008 (3) postpones the application period for certificates for products originating in Brazil until the first seven days of November 2008 for the third quota subperiod, which will run from 1 January to 31 March 2009.
(2)
In view of the continuing uncertainty regarding the conditions for issuing certificates of origin for products originating in Brazil and given the fact that additional time is needed to clarify the situation for operators with regard to those conditions, the application period for the quota subperiod in question should, at this stage, be postponed by a further month for imports from Brazil.
(3)
Regulation (EC) No 957/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(4)
As the application period for the next subperiod is due to begin on 1 November 2008, it is essential for this Regulation to apply from that date.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 957/2008 is hereby replaced by the following:
‘Article 1
By way of derogation from Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 616/2007, applications for certificates for products in groups 1, 4 and 7 for the quota subperiod beginning on 1 January 2009 may be submitted only in the first seven days of December 2008.’.
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 1 November 2008.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 October 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2254/2000
of 10 October 2000
establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 955/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1602/2000(4), and in particular Article 173 (1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Articles 173 to 177 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 provide that the Commission shall periodically establish unit values for the products referred to in the classification in Annex 26 to that Regulation.
(2) The result of applying the rules and criteria laid down in the abovementioned Articles to the elements communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 173 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 is that unit values set out in the Annex to this Regulation should be established in regard to the products in question,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The unit values provided for in Article 173 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 are hereby established as set out in the table in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 October 2000.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 October 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 521/2003
of 21 March 2003
suspending the buying-in of butter in certain Member States
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 509/2002(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 of 16 December 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter and cream(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 359/2003(4), and in particular Article 2 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 lays down that buying-in by invitation to tender is to be opened or suspended by the Commission in a Member State, as appropriate, once it is observed that, for two weeks in succession, the market price in that Member State is below or equal to or above 92 % of the intervention price.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 378/2003 suspending the buying-in of butter in certain Member States(5) establishes the most recent list of Member States in which intervention is suspended. This list must be adjusted as a result of the market prices communicated by Sweden under Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999. In the interests of clarity, the list in question should be replaced and Regulation (EC) No 378/2003 should be repealed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Buying-in of butter by invitation to tender as provided for in Article 6(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 is hereby suspended in Belgium, Denmark, Greece, the Netherlands, Austria, Luxembourg and Finland.
Article 2
Regulation (EC) No 378/2003 is hereby repealed.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 March 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 March 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3945/88
of 16 December 1988
authorizing the conclusion of long-term private storage contracts for table wine, grape must, concentrated grape must and rectified concentrated grape must in respect of the 1988/89 wine year
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 2964/88 (2), and in particular Articles 32 (5) and 81 thereof,
Whereas the forward estimate drawn up for the 1988/89 wine year indicates that the amounts of table wine available at the beginning of the wine year exceeds by more than four months' supply those normally used up over the year; whereas the conditions for authorization of long-term storage contracts specified in Article 32 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 are therefore met;
Whereas the forward estimate indicates the existence of surpluses for all types of table wine and for table wines which stand in close economic relationship to those types of table wine; whereas it should therefore be made possible for long-term contracts to be concluded for those types of table wine; whereas it is necessary for the same reasons to open this possibility for grape must, concentrated grape must and rectified concentrated grape must;
Whereas Article 47 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 provides that only producers fulfilling the obligations laid down in Article 35 and, where appropriate, Articles 36 and 39 of that Regulation during a reference period to be determined may qualify for the intervention measures; whereas that period must therefore be specified;
Whereas the first subparagraph of Article 6 (2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1059/83 of 29 April 1983 on storage contracts for table wine, grape must, concentrated grape must and rectified concentrated grape must (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3500/88 (4), specifies that table wines eligible for long-term storage contracts shall be classified into two categories on the basis of their characteristics with regard to quality; whereas minimum quality characteristics commensurate with the quality of the 1988 harvest should be fixed for each category;
Whereas it is necessary, for the purposes of possible implementation of Article 42 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87, to know the maximum quantity of table wine subject to storage contract which may be distilled as provided for in the said Article; whereas producers should therefore be requried to provide intervention agencies with the necessary information, which they are then to pass on to the Commission;
Whereas 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
1. During the period 16 December 1988 to 15 February 1989 private long-term storage contracts may be concluded, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1059/83, for:
- all types of table wine and for table wines in close economic relationship to such table wine, provided that the conditions of Article 6 of that Regulation are met, and
- grape must, concentrated grape must and rectified concentrated grape must.
2. In accordance with Article 47 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 producers who, during the 1987/88 wine year, were subject to the obligations referred to in Articles 35, 36 or 39 of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 wine year shall not be entitled to benefit from the measures provided for in this Regulation unless they provide evidence that they have complied with their obligations during the reference periods laid down in Article 18 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3105/88 (5) and Article 22 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 441/88 (6).
Article 2
The minimum quality conditions that must be met for the two categories of wine referred to in Article 6 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1059/83 are set out in the Annexes to this Regulation.
Article 3
1. Producers who, within the limits specified in the first subparagraph of Article 5 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1059/83, wish to conclude a long-term storage contract for a table wine shall, when submitting the application for conclusion of a contract, advise the intervention agency of the total quantity of table wine they have produced during the current wine year.
For this purpose the producer shall submit a copy of the production declaration(s) drawn up pursuant to Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3929/87 (1).
2. The Member States shall communicate to the Commission, not later than 10 May 1989, the maximum quantity of table wine subject to long-term storage contract which may be distilled as provided for in Article 42 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 822/87.
Article 4
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 16 December 1988.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1988.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3308/84
of 23 November 1984
concerning the stopping of fishing for saithe by Community vessels
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2057/82 of 29 June 1982 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities by vessels of the Member States (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1729/83 (2), and in particular Article 10 (3) thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 320/84 of 31 January 1984 fixing, for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks occurring in the Community's fishing zone, provisional total allowable catches for 1984, the provisional share of these catches available to the Community, the allocation of that share between the Member States and the conditions under which the total allowable catches may be fished (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3175/84 (4), fixes the Community share of the TAC for saithe in the waters of ICES divisions II a (EC zone), III a, III b, c, d (EC zone) and IV for 1984, in conformity with the Community's obligations under the Agreement on fisheries between the European Economic Community and the Kingdom of Norway (5);
Whereas, in order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantitative limitations on catches of stocks subject to TAC, and with the Community's obligations under the abovementioned Agreement with the Kingdom of Norway, it is necessary for the Commission to fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State, including the fishery in Norwegian waters, are deemed to have exhausted the share of the TAC for saithe available to the Community;
Whereas, according to the information communicated to the Commission, catches of this stock by Community vessels have reached the share of the TAC available to the Community for 1984,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Catches of saithe in the waters of ICES divisions II a (EC zone), III a, III b, c, d (EC zone), IV, by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or registered in a Member State, are deemed to have exhausted the share of the TAC available to the Community for 1984.
Fishing for saithe in the waters of ICES divisions II a (EC zone), III a, III b, c, d (EC zone), IV, by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or registered in a Member State, is prohibited, as well as the retention on board, the transhipment and the landing of such fish by the abovementioned vessels after the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 28 November 1984.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 November 1984.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1006/97 of 4 June 1997 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processing (1 July 1997 to 30 June 1998)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1095/96 of 18 June 1996 on the implementation of the concessions set out in Schedule CXL drawn up in the wake of the conclusion of the GATT XXIV.6 negotiations (1), and in particular Article 1 (1) thereof,
Whereas pursuant to Schedule CXL the Community has undertaken to open an annual import tariff quota of 50 700 tonnes of frozen beef intended for processing; whereas the rules of application for the quota year 1997/98 starting 1 July 1997 must be established;
Whereas the import of frozen beef under the tariff quota shall qualify for the total suspension of the specific rate of customs duty where the meat is intended for the manufacture of preserved food, which does not contain characteristic components other than beef and jelly; whereas where the meat is intended for other processed products containing beef the import shall qualify for a 55 % suspension of the autonomous specific rate of customs duty; whereas the breakdown of the tariff quota into each of the arrangements referred to above should be made taking into account the experience gained in respect of similar imports in the past;
Whereas so as to avoid speculation, access to the quota should be allowed only to active processors carrying out processing in a processing establishment approved in accordance with Article 8 of Council Directive 77/99/EEC (2), as last amended by Directive 95/68/EC (3);
Whereas, imports into the Community under the present tariff quota are subject to presentation of an import licence; whereas licences may be issued following allocations of import rights on the basis of applications from eligible processors; whereas subject to the provisions of this Regulation the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88 of 16 November 1988 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance fixing certificates for agricultural products (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2350/96 (5), and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of 26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (6), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 266/97 (7), shall apply to import licences issued under this Regulation;
Whereas the application of the present tariff quota requires strict surveillance of imports and effective checks as to their use and destination; whereas the processing should therefore be authorized only in the importing Member State; whereas, furthermore, a security shall be lodged in order to ensure that the imported meat is used according to the tariff quota specifications; whereas the amount of security should be fixed taking into account the difference between the customs duties applicable inside and outside the quota;
Whereas experience shows that importers do not always notify the competent authorities which issued the import licences of the quantity and origin of the beef imported under the quota concerned; whereas this information is important for assessing the market situation; whereas a security covering notification of the information should therefore be introduced;
Whereas provision should be made for communication by the Member States of information concerning the imports concerned;
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
1. An import tariff quota of 50 700 tonnes, bone-in equivalent of frozen beef falling within CN codes 0202 20 30, 0202 30 10, 0202 30 50, 0202 30 90 or 0206 29 91 and intended for processing in the Community is hereby opened for the period 1 July 1997 to 30 June 1998.
2. The overall quantity referred to in paragraph 1 shall be divided into two quantities:
(a) 38 000 tonnes of frozen beef intended for manufacture of preserved food as defined in Article 7 (a),
(b) 12 700 tonnes of frozen beef intended for manufacture of beef containing products as defined in Article 7 (b).
3. The quota shall bear the following order Nos:
- 09.4057 for the quantity to in paragraph 2 (a),
- 09.4058 for the quantity referred to in paragraph 2 (b).
4. The customs import duties to apply on frozen beef under the present tariff quota are those referred to in order No 13 of Annex 7 to Annex III of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1734/96 (8).
The conversion rate for the relevant amounts of duty shall be the agricultural rate applicable on the day of importation.
5. For the purpose of this Regulation the day of importation is the day of acceptance of the declaration of release for free circulation.
Article 2
1. An application for import rights is valid only if it is lodged by, or on behalf of a natural or legal person who, during the 12 months prior to the entry into force of this Regulation, has been in the business of producing processed products containing beef and who is entered in a national VAT register. Furthermore, the application shall be lodged by, or on behalf of a processing establishment approved under Article 8 of Directive 77/99/EEC. For each quantity referred to in Article 1 (2) only one application for import rights may be accepted in respect of each approved processing establishment.
For the purposes of the above subparagraph, an approved processing establishment does not include a retail or catering establishment, or an establishment attached to a retail sales point, in which meat is being processed and offered for sale to the final consumer.
2. Applicants no longer active in the meat processing industry on 1 June 1997 shall not qualify under the arrangements provided for in this Regulation.
3. Documentary evidence, to the satisfaction of the competent authority, of compliance with the conditions of the preceding paragraphs shall be lodged together with the application.
Article 3
1. Each application for import rights for production of A-products or B-products shall be expressed in bone-in equivalence and shall not exceed the available quantity under each of the two categories.
2. Each application referring to either A-products or B-products shall reach the competent authority by 12 June 1997.
3. Member States shall forward to the Commission by 24 June 1997 a list of applicants and quantities applied for under each of the two categories together with the approval numbers of the processing establishments concerned.
The Commission shall decide as soon as possible to what extent applications may be accepted, where necessary as a percentage of the quantity applied for.
Article 4
1. Any import of frozen beef for which import rights have been allocated pursuant to Article 3 shall be subject to presentation of an import licence.
2. Within his allocated import rights a processor may apply for import licences until 27 February 1998 at the latest. The application shall be lodged in the Member State where the import rights are registered.
For the purpose of this paragraph 100 kilograms of bone-in beef equals 77 kilograms of boneless beef.
3. A security shall be lodged with the competent authority at the time of importation ensuring that the processor processes the entire quantity of meat imported into the required finished products in the establishment specified in the licence application, within three months following the day of importation.
The amounts of security are fixed in Annex I.
Article 5
1. On the licence application and the licence itself shall be entered:
(a) in box 8, the country of origin,
(b) in box 16, one of the eligible CN codes,
(c) in box 20, at least one of the following endorsements:
- Certificado válido en . . . (Estado miembro expedidor) / carne destinada a la transformación . . . [productos A] [productos B] (táchese lo que no proceda) en . . . (designación exacta y número de registro del establecimiento en el que vaya a procederse a la transformación / Reglamento (CE) n° 1006/97.
- Licens gyldig i . . . (udstedende medlemsstat) / Kød bestemt til forarbejdning til (A-produkter) (B-produkter) (det ikke gældende overstreges) i . . . (nøjagtig betegnelse for den virksomhed, hvor forarbejdningen sker) / forordning (EF) nr. 1006/97.
- In . . . (ausstellender Mitgliedstaat) gültige Lizenz / Fleisch für die Verarbeitung zu [A-Erzeugnissen] [B-Erzeugnissen] (Unzutreffendes bitte streichen) in . . . (genaue Bezeichnung des Betriebs, in dem die Verarbeitung erfolgen soll) / Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1006/97.
- Ôï ðéóôïðïéçôéêü éó÷ýåé . . . (êñÜôïò ìÝëïò Ýêäïóçò) / ÊñÝáò ðïõ ðñïïñßæåôáé ãéá ìåôáðïßçóç . . . [ðñïúüíôá Á] [ðñïúüíôá Â] (äéáãñÜöåôáé ç ðåñéôôÞ Ýíäåéîç) . . . (áêñéâÞò ðåñéãñáöÞ êáé áñéèìüò Ýãêñéóçò ôçò åãêáôÜóôáóçò üðïõ ðñüêåéôáé íá ðñáãìáôïðïéçèåß ç ìåôáðïßçóç) / Êáíïíéóìüò (ÅÊ) áñéè. 1006/97.
- Licence valid in . . . (issuing Member State) / Meat intended for processing . . . [A-products] [B-products] (delete as appropriate) at . . . (exact designation and approval No of the establishment where the processing is to take place) / Regulation (EC) No 1006/97.
- Certificat valable . . . (État membre émetteur) / viande destinée à la transformation de . . . [produits A] [produits B] (rayer la mention inutile) dans . . . (désignation exacte et numéro d'agrément de l'établissement dans lequel la transformation doit avoir lieu) / règlement (CE) n° 1006/97.
- Titolo valido in . . . (Stato membro di rilascio) / Carni destinate alla trasformazione . . . [prodotti A] [prodotti B] (depennare la voce inutile) presso . . . (esatta designazione e numero di riconoscimento dello stabilimento nel quale è prevista la trasformazione) / Regolamento (CE) n. 1006/97.
- Certificaat geldig in . . . (Lidstaat van afgifte) / Vlees bestemd voor verwerking tot [A-producten] [B-producten] (doorhalen wat niet van toepassing is) in . . . (nauwkeurige aanduiding en toelatingsnummer van het bedrijf waar de verwerking zal plaatsvinden) / Verordening (EG) nr. 1006/97.
- Certificado válido em . . . (Estado-membro emissor) / carne destinada à transformação . . . [produtos A] [produtos B] (riscar o que não interessa) em . . . (designação exacta e número de aprovação do estabelecimento em que a transformação será efectuada) / Regulamento (CE) nº 1006/97.
- Todistus on voimassa . . . (myöntäjäjäsenvaltio) / Liha on tarkoitettu [A-luokan tuotteet] [B-luokan tuotteet] (tarpeeton poistettava) jalostukseen . . .:ssa (tarkka ilmoitus laitoksesta, jossa jalostus suoritetaan, hyväksyntänumero mukaan lukien) / Asetus (EY) N:o 1006/97.
- Licensen är giltig i . . . (utfärdande medlemsstat) / Kött avsett för bearbetning . . . [A-produkter] [B-produkter] (stryk det som inte gäller) vid . . . (exakt angivelse av och godkännandenummer för anläggningen där bearbetningen skall ske) / Förordning (EG) nr 1006/97.
2. Without prejudice to the provisions of this Regulation, Regulations (EEC) No 3719/88 and (EC) No 1445/95 shall apply.
3. Import licences shall be valid for 120 days from the date of issue within the meaning of Article 21 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88. However, their term of validity shall expire on 30 June 1998 at the latest.
4. Notwithstanding Article 8 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88, the full Common Customs Tariff duty applicable on the date of release for free circulation shall be collected in respect of all quantities imported in excess of those shown on the import licence.
5. The second subparagraph of Article 14 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88 shall not apply.
6. Notwithstanding Article 33 (3) (b) (ii) of Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88, the maximum period within which proof of importation must be provided if the portion of the security forfeited is to be limited to 15 % shall be four months.
