utterance
stringlengths 594
850k
| label
listlengths 11
11
|
|---|---|
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2231/2003
of 23 December 2003
opening tariff quotas for the year 2004 for imports into the European Community of certain products originating in the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 of 6 December 1993 laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products(1), and in particular Article 7(2) thereof,
Having regard to Council Decision 98/707/EC of 22 October 1998 relating to the conclusion of a Protocol for the adaptation of the trade aspects of the Europe Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Czech Republic, of the other part, to take into account the accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to the European Union and the results of the agricultural negotiations of the Uruguay Round, including the improvements of the existing preferential regime(2), and in particular Article 2(1) of that Decision and Articles 2 and 6 of that Protocol,
Having regard to Council Decision 98/638/EC of 5 October 1998 relating to the conclusion of a Protocol for the adaptation of the trade aspects of the Europe Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Slovak Republic, of the other part, to take into account the accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to the European Union and the results of the agricultural negotiations of the Uruguay Round, including the improvements of the existing preferential regime(3), and in particular Article 2(1) of that Decision and Articles 2 and 6 of that Protocol,
Whereas:
(1) Protocols 3 on trade in processed agricultural products to the Europe Agreements with the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic, as amended by the Protocols for the adapting of those Agreements, provide for the granting of annual tariff quotas for imports of products originating in the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic. Those quotas should be opened for 2004.
(2) 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 Common Customs Code(4) lays down rules for the management of tariff quotas. It is appropriate to provide that the tariff quotas opened by this Regulation are to be managed in accordance with those rules.
(3) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for horizontal questions concerning trade in processed agricultural products not listed in Annex I,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION
Article 1
The annual quotas for the products originating in the Czech Republic and in the Slovak Republic, set out in Annexes I and II shall be open from 1 January 2004 to 30 April 2004 under the conditions set out in the said Annexes.
Article 2
The Community tariff quotas referred to in Article 1 shall be managed by the Commission in accordance with Articles 308a, 308b and 308c of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 January 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1925/84
of 5 July 1984
fixing for the 1984/85 marketing year the minimum price to be paid to producers and the amount of production aid for certain products processed from fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Greece,
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 988/84 (2), and in particular Articles 3b and 3c thereof,
Whereas, under Article 3b (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 516/77, the minimum price to be paid to producers is to be determined for the Member States other than Greece on the basis of:
(a) the minimum price applying during the previous marketing year;
(b) the movement of basic prices in the fruit and vegetable sector;
(c) the need to ensure the normal marketing of fresh products for the various uses.
Whereas Article 3c of the said Regulation lays down the criteria for fixing the amount of production aid; whereas, in respect of tomato concentrates and preserved whole tomatoes, the volume of imports makes the third country price unrepresentative; whereas the production aid for these products must be calculated by reference to a price based on the Community market price;
Whereas Article 1 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 989/84 (3) fixed as the guarantee threshold for each year a quantity of processed tomato products corresponding to 4 700 000 tonnes of fresh tomatoes; whereas Community production calculated in accordance with Article 2 (2) of that Regulation exceeds the threshold for the 1983/84 marketing year and the production of tomato concentrates is higher than the quantity specified in the second subparagraph of Article 1 (1) of the same Regulation; whereas the production aid for the 1984/85 marketing year must be reduced for tomato concentrates pursuant to Article 2 (1) of the same Regulation;
Whereas, as regards Greece, pursuant to Article 103 of the Act of Accession and until the first move towards alignment of prices, the minimum price to be paid to Greek producers is to be established on the basis of prices paid in Greece to national producers, over the reference period defined in Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 41/81 (4); whereas that price must be aligned with the level of the common prices pursuant to Article 59 of the Act of Accession;
Whereas, as regards Greece, the said Article 103 and Council Regulation (EEC) No 990/84 (5) lay down the criteria for fixing the amount of production aid;
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
For the 1984/85 marketing year:
(a) the minimum prices referred to in Article 3b of Regulation (EEC) No 516/77 to be paid to producers for the products listed in Annex I hereto, and
(b) the production aid referred to in Article 3c of the same Regulation for the products listed in Annex II hereto
shall be as set out in the said Annexes.
Article 2
1. The aid provided for in respect of Greece shall be applicable to all production of processed products obtained from produce grown in Greece.
2. Where processing takes place outside the Member State in which the produce was grown, such Member State shall furnish proof to the Member State paying the production aid that the minimum price payable to the producer has been paid.
Article 3
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, 5 July 1984.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1267/93 of 26 May 1993 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1108/93 with respect to the management of a quota of 5 000 tonnes of pet food, falling within CN code 2309 10 and originating in Sweden
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1108/93 of 4 May 1993 laying down certain provisions for the application of the Bilateral Agreements on agriculture between the Community, of the one part, and Austria, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, of the other part (1), and in particular Article 1 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to an agreement concluded between the Community and Sweden on 17 March 1993, all Community importers should be guaranteed access, from 15 April 1993 onwards, to the annual 5 000 tonne quota of pet food prepared for retail sale and originating in Sweden, as provided for in Annex II to the Bilateral Agreement with Sweden signed in Oporto on 2 May 1992, and an import duty of Ecu 0 per tonne should be applied until such time as the said quantity is used up;
Whereas, however, the quantity of 5 000 tonnes must be reduced pro rata temporis to take account of the actual period during which the aforementioned quota for 1993 is applicable;
Whereas this type of management requires close collaboration between the Member States and the Commission, whereby the Commission must in particular be able to monitor the progress made in using up the tariff quotas and inform the Member States thereof;
Whereas the import licences for the products in question should be issued subject to the limits of the appointed quantity provided for after a scrutiny period and, where necessary, with a single percentage reduction fixed for the quantities applied for;
Whereas the origin of the products in particular should be verified by making issue of the import licences conditional upon the presentation of proofs of origin, issued or prepared in Sweden;
Whereas provision should be made to specify the information to be included in the application and licences, notwithstanding Articles 8 and 21 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 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2101/92 (3);
Whereas, with a view to the sound management of the scheme, provision should be made, notwithstanding Article 12 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 891/89 of 5 April 1989 on special detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences for cereals and rice (4), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3570/92 (5), for the security relating to the import licences for the said scheme to be fixed at ECU 25 per tonne;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Products falling within CN code 2309 10 originating in Sweden and qualifying for an annual zero-rated tariff quota amounting to 5 000 tonnes, pursuant to the system provided for in the Bilateral Agreement concluded between the Community and Sweden, may be imported into the Community in accordance with the provisions of this Regulation.
However, the said quantity shall be reduced pro rata temporis in 1993 to 3 540 tonnes in accordance with point 2 of Annex II to the said Agreement.
Article 2
To be admissible, the application for an import licence must be accompanied by the original of the proof of origin, namely either an EUR.1 certificate or a declaration on an invoice, issued or prepared in Sweden in accordance with Annex VI of the Bilateral Agreement for the products in question.
Article 3
1. Applications for import licences shall be lodged with the competent authorities in each of the Member States on the first working day of the week by 1 p.m., Brussels time. The licence application must relate to a quantity equal to or greater than five tonnes of product and may not exceed 1 000 tonnes.
2. The Member States shall send the import licence applications to the Commission by telex or telefax, by 6 p.m. at the latest, Brussels time, on the day on which they are lodged.
3. By the Friday following the day on which the applications were lodged, at the latest, the Commission shall determine the outcome of the licence applications, and shall notify the Member States by telex thereof.
4. Upon receipt of the Commission notification, the Member States shall issue the import licences. Notwithstanding Article 21 (1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88, the term of validity of the licence shall be calculated from the date on which it is actually issued.
5. Notwithstanding Article 8 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 3719/88, the quantity released for free circulation may not be greater than that indicated in boxes 17 and 18 of the import licence. To this end, the figure '0' shall be entered in box 19 of the said licence.
Article 4
In the case of products for importation which qualify for the zero-duty rate under Article 1, the import licence applications and the licence itself shall include:
(a) in box 8, the word Sweden.
The licence requires importation from that country;
(b) in box 24, one of the following entries:
Exacción reguladora cero [artículo 1 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1267/93]
Importafgift 0 ECU/t (artikel 1 i forordning (EOEF) nr. 1267/93)
Abschoepfungsfrei (Artikel 1 der Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 1267/93)
Eisfora «miden» [arthro 1 toy kanonismoy (EOK) arith. 1267/93]
Zero levy (Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1267/93)
Prélèvement « zéro » [article 1er du règlement (CEE) no 1267/93]
Prelievo « 0 » [articolo 1 del regolamento (CEE) n. 1267/93]
Nulheffing (artikel 1 van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1267/93)
Direito nivelador zero [artigo 1o do Regulamento (CEE) no 1267/93].
Article 5
Notwithstanding Article 12 (a) and (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 891/89, the amount of the security for import licences under this Regulation shall be ECU 25 per tonne.
Article 6
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 15 April 1993.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 May 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1023/2005
of 30 June 2005
fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 581/2004
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), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 581/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain types of butter (2) provides for a permanent tender.
(2)
Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 28 June 2005.
(3)
The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 581/2004, for the tendering period ending on 28 June 2005, the maximum amount of refund for the products referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 June 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE
of 30 June 1988
adapting to technical progress Council Directive 78/764/EEC on the laws of the Member States relating to the driver's seat on wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors
(88/465/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 74/150/EEC of 4 March 1974 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type approval of wheeles agricultural or forestry tractors (1), as last amended by Directive 88/297/EEC (2), and in particular Article 11 thereof,
Whereas, in view of the experience acquired and taking account of the current state of the art, it is now possible to amend the classification of the standard tractors provided for in Council Directive 78/764/EEC (3), as last amended by Directive 87/354/EEC (4), and to make certain provisions of that Directive more precise and complete;
Whereas this new classification has also been accepted by the ISO on the basis of the results of research carried out in Europe and the United States of America;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on the Adaptation to Technical Progress of the Directives aimed at the removal of technical barriers to trade in the agricultural or forestry tractor sector,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annexes I and II to Directive 78/764/EEC are hereby amended in accordance with the Annex to this Ditective.
Article 2
1. From 1 October 1988, no Member State may:
(a) - refuse, in respect of a type of tractor, to grant EEC type approval, to issue the document referred to in Article 10 (1), final indent, of Directive 74/150/EEC, or to grant national type approval, or
- prohibit the entry into service of tractors,
if the driver's seat on this type of tractor or tractors complies with the provisions of this Directive;
(b) - refuse, in respect of a type of driver's seat, to grant EEC component type approval or national type-approval if seats of that type comply with the provisions of this Directive, or
- prohibit the placing on the market of driver's seats which bear the EEC component type approval mark issued in accordance with the provisions of this Directive.
2. From 1 October 1989, Member States:
(a) - shall no longer issue the document referred to in Article 10 (1), final indent, of Directive 74/150/EEC in respect of a type of tractor the driver's seat of which does not comply with the provisions of this Directive,
- may refuse to grant national type approval in respect of a type of tractor the driver's seat of which does not comply with the provisions of this Directive;
(b) - shall not grant EEC component type approval in respect of a type of driver's seat if it does not comply with the provisions of this Directive,
- may refuse to grant national component type approval in respect of a type of driver's seat if it does not comply with the provisions of this Directive.
Article 3
Member States shall bring into force the provisions necessary in order to comply with this Directive not later than 30 September 1988. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof.
Article 4
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 June 1988.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 24 August 2007
on a financial contribution from the Community towards emergency measures to combat swine vesicular disease in Italy in 2006 and 2007
(notified under document number C(2007) 3957)
(Only the Italian text is authentic)
(2007/587/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), and in particular Article 3(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Outbreaks of swine vesicular disease occurred in Italy in 2006 and 2007. The emergence of that disease represents a serious risk to the Community's livestock population.
(2)
In order to prevent the spread of the disease and to help eradicate it as quickly as possible, the Community should contribute financially towards the eligible expenditure incurred by the Member State under the emergency measures taken to combat the disease, as provided for in Decision 90/424/EEC.
(3)
Payment of Community financial support towards emergency measures to combat Swine vesicular disease is subject to the rules laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 349/2005 of 28 February 2005 laying down rules on the Community financing of emergency measures and of the campaign to combat certain animal diseases under Council Decision 90/424/EEC (2).
(4)
On 4 June 2007, Italy submitted a final rough estimate of the costs incurred in taking measures to eradicate the disease.
(5)
The Italian authorities have fully complied with their technical and administrative obligations as set out in Article 3 of Decision 90/424/EEC and Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 349/2005.
(6)
The payment of the Community financial contribution must be subject to the condition that the planned activities were actually implemented and that the authorities provide all the necessary information within the set deadlines.
(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
Financial contribution from the Community
1. A financial contribution from the Community is granted to Italy towards the costs incurred by that Member State in taking the measures referred to in Article 3(2) of Decision 90/424/EEC to combat swine vesicular disease in 2006 and 2007.
2. The financial contribution from the Community shall be 50 % of the expenditure eligible for Community funding as referred to in paragraph 1. It shall be paid under the conditions provided for in Regulation (EC) No 349/2005.
Article 2
Payment arrangements
A first tranche of EUR 1 200 000 shall be paid as part of the Community financial contribution provided for in Article 1.
Article 3
Addressee
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Italy.
Done at Brussels, 24 August 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 December 1998
concerning aid granted by Germany to Riedel-de Haën AG
(notified under document number C(1998) 4566)
(Only the German text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(1999/671/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Communities, in particular the first paragraph of Article 93(2),
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, in particular Article 62(1)(a),
Having given notice in accordance with Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty to interested parties to submit their comments, and having regard to those comments,
Whereas:
1. Procedure
By letter of 3 April 1996, two private individuals lodged a complaint with the Commission to the effect that Riedel-de Haën AG (hereinafter referred to as "Riedel-de Haën")(1), Seelze, Germany had received State aid amounting to DEM 8 million (ECU 4 million) for investment in a special-waste incinerator. The complainants provided the Commission with further particulars by letters of 28 April 1996, 24 September 1996, 4 February 1997, 2 March 1997 and 2 February 1998. They alleged that the company intended to incinerate its industrial wastes on its premises after the port authorities of Antwerp and other cities had refused permission on environmental grounds for incineration at sea by the incineration ship Vesta. This was confirmed by a press report(2). According to the complainants, the company maintained that the new plant was a bromine-recovery plant. They knew, however, that there had been such a plant on the company's premises for the previous 25 years.
By letters of 22 April, 28 June and 25 November 1996, the Commission called on Germany to give its views and to supply further information on the aid to Riedel-de Haën so that it could verify what kind of grants were involved and whether they were compatible with the common market. Germany replied by letters of 4 June and 30 September 1996 and 8 January 1997, confirming that the company had received two grants amounting in all to DEM 8 million (ECU 4 million). After Germany had first stated that the aid was granted for a bromine-recovery plant, it subsequently explained that the aid was in fact for a residue-processing plant incorporating a bromine-recovery plant.
By letter of 16 September 1997, the Commission notified Germany of its decision to initiate the procedure under Article 93(2) concerning the grants of aid amounting to DEM 8 million (ECU 4 million). It concluded that one of the grants had not been made under the approved Economy and Environment Scheme (Programme "Wirtschaft und Umwelt"), while the second grant was not covered by any approved rules and neither of the grants appeared to be compatible with the Community Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection(3). This was notified to Germany by letter of 2 October 1997. By letters of 7 November 1997 and 19 March 1998, Germany gave its views on those questions and reservations but responded to the Commission's requests for information only in very general terms.
The Commission's Decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities(4). In that Decision, it gave other parties concerned notice to submit their comments. By the deadline, 19 January 1998, it had received no comments. On 14 April 1998 solicitors acting for AlliedSignal, Riedel-de Haën's parent company, set out the company's position.
By letter of 24 June 1998 the Commission asked Germany to provide the information necessary for it to decide whether the grants of aid were compatible with the common market. It was made clear that Germany was being given its last chance to provide this information; if they failed to do so, the decision would be taken on the basis of the information at the Commission's disposal.
Following a meeting with Germany and representatives of Riedel-de Haën held in Brussels on 28 July 1998, Germany and Riedel-de Haën responded with a joint letter of 28 August 1998. In that letter they considered the position adopted by Riedel-de Haën in its letter of 14 April 1998. This position was fully taken into consideration by the Commission. The following analysis of Germany's position incorporates the Commission's analysis of Riedel-de Haën's position.
2. Aid
Each year Riedel-de Haën generates 1300 tonnes of liquid waste containing halogenated hydrocarbon compounds. This waste was previously disposed of by specialised businesses in special-waste incinerators. In 1994 the company began constructing a recycling plant so that it could dispose of the liquid waste on site. The plant is not yet operational.
Germany initially assessed the cost of the project at DEM 21,4 million (ECU 10,7 million) but adjusted this to DEM 20,6 million (ECU 10,3 million) by letter of 28 August 1998. This figure incorporates investment, development and other costs as well as operating costs.
The company's investment costs are estimated at DEM 16,3 million (ECU 8,1 million), of which DEM 14,2 million (ECU 7,1 million) were invested by 24 June 1998. The following table provides a breakdown of the various costs: [...(5)(6)](7).
Development and other costs estimated at DEM 1,9 million (ECU 0,9 million), with trial-operation costs amounting to DEM 2,5 million (ECU 1,2 million).
The accuracy of those figures was verified by a firm of accountants.
Riedel-de Haën was granted the following investment aid:
1. a grant of DEM 4 million (ECU 2 million) from the Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund (letter of 25 April 1994) as part of the Economy and Environment Scheme, which had been approved;
2. a grant of DEM 4 million (ECU 2 million) from the Federal Foundation for the Environment (letter of 20 May 1994) under a scheme which at the time had not been approved by the Commission.
According to Germany, instalments amounting to DEM 2,9 million (ECU 1,4 million) have been paid over.
3. Comments of the German authorities
By letter of 28 August 1998, Germany submitted the comments set out below.
It maintained that the plant was used exclusively for environmental protection purposes.
Moreover, it was alleged that the Economy and Environment Scheme had already been authorised by the Commission and declared to be compatible with the common market. A copy of the Scheme, the Commission's authorisation of it and the notice authorising it published in the Official Journal of the European Communities were appended.
The Federal Foundation for the Environment's aid was in principle compatible with the Community Guidelines.
Moreover, the grants could also be considered aid for research and development within the meaning of the Community framework for aid for research and development(8).
In addition, Germany expressed the view that the Commission could not require the aid to be repaid since the company's legitimate expectations must be met.
Germany presented an excerpt from the Commercial Register entry for Riedel-de Haën AG and Riedel-de Haën GmbH, the annual report for 1997 and a list of the company's fixed assets, in particular the plant producing halogenated hydrocarbon, together with a plan of the production site in Seelze.
A table of the project costs and a breakdown of those costs viewed from various standpoints were also presented. The accuracy of the data had been verified by a firm of accountants. To this data was appended a comparison of the costs, contrasting the current supply costs with the costs of supplies in the new plant. A firm of accountants had verified part of the costs forming the basis of those calculations.
Explanations were also provided by Germany regarding the operations of the incineration and recycling plant and the difference between the old and new bromine-recovery plant. A second environmental impact assessment on Riedel-de Haën from 1995 was also provided, together with the report of an expert on the generation of contaminants by the new plant, as well as supplementary materials. A Riedel-de Haën brochure entitled Recycling plant for bromine residues - verification of environmental compatibility was also lodged.
A copy of the 17th Federal Emission Protection Order (BimSchV)(9) and Technical Instructions (TA) "Air 86" was appended to the foregoing documents.
In addition, a copy of Riedel-de Haën's application for aid under Council Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92(10) which establishes the LIFE programme, a copy of the Commission's refusal and a copy of the company's letter and reply were presented.
A copy of Riedel-de Haën's applications for aid to the Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund and the Federal Foundation for the Environment was also appended.
The results of the environmental impact assessment were also notified.
4. Assessment
4.1. The recipient of the aid
Riedel-de Haën is a former subsidiary of Hoechst AG and since 4 November 1996 has belonged to the American group AlliedSignal Inc., Morristown, New Jersey.
In 1997 it had an average of 1256 employees and generated turnover amounting to DEM 409,2 million (ECU 204,6 million) with total assets of DEM 459,1 million (ECU 229,5 million). When measured according to the Commission Recommendation of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises(11), Riedel-de Haën is a large enterprise.
The company is located outside the assisted areas in Lower Saxony.
It is a chemical enterprise operating in the following fields: inorganic chemicals, laboratory chemicals, organic chemicals, technical preservation products, electrochemicals, luminescent pigments, photographic dyes, pharmaceuticals and medicinal products.
4.2. Aid
The Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund and in the Federal Foundation for the Environment are public institutions that finance their grants of aid, including the present grants, from State resources.
By letter of 28 August 1998, Germany called in question the status of the Foundation as a State institution. In response to this, the Commission again brought out the points which were relevant to its decision: the Foundation was set up by a federal law(12); its capital, amounting to over DEM 2,5 billion (ECU 102 billion), derived from the privatisation of the former State enterprise Salzgitter AG. Paragraph 2 of the Law states that the Foundation's object is to provide financial support for environmental projects, particularly when they are implemented by SMEs. Under Paragraph 5(2) of the Law, the Foundation's board members are appointed by the Federal Government and they decide, inter alia, what assistance will be granted. In granting aid, the Foundation does not have a generally applicable and automatic procedure on the basis of objective criteria and in actual fact it is the German authorities who, with the assistance of the board, take the decision according to their discretion. Lastly, under Paragraph 3 of the Law, the Foundation is audited by the Federal Court of Auditors. Having regard to all those circumstances and to the fact that Article 92(1) applies to "any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever", the Commission concludes that the Foundation's assistance constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 92(1). In fact, Germany has in the meantime notified the Foundation's amended rules under Article 93(3), which have been authorised by the Commission as State aid compatible with the common market.
In the various sectors of its activities Riedel-de Haën competes with chemical enterprises in other Member States. Its products feature in intra-Community trade. In 1997 it generated 52 % of its turnover on foreign markets, 67 % of that being in Europe. The aid lowers its investment costs considerably, giving it an advantage over competitors from other Member States who do not receive such investment aid and is liable to prejudice their competitive position.
Regarding bromine recovery, Riedel-de Haën may well be in competition with other businesses that operate this kind of plant. In a study presented by Germany(13), it was estimated that at least 10 bromine-recovery plants were needed in western Europe. The grants of aid give Riedel-de Haen an advantage over businesses in other Member States that also have that kind of plant but no aid and are liable to affect their competitive position adversely.
Both grants of aid are thus liable to distort trade between Member States and therefore constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 92(1).
4.3. Obligation of notification
Aid from the Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund
On 1 December 1993 Riedel-de Haën applied to the Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund for financial support. By letter of 25 April 1994 the Fund made a grant under the Economy and Environment Scheme of DEM 4 million (ECU 2 million) towards project costs amounting to DEM 21,4 million (ECU 10,7 million). It was intended that the investment should be completed on 31 December 1996. According to Germany, at this time funding amounting only to DEM 8,2 million (ECU 4,1 million) had been expended on the project, of which DEM 6,5 million (ECU 3,2 million) was accounted for by investment costs. Under the aid contract, Riedel-de Haën therefore should not have received the full amount of the DEM 4 million (ECU 2 million).
In its Decision initiating the procedure under Article 93(2), the Commission has already expressed its finding that the Fund's grant was not made on the terms fixed in the Economy and Environment Scheme that the Commission authorised on 13 September 1991 for the period 1991 to 1994. Under the Scheme, the Fund was entitled to provide aid for investments for environmental projects. The thrust is clearly on development and demonstration projects which involve "ecological added value for the Community". Under point 2 of the Scheme "only expenditure which basically exceeds existing legal requirements may be regarded as eligible for assistance".
In spite of being requested to do so by the Commission, Germany has not indicated which part of the investment manifestly exceeds the legal requirements(14). It is thus unclear whether parts of the project were eligible within the meaning of the Scheme and, if so, which parts. It is clear that the Fund has not acted in accordance with point 2 of the Scheme. At the meeting held in Brussels held on 28 July, the German delegation furthermore confirmed that no special investment was required in order to exceed existing legal requirements.
Regarding the comments sent by Germany by letter of 28 August 1998, the Commission sees no reason to review its examination of the Scheme and refers Germany to the Decision it has already adopted. The fact is that a review of that examination would merely confirm that Decision.
The Economy and Environment Scheme for Lower Saxony thus provided no grounds for the Fund to grant Riedel-de Haën the aid in question. The grant must therefore be considered an individual grant of aid and as such should have been notified by Germany under Article 93(3). The aid was therefore granted unlawfully.
Aid from the Federal Foundation for the Environment
On 10 September 1993 Riedel-de Haën applied to the Foundation for financial support. Since the Foundation, in its examination, proceeded on the basis of an application of 10 September 1993 it may be that the company altered its application to a subsequent date. By letter of 20 May 1994 the Foundation granted aid amounting to DEM 4 million (ECU 2 million).
The Commission has already found in its Decision initiating the procedure under Article 93(2) that the aid does not come under an authorised scheme. Germany has not disputed this view. It follows that Germany has failed to comply with its duty of notification under Article 93(3) for this aid, too. The aid was therefore granted unlawfully.
The Commission further points out that the Foundation made the grant of aid conditional on the company's providing from its own funds DEM 15,7 million (ECU 7,6 million) of the probable costs of the project amounting in all to DEM 19,7 million (ECU 9,8 million). The aid granted by the Fund reduces the burden on the company in so far as the condition has not been fulfilled.
4.4. Exemptions
The aid specified in Article 92(1) is incompatible with the common market. Article 92(2) and (3) sets out the conditions to be met if aid is to be considered compatible with the common market.
The Commission has examined whether the grants of aid amounting to DEM 8 million (ECU 4 million) qualify under the latter provisions for exemption from the general prohibition on aid.
Article 92(2) does not apply since the assistance does not constitute aid having a social character, granted to individual consumers, aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters, or aid granted to the economy of certain areas of Germany affected by the division of Germany.
Article 92(3)(a) and the exemptions for regions in Article 92(3)(c) are not applicable since the company is not located in an assisted area.
Moreover, there are no grounds for granting an exemption under Article 92(3)(b) since, in the Commission's opinion, the project does not meet the criteria normally applicable for it to be treated as an important project of common European interest and the aid is not intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State.
Likewise, there is no question of exemption under Article 92(3)(d) since the aid is not intended to promote culture or conserve heritage.
The only provisions that might be applicable are the first part of Article 92(3)(c), under which aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities can be exempted where it does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.
4.5. Compatibility with the Community Guidelines
Germany maintains that the aid is to be considered investment made for environmental protection. The conditions on which investment can be considered aid for environmental protection such as is compatible with the common market are laid down in Community Guidelines.
The current Community Guidelines were published on 10 March 1994. Since both grants of aid were made after that date, namely on 25 April and 20 May 1994, the Commission considered them in the light of the current Community Guidelines.
Germany argues that the plant is not for production purposes but is exclusively intended for environmental protection. Moreover, the company is not under an obligation to construct a residue-processing plant. Consequently, they conclude that it was permissible to grant the total project costs - namely investment costs including development and other costs - as aid for environmental protection.
The Commission cannot share this standpoint. In its view, the new plant does indeed involve the production process. Riedel-de Haën's production creates hazardous liquid wastes that it is under an obligation to dispose of; disposal can thus be considered part of the production process. The new plant enables the waste to be disposed of on-site and is thus part of the production process. Moreover, the bromine-recovery plant, which forms a significant part of the processing plant, recovers major quantities of bromine that can be directly returned to the production process.
Under point 3.2.1 of the Community Guidelines, aid for investment can be granted for investment in land, buildings, plant and equipment. Under those provisions only the investment costs of DEM 16,3 million (ECU 8,1 million) might possibly be considered aid for environmental protection, but not the development and other costs or the costs of trial operations. Moreover, point 3.2.1 states unequivocally that "the eligible costs must be strictly confined to the extra investment costs necessary to meet environmental objectives. General investment costs not attributable to environmental protection must be excluded". It was therefore necessary for Germany to establish which part of the investment costs were attributable to environmental protection.
Proceeding on those principles, the Commission has concluded that the following aid could be considered aid for environmental protection:
1. investment to help firms adapt to new mandatory standards or to promote quicker compliance with those standards;
2. investment to support measures that lower emissions and significantly exceed mandatory standards;
3. investments that, notwithstanding the absence of mandatory standards, are adopted on the basis of agreements whereby companies intensify their efforts to reduce environmental pollution, notwithstanding the absence of a statutory obligation or before such an obligation comes into effect.
Investment aid to help firms adapt to new mandatory standards
With regard to the first category, the Community Guidelines provide in point 3.2.3.A that, "in keeping with the 'polluter pays' principle, no aid should normally be given towards the cost of complying with mandatory standards in new plant".
The Commission points out that the residue-processing plant forms a new investment, not the replacement of existing plant. Furthermore, Riedel-de Haën was already operating a bromine-recovery plant. According to Germany's information, this plant had been decommissioned as early as 1985 and, from a technical standpoint, was significantly inferior to the new plant integrated into the residue-processing plant. Consequently, the Commission does not consider the new plant as a replacement for the existing plant.
It thus follows that the entire residue-processing plant undoubtedly constitutes new plant for the purposes of the Community Guidelines. It is therefore impossible to authorise the aid as investment to adapt to new mandatory standards since this is contrary to the "polluter pays" principle.
Investment aid to firms going significantly beyond mandatory standards
Germany maintains that the aid constitutes an incentive to improve on mandatory standards. However, the Commission, in its position of 28 August 1998, concluded that Germany granted the aid only partly for this objective.
The general emissions standards for projects of this nature are laid down in the 17th Federal Emission Protection Order. The Order requires the Land authorities to adopt decisions laying down the applicable environmental standards, taking into account the characteristics of each individual project. In the present case the Government of the Land of Lower Saxony fixed the mandatory standards in a decision of 15 March 1991 applicable to Riedel-de Haën's site and confirmed them in its decision of 11 August 1996 granting the authorisation.
The requirements laid down by the Land Government of Hannover in its decision go beyond the requirements of the Order. While the decision fixes mean values for emissions in terms of half hourly readings, the emission mean values in the Order are only fixed for daily readings. Germany therefore considers that the company is improving on the requirements laid down in mandatory standards.
The Commission does not share this view. Since the decision requires the company to comply with mean values, those values are obviously the mandatory standards. The only part of the investments eligible for aid is that part relating to the measures going beyond the mandatory standards in the decision.
The Commission therefore requested Germany to state whether a significant reduction in emissions below the prescribed mean values was linked to increased costs and, if so, how much. However, Germany has failed to indicate which part of the investment served to improve on the standards, either those fixed in the decision or in the Order. In fact, at the meeting in Brussels on 28 July 1998 the German delegation confirmed that no special investments were needed to comply with the values specified in the decision that improved on the values in the Order.
Consequently, the Commission cannot authorise the assistance as investment aid to encourage firms to improve on mandatory standards since Germany has failed to establish that there are any investment costs eligible for aid.
Aid in the absence of mandatory environmental standards
By letter of 28 August 1998, Germany maintained that the aid had been granted for environmental protection in fields in which there were no mandatory standards.
They claimed that the company had hitherto disposed of its residues in a special-waste incinerator. Recycling the residues instead of incinerating them would generate significantly lower levels of gaseous and solid wastes. Regarding hazardous wastes, the Order prescribed threshold values for concentrations only but not for the relevant quantities. Consequently, the investment would result in an appreciable improvement in environmental performance in a field in which there are no mandatory standards.
Under point 3.2.3.C of the Community Guidelines, in fields in which there are no mandatory standards or other legal obligations on firms to protect the environment, firms undertaking investment that will significantly improve on their environmental performance or match that of firms in other Member States in which mandatory standards apply may be granted aid subject to the same condition of proportionality as for going beyond existing standards, as indicated in point 3.2.3.B of the Guidelines.
Under point 3.2.3.B of the Community Guidelines, the level of aid actually granted for exceeding standards must be in proportion to the improvement of the environment that is achieved and to the investment necessary for achieving the improvement. It follows that aid cannot be granted if, in comparison to the plant that would in any case have been installed, an improvement in the environment does not occur or the investment is made on commercial grounds and not in order to achieve an improvement in environmental conditions.
In order words, the essential purpose of this part of the Community Guidelines is to allow State aid for the purpose of encouraging a firm to carry out supplementary investment to secure an improvement in environmental performance. For this, both positive financial incentives, i.e. aid, and disincentives, i.e. taxes and levies, are considered appropriate (Community Guidelines, point 1.2). The ultimate objective of investment incentives in this sphere is to facilitate a gradual improvement in the quality of the environment (Community Guidelines, point 1.5.1). The Community Guidelines are not intended to allow the grant of State aid for a general investment which a company would in any case have made on business grounds. It is laid down in point 3.2.1 of the Community Guidelines that the eligible costs must be strictly confined to the extra investment costs necessary to meet environmental objectives.
On the basis of the objectives fixed in point 3.2.3.C of the Community Guidelines, the Commission concludes that in the case of a new plant a firm's comparable, non-equivalent activities cannot form the basis for assessing aid for environmental protection; nor can a firm's processes that are least harmful to the environment while only just above the statutory minimum. That would be directly contrary to the objective of the Community Guidelines. Instead, the environmental impact of a particular plant must be compared with the impact of a similar and comparable plant which the firm would in all likelihood have contemplated on economic considerations.
Applying those principles, the Commission concludes that a comparison between disposal in a residue-processing plant and an incinerator is only justified if the company would have made the investment on environmental grounds, not on economic considerations. It is only on those conditions that the aid forms an incentive for environmental protection, not a general incentive for investment. However, in the Commission's view there is sufficient evidence for an economic objective for this investment.
As has been mentioned above, the company is under an obligation to dispose of its noxious liquid waste. According to Germany, the liquid waste must be incinerated since final disposal is impossible. Incineration can be carried out in local special-waste incinerators. Because of their high bromine content, the residues can only be incinerated in small quantities as supplements to other wastes.
In future incinerator operators might possibly refuse to dispose of such wastes because waste with a high bromine content leads to significant deterioration in the plant. It can therefore be assumed that the disposal costs of waste with a high bromine content will rise appreciably in the near future. The new plant would mean that the company was not dependent upon the price policy of the operator of the special-waste incinerator and would be able to avoid dependence by having the company dispose of its liquid waste itself.
In addition the recovery plant will enable Riedel-de Haën to recycle significant quantities of substances each year including 330 tonnes of bromine, 440 tonnes of potassium chloride and 160 tonnes of potassium fluoride and to use them again directly in the manufacturing process. This could allow the company to reduce its production costs appreciably.
Lastly, the company will save the costs of transporting its liquid waste from its site to the special-waste incinerator. According to Germany, considerable costs are involved.
The Commission cannot agree with Germany's view that the advantages for the environment provided by the plant are that disposal of the residues in the special-waste incinerator is cheaper than processing in special plant. Germany has merely provided the Commission with an imprecise calculation to the effect that additional costs of [...] * per year would be incurred. The conclusive nature of this calculation and its accuracy have not been established, however, nor have they have been confirmed by the firm of accountants in its verification, which merely stated that the accuracy of the costs of disposal of the residues in 1996 and 1997 had been duly established.
Moreover, Riedel-de Haën would be the only German company with a bromine-recovery plant. According to a report lodged by Germany, the company would be able to dispose of bromine residues for small and medium-sized enterprises. The view taken in the report was that "if the project were carried out, it would be highly interesting to many businesses". The new plant is designed to process [...] * tonnes of residues per year. Germany has established that in 1996 and 1997 only [...] * tonnes of liquid wastes could be disposed of. The company could therefore acquire new business, with additional income and economies of scale.
Those considerations establish clearly that Riedel-de Haën, in investing in the recycling plant, was motivated by economic, not environmental, considerations. A comparison of the quantities of harmful residues from such plant with those of an incinerator is thus inappropriate.
Proceeding on the basis of the abovementioned considerations, the Commission must thus verify whether Riedel-de Haën intended, on environmental grounds, to make specified investments in the residue-processing plant, which increased the investment costs, while it must be assumed, in view of the plant's environmental impact, that the company would in any event have installed it on purely economic grounds.
According to the expert report submitted by Germany, gaseous and solid wastes are reduced because, in the incineration process, 11 % by volume of oxygen concentration in dry waste gases occurs while in a residue-processing plant the oxygen concentration is usually 3 % by volume. Riedel-de Haën's plant operates with an oxygen concentration of 3 % by volume. The amount of waste gases generated by this plant is in fact an operational characteristic and thus does not produce any improvement over other plant of this kind.
The Commission points out that Germany has tried to argue that these are necessary costs for an appreciable improvement in environmental terms in a field where there are no mandatory standards. It has, however, failed to prove that, by opting to invest in a residue-processing plant, the investment was made exclusively or mainly for the purposes of environmental protection.
The Commission is consequently unable to regard this support as investment aid for environmental protection in fields where there are no mandatory standards, since Germany has failed to prove the existence of eligible investment costs.
Operating aid
Under point 3.4 of the Community Guidelines, in accordance with long-standing policy, the Commission does not normally approve operating aid which relieves firms of costs resulting from the pollution or nuisance they cause. However, the Commission may make an exception to this principle in certain well-defined circumstances. In the field of waste management, the public financing of the additional costs of selective collection, recovery and treatment of waste for the benefit of businesses as well as consumers may involve State aid. Under point 1.5.3 of the Community Guidelines, such plant can be operated by semi-public bodies whose service costs are met by consumers. Taking account of all the circumstances of the case, on the basis of the existing information and in view of the nature of the procedure and on the basis of the preceding analysis, the Commission considers that the aid at issue in this procedure could not have been granted on the basis of point 3.4 of the Community Guidelines.
4.6. Other considerations
By letter of 19 March 1993, Riedel-de Haën asked the Commission for aid under the LIFE programme. According to Germany, the programme was not in fact financed by the Commission because funding was lacking but the company assumed that the Commission had recognised the project's innovatory characteristics.
However, the Commission certainly did not recognise this as an innovatory project and accordingly, by letter of 30 July 1996, refused the application while in fact adding that if the plan were amended there would be a prospect of Community assistance in the succeeding year.
Germany also took the view that the aid for R& D could be exempted. However, the Commission considers that there is no justification for this aid. It refers to the brochure produced by Riedel-de Haën Recycling plant for bromine residues - verification of environmental compatibility, according to which the technology in question had been developed as early as 1989 by a US engineering firm. Nevertheless, State aid was granted on 25 April and 20 May 1994. Moreover, Germany has failed to demonstrate that there are any costs that could be considered eligible for research and development aid under the Community Guidelines.
5. Conclusions
It is clear that both grants of aid are at odds with the applicable Community Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and therefore, in relation to the environmental-protection criterion, are not compatible with the common market.
The project must be considered a general investment project. Riedel-de Haën is a large enterprise located outside an assisted area. However, investment aid for such a firm cannot be exempted under Article 93(3)(c).
These grants of aid, which are not covered by exempting provisions, adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. Moreover, they would give Riedel-de Haën an unjustified advantage over its competitors that do not receive assistance.
The aid is not compatible with the common market since it was unlawfully granted for the purposes of Article 93(3) and does not fulfil the conditions for the exempting provisions in Article 92(2) and (3).
The grants of aid must therefore be terminated and repaid, in accordance with the terms set out by the European Court of Justice in its judgment in Case C-301/87(15). Repayments to be effected must make good the distortion of competition resulting from the grant of the aid, notwithstanding any formal restructuring carried out within the group. If for any reason the repayment cannot be made by Riedel-de Haën AG or its successor, the aid must be recovered from the group's subsidiaries continuing the business and/or exploiting the productive assets acquired by Riedel-de Haën through the aid, namely Riedel-de Haën GmbH.
The repayment must be made in accordance with the procedures and rules of German law, in particular those concerning interest on the State's outstanding claims, to the effect that interest is payable from the time when the unlawful aid was granted. This measure is necessary in order to restore the original situation by making good all financial advantages received by the assisted enterprise from the point when the aid was unlawfully paid,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The aid of DEM 4 million from the Lower Saxony Economic Assistance Fund and the aid of DEM 4 million from the Federal Foundation for the Environment have been granted unlawfully to Riedel-de Haën AG, Seelze, and are not compatible with the common market.
Article 2
Germany shall take the necessary measures to recover the aid paid to Riedel-de Haën AG or its successor. If this proves impossible, Germany shall take the necessary measures to recover the aid specified in Article 1 from Riedel-de Haën GmbH.
The aid shall be recovered in accordance with the procedures and rules of German law. Interest shall be payable on the sums recovered from the time when they were granted until actual repayment is made. The rate shall be that used by the Commission during the period in question to calculate the net grant equivalent of regional aid.
Article 3
Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Done at Brussels, 22 December 1998.
|
[
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2004/81/EC
of 29 April 2004
on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular point 3 of Article 63 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 European Economic and Social Committee, (3)
Having consulted the Committee of the Regions,
Whereas:
(1)
The framing of a common immigration policy, including the definition of the conditions of entry and residence for foreigners and measures to combat illegal immigration, is a constituent element of the European Union's objective of creating an area of freedom, security and justice.
(2)
At its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999, the European Council expressed its determination to tackle illegal immigration at source, for example by targeting those who engage in trafficking of human beings and the economic exploitation of migrants. It called on the Member States to concentrate their efforts on detecting and dismantling criminal networks while protecting the rights of victims.
(3)
An indication of the growing concern about this phenomenon at international level was the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of a Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, supplemented by a Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, and a Protocol Against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air. These were signed by the Community and the 15 Member States in December 2000.
(4)
This Directive is without prejudice to the protection granted to refugees, to beneficiaries of subsidiary protection and persons seeking international protection under international refugee law and without prejudice to other human rights instruments.
(5)
This Directive is without prejudice to other provisions on the protection of victims, witnesses or persons who are particularly vulnerable. Nor does it detract from the prerogatives of the Member States as regards the right of residence granted on humanitarian or other grounds.
(6)
This Directive respects fundamental rights and complies with the principles recognised for example by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
(7)
Member States should give effect to the provision of this Directive without discrimination on the basis of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or belief, political or other opinions, membership of a national minority, fortune, birth, disabilities, age or sexual orientation.
(8)
At European level, Council Directive 2002/90/EC of 28 November 2002 defining the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence (4) and Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA of 19 July 2002 on combating trafficking in human beings (5) were adopted to strengthen the prevention and the fight against the above offences.
(9)
This Directive introduces a residence permit intended for victims of trafficking in human beings or, if a Member State decides to extend the scope of this Directive, to third-country nationals who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration to whom the residence permit offers a sufficient incentive to cooperate with the competent authorities while including certain conditions to safeguard against abuse.