Article 6
1. Quantities for which import licence applications have not been lodged by 27 February 1998 shall be subject to a further allocation of import rights.
To that end, by 6 March 1998, Member States shall forward to the Commission details of the quantities for which no applications have been received.
2. The Commission shall decide as soon as possible on the breakdown of those quantities into those intended for A-products and those intended for B-products. In doing so, the actual utilization of the import rights allocated pursuant to Article 3 under each of the two categories may be taken into account.
3. For the purposes of this Article, Articles 2 to 5 shall apply. However, the date referred to in Article 3 (2) shall be replaced by 3 April 1998 and the date referred to in Article 3 (3) shall be replaced by 10 April 1998.
Article 7
For the purposes of this Regulation:
(a) An A-product shall be defined as a processed product falling within CN codes 1602 10, 1602 50 31, 1602 50 39 or 1602 50 80, not containing meat other than that of animals of the bovine species, with a collagen/protein ratio of no more than 0,45 % (9) and containing by weight at least 20 % (10) of lean meat excluding offal (11) and fat with meat and jelly accounting for at least 85 % of the total net weight.
The product must be subjected to a heat treatment sufficient to ensure the coagulation of meat proteins in the whole of the product which may not show any traces of a pinkish liquid on the cut surface when the product is cut along a line passing through its thickest part.
(b) A B-product shall be defined as a processed product containing beef, other than:
- one specified in Article 1 (1) (a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 (12), or
- one referred to under (a).
However, a processed product falling within CN code 0210 20 90 which has been dried or smoked so that the colour and consistency of the fresh meat has totally disappeared and with a water/protein ratio not exceeding 3,2 shall be considered to be a B-product.
Article 8
Member States shall set up a system of physical and documentary supervision to ensure that all meat is processed into the category of product specified on the import licence concerned.
The system must include physical checks of quantity and quality at the start of the processing, during the processing and after the processing operation is completed. To this end, processors shall at any time be able to demonstrate the identity and use of the imported meat through appropriate production records.
Technical verification of the production method by the competent authority may, to the extent necessary, make allowance for drip losses and trimmings.
In order to verify the quality of the finished product and establish its conformity with the processor's recipe Member States shall proceed to representative samplings and analysis of those products. The costs of such operations shall be born by the processor concerned.
Article 9
1. The security referred to in Article 4 (3) shall be released in proportion to the quantity for which, within seven months, proof has been furnished to the satisfaction of the competent authority that all or part of the imported meat has been processed into the relevant products within three months following the day of importation in the designated establishment.
However,
(a) if processing took place after the abovementioned three-month time limit, the security shall be released minus:
- 15 % and
- 2 % of the remaining amount for each day by which the time limit has been exceeded;
(b) if proof of processing is established within the abovementioned seven-month time limit and is produced within 18 months following those seven months the amount forfeited less 15 % of the security amount, shall be repaid.
2. The amount of security not released shall be forfeited and retained as a customs duty.
Article 10
1. Importers shall notify the competent authority which issued the import licence not later than three weeks after the importation of the product referred to in this Regulation of the quantity and origin of the product imported giving separate particulars for each of the CN codes for the frozen meat and for each of the two categories of finished products.
The competent authority shall forward the information to the Commission at the beginning of each month.
2. The competent authority shall communicate to the Commission not later than four months after each half year of importation the quantities of products referred to in Article 1 for which import licences issued under this Regulation have been used during that half year.
3. All communications to the Commission under this Regulation, including nil returns, shall be made to the address indicated in Annex II.
Article 11
1. Importers shall, when submitting an import licence application, establish a security of ECU 1 per 100 kg to cover the notification referred to in Article 10 (1) of this Regulation.
2. The security shall be released where the information is sent to the competent authority within the period referred to in Article 10 (1) regarding the quantity covered by the notification. Where notification is not made within the period specified the security shall be forfeit.
A decision to release the security shall be taken simultaneously with the decision to release the security covering the licence.
Article 12
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, 4 June 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 25 May 2009
on the adoption of a supplementary research programme to be implemented by the Joint Research Centre for the European Atomic Energy Community
(2009/410/Euratom)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
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 submitted after consultation of the Scientific and Technical Committee,
Whereas:
(1)
Within the framework of the European Research Area, the high flux reactor at Petten (hereinafter HFR) has been, and continues to be, an important means available to the Community to contribute to materials sciences and testing, to nuclear medicine and to safety research in the field of nuclear energy.
(2)
The operation of the HFR has been supported by a series of supplementary research programmes the last of which, Council Decision 2007/773/Euratom of 26 November 2007 on a one year extension of the supplementary research programme to be implemented by the Joint Research Centre for the European Atomic Energy Community (1) expired on 31 December 2007.
(3)
The operation of the HFR continued throughout 2008 without a supplementary research programme, while efforts were made to base its operation and exploitation on an independent and more durable legal regime. Since those efforts failed, it is necessary to provide for continued financial support under a new supplementary research programme.
(4)
Given the continued need for the HFR as an irreplaceable infrastructure for Community research in the fields of improvement of safety of existing nuclear reactors, of health including the development of medical isotopes to answer questions of medical research, of nuclear fusion, of fundamental research and of training and waste management including the possibility to study the safety behaviour of nuclear fuels for the new generation of reactor systems, its operation should continue under this supplementary research programme until 2011.
(5)
Due to their special interest in the continued operation of the HFR, Belgium, France and the Netherlands should, as indicated by them, finance this programme through financial contributions made to the general budget of the European Union by way of assigned revenue.
(6)
Part of the contributions under the present supplementary programme should also cover expenditure made during the year 2008,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The supplementary research programme on the operation of the high flux reactor at Petten (HFR), (hereinafter the programme), the objectives of which are set out in Annex I, is adopted for a period of three years, starting on 1 January 2009.
Article 2
The financial contribution estimated as necessary for the execution of the programme amounts to EUR 34,992 million. The breakdown of this amount is set out in Annex II. This contribution shall be considered as assigned revenue in accordance with Article 18(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (2).
Article 3
1. The Commission shall be in charge of the management of the programme. To this end, it shall call upon the services of the Joint Research Centre.
2. The Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre shall be kept informed of the implementation of the programme.
Article 4
The Commission shall each year, before 15 September, submit to the European Parliament and to the Council, a report on the implementation of this Decision.
Article 5
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 January 2009.
Article 6
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 25 May 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 486/2003
of 17 March 2003
fixing Community producer and import prices for carnations and roses with a view to the application of the arrangements governing imports of certain floricultural products originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 of 21 December 1987 fixing conditions for the application of preferential customs duties on imports of certain flowers originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1300/97(2), and in particular Article 5(2)(a) thereof,
Whereas:
Pursuant to Article 2(2) and Article 3 of abovementioned Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87, Community import and producer prices are fixed each fortnight for uniflorous (bloom) carnations, multiflorous (spray) carnations, large-flowered roses and small-flowered roses and apply for two-weekly periods. Pursuant to Article 1b of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 700/88 of 17 March 1988 laying down detailed rules for the application of the arrangements for the import into the Community of certain floricultural products originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2062/97(4), those prices are determined for fortnightly periods on the basis of weighted prices provided by the Member States. Those prices should be fixed immediately so the customs duties applicable can be determined. To that end, provision should be made for this Regulation to enter into force immediately,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The Community producer and import prices for uniflorous (bloom) carnations, multiflorous (spray) carnations, large-flowered roses and small-flowered roses as referred to in Article 1b of Regulation (EEC) No 700/88 for a fortnightly period shall be as set out in the Annex.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 March 2003.
It shall apply from 19 March to 1 April 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 March 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 325/2009
of 21 April 2009
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 Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,
Whereas:
Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 April 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 21 April 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 27 November 1981 establishing that the apparatus described as "Molectron - pulsed Nd : YAG laser, model MY 34, with accessories" may not be imported free of Common Customs Tariff duties (81/997/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1798/75 of 10 July 1975 on the importation free of Common Customs Tariff duties of educational, scientific and cultural materials (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1027/79 (2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2784/79 of 12 December 1979 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 1798/75 (3), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Whereas, by letter dated 20 May 1981, the United Kingdom has requested the Commission to invoke the procedure provided for in Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2784/79 in order to determine whether or not the apparatus described as "Molectron - pulsed Nd : YAG laser, model MY 34, with accessories", to be used for the investigation of relaxation processes in solids following picosecond laser excitation, should be considered to be a scientific apparatus, and where the reply is in the affirmative, whether apparatus of equivalent scientific value is currently being manufactured in the Community;
Whereas, in accordance with the provisions of Article 7 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2784/79, a group of experts composed of representatives of all the Member States met on 30 October 1981 within the framework of the Committee on Duty-Free Arrangements to examine the matter;
Whereas this examination showed that the apparatus in question is a laser;
Whereas its objective technical characteristics, such as the energetic value of the impulses, and the use to which it is put make it specially suited to scientific research ; whereas, moreover, apparatus of the same kind are principally used for scientific activities ; whereas it must therefore be considered to be a scientific apparatus;
Whereas however, on the basis of information received from Member States, apparatus of scientific value equivalent to the said apparatus, capable of being used for the same purposes, are currently being manufactured in the Community ; whereas this applies, in particular, to the apparatus "hyper YAG laser system 2000" manufactured by J.K. Lasers Ltd, Somers Road, UK-Rugby CV22 7DG, Warwickshire and to the apparatus "laser YAG, model YG 481 DT" manufactured by Quantel, avenue de l'Atlantique, F-91941 Les Ulis Orsay Cedex,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The apparatus described as "Molectron - pulsed Nd : YAG laser, model MY 34, with accessories", which is the subject of an application by the United Kingdom of 20 May 1981, may not be imported free of Common Customs Tariff duties.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 November 1981.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1121/2002
of 27 June 2002
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98(2), 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 28 June 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 June 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 18 December 1991 on certain adaptations of measures covered by Regulation (EEC) No 4028/86 in the territory of the former German Democratic Republic (Only the German text is authentic) (92/86/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3571/90 of 4 December 1990 introducing various measures concerning the implementation of the common fisheries policy in the former German Democratic Republic (1), and in particular Article 4 (2) thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 4028/86 of 18 December 1986 on Community measures to improve and adapt structures in the fisheries and aquaculture sector (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3944/90 of 20 December 1990 (3) requires in its
Article 3
that Member States shall forward to the Commission a multiannual guidance programme concerning the fishing fleet;
Whereas the Commission adopted by Decision 88/139/EEC (4) a multiannual guidance programme for the German fishing fleet (1987 to 1991), as last amended by Decision (91/540/EEC) (5);
Whereas the adjustment of capacity is one of the major measures to achieve the objectives of the amendment for the fishing fleet of the former German Democratic Republic;
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 3571/90 provides for a simplified procedure concerning the implementation of the common fisheries policy in the former German Democratic Republic in respecting the general tenor and the basic principles of Regulation (EEC) No 4028/86;
Whereas the specific situation in that territory makes it particularly difficult to obtain information about the number of fishing days per vessel in the period prior to German unification;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee for the Fishing Industry,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
If the German authorities certify that such vessels were used exclusively for fishing activities during the qualifying calendar years in question, the fishing vessels from the former German Democratic Republic shall be eligible for reimbursement by the Community of premiums paid under Title VII of Regulation (EEC) No 4028/86 in respect of the adjustment of capacity, by way of derogation from the provisions of Articles 23 (1), 23 (2b) and 24 (2b).
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Done at Brussels, 18 December 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 5 April 2006
amending Decision 2005/432/EC laying down the animal and public health conditions and model certificates for imports of meat products for human consumption from third countries and repealing Decisions 97/41/EC, 97/221/EC and 97/222/EC
(notified under document number C(2006) 1319)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2006/330/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC (1), and in particular Article 10(2)(c) thereof,
Having regard to 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 (2), and in particular the introductory phrase of Article 8, the first paragraph of Article 8(1), Article 8(4) and Articles 9(2)(b), (4)(b) and (c) thereof.
Whereas:
(1)
Council Decision 79/542/EEC of 21 December 1976 drawing up a list of third countries or parts of third countries, and laying down animal and public health and veterinary certification conditions, for importation into the Community of certain live animals and their fresh meat (3) establishes the animal health conditions for imports into the Community of live animals, excluding equidae, and of fresh meat of such animals but excluding meat preparations.
(2)
Commission Decision 2005/432/EC (4) lays down animal and public health rules on imports into the Community of consignments of certain meat products, including the lists of third countries and parts of third countries from which imports of such products are to be authorised. That Decision also lays down the model public and animal health certificates and rules on treatments required for those products.
(3)
It is necessary to ensure that there is proper correlation with the regionalisation, where applicable, of third countries, and in particular of Brazil, Namibia and South Africa, for the purposes of importing fresh meat into the Community, in order to ensure that any meat used in meat products does not come from animals from premises subject to restrictions on grounds of disease, to clarify the use of offal in certain meat products and to spell out clearly the requirements for meat of game birds used in meat products.
(4)
Serbia and Montenegro are Republics with their own customs territories, which together form a State Union. They should therefore be entered separately on the list of third countries and parts of third countries from which imports of meat products are to be authorised.
(5)
Decision 2005/432/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
Decision 2005/432/EC is amended as follows:
1.
Article 4 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 4
Animal health conditions concerning the origin and treatment of the meat products
Subject to compliance with the conditions concerning the origin and treatment of the meat products set out in Annex I(1) and (2), Member States shall authorise imports of meat products originating in the following third countries and parts of third countries:
(a)
in the case of meat products not subject to a specific treatment as referred to in point 2(a)(ii) of Annex I, the third countries listed in Part 2 of Annex II and the parts of third countries listed in Part 1 of that Annex;
(b)
in the case of meat products subject to a specific treatment as referred to in point 2(a)(ii) of Annex I, the third countries listed in Parts 2 and 3 of Annex II and the parts of third countries listed in Part 1 of that Annex.’;
2.
Annexes I, II and III are replaced by the text in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision shall apply from 1 July 2006.
However, animal and public health certificates issued before the date of application of this Decision may be used until 1 October 2006.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 April 2006.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 920/2004
of 29 April 2004
amending Regulation (EC) No 2550/2001 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2529/2001 on the common organisation of the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat as regards premium schemes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia to the European Union
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) A number of technical adjustments are required to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2550/2001(1) by reason of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (hereafter referred to as the "new Member States").
(2) Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2550/2001 lays down that each Member State must set a period for the submission of applications for sheep and goat premiums. Given that the new Member States are due to accede to the European Union on 1 May 2004, they should be authorised to set a special timetable for the submission of premium applications in 2004 and the rules on notifications should be adjusted.
(3) Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2550/2001 should be amended to take account of the goat herds of Cyprus, Slovenia and Slovakia,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 2550/2001 is hereby amended as follows:
(a) In Article 2(2), the following subparagraph is added:"For 2004, Malta and Slovenia may set a period commencing on the date of entry into force of the 2003 Treaty of Accession at the earliest and ending 31 days later at the latest."
(b) In Article 18, the following second paragraph is added:"In the case of Malta and Slovenia, the information referred to in the first paragraph shall be provided before 30 August 2004."
(c) Annex I is replaced by the text given in the Annex hereto.
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, 29 April 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Regulation (EC) No 545/2002
of 18 March 2002
extending the financing of quality and marketing improvement plans for certain nuts and locust beans approved under Title IIa of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 and providing for a specific aid for hazelnuts
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(1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(3),
Whereas:
(1) Title IIa of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables(4), provides for various specific measures to make good the inadequacy of production and marketing facilities for certain nuts and locust beans. Aid is provided to producer organisations which have received specific recognition and which have submitted a plan approved by the competent authority for improving the quality and the marketing of their produce.
(2) The specific aid granted towards the drawing up and implementation of the quality and marketing improvement plan as specified in Article 14(d)(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 is restricted to a period of 10 years to allow a shift of financial responsibility on to the producers.
(3) Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 was repealed by Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables(5). However, as specified by Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96, any rights acquired by producer organisations in application of Title IIa of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 are to be maintained until exhausted.
(4) A number of plans expired in 2000, having completed their tenth year. These plans became eligible for an eleventh year of aid under Council Regulation (EC) No 558/2001 of 19 March 2001 extending for a period of up to one year the financing of certain quality and marketing improvement plans approved under Title IIa of Regulation (EC) No 1035/72(6).
(5) A number of additional plans expired in 2001, having completed the tenth year.
(6) In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2200/96, the Commission forwarded to the Council a report on the state of implementation of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96. This report includes a description of the results of the specific measures for nuts and locust beans carried out under Title IIa of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 but does not put forward final proposals for a permanent support framework for the sector.
(7) In recognition of the important environmental role played by the nut sector in protection against erosion, fire prevention and preservation of indigenous genetic material, and of its important social role in keeping people on the land and thus furthering preservation of the countryside, it is appropriate, for the year 2001, to grant to those producer organisations whose improvement plans expire in 2001, and who continue to fulfil the recognition criteria, continued financing of their plans within the 2002 budget. This should include those producer organisations whose original improvement plans expired in 2000 and which were extended under Regulation (EC) No 558/2001.