(10)
To this end, it is necessary to lay down the criteria for issuing a residence permit, the conditions of stay and the grounds for non-renewal and withdrawal. The right to stay under this Directive is subject to conditions and is of provisional nature.
(11)
The third country nationals concerned should be informed of the possibility of obtaining this residence permit and be given a period in which to reflect on their position. This should help put them in a position to reach a well-informed decision as to whether or not to cooperate with the competent authorities, which may be the police, prosecution and judicial authorities (in view of the risks this may entail), so that they cooperate freely and hence more effectively.
(12)
Given their vulnerability, the third-country nationals concerned should be granted the assistance provided by this Directive. This assistance should allow them to recover and escape the influence of the perpetrators of the offences. The medical treatment to be provided to the third-country nationals covered by this Directive also includes, where appropriate, psychotherapeutical care.
(13)
A decision on the issue of a residence permit for at least six months or its renewal has to be taken by the competent authorities, who should consider if the relevant conditions are fulfilled.
(14)
This Directive should apply without prejudice to the activities carried out by the competent authorities in all phases of the relevant national proceedings, and in particular when investigating the offences concerned.
(15)
Member States should consider authorising the stay on other grounds, according to their national legislation, for third-country nationals who may fall within the scope of this Directive, but who do not, or no longer, fulfil the conditions set by it, for the members of his/her family or for persons treated as members of his/her family.
(16)
To enable the third-country nationals concerned to gain their independence and not return to the criminal network, the holders of the residence permit should be authorised, under the conditions set by this Directive, to have access to the labour market and pursue vocational training and education. In authorising access of the holders of the residence permit to vocational training and education, Member States should consider in particular the likely duration of stay.
(17)
The participation of the third-country nationals concerned to programmes and schemes, already existing or to be introduced, should contribute to their recovery of a normal social life.
(18)
If the third-country nationals concerned submit an application for another kind of residence permit, Member States take a decision on the basis of ordinary national aliens' law. When examining such an application, Member States should consider the fact that the third-country nationals concerned have been granted the residence permit issued under this Directive.
(19)
Member States should provide the Commission, with respect to the implementation of this Directive, with the information which has been identified in the framework of the activities developed with regard to the collection and treatment of statistical data concerning matters falling within the area of Justice and Home Affairs.
(20)
Since the objective of introducing a residence permit for the third-country nationals concerned who cooperate in the fight against trafficking in human beings cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at the Community level, the Community may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
(21)
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland, annexed to the Treaty on the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Community and without prejudice to Article 4 of the said Protocol, these Member States are not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and are not bound by it or subject to its application.
(22)
In accordance with Article 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, Denmark does not take part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
Purpose
The purpose of this Directive is to define the conditions for granting residence permits of limited duration, linked to the length of the relevant national proceedings, to third-country nationals who cooperate in the fight against trafficking in human beings or against action to facilitate illegal immigration.
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Directive:
(a)
‘third-country national’ means any person who is not a citizen of the Union within the meaning of Article 17(1) of the Treaty;
(b)
‘action to facilitate illegal immigration’ covers cases such as those referred to in Articles 1 and 2 of Directive 2002/90/EC;
(c)
‘trafficking in human beings’ covers cases such as those referred to in Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA;
(d)
‘measure to enforce an expulsion order’ means any measure taken by a Member State to enforce the decision of the competent authorities ordering the expulsion of a third-country national;
(e)
‘residence permit’ means any authorisation issued by a Member State, allowing a third-country national who fulfils the conditions set by this Directive to stay legally on its territory.
(f)
‘unaccompanied minors’ means third-country nationals below the age of eighteen, who arrive on the territory of the Member State unaccompanied by an adult responsible for them whether by law or custom, and for as long as they are not effectively taken into the care of such a person, or minors who are left unaccompanied after they have entered the territory of the Member State.
Article 3
Scope
1. Member States shall apply this Directive to the third-country nationals who are, or have been victims of offences related to the trafficking in human beings, even if they have illegally entered the territory of the Member States.
2. Member States may apply this Directive to the third-country nationals who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration.
3. This Directive shall apply to the third-country nationals concerned having reached the age of majority set out by the law of the Member State concerned.
By way of derogation, Member States may decide to apply this Directive to minors under the conditions laid down in their national law.
Article 4
More favourable provisions
This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining more favourable provisions for the persons covered by this Directive.
CHAPTER II
PROCEDURE FOR ISSUING THE RESIDENCE PERMIT
Article 5
Information given to the third-country nationals concerned
When the competent authorities of the Member States take the view that a third-country national may fall into the scope of this Directive, they shall inform the person concerned of the possibilities offered under this Directive.
Member States may decide that such information may also be provided by a non-governmental organisation or an association specifically appointed by the Member State concerned.
Article 6
Reflection period
1. Member States shall ensure that the third-country nationals concerned are granted a reflection period allowing them to recover and escape the influence of the perpetrators of the offences so that they can take an informed decision as to whether to cooperate with the competent authorities.
The duration and starting point of the period referred to in the first subparagraph shall be determined according to national law.
2. During the reflection period and while awaiting the decision of the competent authorities, the third-country nationals concerned shall have access to the treatment referred to in Article 7 and it shall not be possible to enforce any expulsion order against them.
3. The reflection period shall not create any entitlement to residence under this Directive.
4. The Member State may at any time terminate the reflection period if the competent authorities have established that the person concerned has actively, voluntarily and on his/her own initiative renewed contact with the perpetrators of the offences referred to in Article 2(b) and (c) or for reasons relating to public policy and to the protection of national security.
Article 7
Treatment granted before the issue of the residence permit
1. Member States shall ensure that the third-country nationals concerned who do not have sufficient resources are granted standards of living capable of ensuring their subsistence and access to emergency medical treatment. They shall attend to the special needs of the most vulnerable, including, where appropriate and if provided by national law, psychological assistance.
2. Member States shall take due account of the safety and protection needs of the third-country nationals concerned when applying this Directive, in accordance with national law.
3. Member States shall provide the third-country nationals concerned, where appropriate, with translation and interpreting services.
4. Member States may provide the third-country nationals concerned with free legal aid, if established and under the conditions set by national law.
Article 8
Issue and renewal of the residence permit
1. After the expiry of the reflection period, or earlier if the competent authorities are of the view that the third-country national concerned has already fulfilled the criterion set out in subparagraph (b), Member States shall consider:
(a)
the opportunity presented by prolonging his/her stay on its territory for the investigations or the judicial proceedings, and
(b)
whether he/she has shown a clear intention to cooperate and
(c)
whether he/she has severed all relations with those suspected of acts that might be included among the offences referred to in Article 2(b) and (c).
2. For the issue of the residence permit and without prejudice to the reasons relating to public policy and to the protection of national security, the fulfilment of the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 shall be required.
3. Without prejudice to the provisions on withdrawal referred to in Article 14, the residence permit shall be valid for at least six months. It shall be renewed if the conditions set out in paragraph 2 of this Article continue to be satisfied.
CHAPTER III
TREATMENT OF HOLDERS OF THE RESIDENCE PERMIT
Article 9
Treatment granted after the issue of the residence permit
1. Member States shall ensure that holders of a residence permit who do not have sufficient resources are granted at least the same treatment provided for in Article 7.
2. Member States shall provide necessary medical or other assistance to the third-country nationals concerned, who do not have sufficient resources and have special needs, such as pregnant women, the disabled or victims of sexual violence or other forms of violence and, if Member States have recourse to the option provided for in Article 3(3), minors.
Article 10
Minors
If Member States have recourse to the option provided for in Article 3(3), the following provisions shall apply:
(a)
Member States shall take due account of the best interests of the child when applying this Directive. They shall ensure that the procedure is appropriate to the age and maturity of the child. In particular, if they consider that it is in the best interest of the child, they may extend the reflection period.
(b)
Member States shall ensure that minors have access to the educational system under the same conditions as nationals. Member States may stipulate that such access must be limited to the public education system.
(c)
In the case of third-country nationals who are unaccompanied minors, Member States shall take the necessary steps to establish their identity, nationality and the fact that they are unaccompanied. They shall make every effort to locate their families as quickly as possible and take the necessary steps immediately to ensure legal representation, including representation in criminal proceedings, if necessary, in accordance with national law.
Article 11
Work, vocational training and education
1. Member States shall define the rules under which holders of the residence permit shall be authorised to have access to the labour market, to vocational training and education.
Such access shall be limited to the duration of the residence permit.
2. The conditions and the procedures for authorising access to the labour market, to vocational training and education shall be determined, under the national legislation, by the competent authorities.
Article 12
Programmes or schemes for the third-country nationals concerned
1. The third-country nationals concerned shall be granted access to existing programmes or schemes, provided by the Member States or by non-governmental organisations or associations which have specific agreements with the Member States, aimed at their recovery of a normal social life, including, where appropriate, courses designed to improve their professional skills, or preparation of their assisted return to their country of origin.
Member States may provide specific programmes or schemes for the third-country nationals concerned.
2. Where a Member State decides to introduce and implement the programmes or schemes referred to in paragraph 1, it may make the issue of the residence permit or its renewal conditional upon the participation in the said programmes or schemes.
CHAPTER IV
NON-RENEWAL AND WITHDRAWAL
Article 13
Non-renewal
1. The residence permit issued on the basis of this Directive shall not be renewed if the conditions of Article 8(2) cease to be satisfied or if a decision adopted by the competent authorities has terminated the relevant proceedings.
2. When the residence permit issued on the basis of this Directive expires ordinary aliens' law shall apply.
Article 14
Withdrawal
The residence permit may be withdrawn at any time if the conditions for the issue are no longer satisfied. In particular, the residence permit may be withdrawn in the following cases:
(a)
if the holder has actively, voluntarily and in his/her own initiative renewed contacts with those suspected of committing the offences referred to in Article 2(b) and (c); or
(b)
if the competent authority believes that the victim's cooperation is fraudulent or that his/her complaint is fraudulent or wrongful; or
(c)
for reasons relating to public policy and to the protection of national security; or
(d)
when the victim ceases to cooperate; or
(e)
when the competent authorities decide to discontinue the proceedings.
CHAPTER V
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 15
Safeguard clause
This Directive shall apply without prejudice to specific national rules concerning the protection of victims and witnesses.
Article 16
Report
1. No later than 6 August 2008, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive in the Member States and propose any amendments that are necessary. The Member States shall send the Commission any information relevant to the preparation of this report.
2. After presenting the report referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council at least every three years on the application of this Directive in the Member States.
Article 17
Transposal
The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive before 6 August 2006. They shall immediately inform the Commission accordingly.
When the Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States.
Article 18
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 19
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community.
Done at Luxembourg, 29 April 2004.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 9 April 1986
concerning animal health conditions and veterinary certification for imports of fresh meat from Uruguay
(86/192/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 animals and swine and fresh meat from third countries (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3768/85 (2), and in particular Article 16 thereof,
Whereas animal health conditions and veterinary certification requirements for imports of fresh meat from Uruguay have been established by Commission Decision 85/96/EEC (3), particularly as regards foot-and-mouth disease;
Whereas recently evolved scientific conclusions in respect of the survival of foot-and-mouth disease virus in certain categories of fresh meat suggest that a general review of import conditions for this meat from countries where the disease is endemic should take place;
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
1. Member States shall authorize the importation of fresh meat from Uruguay as follows:
(a) de-boned fresh meat of bovine animals, sheep and goats, excluding offal, from which have been removed the major accessible lymphatic glands, which presents the guarantees laid down in the accompanying animal health certificate corresponding with the specimen given in Annex A;
(b) fresh meat of domestic solipeds which presents the guarantees laid down in the accompanying animal health certificate corresponding with the specimen given in Annex B;
(c) the following offal of bovine animals:
- completely trimmed hearts,
- completely trimmed diaphragmatic muscles,
- completely trimmed tongues with epithelium and without bone, cartilage or tonsils,
which presents the guarantees laid down in the accompanying animal health certificate corresponding with the specimen given in Annex C.
2. Member States shall prohibit the import of categories of fresh meat from Uruguay other than those mentioned in paragraph 1.
Article 2
1. By way of derogation from Article 1 (2), Member States may also authorize the importation of certain kinds of offal of bovine animals:
- completely trimmed livers,
- completely trimmed masseter muscles,
- trimmed lungs,
- other trimmed offal without bone or cartilage,
presenting at least the guarantees laid down in the accompanying animal health certificate corresponding with the specimen given in Annex D. Masseter muscles may be used either for human consumption or in the manufacture of pet food. Lungs, livers and other offal are to be used in the manufacture of pet food only.
2. The authorization, provided for in paragraph 1, to import the offal described above for human consumption or for use in the manufacture of pet food can only be given to establishments especially approved for this purpose by the Member States. Member States shall immediately inform the Commission of the approval and the conditions of approval of such establishments.
In any case, the authorization can only be given to a processing establishment approved by the national authorities and under continuous veterinary supervision and on condition that a guarantee is provided that the raw material will be used only for the specified purpose without risk of contact with any product which remains unsterilized, and that it will not leave the establishment in its
original state, except in case of necessity where it is consigned to an animal carcase destruction plant under the control of an official veterinarian. In addition the following minimum conditions shall be met:
(a) on dispatch to Community territory, the raw material shall be enclosed in leak-proof and sealed containers. In case masseter muscles are used for human consumption, the cartons, the containers and the accompanying documents must be marked: 'Use restricted to the manufacture of cooked meat based products'. In case livers, masseter muscles, lungs or other offal are used in the manufacture of pet food, the cartons, the containers and the accompanying documents must be marked: 'Use restricted to the manufacture of pet food'. In both cases, the containers and the accompanying documents shall bear the name and address of the consignee.
(b) the raw material shall be transported from the point of arrival in Community territory in containers or means of transport which are leak-proof, duly sealed, to the processing establishment approved by the national authorities and under continuous veterinary supervision.
However, in case of necessity, the raw material may be consigned temporarily to a cold store which is approved for the purpose and is under continuous veterinary supervision provided the above conditions are met;
(c) on arrival in the territory of the Member State of destination and before dispatch of the raw material to the approved processing establishment, notification of intending dispatch shall be made by the quickest route possible to the local official veterinarian;
(d) the raw material, during manufacture, shall be sterilized in tins in such a way as to achieve a minimum Fc value of 3 and a veterinary inspection shall be made to ensure that the finished product has actually achieved that value;
(e) the vehicles and containers or any other means of transport referred to in (b) and all equipment and utensils which come into contact with the raw material before sterilization shall be cleansed and disinfected and packagings shall be destroyed in an incinerator.
3. The authorization mentioned in paragraph 1 shall be notified to the competent authorities of Member States through which the raw material will pass.
Article 3
While continuing to prohibit routine vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease in their territories, Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom may, in respect of the de-bpned fresh meat of bovine animals, sheep and goats referred to in Article 1 (1) (a) and of the offal referred to in Article 1 (1) (c), retain the arrangements which they were applying to the importation of this fresh meat until the date of application of this Decision.
Article 4
This Decision shall not apply to imports of glands and organs authorized by the country of destination for pharmaceutical manufacturing purposes.
Article 5
This Decision shall apply with effect from 1 April 1986. However, the certificate currently used, amended if necessary in accordance with the provisions of this Decision, may be used until 30 June 1986.
Article 6
This Decision shall be reviewed in the light of the evolution of foot-and-mouth disease in the Community and in the event of any changes in the control measures taken for this disease.
Article 7
Decision 85/96/EEC is hereby repealed.
Article 8
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 9 April 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 904/2001
of 8 May 2001
fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 38th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 of 13 September 1999 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector(1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1527/2000(2), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 18(5) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000 of 13 July 2000 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar(3), requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar.
(2) Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question.
(3) Following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the 38th partial invitation to tender, the provisions set out in Article 1 should be adopted.
(4) 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 38th partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000 the maximum amount of the export refund is fixed at 42,964 EUR/100 kg.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 May 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 May 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 2 February 1995 on the recognition of the producer group for hops in northern France (Only the French text is authentic) (95/17/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1351/72 of 28 June 1972 on the recognition of producer groups for hops (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3858/87 (2), and in particular Article 2 (2) thereof,
Whereas Article 2 (2) of that Regulation lays down that a Member State may be authorized, upon application, to recognize a group whose registered areas comprise less than 60 hectares if the area is located in a recognized production region covering less than 100 hectares; whereas such an application has been submitted by the French authorities for the Société Coopérative Houblonnière du Nord, known as Coophounord;
Whereas these producers, who number 16, also fulfil all the other conditions required by Regulation (EEC) No 1351/72 to be recognized as a producer group;
Whereas, to avoid creating a situation whereby these producers might be handicapped compared to the other Community producers, the application should be accepted;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the Management Committee for Hops,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
France is hereby authorized to recognize the Coophounord producer group pursuant to Article 2 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1351/72.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.
Done at Brussels, 2 February 1995.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 407/2007
of 16 April 2007
imposing definitive anti-dumping measures and releasing the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain frozen strawberries originating in the People's Republic of China
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)
On 18 October 2006 the Commission imposed, by Regulation (EC) No 1551/2006 (2) (the provisional Regulation), a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain frozen strawberries originating in the People's Republic of China (PRC).
2. Subsequent procedure
(2)
Following the imposition of a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain frozen strawberries from the PRC, all parties received a disclosure of the facts and considerations on which the provisional Regulation was based. All parties were granted a period within which they could make representations in relation to these disclosures.
(3)
Some interested parties submitted comments in writing. Those parties who so requested were also granted an opportunity to be heard orally. The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed necessary. The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were examined, and, where considered appropriate, the provisional findings were modified accordingly.
(4)
All interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to impose definitive measures and to release the amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty imposed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1551/2006 (the final disclosure). The interested parties were also granted a period within which they could make representations subsequent to this disclosure. The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, the findings have been modified accordingly.
3. Parties concerned by the proceeding
(5)
The Commission continued to seek all information it deemed necessary for the purpose of its definitive findings. In addition to the verification visits undertaken at the premises of the companies mentioned in recital 8 of the provisional Regulation, it should be noted that after the imposition of provisional measures, additional on-spot visits were carried out at the premises of the following Community users and importers:
Importers/traders:
-
BS Foods BV, Gennep, The Netherlands,
-
Skogsmat AB, Karlstad, Sweden;
Users/processors:
-
Agrana Frucht GmbH & Co KG, Gleisdorf, Austria,
-
Agrana, S.A. Neuilly-sur-Seine, France,
-
Dairy Fruits A/S, Odense, Denmark,
-
Groupe Danone, Paris, France,
-
Materne S.A.S., Limonest, France,
-
Rudolf Wild GmbH & Co. KG, Eppelheim, Germany,
-
Schwartauer Werke GmbH & Co KGaA, Bad Schwartau, Germany,
-
Yoplait France S.A.S., Boulogne, France.
4. Investigation period (IP)
(6)
It is recalled that the investigation period of dumping and injury (IP) covered the period from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005. The examination of trends relevant for the injury analysis covered the period from 1 January 2002 to the end of the IP (period considered).
(7)
One interested party has questioned the appropriateness of the chosen investigation period claiming that the year 2005 was not representative as import prices in this year were abnormally low. However, the selection of the IP was made in accordance with Article 6(1) of the basic Regulation which provides that the IP should normally cover a period of not less than six months immediately prior to the initiation of the proceeding. Thus, any alleged particularities concerning the year 2005 were not reflected in the choice of the IP, but were examined in the causality analysis.
(8)
Based on the above, the investigation period (IP) as detailed in recital 11 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
5. Product concerned and like product
(9)
It is recalled that, in recital 13 of the provisional Regulation, the product concerned was defined as strawberries, uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweeteners, originating in the People's Republic of China currently classifiable within CN codes 0811 10 11, 0811 10 19 and 0811 10 90.
(10)
Some interested parties have maintained that there are significant differences in terms of use and quality between different types of frozen strawberries. It was claimed for the same reason that frozen strawberries of Chinese origin were not comparable to those produced by the Community industry.
(11)
In recital 15 of the provisional Regulation, it was stated that the investigation has shown that despite differences in varieties, quality, size and post-processing, the different types of the product concerned, as well as the frozen strawberries produced and sold on the Community market by the Community industry, all share the same basic physical and biological characteristics and are basically used for the same purposes. They were therefore considered to constitute one single product. As those interested parties did not provide any additional evidence to substantiate their claim and no new facts came to light, this claim is rejected.
(12)
In the absence of any further comments regarding the product definition and the like product, the contents and provisional conclusions of recitals 12 to 16 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
B. DUMPING
1. Market Economy Treatment
(13)
No comment was received that was apt to alter the findings on market economy treatment. Therefore, the findings set out in recitals 17 to 26 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
2. Individual Treatment
(14)
The three exporting producers that were denied individual treatment (IT) argued that this decision should be reviewed. It is recalled that the three companies in question did not meet criterion (b) and (e) under Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation. Criterion (b) requires that export prices and quantities, and conditions of sale are freely determined. Criterion (e) requires that state interference is not such as to permit circumvention of measures if individual exporters are given individual rates of duty.
(15)
None of the arguments raised by the three companies in question were apt to alter the decision taken at the provisional stage. In particular, it was found that the companies concerned were exposed to state interference which limited them in freely determining export quantities (criterion (b)).
(16)
Furthermore, state interference also prevailed to a degree which would make circumvention of measures likely if individual exporters were given individual rates of duty (criterion (e)).
(17)
In the absence of any further comments relating to the findings on IT, the findings set out in recitals 27 and 28 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
3. Normal Value
(18)
After publication of the provisional measures, no comment was received that was apt to alter the decision to use Turkey as an analogue country. The decision is therefore confirmed. It is recalled that for the purpose of establishing normal value, the domestic prices of Turkish strawberries had been adjusted to take account of their better quality in comparison with Chinese strawberries (see recitals 39 and 44 of the provisional Regulation).
(19)
In the absence of any further comments relating to the findings on normal value, the findings set out in recitals 29 to 42 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
4. Export Price
(20)
In the absence of any comments relating to the findings on export price, the findings set out in recital 43 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
5. Comparison
(21)
Reference is made to recital 44 of the provisional Regulation. In the absence of any comments that were apt to alter the findings stated in that recital, the provisional findings are hereby confirmed.
6. Dumping margin
(22)
In the light of the above, the dumping margins finally determined, expressed as a percentage of the CIF Community frontier price, duty unpaid, are as follows:
Yantai Yongchang Foodstuff 0 %
Dandong Junao Foodstuff 31,1 %
All other companies 66,9 %
C. INJURY
1. Community production
(23)
In the absence of any comments submitted, the provisional findings concerning the total Community production as set out in recital 51 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
2. Definition of the Community industry
(24)
In the absence of any comments, the definition of Community industry as set out in recitals 52 and 53 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
3. Sampling for injury assessment purposes
(25)
It is recalled that in view of the large number of producers of frozen strawberries in the Community, a sample of eight producers was chosen for the assessment of injury. One interested party claimed that the sample of Community producers was not representative because all selected Community producers were located in Poland. It was held that a sample based on the largest production volume should also take into account the geographical location of producers in order to be representative.
(26)
It should be recalled that recital 54 of the provisional Regulation outlines that the selection of the sample was made in accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation which provides that a sample can be chosen based on the largest representative volume of production that can reasonably be investigated within the time available.
(27)
Thus, a selection of a sample based on this method would have to primarily take into account the representativity in terms of production volume. It is not required that the sample also covers a certain geographical representation; this could, but clearly does not have to be, an ancillary consideration.
(28)
Furthermore, since the production of frozen strawberries is to a great extent concentrated in Poland, not only in terms of volume but also in terms of number of producers, a consideration of the geographical location would in this case not prevent the selection of a sample consisting of only Polish producers. This argument is therefore dismissed.
(29)
In the absence of any further comments, the selection of the sample for injury purposes as set out in recitals 54 and 55 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
4. Community consumption
(30)
In the absence of any comments, the calculation of Community consumption as set out in recitals 56 to 59 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
5. Imports into the Community from the countries concerned
5.1. Volume and market share of the imports concerned
(31)
In the absence of any comments, the calculation of volume and market share of the imports concerned as set out in recitals 60 and 61 of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
5.2. Prices of imports and undercutting
(32)
One party claimed that for the purpose of the undercutting analysis, an adjustment would have to be made taking into account the qualitative differences between the frozen strawberries produced by the Community industry and those of the exporting producers. However, it was noted that, at the provisional stage, only certain sales transactions of the exporting producers were taken into account in the calculation of undercutting and underselling. Sales of low grade exports were disregarded because such low quality products were not produced and sold by the Community industry. In these circumstances, the adjustment claimed was not warranted. In the absence of any further comments, the prices of the imports concerned and the price undercutting findings as set out in recitals 62 to 64 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
6. Situation of the Community industry
(33)
It was claimed by some interested parties that the Community industry prices increased in 2006 to around EUR 1 000 per tonne and that this should be reflected in the injury analysis. However, it should be recalled that the IP covered the period 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005 and that the period for which trends relevant for the assessment of injury be examined, covered the period from 1 January 2002 until the end of the IP. In these circumstances, price movements after the IP have not been taken into account in the injury analysis, in accordance with the last sentence of Article 6(1) of the basic Regulation. The significance of the increase in prices in 2006 is however considered below, in Section D. Causation (recitals 51 to 54).
(34)
No interested party questioned the figures or their interpretation relating to the situation of the Community industry as presented in recitals 66 to 85 of the provisional Regulation. Therefore, the findings as set out in these recitals of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
6.1. Data of Community production as a whole
(35)
No interested party questioned the figures or their interpretation relating to the macroeconomic data of Community production as a whole presented in recitals 86 to 88 of the provisional Regulation. Therefore, the findings as set out in these recitals of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
7. Conclusion on injury
(36)
In view of the above, it is confirmed that the Community industry has suffered material injury within the meaning of Article 3 of the basic Regulation.
D. CAUSATION
1. Comments by the interested parties
(37)
Following the imposition of provisional measures, various interested parties claimed that the material injury suffered by the Community industry was caused by other factors. A number of these claims had already been duly addressed in the provisional Regulation. Any new arguments are considered, where necessary, below.
2. Impact of imports from third countries
(38)
It was claimed that no sufficient consideration was given to imports from Morocco as a cause of injury. One party questioned the interpretation of the figures under recital 99 of the provisional Regulation, indicating that the Moroccan price charged during the IP was lower than the Community industry break-even price. It was held that this had contributed to the injury.
(39)
It is recalled that the table contained in recital 99 of the provisional Regulation demonstrates that the Moroccan price was consistently much higher than that of the Community industry. Moroccan exporters were also affected by the low priced Chinese exports and had to respond by reducing prices charged to the Community. This is confirmed by the decreasing volumes of imports of frozen strawberries originating in Morocco. This argument therefore had to be rejected.
3. Impact of currency fluctuations
(40)
During the IP, the Zloty depreciated against the Euro. It was claimed by some interested parties that the price decrease suffered by the Community industry would appear less dramatic if calculations were analysed in Zloty rather than in Euros. Between 2004 and 2005, the Zloty did indeed fluctuate by around 10 %. However, when assessing the trends of Community prices between these two years, the price decrease in Euro was 35 %.
(41)
Taking into account the difference between the fluctuation of the currency of around 10 % and the price decrease which amounted to 35 %, the depreciation of the Zloty against the Euro cannot be considered as a major cause of the decrease in Community industry prices. This argument therefore had to be rejected.
4. Impact of alleged structural deficiencies or speculative business decisions by the Community industry
(42)
Some interested parties further developed the argument already addressed in the provisional Regulation in recitals 106 to 110, that injury was self-inflicted due to poor business decisions and structural difficulties encountered by the Community industry. To this end, a report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the situation of the sector of soft fruits and cherries intended for processing, and annexed staff working document on the same subject (3), as well as a European Parliament resolution on the situation with regard to soft fruits and cherries intended for processing adopted on 12 October 2006 (4), were held to support these claims.
(43)
It should be noted that the Commission took account of the report in its provisional findings as evidenced by the reference in recital 138 of the provisional Regulation. While the report and the resolution provide important background information about the red fruit sector within the Community, it should be noted that they both focus on the problems facing the growers of fresh strawberries rather then the Community industry (freezers). In any event, neither the report nor the resolution concludes that the problems facing the Community industry are due to structural deficiencies of the Community industry itself.
(44)
It was further claimed that Poland's accession to the EU has resulted in the relocation of Polish labour to countries with higher wages thus posing additional problems for the industry in the form of increased labour costs on the domestic market. It was also held that as a result of new border restrictions, the Community industry could no longer rely on cheaper labour from neighbouring non-EU countries. It was suggested that these developments have had significant negative effects upon such a labour intensive industry.
(45)
These developments could have led to an increase of the labour costs of the farmers. However, this possible increase relates directly to the costs of the farmers and not to the costs of the Community industry (freezers). Therefore, there is only a partial link between the increased costs of the farmers and the costs of the Community industry. Moreover according to the Commission report and staff paper as referred to in recital 42, it would appear that despite a rise in the cost of production, the sales prices of fresh strawberries decreased rather than increased after the accession of Poland to the European Union. Considering that the sales prices went down, there could not have been an effect on the Community industry of the increase in costs facing the farmers of fresh strawberries. This argument therefore has to be rejected.
(46)
One party claimed that the investments and restructuring executed by the Community industry in order to improve efficiency has negatively affected its profitability and cash flow. However, any costs encountered by the Community industry in terms of investments do not alter the fact that prices fell significantly to an injurious level during the IP and that it was the low prices that had by far the greatest impact on the profitability of the Community industry. Indeed, the investments made contributed to greater efficiency by the Community industry, as stated in recital 81 of the provisional Regulation. This argument therefore has to be rejected.
(47)
It was additionally claimed that the injury suffered by the Community industry was self inflicted because the quality of the produce was lower than that originating in Spain and California. To this end, it should be noted that Spain and California both produce predominantly for the fresh market and that there have been no indications showing that the Community industry has lost market share by comparison to these producers. Imports of frozen strawberries from the US were less than 200 tonnes during the IP and could not have had any substantial impact on the profitability of the Community industry. This argument therefore has to be rejected.
(48)
In any event, regarding the alleged structural deficiencies of the Community industry, there is no evidence demonstrating such deficiencies on the part of that industry. These claims must therefore be rejected. The conclusions reached in recitals 106 to 110 of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
5. Self-inflicted injury as a result of the price levels set by the Community industry
(49)
In the context of the allegation of speculative business decisions on behalf of the Community industry, as referred to in recital 108 and 110 of the provisional Regulation, one user claimed that prices on the Community market were not set by the Chinese imports but predominantly by the Community industry holding the highest market share. This party thus alleged that the price decreasing trend was set by the Community industry itself and not by any dumped Chinese imports.
(50)
It is clear that the Community industry retained a market share in the IP of 59 %, thus maintaining a significant role as regards market prices. However, even if the Community industry's market share was high, it cannot be denied that low priced imports from the PRC that undercut the Community industry's prices by 6 %, had a negative impact on the market prices. Those dumped imports exerted an overall downward price pressure on prices within the Community and also managed to considerably increase their market share from 4 % in 2002 to 20 % in the IP. The argument therefore has to be rejected.
6. The cyclical nature of frozen strawberries and the impact of the size of the harvest
(51)
Frozen strawberries are a sensitive agricultural product and the investigation has shown that the availability of fresh strawberries is of major importance to the price of frozen strawberries. Several interested parties argued that the particularly poor harvest in 2003 was a major cause of the injury found during the IP. Some interested parties also asserted that the price of strawberries typically follows a four year cycle whereby a price increase leads to overproduction and then to a price collapse. It was claimed that 2005 marked the low point in this cycle and that the particularly low prices experienced in that year were a result of this natural fluctuation. Price variations could also be observed for a period before 2002 and this argument was further supported by the +/- 20 % increase in price that was seen in 2006, i.e. the year following the IP.
(52)
Further analysis of prices of frozen strawberries beyond the period concerned did indicate that price fluctuations also occurred over a significant period of time prior to 2002. For example, during the campaign in 2001, the abundant harvest led to very low prices. These low prices then led to a decrease in production of fresh strawberries in the following years, allowing prices to stabilise themselves again. An analysis of the trends supports claims that prices of the product concerned follow a cyclical pattern, strongly influenced by the weather and crop size.
(53)
It must however be recalled that the volume of imports from China increased by 380 % at prices that decreased by 38 % during the period considered and that this had a significant effect on the financial situation of Community industry that reported unsustainable losses.
(54)
Even though the natural fluctuation in prices of frozen strawberries and the impact of the harvest size have certainly had a significant impact on the prices of Community industry, they cannot in themselves be considered the sole or major significant cause of the injury suffered by Community industry.
7. Conclusion on causation
(55)
As concluded in recitals 97 and 98 of the provisional Regulation the investigation has shown that there was a causal link between the dumped imports from the PRC and the injury observed with the Community industry.
(56)
The investigation has also shown that there is a correlation between the prices of the Community industry and the price fluctuations linked to the cyclical nature as well as seasonal variations in the harvest. This conclusion is supported by data from before and during the period considered, as well as by the development after the IP.
(57)
Even though these cyclical variations may have aggravated the financial situation of the Community industry, the magnitude in the fall in prices of the Community industry, and the negative trend seen in the analysis of the situation of the Community industry as described in recitals 66 to 85 of the provisional Regulation, cannot be solely attributed to the ‘natural fluctuation patterns’. The analysis of the impact of the cyclical nature of the product and the size of the harvest does not therefore support the argument that these factors would have been significant enough as to breach the causal link between the dumped imports and the injury suffered by the Community industry.
(58)
On the basis of the above, and in the absence of any further comments in respect to causation, the conclusions reached in recitals 113 to 114 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.
E. COMMUNITY INTEREST
1. General considerations
(59)
It has been analysed whether, in light of the comments and additional elements provided by interested parties following the imposition of provisional measures, the provisional conclusion that the imposition of measures was not contrary to the Community interest remained valid. As at the provisional stage, the determination of the Community interest was based on an appreciation of all the different interests involved, i.e. those of the Community industry, importers, processors/users and farmers.
(60)
The Commission indeed contacted a significant number of interested parties to obtain their views. In addition to the Community industry, representatives of all the major user brands on the market as well as associations representing the interests of the users have been heard and additional on-the-spot verifications have been carried out.
2. Interest of the Community industry and the upstream industry
(61)
At the preliminary stage, the investigation showed that Community production was manufactured by a large number of producers in the freezing industry which employs around 2 700 people for the production and sales of the product concerned. There is also a partial link between the situation of the freezer industry and the farmers supplying strawberries given that the latter grow only the type of strawberries destined for freezing and that the freezers constitute the only market for that product.
(62)
It is recalled that the Community producers suffered substantial injury in the period considered and reported losses of 12,5 % as a consequence of the dumped imports. These losses were reported despite the fact that the Community industry reduced its costs by reducing the prices that it paid to the farmers for fresh strawberries. The price paid for fresh strawberries was below the farmers' cost of production and would therefore be unsustainable both for the farmers and the Community industry in the long run. Should prices of frozen strawberries again drop to below the non-injurious level the consequences would be twofold. Community industry would suffer financial losses but would also risk running out of supply of fresh strawberries in the long term since the prices they would be able to pay the farmers would be so low that farmers would risk going out of business. It is recalled that the estimated number of commercial producers of fresh strawberries in Poland was 96 700 in 2002 out of which around 80 000 were involved in the growing of strawberries for further processing. Although it is possible that this number has decreased as a consequence of consolidation of the sector, it is nevertheless clear that the farming of strawberries is an important economic activity for a large number of farms in Poland. It has been argued that the sector for growing strawberries in Poland is of key importance to a number of regions in the country that are otherwise characterised by high unemployment and that the failure to impose measures would increase these unemployment figures even more. It has also been held that these farmers cannot switch to other more profitable crops since the soil conditions in these areas are mainly suitable for strawberry farming.
(63)
As stated in the provisional Regulation (recital 139), prices paid to the farmers from 2004 and onwards have been so low that the cost of production has not been covered.
(64)
In addition, as supported by the report from the Commission referred to in recital 42, the Polish strawberry farmers constitute a fragmented industry and it is not probable that they could reach out to markets other than the local freezing industry. Consequently, the deteriorating financial situation of the freezer industry would have a substantial impact on the farmers. The fact that after the IP market prices increased again to non-injurious levels and that Chinese import levels decreased, may cast some doubt on the necessity of measures to remedy the situation of the Community industry but there are no indications predicting that this increase would be of a permanent, or even of a long-lasting nature.
(65)
Under these circumstances it is clear that the Community industry and the farmers would benefit from the adoption of anti-dumping measures and that measures could have a stabilising effect on the Community market. The prices of frozen strawberries would not be depressed as a result of imports of strawberries originating in the PRC. Thus, Community producers would be able to increase their prices and to obtain a reasonable profit margin. This will in all likelihood have positive effects upon the upstream industry. It is therefore concluded that the imposition of measures would be in the interest of the Community industry and the strawberry farmers.
3. Interest of unrelated importers
(66)
Further to the findings at the preliminary stage of the investigation, the Commission visited two more importers of the product concerned. These importers import the product concerned from the PRC although each of them also trades strawberries produced in the EU, which represent between 50 to 60 % of their respective purchases. It has to be noted, however, that trading frozen strawberries only constitutes a part of their business activities and accounts for 30 to 50 % of their overall turnover. Their imports from the PRC represent around 14 % of all imports of the product concerned. The importers are therefore considered to be representative. Both importers expressed opposition to anti-dumping measures. The investigation has shown that, given that the demand for strawberries is driven by consumer preferences which will not be affected by the imposition of anti dumping measures, the demand for frozen strawberries is not likely to change. Thus, importers are unlikely to be affected by higher prices, as they could continue importing the same quantities as before and would in all likelihood be able to pass on a substantial part of additional costs of frozen strawberries onto the users. This is confirmed by the fact that past price differences did not affect the sales price and profit margins of the importers as they remained fairly stable.
(67)
The provisional conclusion drawn in the provisional Regulation, i.e. that the effects on the importers by increased prices of imports are not expected to be substantial, is hereby confirmed.
4. Interest of users and consumers
4.1. Level of cooperation
(68)
As noted in recital 127 of the provisional Regulation, the response from users and processors was limited at the outset. In the preliminary stage of the proceeding the Commission encountered difficulties in collecting and verifying data which would substantiate the claims of the user industry. After publication of the provisional Regulation, the Commission renewed therefore its efforts to encourage cooperation. Supplementary on-the spot verification visits took place in the premises of eight user companies. Out of these, data that allowed for a meaningful impact assessment could be obtained from five companies. Additional information and data were collected. With this supplementary information, the Commission services undertook a new analysis of the potential effects that the imposition of measures would have upon Community users.
(69)
One interested party argued that this cooperation should not be considered as it was not submitted within the time limits set in the Notice of Initiation. In this regard, it has to be noted that the cooperating companies made themselves known and provided comments on the provisional measures in accordance with the rules laid down in the basic Regulation.
(70)
The information verified on the spot concerns around 9 % of the overall Community level of consumption. In addition, the different user sectors were represented: producers of strawberry preparations used as input for other products (e.g. yoghurts), yoghurt producers, and producers of strawberry jam. Finally, the cooperating associations represent around 80 % of the Community consumption of frozen strawberries. The recognition of such a level of representativity is consistent with the general practice. Therefore, the argument on lack of representativity had to be rejected.
4.2. Cost impact of measures
(71)
The user industry claimed that the Commission should evaluate the impact of measures not only by analysing a possible price increase of imported Chinese strawberries. Measures would have a broader impact on the market including frozen strawberries from other sources.
(72)
Indeed, the deepened investigation has shown that measures will very likely provoke a more general price rise, not limited to the order of 34,2 % (level of the provisional duty) for Chinese strawberries. They may also be likely to lead to a price increase for the Community industry by about 19 %, up to the calculated non-injurious level. Such an overall price increase would indeed appear unavoidable because, unlike in other sectors and in view of the limitations imposed by the weather and crop results, other strategies such as market expansion in terms of volumes would appear not to be an option for the Community industry. Finally, since the Community industry and the Chinese imports combined represent about 80 % of Community consumption, it is very likely that other countries exporting frozen strawberries to the Community will also increase their prices in order to follow the ‘price leaders’.
(73)
Regarding the strawberry-related activities of the users, under these circumstances the imposition of a duty at the level set in the provisional measures would entail a cost increase of inputs for the users of on average around 6 %. Indeed, quite a few of the users would be forced into a loss making position. The conclusions have been based on the strawberry related activities, as the investigation focuses on frozen strawberries as the product concerned and does not concern other activities of the companies involved. Also for the purpose of carrying out an injury and dumping analysis it has to be ensured that like activities are being compared, i.e. activities related to the product under investigation.
The table below demonstrates the impact on the costs of the verified users:
Company
Actual profit (IP) 2005 (5)
Profit on 2005 (IP) basis if prices of strawberries of all origins increase in accordance with the formula specified in recital 74 and resale prices do not change (5)
Profit as in previous column but on basis of reported actual (or increased) resale prices for 2006 (5)
Share of strawberry products in company turnover (2005)
Overall company profitability (2005)
Company A
Between + 2 % and + 4 %
Between - 4 % and - 6 %
Between - 3,0 % and - 5,0 %
Between 25 % and 30 %
Between + 2,5 % and + 5,0 %
Company B
Between + 1,0 % and + 2,5 %
Between - 1,0 % and - 2,5 %
Around 0 %
Between 12 % and 17 %
Between + 4,0 % and + 5,5 %
Company C
Around 0 %
Around - 1 %
Between + 2 % and + 4 %
Between 5 % and 10 %
Around 0 %
Company D
Between + 12,0 % and + 14,0 %
Between + 4 % and + 8,0 %
Between + 3,0 % and + 5,0 %
Between 10 % and 15 %
Between + 5,0 % and + 8,0 %
Company E
Between + 3,0 % and + 5,0 %
Between - 4,0 % and - 6,0 %
Between - 7,0 % and - 9,0 %
Between 18 % and 23 %
Around 1 %
(74)
The cooperating producers of strawberry preparations and jam would be the most affected by an increase in strawberry prices. This is due to the fact that the relative importance of strawberries in the jam recipe is far greater than that of the other ingredients. For the companies in question, the deterioration of their profit margin would be in the range of between 7 to 8 percentage points, which for two of them would trigger losses of around 5 %.
(75)
For the cooperating yoghurt producers the relative importance of the cost of strawberries in their cost of production is less, since the cost of milk products is added to the recipe calculation. Nevertheless, it was found that their profit margin, on average, was quite low. Thus, even if the total cost for the production of given yoghurt only increases by 2 %, this is sufficient to turn a profit of around 1 % into a loss of around 1 %.
(76)
Consequently, the impact of measures on the user industry in terms of the cost increase might be greater than estimated in the analysis leading up to the provisional measures. However, as shown below in Section 4.4, this cost impact is likely to be less hard felt in the long term.
4.3. Inability to pass on cost increases in the distribution chain
(77)
One user association claimed that duties would damage internationally competitive Community based users of frozen strawberries. It was claimed that the duties could not be passed onto their customers (retailers and distributors) since many users concluded long term contracts with fixed prices with these customers. These fixed prices mean that the users bear the risk of any additional price rises. Many users claimed and provided evidence that they were under price pressure from the big retailers/distributors and that it was very difficult to raise their prices. It has been held that the contracts between users and the retail sector fix the prices for periods between 6 months and a year. Therefore, the users claim that they would have no choice but to absorb the additional costs themselves. In view of the above it must be recognised that the users are likely to have to absorb the increase in cost, at least in the short term. The investigation has also revealed, however, that notwithstanding the negative effect of measures on the profitability for products incorporating the product concerned, the overall profitability of the user companies would remain positive for most of the users.
(78)
To the extent that cost increases can be passed on, this may have a certain effect on consumer prices. Indeed fruit preparations, especially yoghurts, are part of the staple diet for a large segment of consumers. Strawberry flavour makes up around 20 % to 30 % of the yoghurt market and notwithstanding the fact that no consumer organisations have made submissions in this respect, it cannot be excluded that a price increase could have an impact on consumers, at least in the medium to long term. The same holds true for jams.
4.4. The temporary nature of impact on users
(79)
Under Sections 4.2 and 4.3 it has been demonstrated that the imposition of measures is likely to have an impact on the cost of input materials of the users and users have furthermore asserted that this cost increase will have to be borne by themselves for the duration of the contract with the retail sector. It could however be presumed that this inability to pass on an eventual cost increase is temporary, as the duration of the contracts is limited in time.
4.5. Availability of Community industry supplies
(80)
It has been broadly held by the users that the supply of Polish strawberries of the Senga sengana variety is essential to the volume as well as to the quality of the production of the full range of products derived from frozen strawberries. Thus, the danger of deterioration of the situation of the Community industry would have a considerable negative impact upon them. It cannot be excluded that in the situation of limited availability or unavailability of the Polish strawberries on the market, the users would face serious problems in finding alternative sources of supply for the varieties of strawberries produced in Poland. In fact, it seems highly improbable that such alternative sources could be found as the users themselves stated that the quality found in Poland could not be found anywhere else. Furthermore, it could not be excluded that in a situation of reduced competition on the market the users would anyway be faced with the price increase.
5. Conclusion on Community interest
(81)
The investigation has shown that not only the Community producers employing around 2 700 persons but also the around 80 000 farmers that are more or less dependent on strawberries for their livelihood would benefit from the imposition of measures.
(82)
As detailed in recital 133 of the provisional Regulation, the user industry has indicated that the supply of the product concerned by Community industry is essential in order for the users to cover their full range and provide a high quality product to the market. The investigation has shown that the cyclical nature of the raw material for the Community industry, i.e. the variations in the strawberry crops, has significant impact on prices which is confirmed by developments after the IP. Nevertheless, as detailed in recital 74 of the provisional Regulation, prices were so depressed in the latter part of the period considered and the IP that the Community industry was forced to pay below the cost of production prices to the farmers when purchasing fresh strawberries. This resulted in the cessation of strawberry production by some of the farmers. Even though prices have gone up in 2006, it is clear that the supply of fresh strawberries to the Community industry, and in extension also to the users, could be endangered should the low-price trend as seen in the period considered reoccur.
(83)
The deepened investigation has indeed shown that the impact of the anti-dumping duty on the users in this case would be significant. The duty would result in reduced profitability or even financial losses, some of them heavy, for a number of the users, especially since this price increase may not be transferred to the distributor/retail level in the short term. These effects are however much less pronounced when looking at the overall profitability of the investigated users.
(84)
The user industry has argued that it is the existence of fixed-price contracts with the user industry that prevents the processing industry from passing on the cost increase in case of measures to the retail sector. Considering that these contracts run for a limited period of time it must however also be presumed that the inability for the user industry to pass on the cost increase would only apply for a period of 6 to 12 months.
(85)
It thus appears that the imposition of definitive measures would have a material impact on users of frozen strawberries but this impact is likely to be temporary in nature. In contrast, the adverse effects on Community industry and farmers would be of a substantial and lasting nature should measures not be imposed and the drop in prices allowed to reoccur.
(86)
Based on the above it is therefore concluded that there are no compelling reasons not to impose anti-dumping duties on imports of frozen strawberries originating in the PRC.
F. IMPOSITION OF DEFINITIVE MEASURES
1. Form of the definitive measures
(87)
In view of the definitive conclusions reached with regard to dumping, injury, causation, and Community interest, anti-dumping measures should be imposed in order to prevent further injury to Community industry resulting from the dumped exports.
(88)
Anti-dumping measures may take different forms. While the Commission has a large discretion when choosing the form of measures, the purpose remains to remove the effects of the injurious dumping. An ad valorem duty set in accordance with the lesser duty rule, ranging between 0 % for the exporting producer granted market economy status, 12,6 % for the exporting producer granted IT and 34,2 % for all other companies, was established in the provisional Regulation.
(89)
After the adoption of provisional measures, and as pointed out in rectal (51), the price of the product concerned on the Community market increased by +/- 20 %, in 2006, the year following the investigation period. Given that the product concerned is rather homogeneous and in order to avoid that measures burden users disproportionately in these circumstances, it is considered that a minimum import price, hereafter ‘MIP’, would be the most appropriate form of measures in this case. Note that the purpose of the minimum import price is the same as that of the ad valorem duty, i.e. to remove the effects of injurious dumping. Under this form of duty, no duty will be payable for imports undertaken at the cif Community border price that are equal to or above the minimum import price. If imports are undertaken at a lower price, the difference between the actual and the MIP would become payable.
(90)
As regards the level of the MIP, this has been established based on the same findings, notably the same margins of dumping and underselling, as set out in the provisional Regulation.
(91)
In establishing the MIP, account has been taken both of the dumping margins found and of the amounts of duties necessary to eliminate the injury sustained by Community industry.
2. Injury elimination level
(92)
In accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, the definitive duty should be set at the level of dumping or injury margins, which ever is the lowest. Therefore, a non-injurious price or, non-injurious MIP, had to be established in order to apply this rule. This non injurious MIP was then compared against a company specific non-dumped MIP which was based on the normal value adjusted to the net free-at-Community-frontier price.
(93)
For the purpose of calculating the non-injurious price, account had to be taken of the level of duties needed in order for Community industry to cover the cost of production and obtain a profit before tax that could reasonably be achieved by an industry of this type in the sector under normal conditions of competition. In the absence of any comments from interested parties the same considerations as stipulated in recital 144 of the provisional Regulation were used to determine a profit margin of 6,5 %.
(94)
Frozen strawberries are imported under three different codes in the Combined Nomenclature (CN codes) with different levels of customs duties, depending on the amount of added sugar or other sweetening matters contained in the imported goods. In order to take into account the different levels of customs duties, distinct MIPs per CN code had to be established.
(95)
As established under recital 153 of the provisional Regulation, one Chinese exporting producer was not found to export frozen strawberries at dumped price. Subsequently, no anti-dumping measure will be applied to exports by that company.
(96)
In all other cases, the non injurious MIP of EUR 684,20, which is applicable to all Chinese exports, was found to be lower than the respective non dumped MIPs. The MIP has therefore been established at the level of the non injurious MIP for all other exports from the PRC.
(97)
Where imports are undertaken at a cif Community border price that is equal to, or above the MIP, no duty would be payable. Conversely, if imports are undertaken at prices below the MIP, a duty corresponding to the price actually paid and the MIP will be payable.
3. Definitive collection of the provisional duties
(98)
The provisional duties in the form of ad valorem duties ranging between 0 and 34,2 % for the imported product which applied during the period from 19 October 2006 shall be released. The definitive collection of the ad valorem duties would be disproportionate to the removal of injurious dumping given that prices during this period were significantly above those of the MIP.
4. Enforceability of the MIP
(99)
A duty system under MIP may be more difficult to enforce and more open to misdeclaration of the customs value of the goods than other forms of the measure. Indeed, in view of the potential risk which exists for compensatory arrangements in this market sector, it is necessary to introduce a double system of measures. This double system is composed of a MIP and a fixed duty. In accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, the fixed duty was calculated on the basis of the weighted average injury margin as this was found to be lower than the weighted average dumping margin. To ensure the effective respect of the MIP, importers should be made aware that when it is found following, a post-importation verification that (i) the net free at Community frontier price actually paid by the first independent customer in the Community (post importation price) is below the net free-at-Community-frontier price before duty, as resulting from the customs declaration; and (ii) the post-importation price is lower than the MIP, a fixed duty shall apply retrospectively for the relevant transactions, unless the application of a fixed duty plus the post-importation price lead to an amount (price actually paid plus fixed duty) which remains below the MIP. In such cases an amount of duty equivalent to the difference between the MIP and the post-importation price shall apply. Customs authorities should inform the Commission immediately whenever indications of a misdeclaration are found.
(100)
In this context, and in order to address the concerns raised, the Commission intends to put in place two specific pillars to ensure that the measures continue to be relevant whilst also being fully respected. Firstly, reference is made to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (6), inter alia, to Article 78, according to which the customs authorities may inspect the commercial documents and data relating to the import or export operations in respect of the goods concerned or to subsequent commercial operations involving those goods. Such inspections may be carried out at the premises of the declarant, of any other person directly or indirectly involved in the said operations in a business capacity or of any other person in possession of the said documents and data for business purposes. Those authorities may also examine the goods.
(101)
Secondly, in order to best guard against any possible absorption of the measures, particularly between related companies, the Commission hereby notifies its intention to immediately initiate a review under Article 12(1) of the basic Regulation and may subject importations to registration in accordance with Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation, should any evidence of such behaviour be provided.
(102)
The Commission will rely, inter alia, on import surveillance information provided by national customs authorities, as well as information provided by Member States pursuant to Article 14(6) of the basic Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of strawberries, uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweeteners, originating in the People's Republic of China and falling within CN codes 0811 10 11, 0811 10 19 and 0811 10 90.
2. The amount of the definitive anti-dumping duty in respect of Yantai Yongchang Foodstuff shall be:
Company
Definitive Duty
TARIC additional code
Yantai Yongchang Foodstuff
0,0 %
A779
3. For all other companies, the amount of the definitive anti-dumping duty shall be the difference between the minimum import price fixed in paragraph 4 and the net free at Community frontier price, before duty, if the latter is lower than the former. No duty shall be collected where the net free-at-Community-frontier price is equal to or higher than the corresponding minimum import price fixed in paragraph 4.
4. For the purpose of paragraph 3, the minimum import price set out in column 2 in the table below shall apply. Where it is found, following post-importation verification, that the net free-at-Community-frontier price actually paid by the first independent customer in the Community (post-importation price) is below the net free-at-Community-frontier price, before duty, as resulting from the customs declaration, and the post-importation price is lower than the minimum import price, the fixed anti-dumping duty set out as appropriate in column 3 or 4 of the table below shall apply, unless the application of the fixed duty set out as appropriate in column 3 or 4 plus the post-importation price lead to an amount (price actually paid plus fixed duty) which remains below the minimum import price set out in column 2 in the table below. In such a case, an amount of duty equivalent to the difference between the minimum import price set out in column 2 in the table below and the post-importation price shall apply. Where such fixed anti-dumping duty is collected retrospectively, it shall be collected net of any anti-dumping duty previously paid, calculated on the basis of the minimum import price.
CN code and presentation of strawberries
Minimum import price EUR/tonne net product weight
Fixed duty EUR/tonne net product weight, applicable to Dandong Junao Foodstuff (TARIC additional code A780)
Fixed duty EUR/tonne net product weight, applicable to all other companies (TARIC additional code A999)
Strawberries uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, containing added sugar or other sweetening matter with a sugar content exceeding 13 % by weight (CN 0811 10 11)
496,8
62,6
169,9
Strawberries uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, containing added sugar or other sweetening matter with a sugar content not exceeding 13 % by weight (CN 0811 10 19)
566,3
71,3
193,7
Strawberries uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter (CN 0811 10 90)
598
75,3
204,5
5. In cases where goods have been damaged before entry into free circulation and, therefore, the price actually paid or payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article 145 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (7), the amount of anti-dumping duty, calculated on the basis of paragraphs 3 and 4 above, shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning of the price actually paid or payable.
6. Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
Article 2
Amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1551/2006 on imports of strawberries, uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweeteners and originating in the People's Republic of China, shall be released.
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 Luxembourg, 16 April 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 14 September 1994 concerning the prohibition of PCP notified by the Federal Republic of Germany (Only the German text is authentic) (94/783/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, in particular Article 100a (4) thereof,
Whereas:
I. PROCEDURE (1) The measure notified
On 2 August 1991 the Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany notified the Commission pursuant to Article 100a (4) of the EEC Treaty, of his Government's decision to continue to apply national provisions concerning pentachlorophenol (PCP) instead of Council Directive 91/173/EEC (1).
Those mandatory provisions are set out in the regulation of 12 December 1989 prohibiting pentachlorophenol (Pentachlorphenolverbotsverordnung) (2) and have applied since 23 December 1989.
This regulation prohibits the manufacture, marketing and use of pentachlorophenol, its salts and compounds, preparations containing more than 0,01 % of such substances and products which, following treatment with preparations, contain the said substances in a concentration of more than 5 mg/kg (parts per million - ppm). By way of derogation, the competent authorities may authorize such substances, preparations and products for use as synthesizing agents or secondary products, for scientific research or analysis or for disposal.
(2) Directive 91/173/EEC
Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 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 (3), as last amended by Directive 94/27/EC (4), provides for the prohibition or restriction of the use of certain dangerous substances and preparations.
Directive 91/173/EEC amending for the ninth time Directive 76/769/EEC prohibits the marketing and use of pentachlorophenol and its salts and esters in a concentration equal to or greater than 0,1 % by mass in substances and preparations. However, four exceptions are given. The use of pentachlorophenol and its compounds in industrial installations is permitted:
(a) for wood preservation;
(b) for the impregnation of fibres and heavy-duty textiles;
(c) as a synthesizing and/or processing agent in industrial processes;
(d) for the in situ treatment of buildings of cultural and historic interest (subject to individual authorization by the Member State concerned).
In any event, PCP used as such or as a constituent of preparations used under the derogations referred to above must have a total hexachlorodibenzoparadioxin content of less than 4 ppm.
These exceptions have to be reconsidered in the light of changes in knowledge and technology no later than three years after the implementation of the Directive. Member States had to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions required to comply with the Directive before 1 July 1992 at the latest.
The Directive was adopted by the Council by qualified majority on 21 March 1991 under Article 100a of the Treaty.
(3) Opinions
An acknowledgement of receipt of the notification of 2 August 1991 was sent to the Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Germany on 18 November 1991.
The notification was transmitted to the other Member States for their opinions. The Commission received opinions from Greece, Italy, France, Belgium and Denmark.
Greece takes the view that Directive 91/173/EEC provides an appropriate level of protection for man and the environment. It claims that the German measure would thus create an obstacle to intra-Community trade.
Italy expressed an unfavourable opinion on the use of Article 100a (4) in the case of Directive 91/173/EEC. In particular, the Italian authorities take the view that the limits set, namely 5 mg/kg, for traces of pentachlorophenol would adversely affect the importation of leather goods from Italy without providing any additional protection for man and the environment.
France also challenges the use of this Article in the particular case of pentachlorophenol. Its use is not sufficiently justified and would lead to serious losses in terms of both intra-Community trade and trade between the Community and some third countries.
Belgium does not challenge the use of the Article. It nevertheless believes that the limit laid down by the German authorities for traces of pentachlorophenol might create problems as regards some products.
Denmark supports the German measure.
(4) The decision of 2 December 1992
By decision of 2 December 1992, the Commission had endorsed the German regulation of 12 December 1989 prohibiting the manufacture, marketing and use of pentachlorophenol, its salts and compounds, preparations containing more than 0,01 % of the said substances and products which, following treatment with preparations, contain the said substances at a concentration exceeding 5 mg/kg (ppm).
(5) Judgment of the Court of Justice and action to be taken thereon
Following an application submitted by the French Republic, the Court of Justice, in its judgment of 17 May 1994 (5), annulled the decision in question because of the failure to provide the statement of reasons laid down by Article 190 of the EC Treaty, without ruling on the other points raised by the applicant.
By letter of 18 May 1994, the German Federal Republic confirmed its intention to continue to apply the German regulations, pointing out however that the 1989 rules had been consolidated in two regulations, one containing the provisions on the production and use of PCP (regulation of 26 October 1993, BGBl. I of 30 October 1993, Annex 4, p. 1782), the other containing the provisions on its marketing (regulation of 14 October 1993, BGBl. I of 20 October 1993, p. 1720). The Commission decided to seek the scientific assistance of an internationally recognized expert, Professor Rappe, of the Institute for Environmental Chemistry of the University of Umea in Sweden, who has presented his report to the Commission.
II. FACTS (6) Pentachlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol is a synthetic chemical substance recognized as being dangerous. It is dangerous for both man and the environment. Its classification and labelling, harmonized at Community level in accordance with Council Directive 67/548/EEC (6), as amended by Directive 92/32/EEC (7) for the seventh time, relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, are as follows:
- classified as Category 3 carcinogenic, i.e. a substance which is of concern because of possible carcinogenic effects in man but which cannot be assessed satisfactorily on the basis of the information available. Information is available from appropriate animal experiments but it is not sufficient to classify this substance in the second category of carcinogens; it is labelled with risk phrase 'R 40: substance capable of producing irreversible effects',
- classified as very toxic by inhalation and labelled 'R 26: very toxic by inhalation',
- classified as toxic by skin contact and by ingestion and labelled 'R 24/25: toxic by skin contact and by ingestion',
- classified as irritant to eyes, respiratory system and skin and labelled 'R 36/37/38: irritant to eyes, respiratory system and skin',
- classified as dangerous to the environment and labelled 'R 50: very toxic for aquatic organisms',
- classified as dangerous to the environment and labelled 'R 53: may have long term adverse affects on the aquatic environment'.
Having regard to the three criteria of toxicity, persistence and bioaccumulation, PCP was included in List I of Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (8), as last amended by Directive 91/692/EEC (9). With a view to eliminating the pollution of the various parts of the aquatic environment which could be threatened by the discharge of PCP, limit values were laid down by Council Directive 86/280/EEC of 12 June 1986 on limit values and quality objectives for discharges of certain dangerous substances included in List I of the Annex to Directive 76/464/EEC (10), as last amended by Directive 91/692/EEC.
Pentachlorophenol contains dangerous impurities, including up to 0,1 % of polychlorodibenzodioxins and 1 to 5 % of polychlorinated phenoxyphenols. PCP on its own and these last named impurities are responsible for the daily discharge of dioxins into the environment. Dioxins are discharged when products treated with PCP are exposed to sunlight and when at the end of their useful life they are incinerated. PCP in sewage sludge is also a source of dioxins.
PCP is used as:
- a wood preservative (fungicide and effective against blue stain),
- an agent for the impregnation in the textile industry (fungicide effect),
- a bactericide in tanning and the paper pulp industry,
- a soil sterilization agent,
- a molluscicide in the treatment of industrial water, particularly cooling water.
Because of its toxicity, PCP has been subject to various restrictions in more than 30 countries.
III. ASSESSMENT OF WHETHER THE NATIONAL PROVISIONS ARE JUSTIFIED HAVING REGARD TO THE OBJECTIVES PUT FORWARD (7) Germany, like other Member States, is particularly concerned by the toxic effects of PCP on human health and the aquatic environment and the part it plays in the discharge of dioxins into the environment.
A. Protecting, health against the direct effects of PCP
Pentachlorophenol poses a special health problem for Germany because of its past as a major producer and user of this substance. Germany was the biggest European producer of PCP until 1985: thus, its leading firm produced 4 503 tonnes in 1978, which is three times the amount currently used in the Community.
Part of this production was used in Germany, mainly inside houses. However, the use of this substance inside houses presents a potential risk to human health. Because of the high production levels in the past and the way in which PCP was used, the German population is still exposed to abnormally high doses of PCP (11).
B. Protection of the aquatic environment
PCP is a substance which kills certain aquatic organisms at concentrations in water as low as 0,1 mg/litre. This level was generally exceeded in German rivers before the ban on PCP. Most of those rivers now have concentrations of less than 0,1 mg/litre. If Directive 91/173/EEC were to be transposed by Germany as it stands, then those average concentrations would again, given the industrial structures and the activities linked to PCP, probably exceed the readings recorded before the ban on PCP; the concentrations in watercourses near plants using PCP would rise to between 300 and 400 mg/litre. In such an eventuality, moreover, concentrations in underground water used for consumption (around 72 % of all drinking water) could once again rise above 0,1 mg/litre.
In conclusion, the specific circumstances connected with the production and use of PCP in Germany in the past continue to pose a threat to the aquatic environment.
C. Protecting health and the environment against dioxins
(a) The characteristic of dioxins
Pentachlorophenol presents a problem because of its close links with dioxins. In the production of PCP, whether through the chlorination of phenol by catalysis or by the alkaline hydrolysis of hexachlorobenzene, a number of secondary products or impurities are also synthesized, including dioxins (0,1 %).
Dioxins also form during the high temperature combustion of organic materials containing chlorine: this is what happens when products containing PCP are incinerated.
However, dioxins are also emitted into the environment in a whole range of industrial and domestic processes.
Dioxins accumulate in the sediment of rivers and oceans where they are ingested by fish. They also accumulate in the soil where they are taken up directly of indirectly by plants and animals.
Man comes into contact with dioxin when he consumes food products.
Certain dioxins are very toxic and cause cancer.
(b) The incidence of dioxins in Germany
Germany has always considered that, as in animals, human cancer could be caused by inter alia contact with dioxins.
The problem of dioxins is viewed as particularly serious in that country, where the average rate of absorption by man reaches 1,3 pg/kg of body weight/day and where the absorption rate of certain groups of the population, such as babies, reaches 180 pg/kg/day.
A study carried out by the World Health Organisation in 1989 in 12 European countries on the levels of certain dioxins in breast milk showed that the highest concentrations of dioxins were found in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The concentrations recorded in Germany began to fall after the ban on PCP.
The high concentration of dioxins in breast milk recorded in Germany has been confirmed by comparative studies carried out on dioxins present in sewage sludge (a study carried out in Germany, Switzerland and Sweden in 1989) and in garden compost.
The high level of dioxins in Germany appears to be due to a number of specific factors. Germany is one of the most highly industrialized and densely populated countries of the European Community. This means that there are a significant number of sources of dioxins apart from PCP such as municipal incinerators, waste incinerators, steel plants and metalworking installations, the high consumption of automative fuel, the massive use of sewage sludge, the number of waste recycling plants, etc.
Other local factors account for the dioxin problem in Germany. There are the climatic conditions which favour the transfer of dioxins (including those originating from the various areas bordering Germany) into the atmosphere and (through snow) into the soil and water. The dietary habits of the Germany population may contribute towards the high level of dioxins found there.
There is no international consensus on what the level of protection against dioxins should be. Some countries and some international organizations have extrapolated the results of tests on animals to determine their level of protection in man, using a number of safety factors. The following examples illustrate the difference in acceptable daily intakes fixed in a number of industrialized countries:
- Germany 1 pg/kg/day, - United Kingdom 1 pg/kg/day, - Netherlands 4 pg/kg/day, - Scandinavian countries 0 to 5 pg/kg/day, - Canada 10 pg/kg/day, - Community no figure.
Whatever the acceptable daily intake, ranging between 0 and 10 pg/kg/day, it is clear that measures are necessary in Germany to protect certain groups exposed to figures of 180 pg/kg/day. The Commission considers it reasonable that the German authorities should wish to reduce the exposure levels of certain high-risk groups.
(c) German policy for combatting dioxins
The German authorities have reacted to this particular situation by adopting a whole legislative programme aimed at controlling sources of dioxin emissions.
Emissions of dioxins from municipal incinerators, motor fuels, sewage sludge and chemical products such as PCB and PCP have been regulated in Germany. A voluntary agreement has also been adopted to control the level of dioxins in industrial packaging used for drinks.
The most recent initiatives concern controls on all chemical products constituting a source of dioxins ('Gefahrstoffe') and the development of a scheme for cleansing soil contaminated by dioxins. Consideration is currently being given to ways of reducing dioxin emissions from the metalworking industries, recycling plants and the paper pulp industries.
According to some estimates, such a programme of legislation could cut dioxin emissions to a tenth of their 1991 level by the year 2000. According to the same estimates, PCP from past uses will account for a third of all dioxin emissions by that date.
Finally, if PCP were to be reintroduced in Germany, the initial achievements of the measures taken in that country would be jeopardized by fresh emissions from factories using PCP for wood and textile treatment and in wood and textile products brought back into the German market.
Moreover, the increased level of dioxins due to the re-legalization of PCP, would entail significant economic costs. The new emissions would endanger the programme for reducing dioxins in municipal incinerators, which has cost more than DM 400 million. It would also threaten the use of 50 million tonnes of sewage sludge used in agriculture.
In conclusion, the Commission considers that the request by the German authorities to continue to apply the national provisions on PCP examined above instead of Directive 91/173/EEC is justified by the specific circumstances relating to health protection and the environment in Germany. The Commission considers moreover that on the basis of the foregoing, the provisions should be regarded as both necessary and proportionate to the objectives that they seek to achieve.
(8) Examination of the non-discriminatory nature of national measures
Annual world production of PCP varies between 25 000 and 30 000 tonnes. Germany no longer produces PCP and indeed it has not been produced anywhere in the Community since Rhône Poulenc stopped making it in 1992. In 1978 the main producer of PCP in Europe was a German firm, Dynamit Nobel, whose production reached 4 503 tonnes. However, after negotiations with the public authorities, the firms making up the German Association of Wood Preservative Manufacturers gave up PCP in 1985. The major producers of PCP are American and there are several importers into the Community.
A study by the German Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt) published in 1992 on part of the West German chemical industry identified 250 producers of more than 1 000 preparations for trenting wood. More than 75 different chemical substances were apparently used in those preparations. An annual total of 47 000 tonnes of these preparations were used to treat wood, including 17 000 tonnes of creosote. Trade in wood preservatives between the former West Germany and other countries is considered to be minimal and around 1 000 tonnes of such products are imported each year into that part of Germany.
The Germany laws apply without distinction to all products containing PCP, whether domestic or imported. The Commission has never received any complaints against this legislation. Although during consultations Member States expressed doubts about the effects that the German measure might have on intra-Community trade, no figures have been put forward nor has there been any impact assessment on the economic sectors supposed to have been affected by the German legislation: leather, textiles, etc. The Commission has consulted various European industrial federations whose firms use large quantities of PCP: the information obtained does not indicate any barrier to trade. In the case of the timber industry it appears that the ban on PCP has not affected trade in wood in any way, since it is now treated with other products.
(9) Do the national provisions in question represent a disguised restriction on trade between Member States?
This concept, which is mentioned in the second subparagraph of Article 100A (4) refers to the objective of preventing restrictions based on the criteria laid down in the preceding subparagraph from being in fact used for economic purposes - that is to say, introduced either to restrict imports of products from other Member States or indirectly to protect domestic production. The Commission considers, however, that the facts and an examination of all the circumstances surrounding the introduction of these provisions as described above do not allow such a conclusion to be drawn.
There is no German special interest in the development, production of exportation of substitutes for PCP; on the contrary. The example of creosote, referred to above, proves the point. A regulation of 14 October 1993 prohibits the marketing of creosote, although Germany was the leading producer of creosote in the world. Trade between Germany and the other Member States in the PCP used in wood preservatives is very limited.
According to the undertakings, imports of PCP into the Community as a whole do not exceed 1 200 tonnes annually, a modest amount. PCP is a very cheap product, and its effect on the market is therefore negligible. Since there is no market for the product in Germany, nor indeed in any of the Scandinavian countries or Austria, the effects on intra-Community trade are practically non-existent.
IV In view of the health and environmental hazards described in the expert report the Commission has arranged for a report on the operation of the Directive and on the substitutability of PCP to be prepared, on the basis of which it will assess by the end of the year the possibility of proposing a total PCP ban.
CONCLUSION In the light of the above considerations, the Commission considers that the national measures notified by the German authorities pursuant to Article 100 a (4):
- should be regarded as justified, having regard to the major requirements referred to in Article 36 of the EC Treaty and those relating to protection of the environment, and are necessary in relation to those requirements and, finally, are not disproportionate to the objectives pursued,
- do not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination,
and
- do not constitute a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.
The Commission is therefore justified in concluding that they may be endorsed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The provisions of the Pentachlorphenolverbotsverordnung (regulation prohibiting pentachlorophenol) of 12 December 1989, notified by Germany, as consolidated by the regulations of 26 October 1993 and 14 October 1993, are hereby endorsed.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.
Done at Brussels, 14 September 1994.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 10 November 1993 amending Decision 93/531/EEC concerning certain protection measures relating to African swine fever in Portugal
(93/582/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 92/118/EEC (2), and in particular, Article 10 (4) 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, and in particular, Article 9 (4) thereof,
Whereas, as a result of outbreaks of African swine fever in the Alentejo region of Portugal, the Commission adopted Decision 93/531/EEC of 15 October 1993 concerning certain protection measures relating to African swine fever in Portugal (4);
Whereas the occurrence of African swine fever is liable to present a serious threat to the herds of other Member States in view of the trade in live pigs, fresh pigmeat and certain meat-based products;
Whereas the temporary protection measures adopted by Decision 93/531/EEC must be extended pending clarification of the African swine fever situation;
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
Decision 93/531/EEC is hereby amended as follows:
In Article 5 '10 November 1993' is replaced by '15 December 1993'.
Article 2
The Member States shall amend the measures which they apply to trade to as to bring them into compliance with this Decision. They shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 November 1993.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 12 October 1998 amending Decision 97/20/EC establishing the list of third countries fulfilling the equivalence conditions for the production and placing on the market of bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods (notified under document number C(1998) 2967) (Text with EEA relevance) (98/571/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council 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 (1), as last amended by the Directive 97/79/EC (2), and in particular Article 9(3)(a) thereof,
Whereas Commission Decision 97/20/EC (3) of 17 December 1996, last amended by Decision 97/565/EC (4), establishes the list of third countries from which imports of bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods in whatever form are authorised for human consumption;
Whereas Commission Decision 98/569/EC (5) lays down special conditions for the import of live bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods originating in Tunisia;
Whereas it is therefore necessary to add Tunisia on the list of third countries from which importation of bivalve molluscs, echinoderms, tunicates and marine gastropods are authorized;
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 97/20/EC is replaced by the Annex of the present Decision.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 October 1998.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (ECSC, EC, Euratom) No 3607/93 of 13 November 1993 amending Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 549/69 determining the categories of officials and other servants of the European Communities to whom the provisions of Article 12, the second paragraph of Article 13 and Article 14 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the Communities apply
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities,
Having regard to the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, and in particular Articles 16 and 23 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 Court of Auditors,
Having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice,
Whereas it is appropriate to extend to the European Monetary Institute the application of Council Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 549/69 determining the categories of officials and other servants of the European Communities to whom the provisions of
Article 12, the second paragraph of Article 13 and Article 14 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the Communities apply (3), in order to ensure that the members of the staff of the European Monetary Institute, in view of their duties and responsibilities and of their particular situation, benefit from the same privileges, immunities and facilities,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following Article is added to Regulation (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) No 549/69;
'Article 4a
Without prejudice to Article 23 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities with regard to the members of the Council of the European Monetary Institute, the privileges and immunities provided for in Article 12, in the second paragraph of Article 13 and in Article 14 of the Protocol shall apply under the same conditions and within the same limits as those laid down in Articles 1, 2 and 3 of this Regulation to:
- staff of the European Monetary Institute;
- persons receiving disability, retirement or survivor's pensions paid by the European Monetary Institute.'
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, 13 December 1993.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
COUNCIL DECISION 2006/807/CFSP
of 20 November 2006
implementing Joint Action 2005/797/CFSP on the European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian Territories
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Council Joint Action 2005/797/CFSP of 14 November 2005 on the European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian Territories (1), and in particular Article 14(2) thereof, in conjunction with the second indent of the first subparagraph of Article 23(2) of the Treaty on European Union,
Whereas:
(1)
By Joint Action 2005/797/CFSP the Council established a European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian territories (hereinafter EUPOL COPPS) for a period of three years. The operational phase of the EUPOL COPPS started on 1 January 2006.
(2)
In accordance with Article 14(2) of that Joint Action, the final budget of EUPOL COPPS for the year 2007 should be decided,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The final budget of EUPOL COPPS for the period from 1 January until 31 December 2007 shall be EUR 2 800 000.
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
Article 3
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 20 November 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2120/2001
of 29 October 2001
prohibiting fishing for haddock by vessels flying the flag of Germany
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1965/2001(2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2848/2000 of 15 December 2000 fixing for 2001 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where limitations in catch are required(3), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1666/2001(4), lays down quotas for haddock for 2001.
(2) In order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated.
(3) According to the information received by the Commission, catches of haddock in the waters of Skagerrak and Kattegat and ICES divisions III bcd (EC waters) by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany have exhausted the quota allocated for 2001. Germany has prohibited fishing for this stock from 8 October 2001. This date should be adopted in this Regulation also,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Catches of haddock in the waters of Skagerrak and Kattegat and ICES divisions III bcd (EC waters) by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated to Germany for 2001.
Fishing for haddock in the waters of Skagerrak and Kattegat and ICES zones III bcd (EC waters) by vessels flying the flag of Germany or registered in Germany is hereby prohibited, as are the retention on board, transhipment and landing of this stock caught by the above vessels after the date of application of this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 8 October 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 October 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2099/97 of 24 October 1997 determining, for the 1997 marketing year, the estimated loss of income and the estimated level of the premium payable per ewe and per female goat and fixing the second advance payment for this premium
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 of 25 September 1989 on the common organization of the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat (1), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1589/96 (2), and in particular Article 5 (6) thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Canary Islands with regard to certain agricultural products (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2348/96 (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,
Whereas Article 5 (1) and (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 provides for the grant of a premium to compensate for any loss of income sustained by producers of sheepmeat and, in certain areas, of goatmeat; whereas those areas are defined in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 and in Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1065/86 of 11 April 1986 determining the mountain areas in which the premium for goatmeat is granted (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3519/86 (6);
Whereas, pursuant to Article 5 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 and to enable an advance payment to be made to sheepmeat and goatmeat producers, the foreseeable loss of income should be estimated in the light of the foreseeable trend in market prices;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, the amount of the premium per ewe for producers of heavy lambs is obtained by multiplying the loss of income referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 of that Article by a coefficient expressing the annual average production of heavy lamb meat per ewe producing these lambs expressed per 100 kilograms of carcase weight; whereas the coefficient for 1997 has not yet been fixed in view of the lack of full Community statistics; whereas, pending the fixing of that coefficient, a provisional coefficient should be used; whereas Article 5 (3) of that Regulation also fixes the amount per ewe for producers of light lambs and per female of the caprine species and at 80 % of the premium per ewe for producers of heavy lambs;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, the premium must be reduced by the impact on the basic price of the coefficient provided for in paragraph 2 of that Article; whereas that coefficient is fixed by Article 8 (4) at 7 %;
Whereas, in accordance with Article 5 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, the half-yearly advance payment is fixed at 30 % of the expected premium; whereas, in accordance with Article 4 (3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2700/93 (7), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1526/96 (8), the advance payment is to be paid only if it is equal to or greater than ECU 1;
Whereas the agricultural conversion rate has been frozen until 1 January 1999 for certain currencies by Council Regulation (EC) No 1527/95 (9);
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 provides for the application of specific measures relating to agricultural production in the Canary Islands; whereas those measures entail the grant of a supplement to the ewe premium to producers of light lambs and she-goats on the same conditions as those governing the grant of the premium referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89; whereas those conditions provide that Spain is authorized to pay an advance on the said supplementary premium;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sheep and Goats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
A difference is hereby estimated between the basic price, reduced by the impact of the coefficient laid down in Article 8 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, and the foreseeable market price during 1997 is ECU 88,785 per 100 kilograms.
Article 2
1. The estimated amount of the premium payable per ewe is as follows:
- producers of heavy lambs: ECU 14,206
- producers of light lambs: ECU 11,365.
2. Pursuant to Article 5 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, the second advance that the Member States are authorized to pay to producers shall be as follows:
- producers of heavy lambs: ECU 4,262 per ewe,
- producers of light lambs: ECU 3,410 per ewe.
Article 3
1. The estimated amount of the premium payable per female of the caprine species in the areas designated in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 and in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1065/86: ECU 11,365.
2. Pursuant to Article 5 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89, the second advance which the Member States are authorized to pay to goatmeat producers located in the areas designated in paragraph 1 shall be as follows: ECU 3,410 per female of the caprine species.
Article 4
Pursuant to Article 13 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92, the second advance on the supplementary premium for the 1997 marketing year for producers of light lambs and she-goats in the Canary Islands within the limits provided for in Article 1 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3493/90 (10).
- ECU 0,852 per ewe in the case of producers referred to in Article 5 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89,
- ECU 0,852 per she-goat in the case of the producers referred to in Article 5 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89.
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, 24 October 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 23 January 2004
on financial assistance from the Community for the storage of antigens for production of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines in France, Italy and the United Kingdom in 2004
(notified under document number C(2004) 102)
(Only the French and Italian texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2004/128/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field(1), and in particular Article 14 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with Council Decision 91/666/EEC of 11 December 1991 establishing Community reserves of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines(2), the establishment of antigen banks is part of the Community's action to create Community reserves of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines.
(2) Decision 91/666/EEC designates the "Laboratoire de pathologie bovine du Centre national d'études vétérinaires et alimentaires" at Lyon in France, which is now part of the "Agence Française de Securité Sanitaire des Aliments (AFSSA)", and the "Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale die Brescia" in Italy, as antigen banks for the storage of Community reserves.
(3) Commission Decision 2000/111/EC of December 1999 designating a new antigen bank and making provisions for the transfer and storage of antigens within the framework of the Community action concerning reserves of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines(3) further designates Merial S.A.S., Pirbright, United Kingdom.
(4) Community assistance should be linked to compliance with certain conditions as to the functioning of the antigen banks and the transmission of information and supporting documents.
(5) For budgetary reasons the Community assistance should be granted for a period of one year.
(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
1. The Community shall grant financial assistance to Agence Française de Securité Sanitaire des Aliments for the stocking of antigens for the production of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines at the premises of Agence Française de Securité Sanitaire des Aliments, Lyon.
2. For the period from 1 January to 31 December 2004 the maximum amount of financial assistance shall be EUR 30000.
Article 2
1. The Community shall grant financial assistance to Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale di Brescia for the stocking of antigens for the production of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines at the premises of Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale di Brescia.
2. For the period from 1 January to 31 December 2004 the maximum amount of financial assistance shall be EUR 30000.
Article 3
1. The Community shall grant financial assistance to Merial S.A.S. with its headquarters in Lyon, France, for the stocking of antigens for the production of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines at the premises of Merial S.A.S., Lyon, France, and at the premises of Merial S.A.S., Pirbright, United Kingdom.
2. For the period from 1 January to 31 December 2004 the maximum amount of financial assistance shall be EUR 81047.
Article 4
1. The Community's financial assistance referred to in Article 1(2), Article 2(2) and Article 3(2) shall only be granted if the conditions provided for in Article 4 of Decision 91/666/EEC are complied with and the information and documents provided for in paragraph 2 are submitted to the Commission by 28 February 2005 at the latest.
2. The information and documents referred to in paragraph 1 shall include the following:
(a) technical information on:
(i) the amount and type of antigen stored (storage records),
(ii) storage equipment used (type, number and capacity of tanks),
(iii) security systems in place (temperature control, anti-theft measures),
(iv) insurance arrangements (fire, accidents);
(b) financial information (completion of a form based on the model set out in the Annex).
Article 5
This Decision is addressed to the Agence Française de Securité Sanitaire des Aliments, 31, avenue Tony Garnier, BP 7033, F-69342 Lyon Cedex 07, France, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale di Brescia, Via Bianchi 9, I-25124 Brescia, Italy, and Merial S.A.S., 29, avenue Tony Garnier, BP 7123, F-69002 Lyon Cedex 07, France.
Done at Brussels, 23 January 2004.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2337/91 of 1 August 1991 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on products falling within CN code 6403, originating in India, Thailand and Indonesia, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3831/90 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3831/90 of 20 December 1990 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1991 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3835/90 (2), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3831/90, suspension of customs duties shall be accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I within the framework of the preferential tariff ceilings fixed in column 6 of Annex I;
Whereas, as provided for in Article 7 of that Regulation, as soon as the individual ceilings in question are reached at Community level, the levying of customs duties on imports of the products in question originating in each of the countries and territories concerned may at any time be re-established;
Whereas, in the case of products falling within CN code 6403, originating in India, Thailand and Indonesia, the individual ceiling was fixed at ECU 4 200 000; whereas, on 12 June 1991, imports of these products into the Community originating in India, Thailand and Indonesia reached the ceiling in question after being charged thereagainst; whereas, it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties in respect of the products in question against India, Thailand and Indonesia,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 5 August 1991, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3831/90, shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in India, Thailand and Indonesia:
Order No CN code Description 10.0670 6403 Footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather
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, 1 August 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1785/2005
of 28 October 2005
amending Regulation (EEC) No 1609/88 as regards the latest date by which butter must have been taken into storage in order to be sold pursuant to Regulations (EEC) No 3143/85 and (EC) No 2571/97
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 organization of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular Article 10,
Whereas:
(1)
Pursuant to Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2571/97 of 15 December 1997 on the sale of butter at reduced prices and the grant of aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter for use in the manufacture of pastry products, ice-cream and other foodstuffs (2), the butter put up for sale must have been taken into storage before a date to be determined.
(2)
In view of the trends on the butter market and the quantities of stocks available, the date in Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1609/88 (3), relating to the butter referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2571/97, should be amended.