(8) Eligible areas should be able to include those areas within a plan, which have been approved in 1990 or 1991, and subsequently included in, or transferred to, another plan through merger or acquisition of producer organisations.
(9) Only aid applications in respect of work carried out until 15 June 2002 should qualify for financing. Plans for which the end of the tenth year was after 15 June 2000 were only entitled to an eleventh year of Community support until 15 June 2001 under Regulation (EC) No 558/2001. For the purpose of continuity, these plans should be entitled to Community support for the period between 15 June 2001 and 31 December 2001.
(10) In order to simplify administrative procedures, aid should be limited to a maximum of those areas for which an aid application was made in the final year of the plan.
(11) The period of up to one year is not sufficient to complete work of grubbing operations followed by replanting and/or varietal reconversion as referred to in Article 2(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 790/89 of 20 March 1989 fixing the level of additional flat-rate aid for the formation of producers' organisations and the maximum amount applied to aid for quality and marketing improvement in the nut and locust bean growing sector(7). The maximum aid per hectare therefore should be paid in respect of other operations as specified in Article 2(2) of that Regulation with a maximum Community contribution of 75 %.
(12) The implementing rules of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2159/89 of 18 July 1989 laying down detailed rules for applying the specific measures for nuts and locust beans as provided for in Title IIa of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72(8) should apply for the period of the continued payment of aid.
(13) In order to deal with the economic situation in the hazelnut sector, flat-rate aid should be granted for hazelnuts harvested in the 2001/2002 marketing year, for those producer organisations not eligible for an extension to improvement plans under this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Recognised producer organisations engaged in the production and marketing of nuts and/or locust beans and receiving aid pursuant to Title IIa of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72, whose quality and marketing improvement plans were approved in 1990 or 1991, or which contain areas approved in 1990 or 1991, may request the continuation of that aid for these areas for a further period of up to one year subject to the rules laid down in Articles 2 and 3 of this Regulation.
For that period producer organisations shall continue to implement the plan as approved for the final year.
For the purposes of this Regulation, the final year of the plan shall mean the tenth year for areas approved in 1991, and the eleventh year for areas approved in 1990 and extended under the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 558/2001.
Article 2
The aid shall:
(a) be paid in regard to, and limited to, those areas for which an aid application has been submitted in respect of the final year of the plan;
(b) be limited to a maximum of EUR 241,50 per hectare, of which the maximum Community participation shall be 75 %;
(c) apply for a period of up to one year immediately following the expiry of the final year of the plan, up to a latest date of 15 June 2002.
Plans extended pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 558/2001, for which the starting date of the final year is after 15 June 2000, shall be entitled to Community support for the period between 15 June 2001 and the end of the final year.
Article 3
Regulation (EEC) No 2159/89 shall apply mutatis mutandis to plans for which aid is paid pursuant to Article 1.
Where necessary, additional implementing measures shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 46 of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96.
Article 4
Article 55 of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 shall be replaced by the following: "Article 55
For hazelnuts harvested during the 2001/2002 marketing year, aid of EUR 15/100 kg shall be granted to producer organisations, recognised pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 or to this Regulation, which implement a quality improvement plan within the meaning of Article 14d of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 or an operational programme within the meaning of Article 15, and do not benefit from the aid provided for in Articles 1 and 2 of Regulation (EC) No 545/2002."
Article 5
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third 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, 18 March 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 28 December 2001
amending Decision 97/232/EC drawing up lists of third countries from which the Member States authorise imports of sheep and goats
(notified under document number C(2001) 4650)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2002/3/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 72/462/EEC(1) of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon importation of bovine, ovine and caprine animals and swine, fresh meat and meat products from third countries, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1452/2001(2), and in particular Article 3(1) and Article 8 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Directive 91/68/EEC(3), as last amended by Commission Decision 2001/10/EC(4), lays down the animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in ovine and caprine animals.
(2) Commission Decision 97/232/EC(5), as last amended by Decision 2001/600/EC(6), draws up lists of third countries from which Member States authorise imports of sheep and goats.
(3) In Romania Brucellosis melitensis has been a notifiable disease for at least five years, no case has been officially confirmed for at least five years and vaccination has been banned for at least three years; therefore this country complies with the requirements laid down in Annex A, Chapter 1.II(1)(b) to Directive 91/68/EEC.
(4) Following a Commission mission carried out in July 2001 it appears that the controls by the competent veterinary services of Romania and the animal health situation with regard to Brucella melitensis are satisfactory.
(5) Furthermore, Romania undertakes to comply with Annex A, Chapter 1.II(2) to Directive 91/68/EEC and therefore sheep and goats introduced onto holdings in Romania must comply with the conditions laid down in Annex A, Chapter 1.I.D to Directive 91/68/EEC.
(6) Romania therefore satisfies the conditions to be recognised as officially free of Brucellosis melitensis and Decision 97/232/EC must be amended accordingly.
(7) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
"PART 5" of the Annex to Decision 97/232/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision shall apply from 1 January 2002.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 December 2001.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 152/78 of 23 January 1978 amending Regulations (EEC) No 1059/69, (EEC) No 1060/69 and (EEC) No 2682/72 on the trade arrangements for processed agricultural products not covered by Annex II to the Treaty
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Articles 28 and 235 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas experience has shown that certain amendments should be made to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1060/69 of 28 May 1969 fixing the quantities of basic products considered to have been used in the manufacture of the goods covered by Regulation (EEC) No 1059/69 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3058/75 (3), with regard both to certain notional quantities and to the wording of certain headings of the Common Customs Tariff;
Whereas certain amendments to the Common Customs Tariff necessitate at the same time amendments to Regulation (EEC) No 1060/69 and Council Regulation (EEC) No 1059/69 of 28 May 1969 laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products (4) as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2670/76 (5), and to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2682/72 of 12 December 1972 laying down the general rules for granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex II to the Treaty and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (6), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3138/76 (7),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 1059/69 is hereby amended as follows: 1. In the table in Article 2: (a) in the English text, delete CCT heading No 17.01 and substitute:
"17.01 Beet sugar and cane sugar, in solid form";
(b) delete CCT heading No 17.03 and substitute:
"17.03 Molasses".
2. In Article 3 (a), for "11.06" read "11.04 C".
3. In the Annex: (a) in the English, Dutch, French, German and Italian texts of CCT heading No ex 17.04, for "weight of sugar" read "weight of sucrose";
(b) delete CCT heading No "19.01 Malt extract";
(c) for CCT heading No ex 19.02 substitute:
"19.02 Malt extract ; preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, of a kind used in infant food or for dietetic or culinary purposes, containing less than 50 % by weight of cocoa"; (1)Opinion delivered on 20 January 1978 (not yet published in the Official Journal). (2)OJ No L 141, 12.6.1969, p. 7. (3)OJ No L 306, 26.11.1975, p. 3. (4)OJ No L 141, 12.6.1969, p. 1. (5)OJ No L 302, 25.10.1976, p. 1. (6)OJ No L 289, 27.12.1972, p. 13. (7)OJ No L 354, 24.12.1976, p. 1.
(d) delete CCT heading No 19.06;
(e) for CCT heading No 19.07 substitute:
"19.07 Bread, ships' biscuits and other ordinary bakers' wares, not containing added sugar, honey, eggs, fats, cheese or fruit ; communion wafers, cachets of a kind suitable for pharmaceutical use, sealing wafers, rice paper and similar products";
(f) amend CCT heading No "ex 21.01" to read "ex 21.02".
Article 2
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1060/69 is hereby replaced by the Annex hereto.
Article 3
Regulation (EEC) No 2682/72 is hereby amended as follows: 1. In the third indent of Article 1 (2) (a), for "11.06" read "11.04 C".
2. In Annex A: (a) in the English text, delete CCT heading No 17.01 and substitute:
"17.01 Beet sugar and cane sugar, in solid form";
(b) amend subheading "ex 17.02 D" to read "ex 17.02 D II";
(c) delete CCT heading No 17.03 and substitute ; "17.03 Molasses".
3. In Annex B: (a) delete CCT heading No "19.01 Malt extract";
(b) for CCT heading No 19.02 substitute:
"19.02 Malt extract ; preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, of a kind used in infant food or for dietetic or culinary purposes, containing less than 50 % by weight of cocoa";
(c) delete CCT heading No 19.06;
(d) for CCT heading No 19.07 substitute:
"19.07 Bread, ships' biscuits and other ordinary bakers' wares, not containing added sugar, honey, eggs, fats, cheese or fruit ; communion wafers, cachets of a kind suitable for pharmaceutical use, sealing wafers, rice paper and similar products";
(e) delete CCT heading No 21.01 and substitute:
"21.02 Extracts, essences or concentrates, of coffee, tea or maté and preparations with a basis of those extracts, essences or concentrates ; roasted chicory and other roasted coffee substitutes and extracts, essences and concentrates thereof: C. Roasted chicory and other roasted coffee substitutes:
II. Other (than roasted chicory)
D. Extracts, essences and concentrates of roasted chicory and other roasted coffee substitutes:
II. Other (than extracts of roasted chicory)";
(f) amend subheading "21.07 ex F" to read "21.07 ex G".
4. In Annex D: (a) for CCT heading No 19.02 substitute:
"19.02 Malt extract ; preparations of flour, meal, starch or malt extract, of a kind used as infant food or for dietetic or culinary purposes, containing less than 50 % by weight of cocoa:
B. Other";
(b) delete CCT heading No 19.06;
(c) for CCT heading No 19.07 substitute: PIC FILE= "T
(d) amend subheading "21.07 F" to read "21.07 G".
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall be applicable from 1 February 1978.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 January 1978.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 975/95 of 28 April 1995 on precautionary measures in the fruit and vegetable sector for cauliflowers for the period 1 to 31 May 1995
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 5 and 155 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 16 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden and by Regulation (EC) No 3290/94 (2), for each of the products listed in Annex II to the said Regulation a basic price and a buying-in price must be fixed for each marketing year, whereas cauliflowers harvested in a particular production year are marketed from May to the following April;
Whereas the Council has not yet adopted the basic price and buying-in price applicable to cauliflowers from 1 May 1995; whereas the Commission, in line with its responsibilities pursuant to the Treaty, is obliged to adopt the precautionary measures necessary to ensure the continued functioning of the common agricultural policy in the sector in question; whereas these measures are taken as a precaution and without prejudice to the Council's subsequent decisions on prices for the 1995/96 marketing year;
Whereas these precautionary measures should aim at ensuring the continuity of the intervention arrangements provided for in Articles 15 and 19 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72; whereas, to that end, the amounts to be used to calculate the prices for the abovementioned intervention measures should be fixed for the period 1 to 31 May; whereas the amounts correspond to the basic and buying-in prices proposed to the Council by the Commission,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the period 1 to 31 May 1995, the intervention measures provided for in Articles 15 and 19 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be carried out for cauliflowers at prices determined on the basis of the following amounts expressed in ecus per 100 kg net weight:
TABLE
These prices shall refer to packed, trimmed cauliflowers of quality class I.
These prices shall not include the cost of the packaging in which the product is presented.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 May 1995.
This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to any subsequent decisions to be adopted by the Council pursuant to Article 16 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 April 1995.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1874/2006
of 18 December 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 19 December 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 December 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3038/87
of 9 October 1987
re-establishing the levying of customs duties on articles of jewellery and parts thereof, of precious metal, falling within subheading 71.12 A of the Common Customs Tariff originating in Thailand to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/86 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/86 of 16 December 1986 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1987 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 15 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 3924/86, duties on the products listed in Annex II originating in each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III shall be totally suspended and the products as such shall, as a general rule, be subject to statistical surveillance every three months on the reference base referred to in Article 14;
Whereas, as provided for in Article 14, where the increase of preferential imports of these products, originating in one or more beneficiary countries, causes, or threatens to cause, economic difficulties in the Community or in a region of the Community, the levying of customs duties may be re-established once the Commission has had an appropriate exchange of information with the Member States; whereas for this purpose the reference base to be considered shall be, as a general rule, equal to 5 % of the total importations into the Community, originating from third countries in 1984;
Whereas, in the case of articles of jewellery and parts thereof, of precious metal, falling within subheading 71.12 A of the Common Customs Tariff, the reference base is fixed at 6 287 000 ECU; whereas, on 29 September 1987, imports of these products into the Community originating in Thailand reached the reference base in question after being charged thereagainst; whereas the exchange of information organized by the Commission has demonstrated that continuance of the preference threatens to cause economic difficulties in a region of the Community; whereas, therefore, customs duties in respect of the products in question must be re-established against Thailand,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 13 October 1987, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3924/86, shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in Thailand:
1.2 // // // CCT heading No // Description // // // 71.12 A (Nimexe code 71.12-11, 19) // Articles of jewellery and parts thereof, of precious metal // //
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, 9 October 1987.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 31 January 1989
approving a specific programme for the processing and marketing of virgin olive oil notified by the Spanish Government pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 355/77
(Only the Spanish text is authentic)
(89/126/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 355/77 of 15 February 1977 om common measures to improve the conditions under which agricultural and fishery products are processed and marketed (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1760/87 (2), and in particular Article 5 thereof,
Whereas on 23 November 1987 the Spanish Government forwarded a specific programme concerning the olive oil sector and submitted supplementary information on 10 August 1988 and 22 September 1988;
Whereas the aim of this specific programme is to rationalize and adapt the processing and marketing of virgin olive oil in the Spanish autonomous regions of Andalusia, Castile-la-Mancha, Extremadura, Catalonia, Valencia, Aragon, Madrid, Castile-Léon, Murcia and Balearics so as to increase the competitiveness of the sector and add value to its production; whereas it therefore constitutes a programme within the meaning of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 355/77;
Whereas concern for the quality of virgin olive oil necessitates shorter storage periods for harvested olives prior to processing, it would be appropriate to amplify point B.6.23 of the Commission criteria for the choice of projects to be financed under Regulation (EEC) No 355/77 (3) to allow the programme to include investments involving an increase in oil crushing capacities in a mill even when proof is not given that corresponding capacity is abandoned in other mills, as long as such investments will serve that purpose;
Whereas approval of this programme cannot include investments in research and development, namely in the field of effluent treatment;
Whereas this programme contains sufficient information as prescribed by Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 355/77 to show that the aims set out in Article 1 of that Regulation can be achieved in the virgin olive oil sector in Spain;
Whereas the estimatesd time required for implementation of this programme does not exceed the period mentioned in Article 3 (1) (g) of the Regulation;
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
1. The programme for the virgin olive oil sector submitted by the Spanish Government on 23 November 1987, concerning which further particulars were provided on 10 August 1988 and 22 September 1988 pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 355/77 is hereby approved.
2. Such approval does not extend to investments in research and development in the field of sewage disposal.
3. Approval of this programme also covers investments for the increase of the crushing capacity of mills provided such capacity is used to shorten storage periods for olives prior to crushing.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.
Done at Brussels, 31 January 1989.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1154/78 of 30 May 1978 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables and Regulation (EEC) No 2601/69 laying down special measures to encourage the processing of certain varieties of oranges
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,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1122/78 (3), does not fix the dates for the beginning and end of the marketing years or seasons for fresh fruit and vegetables produced in the Community ; whereas experience has shown the need, in particular when the representative rates for the various currencies are adjusted, to fix marketing periods at least for products subject to the intervention system or for which there are reference prices;
Whereas, so that there may be fuller information as to quantities produced and quantities coming on to the market, producers who are members of producers' organizations should be required to provide such information when requested by their organization;
Whereas Article 14 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 makes provision for measures to encourage the formation and operation of these organizations;
Whereas experience has shown that these measures have not been fully successful in encouraging the formation of producers' organizations in certain regions of the Community ; whereas additional measures should therefore be introduced for a limited period;
Whereas, in order to encourage action by producers' organizations to adapt supplies more closely to market requirements, these organizations should be authorized to withdraw products which, while meeting the quality standards, do not comply with the marketing rules which they have adopted;
Whereas Article 16 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 provides that the price at which the products subject to intervention are bought in pursuant to Article 19 shall be calculated by applying conversion factors to the buying-in price ; whereas, with respect to grapes, there are structural surpluses of this product for which corrective measures have already been taken ; whereas, pending the results of these measures, conversion factors to be applied to the buying-in price to maintain a balance between the intervention price for table grapes and the price obtained by the producer for that same product when intended for wine-making should be determined;
Whereas the markets in peaches and summer pears are particularly sensitive ; whereas it should be possible to follow trends in their prices, even if those of products having the same characteristics as those by reference to which the basic price is fixed are not available ; whereas balancing supply and demand should also be encouraged by permitting Member States to intervene more quickly ; whereas this may be achieved by raising the level of prices and shortening the period of market observation, since these are the two points which are decisive for recording a state of serious crisis for the product concerned;
Whereas Community preference would be better served if reference prices were adjusted to take account of changes in production costs;
Whereas Article 25 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 provides that where it would be appropriate to apply a countervailing charge in respect of a number of exporting countries for the same product over the same period, a single charge shall be applied in respect of those countries unless the entry prices for one or more of those countries are abnormally low in relation to entry prices recorded for the other exporting country or countries concerned ; whereas recent experience has shown that application of these provisions results in repeated adjustments to the countervailing charge, causing uncertainty among traders ; whereas this could be prevented if the situation of each exporting country were treated separately ; whereas appropriate measures should, therefore, be introduced;
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 2601/69 of 18 December 1969 laying down special measures to encourage the processing of certain varieties of oranges (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2483/75 (5), lays down the criteria on the basis of which the financial compensation granted to (1)OJ No C 6, 9.1.1978, p. 15. (2)OJ No L 118, 20.5.1972, p. 1. (3)OJ No L 142, 30.5.1978, p. 13. (4)OJ No L 324, 27.12.1969, p. 21. (5)OJ No L 254, 1.10.1975, p. 5. processors is fixed ; whereas one of these criteria is the price which processors usually pay for their supplies, which is calculated on the basis of the prices obtaining in the industry during the three marketing years preceding the one for which financial compensation is granted ; whereas, following the extension of the granting of financial compensation to include all quantities of oranges bought by the industry, the prices obtaining in the industry are tending to merge with the minimum price ; whereas new criteria for fixing the financial compensation should therefore be laid down ; whereas these criteria should establish a direct link between the movement of the minimum price and changes in the proportion of that price which is payable by the processor,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following paragraph shall be added to Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"3. The marketing years or seasons shall be as follows: - for tomatoes and cucumbers, from 1 January to 31 December,
- for cherries, from 1 April to 30 September,
- for peaches, from 1 May to 31 October,
- for cauliflowers and grapes, from 1 May to 30 April,
- for plums, from 1 June to 31 October,
- for pears and lemons, from 1 June to 31 May,
- for apples, from 1 July to 30 June,
- for oranges, from 1 October to 15 July,
- for mandarins (including tangerines and satsumas), clementines, wilkings and other similar citrus hybrids, from 1 October to 15 May.