(3)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
In Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1609/88, the second subparagraph is hereby replaced by the following:
‘The butter referred to in Article 1(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 2571/97 must have been taken into storage before 1 January 2004.’
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third 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, 28 October 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 965/91 of 19 April 1991 reimposing the levying of customs duties applicable to third countries on certain products originating in Yugoslavia
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1), and in particular Protocol 1 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3412/90 of 19 November 1990 establishing ceilings and Community supervision for imports of certain products originating in Yugoslavia (2), and in particular Article 1 thereof,
Whereas the abovementioned Protocol 1 and Article 15 of the Cooperation Agreement provide that the products listed in the Annex are imported exempt of customs duty into the Community, subject to the ceilings shown, above which the customs duties applicable to third countries may be re-established;
Whereas imports into the Community of those products, originating in Yugoslavia, have reached those ceilings; whereas the situation on the Community market requires that customs duties applicable to third countries on the products in question be reimposed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1
From 23 April to 31 December 1991, the levying of customs duties applicable to third countries shall be reimposed on imports into the Community of the products listed in the Annex, originating in Yugoslavia. 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, 19 April 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 5 February 2001
excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)
(notified under document number C(2001) 198)
(Only the Danish, German, Greek, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Swedish and English texts are authentic)
(2001/137/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)(c) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy(3), and in particular Article 7(4) thereof,
After consulting the Committee of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund,
Whereas:
(1) Article 5(2)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 and Article 7(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 stipulate that the Commission is to exclude expenditure from Community financing where it finds that it has not been incurred in accordance with the Community rules.
(2) Those Articles of Regulations (EEC) No 729/70 and (EC) No 1258/1999 and Article 8(1) and (2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 of 7 July 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 regarding the procedure for the clearance of the accounts of the EAGGF Guarantee Section(4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2245/1999(5), provide that the Commission is to carry out the necessary checks, forward its findings to the Member States, consider any comments from the latter, enter into bilateral discussions to reach an agreement with the Member States concerned and formally communicate its conclusions to them, referring to Commission Decision 94/442/EC of 1 July 1994 setting up a conciliation procedure in the context of the clearance of the accounts of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guarantee Section(6), as amended by Decision 2000/649/EC(7).
(3) The Member States have had the opportunity to request that a conciliation procedure be initiated. That procedure has been applied in some cases and the reports issued on the outcome have been considered by the Commission.
(4) Articles 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 and Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 provide that refunds on exports to non-member countries and intervention intended to stabilise the agricultural markets may be financed only where they are, respectively, granted and undertaken in accordance with the Community rules governing the common organisation of the agricultural markets.
(5) The findings of checks performed, the results of bilateral discussions and the outcome of the conciliation procedures have shown that some expenditure declared by the Member States does not meet those conditions and cannot therefore be financed under the EAGGF Guarantee Section.
(6) The Annex to this Decision sets out the amounts that are not recognised as being chargeable to the EAGGF Guarantee Section. Those amounts do not relate to expenditure incurred more than 24 months before the Commission's written notification of the results of the checks to the Member States.
(7) As regards the cases covered by this Decision, the assessment of the amounts to be excluded on grounds of non-compliance with the Community rules was notified by the Commission to the Member States in a summary report on the subject.
(8) This Decision is without prejudice to any financial conclusions that the Commission may draw from the judgments of the Court of Justice in cases pending at the date of this Decision and relating to the subject thereof,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The expenditure itemised in the Annex that has been incurred by the Member States' accredited paying agencies and declared under the EAGGF Guarantee Section is hereby excluded from Community financing because it does not comply with the Community rules.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Portuguese Republic, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Done at Brussels, 5 February 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 7 November 1994 appointing a member of the Committee of the Regions (94/734/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 198a thereof,
Having regard to the Council Decision of 26 January 1994 appointing members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period 26 January 1994 to 25 January 1998 (1),
Whereas a seat has become vacant on the Committee of the Regions following the resignation of Mr Jean Baggioni, notified to the Council on 24 October 1994;
Having regard to the proposal from the French Government,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Mr Jérôme Polvérini is hereby appointed a member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Jean Baggioni for the remainder of the latter's term of office, which runs until 25 January 1998.
Done at Brussels, 7 November 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1
] |
*****
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE
of 28 October 1986
amending the Annex to Council Directive 82/471/CEE concerning certain products used in animal nutrition
(86/530/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 82/471/EEC of 30 June 1982 concerning certain products used in animal nutrition (1), as last amended by Commission Directive 85/509/EEC (2), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
Whereas Directive 82/471/EEC provides for regular amendment of the content of the Annexes thereto as a result of developments in scientific or technical knowledge;
Whereas the study of three new products belonging to the proteins, non-protein nitrogenous compounds and amino acids groups has shown that these products fulfil the requirements of Directive 82/471/EEC; whereas the use of these products in animal nutrition should, therefore, be permitted under certain conditions;
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
The Annex to Directive 82/471/EEC is amended as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
The Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 1 not later than 30 June 1988. They shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
Article 3
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 October 1986.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 February 2000
concerning certain protection measures relating to avian influenza in Italy
(notified under document number C(2000) 489)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2000/149/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 92/118/EEC(2), and in particular, Article 10(4) 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, and in particular, Article 9(4) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Outbreaks of avian influenza have occurred in Italy in several regions since 20 December 1999.
(2) Measures to control avian influenza are given in Council Directive 92/40/EEC introducing Community measures for the control of avian influenza(4).
(3) The provisions for intra Community trade in live poultry and hatching eggs are given in Council Directive 90/539/EEC on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs(5), as last amended Directive 1999/90/EC(6).
(4) The provisions for intra-Community trade in birds other than poultry referred to in Directive 90/539/EEC are given in Council Directive 92/65/EEC laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A Section I to Directive 90/425/EEC(7), as last amended by Commission Decision 95/176/EC(8).
(5) The provisions for intra-Community trade in fresh poultry meat are given in Council Directive 91/494/EEC of 26 June 1991 on animal helath conditions governing intra-Community trade in and imports from third countries of fresh poultry meat(9), as last amended by Directive 1999/89/EC(10).
(6) The disease situation is liable to endanger the flocks in other parts of the Community in view of trade in live poultry and birds and hatching eggs thereof.
(7) Italy has established avian influenza preventive and control measures within the framework of:
- Directive 92/40/EEC
- Directive 90/539/EEC
- Directive 92/65/EEC
- Directive 91/494/EEC
- National Decree No 600.6/24461/57N/139 issued on 14 January 2000 by the Ministry of Health of Italy.
(8) Member States recognise that measures implemented by Italy are appropriate.
(9) However in view of the evolution of the disease and the specifity of the epidemiology of this particular epidemic specific measures shall be adopted in view of reducing the risk of spreading the virus within the poultry population.
(10) These measures should reflect the specific structure of the integrated industry in the affected area.
(11) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Complementary measures shall be implemented by Italy. They should contain at least the following provisions:
(a) In the state of Italy
1. Disposable packaging shall be used for collection, storage and transport of table eggs. The pieces of packaging shall be destroyed immediately after use in such a way to guarantee the destruction of the vrius with methods approved by the competent authority.
2. Packaging centres for table eggs situated in close proximity of a farm where birds of susceptible species are kept must not introduce eggs coming from farms located in provinces where avian influenza has been confirmed.
(b) In regions where avian influenza has been confirmed in the last 30 days
1. All means of transport used for poultry, hatching eggs, table eggs and poultry feedstuff must be cleaned and disinfected immediately before entering and after leaving a farm or a related plant with disinfectants and methods approved by the competent authority. For means of transport engaged in intra-Community trade, a document ascertaining this disinfection shall be issued and should at least contain the information on cleansing and disinfection equivalent to that shown in the Annex.
2. All the machinery for loading and unloading the lorries shall be cleaned and disinfected immediately before and after use according to paragraph 1.
3. Hatching eggs, their packing and means of transport must be disinfected before dispatch according to paragraph 1.
4. The person responsible for a poultry-holding shall ensure that all persons entering and leaving the holding apply strict bio-security measures as well as providing clean protective clothes and footwear to visitors, catchers and other persons. The responsible person shall also ensure that appropriate means of disinfection are used at the entrances and exists of buildings housing poultry.
(c) In provinces where avian influenza has been confirmed in the last 30 days
1. All means of transport for poultry, hatching eggs, table eggs and poultry feedstuff shall transport only one single consignment intended for or coming from one single farm or plant at one time.
2. All means of transport for poultry, hatching eggs, table eggs and poultry feedstuff leaving these provinces must be accompanied by an official document certifying that the means of transport have been cleaned and disinfected prior to movement according to point (b)1. These lorries shall transport only one single consignment intended for or coming from one single farm or plant at one time.
3. Used litter and poultry manure may only be removed from the holding or spread with authorisation given by the competent authority. Such authorisation must take into account the provisions of Annex II Section II(d) of Directive 92/40/EEC.
Article 2
The central veterinary authority may introduce further measures other than those referred to in this Decision if they are deemed necessary for the eradication of the disease. Italy shall inform the Commission and the Member States of these measures immediately.
Article 3
Member States shall ensure that the provisions of Article 1(a) (1) are applied for all consignments coming from or originating in Italy.
Article 4
Member States shall amend the measures which they apply to trade so as to bring them into conformity with this Decision. They shall immediately inform the Commission thereof.
Article 5
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 22 February 2000.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2092/2004
of 8 December 2004
laying down detailed rules of application for an import tariff quota of dried boneless beef originating in Switzerland
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 32(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
The Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products (2) (hereinafter the Agreement) which was approved on behalf of the Community by Decision 2002/309/EC, Euratom provides for tariff-free imports of a quantity of 1 200 tonnes per annum for meat of bovine animals, boneless, dried, falling under CN code ex 0210 20 90.
(2)
Due to the BSE crisis the parties declared in the Joint Declaration on the meat sector, included in the Final Act to the Agreement (3) that, by way of an exception, an annual autonomous quota should be opened by the Community for 700 tonnes net weight dried beef subject to ad valorem duty and exempt from the specific duty until the lifting of import restrictions imposed by certain Member States on Switzerland. Commission Regulation (EC) No 2424/1999 of 15 November 1999 laying down detailed rules of application for an import tariff quota of dried boneless beef provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 2249/1999 (4) opened an import tariff quota of dried boneless beef for imports from Switzerland on a pluriannual basis for an annual volume of 700 tonnes from 1 July to 30 June of the following year.
(3)
At its third meeting held in Brussels on 4 December 2003 the Joint Committee on Agriculture concluded that after the adoption of Decision No 2/2003 of the Joint Veterinary Committee set up by the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products of 25 November 2003 amending Appendices 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11 to Annex 11 to the Agreement (5), and the subsequent lifting of the restrictive measures by the Member States on Switzerland, the concessions as provided for in the Agreement should be applied as soon as possible. However, with consideration to the change in rules of origin, it was jointly felt necessary to allow sufficient time for operators to adjust and to take appropriate steps in relation to possible stocks. Consequently, it was agreed to implement the new concessions as of 1 January 2005.
(4)
Detailed rules of application should, therefore, be laid down on a pluriannual basis for a tariff-free import quota of a quantity of 1 200 tonnes per annum starting on 1 January 2005 for meat of bovine animals, boneless, dried, falling under CN code ex 0210 20 90 originating in Switzerland.
(5)
To be eligible for the benefit of this tariff quota, the products concerned should originate in Switzerland in conformity with the rules referred to in Article 4 of the Agreement. A precise definition of the eligible products should be provided. For reasons of control, imports under that quota should be subject to the presentation of a certificate of authenticity attesting that the meat corresponds exactly to the eligible definition. It is necessary to establish a model for those certificates and lay down detailed rules for their use.
(6)
The arrangements should be managed using import licences. To this end, rules should be laid down on the submission of applications and the information to be given on applications and licences, where necessary by derogation from Commission Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000 of 9 June 2000 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences and advance fixing certificates for agricultural products (6) and from 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 (7).
(7)
In order to ensure proper management of the imports of the products concerned, provisions should be made for import licences to be issued subject to verification, in particular of entries on certificates of authenticity.
(8)
Regulation (EC) No 2424/1999 should be repealed.
(9)
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. A Community duty-free import tariff quota for dried boneless meat of bovine animals falling within CN code ex 0210 20 90 and originating in Switzerland is hereby opened on a pluriannual basis for an annual volume of 1 200 tonnes for periods from 1 January to 31 December (hereinafter the quota).
The order number of the quota shall be 09.4202.
2. The rules of origin applicable to the products referred to in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in Article 4 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products.
3. For the purposes of this Regulation, dried boneless meat shall mean cuts of meat from haunches of bovine animals aged at least 18 months, with no visible intramuscular fat (3 to 7 %) and a pH of the fresh meat between 5,4 and 6,0; salted, seasoned, pressed, dried only in fresh dry air and developing noble mould (bloom of microscopic fungi). The weight of the finished product is between 41 % and 53 % of the raw material before salting.
Article 2
1. Imports of the quantities set out in Article 1(1) shall be subject to presentation, on release for free circulation, of an import licence.
2. The original of the certificate of authenticity drawn up in accordance with Article 3 plus a copy thereof shall be presented to the competent authority together with the application for the first import licence relating to the certificate of authenticity.
The original of the certificate of authenticity shall be kept by that authority.
3. A certificate of authenticity may be used for the issuing of more than one import licence for quantities not exceeding that shown on the certificate. Where more than one licence is issued in respect of a certificate, the competent authority shall endorse the certificate of authenticity to show the quantity attributed.
4. The competent authorities may issue import licences only after they are satisfied that all the information on the certificate of authenticity corresponds to that received each week from the Commission on the subject. The licences shall be issued immediately thereafter.
However, the competent authorities may, in exceptional cases and on duly reasoned application, issue import licences on the basis of the relevant certificates of authenticity before the information from the Commission is received. In such cases, the security for the import licences shall be equal to the amount corresponding to the full customs duty under the common customs tariff. After having received the information relating to the certificate, Member States shall replace this security with that referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1445/1995.
5. Section 20 of the licence applications and of the licences themselves shall show one of the endorsements listed in Annex I.
Article 3
1. The certificates of authenticity referred to in Article 2 shall be made out in one original and two copies, to be printed and completed in one of the official languages of the Community, in accordance with the model in Annex II. It may also be printed and completed in the official language or one of the official languages of the exporting country.
The competent authorities of the Member State in which the import licence application is submitted may require a translation of the certificate to be provided.
2. The certificate forms shall measure 210 × 297 mm. The paper used shall weigh not less than 40 g/m2. The original shall be white, the first copy pink and the second copy yellow.
3. The original of the certificate and copies thereof may be typed or handwritten. In the latter case, they must be completed in black ink and in block capitals.
4. Each certificate shall have its own individual serial number followed by the name of the issuing country.
The copies shall bear the same serial number and the same name as the original.
5. The definition of dried boneless meat provided for in Article 1(3) shall be clearly laid down in the certificate.
6. Certificates shall be valid only if they are duly endorsed by an issuing authority listed in Annex III.
Certificates shall be deemed to have been duly endorsed if they state the date and place of issue and if they bear the stamp of the issuing authority and the signature of the person or persons empowered to sign them.
Article 4
1. The issuing authorities listed in Annex III must:
(a)
be recognised as such by the exporting country concerned;
(b)
undertake to verify entries on the certificates;
(c)
undertake to forward to the Commission at least once a week any information enabling the entries on the certificates of authenticity, in particular the number of the certificate, the exporter, the consignee, the country of destination, the product, the net weight and the date of signature, to be verified.
2. The list in Annex III may be revised by the Commission where the requirement referred to in paragraph 1(a) of this Article is no longer met or where the issuing authority fails to fulfil any of the obligations incumbent on it.
Article 5
Certificates of authenticity and import licences shall be valid for three months from their respective dates of issue. However, their term of validity shall expire on 31 December following the date of issue.
Article 6
The provisions of Regulations (EC) No 1291/2000 and (EC) No 1445/95 shall apply subject to the provisions of this Regulation.
Article 7
The authorities of the exporting countries shall communicate to the Commission specimens of the stamp imprints used by their issuing authorities and the names and signatures of the persons empowered to sign certificates of authenticity. Any subsequent changes of stamps or names shall equally be notified to the Commission as soon as possible. The Commission shall communicate this information to the competent authorities of the Member States.
Article 8
Regulation (EC) No 2424/1999 is repealed.
Article 9
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.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 December 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1204/2008
of 3 December 2008
on the entry of certain names in the ‘Register of traditional specialities guaranteed’ provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed
(Codified version)
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 of 20 March 2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed (1) and, in particular Article 9(4) and the second subparagraph of Article 9(5) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2301/97 of 20 November 1997 on the entry of certain names in the ‘Register of certificates of specific character’ provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/92 on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs (2) has been substantially amended several times (3). In the interests of clarity and rationality the said Regulation should be codified.
(2)
In accordance with Article 7 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/92 of 14 July 1992 on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs (4), the Member States have forwarded to the Commission applications for the registration of certain names as certificates of special character.
(3)
The names concerned could be entered in the ‘Register of certificates of specific character’ and therefore protected throughout the Community as traditional specialities guaranteed. Following the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, the said register was replaced by the ‘Register of traditional specialities guaranteed’ laid down in Article 3 of the said Regulation.
(4)
The names so registered are entitled to use the endorsement ‘traditional speciality guaranteed’ which is reserved for them.
(5)
The term ‘Serrano’ is considered specific in itself in accordance with Article 4(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, i.e. it is untranslatable. It must therefore be used as it stands. Furthermore, the term ‘Serrano’ is registered without prejudice to the use of the term ‘mountain’. There is no conflict between the two terms.
(6)
As regards the names ‘Leche certificada de Granja’ and ‘Traditional Farmfresh Turkey’, protection has been requested solely for the Spanish version of the name ‘Leche certificada de Granja’ and for the English version of the name ‘Traditional Farmfresh Turkey’. Therefore, in accordance with Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000, on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs (5), when these two products are marketed their labels must include in the other languages, immediately next to the name concerned, the words ‘traditional Spanish-style’ or their equivalent for the former product and the equivalent of ‘traditional British-style’ for the latter.
(7)
As regards the name ‘Traditional Farmfresh Turkey’, in accordance with Directive 2000/13/EC, the labelling and in particular the information intended for consumers must in no case lead to confusion with the terms laid down for indicating types of farming in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1538/91 of 5 June 1991 introducing detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1906/90 on certain marketing standards for poultrymeat (6),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The names set out in Annex I hereto are hereby entered in the ‘Register of traditional specialities guaranteed’, as provided for in Article 9(4) and the second subparagraph of Article 9(5) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006.
Article 2
When marketing ‘Leche certificada de Granja’ in languages other than Spanish, the label must include the expression ‘traditional Spanish-style’, or its equivalent in the other languages.
When marketing ‘Traditional Farmfresh Turkey’ in languages other than English, the label must include an expression equivalent to: ‘traditional British-style’.
Article 3
Regulation (EC) No 2301/97 is repealed.
References to the repealed Regulation shall be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance with the correlation table in Annex III.
Article 4
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 December 2008.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1760/2005
of 27 October 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 28 October 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 October 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 3704/90 of 18 December 1990 extending the arrangements applicable to trade with Malta beyond the expiry date of the first stage of the Association Agreement
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the provisions governing the first stage of the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Malta (1), including the Protocol laying down certain provisions relating to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Malta (2), extended by the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement (3) and the Supplementary Protocol to the Association Agreement (4), expire on 31 December 1990;
Whereas a Protocol extending the first stage of the Association Agreement is being prepared;
Whereas, pending the entry into force of that Protocol, the arrangements applied by the Community to trade with Malta within the framework of association with that country should be extended in order to prevent sudden disruption of traditional flows of trade,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The trade arrangements introduced by the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Malta, including the Additional Protocol to the Association Agreement and the Supplementary Protocol to the Association Agreement shall continue to apply in the Community beyond 31 December 1990.
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 1991.
This Regulation shall apply until the entry into force of the Protocol extending the first stage of the Association Agreement.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 December 1990.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 168/2009
of 3 March 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 4 March 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 March 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 365/2008
of 23 April 2008
adopting the programme of ad hoc modules, covering the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, for the labour force sample survey provided for by Council Regulation (EC) No 577/98
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 577/98 of 9 March 1998 on the organisation of a labour force sample survey in the Community (1), and in particular Article 4(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
In accordance with Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 577/98, it is necessary to specify the elements of the programme of ad hoc modules covering the years 2010, 2011 and 2012.
(2)
The Employment Guidelines (2005-2008) adopted by Council Decision 2005/600/EC (2), the European Commission’s ‘Roadmap on equality between women and men’ (3) and the European Pact for Gender Equality (4) encourage Member States to take measures to promote a better work-life balance for all in terms of childcare, care facilities for other dependents and the promotion of parental leave for both women and men. Therefore, to measure the impact of recent policies in this area, it would be essential to collect relevant information with the 2010 ad hoc module.
(3)
The Council Resolution of 17 June 1999 on equal opportunities for people with disabilities (5) refers to the need for a comprehensive and comparable dataset on the labour market situation of people with disabilities. Moreover, the Commission’s European Action Plan on equal opportunities for people with disabilities (6), which focuses on the active inclusion of people with disabilities, should be monitored. Therefore, this information should be collected through the ad hoc module for 2011.
(4)
There is a need for a comprehensive and comparable set of data on transitions from work into retirement in order to monitor progress towards the common objectives of the European Employment Strategy and of the open method of coordination in the area of pensions launched by the Laeken European Council in December 2001. Both processes identify the promotion of active ageing and prolongation of working life as priorities for action. Therefore, information on the labour market situation of older workers and the main factors influencing their labour market participation and transitions should be collected through the ad hoc module 2012.
(5)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 430/2005 of 15 March 2005 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 577/98 on the organisation of a labour force sample survey in the Community concerning the codification to be used for data transmission from 2006 onwards and the use of a sub-sample for the collection of data on structural variables (7) sets out the characteristics of the sample to be used to collect information on ad hoc modules.
(6)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Statistical Programme Committee established by Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom (8),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The programme of ad hoc modules for the labour force sample survey, covering the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, as set out in the Annex, is hereby adopted.
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.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 April 2008.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 199/2004
of 5 February 2004
fixing the representative prices and the additional import duties for molasses in the sugar sector
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 market in sugar(1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 of 23 June 1995 laying down detailed rules of application for imports of molasses in the sugar sector and amending Regulation (EEC) No 785/68(2), and in particular Article 1(2) and Article 3(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 stipulates that the cif import price for molasses, hereinafter referred to as the "representative price", should be set in accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 785/68(3). That price should be fixed for the standard quality defined in Article 1 of the above Regulation.
(2) The representative price for molasses is calculated at the frontier crossing point into the Community, in this case Amsterdam; that price must be based on the most favourable purchasing opportunities on the world market established on the basis of the quotations or prices on that market adjusted for any deviations from the standard quality. The standard quality for molasses is defined in Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.
(3) When the most favourable purchasing opportunities on the world market are being established, account must be taken of all available information on offers on the world market, on the prices recorded on important third-country markets and on sales concluded in international trade of which the Commission is aware, either directly or through the Member States. Under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68, the Commission may for this purpose take an average of several prices as a basis, provided that this average is representative of actual market trends.
(4) The information must be disregarded if the goods concerned are not of sound and fair marketable quality or if the price quoted in the offer relates only to a small quantity that is not representative of the market. Offer prices which can be regarded as not representative of actual market trends must also be disregarded.
(5) If information on molasses of the standard quality is to be comparable, prices must, depending on the quality of the molasses offered, be increased or reduced in the light of the results achieved by applying Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.
(6) A representative price may be left unchanged by way of exception for a limited period if the offer price which served as a basis for the previous calculation of the representative price is not available to the Commission and if the offer prices which are available and which appear not to be sufficiently representative of actual market trends would entail sudden and considerable changes in the representative price.
(7) Where there is a difference between the trigger price for the product in question and the representative price, additional import duties should be fixed under the conditions set out in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95. Should the import duties be suspended pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95, specific amounts for these duties should be fixed.
(8) Application of these provisions will have the effect of fixing the representative prices and the additional import duties for the products in question as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
(9) 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 representative prices and the additional duties applying to imports of the products referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 February 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 February 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 28 January 2004
amending Decisions 95/233/EC, 96/482/EC, and 2001/751/EC relating to the importation of live poultry and hatching eggs and live ratites and hatching eggs; Decisions 94/85/EC, 94/984/EC, and 2000/609/EC relating to the importation of fresh poultrymeat, fresh farmed ratite meat, wild and farmed feathered game meat; Decision 2000/585/EC relating to the importation of wild and farmed game and rabbit meat and Decision 97/222/EC relating to the importation of meat products, with respect to certain Acceding States
(notified under document number C(2004) 125)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2004/118/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 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), and in particular Articles 14 (3) and 21a (2) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 90/539/EEC of 15 October 1990 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of poultry and hatching eggs(2), and in particular Articles 21(1), 23(1) and 26(2) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/494/EEC of 26 June 1991 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in and imports from third countries of fresh poultrymeat(3), and in particular Articles 9(1) and 11(1)(a) thereof,
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(4), and in particular Article 10 thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 92/45/EC 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(5), and in particular Article 16(3) 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(6), and in particular Article 8(1) and (4) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Decision 95/233/EC(7) lists in principle third countries from which Member States are authorised to import live poultry and hatching eggs including ratites and eggs thereof.
(2) Commission Decision 96/482/EC(8) lays down more detailed rules for the importation of live poultry and hatching eggs and the relevant animal health certificates.
(3) Commission Decision 2001/751/EC(9) lays down the animal health conditions and veterinary certification for imports of live ratites and hatching eggs from third countries including animal health measures to be applied after such importation, and lists the third countries from where such imports may be authorised.
(4) Consolidated evidence including: freedom from disease affecting poultry; poultry disease surveillance and monitoring programmes; the development of appropriate contingency plans for poultry diseases; and, the development of the veterinary acquis in regard to general veterinary legislation and legislation in the poultry sector in advance of EU accession, has demonstrated that Estonia, Malta, Latvia and Lithuania have sufficiently well structured and organised veterinary services regarding the animal health status for live poultry and ratites.
(5) It is therefore appropriate to add Lithuania, Estonia and Malta to the list of third countries that are, in principle, authorised to import live poultry and hatching eggs including ratites and eggs as laid down in Commission Decision 95/233/EC.
(6) Commission Decision 96/482/EC and Commission Decision 2001/751/EC should also be amended to include Estonia, Malta, Latvia and Lithuania.
(7) Commission Decision 94/85/EC(10) establishes a list of third countries from which importation of fresh poultry meat is authorised.
(8) Commission Decision 94/984/EC(11) lays down animal health conditions and veterinary certificates for the importation of fresh poultry meat from third countries.
(9) Commission Decision 2000/609/EC(12) establishes animal and public health conditions and veterinary certification for imports of farmed ratite meat.
(10) Because of the improved animal health status of the Acceding States in relation to poultry, Estonia should be added to the list of third countries that are, in principle, authorised to import fresh poultrymeat into the EU as laid down in Commission Decision 94/85/EC. This will also allow Estonia to be authorised to import wild feathered game meat as laid down in Commission Decision 94/86/EC(13).
(11) It is also appropriate to include Estonia, Malta and Latvia in Commission Decision 94/984/EC for the importation of fresh poultrymeat, and in Commission Decision 2000/609/EC for the importation of live ratites and hatching eggs.
(12) Commission Decision 2000/585/EC(14) lays down animal and public health conditions and veterinary certifications for import of wild and farmed game meat and rabbit meat from third countries. In order to take account of the improved health status of the Acceding States, Malta should be added to the list of authorised third countries, and the existing third country lists and the specific conditions under which wild and farmed game meat and rabbit meat can be imported into the EU from other Acceding States should also be updated.
(13) Commission Decision 97/222/EC(15) establishes a list of third countries or parts of third countries from which the importation of meat products is authorised.
(14) Certain Acceding States continue to present an animal health risk associated with Classical Swine Fever in wild boar populations. In order to reflect both this but also the improved animal health status in the Acceding States, Commission Decision 97/222/EC should be amended.
(15) It is opportune, where appropriate, to update certain country names, ISO codes and regionalisation definitions.
(16) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Annexes I and II to Decision 95/233/EC are replaced by the text in Annex I and Annex II to this Decision.
Article 2
Annex I to Decision 96/482/EC is replaced by the text in Annex III to this Decision.
Article 3
Annex I to Decision 2001/751/EC is replaced by the Annex IV to this Decision.
Article 4
The Annex to Decision 94/85/EC is replaced by Annex V to this Decision.
Article 5
Annex I to Decision 94/984/EC is replaced by Annex VI to this Decision.
Article 6
Annex I to Decision 2000/609/EC is replaced by Annex VII to this Decision.
Article 7
Annex I to Decision 2000/585/EC is replaced by the text in Annex VIII to this Decision.
Article 8
Annex II to Decision 2000/585/EC is replaced by the text in Annex IX to this Decision.
Article 9
Part I of the Annex to Decision 97/222/EC is replaced by the text in Annex X to this Decision.
Article 10
Part II of the Annex to Decision 97/222/EC is replaced by the text in Annex XI to this Decision.
Article 11
This Decision shall apply from 14 February 2004.
Article 12
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 January 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 614/2004
of 30 March 2004
concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff(1), and in particular Article 9(1)(a) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In order to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.
(2) Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has laid down the general rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature. Those rules apply also to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific Community provisions, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods.
(3) Pursuant to those general rules, the goods described in column 1 of the table set out in the Annex should be classified under the CN code indicated in column 2, by virtue of the reasons set out in column 3.
(4) It is appropriate to provide that binding tariff information which has been issued by the customs authorities of Member States in respect of the classification of goods in the Combined Nomenclature but which is not in accordance with this Regulation can, for a period of three months, continue to be invoked by the holder, under Article 12(6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code(2).
(5) The Customs Code Committee has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman as regards product No 2 in the annexed table.
(6) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee as regards products Nos 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 in the annexed table,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The goods described in column 1 of the table set out in the Annex shall be classified within the Combined Nomenclature under the CN code indicated in column 2.
Article 2
Binding tariff information issued by the customs authorities of Member States, which is not in accordance with this Regulation, can continue to be invoked for a period of three months pursuant to Article 12(6) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 March 2004.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 646/2008
of 8 July 2008
amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 60 and 301 thereof,
Having regard to Common Position 2006/276/CFSP of 10 April 2006 concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus and replacing Common Position 2004/661/CFSP (1),
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 of 18 May 2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus (2) imposed restrictive measures in accordance with Common Position 2006/276/CFSP.
(2)
It is appropriate to align Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 with recent developments in sanctions practice regarding the identification of competent authorities, liability for certain infringements and public notice regarding procedures for maintenance of certain lists. For the sake of clarity, those Articles to which amendments need to be made should be republished in full,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 is amended as follows:
1.
the following Article is inserted:
‘Article 2a
The prohibition set out in Article 2(2) shall not give rise to liability of any kind on the part of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies concerned, if they did not know, and had no reasonable cause to suspect, that their actions would infringe this prohibition.’;
2.
Article 3 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 3
1. The competent authorities in the Member States, as indicated in the websites listed in Annex II, may authorise the release of certain frozen funds or economic resources or the making available of certain funds or economic resources, under such conditions as they deem appropriate, after having determined that the funds or economic resources concerned are:
(a)
necessary to satisfy the basic needs of persons listed in Annex I and their dependent family members, including payments for foodstuffs, rent or mortgage, medicines and medical treatment, taxes, insurance premiums and public utility charges;
(b)
intended exclusively for payment of reasonable professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses associated with the provision of legal services;
(c)
intended exclusively for payment of fees or service charges for routine holding or maintenance of frozen funds or economic resources; or
(d)
necessary for extraordinary expenses, provided that the Member State concerned has notified the other Member States and the Commission of the grounds on which it considers that a specific authorisation should be granted, at least two weeks before the authorisation.
2. Member States shall inform the other Member States and the Commission of any authorisation granted under paragraph 1.’;
3.
Article 5 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 5
1. Without prejudice to the applicable rules concerning reporting, confidentiality and professional secrecy, natural and legal persons, entities and bodies shall:
(a)
immediately supply the competent authorities indicated in the websites listed in Annex II, in the country where they are resident or located, with any information which would facilitate compliance with this Regulation, such as accounts and amounts frozen in accordance with Article 2, and directly or indirectly supply such information to the Commission; and
(b)
cooperate with the competent authorities indicated in the websites listed in Annex II in any verification of this information.
2. Any information provided or received in accordance with this Article shall be used only for the purposes for which it was provided or received.’;
4.
Article 8 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 8
1. The Commission shall be empowered to:
(a)
amend Annex I on the basis of decisions taken in respect of Annex IV to Common Position 2006/276/CFSP; and
(b)
amend Annex II on the basis of information supplied by Member States.
2. A notice shall be published regarding the procedures for submitting information in relation to Annex I.’;
5.
the following Article is inserted:
‘Article 9a
1. Member States shall designate the competent authorities referred to in Articles 3, 4(2) and 5 and identify them in the websites listed in Annex II.
2. Member States shall notify the Commission of their competent authorities and the contact details thereof by 31 July 2008 and shall notify it of any subsequent amendment without delay.’;
6.
Annex II is replaced by the text in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 July 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 532/2000
of 10 March 2000
derogating from Regulation (EC) No 658/96 on certain conditions for granting compensatory payments under the support system for producers of certain arable crops
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1624/98(2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 658/96(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 610/1999(4), establishes the rules for applying Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 as regards the conditions for granting compensatory payments for certain arable crops. Article 3(1)(c) stipulates that the arable crop must be maintained in normal growth conditions until at least the beginning of the flowering period.
(2) During May 1999 certain Community regions were hit by flooding thus preventing them from complying with the above condition.
(3) Since non-compliance with the condition was due to circumstances beyond the control of those concerned, it would not be appropriate to refuse to grant compensatory payments for the flooded land. It is therefore necessary to derogate from Regulation (EC) No 658/96 under certain conditions.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Joint Meeting of Management Committees for Cereals, Oils and Fats and Dried Fodder,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the 1999/2000 marketing year and by derogation from Article 3(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 658/96, land sown to arable crops and declared flooded in the regions listed in the Annex to this Regulation shall remain eligible for the compensatory payments laid down for non-irrigated crops provided that that land remained unused during the normal flowering period of the damaged crop.
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 to compensatory payments for the 1999/2000 marketing year.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 March 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 22 May 1990
derogating from High Authority recommendation No 1-64 on tariff protection in order to enable the generalized tariff preferences to be applied to certain iron and steel products originating in the developing countries (144th derogation)
(90/250/ECSC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,
Having regard to High Authority reccomendation No 1-64 of 15 January 1964 to the Governments of the Member States concerning an increase in the protective duty on iron and steel products at the external frontiers of the Community (1), as last amended by recommendation 88/27/ECSC (2), and in particular Article 3 thereof,
Whereas, for a number of years, the Governments of the Member States of the European Coal and Steel Community meeting within the Council have granted non-member countries covered by the generalized preferences scheme tariff advantages in respect of imports into the Community of certain ECSC iron and steel products in the form of total tariff suspensions without quantitative limits for certain types of product or total tariff suspensions within the limits of quotas either fixed or to be calculated for other types of product;
Whereas the Commission is involved in the negotiation of such concessions and in the decisions of the representatives of the Governments implementing them; whereas the decisions in question are taken with the Commission's full agreement;
Whereas such concessions are covered by Article 3 of High Authority recommendation No 1-64, under which the Commission, after consulting the Member States, can for reasons of commercial policy derogate from the tariff obligations laid down by the recommendation;
Whereas Decision 89/645/ECSC (3) establishing tariff concessions was taken by the Member States with the Commission's agreement; whereas it meets the requirements laid down in Article 3 of the recommendation for the granting of a derogation; whereas as a consequence it is appropriate to grant the derogation for the concessions in question;
Whereas the Member States have been consulted on the draft of this Decision,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Member States are hereby authorized to derogate from obligations arising under Article 1 of High Authority Recommendation No 1-64 to the extent necessary to apply, on imports from non-member countries of iron and steel products covered by the ECSC Treaty, originating in those countries, the duty suspensions resulting from Decision 89/645/ECSC of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Coal and Steel Community meeting within the Council.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
It shall apply from 1 January 1989 until 31 December 1990.
Done at Brussels, 22 May 1990.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1479/2004
of 19 August 2004
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 August 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 August 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1797/2001
of 13 September 2001
fixing the representative prices and the additional import duties for molasses in the sugar sector
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 market in sugar(1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 of 23 June 1995 laying down detailed rules of application for imports of molasses in the sugar sector and amending Regulation (EEC) No 785/68(2), and in particular Articles 1(2) and 3(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 stipulates that the cif import price for molasses, hereinafter referred to as the "representative price", should be set in accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 785/68(3). That price should be fixed for the standard quality defined in Article 1 of the above Regulation.
(2) The representative price for molasses is calculated at the frontier crossing point into the Community, in this case Amsterdam; that price must be based on the most favourable purchasing opportunities on the world market established on the basis of the quotations or prices on that market adjusted for any deviations from the standard quality. The standard quality for molasses is defined in Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.
(3) When the most favourable purchasing opportunities on the world market are being established, account must be taken of all available information on offers on the world market, on the prices recorded on important third-country markets and on sales concluded in international trade of which the Commission is aware, either directly or through the Member States. Under Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68, the Commission may for this purpose take an average of several prices as a basis, provided that this average is representative of actual market trends.
(4) The information must be disregarded if the goods concerned are not of sound and fair marketable quality or if the price quoted in the offer relates only to a small quantity that is not representative of the market. Offer prices which can be regarded as not representative of actual market trends must also be disregarded.
(5) If information on molasses of the standard quality is to be comparable, prices must, depending on the quality of the molasses offered, be increased or reduced in the light of the results achieved by applying Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.
(6) A representative price may be left unchanged by way of exception for a limited period if the offer price which served as a basis for the previous calculation of the representative price is not available to the Commission and if the offer prices which are available and which appear not to be sufficiently representative of actual market trends would entail sudden and considerable changes in the representative price.
(7) Where there is a difference between the trigger price for the product in question and the representative price, additional import duties should be fixed under the conditions set out in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95. Should the import duties be suspended pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95, specific amounts for these duties should be fixed.
(8) Application of these provisions will have the effect of fixing the representative prices and the additional import duties for the products in question as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
(9) 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 representative prices and the additional duties applying to imports of the products referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 September 2001.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 September 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1636/98 of 20 July 1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 42 and 43 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
(1) Whereas Article 26 of Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 (3), requires the Commission to submit proposals on the premium and quota arrangements governing the organisation of the market in raw tobacco;
(2) Whereas the present market situation is one of mismatch of supply and demand, largely due to the poor quality of Community production; whereas that situation calls for fundamental reform of the sector to improve its economic position; whereas such reform must entail a variation of Community aid in line with product quality, greater flexibility and simplicity in the setting of quotas, stricter control procedures and improved observance of public health and environmental protection requirements;
(3) Whereas the premium for flue-cured, light air-cured and dark air-cured tobaccos grown in Belgium, Germany, France and Austria should be increased; whereas the Council will reduce, in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 43(2) of the Treaty, the guarantee thresholds of these Member States in order to ensure the maintenance of budgetary neutrality;
(4) Whereas, in order to encourage improvement of the quality and value of Community production, and at the same time to provide income support to producers, the payment of part of the premium should be linked to the value of the tobacco produced; whereas the extent of this differentiation may vary by variety and tobacco-growing Member State; whereas, if it is to be effective, differentiation should operate within a certain range; whereas, given the magnitude of the changes made, a transitional period should be set; whereas this system should be established within the producer groups, while permitting a comparison to be made of the market prices obtained by individual producers;
(5) Whereas it is essential to reinforce control procedures in the tobacco sector; whereas the definitions of 'producer`, 'first processor` and 'first processing` should be made more precise and control agencies should be allowed access to all information relevant to their task;
(6) Whereas an auction system for cultivation contracts should be established so that contract prices for tobacco truly reflect market conditions; whereas this system should be optional for the Member States, to take account of their different structures;
(7) Whereas by participating in determination of the purchase price of the tobacco delivered the processor plays a central role in determination of the premium to be paid to the individual producer; whereas first processors benefit indirectly from Community aid by acquiring a subsidised product; whereas national authorities should be allowed to take appropriate action against any first processors not complying with Community rules; whereas to that end only approved first processors should be able to sign cultivation contracts, approval being withdrawn for non-compliance;
(8) Whereas to simplify management of the sector, producer groups should be made responsible for paying the variable part of the premium to producers and for allocating production quotas to their members;
(9) Whereas transfer of production quotas between producers should be permitted to improve production structures; whereas quota buy-back arrangements should be introduced to help producers who wish to leave the sector but find no purchasers for their quotas;
(10) Whereas due account should be taken of the requirements of public health and respect for the environment; whereas to that end the premium deduction financing the Community fund for tobacco research and information should be doubled and the specific aid used not only to help producer groups discharge their new management functions but also to finance action aimed at increasing respect for the environment,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 is amended as follows:
1. Article 3(1) and (2) shall be replaced by the following:
'1. From the 1999 harvest onwards, a premium scheme shall apply to tobacco, its amount being set for all the tobacco varieties shown in each of the different groups.
2. A supplementary amount shall, however, be granted on flue-cured, light air-cured and dark air-cured tobaccos grown in Austria, Belgium, France and Germany. That amount shall be equal to 65 % of the difference between the premium granted for those tobaccos in accordance with paragraph 1 and the premium applicable to the 1992 harvest.`;
2. the following Article shall be inserted:
'Article 4a
1. The premium shall comprise a fixed part, a variable part and a specific aid.
2. The variable part of the premium shall account for 30 % to 45 % of the total premium. It shall be introduced in stages up to the 2001 harvest. It may be adjusted within that specified range, according to variety group and Member State.
3. The fixed part of the premium shall be paid either to producer groups for distribution to the members of the group or to individual producers who are not members of a group.
4. The variable part shall be paid to producer groups for distribution to each member in proportion to the purchase price paid by the first processor for his crop.
5. Specific aid, not exceeding 2 % of the total premium, shall be paid to producer groups.`;
3. Articles 6 and 7 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 6
1. Cultivation contracts shall be concluded between first processors of tobacco and producer groups or individual producers who are not members of a group.