For the other products, the marketing years or seasons shall be determined, if necessary, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 33. Decisions on any changes to be made to the marketing years as defined above shall be taken in accordance with the same procedure."
Article 2
The following indent shall be added to Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"- of providing the information requested by the organization on harvests and supplies."
Article 3
1. The following paragraph shall be inserted in Article 14 of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"1a. However, Member States may grant aid to producers' organizations which are established during the seven years beginning 1 October 1977, in respect of the five years following the date on which they are established, to encourage their formation and to facilitate their operation provided that the organizations furnish adequate guarantees as regards the duration and effectiveness of their activities. The amount of such aid shall not be less, for the first, second, third, fourth and fifth years respectively, than 5 %, 4 %, 3 %, 2 % and 1 % of the value of production marketed under the auspices of the producers' organization in question but, nevertheless, may not exceed the actual cost of formation and administrative costs of the organization concerned.
The aid shall be paid during the seven years following the date of establishment."
2. The following paragraph shall be added to Article 14 of Regulation (EEC) 1035/72:
"4. Detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 33."
Article 4
The following subparagraph shall be inserted after the first subparagraph of Article 15 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"If marketing rules aimed at limiting the volume of the supply of products listed in Annex II are applied, the producers' organizations may decide not to put on sale products which, while conforming to the quality standards, do not comply with the marketing rules referred to above. In that case the producers' organizations or the appropriate associations of such organizations shall grant members compensation, calculated on the basis of the withdrawal price, for the quantities that remain unsold. Detailed rules for the application of this paragraph shall be adopted as necessary in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 33."
Article 5
The third subparagraph of Article 16 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be replaced by the following:
"In determining the period for which these prices are to apply, slack market periods at the beginning and at the end of the marketing year shall be disregarded."
Article 6
Article 16 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 is hereby amended as follows: (a) in the first subparagraph the words "or Article 19a" shall be added after "Article 19";
(b) the following subparagraph shall be inserted after the second subparagraph:
"With respect to table grapes, the conversion factors shall be so fixed as to maintain a balance between the price at which the product is bought in under Article 19 and the price obtained for grapes produced with a view to the obligatory distillation of wine made from table grapes."
Article 7
The following second subparagraph shall be added to Article 17 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"If, for peaches throughout the marketing year and for pears during the period 1 July to 31 August, these prices are unavailable for a given market on a given day, Member States shall communicate to the Commission the prices recorded for products to be defined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 33."
Article 8
In Article 19 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 the phrase "with the exception of peaches throughout the marketing year and pears for the period 1 July to 31 August" shall be added after "for a given product".
Article 9
The following Article shall be inserted in Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72:
"Article 19a 1. By way of derogation from Article 19, where, for peaches or pears during the period 1 July to 31 August, on one of the representative markets referred to in Article 17 (2), the prices communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 17 (1) remain below the buying-in price plus 5 % of the basic price for two consecutive market days, the Commission shall without delay record, if the Member State in which such a situation arises so requests, that the market in the product in question is in a state of serious crisis in that Member State.
2. Upon that finding, the Member State in question shall, through the body or natural or legal persons appointed by it for the purpose, buy in products of Community origin offered to it, provided that these products satisfy the quality and grading requirements laid down by the quality standards and they were not withdrawn from the market pursuant to Article 15 (1). The products concerned shall be purchased in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 19 (2).
3. Buying-in operations shall be suspended when prices remain higher than the buying-in price plus 5 % of the basic price for two consecutive market days ; once this condition has been fulfilled, the Commission shall record the fact without delay."
Article 10
1. Article 20 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be replaced by the following:
"1. Articles 18, 19 and 19a shall apply without prejudice to provisions adopted pursuant to Articles 4 and 5 (2)."
2. In Article 21 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72, the words "under Article 19" shall be replaced by "under Articles 19 and 19a".
Article 11
The second indent of the first subparagraph of Article 23 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be amended as follows:
"- taking into account the trend in production costs in the fruit and vegetable sector."
Article 12
1. Paragraph 2 of Articles 25 and 25a of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be deleted.
2. The first subparagraph of Article 26 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 shall be replaced by the following:
"1. Where, after the charge introduced under Article 25 has come into effect, there are changes in the items used to calculate it, such changes shall not be taken into account unless they result in a change over three successive market days of more than one unit of account in the said charge."
Article 13
In Article 36 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 the words "Article 14 (1)" shall be replaced by "Article 14 (1) and (1a)".
Article 14
Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2601/69 shall be replaced by the following:
"1. Member States shall grant financial compensation to those processors who have concluded contracts in accordance with the provisions of Article 2.
The financial compensation shall be so fixed that the difference between the minimum price and the financial compensation does not vary in relation to that recorded for the previous marketing year by a percentage exceeding the percentage variation in the minimum price.
The financial compensation shall be paid to the interested parties at their request as soon as the supervisory authorities in the Member State where processing is carried out have ascertained that the products under contract have been processed.
The amount of such financial compensation shall be fixed before the beginning of each marketing year."
Article 15
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 June 1978.
However, the countervailing charges introduced before the date of the entry into force of this Regulation, under Article 25 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72, will be amended only if the application of that paragraph would so require.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 May 1978.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 5 December 2003
amending Decision 2002/106/EC as regards the establishment of a classical swine fever discriminatory test
(notified under document number C(2003) 4522)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/859/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 2001/89/EC of 23 October 2001 on Community measures for the control of classical swine fever(1), and in particular Article 17(5) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Rules on the use of classical swine fever vaccines and related discriminatory tests are laid down in Directive 2001/89/EC and in Commission Decision 2002/106/EC of 1 February 2002 approving a Diagnostic Manual establishing diagnostic procedures, sampling methods and criteria for evaluation of the laboratory tests for the confirmation of classical swine fever(2).
(2) The use of marker vaccines has been hampered by the lack of a reliable discriminatory test able to distinguish between vaccinated pigs and pigs naturally infected with classical swine fever virus. For that reason no classical swine fever discriminatory test was established by Decision 2002/106/EC.
(3) In 2003 the Community reference laboratory for classical swine fever in cooperation with the national classical swine fever laboratories evaluated a newly developed discriminatory test in the context of Commission Decision 2003/265/EC of 10 April 2003 on financial assistance to the Community reference laboratory for classical swine fever for the evaluation of a new classical swine fever discriminatory test(3).
(4) The results of that evaluation show that the sensitivity and specificity of the new discriminatory test are sufficient to allow its use in the context of an emergency vaccination with a marker vaccine.
(5) The new discriminatory test to distinguish vaccinated pigs from pigs naturally infected with classical swine fever virus should therefore be established in accordance with Directive 2001/89/EC by laying down guidelines on its use. Those rules should ensure that the use of marker vaccines in conjunction with this test does not pose unacceptable risks in relation to the movements or trade of the vaccinated pigs, their offspring or their products.
(6) Commission Decision 2002/106/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
(7) 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
Chapter VIII of the Annex to Decision 2002/106/EC is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 December 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 17 March 2004
on certain protection measures with regard to registered horses coming from South Africa
(notified under document number C(2004) 808)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2004/262/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/496/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on animals entering the Community from third countries and amending Directives 89/662/EEC, 90/425/EEC and 90/675/EEC(1), and in particular Article 18(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Directive 90/426/EEC of 26 June 1990 on animal health conditions governing the movement and imports from third countries of equidae(2), lays down the measures to be taken in relation to African horse sickness.
(2) The animal health conditions for temporary admission and imports into the Community of registered horses from certain parts of South Africa have been established by Commission Decision 97/10/EC(3).
(3) An outbreak of African horse sickness has been declared in horses kept within the African horse sickness surveillance zone of the Western Cape Province and approximately 40 km from the African horse sickness free zone established in accordance with Decision 97/10/EC and which is the only area in South Africa from where horses are accepted for export to other countries.
(4) The competent veterinary authorities in South Africa have taken the necessary measures to control the disease, including vaccination of susceptible animals within the radius of 20 km around the outbreak.
(5) The presence of this disease in the surveillance zone of the Western Cape Province is liable to constitute a serious danger for Community equidae; whereas moreover the recourse to vaccination in an area close to the disease-free zone precludes from further regionalisation in accordance with Community legislation and internationally accepted health standards.
(6) Although the authorities have suspended any exports of registered horses from the disease-free zone to Member States, it is necessary to adopt protection measures at Community level with regard to temporary admission, transit and imports of registered horses from South Africa.
(7) The temporary admission, permanent imports and transits of registered horses from South Africa should be suspended. However, the situation should be reviewed in the light of the information supplied by the competent authorities and the effect of the measures taken to control the disease.
(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 ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Member States shall prohibit the temporary admission, transits and imports of registered horses coming from South Africa.
Article 2
Member States shall amend the measures they apply with regard to temporary admission, imports and transits of registered horses from South Africa to bring them into line with this Decision. They shall inform the Commission thereof.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 March 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1974/2004
of 29 October 2004
amending Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) N 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (1), and in particular Articles 42(4) and (9), 145(c) and (d) and 155 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 of 21 April 2004, laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (2), introduces the implementing rules for the single payment scheme that will apply starting from 2005. The administrative and operational implementation of the scheme, which has started at national level on the basis of that Regulation, has shown the need for further detailed rules on some aspects of the scheme and to clarify certain aspects of the existing rules.Further to the publication of Regulation (EC) No 795/2004, it appears that some references to Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 have been wrongly published (3). It is therefore appropriate to correct them.The purpose of Article 46(2), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 is to allow the transfer of payment entitlement without land under specific conditions. Article 46(2), first subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 clearly provides that only sale of payment entitlements is possible without land. In order to avoid that the second subparagraph may be misunderstood and result in making without object the provision of the first subparagraph of that Article, therefore it is appropriate for the sake of clarification to indicate that the transfer mentioned in the second subparagraph only refers to the sale of payment entitlements without land and not to the lease of payment entitlements which is not possible without land.For administrative reasons, in order to limit the creation of fractions of payment entitlements to the extent that is necessary, it is appropriate to provide for a rule providing that, once all entire entitlements have been used, partially used entitlements should be considered as fully used whilst giving right to a payment proportionate to the land declared and, in case of transfer, before splitting an existing entitlement, all existing fractions should be used.Article 2(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 provides that the payments in the reference period are those granted or to be granted in that period. Annex VII adds that reductions resulting from the application of base areas, ceilings or other quantitative limitations should be taken into account. It is therefore appropriate, for the sake of clarification, to specify that the reductions and exclusions applied under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 (4) should not be taken into consideration for all the direct payments referred to in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in order not to perpetuate the reductions and exclusions applied in that period. Therefore the number of animals and hectares determined at the time of the establishment of the payment entitlements should be taken into consideration without prejudice to further controls and the application of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (5).Farmers who leased or sold hectares should not benefit from the mechanism provided for in Article 7. Therefore it is necessary that land sold or transferred shall be included in the number of hectares which the farmer declares in order that those hectares do not benefit from the mechanism.Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 provides for the application of a different reference period in hardship cases affecting production. It is therefore appropriate to specify that the application of that Article should be done on the basis of each direct payment referred to in Annex VI of that Regulation which corresponds to the different productions.Concerning the application of Article 42(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, it is appropriate to specify its application in the case of transfer of premium rights and the consequences for the calculation of the remaining reference amount on the remaining hectares. Moreover, following the change of date from 29 September 2003 to 15 May 2004 introduced by Regulation (EC) No 864/2004, in order to avoid that that Article, where applied, could have an effect on the legitimate expectation of farmers who have already concluded contracts between 30 September 2003 and 15 May 2004 being aware of the application of that clause, it is appropriate to provide for the non application of that Article in such cases.In order to take into account the possibility for Member States to provide for a further allocation of reference amounts in the first year of application of the single payment scheme according to Article 34(3), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, it is appropriate to fix the final date for the definitive establishment of payment entitlements at 15 August whilst at the same time taking into account the possibility for Member States to set up a later date where administrative reasons so warrant. It is appropriate to indicate the area to which the minimum size refers and when parcels should be declared.Following the change of date from 29 September 2003 to 15 May 2004 introduced by Regulation (EC) No 864/2004, for consistency reasons, the same date should be introduced in the provisions relating to farmers in special situations.Consideration should be taken of any eventual administrative act or court's ruling putting an end to a conflict between the administration and the farmer in case this results in the allocation or increase of payment entitlements. This situation should be considered a special situation in accordance with Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and treated consequently.Without prejudice to the application of Article 43(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 which provides that all forage area in the reference period should be included in the calculation of the payment entitlements, in order to facilitate the task of the national administrations in establishing the provisional payment entitlements, it is appropriate to give them the possibility to take into account the number of forage areas declared in the area aid application before the introduction of the single payment scheme or in case of preliminary establishment of payment entitlements, whilst allowing the farmer the possibility to prove that his or her forage area in the reference period was lower.The current implementing rules on the payment entitlements subject to special conditions need to be completed or specified as far as they concern certain aspects of the establishment and management of those entitlements.Extensification payments and additional payments in the beef and veal and sheep and goat sectors referred to in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 were granted in the reference period according to eligibility conditions and amounts set up by Member States and may vary from one year to the other. Due to those changing elements, it is therefore appropriate to allow Member States concerned to take into account, according to objective criteria, those different eligibility conditions and amounts when calculating the reference amount relating to those payments whilst respecting the relative budgetary ceilings. Concerning the slaughter premium, in order to facilitate inclusion of the current regime of premiums into the single payment scheme, the current ceiling referred to in Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1254/12999 should be taken into account in the calculation of the reference amount.In order to take into account any eventual hardship case in the application of the regional model, it is appropriate to provide for the application of the existing rules on hardship cases set up in Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.Farmers producing fruit and vegetables and table potatoes should be taken into account when applying the provisions on special situations.According to Chapter 6 of Title III of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, new Member States shall apply the single payment scheme only in a regionalised way based on the provisions existing for the regionalised model provided for in Articles 58 to 63 of that Regulation. For the implementation of the single payment scheme in those Member States, it is therefore appropriate to provide for the same detailed rules, which are applicable, established in Regulation (EC) No 795/2004.Where the Member State decides to make use of the option provided for in Article 71(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, a deadline for the notification of the decisions it has taken in accordance with Articles 58, 59, 61 to 64 and 70 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 should be fixed in order to allow the Commission to establish the ceilings referred to in those Articles.According to Article 60(2), Annex VII (B) and (D), last subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the Commission shall fix a maximum area for fruit and vegetables, dried fodder and starch potatoes on the basis of data communicated by Member States. It is therefore appropriate to provide for a deadline for those communications.The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Direct Payments,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 is hereby amended as follows:
1.
Article 2 shall be amended as follows:
(a)
in points (b) and (e), the reference to Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 shall be replaced by the reference to Regulation (EC) No 796/2004;
(b)
in point (I) the following subparagraph shall be added:
‘The case of transfer of payment entitlements without land referred to in Article 46(2), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall be considered as a case of sale of payment entitlements without land’;
2.