2. For the purposes of this Regulation:
- the term "producer" shall mean individual producers who are not members of a group, individual producers who are members of a group, or producer groups, all of whom deliver their crop of raw tobacco to a first processor under a cultivation contract,
- a "first processor" shall mean any approved natural or legal person who carries out first processing of raw tobacco by operation, in his own name and on his own account, of one or more first tobacco-processing establishments suitably equipped for that purpose,
- "first processing" shall mean the processing of raw tobacco delivered by a producer into a stable, storable product put up in uniform bales of a quality meeting final user (manufacturer) requirements.
3. The cultivation contract shall include:
- a commitment by the first processor to pay the producer the purchase price according to quality grade,
- a commitment by the producer to deliver to the first processor the raw tobacco meeting the quality requirements specified in the contract.
4. The Member State's competent body shall, on submission of proof of delivery of the tobacco and of payment of the price as referred to in the first indent of paragraph 3, pay:
- the fixed part of the premium to the producer group or to the individual producer not a member of a group,
- the variable part of the premium and the specific aid to the producer group.
However, on a transitional basis and for a period not exceeding two harvests, the premium may be paid through the intermediary of the first processor.
5. The Member State may, if its structures make it appropriate, apply a cultivation contract auction scheme covering all contracts referred to in paragraph 1 that were concluded before the date on which delivery of the tobacco commences.
Article 7
Rules for the application of this Title shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.
Their scope shall include:
- delimitation of production zones for each variety,
- quality requirements for tobacco delivered,
- other details of the cultivation contract and the closing date for its conclusion,
- any requirement of a security to be lodged by producers applying for an advance, and the terms of its provision and release,
- determination of the variable part of the premium,
- specific premium terms for cultivation contracts concluded with producer groups,
- action to be taken if the producer or first processor fails to meet his obligations,
- the cultivation-contract auction scheme, including the option for the first purchaser to match any offers.`;
4. Articles 8 to 14 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 8
A maximum overall guarantee threshold of 350 600 tonnes of raw leaf tobacco per harvest shall be set for the Community.
Within that quantity the Council shall set individual guarantee thresholds for each variety group for three consecutive harvests, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 43(2) of the Treaty.
Article 9
1. To ensure observance of the guarantee thresholds, production quotas shall be imposed.
2. The Council, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 43(2) of the Treaty, shall allocate the quantity available for each variety group between producer Member States for three consecutive harvests.
3. On the basis of the quantities set pursuant to paragraph 2 and without prejudice to paragraphs 4 and 5, Member States shall assign production quotas to individual producers who are not members of a producer group and to producer groups, in proportion to the average quantity of tobacco of the particular variety group delivered for processing by each individual producer over the three years preceding that of the most recent harvest.
4. Before the final date for the conclusion of cultivation contracts, Member States may be authorised to transfer parts of their guarantee threshold allocations to other variety groups, in accordance with paragraph 3.
Subject to the third subparagraph, a one-tonne reduction in the allocation for one variety group shall give rise to an increase of at most one tonne in the allocation for the other variety group.
No transfer of parts of guarantee threshold allocations from one variety group to another may give rise to additional costs to the EAGGF.
The quantities authorised for transfer shall be determined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.
5. National quota reserves shall be set up, the rules of operation of which shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.
Article 10
1. No premium may be granted on any quantity in excess of a producer's quota.
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, a producer may deliver excess production of up to 10 % of his quota for each variety group, this surplus being eligible for the premium granted on the following harvest, provided that he reduces his production for that harvest accordingly so that the combined quota for the two harvests is observed.
3. Member States shall keep accurate data on the production of all individual producers so that, where appropriate, production quotas can be assigned to them.
4. Production quotas may be transferred between individual producers in the same Member State.
Article 11
Rules for the application of this Title shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.
TITLE III
Measures to convert production
Article 12
The specific aid referred to in Article 4a shall be paid to producer groups for the purposes of improving respect for the environment, boosting production quality, strengthening management and ensuring compliance with Community rules within the group.
Article 13
1. A Community Tobacco Fund financed by a deduction of 2 % of the premium shall be set up.
2. The Fund shall finance action in the following areas:
(a) combating tobacco-smoking, in particular informing the public of the dangers of tobacco consumption,
(b) - research to create or develop new varieties and cultivation methods that result in less harm to human health and are better geared to market conditions and more environment-friendly,
- the creation or development of alternative uses for raw tobacco,
(c) studies of the possibilities for producers of raw tobacco of switching to other crops or activities,
(d) the dissemination of the results obtained in the above areas to national authorities and to the sectors concerned.
Article 14
1. In order to facilitate the voluntary departure from the sector by individual producers, a quota buy-back programme with corresponding reduction of the guarantee thresholds referred to in Article 8 shall be set up.
2. Rural development programmes for the conversion of tobacco-growing regions in difficulty to other activities may be implemented under Community structural policies.`;
5. the following Article shall be inserted:
'Article 14a
Rules for the application of this Title shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. Those rules shall cover:
- fixing of the specific aid amount,
- the definition of producer groups eligible for specific aid,
- terms for the recognition of groups,
- use of the specific aid, and in particular its allocation between the purposes specified in Article 12(1),
- setting the level of the quota buy-back price, which should not be such as to encourage any excessive exodus of producers from the sector,
- definition, on the basis of a proposal from the Member State, of sensitive production areas and/or groups of high-quality varieties to be exempted from the quota buy-back system, which may not affect more than 25 % of each Member State's guarantee threshold,
- definition of a period of not more than four months between the individual producer's intention to sell his quota and the actual buy-back; during that period the Member State shall make public the intention to sell so that other producers may buy the quota before it is actually bought back.`;
6. the heading of Title V shall be replaced by the following:
'TITLE V
Control measures`;
7. Article 17 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 17
1. Member States shall take all necessary action to ensure and verify compliance with Community provisions concerning raw tobacco.
2. Member States shall make arrangements for granting entitlement to first processors to sign cultivation contracts.
3. Entitlement shall be withdrawn by the Member State if the processor deliberately or through serious negligence fails to comply with the Community provisions concerning raw tobacco.
4. Member States shall take the action necessary for their control bodies to be able to verify compliance with Community provisions, and in particular:
- to have access to production and processing facilities,
- to be able to acquaint themselves with first processors' accounting and stock records and with other relevant documents and take copies or extracts,
- to be able to obtain all relevant information, particularly in order to check that tobacco delivered has actually been processed,
- to obtain exact figures for the volume and purchase price of the production of all individual producers,
- to check the quality of the tobacco and payment by the processor of a purchase price to the individual producer,
- to check each year the areas planted by individual producers.
5. Rules for the application of this Title shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.`;
8. the following heading shall be inserted after Article 17:
'TITLE VI
General and transitional provisions`;
9. Article 20 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 20
To deal with unforeseen circumstances, exceptional market support measures may be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. Their scope and duration shall be strictly limited to what is necessary to support the market.`;
10. Article 26 shall be replaced by the following:
'Article 26
Before 1 April 2002, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco.`;
11. the following paragraph shall be added to Article 27:
'Where transitional measures prove necessary to facilitate the application of the amendments to this Regulation introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1636/98 (*), such measures shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23.
(*) OJ L 210, 28.7.1998, p. 23.`
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from the 1999 harvest.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 July 1998.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 29 October 2007
exempting the production and sale of electricity in Sweden from the application of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors
(notified under document number C(2007) 5197)
(Only the Swedish text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2007/706/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (1), and in particular Article 30(4) and (6) thereof,
Having regard to the request submitted by the Kingdom of Sweden by e-mail of 29 June 2007,
After consulting the Advisory Committee for Public Contracts,
Whereas:
I. Facts
(1)
On 29 June 2007, Sweden transmitted a request pursuant to Article 30(4) of Directive 2004/17/EC to the Commission by e-mail. The Commission requested additional information by e-mail of 20 July 2007, which, following a prolongation of the initial deadline, was transmitted by the Swedish authorities by e-mail of 17 August 2007.
(2)
The request submitted by the Kingdom of Sweden concerns production and sale (wholesale and retail) of electricity.
(3)
The request is accompanied by the conclusions of the independent national authority, Konkurrensverket (the Swedish Competition Authority), that the conditions for the applicability of Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC would be met.
II. Legal framework
(4)
Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC provides that contracts intended to enable the performance of one of the activities to which the Directive applies shall not be subject to the Directive if, in the Member State in which it is carried out, the activity is directly exposed to competition on markets to which access is not restricted. Direct exposure to competition is assessed on the basis of objective criteria, taking account of the specific characteristics of the sector concerned. Access is deemed to be unrestricted if the Member State has implemented and applied the relevant Community legislation opening a given sector or a part of it. This legislation is listed in Annex XI of Directive 2004/17/EC, which, for the electricity sector, refers to Directive 96/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (2). Directive 96/92/EC has been superseded by Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC (3), which requires an even higher degree of market opening.
(5)
Sweden has implemented and applied not only Directive 96/92/EC but also Directive 2003/54/EC, opting for full ownership unbundling for transmission networks and legal and functional unbundling for distribution networks except for the smallest companies, which are exempted from the requirements of functional unbundling. Consequently, and in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 30(3), access to the market should be deemed not to be restricted.
(6)
Direct exposure to competition should be evaluated on the basis of various indicators, none of which are, per se, decisive. In respect of the markets concerned by this decision, the market share of the main players on a given market constitutes one criterion which should be taken into account. Another criterion is the degree of concentration on those markets. Given the characteristics of the markets concerned, further criteria should also be taken into account such as the degree of liquidity, the functioning of the balancing market, price competition and the degree of customer switching.
(7)
This Decision is without prejudice to the application of the rules on competition.
III. Assessment
(8)
The request submitted by Sweden concerns production as well as the sale (wholesale and retail) of electricity.
(9)
The wholesale electricity market in Sweden is to a large degree integrated into the Nordic power market, which consists of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland. It consists of a bilateral trading market between generators on one hand and suppliers and industrial companies on the other hand, and a voluntary Nordic power exchange ‘Nord Pool’ which has a spot market and a forward market. This and the integrated market design of ‘Nord Pool’ (4) shows that there is a clear development towards a Nordic regional wholesale market. However, transmission bottlenecks (congestion) part of the time divide the Nordic area up into six geographically distinct price areas, of which Sweden is one. Sweden has five main connections between its networks and those of other parts of the European Economic Area (Western Denmark - Sweden, Eastern Denmark - Sweden, Sweden - Southern Norway, Sweden - Northern Norway and Sweden - Finland). In 2005, the most congested of these five connections was congested for 52 % of the time and the least congested for 8 % of the time (5). However, this seldom occurred simultaneously on all five connections. Thus, according to the Swedish authorities, Sweden was a fully separate price area, that is, it had no connections with any other price area, during 0,5 % of the time in 2005. Furthermore, an overview of the number of areas connected with Sweden since 2001 shows that Sweden was connected to at least 4 of the then 6 other price areas - Norway was then divided into three areas as opposed to the current two - in 82,4 % of the time (6). Consequently, and in line with previous Commission practice (7), the issue of whether the market is national or regional will be left open as the result of the analysis remains the same whether it is based on a narrow or a broader definition.
(10)
For essentially the same reasons, there is also a clear development towards a Nordic regional market in the case of electricity production, although transmission bottlenecks and the limits to capacity - of the order of 24 % of the installed generation capacity in Sweden - of the connections between the Swedish networks and those of other areas of the European Economic Area can have the effect of temporarily limiting the market to the territory of Sweden. Here as well the issue of whether the market is national or regional will be left open as the result of the analysis remains the same whether it is based on a narrow or a broader definition.
(11)
As confirmed by the Swedish authorities, the retail market area corresponds to the territory of Sweden, due to, among others, differences in taxation and the rules for balance responsibility between Nordic countries. Furthermore, Konkurrensverket explicitly states that the retail market ‘is national, primarily because several technical and regulatory obstacles prevent the end user from buying electricity from energy brokers in other countries.’
(12)
The Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Report on progress in creating the internal gas and electricity market (8), hereafter referred to as the ‘2005 Report’ states that ‘many national markets display a high degree of concentration of the industry, impeding the development of effective competition’ (9). Consequently, it considered that, in respect of electricity generation, ‘one indicator for the degree of competition on national markets is the total market share of the biggest three producers’ (10). According to the ‘Technical Annex’ (11), the aggregate market share of the three largest generators of the total production in the Nordic area is 40 % (12), which is a satisfactorily low level. When referred to the Swedish territory, the aggregate market shares of the three largest generators are, of course, higher at 86,7 % (13) in 2004. However, the periods in which the Swedish market is isolated were limited to 0,5 % of the time in 2005 (14). There is therefore during significant parts of the year a competitive pressure on the Swedish market deriving from the potential to import electricity from outside the Swedish territory, the more so as no transmission fee is charged between the Nordic countries. The frequently uncongested links between Sweden and other price areas ensure that investment in the electricity sector inside the Swedish territory cannot be made without taking into account other producers in the Nordic market. These factors should therefore be taken as an indication of direct exposure to competition for the production market whether taken as the national Swedish market or the emerging regional one.
(13)
The degree of concentration is also a good indicator of competition on the wholesale market for electricity as is the degree of liquidity. At the regional level, 42,82 % of electricity consumption in the Nordic countries was sold through Nord Pool Spot AS - the voluntary Nordic power exchange described in recital 9 - in 2004-2005 (15). According to the Final Report, on that type of power exchange ‘the concentration in generation finds […] direct expression in a rather stable equivalent (16) concentration in the power exchanges’ (17). For the three largest generators in the Nordic area, this amounts to 40 % (18), which, referred to a regional market, is at a satisfactory level. When referred to the sole Swedish market, the aggregate market shares of the three largest actors on the wholesale market are, of course, higher at 86 % (19) in 2006. It should, however, be stressed that there is competition between the three large and several smaller wholesale actors on the Swedish market. Furthermore, as regards the connection to the Nordic area, it should be noted again that the aforementioned bottleneck problems (congestion) are not constant, only temporary. There is therefore, in addition to domestic competition, a frequent external competitive pressure on the Swedish market deriving from the potential to obtain electricity from outside the Swedish territory. This is the more so as Sweden is the third biggest net importer of electricity in the EU in terms of percentage of its domestic consumption (20) and no transmission fee is charged between the Nordic countries. It should further be noted that the conditions of competition in wholesale trade in electricity are also greatly influenced by financial trade in electricity in the market area concerned, which, in terms of volume via Nord Pool, represented almost twice the amount consumed in the Nordic countries in 2005 (21) (and, if other identified transactions such as OTC - Over The Counter or direct sale - are included, more than five times the amount in 2005 (22)). In the Technical Annex (23), this degree of liquidity was considered as being satisfactory, i. e. it is such as to constitute an indicator of a well-functioning and competitive market. Given the strong link between the Swedish wholesale market and the Nordic market, this degree of liquidity should also be considered as providing a competitive pressure on the Swedish market. The Final Report also ranges Nord Pool among the ‘most liquid and efficient wholesale electricity markets’ (24). These factors should therefore be taken as an indication of direct exposure to competition for the wholesale market whether taken as the national Swedish market or the emerging regional one.
(14)
Taking the size of the country into account, the number of economic operators on the retail market is fairly large (25) (approximately 130, according to the Swedish authorities, a considerable number of which are offering their services on a nationwide basis) as is the number of companies with a market share above 5 %. At the end of 2004, the aggregate market share of the three largest companies in terms of supply to all categories of users (large industrial users, small and medium sized businesses and very small commercial customers and households) is at a satisfactorily low level at 50 % (26). According to the information supplied by the Swedish authorities, the aggregate shares of the three biggest companies on the Swedish retail market amounted to 43 % in terms of number of customers in 2006. These factors should therefore be taken as an indication of direct exposure to competition.
(15)
Furthermore, the functioning of the balancing markets should also be considered as an indicator, not only in respect of production but also for the wholesale and retail markets. In fact, ‘any market participant who cannot easily match its generation portfolio to the characteristics of its customers may find itself exposed to the difference between the price at which the transmission system operator [hereinafter TSO] will sell imbalance energy, and the price at which it will buy back excess production. These prices may either be directly imposed by the regulator on the TSO; or alternatively a market based mechanism will be used in which the price is determined by bids from other producers to regulate their production upwards or downwards […]. A key difficulty for small market participants arises where there is the risk of a large spread between the buying price from the TSO and the selling price. This occurs in a number of Member States and is likely to be detrimental to the development of competition. A high spread may be indicative of an insufficient level of competition in the balancing market which may be dominated by only one or two main generators. Such difficulties are made worse where network users are unable to adjust their positions close to real time’ (27). There is an almost fully integrated balancing market in the Nordic area for supplying balancing energy and its main characteristics - market based pricing, hourly gate closures, that is the possibility for network users to adjust their position each hour, and a low spread between the buying price from the TSO and the selling price - are such that it should be taken as an indicator of direct exposure to competition.
(16)
Given the characteristics of the product concerned (electricity) and the scarcity or unavailability of suitable substitutable products or services, price competition and price formation assume greater importance when assessing the competitive state of the electricity markets. The number of customers switching supplier is an indicator of genuine price competition and, thus, indirectly, ‘a natural indicator of the effectiveness of competition. If few customers are switching, there is likely to be a problem with the functioning of the market, even if the benefits from the possibility of renegotiating with the historical supplier should not be ignored’ (28). Furthermore, ‘the existence of regulated end-user prices is clearly a key determinant of customer behaviour […]. Although the retaining of controls may be justified in a period of transition, these will increasingly cause distortions as the need for investment approaches’ (29).
(17)
A recent Commission Staff Document (30) states that ‘Customer switching is very common in the Swedish retail electricity market. In total 54 per cent of electricity customers have either renegotiated their contracts or switched supplier since the market reform in 1996. Generally speaking competition on final customers is considered to work’ (31). Furthermore, there is no end-user price control (32) in Sweden, that is, prices are set by the economic operators themselves and do not have to be approved by any authority prior to their application. The situation in Sweden is therefore satisfactory as far as switching and end-user price control are concerned and should be taken as an indicator of direct exposure to competition.
IV. Conclusions
(18)
In view of the factors examined in recitals (8) to (17), the condition of direct exposure to competition laid down in Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC should be considered to be met in respect of production and sale (wholesale and retail) of electricity in Sweden.
(19)
Furthermore, since the condition of unrestricted access to the market is deemed to be met, Directive 2004/17/EC should not apply when contracting entities award contracts intended to enable electricity generation or the sale (wholesale and retail) of electricity to be carried out in Sweden nor when they organise design contests for the pursuit of such an activity in Sweden.
(20)
This Decision is based on the legal and factual situation as of June to August 2007 as it appears from the information submitted by the Kingdom of Sweden, the 2005 Report and the Technical Annex thereto, the 2007 Communication and the 2007 Staff Document as well as the Final Report. It may be revised, should significant changes in the legal or factual situation mean that the conditions for the applicability of Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC are no longer met,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Directive 2004/17/EC shall not apply to contracts awarded by contracting entities and intended to enable them to carry out electricity generation or the sale of electricity in Sweden.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Sweden.
Done at Brussels, 29 October 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2242/2002
of 16 December 2002
fixing the minimum selling prices for beef put up for sale under the second invitation to tender referred to in Regulation (EC) No 2042/2002
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2345/2001(2), and in particular Article 28(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Tenders have been invited for certain quantities of beef fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2042/2002(3).
(2) 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) 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 second invitation to tender held in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2042/2002 for which the time limit for the submission of tenders was 9 December 2002 are as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 December 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION of 18 September 1995 on the conclusion of additional Protocols to the Europe Agreements on trade in textile products between the European Community and certain countries of Central and Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, the Czech and Slovak Republics) (97/295/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof, in conjunction with Article 228 (2), first sentence,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the Commission has negotiated on behalf of the Community additional Protocols to the Europe Agreements on trade in textile products with the Republic of Bulgaria, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Poland, Romania, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic;
Whereas those additional Protocols should be approved,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The additional Protocols to the Europe Agreements on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Bulgaria, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Poland, Romania, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic are hereby approved on behalf of the Community.
The texts of the additional Protocols are attached to this Decision.
Article 2
The President of the Council is hereby authorized to designate the person empowered to sign the additional Protocols on behalf of the European Community.
Article 3
The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 15 of each of the additional Protocols on behalf of the European Community.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Done at Brussels, 18 September 1995.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 4 November 2008
providing Community medium-term financial assistance for Hungary
(2009/102/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 332/2002 of 18 February 2002 establishing a facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balance of payments (1), and in particular Article 3(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission made after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee (EFC),
Whereas:
(1)
By Decision 2009/103/EC (2), the Council decided to grant mutual assistance to Hungary.
(2)
Despite the expected improvement in the current account, Hungary’s external financing needs in 2008 and 2009 are estimated at EUR 20 billion as, in view of the recent developments on the financial market, the capital and financial account could substantially deteriorate, with the acceleration of net portfolio outflows.
(3)
It is appropriate to provide Community support to Hungary of up to EUR 6,5 billion under the Facility providing medium-term financial assistance for Member States' balance of payments which was established by Regulation (EC) No 332/2002. That assistance should be provided in conjunction with a loan from the International Monetary Fund of SDR 10,5 billion (around EUR 12,5 billion) under a Stand-by arrangement expected to be approved on 6 November 2008. The World Bank has also agreed to provide a loan to Hungary of EUR 1 billion.
(4)
The assistance should be managed by the Commission which, after consulting the EFC, should agree with the authorities of Hungary the specific economic policy conditions attached to the financial assistance. Those conditions should be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding. The detailed financial terms should be laid down by the Commission in the Loan Agreement.
(5)
The assistance should be provided with a view to supporting balance of payments sustainability in Hungary and, in this way, contributing to the successful implementation of the Government’s economic policy programme under current economic and financial conditions,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. The Community shall make available to Hungary a medium-term loan amounting to a maximum of EUR 6,5 billion, with a maximum average maturity of five years.
2. This Community financial assistance shall be made available during a period of two years starting from the first day after the entry into force of this Decision.
Article 2
1. The Commission shall manage the assistance in a manner consistent with Hungary’s undertakings and with recommendations by the Council, in particular in the context of the implementation of the National Reform Programme as well as of the convergence programme and the excessive deficit procedure.
2. The Commission shall agree with the authorities of Hungary, after consulting the EFC, the specific economic policy conditions attached to the financial assistance as laid down in Article 3(4). Those conditions shall be laid down in a Memorandum of Understanding consistent with the undertakings and recommendations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. The detailed financial terms shall be laid down by the Commission in the Loan Agreement.
3. The Commission shall, in collaboration with the EFC, verify at regular intervals that the economic policy conditions attached to the assistance are fulfilled. The Commission shall keep the EFC informed of possible refinancing of the borrowings or restructuring of the financial conditions.
Article 3
1. The Community financial assistance shall be made available by the Commission to Hungary in a maximum of five instalments, the size of which shall be laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding.
2. The first instalment shall be released subject to the entry into force of the Loan Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding, as well as based on the submission to the Hungarian Parliament of the legislative amendments to the draft 2009 budget proposal, which aim at achieving a deficit of 2,6 % of GDP and which include the underpinning budgetary measures.
3. If required in order to finance the loan, the prudent use of interest rate swaps with counterparties of highest credit quality shall be permitted.
4. The Commission, after having obtained the opinion of the EFC, shall decide on the release of further instalments. The disbursement of each further instalment shall be made on the basis of a satisfactory implementation of the new economic programme of the Hungarian Government backed by the IMF arrangement and also included in the forthcoming convergence programme of Hungary and, more particularly, the specific economic policy conditions laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding.
These policy conditions should include, inter alia:
(a)
the progress of fiscal consolidation as planned by the Government in the context of its new programme which is in line with the Council recommendation under the excessive deficit procedure of 10 October 2006 as well as the Council opinion on the November 2007 convergence programme update, in particular with respect to the 2009 deficit target;
(b)
specific measures to control expenditure underlying the planned consolidation process;
(c)
progress with fiscal governance reform by strengthening the institutional framework and introducing medium-term fiscal rules along the lines of the draft proposal that is currently being discussed in the Hungarian Parliament;
(d)
financial sector regulation and supervision reforms and stepping-up the authorities' capacity to address efficiently solvency and liquidity concerns; and
(e)
other structural reform measures supported in the context of the Lisbon Strategy, such as the reinforcement of incentives to work with a view to supporting employment and contributing to the long-term sustainability of public finances.
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Hungary. It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 4 November 2008.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1505/94 of 28 June 1994 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),
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 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 655/94 (3), and in particular Article 173 (1) thereof,
Whereas 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;
Whereas 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 1 July 1994.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 June 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION DECISION
of 10 March 1987
changing the import arrangements established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3420/83 and applied in the Benelux countries, Denmark and the United Kingdom in respect of the People's Republic of China
(Only the Danish, English, French and Dutch texts are authentic)
(87/201/EEC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3420/83 of 14 November 1983 on import arrangements for products originating in State-trading countries, not liberalized at Community level (1), and in particular Article 9 (1), thereof,
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 3420/83 established the list of products originating in State-trading countries whose release for free circulation in the Member States is subject to quantitative restrictions;
Whereas the Joint Committee established by the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the People's Republic of China of 3 April 1978 (2) met in Brussels on 12 January 1987; whereas upon completion of its work it recommended, among other measures, the abolition of quantitative restrictions on the release for free circulation in certain Member States of products originating in China;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 7 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3420/83, the Govnerments of the Benelux countries, Denmark and the United Kingdom have informed the other Member States and the Commission that they consider that the import arrangements applied in the Benelux countries, Denmark and the United Kingdom in respect of imports of various industrial products from China should be amended in accordance with that Regulation;
Whereas, following the examination of different aspects of the measures recommended by the Joint Committee, action should be taken thereon, account being taken in particular of Article 4 (2) of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the People's Republic of China,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The quantitative restrictions on the release for free circulation in the Member States specified in the Annex, of the goods therein indicated originating in China, are hereby abolished.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Denmark and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Article 3
This Decision shall apply from 31 March 1987.
Done at Brussels, 10 March 1987.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 591/79 of 26 March 1979 laying down general rules concerning the production refund for olive oils used in the manufacture of certain preserved foods
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 1562/78 (2), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 20a thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2749/78 of 23 November 1978 on trade in oils and fats between the Community and Greece (3), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Article 20a of Regulation No 136/66/EEC lays down that olive oil used in the manufacture of preserved fish and vegetables may benefit from a system of production refunds or from full or partial suspension of the import levy ; whereas, account being taken of the characteristics of the market in olive oil and of experience gained, the system of production refunds would appear the most appropriate ; whereas general rules for the implementation of this system must be adopted;
Whereas the production refund must enable beneficiaries to purchase on the Community market at prices close to world market prices the quality of oil which they use most frequently in their manufactures ; whereas, for this purpose, the production refund must be fixed on the basis of the variable component of the import levy on oils obtained by refining virgin olive oil;
Whereas interested parties must be ensured a certain degree of stability in the cost price of olive oil used in preserved products ; whereas, for this purpose, the refund must be fixed for a fairly long period and without account being taken of relatively small alterations in the import levies;
Whereas Article 11 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides for the granting of aid for the consumption of olive oil of Community origin ; whereas, according to Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 3089/78 (4), this aid shall be granted only to approved olive oil packaging plants ; whereas, however, in order to avoid placing oils of Community origin at a disadvantage as compared with imported oils, it is necessary to increase the refund to be granted in respect of oils of Community origin by an amount equal to the consumption aid;
Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 2751/78 (5) provides that the import levies shall be fixed by tender when certain conditions obtain ; whereas, in the event of this procedure being applied, the Commission shall fix a minimum import levy in respect of refined olive oils ; whereas, in that case, it is necessary to provide for the fixing of the production refund on the basis of these minimum levies;
Whereas, in order to ensure the proper functioning of the refund system, account should be taken, when the refund is fixed, of any significant change in the threshold price envisaged at the beginning of the period of application of the refund in question, and of any significant change in the import levy during the said period;
Whereas the refund must be granted only in respect of quantities actually used in the preserved products ; whereas Member States must therefore ensure the application of an appropriate system of checking;
Whereas this Regulation replaces Regulations (EEC) No 155/71 (6) and (EEC) No 1794/76 (7) ; whereas those Regulations must be repealed,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Olive oil used in the manufacture of preserved fish and vegetables shall benefit from a system of production refunds.
The general rules for applying this system are defined in the following Articles. (1)OJ No 172, 30.9.1966, p. 3025/66. (2)OJ No L 185, 7.7.1978, p. 1. (3)OJ No L 331, 28.11.1978, p. 1. (4)OJ No L 369, 29.12.1978, p. 12. (5)OJ No L 331, 23.11.1978, p. 6. (6)OJ No L 22, 28.1.1971, p. 5. (7)OJ No L 201, 27.7.1976, p. 3.
Article 2
A production refund shall be granted in respect of olive oil used in the manufacture of preserved fish falling within subheadings 16.04 B, C, D, E, F and G of the Common Customs Tariff and preserved vegetables falling within heading No 20.02 thereof.
Article 3
Without prejudice to the second subparagraph of Article 7, the Commission shall fix the production refund every two months.
Article 4
1. Subject to Article 6, the amount of the refund shall be the arithmetic mean of the variable component of the levies applied to the import of olive oils falling within subheading 15.07 A II a) of the Common Customs Tariff during the two months preceding the month in which the refund is implemented.
However, where the olive oil used in the manufacture of preserved products has been produced in the Community, the refund shall be the mean referred to above plus the amount of the consumption aid valid on the day of implementation of the refund.
2. The refund fixed previously shall be maintained where the difference between that refund and the new amount calculated pursuant to paragraph 1 does not exceed an amount to be determined.
Article 5
1. In the event of the tendering procedure referred to in Article 16 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC and in Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 2749/78 being used, the production refund shall be fixed, subject to Article 6 of this Regulation, on the basis of the minimum levies determined under that procedure in respect of oils falling within subheading 15.07 A II a) of the Common Customs Tariff.
2. However, where the olive oil used in the manufacture of preserved products has been produced in the Community, the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 1, shall be increased by the amount of the consumption aid valid on the day of implementation of the refund.
Article 6
1. If it is decided to use the tendering procedure, the Commission shall fix the production refund, in accordance with Article 5, for the first time when a refund fixed in accordance with Article 4 falls due and provided that at least two minimum levies have been fixed.
2. If it is decided to terminate the tendering procedure, the Commission shall fix the refund in accordance with Article 4, for the first time when a refund fixed in accordance with Article 5 falls due and provided that at least two levies have been fixed pursuant to Article 15 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC.
Article 7
In the event of any significant change in the threshold price envisaged at the beginning of the period of validity of the refund, account may also be taken, in fixing the refund, of the difference between the new threshold price and the one valid previously.
In the event of any significant change taking place in the import levies during the period of validity of the refund, the latter may be altered accordingly during the said period.
Article 8
1. Entitlement to the refund shall arise as soon as the oil is used in the manufacture of preserved products.
2. The Member States shall ensure by means of a supervisory system that the production refund is granted solely in respect of olive oil used in the manufacture of the preserved fish and vegetables referred to in Article 2.
Article 9
Detailed rules for the application of this Regulation, and in particular of the supervisory system referred to in Article 8 (2), shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 38 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC.
Article 10
Regulations (EEC) No 155/71 and (EEC) No 1794/76 are hereby repealed.
Article 11
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 April 1979.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 March 1979.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1869/2006
of 15 December 2006
amending Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005 laying down detailed rules for the application of an import tariff quota for live bovine animals of a weight exceeding 160 kg and originating in Switzerland provided for in the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 32(1) thereof,
Whereas,
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005 (2) opens, on a multi-annual basis for periods from 1 January to 31 December, a duty-free tariff quota for the import of 4 600 live bovine animals originating in Switzerland. In view of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union on 1 January 2007, the deadline for the submission of applications for the import tariff quota period 1 January to 31 December 2007 was extended to 8 January 2007 by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1677/2006 of 14 November 2006 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005, as regards the date of application for import rights for the tariff quota period 1 January to 31 December 2007 (3).
(2)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 of 31 August 2006 laying down common rules for the administration of import tariff quotas for agricultural products managed by a system of import licences (4) applies to import licences for import tariff quota periods starting from 1 January 2007. Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 lays down in particular detailed provisions on applications for import licences, the status of applicants and the issue of licences. That Regulation provides that import tariff quotas shall be opened for a period of 12 consecutive months and limits the period of validity of licences to the last day of the import tariff quota period. The provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 should apply to imports licences issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005, without prejudice to additional conditions or derogations laid down in that Regulation. It is necessary to align the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005 on Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 where appropriate.
(3)
With a view to preventing speculation, the quantities available within the quota should be made accessible to operators able to show that they are genuinely engaged in trade of a significant scale with third countries. In consideration of this and in order to ensure efficient management, the traders concerned should be required to have imported a minimum of 50 animals during both reference periods referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006. Moreover, for administrative reasons, Member States should be allowed to accept certified copies of the documents proving the existence of trade with third countries.
(4)
In case the application of the allocation coefficient referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 gives a figure of less than 50 head per application, the quantity available should be awarded by the Member States concerned by drawing lots for import rights covering 50 head each, in order to ensure a commercially viable number of animals per application.
(5)
Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(6)
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
Regulation (EC) No 2172/2005 is amended as follows:
1.
In Article 1(1), the first sub-paragraph is replaced by the following:
‘A duty-free Community import tariff quota is hereby opened every year for periods from 1 January to 31 December for the import of 4 600 live bovine animals originating in Switzerland weighing more than 160 kg, falling within CN codes 0102 90 41, 0102 90 49, 0102 90 51, 0102 90 59, 0102 90 61, 0102 90 69, 0102 90 71 or 0102 90 79.’
2.
Article 2 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. For the purposes of application of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006, engagement in trade with third countries as referred to in that Article shall mean that applicants have imported at least 50 animals covered by CN codes 0102 10 and 0102 90.
Member States may accept as proof of trade with third countries copies of the documents referred to in the second sub-paragraph of Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006, duly certified by the competent authority.’
(b)
paragraphs 2 and 3 are deleted.
3.
Article 3 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraphs 1 and 4 are deleted;
(b)
paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:
‘5. After verification of the documents presented, Member States shall forward to the Commission, by the 10th working day following the end of the period for the submission of applications at the latest, the total quantities applied for.
Notwithstanding Article 6(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006, Article 11 of that Regulation shall apply.’
4.
In Article 4, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
‘2. Where application of the allocation coefficient referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 gives a figure of less than 50 head per application, the quantity available shall be awarded by the Member States concerned by drawing lots for import rights covering 50 head each. Where the remainder is less than 50 head, a single import right shall be awarded for that quantity.’
5.
In Article 6(4), point (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
in Box 8, the country of origin and the mention ‘‘yes’’ is marked by a cross;’
6.
Article 7 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. By way of derogation from Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000, import licences issued pursuant to this Regulation shall not be transferable.’
(b)
paragraphs 2 and 4 are deleted.
7.
Article 8 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 8
Regulations (EC) No 1445/95 and (EC) No 1291/2000 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (5) shall apply, subject to this Regulation.
8.
Annex I is deleted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of 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 Brussels, 15 December 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1759/2006
of 28 November 2006
amending Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 37 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1)
Expenditure incurred by Member States in accordance with certain provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 (2) is currently subject to the rules laid down by Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (3). The latter has been repealed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (4), which applies to expenditure by Member States from 16 October 2006.
(2)
Article 2(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 sets up a European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (hereinafter EAGF).
(3)
Article 3(2)(f) of the abovementioned Regulation provides that EAGF is to finance the expenditure relating to fisheries markets in a centralised manner.
(4)
Financing expenditure relating to fisheries markets pursuant to Article 3(2)(f) is an implementation of the budget on a centralised basis and is, as such, to comply with Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5) and its implementing rules set out by Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 (6).
(5)
Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 shall be replaced by the following:
‘Article 35
1. Expenditure incurred by the Member States in accordance with Articles 10, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 27 of this Regulation shall be deemed to be expenditure referred to in Article 3(2)(f) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (7).
2. Financing for the expenditure referred to in paragraph 1 shall be granted in respect of products from a stock or group of stocks only up to the limit of any quantities allocated to the Member State in question from the total volume of allowable catches for the stock or group of stocks in question.
3. Detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 38(2).
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall apply from 16 October 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 November 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2009/151/EC
of 27 November 2009
amending Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council to include tolylfluanid as an active substance in Annex I thereto
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (1), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 16(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 of 4 December 2007 on the second phase of the 10-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (2) establishes a list of active substances to be assessed, with a view to their possible inclusion in Annex I, IA or IB to Directive 98/8/EC. That list includes tolylfluanid.
(2)
Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, tolylfluanid has been evaluated in accordance with Article 11(2) of Directive 98/8/EC for use in product-type 8, wood preservatives, as defined in Annex V to Directive 98/8/EC.
(3)
Finland was designated as Rapporteur Member State and submitted the competent authority report, together with a recommendation, to the Commission on 24 April 2006 in accordance with Article 14(4) and (6) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007.
(4)
The competent authority report was reviewed by the Member States and the Commission. In accordance with Article 15(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, the findings of the review were incorporated, within the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products on 15 May 2009, in an assessment report.
(5)
It appears from the examinations made that biocidal products used as wood preservatives and containing tolylfluanid may be expected to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 5 of Directive 98/8/EC. It is therefore appropriate to include tolylfluanid in Annex I, in order to ensure that in all Member States authorisations for biocidal products used as wood preservatives and containing tolylfluanid can be granted, modified, or cancelled in accordance with Article 16(3) of Directive 98/8/EC.
(6)
However, unacceptable risks were identified for the in situ treatment of wood outdoors and for treated wood exposed to weathering. Therefore, products containing tolylfluanid and used as wood preservatives should not be authorised for those uses.
(7)
In the light of the findings of the assessment report, it is appropriate to require that risk mitigation measures are applied at product authorisation level to products containing tolylfluanid and used as wood preservatives to ensure that risks are reduced to an acceptable level in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 98/8/EC and Annex VI thereto. In particular, it is appropriate to require that products intended for industrial or professional use be used with appropriate protective equipment unless it can be demonstrated that risks for industrial or professional users can be reduced by other means. Appropriate measures should be taken to protect the soil and aquatic compartments since unacceptable risks to these compartments have been identified during the evaluation. Instructions should therefore be provided to indicate that treated timber must be stored after treatment under shelter and/or on impermeable hard standing and that any losses must be collected for reuse or disposal.
(8)
It is important that the provisions of this Directive be applied simultaneously in all the Member States in order to ensure equal treatment of biocidal products on the market containing the active substance tolylfluanid and also to facilitate the proper operation of the biocidal products market in general.
(9)
A reasonable period should be allowed to elapse before an active substance is included in Annex I in order to permit Member States and the interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements entailed and to ensure that applicants who have prepared dossiers can benefit fully from the 10-year period of data protection, which, in accordance with Article 12(1)(c)(ii) of Directive 98/8/EC, starts from the date of inclusion.
(10)
After inclusion, Member States should be allowed a reasonable period to implement Article 16(3) of Directive 98/8/EC, and in particular, to grant, modify or cancel authorisations of biocidal products in product-type 8 containing tolylfluanid to ensure that they comply with Directive 98/8/EC.
(11)
Directive 98/8/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.
(12)
The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annex I to Directive 98/8/EC is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive.
Article 2
1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by 30 September 2010 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive.
They shall apply those provisions from 1 October 2011.
When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 3
This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 4
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 November 2009.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 446/2004
of 10 March 2004
repealing a number of Decisions concerning animal by-products
(Text with EEA relevance)
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(4) thereof,
Having regard to 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(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 808/2003(4), and in particular Article 32(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Council Directive 90/425/EEC lays down rules on animal health and public health in relation to certain animal by-products. That Directive provides the legal basis for Commission Decision 97/735/EC of 21 October 1997 concerning certain protection measures with regard to trade in certain types of mammalian waste(5), as last amended by Council Decision 1999/534/EC(6), and Commission Decision 2001/25/EC of 27 December 2000 prohibiting the use of certain animal by-products in animal feed(7).
(2) Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 provides the legal basis for Commission Decision 92/562/EEC of 17 November 1992 on the approval of alternative heat treatment systems for processing high-risk material(8), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.
(3) 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/EEC as regards health requirements for animal by-products significantly amended those Directives, in particular in order to reduce their scope so that it only covered animal products intended for human consumption and pathogens.
(4) All the Community rules on animal by-products not intended for human consumption are now provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002.
(5) Accordingly, in the interests of consistency and clarity of Community legislation, Decisions 92/562/EEC, 97/735/EC and 2001/25/EC should therefore be repealed.
(6) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Repealed Decisions
Decisions 92/562/EEC, 97/735/EC and 2001/25/EC are repealed.
Article 2
Entry into force and applicability
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 May 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 March 2004.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1355/2006
of 13 September 2006
prohibiting fishing for orange roughy in ICES zones I, II, III, IV, V, VIII, IX, X, XII and XIV (Community waters and international waters) by vessels flying the flag of France
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (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 the common fisheries policy (2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 2270/2004 of 22 December 2004 fixing for 2005 and 2006 the fishing opportunities for Community fishing vessels for certain deep-sea fish stocks (3) lays down quotas for 2005 and 2006.
(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 2006.
(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 in 2006 referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein 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 September 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 139/2005
of 27 January 2005
fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004 of 3 September 2004 on a special intervention measure for oats in Finland and Sweden for the 2004/2005 marketing year (3),
Whereas:
(1)
An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland or Sweden to all third countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004.
(2)
On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should be fixed.
(3)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For tenders notified from 21 to 27 January 2005, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1565/2004, the maximum refund on exportation of oats shall be 30,90 EUR/t.
Article 2
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 412/96 of 6 March 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 1588/94 laying down detailed rules for the application to milk and milk products of the arrangements provided for in the Interim Agreements between the Community of the one part and Bulgaria and Romania of the other part
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3383/94 of 19 December 1994 on certain procedures for applying the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Bulgaria, of the other part (1), and in particular Article 1 thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3066/95 of 22 December 1995 establishing certain concessions in the form of Community tariff quotas for certain agricultural products and providing for an autonomous and transitional adjustment to certain agricultural concessions provided for in the Europe Agreements so as to take account of the agreement on agriculture concluded as part of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations (2), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1588/94 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 194/96 (4), provides for different customs duties for two quantities of cheeses originating in Bulgaria and falling within the same Combined Nomenclature code; whereas applications for licences for those cheeses must be differentiated with effect from 1 April 1996 according to the applicable customs duty; whereas, therefore, Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1588/94 should be amended;
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
Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1588/94 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In letter (b), a new subparagraph is inserted after the first subparagraph, as follows:
'However, licence applications for products from Bulgaria must indicate whether they relate to the quantity referred to in B.1 or B.2 of Annex I.`
2. The following text is added to letter (e):
'or
Exemption from customs duty pursuant to:
- Reglamento (CE) n° 1588/94
- Forordning (EF) nr. 1588/94
- Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1588/94
- Êáíïíéóìüò (ÅÊ) áñéè. 1588/94
- Regulation (EC) No 1588/94
- Règlement (CE) n° 1588/94
- Regolamento (CE) n. 1588/94
- Verordening (EG) nr. 1588/94
- Regulamento (CE) nº 1588/94
- Asetus (EY) N:o 1588/94
- Förordning (EG) nr 1588/94.`
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, 6 March 1996.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1071/2004
of 3 June 2004
on granting of import licences for cane sugar for the purposes of certain tariff quotas and preferential agreements
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1),
Having regard to 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 (2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 of 30 June 2003 laying down detailed rules of application for the 2003/04, 2004/05 and 2005/06 marketing years for the import of cane sugar under certain tariff quotas and preferential agreements and amending Regulations (EC) No 1464/95 and (EC) No 779/96 (3), and in particular Article 5(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 stipulates how the delivery obligations at zero duty of products of CN code 1701, expressed in white sugar equivalent, are to be determined for imports originating in signatory countries to the ACP Protocol and the Agreement with India.
(2)
Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 stipulates how the zero duty tariff quotas for products of CN code 1701 11 10, expressed in white sugar equivalent, are to be determined for imports originating in signatory countries to the ACP Protocol and the Agreement with India.
(3)
Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 opens tariff quotas at a duty of EUR 98 per tonne for products of CN code 1701 11 10 for imports originating in Brazil, Cuba and other third countries.
(4)
In the week of 24 to 28 May 2004 applications were presented to the competent authorities in line with Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 for import licences for a total quantity exceeding a country's delivery obligation quantity of ACP-India preferential sugar determined pursuant to Article 9 of that Regulation.
(5)
In these circumstances the Commission must set reduction coefficients to be used so that licences are issued for quantities scaled down in proportion to the total available and must indicate that the limit in question has been reached,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
In the case of import licence applications presented from 24 to 28 May 2004 in line with Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 licences shall be issued for the quantities indicated in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 June 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 June 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1181/2003
of 2 July 2003
amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 of 17 December 1999 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products(1), and in particular Article 2(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 provides for the possibility of adopting common marketing standards for fishery products in the Community, particularly in order to facilitate commerce based on fair competition. These standards may, in particular, cover labelling.
(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89(2) lays down common marketing standards for preserved sardines in the Community.
(3) The widening variety of supply of preserved products marketed and presented in the same way as preserved sardines in the Community makes it necessary to provide consumers with sufficient information on the identity and the main characteristics of the product. It is therefore necessary to lay down common rules on trade descriptions for preserved products marketed and presented in the same way as preserved sardines in the Community.
(4) The Codex Alimentarius standard Codex STAN94 as well as the particular conditions prevailing on the Community market should be taken into account to that purpose.
(5) In the interest of market transparency, fair competition and variety of choice, it is necessary to specify that preserved sardine-type products should be prepared exclusively from well defined species.
(6) It is necessary to take account of changes in the Combined Nomenclature codes for preserved sardines.
(7) The term "sardine" can only be part of the trade description of sardine-type products if it is adequately qualified. Trade descriptions based on geographic names alone are not sufficiently distinctive. In order to enable a proper identification of each sardine-type product, thus avoiding confusion between different fish species, the scientific name of the species should be used as a qualifier term.
(8) The combination of the word "sardines" with the common name of a sardine-type fish species can only generate confusion as to the true nature of the product. On the other hand, common names not including the word "sardines" may continue to be used for the marketing of sardine-type products, in accordance with the law of the Member State on marketing and in a manner not to mislead the consumers.
(9) The requirements laid down in this Regulation should be applied without prejudice to Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs(3).
(10) Regulation (EEC) No 2136/89 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(11) 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 2136/89 is amended as follows:
1. In the title the words "laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines" are replaced by the following: "laying down common marketing standards for preserved sardines and trade descriptions for preserved sardines and sardine-type products".
2. Article 1 is replaced by the following:
"Article 1
This Regulation defines the standards governing the marketing of preserved sardines and the trade descriptions for preserved sardines and preserved sardine-type products marketed in the Community."
3. The following Article 1a is inserted:
"Article 1a
For the purposes of this Regulation:
1. 'preserved sardines' means products prepared from fish of the species Sardina pilchardus;
2. 'preserved sardine-type products' means products marketed and presented in the same way as preserved sardines and prepared from fish of the following species:
(a) Sardinops melanosticus, S. neopilchardus, S. ocellatus, S. sagax, S. caeryleus;
(b) Sardinella aurita, S. brasiliensis, S. maderensis, S. longiceps, S. gibbosa;
(c) Clupea harengus;
(d) Sprattus sprattus;
(e) Hyperlophus vittatus;
(f) Nematalosa vlaminghi;
(g) Etrumeus teres;
(h) Ethmidium maculatum;
(i) Engraulis anchoita, E. mordax, E. ringens;
(j) Opisthonema oglinum."
4. The first indent of Article 2 is replaced by the following:
"- they must be covered by CN codes 1604 13 11, 1604 13 19 and ex 1604 20 50;".
5. The following Article 7a is inserted:
"Article 7a
1. Without prejudice to Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(4), preserved sardine-type products may be marketed in the Community under a trade description consisting of the word 'sardines' joined together with the scientific name of the species.
2. Wherever the trade description provided for in paragraph 1 is marked on the container of a preserved sardine-type product, it shall be displayed in a clear and distinct manner.
3. The scientific name shall include in all cases the generic and the specific Latin names.
4. Only one species shall be marketed under a single trade description."
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 July 2003.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 July 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 3228/90 of 5 November 1990 opening and providing for the administration of a Community tariff quota for certain kinds of prepared or preserved tuna coming from Portugal (1991)
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 Article 362 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas Article 362 of the Act of Accession provides that during the period of progressive elimination of customs duties between the Community as constituted on 31 December 1985 and Portugal, certain kinds of sardine, tuna, fish of the genus Euthynnus, certain kinds of mackerel and fish of the species Orcynopsis unicolor, prepared or preserved, falling within CN codes ex 1604 13 10, ex 1604 20 50, 1604 14 10, 1604 19 30, 1604 20 70, 1604 15 10, 1604 19 50 and ex 1604 20 50 and coming from Portugal, may be imported free of duty into the Community as constituted on 31 December 1985 within the limits of annual Community tariff quotas of 5 000 tonnes, 1 000 tonnes and 1 000 tonnes respectively;
Whereas, by virtue of Regulations (EEC) No 3482/88 (1), (EEC) No 839/88 (2) and (EEC) No 1673/89 (3), the customs duties applicable on import into the Community, excluding Spain, of certain prepared or preserved fish other than tuna, coming from Portugal, are suspended; whereas therefore it is appropriate to open, for 1991, only the Community tariff quota laid down for the said tuna, prepared or preserved;
Whereas equal and continuous access to the quota should be ensured for all Community importers and the rate laid down for the quota should be applied consistently to all imports of the products in question into all the Member States until the quota is exhausted; whereas it is appropriate to take the necessary measures to ensure effective Community administration of this tariff quota while offering the Member States the opportunity to draw from the quota volume the necessary quantities corresponding to actual imports; whereas this method of administration requires close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission;
Whereas, since the Kingdom of Belgium, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg are united within, and jointly represented by, the Benelux Economic Union, any operation concerning the administration of the quota may be carried out by any one of its members,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
From 1 January to 31 December 1991 the customs duty on imports into the Community as constituted on 31 December 1985, for the following products from Portugal, shall be totally suspended within the limit of Community tariff quota as shown herewith: TABLE
(a) Taric code: 1604 14 10*10 1604 10 70*10
Article 2
The tariff quota referred to in Article 1 shall be administered by the Commission, which may take any appropriate measure with a view to ensuring the effective administration thereof.
Article 3
If an importer presents, in a Member State, a declaration of entry into free circulation including a request for preferential benefit for a product covered by this Regulation, and if this declaration is accepted by the customs authorities, the Member State concerned shall draw, from the tariff quota, by means of notification to the Commission, a quantity corresponding to these needs.
The requests for drawing, with the indication of the date of acceptance of the said declaration, must be communicated to the Commission without delay.
The drawings are granted by the Commission on the basis of the date of acceptance of the declaration of entry into free circulation by the customs authorities of the Member State concerned, to the extent that the available balance so permits.
If a Member State does not use the quantities drawn, it shall return them as soon as possible to the tariff quota.
If the quantities requested are greater than the available balance of the tariff quota, allocation shall be made on a pro rata basis with respect to the requests. Member States shall be informed by the Commission of the drawings made.
Article 4
Each Member State shall ensure that importers of the product concerned have equal and continuous access to the quota for such time as the residual balance of the quota volume so permits.
Article 5
The Member States and the Commission shall cooperate closely to ensure that this Regulation is complied with.
Article 6
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1991.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 November 1990.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 14 February 1997 amending Council Decision 79/542/EEC and Commission Decisions 92/260/EEC, 93/195/EEC and 93/197/EEC with regard to the animal health conditions for the temporary admission, re-entry and imports into the Community of registered horses from Lebanon (Text with EEA relevance) (97/160/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 imports from third countries of equidae (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Articles 12, 13, 15, 16 and 19 (ii) thereof,
Whereas by Council Decision 79/542/EEC (2), as last amended by Commission Decision 96/624/EC (3), a list of third countries from which Member States authorize imports of bovine animals, swine, equidae, sheep and goats, fresh meat and meat products has been established;
Whereas the health conditions and veterinary certification for the temporary admission, the re-entry of registered horses after temporary export and imports of registered horses are laid down respectively in Commission Decisions 92/260/EEC (4), 93/195/EEC (5) and 93/197/EEC (6), all as last amended by Commission Decision 96/279/EC (7);
Whereas following a Commission veterinary inspection mission to Lebanon the animal health situation initially appeared insufficiently under control of the veterinary services; whereas however substantial improvements have been made since, including a comprehensive sero-epidemiological survey for African horse sickness, glanders, dourine and infectious anaemia, carried out on equidae all over the territory of the country with negative result in each case;
Whereas Lebanon has been free from African horse sickness for more than thirty years and vaccination against this disease has not been carried out during that period of time;
Whereas Lebanon is free from glanders and dourine for more than six months and Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis and vesicular stomatitis have never occurred;
Whereas the veterinary authorities of Lebanon have guaranteed to notify within 24 hours by telefax, telegram or telex to the Commission and the Member States the confirmation of any infectious or contagious disease in equidae mentioned in Annex A of Directive 90/426/EEC and any change in the vaccination or import policy in respect of equidae;
Whereas the animal health conditions and veterinary certification must be adopted according to the animal health situation of the third country concerned; whereas the present case relates only to registered horses;
Whereas Decision 79/542/EEC and Decisions 92/260/EEC, 93/195/EEC and 93/197/EEC must be amended accordingly;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
In Part 2 of the Annex to Council Decision 79/542/EEC, special column for equidae, the following line is inserted in accordance with the alphabetical order of the ISO code:
TABLE
Article 2
Decision 92/260/EEC is amended as follows:
1. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries in Group E of Annex I;
2. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries in the title of the health certificate set out in Annex II E.
Article 3
Decision 93/195/EEC is amended as follows:
1. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries in Group E of Annex I;
2. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries under Group E in the title of the health certificate set out in Annex II.
Article 4
Decision 93/197/EEC is amended as follows:
1. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries in Group E of Annex I;
2. 'Lebanon` is added in alphabetical order of the ISO code to the list of third countries in the first half sentence of the title relating to registered horses of the health certificate set out in Annex II E.
Article 5
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 February 1997.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 429/2007
of 19 April 2007
fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 958/2006
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), and in particular the second subparagraph and point (b) of the third subparagraph of Article 33(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 of 28 June 2006 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2006/2007 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.
(2)
Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 19 April 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.
(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
For the partial invitation to tender ending on 19 April 2007, the maximum export refund for the product referred to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 shall be 34,165 EUR/100 kg.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 April 2007.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 19 April 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 3363/94
of 20 December 1994
allocating, for 1995, Community catch quotas in Greenland waters
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture (1), and in particular Article 8 (4) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the Agreement on fisheries between the European Economic Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland, on the other (2), has been extended for an additional period of six years, until 31 December 2000;
Whereas the European Community, on the one hand, and the Government of Denmark and the local Government of Greenland, on the other hand, have subsequently approved the Third Fisheries Protocol, establishing the conditions for fishing and, in particular, the catch quotas for Community vessels in Greenland waters for the period from 1 January 1995 to 31 December 2000;
Whereas these catch qutoas may be used by vessels not flying the flag of a Member State of the Community, to the extent that this is necessary for the proper functioning of the fisheries agreements which the Community has concluded with third countries;
Whereas the Community shall inform the authorities responsible for Greenland of its reaction to offers regarding supplementary catch possibilities, as referred to in Article 8 of the Agreement, not later than six weeks after receipt of the offer;
Whereas, to ensure efficient management of the catch possibilities available, they should be allocated among Member States by means of quotas in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92;
Whereas the fishing activities covered by this Regulation are subject to the relevant control measures provided for by Council Regulation (EC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (3),
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For 1995, the allocation of the Community catch quotas in Greenland waters shall be as set out in the Annex.
Article 2
Should the authorities responsible for Greenland make an offer regarding supplementary catch possibilities, as referred to in Article 8 of the Agreement on fisheries, the Council shall, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, take a decision on that offer within six weeks of receipt thereof.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1995.
However, for new Member States, the Regulation shall enter into force on the date of accession.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 1994.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Decision
of 25 April 2001
on the State aid which Austria is planning to implement in favour of Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH
(notified under document number C(2001) 1130)
(Only the German text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2001/669/ECSC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 4(c) thereof,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof read in conjunction with Protocol 14,
Having regard to Commission Decision No 2496/96/ECSC of 18 December 1996 establishing Community rules for State aid to the steel industry(1),
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above(2),
Whereas:
I. PROCEDURE
(1) By letter dated 15 April 1999 Austria notified the Commission of aid for environmental protection to Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH concerning an extension of its wastewater treatment installations.
(2) By letter dated 17 May 2000 the Commission informed Austria that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 6(5) of Decision No 2496/96/ECSC of 18 December 1996 establishing Community rules for State aid to the steel industry (hereinafter referred to as the "steel aid code"), in respect of the aid.
(3) The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities(3).The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments.
(4) The Commission has received no comments from interested parties. Austria presented its comments by letter dated 20 June 2000 and a change to its initial notification, reducing the aid to 15 % of the eligible investment costs, by letter dated 28 February 2001.
II. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID
(5) Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH is an integrated steel company producing crude steel and hot- rolled sheets. It operates a hot rolling mill with an annual production of 3 to 3,7 million tonnes. The rolling mill comprises a reheating furnace and a strip-cooling installation. The entire rolling process involves the use of water, which the company gets from the Danube. This water is contaminated with solids and machine oil before it is discharged back into the river.
(6) On 27 November 1998 new standards for pollution in wastewater by steel companies entered into force in Austria. Existing installations such as those of Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH qualified for a transition period of seven years, i.e. until 27 November 2005. The company decided, however, to bring its installations into line with the new standards before the deadline. In 1997 it applied to the Austrian authorities for aid with a view to a significant extension of its water purification system in 1997 and 1998.
(7) In its decision to open the procedure, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the project was eligible for environmental aid in view of the age of the former installations, which dated from 1958. It was not clear at the time whether the investments had been carried out purely in order to meet higher environmental standards or whether they would have been necessary in any case because the old equipment had become obsolete. This situation was clarified in the context of the procedure.
(8) The existing water treatment was rather rudimentary and consisted mainly of three sedimentation basins, which filtered the water before it was dumped into the Danube. These installations remain in place but significant additions have been made to them. Five separators have been installed which receive the water from the existing sedimentation basins and in which water is separated from oil and solids. The water then proceeds to newly installed filters, from where part of it is reused for cooling purposes in the rolling-mill process, and the other part is discharged, undergoing further treatment via a sand and gravel bed before reaching the Danube. Solids and oil are disposed of by incineration in the company's blast furnace.
(9) The Austrian authorities propose to grant aid of ATS 22,4 million (EUR 1,6 million), equivalent to 15 % of the project's eligible costs, which amount to ATS 149,1 million (EUR 10,9 million) in total.
III. COMMENTS FROM AUSTRIA
(10) In its comments, Austria explained the nature of the investments and what they represented in comparison with the initial water treatment facilities. Those facilities could have remained unchanged if it had not been deemed necessary to limit wastewater pollutants. Indeed, the most important component of the original facilities, namely the three sedimentation basins, remains in place and has been integrated into the new water purification installations. Austria has also amended its notification concerning the level of aid and reduced it to 15 % of investment costs as opposed to the 20 % originally indicated.
IV. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID
(11) Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH is an undertaking within the meaning of Article 80 of the ECSC Treaty and therefore it is subject to the rules of the steel aid code. The measure notified by Austria constitutes aid within the meaning of Article 1 thereof. Article 3 provides for the possibility of environmental aid to be deemed compatible with the common market in so far as it complies with the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection(4) (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines") and with the criteria for their application to the ECSC steel industry outlined in the annex to the steel aid code.
(12) The guidelines provide as a general rule that the eligible costs must be strictly confined to the additional investments necessary if environmental targets are to be met(5). Aid for investments to comply with new mandatory standards which involve adapting plant and equipment to meet new environmental standards can be authorised up to the level of 15 % gross of the eligible costs. Aid may be granted only in respect of installations that have been in operation for at least two years when the new standards enter into force(6).
(13) The annex to the steel aid code, while reaffirming the above rules, also requires the reason for the investments to be assessed. Essentially, investments carried out on economic grounds or as a result of the age of the existing plant or equipment, are not eligible for aid. The existing plant must have significant useful life left (at least 25 %) for the new investments to be eligible.
(14) New environmental standards for wastewater from steel companies in Austria were published on 28 November 1997 and entered into force on 27 November 1998. However, existing installations such as those of Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH qualified for a transition period of seven years, ending on 27 November 2005.
(15) In order to comply with the new standards, Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH carried out the notified investments, which entail important benefits for the environment: discharge of solids in open water have been reduced by 80 % and discharge of oil by 44 %. In its initial assessment, the Commission raised doubts about the eligibility of the investments for environmental aid under the steel aid code on the basis that the pre-existing installations dated from 1958. It questioned whether the new investments would have been necessary in any event and whether the remaining useful life of the pre-existing installations amounted to more than 25 % at the time of the investments.
(16) On the basis of the information provided by the Austrian authorities in connection with the procedure, the doubts raised by the Commission have been cleared up. Although the former installations dated from 1958, they would not have had to be replaced for production or environmental reasons if the wastewater pollution standards had not been changed. They could have continued to operate without any time limit. The investments had to be carried out purely because the old system was not able to meet the new environmental protection standards on wastewater. The main elements of the old system, the three basins, have been integrated into the new system. The Commission therefore concludes that the investments were carried out purely for environmental reasons and with a view to meeting the new standards.
V. CONCLUSION
(17) hi the light of the above considerations, the Commission concludes that its initial doubts have been cleared up. The subsidy of 15 % of the investment cost, as proposed by the Austrian authorities, meets the criteria for environmental aid to help firms comply with new environmental standards as laid down in the guidelines and in the annex to the steel aid code,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The aid which Austria is planning to implement in favour of Voest Alpine Stahl Linz GmbH amounting to ATS 22,4 million (EUR 1,6 million), and representing 15 % of the total eligible investment cost of ATS 149,1 million (EUR 10,9 million), is compatible with the common market.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Austria.
Done at Brussels, 25 April 2001.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1449/85
of 31 May 1985
amending Regulation (EEC) No 1805/78 on the withdrawal by fruit and vegetable producers' organizations of products not complying with their marketing rules
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to 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 Regulation (EEC) No 1332/84 (2), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 15 (1) thereof,
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1805/78 (3) specifies the conditions in which producers' organizations may decide not to offer for sale certain products which conform to the quality standards but which do not comply with the marketing rules which the said organizations have adopted in order to limit the volume of supplies; whereas that Regulation specifies in particular the minimum requirements which the products withdrawn must meet;
Whereas aubergines and apricots have been added to the list of products in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 which producers' organizations may withdraw from the market if they do not comply with their marketing rules; whereas the said products should therefore be included in Regulation (EEC) No 1805/78 so that the same derogations from the quality standards regarding packing and marking may be applied to them;
Whereas 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
Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 1805/78 is hereby amended as follows:
- in the first indent, 'aubergines' is added after 'citrus fruit',
- in the second indent, 'apricots' is added after 'table grapes'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 June 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 31 May 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 23 April 1997 modifying the decisions approving the Community support frameworks, the single programming documents and the Community initiative programmes in respect of France (Only the French text is authentic) (97/317/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 of 24 June 1988 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3193/94 (2), and in particular the fourth subparagraph of Article 8 (5), the third subparagraph of Article 9 (9), the third subparagraph of Article 10 (3.3), Article 11 and the third subparagraph of Article 11 (a) (6) thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 3193/94, and in particular Article 8 (3), the last subparagraph of Article 10 (1), Article 11 and Article 14 (3) thereof,
Whereas Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4254/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Regional Development Fund (4), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2083/93 (5), specifies the type of operations the ERDF may help finance;
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 4255/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Social Fund (6), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2084/93 (7), specifies in Article 1 the type of operations which may receive ESF financing and in Article 2 eligible expenditure;
Whereas Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the EAGGF Guidance Section (8), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2085/93 (9), specifies the type of measures which the EAGGF Guidance Section may help finance;
Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 2080/93 of 20 July 1993, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (10), specifies in Article 1 the type of measures which may receive FIFG financing as well as in Article 5 and in Regulation (EC) No 3699/93 of 21 December 1993 specifying the criteria and conditions of forms of assistance for structural purposes in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors as well as the processing and marketing of their products (11), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 25/97 (12), the criteria and conditions of forms of assistance;
Whereas the Council (Economic and Financial Affairs) of 11 March 1996, in its discussions on the discharge to be given in respect of the 1994 budget, called for all sources of uncertainty regarding the eligibility of expenditure to be eliminated so as to guarantee that the best possible use be made of Community resources, in accordance with the regulations in force (13); whereas in order to clarify the situation as regards the eligibility of expenditure, for the Member States as well as for the beneficiaries, it is appropriate to incorporate the Annex attached, drawn up in partnership with the Member States, in the different decisions approving Community support frameworks, the single programming documents, and the Community initiative programmes currently in operation;
Whereas in order to respect the principle of legitimate expectation only the provisions of this Annex which impose no new charge or condition on Member States or on beneficiaries can be applied in respect of projects already selected;
Whereas the Commission will apply this decision fully respecting the institutional, legal and financial characteristics and competence of the Member States in the context of partnership;
Whereas this Decision is in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Agricultural Structures and Rural Development and the Standing Committee on Fisheries Structures;
After consultation of the Advisory Committee on the Development and Conversion of Regions and the Committee pursuant to Article 124 of the Treaty,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. The Annex to the present Decision (14) comprises an integral part of the decisions approving Community support frameworks, single programming documents, and Community initiative programmes.
2. To the extent that the provisions of the Annex impose new or complementary charges or conditions on Member States or beneficiaries, they shall apply only to investments, operations, measures and projects comprising part of the forms of assistance mentioned in the first paragraph and selected after 1 May 1997.
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.
Done at Brussels, 23 April 1997.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1181/2008
of 28 November 2008
amending Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 opening and providing for the administration of 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 Federal 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 poultry meat (2), and in particular Article 2 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 5(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 (3) stipulates that a security of EUR 50 per 100 kilograms must be lodged at the time of submission of a licence application.
(2)
In view of the new conditions applicable to imports of products originating in Brazil, the amount of the security relating to the licence should be set at an appropriate level to ensure proper management of the tariff quotas and satisfactory access to them for operators.
(3)
In view of the reduction in the security, and also in order to ensure proper management, the maximum quantity for which each operator is entitled to apply for Group No 1 quotas should be increased.
(4)
Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(5)
As the application period for the next subperiod begins on 1 December 2008, it is essential that this Regulation applies from that date.
(6)
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 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 is replaced by the following:
‘5. Licence applications must be for a minimum of 100 tonnes and a maximum of 10 % of the quantity available for the quota concerned in the period or subperiod in question. However, for Group Nos 2 and 3, the maximum quantity for licence applications shall be 5 % of the quantity available for the quota concerned in the period or subperiod in question.
For Group Nos 3, 6 and 8, the minimum quantity for licence applications shall be reduced to 10 tonnes.’
Article 2
Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 616/2007 is replaced by the following:
‘2. A security of EUR 50 per 100 kilograms shall be lodged at the time of submission of the licence application.
However, for applications concerning Group Nos 1, 4 and 7, the security shall be set at EUR 10 per 100 kilograms.’
Article 3
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 December 2008.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 November 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
DECISION 2004/763/CFSP OF THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL
of 5 November 2004
amending Common Strategy 2000/458/CFSP on the Mediterranean region in order to extend the period of its application
THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article 13(2) thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation of the Council,
Whereas:
(1)
Common Strategy 2000/458/CFSP of the European Council of 19 June 2000 on the Mediterranean region (1)expired on 23 July 2004.
(2)
It is considered necessary to amend Common Strategy 2000/458/CFSP in order to extend the period of its application, thereby allowing for a review of the European Union's relations with the Mediterranean Region, taking into consideration the evaluation of the Strategic Partnership with the Mediterranean and the Middle East by the European Council in June 2005 and the evaluation of the Barcelona Process in the framework of its 10th anniversary in 2005, as well as the evolution of the European Neighbourhood Policy during that period,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
In Part V of Common Strategy 2000/458/CFSP, the first sentence of point 36 (Duration) shall be replaced by the following:
‘36.
This Common Strategy shall apply until 23 January 2006.’
Article 2
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 5 November 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 706/2009
of 5 August 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 6 August 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 August 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 20 December 2005
repealing Decision 2001/381/EC accepting an undertaking offered in connection with imports into the Community of certain aluminium foil originating in Russia
(2006/45/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 8 thereof,
After consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
A. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE
(1)
By Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 (2) the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain aluminium foil (‘AHF’) originating, inter alia, in Russia. By Decision 2001/381/EC (3) the Commission accepted an undertaking offered by the Russian exporting producer Joint Stock ‘United Company Siberian Aluminium’, which since then has changed its name (4) to Open Joint Stock Company Rusal Sayanal (‘Sayanal’).
B. REPEAL OF DECISION 2001/381/EC
(2)
Further to a request lodged by Sayanal, the Commission initiated (5) a partial interim review limited in scope to the examination of dumping in accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.
(3)
The findings of the review, which are set out in detail in Council Regulation (EC) No 161/2006 (6), showed that Sayanal is no longer dumping. As a consequence, by the aforementioned Regulation, the anti-dumping duty rate applicable to imports of AHF from Sayanal has been set at 0 %.
(4)
In view of the above, Decision 2001/381/EC, by which the Commission accepted an undertaking from Sayanal, should be repealed,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Decision 2001/381/EC is hereby repealed.
Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 20 December 2005.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2429/85
of 28 August 1985
determining the actual production of unginned cotton for the 1984/85 marketing year and fixing the percentage of the aid to be paid by Member States for the 1985/86 marketing year
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Greece, and in particular Protocol 4 on cotton,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2169/81 of 27 July 1981 laying down the general rules for the system of aid of cotton (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1976/85 (2), and in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof,
Whereas Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2169/81 states that actual production for each marketing year shall be determined every year, account being taken in particular of the quantities for which aid has been requested; whereas application of this criterion gives the figure for actual production in the 1984/85 marketing year indicated below;
Whereas Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 2169/81 provides that the percentage of the aid to be paid by Member States after ginning of the cotton, pending determination of the quantity actually produced, shall be laid down for each marketing year taking into account crop estimates; whereas those estimates for the marketing year concerned indicate that the percentage should be fixed at the level shown below;
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
Actual Community production of unginned cotton is hereby determined at 480 927 tonnes for the 1984/85 marketing year.
Article 2
The percentage of the aid for the 1985/86 marketing year to be paid by the Member States after ginning of the cotton has been carried out and pending determination of the actual quantity produced is hereby fixed at 100.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 August 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3263/91 of 8 November 1991 concerning the quantities of sheepmeat and goatmeat products which may be imported from Romania during 1991
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 84/633/EEC of 11 December 1984 authorizing the Commission, within the context of the voluntary restraint agreements on trade in the sheepmeat and goatmeat sector between the Community and 12 non-member States, to convert, for the purposes of the smooth operation of trade and within the limits agreed, live animal quantities into fresh or chilled meat quantities or such latter quantities into the former (1), and in particular Article 1 (1) thereof;
Whereas, under an Agreement concluded with the Community, Romania has undertaken to restrict its exports of sheepmeat and goatmeat to the Community to annual quantities of 475 tonnes of live animals, expressed as carcase weight bone-in, and of 75 tonnes of fresh and chilled meat;
Whereas Romania has asked the Community to convert the 75 tonnes of fresh and chilled meat that may be exported to the Community in 1991 into 75 tonnes of live animals expressed as carcase weight bone-in; whereas the extremely limited quantity covered by the request will not disturb the Community market; whereas the market situation is such that the application can be granted;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sheep and Goats,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The quantity of live sheep and goats falling within (CN codes 0104 10 90 and 0104 20 90 that may be imported from Romania in 1991, under the Agreement concluded with that country, shall be 550 tonnes expressed as carcase weight bone-in.
The quantity of fresh and chilled sheepmeat and goatmeat falling within CN code 0204, that may be imported from Romania in 1991 under the Agreement concluded with that country, shall be nil.
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, 8 November 1991.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 792/2007
of 5 July 2007
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 July 2007.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 5 July 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1789/89
of 19 June 1989
amending Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 adopting general rules concerning specific measures for peas, field beans and sweet lupins
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82 of 18 May 1982 laying down special measures for peas, field beans and sweet lupins (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1104/88 (2), and in particular Article 3 (5) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the control systems provided for in Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1105/88 (4), are ill-adapted to the new market situation; whereas checks to ensure that imported peas and field beans are processed in such a way as to render them ineligible for aid must be stepped up in view of the development of imports from third countries; whereas under those circumstances, verification of the Community origin of peas, field beans and sweet lupins for which aid is applied for may be simplified;
Whereas the price paid to the producer should be verified at the level of the first buyer of the Community products in question; whereas, to streamline the administrative procedures for such controls, the declaration of delivery defined in Article 3 (2) and the certificate referred to in Article 4 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 may be abolished; whereas, however, provision should be made for the approval of the first buyer under conditions to be determined, which approval may be withdrawn in case of failure to comply with the rules laid down;
Whereas approved users who use the products in question may ensure compliance with the minimum price by undertaking to apply for the aid only in respect of products from an approved first buyer; whereas Articles 3 (4) and 5 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 should be amended accordingly;
Whereas the definition of sweet lupins in Article 11 (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 entails difficulties of controls of the seed and does not afford any certainty that the products for which the aid is applied for have an acceptable bitter seed content; whereas provision should accordingly be made for a definition of sweet lupins permitting verification of products intended for use as feedingstuff to see whether they comply with the criteria of eligibility for the aid;
Whereas the definition and classification of the products actually used, as laid down in Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82, take account of technical processing procedures the relevance and exhaustiveness of which depend on technical progress; whereas the said paragraph should indicate only the general conditions under which the products in question should be considered as having been used; whereas Article 6 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 must be adapted to the definition of the products actually used;
Whereas Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 does not enable a member of an approved organization to market his products; whereas, to qualify under the aid system, producers must either market all their production or use it completely under an approved organization; whereas, for the sake of fairness, producers who market part of their production should be authorized to join an approved organization;
Whereas Article 12a (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 provides for a carry-over of monetary gaps when calculating differential amounts where they differ by less than one point; whereas that rule leads in certain cases to an extension of the validity of monetary gaps which are no longer in force; whereas that rule should be abolished to make it easier to understand the calculation of the amount of the aid in national currencies;
Whereas the control system provided for in Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 must be made more stringent by the possibility of providing for a guarantee ensuring that products imported are processed in such a way as to render them ineligible for aid;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation lead to changes in the administrative procedures; whereas, where temporary adaptations are necessary, provision should be made for the possibility of adopting transitional measures,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 2036/82 is hereby amended as follows:
1. In Article 3 (1):
- 'approved' is inserted before 'first buyer',
- 'in accordance with the condition laid down in the second indent of Article 3 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82,' is deleted.
2. The following is added to Article 3 (4):
'and who in particular undertakes to apply for the aid only for peas, field beans and sweet lupins delivered by a producer to an approved first buyer;'.
3. In Article 3, point (2) is deleted and points (3), (4), (5) and (6) become points (2), (3), (4) and (5) respectively.
4. The following point is added to Article 3:
'6. "sweet lupins" shall mean lupins not containing more than 5 % bitter seeds under conditions determined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/88.'
5. Article 4 is replaced by the following:
'Article 4
1. In cases where the products are sold by the producer, the aid shall be granted for the products in question subject to their purchase by an approved first buyer.
2. Approval as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be given by the Member State where the person concerned is established only to first buyers who:
- undertake to conclude with the producer, in all cases where they purchase peas, field beans and sweet lupins produced in the Community, a contract providing for the payment of at least the minimum price referred to in the second indent of Article 3 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82,
- keep accounts in accordance with rules to be laid down,
and
- agree to submit to all controls laid down under the application of the aid arrangements.
3. Without prejudice to the implementation of the provisions of paragraph 4, where approved first buyers fail to comply with the condition relating to the minimum price, they shall be required to compensate each producer concerned, under conditions to be determined.
Compensation shall be equal to twice the difference between the minimum price and the price actually paid.
4. Approval as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be withdrawn, temporarily or permanently depending on the gravity or the failure to comply with the provisions in question, if, except in cases of force majeure, one of the undertakings or one of the conditions for approval laid down in paragraph 2 is no longer fulfilled or satisfied.
5. Detailed rules for the application of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/88.'
6. Article 5 is replaced by the following:
'Article 5
1. In the case referred to in Article 4, the aid shall be granted to any approved user making use of the products provided that:
- he lodges an application with the agency appointed by the Member State in whose territory the product has been used,
- the quantity specified in the aid application has entered the undertaking and has actually been used.
2. For the purposes of this Article, a product shall be deemed to have actually been used if it has been;
(a) irreversibly processed and incorporated in feedingstuffs or is intended to be incorporated therein as a result of the type of processing which it has undergone;
(b) irreversibly processed for use as foodstuffs, or available for sale after being prepared for market for consumption without further processing.
Irreversible processing as referred to in points (a) and (b) and additional conditions may be determined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78.'
7. Article 6 (5) is replaced by the following:
'5. The aid to be paid shall:
(a) for the products referred to in Article 5 (2) (a), be the amount fixed in Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82;
(b) for the products referred to in Article 5 (2) (b), be the amount fixed in Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82.'
8. In Article 7 (1), 'if a producer does not market the product' is replaced by 'if a producer does not market the entire amount produced'.
9. Article 11 (4) is deleted.
10. The second sentence of Article 12a (3) is deleted. 11. The following paragraph is added to Article 13:
'For peas and field beans which have not undergone treatment to ensure that they are processed in such a way as to render them ineligible for aid, controls may also entail the lodging of a security, which may not be higher than that necessary to ensure that it is not worthwhile to fail to submit imported products to controls.'
Article 2
Where traditional measures prove necessary to facilitate the changeover from the arrangements in force to those provided for in this Regulation, such measures shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1117/78. They shall continue to apply for the period strictly required to facilitate the changeover from one set of arrangements to the other.
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 1989.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 19 June 1989.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1429/2006
of 28 September 2006
fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 958/2006
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), and in particular the second subparagraph and point (b) of the third subparagraph of Article 33(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 of 28 June 2006 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2006/2007 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.
(2)
Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 28 September 2006, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.
(3)
The Management Committee for Sugar has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the partial invitation to tender ending on 28 September 2006, the maximum export refund for the product referred to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 shall be 35,481 EUR/100 kg.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 September 2006.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 28 September 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION
of 15 July 2008
implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2007/868/EC
(2008/583/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (1), and in particular Article 2(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
On 20 December 2007 the Council adopted Decision 2007/868/EC implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (2), and establishing an updated list of persons and entities to which that Regulation applies.
(2)
The Council has provided all the persons, groups and entities for which it was practically possible with statements of reasons explaining why they were listed in Decision 2007/868/EC. Concerning one group and three persons the amended statements of reasons has been provided to them, if possible, in April 2008.
(3)
By way of a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 22 December 2007 (3) the Council informed the persons, groups and entities listed in Decision 2007/868/EC that it had decided to keep them on the list. The Council also informed the persons, groups and entities concerned that it was possible to request a statement of the Council’s reasons for putting them on the list (where one had not already been communicated to them).
(4)
The Council has carried out a complete review of the list of persons, groups and entities to which Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 applies, as required by Article 2(3) of that Regulation. When doing so it took account of observations submitted to the Council by those concerned.
(5)
In the case of one group, the Council has taken account of the fact that the decision by a competent authority on the basis of which the group was included on the list has not been in force since 24 June 2008. However, new information concerning the group has been brought to the Council’s attention. The Council considers that this new information warrants the group’s inclusion on the list.
(6)
The Council has determined that one person should be removed from the list of persons, groups and entities to which Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 applies.
(7)
The Council has concluded that with the exception of the person mentioned in recital (6), the persons, groups and entities listed in the Annex to Common Position 2007/871/CFSP (4) have been involved in terrorist acts within the meaning of Article 1(2) and (3) of Council Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism (5), that a decision has been taken with respect to them by a competent authority within the meaning of Article 1(4) of that Common Position, and that they should continue to be subject to the specific restrictive measures provided for in Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001.
(8)
The list of the persons, groups and entities to which Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 applies should be updated accordingly,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The list provided for in Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 shall be replaced by the list set out in the Annex to this Decision.
Article 2
Decision 2007/868/EC is hereby repealed.
Article 3
This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 15 July 2008.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
Commission Decision
of 14 March 2000
modifying Decision 2000/167/EC approving a Finnish national aid programme implementing in particular Article 141 of the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden
(notified under document number C(2000) 835)
(Only the Finnish and the Swedish texts are authentic)
(2000/364/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 141 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) On 25 October 1999, Finland notified the Commission, pursuant in particular to Article 143 of the Act of Accession and Article 88 of the EC Treaty, a national aid programme implementing in particular Article 141 and comprising other related measures for regions A and B and the Archipelago of regions A and B.
(2) On 6 December 1999, Finland submitted an amended version of this programme.
(3) Parts of this programme were approved by Commission Decision 2000/167/EC of 22 December 1999 approving a Finnish national aid programme implementing in particular Article 141 of the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden(1).
(4) On 31 January 2000 Finland notified to the Commission, pursuant to Article 143 of the Act of Accession, a request to modify that programme in three respects.
(5) The first request concerns the milk sector: it would allow for the possibility of including in the quota eligible for aid unused reference quantities allocated to producers during the same marketing year. Since Commission Decision 95/196/EC of 4 May 1995 on the long-term national aid scheme for agriculture in the northern regions of Finland(2), as amended by Decision 97/279/EC(3), already provides for this possibility, the Commission considers this request to be justified, in particular in the interest of avoiding any discrimination between producers in different parts of Finland.
(6) The second request concerns the bovine sector and would entail the deletion of the upper limit of 90 male bovine animals eligible for aid on each holding. Since, in accordance with Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal(4), Finland has decided not to apply this upper limit under the common organisation of the market, it appears appropriate to remove the limit in respect of national aid as well. Furthermore, Finland has explained that such a limit is also contrary to the aim of improving production structures in southern Finland, which is one of the prerequisites for the full integration of Finnish agriculture into the common agricultural policy.
(7) The third request also concerns the bovine sector and is intended to harmonise the terminology used to define the conversion factors for livestock units with that used in Decision 95/196/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999; this request appears justified in the interests of transparency and administrative simplification.
(8) Decision 2000/167/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Decision 2000/167/EC is hereby amended as follows:
1. Article 2(2) is amended as follows:
(a) The first indent is replaced by the following:
"- cows milk: the reference quantity allocated pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92(5) after the reallocation of any unused reference quantities in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 2(1) of that Regulation for the milk year which ends during the calendar year in question;"
(b) The third indent is deleted.
2. In Annex I, note 1 is amended as follows:
(a) the entry "Bovines six months to 24 months" is replaced by "Male bovine animals and heifers from six months to 24 months";
(b) the entry "Bovines over 24 months" is replaced by "Male bovine animals and heifers older than 24 months, suckler cows, dairy cows".
Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Finland.
Done at Brussels, 14 March 2000.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION of 16 December 1997 amending Decision 97/467/EC on drawing up provisional lists of third-country establishments from which the Member States authorize imports of rabbit meat and farmed game meat (Text with EEA relevance) (97/871/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 95/408/EC of 22 June 1995 on the conditions for drawing up, for an interim period, provisional lists of third-country establishments from which Member States are authorized to import certain products of animal origin, fishery products or live bivalve molluscs (1), as amended by Council Decision 97/34/EC (2), and in particular Article 2 (1) thereof,
Whereas provisional lists of establishments producing rabbit meat and farmed game meat have been drawn up by Commission Decision 97/467/EC (3) as last amended by Commission Decision 97/869/EC (4);
Whereas the People's Republic of China has sent a list of establishments producing rabbit meat and farmed game meat and for which the responsible authorities certify that the establishments are in accordance with Community rules;
Whereas a Community veterinary mission has shown that the structure and organization of the competent authority responsible for the approval of the establishments are sufficient and that the powers available to that competent authority guarantees that it can provide the implementation of Community rules; whereas these checks included on-the-spot inspection in establishments appearing on the list which have shown that the hygiene standards of these establishments are sufficient;
Whereas a provisional list of establishments producing rabbit meat can thus be drawn up for the People's Republic of China;
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 this Decision is added to the Annex of Decision 97/467/EC.
Article 2
This Decision shall apply from 1 January 1998.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 December 1997.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL AND COMMISSION DECISION
of 28 June 2007
on the conclusion of the Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Russian Federation, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union
(2007/541/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 44(2), the last sentence of Article 47(2) and Articles 55, 57(2), 71, 80(2), 93, 94, 133 and 181a, in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 300(2) and the first 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 opinion 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 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Russian Federation, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union, was signed on behalf of the European Communities and their Member States on 23 April 2007.