Article 3(2) shall be replaced by the following paragraphs:
‘2. Where a farmer, after having declared in accordance with Article 44(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 all possible entire payment entitlements, needs to declare a payment entitlement accompanying a parcel which amounts to a fraction of a hectare, this last payment entitlement shall give right to a payment calculated pro rata to the size of the parcel and it shall be deemed as fully used for the purpose of Article 45 of that Regulation.
3. Where the size of a parcel which is transferred with an entitlement in accordance with Article 46(2) of that Regulation amounts to a fraction of a hectare, the farmer may transfer the part of the entitlement concerned with the land at a value calculated to the extent of the same fraction. The remaining part of the entitlement shall remain at the disposal of the farmer at a value calculated correspondingly.
4. Paragraphs 2 and 3 shall apply only if the farmer still needs to declare or transfer a payment entitlement or a fraction of a payment entitlement with a fraction of a hectare after having declared or transferred existing payment entitlements or fractions of payment entitlements’;
3.
the following Article 3a shall be added:
‘Article 3a
Determined hectares and animals
Without prejudice to the application of Annex VII of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the number of hectares or animals for which a direct payment has been or should have been granted in the reference period to be taken into consideration for the purpose of establishing the reference amount referred to in Article 37(1) of that Regulation shall be the number of hectares or animals determined within the meaning of Article 2 points (r) and (s) of Regulation (EC) No 2419/2001 for each of the direct payments referred to in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
4.
Article 7 shall be modified as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1 the following subparagraph shall be added:
‘For the purpose of this Article, “payment entitlements” shall mean only the payment entitlements allocated by the Member State in the first year of application of the single payment scheme’;
(b)
paragraph 6 shall be replaced by the following:
‘For the purpose of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4, hectares transferred by sale or lease shall be included in the number of hectares which the farmer declares’;
5.
in Article 8(1), second subparagraph, the reference to Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 shall be replaced by a reference to Regulation (EC) No 796/2004;
6.
Article 10 shall be amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1(a), (b) and (c), the following words are added at the end of each indent:
‘or premium rights transferred;’
(b)
in paragraph 2, the word ‘hectares’ shall be replaced by the following words:
‘hectares of the reference period corresponding to that remaining reference amount.’
(c)
in paragraph 3, the date of 30 April 2004 shall be replaced by the date of 15 May 2004.
(d)
the following paragraph shall be added:
‘5. Without prejudice to the application of paragraph 4, paragraph 1 shall not apply in cases where the contractual clause referred to in Article 17 and, where the case may be, Article 27 has been introduced in a contract before 15 May 2004.’
7.
Article 12 shall be amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 4 the second subparagraph shall be replaced by the following:
‘No definitive transfer of payment entitlements shall be possible before the definitive establishment of payment entitlements.
In any case, definitive payment entitlements shall be established by at the latest 15 August of the first year of application of the single payment scheme. Where specific administrative conditions so warrant, a Member State may decide that date for the definitive establishment may be at the same time as the date for the notification of the payment for the first year of application of the single payment scheme but in any case not later than 31 December of the first year of application.
Farmers may introduce, under reserve of the definitive establishment, applications under the single payment on the basis of provisional payment entitlements established by the Member States or acquired via the contractual clause referred to in Articles 17 or 27’;
(b)
in paragraph 6, after ‘per holding’, the following words shall be added:
‘in terms of agricultural area’;
(c)
the following paragraph 8 shall be added:
‘8. Except for the purpose of establishing payment entitlements from the national reserve referred to in Articles 6, 7 and 18 to 23a, and without prejudice to paragraph 5 and 6 of this Article, no parcel needs to be declared for the purpose of the establishment of the payment entitlements. The declaration of parcels referred to in Article 44(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall apply for the purpose of the application for payment of the payment entitlements under the single payment scheme’;
8.
in Article 16, the following paragraph shall be added:
‘3. Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall apply on the basis of each direct payment referred to in Annex VI of that Regulation’;
9.
in Article 18(1) and (2), ‘23’ shall be replaced by ‘23a’;
10.
Article 20 shall be amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1, the words ‘by transfer free of charge or by lease for six or more years’ shall be replaced by the following:
‘by transfer, either by sale or by lease for six or more years, free of charge or at a symbolic price’;
(b)
in Article 20(1), after ‘retired’ the following words shall be added:
‘from agricultural activity’;
11.
in Articles 21, 22 and 23, the date of 29 September 2003 shall be replaced by the date of 15 May 2004;
12.
The following Article 23a shall be added:
‘Article 23a
Administrative acts and court's rulings
Where a farmer should be entitled to receive payment entitlements or increase the value of the existing ones by virtue of a definitive court's ruling or by virtue of a definitive administrative act of the competent authority of a Member State, the farmer shall receive the number and value of payment entitlements established in that ruling or act at a date to be fixed by the Member State but not later than the latest date for lodging an application under the single payment scheme following the date of the ruling or the act and taking into account the application of Article 44(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
13.
Article 28 shall be replaced by the following:
‘1. For the purposes of Article 34(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, a Member State may decide, where the case may be, to use:
(a)
the forage area declared by the farmer in the area aid application for 2004 or in the year preceding the first year of application of the single payment scheme, or
(b)
the forage area declared in application of Article 12(1) or (2) of this Regulation.
2. For the purpose of the establishment of the definitive payment entitlements the farmer may prove, at the satisfaction of the competent authority, that his forage area in the reference period was lower or, in case the area used by Member States is lower, he shall, in accordance with Article 43(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, declare all the forage area he held in the reference period’;
14.
in Article 29, the reference to Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 shall be replaced by the reference to Regulation (EC) No 796/2004;
15.
Article 30 shall be modified as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following:
‘1. For the purposes of calculating the agricultural activity expressed in livestock units (LU) referred to in Article 49(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the conversion table provided for in Article 131(2)(a) of that Regulation shall apply to the three-year average number of animals for which a direct payment referred to in Article 47 of that Regulation was granted in the reference period’;
(b)
in paragraph 2, the following subparagraph shall be added:
‘In case of dairy premium and additional payments, the LU shall be calculated by dividing the reference quantity used for the calculation of the amount of dairy premium and additional payment when included in the single payment scheme by the average milk yield provided for in Annex XVI of Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 (6) applicable at that time or by the individual milk yield, in case the individual yield was higher than the average. Where a Member State makes use of the option provided for in Article 62 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the number of LU shall be modified accordingly.
In case of slaughter premium, where the necessary data regarding the age of the animals are not available, a Member State may convert bulls, steers, cows and heifers in LU by using the coefficient 0,7 and calves by using the coefficient 0,25.
Where the same animal benefitted from several premiums, the coefficient applicable shall be the average of the coefficient applicable to the different premiums
(c)
the following paragraph 3a shall be added:
‘3a. The number of LU shall be calculated pro rata to the payment entitlements for which he did not have hectares in the reference period and for which the farmer requests the application of the special conditions. It shall apply starting from the payment entitlements at the lowest value.
The request shall be made only in the first year of application of the single payment scheme. Member States shall fix the date for the request. It may be renewed in the following years for the same number of payment entitlements subject to special conditions in the previous year or, in case of transfer of some of those payment entitlements, or in case of declaration of some of those payment entitlements with a corresponding number of hectares, for the remaining of those payment entitlements.
In these cases, the number of LU shall be recalculated pro rata to the remaining payment entitlements for which the farmer requests the application of the special conditions.
No request to re-establish the special condition may be introduced for those payment entitlements once they have been declared with an equivalent number of hectares or they have been transferred, without prejudice to Article 49(2) second subparagraph of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
16.
the following Article 31a shall be added:
‘Article 31a
Beef and veal and sheep and goat payments
1. In order to calculate the reference amount relating to extensification payments and additional payments in the beef and veal and sheep and goat sectors referred to in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, Member States shall take into account, according to objective criteria and in such a way as to ensure equal treatment between farmers and to avoid market and competition distortion, the eligibility conditions and amounts set up by the Member State concerned when granting such payments in the reference period provided that the component of such payments in the ceiling referred to in Annex VIII of that Regulation is not exceeded.
2. In order to calculate the reference amount relating to the slaughter premium in the beef and veal sector referred to in Annex VI of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, Member State shall take into account the application of Article 11(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999’;
17.
in Article 32, the following paragraph shall be added:
‘4. For the purposes of Articles 54(2) and 61 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, land under permanent pasture in 2003 shall be:
(a)
land declared by a farmer in his aid application for 2003 as being under permanent pasture, and
(b)
land not declared by a farmer in his aid application for 2003, unless it can be shown that that land was not under permanent pasture in 2003.
However, Member States may provide that land under permanent pasture in 2003 shall be land declared in the aid application for 2003 and in the aid applications for at least the five consecutive years prior to 2003 as land used to grow grasses or other herbaceous forage’;
18.
Article 38 shall be modified as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 3, the reference to Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 shall be replaced by the reference to Regulation (EC) No 796/2004.
(b)
the following paragraphs shall be added:
‘4. Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Article 16 of this Regulation shall apply mutatis mutandis.
5. For the purpose of this Article, the reference to “agricultural area” in Article 12(6) shall be construed as a reference to “eligible area within the meaning of Article 44(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003”’;
19.
the following paragraph 4 shall be added in Article 41:
‘4. For the purpose of Article 60(3)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, Article 20 to 23a of this Regulation shall apply mutatis mutandis to the farmers producing the products referred to in Article 60(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
20.
The following Chapter is inserted after Chapter 6:
‘CHAPTER 6a
NEW MEMBER STATES
Article 48a
Implementation in the new Member States
1.
Save as otherwise provided for in this Chapter, the provisions of this Regulation shall apply to the new Member States.
2.
Any reference to Article 42 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71d of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
3.
Any reference to the regional average in Articles 6(3) and (4) of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to the limit of EUR 5 000 referred to in Article 71d(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
4.
Any reference to Articles 58 and 59 or 58(1) and 59(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Chapters 6 and 7 of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71e of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
5.
Any reference to Article 59(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Article 38 of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71f of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
6.
Any reference to Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Article 8(2), Article 9(1) (e), Article 41 and Article 50a of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71g of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
7.
Any reference to Article 63(2), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Articles 39, 43 and 48b of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71j(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003.
8.
Articles 3a, 7, 10, 12 to 17, 27, 28, 30, 31, 31a, 40, 42, 45 to 46 and 49 shall not apply.
9.
Article 5, 19, 23, 31 and 42 shall not apply in case of application of the single area payment scheme referred to in Article 143b of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
21.
the following Article 48b shall be added:
‘Article 48b
Notification of decisions
Where the Member State decides to make use of the option provided for in Article 71(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, it shall notify by 1 August of the year preceding the first year of application of the single payment scheme the decisions it has taken in accordance with Articles 58, 59, 61 to 64 and 70 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’;
22.
the following Article 50a shall be added:
‘Article 50a
Dried fodder, starch potatoes and fruit and vegetables
For the purpose of Article 60(2), Annex VII (B) and (D) last subparagraph of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, Member States shall communicate to the Commission by at the latest 31 October of the year preceding the first year of application of the single payment scheme the number of hectares referred to in those provisions’.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 January 2005 except Article 1(21) which shall apply from 31 October 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 October 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 97/79/EC of 18 December 1997 amending Directives 71/118/EEC, 72/462/EEC, 85/73/EEC, 91/67/EEC, 91/492/EEC, 91/493/EEC, 92/45/EEC and 92/118/EEC as regards the organisation of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 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),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3),
Whereas for the sake of clarity and rationality, Council Directive 90/675/EEC, laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (4), has been repealed and replaced by Directive 97/78/EC (5);
Whereas the replacement of Directive 90/675/EEC by Directive 97/78/EC has consequences for the existing texts of the following Council Directives:
- Directive 71/118/EEC of 15 February 1971 on health problems affecting the production and placing on the market of fresh poultrymeat (6),
- Directive 72/462/EEC of 12 December 1972 on health and veterinary inspection problems upon importation of bovine, ovine, caprine animals and swine, fresh meat or meat products from third countries (7),
- Directive 85/73/EEC of 29 January 1985 on the financing of veterinary inspections and controls covered by Directives 89/662/EEC, 90/425/EEC, 90/675/EEC and 91/496/EEC (amended and consolidated) (8),
- Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products (9),
- Directive 91/492/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of live bivalve molluscs (10),
- Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products (11),
- Directive 92/45/EEC of 16 June 1992 on public health and animal health problems relating to the killing of wild game and the placing on the market of wild-game meat (12),
- Directive 92/118/EEC of 17 December 1992 laying down animal health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC (13);
Whereas for that reason, those Directives should be brought into line with the text of Directive 97/78/EC,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
1. Directive 71/118/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) in Article 14b(2)(a), the second sentence shall be deleted;
(b) in Article 17, the second subparagraph shall be deleted.
2. Directive 72/462/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) in Article 31a, 'Article 17 of Directive 90/675/EEC` shall be replaced by 'Article 18 of Directive 97/78/EC`;
(b) Article 31 shall be deleted.
3. In Article 3(1) of Directive 85/73/EC, 'Article 20 of Directive 90/675/EEC` shall be replaced by 'Article 23 of Directive 98/78/EC`.
4. Directive 91/67/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Article 23 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 23
The principles and rules laid down in Directives 91/496/EEC and 97/78/EC shall apply, with particular reference to the organisation of and follow-up to the checks to be carried out by the Member States and the safeguard measures to be implemented.`;
(b) Article 24 shall be deleted.
5. The second subparagraph of Article 10(2) of Directive 91/492/EEC shall be deleted.
6. Directive 91/493/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) in the second subparagraph of Article 10, 'Article 18(3) of Directive 90/675/EEC` shall be replaced by 'Article 19(2) of Directive 97/78/EC`;
(b) Article 12(2) shall be deleted.
7. Directive 92/45/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Article 17(2) shall be deleted;
(b) the second paragraph of Article 19 shall be deleted.
8. Directive 92/118/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
(a) in the second subparagraph of Article 12(1), 'Article 8(2) of Directive 90/675/EEC` shall be replaced by 'Article 4(4)(b) of Directive 97/78/EC`;
(b) Article 12(2) shall be deleted.
Article 2
1. Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 1 July 1999. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
They shall apply those provisions as from 1 July 1999.
When Member States adopt these provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. The procedure for making such reference shall be adopted by Member States.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of domestic law which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive.
Article 3
This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Article 4
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 175/2008
of 27 February 2008
on the issue of licences for importing rice under the tariff quota opened for the February 2008 subperiod by Regulation (EC) No 327/98
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1785/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 327/98 of 10 February 1998 opening and providing for the administration of certain tariff quotas for imports of rice and broken rice (2), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 5 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 327/98 opens and provides for the administration of certain import tariff quotas for rice and broken rice, broken down by country of origin and split into several subperiods in accordance with Annex IX to that Regulation and Commission Regulation (EC) No 60/2008, which opens a specific subperiod in February 2008 for the import tariff quota for wholly milled and semi-milled rice originating in the United States of America (3).
(2)
The February subperiod is the second subperiod in 2008 for the quota with the number 09.4127 provided for under Article 1(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 327/98.
(3)
The notification sent in accordance with Article 8(a) of Regulation (EC) No 327/98 shows that, for the quota with serial number 09.4127, the applications lodged in the first 10 working days of February 2008 under Article 4(1) of the Regulation cover a quantity less than (or equal to) that available.
(4)
The total quantity available for the following subperiod should therefore be fixed for the quota with serial number 09.4127, in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 327/98,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The total quantity available under the quota with serial number 09.4127 as referred to in Regulation (EC) No 327/98 for the next subperiod shall be as 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 Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 February 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1736/2004
of 4 October 2004
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of synthetic fibre ropes originating in India
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
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 11(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION
(1)
By Regulation (EC) No 1312/98 (2), the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of synthetic fibre ropes (SFR) originating in India.
B. PRESENT INVESTIGATION
(2)
Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry (3) of the anti-dumping measures in force, the Commission received a request for an expiry review lodged by the Liaison Committee of EU Twine, Cordage and Netting industries (Eurocord) on behalf of ten producers, together representing a major proportion (53 %) of the total Community production of synthetic fibre ropes. The request alleged that injurious dumping of imports originating in India would be likely to recur if the measures expired.
(3)
Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission initiated an investigation (4) pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.
(4)
The investigation into the likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping covered the period from 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 (IP). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of a likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of injury covered the period from 1 January 2000 up to the end of the IP (the period considered).
(5)
The Commission officially advised the applicant Community producers, the other Community producers, the exporters and exporting producers in India, importers/traders, users and suppliers of raw materials which were known to be concerned, of the initiation of the review.
(6)
The Commission requested information from all the abovementioned parties and from those other parties who made themselves known within the time limit set in the notice of initiation. The Commission also gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing.
(7)
In particular, the Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned, i.e. to four exporting producers located in India, six unrelated importers/traders located in the EU, 11 suppliers of raw materials in the EU and 23 users in the EU. No answer to the questionnaire was received from these interested parties.