(2)
Pending its entry into force, the Protocol has been applied on a provisional basis as from 23 April 2007.
(3)
The Protocol should be approved,
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The Protocol to the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, establishing a partnership between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Russian Federation, 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 attached to this Decision (2).
Article 2
The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, give the notification provided for in Article 3 of the Protocol (3). The President of the Commission shall simultaneously give such notification on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community.
Done at Luxembourg, 28 June 2007.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2026/2002
of 14 November 2002
amending representative prices and additional duties for the import of certain products in the sugar sector
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), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 680/2002(2),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1423/95 of 23 June 1995 laying down detailed implementing rules for the import of products in the sugar sector other than molasses(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 624/98(4), and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 1(2), and Article 3(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) The amounts of the representative prices and additional duties applicable to the import of white sugar, raw sugar and certain syrups are fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1153/2002(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1978/2002(6).
(2) It follows from applying the general and detailed fixing rules contained in Regulation (EC) No 1423/95 to the information known to the Commission that the representative prices and additional duties at present in force should be altered to the amounts set out in the Annex hereto,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The representative prices and additional duties on imports of the products referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1423/95 shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 November 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 November 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3758/85
of 23 December 1985
adapting Regulation (EEC) No 1119/79 concerning seeds, by reason of the accession of Spain and Portugal
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, and in particular Article 396 thereof,
Whereas, by reason of the accession of Spain and Portugal and in accordance with Article 396 of the Act of Accession, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1119/79 of 6 June 1979 laying down special provisions for the implementation of the system of import licences for seeds (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3478/80 (2), should be adapted;
Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 (3) of Treaty of Accession, the institutions of the Community may adopt before accession the measures referred to in Article 396 of the Act, these measures to enter into force only subject to and on the date of the entry into force of the said Treaty,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The following terms are added to Article 6 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1119/79:
'Importación realizada en el marco de un contrato de multiplicación'
'Importação realizada no âmbito de um contrato de multiplicação'.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 March 1986 subject to the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession of Spain and Portugal.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 1985.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 380/2009
of 8 May 2009
amending Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system 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, as well as for the implementation of cross-compliance provided for in Regulation (EC) No 479/2008
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (1) and in particular Article 142(b), (c), (d), (e), (k), and (n) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (2) has been repealed and replaced by Regulation (EC) No 73/2009. Certain provisions of the repealed Regulation will however continue to apply also in 2009. The rules provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 (3) apply to both Regulations. Consequently the title of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should be updated.
(2)
References to various Articles of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 which are replaced by Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 are covered by the correlation table in Annex XVIII to that Regulation. Certain references in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 to the repealed Regulation should however, for the sake of clarity, be updated. In addition, provisions which have become obsolete should be deleted.
(3)
The requirements on set-aside within the framework of the single payment scheme have been abolished. The corresponding provisions in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should therefore be deleted.
(4)
The system for the identification and registration of payment entitlements specified in Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 has to ensure effective traceability and allow for cross-checks of payment entitlements. Specific requirements are linked to entitlements allocated in accordance with Article 68(1)c of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009. Therefore, information required to be able to verify that those specific requirements are fulfilled should be included in the system.
(5)
Article 29(3) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 provides that verification of eligibility conditions has to be finalised before payment. Therefore the equivalent provision in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 has become redundant and should be deleted.
(6)
The specific rules provided for in Article 138 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 of 29 October 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 as regards the support schemes provided for in Titles IV and IVa of that Regulation and the use of land set aside for the production of raw materials (4) concerning reductions and exclusions under the single area payments scheme have been deleted by Commission Regulation (EC) No 316/2009 (5). References to the said Article in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should therefore be deleted. Moreover, the Articles in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 where an explicit reference to the single area payment scheme is needed, due to the said modification of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, should be updated.
(7)
Special provisions concerning the administration and control are needed as regards the specific support to be granted in the case of the optional implementation of Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009.
(8)
The application for aid to sugar beet and cane producers has also to contain a copy of the delivery contract referred to in Article 110r of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. These contracts are in some cases not yet concluded at the latest date the Member State may set for lodging the application. It should therefore be possible to submit this information at a later date to be set by the Member State.
(9)
Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 contains special rules to provide for the situation where the latest date for the submission of an aid application is a public holiday, a Saturday or a Sunday. The same rule should apply to the submission of an amendment to the single application in accordance with Article 15 of that Regulation.
(10)
Article 21a of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 lays down the rules for late applications for participation in the single payment scheme. The provisions to be applied the first year of the application of the single payment scheme need to be updated with references to the implementation of that scheme in the new Member States. Article 56 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 provides the latest date to be set by the Member State for an application to participate in the single payment scheme. In the case where new sectors are being included in the single payment scheme, the rules in Article 21a of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 concerning late submissions of applications to the single payment scheme also apply in the case of applications of farmers concerning such new sectors. The importance of punctual lodging of the application to participate in the single payment scheme is crucial for an efficient administration. Therefore a latest date to be set by the Member States for an application for participation when new sectors are included in the single payment scheme should be provided.
(11)
The reference in Article 31a of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 to the scale referred to in Article 110e of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 is obsolete and should therefore be deleted.
(12)
A major part of the area related payments are now decoupled from production and falling into one crop group. A control of any possible over declaration of the overall area covered by the single application is therefore no longer necessary. As a result the rules concerning reductions for over declaration of areas following such control may be simplified.
(13)
To harmonise the rules between area related payments, animal payments and additional payments concerning off-setting of reductions within three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the cancellation of the outstanding balance after three years should apply to all payments. Further, Article 5b of Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 of 21 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the accreditation of paying agencies and other bodies and the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and of the EAFRD (6) provides for horizontal rules for off-setting outstanding debts against future payments. The reference to which payments the debts can be off-set against should therefore be replaced by a reference to that provision.
(14)
Information on the results of controls of cross-compliance should be made available to all paying agencies responsible for the management of the different payments subject to cross-compliance requirements so that, where the findings so justify, appropriate reductions are applied.
(15)
New rules concerning modulation have been introduced. In that context the provisions related to additional payments are obsolete and should therefore be deleted. Moreover, the rules providing the order of application and the basis for calculation of different reductions need to be updated and possible reductions following the respect of the net ceilings as provided for in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 should be included.
(16)
Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 provides rules concerning off-setting of outstanding amounts and the possibility to decide to not recover outstanding amounts of EUR 100 or lower. The equivalent provisions in Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 are therefore redundant and should be deleted.
(17)
Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(18)
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 is applicable from 1 January 2009. Hence, amendments provided for in this Regulation should concern aid applications relating to years or premium periods starting as of 1 January 2009. This Regulation should therefore apply from 1 January 2009.
(19)
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 796/2004 is amended as follows:
1.
the title of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 is replaced by the following:
2.
in Article 2, the first paragraph is amended as follows:
(a)
point 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. “Arable land”: shall mean land cultivated for crop production or maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition in accordance with Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (7), irrespective of whether or not that land is under greenhouses or under fixed or mobile cover;
(b)
point 2 is replaced by the following:
‘2. “Permanent pasture”: shall mean land used to grow grasses or other herbaceous forage naturally (self-seeded) or through cultivation (sown) and that has not been included in the crop rotation of the holding for five years or longer, excluding land under set aside schemes pursuant to Article 107(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, areas set aside in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92 (8), areas set aside in accordance with Articles 22, 23 and 24 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (9) and areas set aside in accordance with Article 39 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (10);
3.
in Article 7(1), point (f) is replaced by the following:
‘(f)
kind of entitlement, in particular entitlements subject to special conditions in accordance with Article 44 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and entitlements allocated in accordance with Article 68(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009;’;
4.
Article 8(1) is replaced by the following:
‘1. Without prejudice to Article 34(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, an agricultural parcel that contains trees shall be considered as eligible area for the purposes of the area-related aid schemes provided that agricultural activities or, where applicable, the production envisaged can be carried out in a similar way as on parcels without trees in the same area.’;
5.
Article 10 is amended as follows:
(a)
the title is replaced by the following text:
‘Article 10
Payment of aid in relation to checks of cross-compliance’;
(b)
paragraph 1 is deleted;
6.
in Article 11(1), the second subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘A farmer who does not apply for aid under any of the area-related aid schemes but applies for aid under another aid scheme listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 or for support pursuant to Articles 11, 12 and 98 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 shall, if he has agricultural area as defined in Article 2(h) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 at his disposal, submit a single application form in which he shall list these areas in accordance with Article 14 of this Regulation.’;
7.
Article 12 is amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1, point (c) is replaced by the following:
‘(c)
the identification of the payment entitlements in accordance with the identification and registration system provided for in Article 7 for the purposes of the single payment scheme;’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
‘2. For the purpose of the identification of the payment entitlements referred to in paragraph 1(c), the pre-established forms provided to the farmer in accordance with Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 shall mention the identification of the payment entitlements in accordance with the identification and registration system provided for in Article 7.’;
(c)
in paragraph 3, the first sentence of the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘For the purpose of the identification of all agricultural parcels on the holding referred to in paragraph 1(d), the pre-established forms provided to the farmer in accordance with Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 shall mention the maximum eligible area per reference parcel for the purposes of the single payment scheme or the single area payment scheme.’;
8.
Article 13(2) is replaced by the following:
‘2. In the case of set-aside land used in accordance with the first indent of Article 107(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the single application shall contain the necessary proof required under the applicable sectoral rules.’;
9.
in Article 14(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘Uses of area referred to in Articles 6(2) and 38 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and those listed in Annex VI to that Regulation, as well as areas used for the production of flax grown for fibre or areas declared for the specific support provided for under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, where those areas do not have to be declared in accordance with Article 13 of this Regulation, shall be declared under a separate heading in the single application form.’;
10.
in Article 15(2), the second subparagraph is deleted;
11.
in Article 17a(2), the following subparagraph is added:
‘Member States may provide that the copy of the delivery contract referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 may be submitted separately by a later date which shall not be later than 1 December of the year of the application.’;
12.
Article 20 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 20
Derogation from the final date for the submission of aid applications, supporting documents, contracts and declarations and the latest date for amendments to the single application
By way of derogation from Article 5(1) of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1182/71 (11), where the latest date for the submission of an aid application or any supporting documents, contracts or declarations under this Title, or the latest date for amendments to the single application, is a public holiday, a Saturday or a Sunday, it shall be deemed to fall on the first following working day.
The first paragraph shall also apply with regard to applications by farmers to the single payment scheme in accordance with Article 56 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009.
13.
Article 21a is amended as follows:
(a)
in paragraph 1, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘Without prejudice to cases of force majeure and exceptional circumstances referred to in Article 56(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and by way of derogation from Article 21 of this Regulation, in the first year of the application of the single payment scheme in accordance with Chapter 3 of Title III of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, where, in the Member State concerned, an application for the allocation of entitlements in accordance with Article 56(1) of that Regulation and the single application for that year have to be submitted together by the farmer and where the farmer submits those applications after the relevant time limit, a 4 % reduction per working day shall be applied to the amounts to be paid in that year in respect of the payment entitlements to be allocated to the farmer.’;
(b)
in paragraph 2, the second subparagraph is replaced by the following:
‘In that case, without prejudice to cases of force majeure and exceptional circumstances referred to in Article 56(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, the submission of an application to the single payment scheme in accordance with that Article after the relevant time limit shall lead to a 3 % reduction per working day in the amounts to be paid in the first year of the application of the single payment scheme in respect of the payment entitlements to be allocated to the farmer.’;
(c)
in paragraph 3, the following subparagraph is added:
‘The application for participation referred to in the first subparagraph shall be submitted by a date to be fixed by the Member State which shall not be later than 15 May of the year in question.’;
14.
in Article 24(1), point (d) is replaced by the following:
‘(d)
between the payment entitlements and the area determined in order to verify that the entitlements are accompanied by an equal number of eligible hectares as defined in Article 34(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009;’;
15.
Article 31a is replaced by the following:
‘Article 31a
On-the-spot checks on approved inter-branch organisations
On-the-spot checks on approved inter-branch organisations in the framework of applications for aid under the crop specific payment for cotton provided for in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 shall verify the respect of the criteria for approval of those organisations and the list of their members.’;
16.
in Article 38, the first sentence is replaced by the following:
‘As regards the additional payment to be granted for specific types of farming, for quality production as provided for in Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 or the specific support provided for under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, the Member States shall, where appropriate, apply the provisions of this Title.’;
17.
in Article 49(2), the second subparagraph is deleted;
18.
in Article 50, paragraph 4 is deleted;
19.
Article 51 is amended as follows:
(a)
paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
‘1. If, in respect of a crop group, the area declared for the purposes of any area-related aid schemes, except those for starch potato, seed and tobacco as provided for in Sections 2 and 5 of Chapter 1 of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and Chapter 10c of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, exceeds the area determined in accordance with Article 50(3) and (5) of this Regulation, the aid shall be calculated on the basis of the area determined reduced by twice the difference found if that difference is more than either 3 % or two hectares, but no more than 20 % of the area determined.
If the difference is more than 20 % of the area determined, no area-linked aid shall be granted for the crop group concerned.
If the difference is more than 50 %, the farmer shall be excluded once again from receiving aid up to an amount equal to the amount which corresponds to the difference between the area declared and the area determined in accordance with Article 50(3) and (5) of this Regulation. That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 (12). If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.
(b)
paragraph 2 is deleted;
(c)
paragraph 2a is replaced by the following:
‘2a. If a farmer declares more area than payment entitlements and the area declared fulfils all other eligibility requirements, the reductions or exclusions provided for in paragraph 1 shall not apply.
If a farmer declares more area than payment entitlements and the area declared does not fulfil all other eligibility requirements, the difference referred to in paragraph 1 shall be the difference between the area fulfilling all other eligibility requirements and the amount of payment entitlements declared.’;
(d)
paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:
‘3. For the purposes of this Article, where a farmer applying for aid for energy crops in accordance with Article 88 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 or declaring parcels as set-aside in accordance with the first indent of Article 107(3) of that Regulation fails to deliver the requisite quantity of any given raw material, he shall be deemed to have failed to fulfil his obligation as regards parcels intended for energy purposes or set-aside, respectively, in respect of an area calculated by multiplying the area of land cultivated and used by him for the production of the raw materials by the percentage shortfall in deliveries of that raw material.’;
20.
in the second subparagraph of Article 52(3), the second and third sentences are replaced by the following:
‘That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
21.
in Article 53, the first and second paragraphs are replaced by the following:
‘Where differences between the area declared and the area determined in accordance with Article 50(3) and (5) result from irregularities committed intentionally, the aid to which the farmer would have been entitled pursuant to Article 50(3) and (5) shall not be granted for the calendar year in question under the aid scheme concerned if that difference is more than 0,5 % of the area determined or more than one hectare.
Moreover, where that difference is more than 20 % of the area determined, the farmer shall be excluded once again from receiving aid up to an amount equal to the amount which corresponds to the difference between the area declared and the area determined in accordance with Article 50(3) and (5). That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
22.
Article 59 is amended as follows:
(a)
in the third subparagraph of paragraph 2, the second and third sentences are replaced by the following:
‘That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
(b)
in the second subparagraph of paragraph 4, the second and third sentences are replaced by the following:
‘That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
23.
in the second subparagraph of Article 60(6), the second sentence is replaced by the following second and third sentences:
‘That amount shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
24.
Article 63 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 63
Findings in relation to the additional payment
As regards the additional payment to be granted for specific types of farming or for quality production as provided for in Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 or the specific support provided for under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, the Member States shall provide for reductions and exclusions which shall, in substance, be equivalent to those provided for in this Title. In case area-related or livestock payments are granted the provisions of this Part shall apply mutatis mutandis.’;
25.
in the second paragraph of Article 64, the third sentence is replaced by the following third and fourth sentences:
‘An amount equal to the amount covered by the refused application shall be off-set in accordance with Article 5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006. If the amount cannot be fully off-set in accordance with that Article in the course of the three calendar years following the calendar year of the finding, the outstanding balance shall be cancelled.’;
26.
Article 65(3) is replaced by the following:
‘3. Where more than one Paying Agency is responsible for the management of the different direct payment schemes as defined in Article 2(d) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and payments referred to under Articles 11, 12 and 98 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2008, Member States shall take the appropriate measures to ensure an appropriate application of the provisions under this Chapter, in particular that one rate of reduction is applied to the entirety of direct payments and amounts established in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 66(1) and the third subparagraph of Article 67(1).
Where, for a farmer, more than one Paying Agency is responsible for the management of different payments as defined under Article 36(a)(i) to (v) and (b)(i), (iv) and (v) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, as defined in Article 2(d) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and as referred to under Articles 11, 12 and 98 of Regulation (EC) No 479/2008, Member States shall ensure that determined non-compliances and, where appropriate, the corresponding reductions and exclusions are brought to the attention of all paying agencies involved in those payments.’;
27.
in Article 71(1), point (b) is replaced by the following:
‘(b)
the reductions and exclusions pursuant to Chapter II of Title IV shall be applied to the total amount of payments to be granted under the single payment scheme, the single area payment scheme and any aid schemes that are not subject to reductions or exclusions referred to in point (a).’;
28.
Article 71a is amended as follows:
(a)
the title is replaced by the following:
‘Article 71a
Application of reductions on each support scheme’;
(b)
paragraph 2 is amended as follows:
(i)
point (a) is replaced by the following:
‘(a)
the reductions or exclusions provided for in Chapter I of Title IV shall be applied with regard to irregularities;’;
(ii)
points (e) and (f) are deleted;
29.
After Article 71a, the following Article 71b is inserted:
‘Article 71b
Basis for calculation of reductions due to modulation, financial discipline and cross-compliance
1. Reductions due to the modulation provided for in Articles 7 and 10 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and, as the case may be, in Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 378/2007 (13), as well as the reduction due to the financial discipline provided for in Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and the reduction provided for in Article 8(1) of that Regulation, shall be applied to the sum of the payments from the different support schemes listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 to which each farmer is entitled to, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 71a of this Regulation.
2. The amount of the payment resulting from the application of paragraph 1 shall serve as the basis for the calculation of any reductions to be applied for the non-respect of cross-compliance in accordance with Chapter II of Title IV of this Regulation.
30.
in Article 73, paragraphs 2 and 8 are deleted;
31.
in Article 78, the first paragraph is replaced by the following:
‘The allocation key for the amounts corresponding to the 4 percentage points referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 shall be compiled by taking the Member States shares in agricultural area and agricultural employment with a weight of 65 % and 35 %, respectively.’;
32.
Article 79 is deleted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply to aid applications relating to years or premium periods starting from 1 January 2009.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 8 May 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 10 December 2002
appointing an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
(2003/40/EC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,
Having regard to the Council Decision of 22 January 2002(1) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions,
Whereas the seat of an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the resignation of Mr Bas VERKERK, of which the Council was notified on 12 November 2002,
Having regard to the proposal from the Netherlands Government,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Mr J.W. van der SLUYS is hereby appointed an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Bas VERKERK for the remainder of his term of office, which expires on 25 January 2006.
Done at Brussels, 10 December 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1
] |
*****
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 483/85
of 26 February 1985
amending Regulation (EEC) No 349/84 suspending tariff concessions and increasing duties under the Common Customs Tariff with regard to certain products originating in the United States of America and establishing quantitative restrictions with regard to other products originating in that country
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas, by Regulation (EEC) No 349/84 (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1346/84 (2), the Council increased customs duties and established quantitative restrictions for imports of certain products originating in the United States of America to compensate, in accordance with Article XIX (3) (a) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, for the unilateral measures taken by the United States of America regarding the import of certain steel products;
Whereas the re-examination of these measures undertaken by the United States of America after their first year of application has not led to their being repealed; whereas, under these circumstances, the Community remains free to suspend the application to the trade of the United States of America of substantially equivalent concessions or other obligations under the General Agreement;
Whereas the compensatory measures in respect of the United States of America should therefore be extended for the period 1 March 1985 to 28 February 1986;
Whereas it is nevertheless necessary to adjust the level of compensation to take account of the degressive nature of the United States' measures and of the special increase in the quota by the United States of America during the year; whereas, the quotas being expressed in ECU, allowance should be made for changes in the exchange rate between the ECU and the United States dollar since the entry into force of the measures,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 349/84 is hereby replaced by the following:
'Article 1
1. The Annex "Common Customs Tariff" to Council Regulation (EEC) No 950/68 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3400/84 (2), is hereby amended as follows:
1.2.3,4 // // // // Heading number // Description // Rates of duty // 1.2.3.4 // // // Autonomous % // Conventional % // // // // // 1 // 2 // 3 // 4 // // // // // 29.04 // Acyclic alcohols and their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives: // // // // A. Saturated monohydric alcohols: // // // // I. Methanol (methyl alcohol) // 18,0 (b) // 13,4 (c) // // II to V. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // B and C. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // // //
(b) The autonomous duty applicable to products originating in the United States of America is set at 18,5 % until 31 December 1985.
(c) Products originating in the United States of America do not receive the benefit of the conventional duty rate.
1.2.3,4 // // // // Heading number // Description // Rates of duty // 1.2.3.4 // // // Autonomous % // Conventional % // // // // // 1 // 2 // 3 // 4 // // // // // 29.14 // Monocarboxylic acids and their anhydrides, halides, peroxides and peracids, and their halogenated, sulphonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives: // // // // A. Saturated acyclic monocarboxylic acids: // // // // I. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // II. Acetic acid and its salts and esters: // // // // a) (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // b) (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // c) Esters of acetic acid: // // // // 1. Ethyl acetate, vinyl acetate, propyl acetate and isopropyl acetate // 20,0 (a) // 12,6 (b) // // 2 to 4. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // III to XI. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // B to D. (unchanged) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // // //
(a) The autonomous duty applicable to vinyl acetate originating in the United States of America is set at 17,7 % until 31 December 1985.
(b) Vinyl acetate originating in the United States of America does not receive the benefit of this conventional duty.
1.2.3,4 // // // // Heading number // Description // Rates of duty // 1.2.3.4 // // // Autonomous % // Conventional % // // // // // 1 // 2 // 3 // 4 // // // // // 85.17 // Electric sound or visual signalling apparatus (such as bells, sirens, indicator panels, burglar and fire alarms, other than those of heading No 85.09 and 85.16: // // // // A. For use in civil aircraft, excluding parts of such goods (a) // (unchanged) // (unchanged) // // B. Other // 15,0 (b) // 4,8 (c) // // // //
(b) The autonomous duty applicable to signalling apparatus against burglary, fire and similar situations (excluding their components and parts), originating in the United States of America, is set at 10,1 % until 31 December 1985.
(c) Signalling apparatus against burglary, fire and similar situations (excluding their components and parts), originating in the United States of America, does not receive the benefit of this conventional duty. 2. From 1 January to 28 February 1986, the autonomous duties applicable to products originating in the United States of America shall be reduced as follows:
- for subheading 29.04 A I to 18,3 %,
- for subheading 29.14 A II C ex I to 17,2 %,
- for subheading 85.17 ex B to 9,9 %
(1) OJ No L 172, 22. 7. 1968, p. 1.
(2) OJ No L 320, 10. 12. 1984, p. 1.'
Article 2
In Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 349/84, '28 February 1985' is hereby replaced by '28 February 1986'.
Article 3
The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 349/84 is hereby replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 4
Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 349/84 is hereby replaced by the following:
'2. The detailed rules for the application of this Regulation, and in particular those concerning the distribution of quotas and the treatment of products benefiting from the inward processing regime, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 1023/70 (1).
(1) OJ No L 124, 8. 6. 1970, p. 1.'
Article 5
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 March 1985.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 26 February 1985.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 3050/90 of 22 October 1990 amending Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1735/90 introducing prior Community surveillance of imports of certain types of footwear originating in South Korea and Taiwan
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 288/82 of 5 February 1982 on common rules for imports (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2727/90 (2), and in particular Article 15 (6) thereof,
Whereas on 25 July 1990, the Federal Republic of Germany pursuant to Article 15 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 288/82, referred Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1735/90 (1) to the Council;
Whereas some Member States have experienced difficulties concerning the procedures for implementing the Community surveillance introduced by the Regulation concerned;
Whereas, under these circumstances, Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1735/90 should be amended and provision should be made for Community surveillance to be carried out in accordance with the procedures set out in Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 288/82,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The final recital of Regulation (EEC) No 1735/90 is replaced by:
'However, since imports under these conditions threaten to cause injury to the Community producers concerned, the Commission considers it necessary to introduce prior Community surveillance of such imports.
Entry of the footwear in question for free circulation in the Community should therefore be made subject to the issue of an import document to be issued by the importing Member State in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 288/82,'.
Article 2
Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1735/90 is replaced by:
'Article 2
1. Entry of the products referred to in Article 1 for free circulation in a Member State shall be subject to presentation of an import document issued by the competent authorities of the Member State, in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 11
of Regulation (EEC) No 288/82.
2. The import document may be used during a period of three months from the date on which it is received by the importer.'
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply until 31 December 1992.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 22 October 1990.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2009/56/EC
of 12 June 2009
correcting Directive 2008/126/EC amending Directive 2006/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels, as regards its date of transposition
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Directive 2006/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels and repealing Council Directive 82/714/EEC (1), and in particular Article 20(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
According to Article 2 of Commission Directive 2008/126/EC of 19 December 2008 amending Directive 2006/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down technical requirements for inland waterway vessels (2), Member States are to transpose Directive 2008/126/EC with effect from 30 December 2008.
(2)
For technical reasons, Directive 2008/126/EC was not published in the Official Journal of the European Union before that date. Directive 2008/126/EC should therefore be corrected as regards its date of transposition.
(3)
In order to avoid distortions of competition as well as different levels of safety, the amendments to Directive 2006/87/EC should be implemented as quickly as possible. Following the publication of Directive 2008/126/EC on 31 January 2009, a reasonable deadline must however be given for the transposition of that Directive.
(4)
The measure provided for in this Directive is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee referred to in Article 7 of Council Directive 91/672/EEC of 16 December 1991 on the reciprocal recognition of national boatmasters′ certificates for the carriage of goods and passengers by inland waterway (3),
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
In the first paragraph of Article 2 of Directive 2008/126/EC, ‘30 December 2008’ is replaced by ‘30 June 2009’.
Article 2
This Directive is addressed to the Member States which have inland waterways as referred to in Article 1(1) of Directive 2006/87/EC.
Done at Brussels, 12 June 2009.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2049/2005
of 15 December 2005
laying down, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, rules regarding the payment of fees to, and the receipt of administrative assistance from, the European Medicines Agency by micro, small and medium-sized enterprises
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (1), and in particular Article 70(2) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, which replaces Council Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 of 22 July 1993 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (2), provides that the revenue of the European Medicines Agency (hereinafter referred to as the Agency) must consist of a contribution from the Community and fees paid by companies.
(2)
In the context of the system established by Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93, Council Regulation (EC) No 297/95 (3) provides for fees payable to the Agency.
(3)
Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the situation of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has to be considered separately. In order to reduce the cost for SMEs of marketing medicinal products authorised via the centralised procedure, that Regulation therefore foresees the adoption of specific provisions allowing a reduction of fees, deferring the payment of fees, and providing administrative assistance. Such provisions should apply equally to the human and veterinary sectors and should aim at promoting innovation and the development of new medicinal products by SMEs.
(4)
The definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises provided in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC (4) should apply, for reasons of coherence and transparency.
(5)
Experience gained since the adoption of Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 shows that the main financial and administrative entry hurdles for SMEs are the various steps involved in pre-marketing authorisation procedures, such as the seeking of scientific advice, the submission of the marketing authorisation application, and the undergoing of inspections. Provisions laid down in this Regulation should therefore be focused on these aspects.
(6)
The fees for the marketing authorisation application and the related inspections conducted for the purpose of assessing the application could constitute a significant financial constraint for SMEs. Consequently, in order to avoid a weakening of the financial situation of undertakings during the assessment of the marketing authorisation application, it is appropriate to defer the payment of these fees until the end of the procedure.
(7)
SMEs operating in the pharmaceutical sector are often innovative companies, such as those active in the fields of gene or somatic cell therapy, which can notably benefit from the pooling of scientific expertise at a Community level. Furthermore, the scientific evaluation of a marketing authorisation application is more likely to be favourable in the case of medicinal products which have obtained scientific advice. Therefore, access to the Agency’s scientific advice for SMEs seeking marketing authorisation should be facilitated through fee reductions. As an additional incentive, a conditional fee exemption should be given to applicants who have requested such advice and who have actually taken it into account for the development of their medicinal product.
(8)
Another incentive should also be provided, in the form of a fee reduction, for the establishment of maximum residue limits (MRL) for veterinary medicinal products in order to further support the establishment of such limits.
(9)
Translations can constitute a significant administrative burden for SMEs. The Agency should therefore make appropriate arrangements to provide for the translations of certain documents required for the granting of marketing authorisation, in particular the draft summary of the product characteristics and the draft text of the labelling and package leaflet.
(10)
A lack of experience with the centralised procedure and the Agency as an administrative organisation should not impair the development and marketing of new medicinal products. Consequently, it is appropriate to create an SME office, with the sole remit of offering administrative assistance to SMEs. The SME office should provide a single interface between the applicant SME and the Agency, so as to facilitate communication and to answer practical or procedural enquiries.
(11)
In order to provide practical guidance to applicant SMEs, the Agency should publish a user guide on the administrative and procedural aspects linked to the centralised procedure which are of particular relevance for SMEs.
(12)
The Agency should report annually on the operation of the provisions laid down in this Regulation, so that feedback on their practical application is available.
(13)
In order to ensure that SMEs benefit, to the largest extent possible, from the derogation provided for in this Regulation it should enter into force immediately.
(14)
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use and of the Standing Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
Subject matter
This Regulation establishes the circumstances in which, by derogation from the relevant provisions of Regulation (EC) No 297/95, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) may pay reduced fees, defer payment of fees, or receive administrative assistance when submitting applications under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 to the European Medicines Agency, hereinafter ‘the Agency’.
Article 2
Scope
1. This Regulation shall apply to SMEs within the meaning of Recommendation 2003/361/EC in the version of 6 May 2003 which are established in the Community.
2. Unless otherwise specified, this Regulation shall apply both to applications concerning medicinal products for human use and to applications concerning veterinary medicinal products, within the meaning of Directives 2001/83/EC (5) and 2001/82/EC (6) of the European Parliament and of the Council respectively.
Article 3
Definition
For the purposes of this Regulation, applicant means an undertaking seeking to benefit from the application of the provisions laid down in Chapters II and III.
Article 4
Submission of information
An SME wishing to benefit from the provisions of this Regulation shall submit to the Agency the information necessary to demonstrate compliance with the criteria mentioned in Article 2(1).
CHAPTER II
FEE DEFERRALS AND REDUCTIONS
Article 5
Fee deferrals
1. The payment of the following fees shall be deferred until the notification of the final decision on the marketing authorisation is issued, or the application is withdrawn:
(a)
the fee for an application for a marketing authorisation of a medicinal product, as referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 3(1) and points (a) and (b) of Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95;
(b)
the fee for inspections undertaken for the purpose of assessing a marketing authorisation application for a medicinal product, as referred to in Article 3(4) and Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95.
2. The fees referred to in paragraph 1 shall be payable within 45 days of the date of the notification of the final decision on the marketing authorisation, or within 45 days of the date of the notification of withdrawal of the application.
Article 6
Conditional fee exemption
Without prejudice to Article 5, where an application for marketing authorisation is submitted for a medicinal product on which scientific advice has already been given by the Agency, the fee payable to the Agency for the examination of that application shall be due only if a marketing authorisation is granted.
Article 7
Fee reductions
1. The following reductions shall apply:
(a)
in the case of inspections a 90 % reduction to the inspection fee, as referred to in Article 3(4) and Article 5(4) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95;
(b)
in the case of scientific advice a 90 % reduction to the scientific advice fee, as referred to in Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95;
(c)
in the case of scientific services a 90 % reduction to the scientific service fee, as referred to in Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95.
2. The administrative services, as referred to in Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 297/95, shall be provided free of charge, except where those services concern the parallel distribution of medicinal products, as referred to in Article 57(1)(o) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004.
3. By derogation from points (b) and (c) of paragraph 1, scientific advice and scientific services for designated orphan medicinal products as referred to in Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7) shall be provided free of charge.
Article 8
Fee reduction for the establishment of maximum residue limits for veterinary medicinal products
1. A 90 % reduction shall apply to the full and additional maximum residue limits (MRL) fees, as referred to in Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 297/95.
2. The reduction referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be taken into account when calculating the deduction of the MRL fees from the fee payable for an application for a marketing authorisation or an application to extend a marketing authorisation, for a medicinal product containing the substance for which the MRL concerned has been set, where such applications are submitted by the same applicant.
However, this deduction shall not exceed one half of the fee to which it applies.
Article 9
Multiple fee reductions
By derogation from Articles 7 and 8, where the applicant could, in respect of the same fee, also benefit from other reductions provided for in Community legislation, the provisions which are the most favourable to the applicant shall apply.
Cumulative fee reductions for a given fee and a given applicant shall not be allowed.
CHAPTER III
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE
Article 10
Translations
The Agency shall provide for the translations of the documents referred to in points (a) to (d) of Article 9(4) and points (a) to (e) of Article 34(4) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 that are required for the purpose of granting a Community marketing authorisation.
Article 11
SME Office
1. The Executive Director of the Agency shall set up dedicated administrative structures and specific procedures for the establishment of an SME Office.
2. The SME Office shall have the following tasks:
(a)
to give advice to applicants on the administrative and procedural steps necessary to comply with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EC) No 726/2004;
(b)
to ensure the appropriate monitoring of all requests and applications submitted by the same applicant and related to a particular medicinal product;
(c)
to organise workshops and training sessions for applicants on the administrative and procedural steps necessary to comply with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EC) No 726/2004.
Article 12
User Guide
The Agency shall, upon agreement of the Commission, publish a detailed User Guide on the administrative and procedural aspects of the provisions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, which are of particular relevance for SMEs. The User Guide shall be kept updated.
The User Guide shall also contain references to existing national provisions for SMEs applicable to the pharmaceutical sector.
For the purposes of the second paragraph, the Member States shall communicate those references to the Agency.
CHAPTER IV
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 13
Report
The Agency shall include in the Annual Report of its activities a section on the experience acquired as a result of the application of this Regulation.
Article 14
Transitional provision
This Regulation shall not apply to valid applications pending at the date of its entry into force.
Article 15
Entry into force
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, 15 December 2005.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2335/2002
of 23 December 2002
supplementing Council Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 as regards Community tariff quotas for tomatoes originating in Morocco
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 of 9 April 2001 providing for the management of Community tariff quotas and of reference quantities for products eligible for preferences by virtue of agreements with certain Mediterranean countries and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1981/94 and (EC) No 934/95(1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 786/2002(2), and in particular Article 5(1)(b) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 opened the tariff quotas for imports into the Community of fresh tomatoes originating in Morocco, provided for in the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part, and laid down detailed rules for managing them.
(2) By Decision 2002/958/EC of 28 November 2002(3) the Council approved an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters derogating temporarily, as regards the importation into the Community of tomatoes originating in Morocco, from agricultural Protocol No 1 to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kingdom of Morocco, of the other part, hereinafter referred to as "the agreement". The agreement provides for the period from 1 November 2002 to 31 May 2003 and for imports into the Community of tomatoes originating in Morocco, for an increase in the volume of a tariff quota already existing under Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 and for the opening of a new tariff quota.
(3) It is necessary to supplement Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 for the implementation, from 1 November 2002, of the arrangements provided for in the agreement.
(4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the period from 1 November 2002 to 31 March 2003, the Community tariff quota with the order No 09.1190, applicable to imports into the Community of fresh or chilled tomatoes of CN code 0702 00 00 originating in Morocco, and opened under Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 747/2001, is hereby increased by 6000 tonnes.
Article 2
1. Provided total imports into the Community of tomatoes originating in Morocco do not exceed 156676 tonnes during the period from 1 October 2002 to 31 March 2003, the following tariff quota shall be opened by the Commission:
TABLE
2. The tariff quota referred to in paragraph 1 shall be managed by the Commission in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 747/2001.
Article 3
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
It shall apply from 1 November 2002.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 December 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COUNCIL DECISION 2007/845/JHA
of 6 December 2007
concerning cooperation between Asset Recovery Offices of the Member States in the field of tracing and identification of proceeds from, or other property related to, crime
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 30(1)(a) and (b) and 34(2)(c) thereof,
Having regard to the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Austria and the Republic of Finland,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),
Whereas:
(1)
The main motive for cross-border organised crime is financial gain. This financial gain is a stimulus for committing further crime to achieve even more profit. Accordingly, law enforcement services should have the necessary skills to investigate and analyse financial trails of criminal activity. To combat organised crime effectively, information that can lead to the tracing and seizure of proceeds from crime and other property belonging to criminals has to be exchanged rapidly between the Member States of the European Union.
(2)
The Council adopted Framework Decision 2003/577/JHA of 22 July 2003 on the execution in the European Union of orders freezing property or evidence (2) and Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA of 24 February 2005 on Confiscation of Crime-Related Proceeds, Instrumentalities and Property (3), dealing with certain aspects of judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the field of the freezing and confiscation of the proceeds from, instrumentalities of, and other property related to, crime.
(3)
Close cooperation is necessary between the relevant authorities of the Member States involved in the tracing of illicit proceeds and other property that may become liable to confiscation and provision should be made allowing for direct communication between those authorities.
(4)
To that end, Member States should have national Asset Recovery Offices in place which are competent in these fields, and should ensure that these offices can exchange information rapidly.
(5)
The Camden Assets Recovery Inter-Agency Network (CARIN) established at The Hague on 22-23 September 2004 by Austria, Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands and the United Kingdom already constitutes a global network of practitioners and experts with the intention of enhancing mutual knowledge on methods and techniques in the area of cross-border identification, freezing, seizure and confiscation of the proceeds from, and other property related to, crime. This Decision should complete the CARIN by providing a legal basis for the exchange of information between Asset Recovery Offices of all the Member States.
(6)
In its Communication to the Council and the European Parliament ‘The Hague Programme: Ten Priorities for the next five years’, the Commission advocated strengthening tools to address the financial aspects of organised crime, inter alia, by promoting the establishment of criminal asset intelligence units in Member States.
(7)
Cooperation between the Asset Recovery Offices and between the Asset Recovery Offices and other authorities charged with the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime should take place on the basis of the procedures and time limits provided for in Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA of 18 December 2006 on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities of the Member States of the European Union (4), including the grounds for refusal contained therein.
(8)
This Decision should be without prejudice to the cooperation arrangements under Council Decision 2000/642/JHA of 17 October 2000 concerning arrangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units of the Member States in exchanging information (5) and to existing arrangements for police cooperation,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Asset Recovery Offices
1. Each Member State shall set up or designate a national Asset Recovery Office, for the purposes of the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime and other crime related property which may become the object of a freezing, seizure or confiscation order made by a competent judicial authority in the course of criminal or, as far as possible under the national law of the Member State concerned, civil proceedings.
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, a Member State may, in conformity with its national law, set up or designate two Asset Recovery Offices. Where a Member State has more than two authorities charged with the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime, it shall nominate a maximum of two of its Asset Recovery Offices as contact point(s).
3. Member States shall indicate the authorities which are the national Asset Recovery Offices within the meaning of this Article. They shall notify this information and any subsequent changes to the General Secretariat of the Council in writing. This notification shall not preclude other authorities which are charged with the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime from exchanging information under Articles 3 and 4 with an Asset Recovery Office of another Member State.
Article 2
Cooperation between Asset Recovery Offices
1. Member States shall ensure that their Asset Recovery Offices cooperate with each other for the purposes set out in Article 1(1), by exchanging information and best practices, both upon request and spontaneously.
2. Member States shall ensure that this cooperation is not hampered by the status of the Asset Recovery Offices under national law, regardless of whether they form part of an administrative, law enforcement or a judicial authority.
Article 3
Exchange of information between Asset Recovery Offices on request
1. An Asset Recovery Office of a Member State or other authorities in a Member State charged with the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime may make a request to an Asset Recovery Office of another Member State for information for the purposes set out in Article 1(1). To that end it shall rely on Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA and on the rules adopted in implementation thereof.
2. When filling out the form provided for under Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA, the requesting Asset Recovery Office shall specify the object of and the reasons for the request and the nature of the proceedings. It shall also provide details on property targeted or sought (bank accounts, real estate, cars, yachts and other high value items) and/or the natural or legal persons presumed to be involved (e.g. names, addresses, dates and places of birth, date of registration, shareholders, headquarters). Such details shall be as precise as possible.
Article 4
Spontaneous exchange of information between Asset Recovery Offices
1. Asset Recovery Offices or other authorities charged with the facilitation of the tracing and identification of proceeds of crime may, within the limits of the applicable national law and without a request to that effect, exchange information which they consider necessary for the execution of the tasks of another Asset Recovery Office in pursuance of purpose set out in Article 1(1).
2. Article 3 shall apply to the exchange of information under this Article mutatis mutandis.
Article 5
Data protection
1. Each Member State shall ensure that the established rules on data protection are applied also within the procedure on exchange of information provided for by this Decision.
2. The use of information which has been exchanged directly or bilaterally under this Decision shall be subject to the national data protection provisions of the receiving Member State, where the information shall be subject to the same data protection rules as if they had been gathered in the receiving Member State. The personal data processed in the context of the application of this Decision shall be protected in accordance with the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981 for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, and, for those Member States which have ratified it, the Additional Protocol of 8 November 2001 to that Convention, regarding Supervisory Authorities and Transborder Data Flows. The principles of Recommendation No R(87) 15 of the Council of Europe Regulating the Use of Personal Data in the Police Sector should also be taken into account when law enforcement authorities handle personal data obtained under this Decision.
Article 6
Exchange of best practices
Member States shall ensure that the Asset Recovery Offices shall exchange best practices concerning ways to improve the effectiveness of Member States’ efforts in tracing and identifying proceeds from, and other property related to, crime which may become the object of a freezing, seizure or confiscation order by a competent judicial authority.
Article 7
Relationship to existing arrangements for cooperation
This Decision shall be without prejudice to the obligations resulting from European Union instruments on mutual legal assistance or on mutual recognition of decisions regarding criminal matters, from bilateral or multilateral agreements or arrangements between the Member States and third countries on mutual legal assistance and from Decision 2000/642/JHA and Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA.
Article 8
Implementation
1. The Member States shall ensure that they are able to cooperate fully in accordance with the provisions of this Decision by 18 December 2008. By the same date Member States shall transmit to the General Secretariat of the Council and to the Commission the text of any provisions of their national law enabling them to comply with the obligations imposed on them under this Decision.