(8)
In addition, the Commission sent questionnaires to five Community industry companies, which had been chosen as a representative sample of the Community producers supporting the request for this expiry review, and information was also requested from 11 non-complainant Community producers. All the five sampled companies replied to the questionnaire, whereas none of the non-complainant producers replied.
(9)
The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed necessary for the purpose of the determination of the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury and for the determination of the Community interest. Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following Community producers:
-
Bexco NV (Belgium),
-
Companhia Industrial de Cerdas Artificiais, SA - Cerfil (Portugal),
-
Companhia Industrial Têxtil, SA - Cordex (Portugal),
-
Companhia de Têxteis Sintéticos, SA - Cotesi (Portugal),
-
Cordoaria Oliveira, SA (Portugal).
C. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
1. Product concerned
(10)
The product concerned is the same as that in the investigation which led to the imposition of the measures currently in force on imports of synthetic fibre ropes from India (the original investigation) and is defined as follows: twine, cordage, ropes and cables, whether or not plaited or braided and whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics, of polyethylene or polypropylene, other than binder and baler twine, measuring more than 50 000 decitex (5 g/m), as well as of other synthetic fibres of nylon or other polyamides or of polyesters, measuring more than 50 000 decitex (5 g/m). It is currently classifiable within CN codes 5607 49 11, 5607 49 19, 5607 50 11 and 5607 50 19. The product concerned is used for a wide variety of naval and industrial applications, in particular for shipping (especially for mooring purposes), and the fishing industry.
2. Like product
(11)
As shown in the previous investigation, and as confirmed in the present investigation, it has been established that the product concerned and the synthetic fibre ropes produced and sold by the Indian exporting producers on their domestic market as well as those produced and sold by the Community producers in the Community are in all respects identical and share therefore the same basic physical and chemical characteristics. Therefore they are considered to be like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
(12)
One interested party has claimed that synthetic fibre ropes produced and sold by Indian exporting producers and those manufactured by the Community producers are not identical in all respects, as some quality differences exist between the two types of products.
(13)
The fact that the product concerned imported from India has some quality differences compared to the product manufactured by the Community industry does not exclude the products from being considered as ‘like’, in so far as they share the same basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics or closely resemble each other.
(14)
Furthermore, in the current investigation, and in the investigation which led to the imposition of the measures in force, it was found that synthetic fibre ropes manufactured by the Community industry and those susceptible of being exported from India are in competition with each other. The argument is therefore rejected.
D. LIKELIHOOD OF RECURRENCE OF DUMPING
(15)
In accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, it was examined whether the expiry of measures would be likely to lead to a recurrence of dumping. In the absence of cooperation from any of the Indian exporting producers, this examination had to be based on information available to the Commission from other sources.
1. Preliminary remarks
(16)
Of the four Indian exporting producers named in the request for an expiry review, one stated at the beginning of the investigation that it had not exported the product concerned to the Community during the IP. The Commission services advised the company that it should nevertheless supply the remaining information requested in the questionnaire, which the company declined to do. Another company also stated that it had no exports to the Community during the IP, but only after the deadline for submission of the questionnaire reply had elapsed. A third company stated that it had not exported to the Community during the IP, and furthermore that it had ceased activity and therefore could not reply to the questionnaire. All companies in question were duly advised that failure to cooperate may result in the finding being based on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation.
(17)
Given that none of the Indian exporting producers replied to the questionnaire of the Commission services, use was made, in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 of the basic Regulation, of the facts available, including those submitted by the Community industry in its request for an expiry review.
(18)
Imports of the product concerned from India dropped to insignificant levels subsequent to the imposition of anti-dumping duties in 1998. During the IP, these imports were less than 20 tonnes per year, i.e. less than 0,1 % of Community consumption.
(19)
In the absence of significant exports to the Community market, it was examined how imports of SFR from India would develop should the measures be allowed to expire. This analysis covered both export prices and volume.
2. Dumping of imports during the investigation period
(20)
It is recalled that, in the original investigation, dumping margins of 53,0 % for the cooperating company and 82,0 % for the remaining exporting producers were established. The elimination of such levels of dumping would therefore have required a substantial increase in export prices, or a diminution of the normal value, in the period since the original measures were imposed.
(21)
The normal values in the original investigation were, for the most part, based on the domestic prices in the Indian market, as reported by the cooperating company. The information contained in the request for an expiry review indicates that those prices have decreased by between 10 % and 20 % in the five years subsequent to the original investigation. It is therefore concluded that, in the absence of cooperation by Indian exporters of the product concerned, normal value has also decreased by similar percentages in the five years subsequent to the original investigation.
(22)
According to Indian export statistics, the average prices for Indian exports to all countries, of the two product groupings concerned, i.e. those classifiable under CN subheadings 5607 49 and 5607 50, declined respectively by 46 % and 51 % between 1997/98 and 2002/2003. Similar price declines over this period can be observed for each of the main markets for the Indian exports, such as Norway and the United States of America, when taken separately. Those declines are more pronounced than that of the normal value, as mentioned in recital 21, and therefore any dumping practices at the time of the original investigation are unlikely to have been reversed. In addition, Indian normal value of some types of the product concerned during the IP was higher than prices on the EU market during that period. It is likely, therefore, that in the event of resumption of exports by Indian exporters to the EU, these exports would be priced below the normal value, i.e. at dumped prices, at least for some types of the product concerned.
(23)
More detailed calculations per tariff code, submitted by the Community industry for Indian exports to the United States of America and Norway, during the IP, take into consideration the differences in prices and normal values between different types of synthetic fibre ropes. These calculations indicate that Indian exports to third countries are still dumped at margins between 53,4 % and 222,2 %.
(24)
In the absence of exports and of cooperation by Indian exporters of the product concerned in the investigation, the level of dumping during the IP has not been established. However, on the basis of the significant decrease in Indian export prices to other third countries in the five years subsequent to the original investigation combined with a smaller decrease in domestic prices over the same period, it is considered that the level of dumping of the product concerned to the Community during the IP would likely have been at a higher level than that found in the original investigation.
3. Development of imports should measures be repealed
(a) Export sales to other countries (volume and prices) and prices on the Indian market
(25)
Overall, the Indian exports to other countries have increased during the five years since the original investigation. According to Indian export statistics, the volume of exports of the products classifiable under CN subheadings 5607 49 and 5607 50, the majority of which consist of the product concerned, increased by 104 % between 1997/98 and 2002/2003.
(26)
The observed export prices from India to third country export markets are 17 % to 61 % lower than the Community industry prices. This suggests that Indian exporters would have a potentially large incentive to shift their exports to the Community market, should the measures be allowed to lapse.
(b) Spare capacity and investments
(27)
As for production capacity, the one exporting producer who cooperated in the original investigation appears to have only slightly increased its capacity over the last five years. There is publicly available information, however, that indicates that some of the other major producers in India have increased their capacity more significantly, or intend to do so in the near future. In the request for an expiry review, the Community industry estimates that the total capacity of the Indian producers is above 110 000 tonnes, well above the current production level of about 40 000 tonnes and representing about 275 % of Community consumption. In the absence of cooperation from the Indian producers and more reliable information, this would indicate that a large excess capacity is available indicating a likelihood of a resumption of exports to the Community should measures lapse.
(28)
No information was available to the Commission on recent or planned investments by Indian exporters with a bearing on production capacity.
(c) Circumvention/absorption practices in the past
(29)
It is argued by the Community industry that, at the same time as the exports of the products subject to measures, under CN heading 5607 (Twine, cordage, rope or cables…) came to a halt, exports of products under CN heading 5609 (Articles of … twine, cordage, rope or cables…) increased sharply, from 200 tonnes to 800 tonnes between 1997 and 2002, while their average price decreased from EUR 2,51 to EUR 1,58 per tonne. Articles exported under CN heading 5609 are produced by the same industry as, and can be very similar to, the products subject to measures, to the point of raising problems of customs classification and inspection. This issue has been raised with the European Commission, the national customs authorities of Italy and those of the United Kingdom by the Community industry. As a result, some cases of wrong classification have been confirmed and steps have been taken by the EU Customs Administrations in order to avoid possible resulting circumventions of the existing anti-dumping measures.
(30)
Independently of the alleged circumvention, this behaviour can be taken as indication that the Indian export producers have a significant interest in entering the Community market.
4. Conclusion on the likelihood of a recurrence of dumping
(31)
The facts available to the Commission in the absence of cooperation from Indian exporting producers indicates that exports to third countries are still made at dumped prices, with dumping margins at higher levels than those found in the original investigation. The fact that average export prices have decreased faster than normal values, indicates that the dumping behaviour of Indian exporters has not ceased after 1997 but, if anything, has been accentuated on third country markets.
(32)
The indications that Indian producers that keep a strategic interest in the European market, together with the huge spare capacity available, make it likely that they would resume exports to the Community in significant quantities should the measures lapse. Taking into account the facts available on the pricing behaviour of the Indian exporters on third country markets, on the decrease of normal value and the fact that the normal value of certain types of the product concerned is higher than prices on the EU market, it is highly probable that a resumption of exports would be at dumped prices. It is therefore concluded that the expiry of measures is likely to lead to a recurrence of dumped exports.
E. DEFINITION OF THE COMMUNITY INDUSTRY AND SAMPLING
(33)
Ten Community producers on whose behalf the request for an expiry review was lodged by Eurocord cooperated in the investigation. During the course of the investigation, it became apparent that data provided by one Community producer were unreliable and the company was declared as non-cooperating according to Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation. Consequently this Community producer was excluded from the definition of the Community industry. The nine remaining companies account for 53 % of the Community production of SFR in the IP and therefore constitute the Community industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) and Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation.
(34)
In view of the large number of Community producers supporting the request for an expiry review, and in conformity with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, the Commission decided to carry out its investigation on the basis of a sample of Community producers. The sample was selected on the basis of the largest representative production and sales volume that could reasonably be investigated within the time available.
(35)
As previously mentioned in recital 8, five companies were initially selected for the sample, based on their production and sales volumes as submitted after initiation. For the reasons mentioned in recital 33, one Community producer which was disregarded as part of the Community industry had also to be taken out of the sample. The remaining four sampled companies cover 66 % of production and 62 % of sales of the Community industry composed of the nine complaining companies as indicated in recital 33. The final sample consisted of the following companies, all located in Portugal:
-
Companhia Industrial de Cerdas Artificiais, SA - (Cerfil),
-
Companhia Industrial Têxtil, SA - (Cordex),
-
Companhia de Têxteis Sintéticos, SA - (Cotesi),
-
Cordoaria Oliveira, SA.
(36)
In the previous investigation the sample which was also established on the basis of production and sales volumes consisted of eight companies. With the exception of Cerfil, all the abovementioned companies formed part of the sample in the previous investigation.
F. SITUATION ON THE COMMUNITY MARKET
1. Consumption in the Community market
(37)
Apparent Community consumption of SFR was established on the basis of sales volumes of the Community industry and of other Community producers on the Community market plus imports from India and other third countries into the Community, as based on Eurostat.
(38)
Between 2000 and the IP, the apparent Community consumption decreased by 9,4 % from 39 825 tonnes in 2000 to 36 093 tonnes in the IP. One of the main reasons for the drop in consumption relates to a decline in demand for SFR by the fishing net industry which is a result of a reduction of fishing quotas in the Community. These fishing quotas have gradually been reduced in the period considered from approximately 4,99 million tonnes in 2000 to 4,12 million tonnes in 2003, i.e. by almost 17,4 %.
2. Imports from India
(39)
After measures have been imposed in 1998, imports originating in India declined substantially and they were negligible throughout the period considered, with a market share below 0,1 %.
3. Imports from other third countries
(40)
Imports from other third countries have increased throughout the period considered, by 44 % (i.e. from 8 280 tonnes in 2000 to 11 893 in the IP). This represents an increase in market share from 20,8 % in 2000 to 33,0 % in the IP. The most important exporting countries in the IP were the acceding countries Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, followed by the People's Republic of China and Tunisia. Average prices from the mentioned countries declined from EUR 3,3/kg to EUR 2,8/kg over the period considered.
4. Economic situation of the Community industry
(41)
Since the original investigation, several complaining companies have completely stopped their activities and closed down, e.g. Ostend Stores (Belgium), Brindon Marine (UK), Irish Ropes (Ireland), Lima (Portugal) and Carlmark (Sweden).
(42)
All injury indicators listed by Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation have been analysed in respect of the sampled companies. In addition, some of these injury indicators (i.e. production, sales, market shares, employment and productivity), have also been analysed in respect of the Community industry and not only in respect of the four sampled companies.
(43)
In line with the decline in Community consumption, the sales volume of the Community industry on the Community market decreased over the period considered, although not by the same magnitude. Whereas Community consumption went down by 9,4 %, the sales volume of the Community industry declined from 16 587 tonnes in 2000 to 15 457 tonnes in the IP, i.e. by 6,8 %.
(44)
Production of the like product by the Community industry decreased during the period considered, by 3,9 %, from 18 782 tonnes in 2000 to 18 053 tonnes in the IP.
(45)
Given the fact that the decline in consumption in the Community was more pronounced than the decline in sales of the Community industry between the years 2000 and the IP, the market shares of the Community industry improved slightly, from 41,6 % in 2000 to 42,8 % in the IP.
(46)
The employment situation of the Community industry deteriorated during the period considered, as there were 1 076 persons employed in 2000 compared to 992 persons in the IP. However, at the same time productivity, measured as production per year per employee, improved from 17 454 kg to 18 194 kg during the same period.
(a) Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation
(47)
Whereas the production capacity remained stable over the period considered, the production volume of the sampled companies decreased slightly by 1,7 % from 12 136 tonnes in 2000 to 11 928 tonnes in the IP leading to a slight decline in the capacity utilisation from 87 % in 2000 to 85 % in the IP.
(b) Stocks
(48)
Regarding stocks, SFR producers keep, in general, the levels of their stocks below 10 % of the production volume as most of the production is made upon demand. Nevertheless, during the period considered, average stocks showed a negative tendency, increasing by 18 %, from 853 tonnes in 2000 to 1 007 tonnes in the IP.
(c) Sales volume and market share
(49)
Sales volumes declined by 7,5 %, from 10 484 tonnes in 2000 to 9 699 tonnes in the IP. However, as in the case of the Community industry as a whole, the market share of the sampled companies improved, rising slightly from 26,3 % in 2000 to 26,9 % in the IP.
(d) Sales prices, factors affecting Community prices and profitability
(50)
Average prices of the like product sold in the Community remained unchanged at EUR 2,2/kg throughout the period considered. Notwithstanding the stable price level, the pre-tax profit margin dropped significantly, from 9,8 % of turnover in 2000 to 0,7 % in the IP, mainly as a result of increased average costs.
(51)
The main factors which caused these stagnating prices were, on the one hand, the deteriorated demand situation and, on the other hand, the impossibility, due to strong competition on the market, to raise the price level to the level before measures were put in place in 1998 when injurious dumping from India occurred.
(e) Investments and ability to raise capital
(52)
Despite the negative development of the above injury indicators, investments increased, from EUR 809 432 in 2000 to EUR 1 768 029 in the IP, i.e. by 118,4 %. The sampled companies did not report any difficulties in accessing new capital.
(f) Return on investments
(53)
In line with the negative profitability trend, the return on investments deteriorated from 12 % in 2000 to 3 % in the IP.
(g) Cash flow
(54)
Among the characteristics of this industry are its capital intensiveness and consequent high depreciation amounts which have a direct impact on cash flow. Throughout the period considered cash flows remained positive, albeit declining from EUR 4,66 million in 2000 to EUR 2,23 million in the IP.
(h) Employment, productivity and labour costs
(55)
As shown in the analysis of the Community industry as a whole, the employment situation also deteriorated in the case of the four sampled companies. Employment declined by 7,1 %, from 747 employees in 2000 to 694 in the IP. Productivity per employee improved by 5,8 % during the period considered. The improvement in productivity has to be seen as a result of the investments made in high technology rope-making machines during the period considered.
(56)
While the number of employees in the sampled companies diminished between the year 2000 and the IP, total labour costs developed in the opposite direction by increasing from EUR 4,49 million to EUR 4,84 million, i.e. by 7,8 %.
(57)
Due to the fact that imports of the product concerned from India during the IP were negligible, no dumping margin could be established.
(58)
It was analysed whether the Community industry is still in the process of recovering from the effects of past dumping. It was concluded that in view of the various negative economic indicators examined relating to the Community industry as a whole and to the sampled Community producers, it is likely that the situation of Community industry, albeit partly improving, has still not fully recovered from the injurious effects of past dumping.
(59)
Despite the fact that effective anti-dumping duties against imports from India are in place, the Community industry finds itself in a still vulnerable situation, albeit some indicators show an improvement in comparison with the original definitive findings (i.e. profitability) and some others show a significant positive evolution (i.e. market share, investments and productivity).
(60)
With the exception of market shares and investments, which increased, and production capacity, average prices and the ability to raise capital, which remained stable, all other injury indicators showed a negative development. Those factors which have been analysed for both the whole Community industry and for the sampled companies show similar trends.
(61)
The negative development of the industry described above cannot, in view of the effective duties in place, be attributed to the imports from India. Instead the cause of the weak financial situation of the Community industry can be attributed to (i) the declining demand situation resulting mainly from the reduction of the European fishing fleet and the decrease of fishing quotas, (ii) the remarkable increase of imports from and market shares of countries other than India (mainly from acceding countries) with a corresponding loss of sales volumes by the Community industry, (iii) prices which have never reached the pre-dumping levels due to the strong competition on the market resulting from the increase in imports from countries other than India and (iv) the downward trend in the economy as a whole as from the year 2001.
(62)
On the other hand, it was found that the profitability of the Community industry followed a less favourable trend during the period considered in the original investigation (i.e. from January 1993 to May 1997) than during the period considered in this review. This indicates a relative improvement of the situation of the Community industry after duties have been imposed.
(63)
As far as the viability of the Community industry in general is concerned, one important element are investments. Investments have more than doubled during the period considered indicating that the industry still considers itself as viable. Furthermore, the improved productivity and the increase in market share of the Community industry demonstrates that despite the fierce competition exerted by other third countries, the Community industry managed not only to maintain, but also to slightly strengthen its position on the Community market.
G. LIKELIHOOD OF RECURRENCE OF INJURY
(64)
With regard to the likely effect on the situation of the Community industry of the expiry of the measures in force, a number of factors were taken into account in line with the elements summarised in recitals 31 and 32.
(65)
As already indicated, in case the anti-dumping measures expired, dumping would resume for imports of the product concerned from India. In particular, in case anti-dumping measures expired there are clear indications that the volume of dumped imports into the Community would considerably increase due to the huge spare capacity held by Indian producers. As explained in recital 27, Indian exporting producers hold a spare capacity of approximately 70 000 tonnes, i.e. almost twice the size of the Community market in the IP (36 093 tonnes).
(66)
An analysis of exports made at allegedly dumped prices by Indian exporters to third countries (United States of America and Norway) shows clear indications that the price of Indian exports, if they resumed into the Community, would undercut the Community industry's prices. Indeed, pursuant to official trade statistics in the United States of America and Norway, the weighted average export price of the product concerned was EUR 1,73/kg in the case of exports to the United States of America and EUR 1,70/kg in the case of exports to Norway. These average prices would undercut the Community industry's average price for the like product by 21 % and 22 %, respectively.
(67)
The Community industry is still in a difficult situation, in particular as regards its profitability which markedly improved just after the imposition of the measures under consideration, but significantly deteriorated again thereafter, due to causes already explained in recital 51.
(68)
On the basis of the above, it is concluded that in case the measures are allowed to expire, there is a likelihood of a recurrence of injury from renewed imports of the product concerned from India.
H. COMMUNITY INTEREST
1. Preliminary remarks
(69)
In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, it was examined whether a prolongation of the existing anti-dumping measures would be against the interest of the Community as a whole. This analysis was based on an examination of all the various interests involved, i.e. those of the Community industry, other Community producers, the importers/traders as well as the users and raw material suppliers of the product concerned.
(70)
It should be recalled that, in the previous investigation, the adoption of measures was considered not to be against the interest of the Community. The present review therefore permits an analysis as to whether, following the introduction of the measures, the Community interest has been adversely affected by the introduction of these measures.
(71)
On this basis, it was examined whether, despite the likelihood of a recurrence of injurious dumping should measures expire, compelling reasons exist which would lead to conclude that it is not in the Community interest to maintain existing measures in this particular case.
2. Interests of the Community industry
(72)
In spite of the negative evolution of the financial situation of the Community industry during the period considered, this latter is structurally viable as it was able to maintain its substantial market share. Furthermore, the Community industry considers itself as viable as demonstrated by the sharp increase in its investments during the period considered. In view of the conclusions on the situation of the Community industry set out at recitals 59 to 61, especially in terms of the industry's extremely low level of profitability, and pursuant to arguments mentioned under section G, it is considered that in the absence of measures, the Community industry is likely to experience a worsening of its financial situation. Given the expected volumes and prices of imports of the product concerned from India subsequent to an expiry of the measures, the Community industry would be put at further risk, creating a decline in its market shares, depressing its prices and provoking an evolution of its profitability akin to the negative levels found during the period considered in the original investigation. Hence, it is concluded that the maintenance of existing measures would not be against the interest of the Community industry.
3. Interest of other producers
(73)
The Commission requested information from 11 non-complainant producers in the Community. No answer to the questionnaire was received.
(74)
Taking into account the likely quantities and prices of the product concerned which would be exported from India to the Community if measures expired, non-complainant producers of the like product would also see their market share and economic situation deteriorated.
(75)
In these circumstances, and in the absence of any contrary indications, it is concluded that the continuation of measures would not negatively affect the non-complainant Community producers.
4. Interest of unrelated importers/traders and suppliers of raw materials
(76)
The Commission sent questionnaires to six unrelated importers/traders and to 11 suppliers of raw materials.
(77)
Only one of the six unrelated importers/traders, whose purchases of the product concerned during the IP represented 0,07 % of the Community consumption, submitted some arguments against the continuation of the duties. However, this company did not provide any information or evidence relating to the impact that the imposition of the measures in force has had on its business nor did it properly assess to what extent the continuation of the duties would prejudice its position as importer. The other five unrelated importers did not submit any comment or information.
(78)
On the other hand, one supplier of raw materials expressly supported the continuation of the measures.
(79)
In these circumstances, it is concluded that the continuation of measures would not negatively affect the unrelated importers/traders and the suppliers of raw materials.
5. Interest of users
(80)
The Commission sent questionnaires to 23 users of the product concerned, mainly consisting of fishing and shipping industries. No user submitted a complete questionnaire reply. One user objected to the continuation of the measures, but did not further substantiate its position.
(81)
Due to the almost total absence of cooperation by users, and to the fact that the impact of duties is negligible compared to the main costs incurred by the users' industry (i.e. depreciation of the vessels, fuel, insurance, labour and maintenance), it is concluded that the continuation of measures will not have a negative impact on such users.
6. Conclusion
(82)
The effects of the continuation of measures can be expected to assist the Community industry to improve profitability, with consequent beneficial effects on the competitive conditions on the Community market and the reduction of the threat of further closures and reductions in employment. The beneficial effects are also expected to assist the Community producers to take full advantage of the investments made in recent years, to continue developing new products of higher technology for new and specialised applications.
(83)
Given the above conclusions on the impact of the continuation of the measures on the different players on the Community market, it is concluded that the continuation of measures is not against the Community interest.
I. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
(84)
All parties concerned were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it is intended to recommend the maintenance of existing measures in their present form. They were also granted a period to make representations subsequent to this disclosure, but none made representations which would have justified altering the above findings.
(85)
It follows from the above that, as provided for by Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping duties imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1312/98 should be maintained,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of twine, cordage, ropes and cables, whether or not plaited or braided and whether or not impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber or plastics, of polyethylene or polypropylene, other than binder and baler twine, measuring more than 50 000 decitex (5 g/m), as well as of other synthetic fibres of nylon or other polyamides or of polyesters, measuring more than 50 000 decitex (5 g/m) originating in India and classifiable within CN codes 5607 49 11, 5607 49 19, 5607 50 11 and 5607 50 19.
2. The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty shall be as follows:
Products manufactured by
-
Garware Wall Ropes Ltd: 53,0 % (additional TARIC code 8755),
-
other manufacturers: 82,0 % (additional TARIC code 8900).
Article 2
Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 3
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 Luxembourg, 4 October 2004.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
DIRECTIVE 97/56/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 20 October 1997 amending for the 16th time Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 100a thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2),
Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 189b of the Treaty (3),
(1) Whereas measures should be adopted for the smooth operation of the internal market; whereas the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured;
(2) Whereas the operation of the internal market should also gradually improve the quality of life, health protection and consumer safety; whereas the measures proposed by this Directive are in line with the Council resolution of 9 November 1989 on future priorities for relaunching consumer protection policy (4);
(3) Whereas the Council and the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, adopted Decision 90/238/Euratom, ECSC, EEC concerning a 1990 to 1994 action plan in the context of the 'Europe against Cancer` programme (5);
(4) Whereas, to improve health protection and consumer safety, substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction and preparations containing them should not be placed on the market for use by the general public;
(5) Whereas Directive 94/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 1994 amending for the 14th time Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provision of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (6) introduces a list in the form of an appendix to points 29, 30 and 31 of Annex I to Directive 76/769/EEC (7) containing substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction of category 1 or 2; whereas such substances and preparations which contain them may not be placed on the market for sale to the general public;
(6) Whereas the Commission will be submitting to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal to extend this list within six months after publication of an adaptation to technical progress of Annex I to Directive 67/548/EEC (8) containing substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction of category 1 or 2;
(7) Whereas the risks and advantages of the substances newly classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic and toxic to reproduction of category 1 or 2 have been taken into account;
(8) Whereas Commission Directives 93/101/EC (9) and 94/69/EC (10) adapting for the 20th and 21st times Directive 67/548/EEC, and more particularly Annex I thereto, to technical progress contain over 800 substances newly classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction of category 1 or 2; whereas these substances should be added to points 29, 30 and 31 of the Appendix of Annex I to Directive 76/769/EEC;
(9) Whereas, for reasons of transparency and clarity, with regard to points 29, 30 and 31, Annex I to Directive 76/769/EEC should be amended and the Appendix in Annex I to the said Directive should be replaced by a consolidated appendix;
(10) Whereas this Directive does not affect Community legislation laying down minimum requirements for the protection of workers contained in Directive 89/391/EEC (11) and individual directives bases thereon, in particular Directive 90/394/EEC (12),
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annex I to Directive 76/769/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
1. In the column entitled 'Conditions of restriction`, the second paragraph relating to points 29, 30 and 31 shall be replaced by the following:
'Without prejudice to the implementation of other Community provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances and preparations, the packaging of such substances and preparations must be marked legibly and indelibly as follows: "Restricted to professional users".`.
2. The Appendix shall be replaced by the text contained in the Annex to this Directive.
Article 2
1. Member States shall adopt and publish before 4 December 1998 the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive: They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
They shall apply these provisions as from 1 March 1999.
2. When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States.
Article 3
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 October 1997.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
DECISION OF THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION
of 13 December 1993
on the conclusion of the Agreement on the European Economic Area between the European Communities, their Member States and the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Swiss Confederation
(94/1/ECSC, EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 238 in conjunction with Article 228 (3), second subparagraph thereof,
Having regard to the assent of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas the Agreement on the European Economic Area between the European Communities, their Member States and the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Swiss Confederation, signed in Oporto on 2 May 1992 should be approved,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Agreement on the European Economic Area between the European Communities, their Member States and the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Swiss Confederation, the Protocols, the Annexes annexed thereto and the Declarations, the Agreed Minutes and exchanges of letters attached to the Final Act are hereby approved on behalf of the European Community and the European Coal and Steel Community.
The texts of the acts referred to in the first paragraph are attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The act of approval provided for in Article 129 of the Agreement shall be deposited by the President of the Council on behalf of the European Community and by the President of the Commission on behalf of the European Coal and Steel Community (2).
Done at Brussels, 13 December 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 2762/80 of 28 October 1980 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3089/78 laying down general rules in respect of aid for the consumption of olive oil
THE COUNCIL 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 1917/80 (2), and in particular Article 11 (7) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, (3),
Whereas Article 11 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC established arrangements for aid for the consumption of olive oil produced and marketed within the Community;
Whereas, in order that the arrangements for aid for consumption achieve their objectives and to prevent olive oil imported from third countries from deriving undue benefit from the aid, Article 9 of a Council Regulation (EEC) No 3089/78 of 19 December 1978 laying down general rules in respect of aid for the consumption of olive oil (4), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2380/79 (5), lays down that all olive oil imported from non-member countries and placed in free circulation within the Community shall be subject to payment of a security, with the exception of oil put up in small containers;
Whereas it has been found during the 1979/80 marketing year that an abnormal increase in the imports of olive oil in small containers has taken place ; whereas the administrations in question have great difficulty in checking the final destination of the said oil ; whereas, in these circumstances, the said oil could derive undue benefit from the consumption aid ; whereas, in order to rectify this situation, all imports of olive oil, in whatever form they are put up, should be subject to provision of a security,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 9 of Regulation (EEC) No 3089/78 is hereby replaced by the following:
"Article 9
1. Every release into free circulation in the Community of olive oil falling within subheading 15.07 A of the Common Customs Tariff shall be subject to the payment of a security. The amount of this security shall be equal to the part of the consumption aid which is paid to packaging plants for the same quantity of olive oil produced in the Community and which obtains when the customs formalities placing the oil into free circulation are completed.
However, in the event of a decision entailing a substantial alteration in the consumption aid, the Commission may adjust, as from the date of that decision, the amount of the security to take account of the alteration in question.
2. The security referred to in paragraph 1 shall be released as soon as the party concerned provides proof that the olive oil placed in free circulation has been made ineligible for consumption aid.".
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 November 1980.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 28 October 1980.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 113/2009
of 6 February 2009
concerning the use of certain traditional terms on labels for wine imported from the United States of America
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 2006/232/EC of 20 December 2005 on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine (1), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Under point 2.1(f) of Part A of the Protocol on wine labelling (2) to which reference is made in Article 8(2) of the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine (3), as well as point 2 of Appendix I to that Protocol, the Community has to permit the use of the terms ‘chateau’, ‘classic’, ‘clos’, ‘cream’, ‘crusted/crusting’, ‘fine’, ‘late bottled vintage’, ‘noble’, ‘ruby’, ‘superior’, ‘sur lie’, ‘tawny’, ‘vintage’ and ‘vintage character’ for wines originating in the United States if, at the time of importation, the terms have been approved for use on US wine labels in the United States on a COLA (Certificate of Label Approval).
(2)
In accordance with point 5 of Appendix I to the Protocol on wine labelling, the permission remains in force until 10 March 2009 and is automatically extended for additional successive two-year periods unless a Party to the Agreement provides written notification to the other Party that the period should not be extended.
(3)
By letter dated 8 September 2008, the Commission notified the United States that the period should not be extended beyond 10 March 2009.
(4)
In order to allow stocks of United States wine imported prior to 10 March 2009 which no longer conform to the applicable labelling rules as a result of the non-extension of this permission to be exhausted, a transitional provision should be introduced.
(5)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Wine originating in the United States of America and imported into the Community before 10 March 2009 under the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine, using terms permitted in accordance with Appendix I to the Protocol on wine labelling as referred to in Article 8(2) of that Agreement, may be held for sale and put into circulation until stocks are exhausted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh 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, 6 February 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 966/2001
of 17 May 2001
concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1701/2000
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 common wheat to all third countries, with the exclusion of certain ACP States, was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1701/2000(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 945/2001(6).
(2) Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no award.
(3) On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 a maximum refund 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 notified from 11 to 17 May 2001 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 1701/2000.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 18 May 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 17 May 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 October 2008
amending the Appendix to Annex VI to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania as regards certain milk processing establishments in Bulgaria
(notified under document number C(2008) 6042)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2008/827/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania, and in particular the first subparagraph of paragraph (f) of Section B of Chapter 4 of Annex VI thereto,
Whereas:
(1)
Bulgaria has been granted transitional periods by the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania for compliance by certain milk processing establishments with the requirements of 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 (1).
(2)
The Appendix to Annex VI to the Act of Accession has been amended by Commission Decisions 2007/26/EC (2), 2007/689/EC (3), 2008/209/EC (4), 2008/331/EC (5), 2008/547/EC (6) and 2008/672/EC (7).
(3)
Bulgaria has provided guarantees that six milk processing establishments have completed their upgrading process and are now in full compliance with Community legislation. Those establishments are allowed to receive and process non-compliant raw milk without separation. They should therefore be included in the list of Chapter I of the Appendix to Annex VI.
(4)
The Appendix to Annex VI to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania should therefore be amended accordingly.
(5)
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
The Appendix to Annex VI to the Act of Accession of Bulgaria and Romania is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 October 2008.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 16 May 2003
amending for the second time Decision 2003/289/EC concerning protection measures in relation to avian influenza in Belgium
(notified under document number C(2003) 1688)
(Only the French and Dutch texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2003/356/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
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(1), as last amended by Directive 2002/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), and, in particular, Article 10 thereof,
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(3), as last amended by Directive 92/118/EEC(4), in particular Article 9 thereof,
Having regard to 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(5), and in particular Article 4(1) and (3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) On 16 April 2003 the veterinary authorities of Belgium have informed the Commission about a strong suspicion of avian influenza in the province of Limburg, which was subsequently officially confirmed.
(2) The Belgian authorities have immediately, before the official confirmation of the disease, implemented the measures foreseen in Council Directive 92/40/EEC(6) introducing Community measures for the control of avian influenza.