2. So long as the Member States have not yet implemented Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA, references to that Framework Decision in this Decision shall be understood as references to the applicable instruments on police cooperation between the Member States.
3. By 18 December 2010 the Council shall assess Member States’ compliance with this Decision on the basis of a report made by the Commission.
Article 9
Application
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 6 December 2007.
|
[
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1473/2005
of 9 September 2005
determining to what extent import right applications submitted during the month of August 2005 for certain live bovine animals as part of a tariff quota provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1241/2005 may be accepted
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1241/2005 of 29 July 2005 laying down detailed rules for the application of a tariff quota for certain live bovine animals originating in Romania, provided for in Council Decision 2003/18/EC (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1241/2005 fixes at 46 000 the number of head of live bovine animals originating in Romania which may be imported under special conditions in the period 1 August 2005 to 30 June 2006.
(2)
Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1241/2005 lays down that the quantities applied for may be reduced. The applications lodged relate to total quantities which exceed the quantities available. Under these circumstances and taking care to ensure an equitable distribution of the available quantities, it is appropriate to reduce proportionally the quantities applied for,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
All applications for import certificates lodged pursuant to Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1241/2005 shall be accepted at a rate of 10,785 % of the import rights applied for.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 September 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 9 September 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DECISION
of 15 December 2006
establishing the Commission's standard security measures and alert states and amending its Rules of Procedure as regards operational procedures for management of crisis situations
(2007/65/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 218(2) thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 131 thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28(1) and Article 41(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
It is appropriate for the Commission to establish operational procedures and measures to manage crises and emergencies (hereinafter referred to as crisis situations), and, in particular, to ensure that all necessary decisions can be taken as efficiently and rapidly as possible, while ensuring that they remain subject to political control.
(2)
It is necessary for the Commission to establish an operational structure for crisis management.
(3)
Procedures and measures should, inter alia, be established to manage the security aspects of a crisis situation. In the interests of clarity, the procedures and measures to be used in normal security conditions should also be specified.
(4)
Good management of crisis situations involves the possibility of rapidly warning the personnel of the nature of the threat and of protective measures to be taken.
(5)
Current practice in the Member States and in other international organisations shows that the establishment of a system of alert states is the most efficient way to ensure that appropriate and proportional security measures are taken in response to the evaluated risk level. A system comprising standard security measures and three alert states should therefore be established. It should apply to all the premises of the Commission.
(6)
The Commission provisions on security annexed to its internal Rules of Procedure by Commission Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom (1) provide for a member of the Commission to be responsible for security matters and for implementation of the Commission's security policy.
(7)
The general principles established in Section 2 of the Annex to those provisions on security establish general principles of legality, transparency, accountability and subsidiarity (proportionality) which apply equally to crisis management.
(8)
The attribution of authority within the Commission and the particular situation of the delegations of the Community in third countries require specific procedures and distinct types of action, depending on whether the security measures concern the premises of the Commission in the Member States or in third countries.
(9)
According to the principle of continuity of public service, the Commission should be able to accomplish its tasks in all circumstances as set out in the Treaties. Consequently, in the case of exceptional and unforeseeable events which make it impossible for the Commission to adopt decisions as a College by written or oral procedure as provided for in its Rules of Procedure (2), the President of the Commission should have extraordinary powers to take any measure which, in the context of the specific situation, is considered urgent and necessary.
(10)
The Commission provisions on operational procedures for crisis management, as annexed to its internal Rules of Procedure by Decision 2003/246/EC, Euratom (3), should therefore be amended accordingly. For reasons of clarity, they should be replaced by this Decision,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
1. The crisis system shall be managed by a Management Group, in accordance with paragraph 2. It shall be supported by an Operational Team and a Monitoring Team, established by the Director of the Commission Security Directorate.
2. The Management Group shall meet under the chairmanship of the Deputy Secretary-General. It shall consist of a Member of the Cabinet of the President and of the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters, the Director of the Commission Security Directorate, Directors-General of the Legal Service, for Personnel and Administration, for Budget, for Communication, for Justice Freedom and Security, for External Relations, for Informatics and such other persons as the Deputy Secretary-General considers appropriate in the circumstances.
3. If a crisis situation arises outside the European Union, a member of the cabinet of the Commissioner responsible for External Relations shall be invited to attend the meetings of the Management Group.
4. The Management Group shall be responsible for advising the Commission and in particular the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters on appropriate measures to be taken to protect the staff and assets of the Commission, and ensure its operational effectiveness, in the event of a crisis situation.
5. The President, the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters and each Member of the Commission involved in the crisis situation shall be kept informed of developments by the Chairman of the Management Group.
6. A 24-hour, seven-days-a-week readiness service shall operate, on the basis of the constant presence of at least two officials, so that the Security Directorate can discharge its responsibilities.
Article 2
1. Inside the European Union, the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters may at any time instruct the Director of the Commission Security Directorate to put the crisis management system into operation.
2. If a crisis situation arises outside the European Union, the decision to put the crisis management system into operation shall be taken jointly by the Members of the Commission responsible for External Relations and for Security Matters.
Article 3
1. To enable decisions to be taken with sufficient speed to ensure the protection of Commission staff (including protection of their health at the workplace), information, buildings and other assets from any threat and to ensure its operational capacity, in situations where urgency precludes the use of usual decision-making procedures, paragraphs 2 and 3 shall apply.
2. If a crisis situation arises inside the European Union, the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters may take any decision he considers necessary to protect the staff and assets of the Commission from such threat.
In situations of extreme urgency the Director of the Commission Security Directorate may take similar decisions to those provided for in the first subparagraph, acting where possible in consultation with the Management Group. Any use of these powers shall immediately be reported to the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters, for review, and where appropriate, endorsement, amendment or revocation. The chairperson of the Management Group shall be informed at the same time as the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters.
3. If a crisis situation arises outside the European Union, in situations of extreme urgency the Head of a Commission mission or Community delegation may take similar decisions to those provided for in the first subparagraph of paragraph 2. Any use of these powers shall be reported to the Member of the Commission responsible for External Relations who shall immediately inform the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters. These decisions shall be jointly reviewed by the two Members, and where appropriate endorsed, amended or revoked. The chairperson of the Management Group shall be informed at the same time as the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters.
4. Any decision taken pursuant to this article shall be submitted to the next meeting of the College for review and, where appropriate, endorsement, amendment or revocation.
Article 4
1. In the case of exceptional and unforeseeable events which make it impossible for the Commission to decide as a College by written or oral procedure as set out in article 4 of its Rules of Procedure, the President of the Commission may, on behalf of the Commission and under its responsibility, adopt any measure which, in the context of the specific crisis situation, is considered urgent and necessary to preserve the Community public interest, to meet legal obligations of the Community or to prevent avoidable damages on Community institutions or bodies, Member States or on the Union's citizens and undertakings.
2. The President shall act, as far as practicable, after consultation of the departments with a legitimate interest and the members of the Commission not prevented from exercising their functions.
3. Any decision taken pursuant to this article shall be submitted to the College for review and, where appropriate, endorsement, amendment or revocation once the conditions necessary for the functioning of the College are in place.
Article 5
The provisions on deputising laid down in the Rules of Procedure of the Commission and the Rules giving effect to them shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to the present decision.
Article 6
A system comprising standard security measures and three alert states is established. The system and the corresponding security measures shall be as set out in the Annex. It shall apply to all the premises of the Commission.
Article 7
The Commission provisions on operational procedures for crisis management annexed to its Rules of Procedure by Decision 2003/246/EC, Euratom are deleted.
Article 8
This Decision is without prejudice to the Commission provisions setting up the ARGUS general alert system annexed to its Rules of Procedure by Commission Decision 2006/25/EC, Euratom (4).
Article 9
This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.
It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 15 December 2006.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 326/2004
of 24 February 2004
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),
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(2), 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 27 February 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 24 February 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Council Decision
of 25 April 2002
concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder
(2002/358/CE)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 175(1) in conjunction with Article 300(2), first sentence of the first subparagraph, and Article 300(3), first subparagraph, thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1),
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament(2),
Whereas:
(1) The ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ("the Convention"), which was approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 94/69/EC of 15 December 1993 concerning the conclusion of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change(3), is to achieve stabilisation of greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level which prevents dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
(2) The Conference of the Parties to the Convention, at its first session, concluded that the commitment by developed countries to aim at returning, individually or jointly, their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer to 1990 levels by the year 2000 was inadequate for achieving the Convention's long-term objective of preventing dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The Conference further agreed to begin a process to enable appropriate action to be taken for the period beyond 2000, through the adoption of a protocol or another legal instrument(4).
(3) This process resulted in the adoption on 11 December 1997 of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ("the Protocol")(5).
(4) The Conference of the Parties to the Convention, at its fourth session, decided to adopt the Buenos Aires Plan of Action, to reach agreement on the implementation of key elements of the Protocol at the sixth session of the Conference of the Parties(6).
(5) The core elements for the implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of Action were agreed upon by consensus by the Conference of the Parties at its resumed sixth session in Bonn from 19 to 27 July 2001(7).
(6) A range of decisions giving effect to the Bonn Agreements were adopted by consensus by the Conference of the Parties at its seventh session in Marrakech from 29 October to 10 November 2001(8).
(7) The Protocol, under Article 24, is open for ratification, acceptance or approval by States and by regional economic integration organisations that have signed it.
(8) The Protocol, under Article 4, provides for Parties to fulfil their commitments under Article 3 jointly, acting in the framework of and together with a regional economic integration organisation.
(9) When the Protocol was signed in New York on 29 April 1998, the Community declared that it and its Member States would fulfil their respective commitments under Article 3(1) of the Protocol jointly in accordance with Article 4 thereof.
(10) In deciding to fulfil their commitments jointly in accordance with article 4 of the Kyoto Protocol, the Community and the Member States are jointly responsible, under paragraph 6 of that article and in accordance with article 24(2) of the Protocol, for the fulfilment by the Community of its quantified emission reduction commitment under Article 3(1) of the Protocol. Consequently, and in accordance with Article 10 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, Member States individually and collectively have the obligation to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations resulting from action taken by the institutions of the Community, including the Community's quantified emission reduction commitment under the Protocol, to facilitate the achievement of this commitment and to abstain from any measure that could jeopardise the attainment of this commitment.
(11) The legal base of any further Decision in relation to the approval by the Community of future commitments in respect of emission reductions will be determined by the content and effect of that Decision.
(12) The Council agreed upon the contributions of each Member State to the overall Community reduction commitment in the Council conclusions of 16 June 1998(9). Certain Member States expressed assumptions concerning base year emissions and common and coordinated policies and measures. The contributions are differentiated to take account i.a. of expectations for economic growth, the energy mix and the industrial structure of the respective Member State. The Council further agreed that the terms of the agreement would be included in the Council Decision on the approval of the Protocol by the Community. Article 4(2) of the Protocol requires the Community and its Member States to notify the Secretariat, established by Article 8 of the Convention, of the terms of this agreement on the date of deposit of their instruments of ratification or approval. The Community and its Member States have an obligation to take measures in order to enable the Community to fulfil its obligations under the Protocol without prejudice to the responsibility of each Member State towards the Community and other Member States to fulfilling its own commitments.
(13) The base-year emissions of the Community and its Member States will not be established definitively before the entry into force of the Protocol. Once these base-year emissions are definitively established and at the latest before the start of the commitment period, the Community and its Member States shall determine these emission levels in terms of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 8 of Council Decision 93/389/EEC of 24 June 1993 for a monitoring mechanism of Community CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions(10).
(14) The Gothenburg European Council on 15 and 16 June 2001 reaffirmed the determination of the Community and the Member States to meet their commitments under the Protocol, and stated that the Commission will prepare a proposal for ratification before the end of 2001 making it possible for the Community and its Member States to fulfil their commitment rapidly to ratify the Protocol.
(15) The Laeken European Council on 14 and 15 December 2001 confirmed the Union's determination to honour its commitment under the Kyoto Protocol and its desire that the Protocol should come into force before the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, 26 August to 4 September 2002.
(16) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Decision should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(11),
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ("the Protocol") signed on 29 April 1998 in New York is hereby approved on behalf of the European Community.
The text of the Protocol is set out in Annex I.
Article 2
The European Community and its Member States shall fulfil their commitments under Article 3(1) of the Protocol jointly, in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 thereof, and with full regard to the provisions of Article 10 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.
The quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments agreed by the European Community and its Member States for the purpose of determining the respective emission levels allocated to each of them for the first quantified emission limitation and reduction commitment period, from 2008 to 2012, are set out in Annex II.
The European Community and its Member States shall take the necessary measures to comply with the emission levels set out in Annex II, as determined in accordance with Article 3 of this Decision.
Article 3
The Commission shall, at the latest by 31 December 2006 and in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 4(2) of this Decision, determine the respective emission levels allocated to the European Community and to each Member State in terms of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent following the establishment of definitive base-year emission figures and on the basis of the quantified emission limitation or reduction commitments set out in Annex II, taking into account the methodologies for estimating anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks referred to in Article 5(2) of the Protocol and the modalities for the calculation of assigned amount pursuant to Article 3(7) and (8) of the Protocol.
The assigned amount of the European Community and of each Member State shall be equal to its respective emission level determined in accordance with this Article.
Article 4
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the committee instituted by Article 8 of Decision 93/389/EEC.
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply.
The period laid down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months.
3. The Committee shall adopt its rules of procedure.
Article 5
1. The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person or persons empowered to notify, on behalf of the European Community, this Decision to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in accordance with Article 4(2) of the Protocol.
2. The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person or persons empowered to deposit, on the same date as the notification referred to in paragraph 1, the instrument of approval with the Secretary-General of the United Nations in accordance with Article 24(1) of the Protocol, in order to express the consent of the Community to be bound.
3. The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person or persons empowered to deposit, on the same date as the notification referred to in paragraph 1, the declaration of competence set out in Annex III, according to the provisions of Article 24(3) of the Protocol.
Article 6
1. When depositing their instruments of ratification or approval of the Protocol, Member States shall notify, at the same time and on their own behalf, this Decision to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in accordance with Article 4(2) of the Protocol.
2. Member States shall endeavour to take the necessary steps with a view to depositing their instruments of ratification or approval simultaneously with those of the European Community and the other Member States and as far as possible not later than 1 June 2002.
3. Member States shall inform the Commission not later than 1 April 2002 of their decisions to ratify or to approve the Protocol or, according to the circumstances, of the probable date of completion of the requisite procedures. The Commission shall, in cooperation with the Member States, arrange a date for depositing the instruments of ratification or approval simultaneously.
Article 7
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Luxembourg, 25 April 2002.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2162/90
of 26 July 1990
re-establishing the levying of the customs duties applicable to polymers of vinyl chloride falling within CN code 3904, originating in Poland, to which the preferential arrangements of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3896/89 apply
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3896/89 of 18 December 1989 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1990 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
Whereas, pursuant to Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3896/89, suspension of customs duties is accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I, within the framework of the preferential tariff ceilings fixed in column 6 of Annex I;
Whereas Article 7 of that Regulation provides that the levying of customs duties on imports of the products in question originating in each of the countries and territories concerned may at any time be reintroduced as soon as the individual ceilings in question are reached at Community level;
Whereas, in the case of polymers of vinyl chloride falling within CN code 3904, originating in Poland, the individual ceiling amounts to ECU 5 000 000 whereas that ceiling was reached on 8 June 1990; by charges of imports into the Community of the products in question originating in Poland; whereas, it is appropriate to reintroduce the levying of customs duties for the products in question with regard to Poland,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
As from 30 July 1990, the levying of customs duties, suspended in pursuance of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3896/89, shall be reintroduced on imports into the Community of the following products, originating in Poland:
1.2.3 // // // // Order No // CN code // Description // // // // 10.0458 // 3904 10 00 3904 21 00 3904 22 00 // Polymers of vinyl chloride or of other halogenated olefins, in primary forms // // //
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, 26 July 1990.
|
[
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DECISION
of 19 January 2000
giving discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year (Sections I-Parliament, II-Council, III-Commission, IV-Court of Justice and V-Court of Auditors)
(2000/135/EC, ECSC, Euratom)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
Having regard to the budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year,
Having regard to the revenue and expenditure account and the financial statement for the 1997 financial year (SEC(1998) 520 - C4-0350/1998, SEC(1998) 522 - C4-0351/1998, SEC(1998) 519 - C4-0352/1998),
Having regard to the report of the Court of Auditors for the 1997 financial year(1) and the special reports pertaining to it, accompanied by the Institutions replies,
Having regard to the statement of assurance provided by the Court of Auditors, on the basis of Article 248 of the EC Treaty, as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions,
Having regard to the Council recommendation of 15 March 1999 (C4-0156/1999),
Having regard to its resolution of 4 May 1999(2) informing the Commission of the reasons for postponing the discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year,
Having regard to the explanations and information provided by the Commission on the measures taken in response to this resolution,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Article 78g thereof,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 180b thereof,
Having regard to Rule 93 and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,
Having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (A5-0004/2000),
1. Gives the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year;
2. Records its comments in the accompanying resolution which forms an integral part of this decision;
3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution containing its comments to the Commission, the Council, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors and the European Investment Bank and to have it published in the "Legislation" series of the Official Journal of the European Communities.
The Secretary-General
Julian PRIESTLEY
The President
Nicole FONTAINE
(1) OJ C 349, 17.11.1998.
(2) OJ C 279, 1.10.1999, p. 119.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
containing the comments which form an integral part of the decision giving discharge to the Commission for the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty,
having regard to Article 89(7) of the Financial Regulation, pursuant to which each Community institution is required to take all appropriate steps to act on the comments appearing in the decisions giving discharge,
having regard to paragraph 8 of the same Article, which requires the institutions to report, at the request of the European Parliament, on the measures taken in the light of these comments and particularly on the instructions given to those of their departments which are responsible for the implementation of the budget,
having regard to the report of the Court of Auditors for the 1997 financial year(1) and the special reports pertaining to it, accompanied by the institutions' replies,
having regard to the Council recommendation of 15 March 1999 (C4-0156/1999),
having regard to its resolution of 4 May 1999(2) informing the Commission of the reasons for postponing the discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 1997 financial year,
having regard to Rules 93 and 173 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,
having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (A5-0004/2000),
A. whereas the turnout in European elections is declining systematically in many Member States;
B. whereas at the time of the European elections allegations of fraud, mismanagement and nepotism in the European institutions were the subject of public debate in several Member States;
C. whereas it decided to postpone the discharge for the 1997 financial year pending commitments from the new Commission regarding reform;
D. whereas with regard to subjects which are essential to the reform of the Commission, criticisms were expressed and measures called for in the second report of the Committee of Independent Experts and in the, Annex to Parliament's abovementioned resolution of 4 May 1999 on the postponement of the discharge;
E. whereas in response to these criticisms and demands, the Commission has entered into commitments and adopted certain measures which should be assessed;
F. whereas in February the Commission will submit a reform programme which should deal in a comprehensive manner with all aspects of its organisational and management structures; whereas this discharge will therefore make it possible to ascertain the current commitments and measures with a view to comparing them with the final programme of February 2000;
G. whereas the citizens of Europe will regain their faith in the European institutions only if major reforms are carried out in the near future,
H. whereas the Commission has in the past appeared to regard the annual report of the Court of Auditors as an irritating ritual rather than a useful contribution to the improvement of financial management,
1. reminds the Commission that the discharge which is being given to it is based on the assumption that its commitments under the reform programme will be implemented in full;
2. indicates to the Commission the guidelines which it must respect in drafting this programme in certain particularly sensitive areas;
Closure of accounts
3. Recalls the statement of assurance annexed to the Court of Auditors 1997 Annual Report, which includes the following points:
(a) that the total volume of assets corresponding to amounts owed to Community bodies by Member States, which is entered as ECU 1756,5 million in the consolidated balance sheet, is incorrectly reflected in the accounts (points 8.10 and 8.11 of the Annual Report),
(b) that the Community's cash account balances are inaccurately presented in the balance sheet, since amounts totalling several hundred million ECUs held in some third countries are recorded as definitive payments charged to the budget rather than as imprest advances, and that the amount for the Phare Programme alone in this context is at least ECU 370 million (point 8.12),
(c) that the value of commitments still to be settled is overstated by a net amount of at least ECU 530 million (points 8.18 to 8.22),
(d) that the total amount of advances and payments on account recorded during the year as payments charged to the budget is understated by at least ECU 4126 million (points 8.23 and 8.24);
4. Recalls that the audit carried out by the Court of Auditors in the context of the statement of assurance (see points 8.34 to 8.40 of the Annual Report) once again revealed an unacceptably high percentage of significant errors which have distorted the figures relating to procedures on which payments are based;
5. Declares that it will be unable to close the accounts for the 1999 financial year if the Commission has failed to rectify the accounting errors identified by the Court of Auditors;
Institutional problems of management and supervision
6. Calls on the Commission to develop a system whereby the recommendations of the Court of Auditors are systematically followed up and reviewed; where complaints are repeated two years in a row, the Commission should hold management accountable for persistent failure to improve the situation;
7. Calls on the Court of Auditors to monitor systematically, each year, the response to the criticisms expressed in its previous reports;
8. Calls on the Court of Auditors to negotiate framework agreements with national courts of auditors whereby the latter carry out complementary checks on Community policies conducted in partnership, on the basis of a programme drawn up by common agreement;
9. Observes that the powers of financial control and auditing powers need to be separated in a new Financial Regulation, and that auditing and inspection structures need to be separate and answerable to different Commissioners;
10. Considers that every Directorate-General should present annual reports and accounts along standardised lines, which should include the following year's qualitative and quantitative targets;
Staff policy
11. Accepts the commitment given by the Commission to define the staff and structures needed on the basis of objectives ranked in order of priority, but calls on the Commission to state clearly in its reform programme all its priorities and the criteria for the selection of the resources to be assigned thereto (staff employed pursuant to the Staff Regulations; external resources), on the basis of a system which can combine activity-based budgeting with an integrated resource-management system;
12. Calls on the Court of Auditors to assess the administrative decentralisation policy which the Commission has embarked upon as part of the MAP 2000 programme;
13. Notes that the Commission has adopted codes of conduct for the Commissioners and their private offices which entail major improvements with regard to the financial interests of Commissioners and the staff composition of the private offices, but calls on the Commission to undertake, in its reform programme:
- to supplement the codes with more precise provisions concerning incompatibility in cases where a Commissioner has a direct personal interest in an act of recruitment, administration or implementation of the budget for which he and his departments are directly responsible,
- to make the codes binding by means of a regulation to be adopted by the Commission on the basis of opinions delivered by Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors;
14. Welcomes the Commission's plans to protect whistleblowers and calls on the Commission to ensure that staff are encouraged to help work towards a professional climate in which whistleblowing will no longer be necessary; calls on the Commission, however, to identify, in connection with the code of conduct, the fundamental duties of officials so that the latter can oppose any instructions from their hierarchy which are illegal or unethical;
15. Notes the strategic guidelines for administrative reform presented by the Commission with the aim of establishing a more effective disciplinary procedure for budgetary irregularities; calls on the Commission to propose rules to ensure the certainty of the procedure and the absolute impartiality of the body responsible for managing it;
Technical Assistance Offices (TAOs)
16. Notes the Commission's attempt to rationalise the TAOs by establishing a more restrictive legislative and budgetary framework and by introducing a vade-mecum which prohibits subcontracting of public-administration responsibilities and steps up supervision and monitoring of these bodies;
17. Is only partially satisfied, however, and hopes that the Commission will include in its reform programme these further improvements:
(a) the vade-mecum should be binding and thus be an element in the revision of the Financial Regulation;
(b) the TAOs must be excluded from any European public-service functions (even those which are purely preparatory, such as assessment of bids) and be confined to implementation;
(c) relations with TAOs must be governed by transparent provisions laid down in standard contracts;
(d) any function entailing discretionary assessment must be entrusted to executive agencies which operate as decentralised organs of the Commission and will make use of officials and specialised external staff who are entirely subject to the authority, supervision and monitoring of the Commission;
18. Stresses that, pending codification of the new criteria governing delegation of Commission tasks, the Commission must honour its contractual obligations towards existing TAOs and rectify delays in payment, which cause serious financial problems, particularly for small businesses:
19. Notes that the Commission has ended the contract with the TAO Agenor and resumed responsibility for managing the Leonardo programme, with the assistance of some of Agenor's staff; considers that this action by the Commission demonstrates some elements of the executive agency formula;
20. Calls on the Commission immediately to waive the immunity of its officials if and when requested by a national prosecutor, and to bring a parallel civil action before the Belgian courts if the Public Prosecutions Department decides to institute criminal proceedings in the four fraud cases reported by the Commission;
The discharge authority's access to information
21. Recalls that Article 276(2) of the EC Treaty states that the Commission, in connection with the exercise of its powers over the implementation of the budget, must submit any necessary information to the European Parliament at the latter's request;
22. Notes that the EC Treaty provides for no such right to information for the Council in the area of the budget, so that Parliament's right to information in this area is thus more farreaching than that of the Council;
23. Notes that there is general consensus on the right of the discharge authority to full access to information on the implementation of the budgets and considers that the formal and practical arrangements which need to be put in place to facilitate this right should be set out both in Parliament's Rules and in an agreement with the Commission on the basis of the principles to be laid down in the framework agreement on relations between the Commission and the European Parliament;
24. Instructs its Secretary General and the Constitutional Affairs Committee, in their respective areas of competence, to bring forward proposals for the necessary formal and practical arrangements (including changes to Parliament's Rules of Procedure, notably Annex VII) to ensure Parliament's unfettered rights under Article 276 of the EC Treaty and to create appropriate general procedures for handling documents of a necessarily confidential nature, for example, concerning personnel and subjudice issues, which should include, inter alia:
- a secure archive for documents classified as confidential,
- a secure reading room (without copying and fax facilities, etc),
- formal rules of access and an access register,
- a new set of graduated procedures to replace Annex VII to reflect the classification of a confidential document,
- consideration of a sanctions procedure for transgression of Parliament's rules on confidential documents,
25. Calls on the Commission to bring forward proposals for the classification of documents and consider other ways - drawing on the experience of the relationship between the executive and the legislative in Member States - in which full transparency with Parliament can be respected whilst minimising the risks of prejudicing ongoing court cases or transgressing the rights of individual staff members, etc.;
26. Points out to the Commission as of now, however, that:
(a) Parliament will consent to the agreement's providing for exceptional restrictions only with regard to the procedures for forwarding, disseminating and collecting data and not with regard to the subject of the information;
(b) the principle must apply that Parliament, as the discharge authority, has at least as much access to Commission documents as the Court of Auditors, whose task it is to support Parliament in monitoring the implementation of the budget;
(c) the Commission must undertake, pending the introduction of the new rules, to provide all information which the discharge authority requests from it, on the basis of ad hoc agreements designed to ensure respect for confidentiality;
The discharge and management of Community policies in partnership (SEM 2000)
27. Notes the Commission's undertaking to forward to Parliament all information, both concerning measures under the SEM 2000 programme regarding budgetary management in partnership and concerning the responses of national administrations to the comments of the discharge authority;
28. Considers these undertakings only partially satisfactory, however, and calls on the Commission to commit itself, in its reform programme, to:
(a) arrange for observers from Parliament to attend meetings of the body responsible for the SEM 2000 programme when the functions of Parliament as a legislative, budgetary or budgetary control authority are at issue;
(b) establish, under the SEM 2000 programme, a procedure whereby Member States can be informed of the comments of the discharge authority;
(c) seek to ensure that national administrations submit to the discharge authority their comments on the cooperation they have afforded to the Commission as referred to in Article 274 of the EC Treaty;
29. Notes the Commission's proposals to deal in an ad hoc trialogue with any legislative matter or problem of budgetary control considered by SEM 2000, and expects the Commission, together with Parliament and the Council, to take rapid steps to establish this practice;
Combating fraud and corruption
30. Notes that the Commission has not yet produced a full list of cases in which it is suspected that Commission officials or other employees may be involved in fraud or corruption; calls on the Commission to present such a list in time for the 1998 discharge procedure and at the latest by 1 March 2000;
31. Notes that the Commission has not yet complied with its request to notify the national judicial authorities of all cases where it is suspected that Commission officials or other employees may be involved in fraud or corruption; calls on the Commission to present such a list in time for the 1998 discharge procedure and at the latest by 1 March 2000;
External aid; aid to Palestine
32. Considers that the Commission still needs to take a number of measures with regard to its aid to Palestine by 31 March 2000, including:
- opening of Gaza hospital,
- work to begin at the site for the construction of the seat of the Palestinian parliament;
33. Notes that the Commission has approved plans by the International Management Team (IMT) to have the Gaza hospital available for use by precise dates (15 July 2000 for out patient consultations, 15 October 2000 for in-patients); reminds the Commission that it must constantly monitor the work of IMT, for which it bears the ultimate responsibility;
34. Calls on the Commission to submit by 31 March a programme setting out in detail the strategies it intends to pursue with regard to external aid in accordance with predetermined priorities.
(1) OJ C 349, 17.11.1998.
(2) OJ C 279, 1.10.1999, p. 119.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2008/44/EC
of 4 April 2008
amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus and prothioconazole as active substances
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC Belgium received on 19 April 2002 an application from Kumiai Chemicals Industry Co. Ltd for the inclusion of the active substance benthiavalicarb in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Commission Decision 2003/35/EC (2) confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(2)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC Germany received on 26 April 2001 an application from BASF AG for the inclusion of the active substance boscalid in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Commission Decision 2002/268/EC (3) confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(3)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC the Netherlands received on 26 March 1997 an application from Luxan B.V. for the inclusion of the active substance carvone in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Commission Decision 1999/610/EC (4) confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(4)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC United Kingdom received on 25 March 2002 an application from Bayer AG for the inclusion of the active substance fluoxastrobin in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Decision 2003/35/EC confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(5)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC Belgium received on 15 September 2002 an application from Prophyta for the inclusion of the active substance Paecilomyces lilacinus strain 251 (hereafter Paecilomyces lilacinus) in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Commission Decision 2003/305/EC (5) confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(6)
In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC United Kingdom received on 25 March 2002 an application from Bayer CropScience for the inclusion of the active substance prothioconazole in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. Decision 2003/35/EC confirmed that the dossier was ‘complete’ in the sense that it could be considered as satisfying, in principle, the data and information requirements of Annexes II and III to Directive 91/414/EEC.
(7)
For those active substances, the effects on human health and the environment have been assessed, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6(2) and (4) of Directive 91/414/EEC, for the uses proposed by the applicants. The designated rapporteur Member States submitted draft assessment report on 13 April 2004 (benthiavalicarb), 22 November 2002 (boscalid), 16 October 2000 (carvone), 2 September 2003 (fluoxastrobin), 3 November 2004 (Paecilomyces lilacinus) and 18 October 2004 (prothioconazole).
(8)
The assessment reports were peer reviewed by the Member States and the EFSA within its Working Group Evaluation and presented to the Commission in the format of the EFSA Scientific Reports on 15 June 2007 for fluoxastrobin (6) and Paecilomyces lilacinus (7) and on 12 July for benthiavalicarb (8) and prothioconazole (9). These reports and the draft assessment reports for boscalid and carvone were reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and the review was finalised on 22 January 2008 in the format of the Commission review reports for benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus and prothioconazole.
(9)
It has appeared from the various examinations made that plant protection products containing the active substances concerned may be expected to satisfy, in general, the requirements laid down in Article 5(1) (a) and (b) and Article 5(3) of Directive 91/414/EEC, in particular with regard to the uses which were examined and detailed in the Commission review report. It is therefore appropriate to include benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus and prothioconazole in Annex I to that Directive, in order to ensure that in all Member States the authorisations of plant protection products containing these active substances may be granted in accordance with the provisions of that Directive.
(10)
Without prejudice to the above conclusion, for fluoxastrobin and prothioconazole it is appropriate to obtain further information on certain specific points. Article 6(1) of Directive 91/414/EEC provides that inclusion of a substance in Annex I may be subject to conditions. Therefore, it is appropriate to require that fluoxastrobin should be subjected to further testing for confirmation of the risk assessment for surface water and for non-rat metabolites and that prothioconazole should be subjected to further testing for confirmation of the risk assessment as regards the triazole metabolite derivatives and the risk to granivorous birds and mammals and that such studies should be presented by the notifiers.
(11)
Without prejudice to the obligations defined by Directive 91/414/EEC as a consequence of including an active substance in Annex I, Member States should be allowed a period of six months after inclusion to review existing provisional authorisations of plant protection products containing benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole to ensure that the requirements laid down by Directive 91/414/EEC, in particular in its Article 13 and the relevant conditions set out in Annex I, are satisfied. Member States should transform existing provisional authorisations into full authorisations, amend them or withdraw them in accordance with the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC. By derogation from the above deadline, a longer period should be provided for the submission and assessment of the complete Annex III dossier of each plant protection product for each intended use in accordance with the uniform principles laid down in Directive 91/414/EEC.
(12)
It is therefore appropriate to amend Directive 91/414/EEC accordingly.
(13)
The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC is amended as set out in the Annex to this Directive.
Article 2
1. Member States shall adopt and publish by 31 January 2009 at the latest the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.
They shall apply those provisions from 1 February 2009.
When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 3
1. Member States shall in accordance with Directive 91/414/EEC, where necessary, amend or withdraw existing authorisations for plant protection products containing benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole as active substance by 31 January 2009. By that date, they shall in particular verify that the conditions in Annex I to that Directive relating to benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole, respectively, are met, with the exception of those identified in part B of the entry concerning the active substance, and that the holder of the authorisation has, or has access to, a dossier satisfying the requirements of Annex II to that Directive in accordance with the conditions of Article 13(2) of that Directive.
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, for each authorised plant protection product containing benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole as either the only active substance or as one of several active substances all of which were listed in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC by 31 July 2008 at the latest, Member States shall re-evaluate the product in accordance with the uniform principles provided for in Annex VI to Directive 91/414/EEC, on the basis of a dossier satisfying the requirements of Annex III to that Directive and taking into account part B of the entry in Annex I to that Directive concerning benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole. On the basis of that evaluation, they shall determine whether the product satisfies the conditions set out in Article 4(1)(b), (c), (d) and (e) of Directive 91/414/EEC.
Following that determination Member States shall:
(a)
in the case of a product containing benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole as the only active substance, where necessary, amend or withdraw the authorisation by 31 January 2010 at the latest; or
(b)
in the case of a product containing benthiavalicarb, boscalid, carvone, fluoxastrobin, Paecilomyces lilacinus or prothioconazole as one of several active substances, where necessary, amend or withdraw the authorisation by 31 January 2010 or by the date fixed for such an amendment or withdrawal in the respective Directive or Directives which added the relevant substance or substances to Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC, whichever is the latest.
Article 4
This Directive shall enter into force on 1 August 2008.
Article 5
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 April 2008.
|
[
1,
1,
0,
1,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 931/2004
of 30 April 2004
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.
(2)
In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 May 2004.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 April 2004.
|
[
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1949/2003
of 3 November 2003
amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2176/2002(2), and in particular Article 9(1)(a) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) In accordance with the Combined Nomenclature, set out in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, certain vegetable-based sauces are to be classified under heading 2103, whereas prepared or preserved vegetables fall within Chapter 20.
(2) To make easier the distinction between products to be classified under heading 2103 and products falling within Chapter 20, Commission Regulation (EC) No 288/97 of 17 February 1997 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff and repealing a number of regulations on classification(3) inserted additional note 1 to Chapter 21 of the Combined Nomenclature. That additional note lays down a distinction criterion based on the passing through a standardised metal wire sieve. The criterion was fixed to a minimum of 80 % by weight of ingredients passing through a metal sieve in order to consider the product as a sauce.
(3) According to the harmonised system explanatory note to heading 2103, part A, the term "sauces" also includes certain preparations, based on vegetables or fruit, which are mainly liquids, emulsions or suspensions, and sometimes contain visible pieces of vegetables or fruit. Those preparations differ from prepared or preserved vegetables and fruit of Chapter 20 in that they are used as sauces, i.e. as an accompaniment to food or in the preparation of certain food dishes, but are not intended to be eaten by themselves.
(4) Nowadays a new type of vegetable-based sauce containing visible and identifiable lumps of vegetables or fruit, but where less than 80 % by weight of the ingredients pass through the sieve, is presented and put on the market as a sauce. By virtue of additional note 1 to Chapter 21 of the Combined Nomenclature, that type of sauce cannot be regarded as a sauce of heading 2103, whereas in accordance with the nomenclature of the harmonised system classification as sauce would be possible(4).
(5) Therefore it appears appropriate and necessary to delete additional note 1 to Chapter 21 of the Combined Nomenclature.
(6) It should be noted that it was not possible to reach an agreement to amend the text of heading 2103 in the harmonised system nomenclature as regards classification of sauces or to adapt additional note 1 to Chapter 21 of the Combined Nomenclature which is established on the basis of the harmonised system.
(7) Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(8) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Additional note 1 to Chapter 21 of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 is deleted.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 November 2003.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 225/2005
of 10 February 2005
fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 581/2004
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), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,
Whereas:
(1)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 581/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain types of butter (2) provides for a permanent tender.
(2)
Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 8 February 2005.
(3)
The Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 581/2004, for the tendering period ending on 8 February 2005, the maximum amount of refund for the products referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 February 2005.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 10 February 2005.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2729/95 of 27 November 1995 on the natural alcoholic strength by volume of Prosecco di Conegliano Valdobbiadene and 'Prosecco del Montello e dei Colli Asolani` produced during the 1995/96 wine year and on the minimum total alcoholic strength by volume of the cuvées used to produce them
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 of 16 March 1987 laying down special provisions relating to quality wines produced in specified regions (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3896/91 (2), and in particular Articles 7 (2) and 8 (4) thereof,
Whereas Article 7 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 allows for derogations to be granted in regard to the minimum alcoholic strength by volume laid down in the Member States for quality wines psr; whereas the second subparagraph of Article 12 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2332/92 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1547/95 (4), on sparkling wines produced in the Community as defined in point 15 of Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1544/95 (6), provides that cuvées intended for the preparation of certain quality sparkling wines psr, the designation of which refers to a variety of vine, may have a total alcoholic strength by volume below that stipulated;
Whereas weather conditions in the 1995/96 wine year were particularly damaging to the Prosecco vine variety in wine-growing zone C II; whereas, as a result, the cuvées for the production of quality sparkling wines psr made from grapes of this variety do not reach the minimum total alcoholic strength by volume of 9 % vol specified in the first subparagraph of Article 12 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2332/92; whereas, in order to prevent serious losses to the producers in question, a lower minimum total alcoholic strength by volume should be fixed for cuvées for the wine year in question and the Member State concerned should be allowed to fix a minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume lower than that laid down in Article 7 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 for the quality sparkling wines psr produced from them;
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
For production in the 1995/96 wine year:
- the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the quality sparkling wine psr 'Prosecco di Conegliano Valdobbiadene`, including wine of the subdesignation 'Superiore di Cartizze`, and of the quality sparkling wine psr 'Prosecco del Montello e dei Colli Asolani` may, by way of derogation from Article 7 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 823/87 be set by Italy at a level lower than 9,5 % vol but not lower than 8,5 % vol,
- the minimum total alcoholic strength by volume of the cuvées for the production of the said quality sparkling wines psr is hereby fixed at 8,5 % vol.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 27 November 1995.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
1,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0
] |
*****
COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1483/86
of 15 May 1986
amending Regulation (EEC) No 3718/85 laying down certain technical and control measures relating to the fishing activities in Portuguese waters of vessels flying the flag of Spain
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, and in particular Article 352 (8) thereof,
Whereas stricter control measures should apply to vessels fishing for albacore tuna;
Whereas the validity of the periodic lists should be shortened, the special conditions to be satisfied for the authorization to fish should also be made applicable to vessels of more than 20 gross registered tons (GRT) and special arrangements should be introduced for vessels of less than 20 GRT;
Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3718/85 (1) should be amended accordingly;
Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fishery Resources,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 3718/85 is hereby amended as follows:
1. The second subparagraph of Article 3 (2) is replaced by the following:
'The list of vessels fishing for large migrants other than tuna shall be forwarded at least 15 days before the date set for its entry into force; this list shall cover a period of at least two calendar months. The list of vessels fishing for albacore tuna shall be forwarded at least 15 days before the date set for its entry into force; this list shall cover a period running from the first to the 15th day of the month or from the 16th to the last day of the month.'
2. The fourth indent of Article 3 (3) is replaced by the following:
'- conversion rate specified in Article 158 (2) of the Act of Accession and, in the case of vessels fishing for albacore tuna, conversion rate adopted by the Council in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 352 (6) of the Act of Accession,'.
3. In Article 8 the following paragraph is added:
'The Spanish authorities shall communicate to the national control authorities specified in point 7 of the Annex, at least 24 hours before vessels enter the 200-nautical-mile zone off the coast of Portugal, the information received in accordance with point 8.1 of the Annex and within 24 hours of the return of the vessel to the port from which it operates, the information in accordance with point 8.2 of the Annex.'
4. In the Annex the title of section B is replaced by the following:
'B. Additional conditions to be complied with by all vessels except those fishing for large migrants other than tuna'.
5. In the Annex, the heading at point 3 is replaced by the following:
'3. All vessels authorized to fish, with the exception of vessels of less than 20 GRT and which do not have a radio on board authorized to fish for albacore tuna, shall communicate the information requested under point 4 to the competent national control authorities as specified in point 7, in accordance with the following timetable:'.
6. The following point is added to the Annex:
'8. Vessels of less than 20 GRT not having a radio on board which are authorized to fish for albacore tuna shall communicate the following information to the control authorities in Spain:
8.1. before the vessel leaves the port from which it operates, and at least 24 hours before the vessel enters the 200-nautical-mile zone off the coast of Portugal;
8.1.1 the dates schedules for entering and leaving the 200-nautical-mile zone off the coast of Portugal;
8.1.2. the ICES or CECAF statistical square in which fishing is to take place;
8.1.3. the dates schedules for entering and leaving a Portuguese port;
8.1.4. the date scheduled for the vessel's return to the port from which it operates;
8.2. in the 24 hours following the vessel's return to the port from which it operates;
8.2.1. the catches taken, broken down by ICES or CECAF statistical square.'
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 15 May 1986.
|
[
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
1,
1,
0,
0,
0
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.