(3) For the sake of clarity and transparency the Commission after consultation with the Belgian authorities, has taken Decision 2003/275/EC(7) of 16 April 2003 concerning protection measures in relation to strong suspicion of avian influenza in Belgium, which has been subsequently replaced by Decision 2003/289/EC(8), as amended by Decision 2003/317/EC(9), thereby reinforcing the measures taken by Belgium.
(4) Since 27 April no further cases of avian influenza have been recorded and no suspicions have been raised in Belgium, so that it can be concluded that the disease has been successfully controlled. The poultry holdings in the established buffer zones have been depopulated and restocking will start following a waiting period after cleaning and disinfection has been carried out.
(5) Following a further waiting period until 26 May 2003, provided that no new outbreaks have been reported it would seem appropriate to limit the trade restrictions in force to the previously disease affected areas and an appropriate buffer zone around this area and to allow trade in live poultry and poultry products from the rest of the Belgian territory, which could then be considered as free of avian influenza.
(6) The animal health certificates to be possibly used as from 27 May 2003 for consignments of live poultry and hatching eggs originating from the regionalised area in Belgium and destined for another Member State or third country should be amended accordingly.
(7) The measures laid down in Decision 2003/289/EC should be further prolonged and adapted in the light of the evolution of the disease.
(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 ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Decision 2003/289/EC is amended as follows:
1. In Article 3 the first paragraph shall be replaced by the following text:"Without prejudice to the measures already taken in the framework of Directive 92/40/EEC, the competent authorities of Belgium shall ensure that the preventive depopulation of poultry holdings at risk within the restricted zones and the zones described in the Annex and the culling of other poultry and birds kept in these areas which are considered to be at risk is completed as soon as possible."
2. A new Article 7a is added as follow:
"Article 7a
1. However as of midnight 26 May 2003, if
(a) no further outbreaks of avian influenza are reported in Belgium before 17.00 on 26 May 2003, and
(b) all the clinical examinations and laboratory tests carried out in Belgium in relation to holdings infected, suspected or suspected to be contaminated with avian influenza have given negative results,
Article 1 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 1
1. Without prejudice to the measures taken by Belgium within the framework of Council Directive 92/40/EEC applied to the surveillance zones, the Belgian veterinary authorities shall ensure that no live poultry, hatching eggs and fresh, unprocessed and non-heat-treated poultry manure or litter are dispatched from the provinces of Antwerp and Limburg, to other parts of Belgium, other Member States and to third countries.
2. Without prejudice to the measures taken by Belgium within the framework of Council Directive 92/40/EEC within the surveillance zones the Belgian veterinary authorities shall ensure that no live poultry and hatching eggs are transported within provinces of Antwerp and Limburg.
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2 the competent veterinary authority, taking all appropriate bio-security measures in accordance with Articles 4 and 5 to avoid the spread of avian influenza, may authorise the transport from areas situated outside the surveillance zones of:
(a) poultry for immediate slaughter, including spent laying hens, to a slaughterhouse that has been designated by the competent veterinary authority;
(b) day-old chicks and ready-to-lay pullets to a holding or shed under official control, where no other poultry is kept;
(c) hatching eggs to a hatchery under official control.
If live poultry transported in accordance with (a) or (b) originate in another Member State or third country the transport has to be approved by the Belgian authorities and the competent authority of the Member State or third country of dispatch.
4. By way of derogation from paragraph 2 the competent veterinary authority, taking all appropriate bio-security measures to avoid the spread of avian influenza, may authorise transport of live poultry and hatching eggs not prohibited by Council Directive 92/40/EEC and in particular in respect to movements of day-old chicks in accordance with the provisions of Article 9 paragraph 4 (a), (b) and (c), which shall be transported to holdings within provinces of Antwerp and Limburg under official control.'
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, Belgium shall inform the Commission and the Member States on 26 May 2003 on the compliance with the conditions set up in paragraph 1.
3. Without prejudice to Article 1 paragraph 1 animal health certificates accompanying consignments of live poultry and hatching eggs originating and/or coming from the territory of Belgium with the exception of the provinces of Antwerp and Limburg to be signed as of 27 May 2003, provided the conditions laid down in paragraph 2 are fulfilled, shall include the words: 'The animal health conditions of this consignment are in accordance with Decision 2003/356/EC'."
3. In Article 4 paragraph (a) and (b) the following words shall be inserted after the word "returned":"after having been cleaned and disinfected in accordance with d) or shall be handled otherwise under official supervision and according to the instructions of the competent authority to avoid cross contamination;".
4. In Article 8 the time and date "until 24.00 on 16 May 2003" are replaced by "until 24.00 on 30 May 2003".
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium.
Done at Brussels, 16 May 2003.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 4/2003
of 3 January 2003
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002(2), 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 4 January 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 January 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1336/95 of 13 June 1995 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3190/82 laying down detailed rules for the extension of certain rules adopted by producers' organizations in the fisheries sector to non-members (Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3318/94 (2), and in particular Article 30 thereof,
Whereas Regulation (EC) No 3318/94 amends, inter alia, Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92, hereinafter called the basic Regulation, by abolishing prior verification by the Commission of decisions for the extension of certain rules adopted by producers' organizations to non-members and by introducing subsequent verification of such decisions taken by the Member States; whereas this amendment makes it necessary to adapt a number of provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3190/82 (3), adopted pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1772/82 (4);
Whereas Member States which have decided to give binding force to certain rules adopted by a producers' organization must notify the Commission of their decision before it comes into force; whereas it is necessary, therefore, to specify the content of such notifcation;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fishery Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 3190/82 is hereby amended as follows:
1. the first subparagraph of Article 5 (1) is replaced by the following:
'Member States which decide to extend certain rules adopted by a producers' organization to non-members shall give the Commission at least the following details.`;
2. paragraph 2 of Article 5 is deleted;
3. paragraph 1 of Article 6 is replaced by the following:
'1. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Communities the decisions it takes pursuant to the second indent of the second subparagraph of Article 5 (2) of the basic 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, 13 June 1995.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 377/2006
of 2 March 2006
fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on sorghum imported in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005
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 12(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain from third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005 (2).
(2)
Pursuant to Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003, may decide to fix a maximum reduction in the import duty. In fixing this maximum the criteria provided for in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 must be taken into account. Whereas a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less than the maximum reduction in the duty.
(3)
The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum reduction in the import duty 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 24 February to 2 March 2006, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005, the maximum reduction in the duty on sorghum imported shall be 29,91 EUR/t and be valid for a total maximum quantity of 3 000 t.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 3 March 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 March 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 10 April 1995 amending Decision 94/942/CFSP on the joint action adopted by the Council on the basis of Article J.3 of the Treaty on European Union concerning the control of exports of dual-use goods (95/128/CFSP)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article J.3 thereof,
Having regard to the general guidelines given by the European Council on 26 and 27 June 1992,
Having regard to Council Decision 94/942/CFSP of 19 December 1994 on the joint action adopted by the Council on the basis of Article J.3 of the Treaty on European Union concerning the control of exports of dual-use goods (1),
Whereas the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden became members of the European Union on 1 January 1995;
Whereas New Zealand has joined the nuclear suppliers group,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The list in paragraph 1 of Annex II to Decision 94/942/CFSP referred to in Article 3 of that Decision and in Article 6 (1) (a) of Regulation (EC) No 3381/94 (2) shall be replaced by the list appearing in Annex I to this Decision.
Article 2
The list in Annex V to Decision 94/942/CFSP referred to in Article 6 of that Decision and in Article 20 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 3381/94 shall, with regard to Austria, Finland and Sweden, be supplemented by the items appearing in Annex II to this Decision.
Article 3
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall enter into force on the day of its publication.
Done at Luxembourg, 10 April 1995.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1585/2001
of 2 August 2001
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), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98(2), 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 3 August 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 August 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1258/2008
of 16 December 2008
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 Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,
Whereas:
Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 December 2008.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 23 December 1992 on financial measures by Spain in respect of the coal industry in 1991, 1992 and 1993 (Only the Spanish text is authentic)
(93/145/ECSC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,
Having regard to Commission Decision No 2064/86/ECSC of 30 June 1986 establishing the Community rules for State aid to the coal industry (1), and in particular Articles 2 (1) and 10 thereof,
Whereas:
I By letter of 10 February 1992, the Spanish Government informed the Commission, pursuant to Decision 91/3/ECSC (2), of its plan to reduce aid to cover the operating losses up to 31 December 1993 of the undertakings Hunosa, Minas de Fiaredo and Mina de la Camocha, as part of a plan to restructure, rationalize and modernize the Spanish coal industry.
By letter of 16 November 1992 the Spanish Government also provided the Commission, in response to its request of 25 February 1992, with additional information, as well as informing it of the financial measures it intends to take in respect of the coal industry in 1991, 1992 and 1993.
Under Decision No 2064/86/ECSC, the Commission must give a ruling on the following financial measures in respect of Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and Mina de la Camocha:
- aid to cover operating losses totalling Pta 50 034 million in 1991, Pta 50 034 million in 1992 and Pta 49 978 million in 1993,
- aid totalling Pta 14 348 million for 1992 for the constitution of a provision to cover social expenditure to be paid out to workers made redundant and other exceptional costs following measures to restructure, rationalize and modernize these undertakings,
- aid totalling Pta 8 734 million for 1992 for the constitution of a provision to defray the specific depreciation costs of fixed assets in connection with pit closures arising from measures to restructure, rationalize and modernize these undertakings.
II The undertakings Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and Mina de la Camocha are located in the central Asturias coalfield; they work a difficult seam with high production costs. Their operating losses are covered partly by the general State budget in the form of contracts which these undertakings have signed with the State.
The increase in aid in recent years caused the Commission to check whether Decision No 2064/86/ECSC was being complied with.
Following this investigation the Commission asked the Spanish authorities to submit a plan for reducing this aid over a period ending on 31 December 1993 at the latest, as part of a plan to restructure, rationalize and modernize the Spanish coal industry.
The plan for these three undertakings which have signed contracts with the State, as submitted by the Spanish Government, provides for a reduction of 895 000 tonnes in annual production (23 % reduction) and the loss of 6 541 jobs (32 % reduction).
III By Decisions 91/3/ECSC, 89/102/ECSC (3), 88/505/ECSC (4) and 87/454/ECSC (5) the Commission authorized aid to cover the operating losses of Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and Mina dela Camocha for 1990, 1989, 1988 and 1987 on the grounds that it would help the process of restructuring the coal industry, particularly by staggering the dates of closure of certain pits with no prospect of economic viability, in the context of regional industrial redevelopment policy. The aid would thus help to selve the social and regional problems related to developments in the coal industry, in accordance with the third indent of Article 2 (1) of Decision No 2064/86/ECSC.
The aid which the Spanish Government intends to grant, totalling Pta 50 034 million for 1991, Pta 50 034 million for 1992 and Pta 49 978 million for 1993, is intended to cover operating losses and aims to offset part of the difference between average estimated costs and average estimates revenue for each tonne produced. The aid will not exceed estimated operating losses and thus complies with Article 3 (1) of Decision No 2064/86/ECSC.
The aid to be granted to the undertakings in question for 1991, 1992 and 1993 must be examined in the light of Decisions 91/3/ECSC and No 2064/86/ECSC.
The conclusion of such examination is that steadily deteriorating geological conditions will mean that the production capacity reductions planned in the period to the end of 1993 will not significantly improve the competitiveness of the three undertakings, as the cost of production par tonne will continue to rise. However, the aid planned for 1991 and 1992 has stabilized in relation to the aid authorized by the Commission for 1990, and the figures for 1993 show the beginning of a downward trend in relation to previous years.
As capacity reductions will involve the closure of the production units making the biggest losses, the planned measures will help improve the competitiveness of the Community's coal industry.
The Commission also welcomes the fact that the plans submitted reveal a significant increase in the intensity of the restructuring efforts carried out by the undertakings concerned, and that the aid notified is to come out of the general State budget, thus guaranteeing greater transparency of aid systems.
Reducing the amount of aid to reflect falling coal production will prevent the creation of replacement production capacity with no long-term prospect of economic viability and is a first step towards greater discipline in the management of these undertakings and towards a more rapid restructuring of the industry, leading in the long term to a significant reduction in aid.
By staggering the dates of closure of certain pits with no prospect of economic viability, the aid will help to solve the social and regional problems related to developments in the coal industry, pursuant to the third indent of Article 2 (1) of Commission Decision No 2064/86/ECSC.
IV To enable the Commission to complete its study of the compatibility of aid to cover the operating losses of Mina de la Camocha with Decision No 2064/86/ECSC, the Spanish authorities should be asked to submit before 30 June 1993 the additional plan which they have undertaken to send the Commission. Pending receipt of this information, Spanish Government aid to Mina de la Camocha for 1993 must not exceed the amount authorized for 1992.
V The aid totalling Pta 11 687 million for the constitution of a provision to cover exceptional social expenditure is designed to cover part of the cost of payments to some 6 000 workers of Hunosa, Minas de Figaredo and Mina de la Camocha forced to take early retirement by 31 December 1993 under the plan for the restructuring, rationalization and modernization of the Spanish coal industry.
The aid will also be used for the constitution of a provision to cover other exceptional expenditure relating to closures, totalling Pta 2 661 million, to finance the cost of maintaining the pumping equipment of closed pits.
These financial measures are not related to current production and should be considered as inherited liabilities. Pursuant to Article 8 of Decision No 2064/86/ECSC they may be considered compatible with the common market provided the amount does not exceed the costs.
As the aim is to constitute provisions, the Spanish Government will inform the Commission each year of the aid actually paid out and the costs covered by such aid.
VI It follows from the phased closure of pits over the period to 31 December 1993 that a substantial proportion of the fixed assets of the undertakings concerned will be irrecoverable. The Spanish Government intends to constitute a provision which, through a financial measure totalling Pta 8 734 million, will defray part of the specific depreciation costs connected with the closure of pits arising from measures to restructure, rationalize and modernize the industry.
This measure has to be considered as 'other aid' on which the Commission is required to be consulted pursuant to Article 10 (2) of Decision No 2064/86/ECSC. The purpose of this measure is to accelerate depreciation in connection with the closure, by 31 December 1993 at the latest, of the pits making the biggest losses, and, by enabling the closures to be phased more, to selve the social and regional problems related to developments in the coal industry pursuant to the third indent of Article 2 (1) of Decision No 2064/86/ECSC.
As the aim is to constitute a provision, the Spanish Government will inform the Commission each year of the aid actually paid out and the costs covered by such aid.
VII The aid measures covered by this Decision are therefore compatible with the proper functioning of the common market.
This Decision does not prejudge the question of the compatibility of the NSCCT system (new system of public contracts for coal used in power stations) with the provisions of the Treaties,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Spain is hereby authorized to grant undertakings which have signed contracts with the State, aid to cover operating losses totalling:
- Pta 50 034 million for 1991,
- Pta 50 034 million for 1992,
- Pta 49 978 million for 1993.
Article 2
Spain is hereby authorized to grant aid totalling Pta 23 082 million for 1992, the total amount being made up of the following items:
- aid totalling Pta 14 348 million for the constitution of a provision to cover exceptional social expenditure to be paid out to workers made redundant and other exceptional expenditure in connection with the maintenance of pumping equipment in pits to be closed following measures to restructure, rationalize and modernize the Spanish coal mining undertakings which have signed contracts with the State,
- aid totalling Pta 8 734 million for the constitution of a provision to defray the specific depreciation costs of irrecoverable fixed assets arising from measures to restructure, rationalize and modernize the Spanish coal mining undertakings which have signed contracts with the State.
Article 3
Spain shall, by 30 June 1993, provide the Commission with information on the second part of the business plan for the Mina de la Camocha undertaking.
Article 4
Spain shall inform the Commission each year of payments made to beneficiaries from the provisions authorized in Article 2.
Article 5
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 1992.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1933/2005
of 24 November 2005
concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1058/2005
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 13(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1058/2005 (2).
(2)
Article 7 of 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), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,
(3)
On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund 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 notified from 18 to 24 November 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley issued in Regulation (EC) No 1058/2005.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 November 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 November 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3684/91 of 17 December 1991 fixing the quotas applying to imports into Spain of beef and veal products from third countries
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 491/86 of 25 February 1986 laying down rules for the application of quantitative restrictions on imports into Spain of certain agricultural products from third countries (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3296/88 (2), and in particular Articles 1 (3) and 3 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Article 77 of the Act of Accession, Spain may, until 31 December 1995, apply quantitative restrictions on imports from third countries; whereas the said restrictions concern products which are subject to the supplementary trade mechanism in the case of beef and veal; whereas the initial quotas in volume were fixed in respect of each product or group of products by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1870/86 (3);
Whereas the quotas for 1992 should be fixed for products other than those referred to in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3913/89 of 20 December 1989 withdrawing certain products in the beefmeat sector from the list of products under the supplementary trade mechanism (4);
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
1. The quotas for 1992 applying to imports into Spain of beef and veal products from third countries, referred to in Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 491/86 under the supplementary trade mechanism, are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
2. Articles 1 (3), 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1870/86 shall remain applicable.
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, 17 December 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.